I would lend my support to the +15 seconds to their spinnaker rating for non-spinnaker boats (unless an allowance was already given for asym only). The PHRFNE standard is +12 seconds, but it is not usually enough on windward / leeward courses. I'd think +15 would be good for you considering the distance race format. We had a Wednesday night fleet in Boston where you could check in as spin / non-spin depending on your crew for any given week. It all worked out OK with the PHRFNE +12, but generally the spinnaker boats won. I don't want to offend anyone, but boats sailing with spinnaker were more experienced, better prepared and better handled than those without, so I think the right performance won... Our fleet varied from Farr 40 with professional crew to J/22's.
Tim Mojito C&C 35-3 (currently waiting for an insurance estimate for a new pedestal, stern rail, instrument pod...) Branford, CT On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 9:03 AM, <cenel...@aol.com> wrote: > As a PHRF racer, I realize that assigning a single rating for a boat > sailing in various conditions of wind, waves, etc. is a very poor > substitute for a more complicated and more expensive solution such as IRC, > etc. etc. > > Adding modifications to this single number to account for sail > configurations such as spin or non-spin is IMHO similar to adding lipstick > to a pig. > > However, for overall winner determinations, a +15 seconds per mile > adjustment to the rating when sailing non-spin has been used in some local > distance races in order to award a winner. This seems to work reasonably > for our club racing--after all this is club racing and our PHRF certificate > costs all of ~ $20 per year! > > However, I have also raced in events where a combined trophy was awarded > where there were spin, non-spin and cruiser fleets. In these events, > sometimes the overall award was given to the winner of the most competitive > class. IIRC this class was defined as the class in the fleet whose > corrected times were the closest or with the smallest spread. Presumably > this means that the first boat in this class had to work very hard to stay > there. > > This may not work in your case but it is another way to combine the > fleets--whether it is less arbitrary than a single number adjustment is > another matter. > > FWIW, > > Charlie Nelson > Water Phantom > C&C 36XL/kcb > > > > > cenel...@aol.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Rick Brass <rickbr...@earthlink.net> > To: cnc-list <cnc-list@cnc-list.com> > Sent: Thu, Feb 28, 2013 1:46 am > Subject: Stus-List PHRF ratings - Spin vs non-spin > > I help out with a local charity regatta called Pirates on the Pungo. > http://www.piratesonpungo.org We are planning to do a couple of special > trophies this year, one of which will go to the C&C sailboat that finishes > first in the long pursuit race on the first day of sailing. While we plan > to have both spin and non-spin classes for the PHRF boats in the regatta > (with sub classes to keep the competition fair for all size boats), we want > the special awards to span both spin and non-spin. > > NCPHRF, unlike some other regional PHRF groups, does not grant different > spin and non-spin ratings. And the PHRF base ratings that we use for a lot > of the casual sailors presume a spinnaker. > > So we’re thinking about creating an adjusted “NON-SPIN” rating for the > boats in the special trophy groups that will let them compete relatively > fairly with the spin boats in the same special group. > > I’ve been told that one of the clubs in Oriental, NC adds an arbitrary 11 > seconds to the NCPHRF spin rating to get a “non-spin” rating – regardless > of the size or type of boat. That doesn’t sound like it would be fair to > the smaller boats like the 24, 25, or 27, and it might be generous for the > larger boats like my own 38 or Charlie Nelson’s 36XL. > > During the past couple of weeks there was some discussion of how various > clubs and local groups calculate a “non-spin” rating that lets all boats > race in one class. I seem to recall one message that indicated 10% or 15% > of the normal rating was added for a boat racing non-spin. But I think > there were other methods, too. > > So the question for the wisdom of the list is this: What is a fair way to > adjust the normal PHRF rating (which presumes a spinnaker) for a boat that > is racing non-spin? > > Thanks for your input. > > > Rick Brass > Washington, NC > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > This List is provided by the C&C Photo > Albumhttp://www.cncphotoalbum.comcnc-l...@cnc-list.com > > > _______________________________________________ > This List is provided by the C&C Photo Album > http://www.cncphotoalbum.com > CnC-List@cnc-list.com > >
_______________________________________________ This List is provided by the C&C Photo Album http://www.cncphotoalbum.com CnC-List@cnc-list.com
