• Class breaks in handicap racing
  15 Comments
  Jonah Zimmerman Today 06:18
• Protest Standard of Proof and Evidence Bars
  8 Comments
  John Quirk Mon 05:40
• Question of terminology when all boats do not race together
  13 Comments
  Gordon Davies 25-Dec-10 14:03
• A keen volunteer with a conflict of interest
  55 Comments
  Benjamin Harding 25-Dec-09 11:09
• Should "Basic Principles" be added to RRS 4 & 5?
  7 Comments
  Angelo Guarino 25-Dec-08 13:40

• Class breaks in handicap racing
  Jonah is in part making a case for ORC vs PHRF. Clearly matching like types and sizes of boats in a class is best, but when there are a limited number of entries it becomes a difficult choice to come up with reasonable class sizes. It's certainly no fun to be placed in a class with just one or two competitors. In Eastern Long Island Sound our PHRF committee has been looking at ORC/PHRF comparisons and a proposed "Random Leg course" adjustment to the single PHRF number. One thing that became obvious as we studied these options was that neither approach dramatically changes real world results. When we re-scored actual races they brought corrected times closer an presumably made the racing fairer, but few boats advanced or dropped a position.  After shadow re-scoring my Wednesday Fleet which mixes all types of boats there was a single position change in the season results between two mid-fleet finishers.  And I've heard similar reports about a fleet in our area that switched to ORC.  So if your corrected time in the mixed class is not already close to your competitors, neither system is going to compensate for the adverse conditions that you feel take your boat out of contention. I'd only suggest that if you see the option for a fairer class split that does not maroon the outliers into a small class, send a proposal to the race committee volunteers to consider for future events. If you don't see a good solution, then a protest, even if it was permissible, does not solve the problem. Instead solve your problem by encouraging other owners with boats like your to enter your races!
  Edgar Smith Today 17:06
• A keen volunteer with a conflict of interest
  I must have been referring to the right subparagraph:  Jim understood.
  
  Fixed.
  John Allan Tue 13:39
• Protest Standard of Proof and Evidence Bars
  Thanks John...even then with "...bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation." (seriousness being the operative word), there is an educated [jurisdictional] assesssment of sorts to be made.
  John Quirk Tue 03:37
• Why is the "red flag" needed?
  Rob .. I like it. It captures the "obvious contact" condition and ties it up nicely. 
  Angelo Guarino Sun 20:09
• Question of terminology when all boats do not race together
  Thank you for your reply born of direct experience. Long ago I ran a national championship with 6 races (one scheduled per day – those were the days) and a four race minimum. We got the required four in, but only just, and on the final day; nail-biting stuff in a light-wind week at a normally-windy venue. The concept of event sponsors, let alone personal ones, was pretty alien, limited to whether we could get the club's brewery to subsidise the bar. 
  
  I still say that, to be a series, you need at least two data points, but if the RRS (which does not define a series) allows the minimum number of races to be set to one, that part of the sentence in RRS A1 – 'and the number required to be scored to constitute a series' can be rendered ineffective. The RRS rule-drafters cannot have had this in mind when they made this condition compulsory. Perhaps RRS A1 should be amended to make this requirement optional. Nevertheless, deciding an event, let alone a championship, on the basis of one race would be farcical.
  Nicolas Livingstone Sat 11:36

Forums Leader Board

This Month