Reforming the Portsmouth Yardstick System

I agree Oli. Whilst that won't solve every problem it would certainly solve a lot of them. The RYA just needs to take some of the blame that would otherwise be hurled at the General Committee.

Loving the myths that keep on recurring.

Firstly, the RYA describe pretty clearly how the yardstick system works. Took 30 seconds typing slow on Google.

https://www.rya.org.uk/racing/Pages/portsmouthyardstick.aspx

They don't go round every dinghy park in britain and explain it in person to every sailor, they maybe expect sailors to meet them half way. They will come to visit clubs if asked.

Secondly, a average performance of everyone in the fleet, barring outliers, doesn't make Portsmouth Yardstick a personal handicap system. The vast majority of classes will have a very similar spread of talent. I've owned many boats, and find myself in similar positions when fleet racing in all of them. I doubt I'm the only one. Some might have world class sailors, but usually they won't be handicap racing, and generally there are lots of returns from classes where they are, so distortion is minimal.

The measurement idea has been pushed by grf before, and it's been suggest before to run it alongside PY and see what happens. Actually, some number crunching with old results would produce similar data. So, why not do this? Mainly I suspect because it should be "someone else" serving this up on a plate. Starting a Handicap Class Association to run it should be pretty easy, too, if enough people are fed up with PY.

So they do in fact come to clubs, we did all that, we then submitted results, we have two classes that win, either the Contender or the Laser and what does the 'system' recommend with it's 'confidence' after five more painful years? Slower numbers for both classes, it's f**ked, it doesn't do what it says on the tin.

Great Lakes is an admirable attempt and does at least offer us a bit more enthusiasm, the only way I can race the Farr is thanks to them, but they're a particular type of water, smooth with big corners fast classes can stretch their legs so slow classes have to have slower numbers to 'ketchup'

What's needed is a system that doesn't just respond to big numbers submitted by small clubs on ponds and great lakes but brings coastal clubs into play, we need a group, but we need to know who and what they are and they need to be accountable. A Handicap Racing Class of GB could include reps from inland coastal and great lakes, but be a bit more corinthian.

Hell they wouldn't need to even drive to meet these days of Zoom.

Originally posted by iGRF So they do in fact come to clubs, we did all that, we then submitted results, we have two classes that win, either the Contender or the Laser and what does the 'system' recommend with it's 'confidence' after five more painful years? Slower numbers for both classes, it's f**ked, it doesn't do what it says on the tin. Great Lakes is an admirable attempt and does at least offer us a bit more enthusiasm, the only way I can race the Farr is thanks to them, but they're a particular type of water, smooth with big corners fast classes can stretch their legs so slow classes have to have slower numbers to 'ketchup' What's needed is a system that doesn't just respond to big numbers submitted by small clubs on ponds and great lakes but brings coastal clubs into play, we need a group, but we need to know who and what they are and they need to be accountable. A Handicap Racing Class of GB could include reps from inland coastal and great lakes, but be a bit more corinthian. Hell they wouldn't need to even drive to meet these days of Zoom.

So set it up. On here, on Facebook, get people involved, invite them to a zoom meeting. It worked for the cvrda more than 20 years ago, so no reason it shouldn't now. You have a core of measurement supporters on here, so go for it.

Originally posted by mongrel Originally posted by robin34024 Originally posted by mongrel Originally posted by davidyacht Problem with formula based PY is it would not overcome the perceived difference in performance in different generations of one designs ... new Solo is built to the same rules, weight, measurements as a 20 year old Solo, but people keep saying that the latest Solos are noticeably faster than the old ones ... ho hum  The right formula could allow for that, factor in year built, material type, construction type into the formula? Even this isn't infallible. Take an Enterprise for example - a 1980's Lufkin/Lloyd/Ovington/possibly other Ent is likely to be fast, even at national level. Heck, even some older boats by Avacraft/Bacon/Smith and Davies/possibly others are likely to be fast. But, take an early Holt FRP Ent that's been ragged, and it's likely to be slower. Playing devils advocate a bit here, but some things can't just be reduced to formula.  This isn't unique to Ents - an early Woof Albacore that hasn't been abused is most likely to be faster than a Fosrite glass boat. A Cory GRP Streaker is liklely to be slower than a Gillard wood of the same vintage. Take the Wooden Solo that GRF mentioned in another thread. I'm sure there are more examples - there are always outliers, and development isn't always linear. And don't get me started on how this would work for some development classes...  So that’s your reason why things should stay the way they are?

No, it's my reason for not wanting to handicap boats on a generalisation of age/material.