The Tasar v the Icon

Originally posted by marke lets look at some real data.

Oh no, not real data !  GRF will tell you it's all wrong.

Good post and tells me what I thought.    Bench marked against the Tasar, the Icon's EN looks about right.

I really shouldn't but lets look at some real data.  One of the top sailors in our club  (possibly the best, certainly in the top 6) has acquired an Icon and has been racing in our handicap fleets this season.  We use local handicaps for most of our classes and this was set initially at 978 for the Icon. The table below is their achieved PN for the Icon for the last 14 races (note: these are not cherry picked this is taken directly from our results database for this season).

Autumn Series 4                    908        
Autumn Series 5                    960    
Autumn Series 6                    993    
Autumn Series 7                    896    
Humbug Series 1                    955        
Evening Series 3                    988        
Evening Series 4                    911        
Spring Series 6                      916        
Squires Cup                          919        
Summer Series 1                    950        
Crash Boat/Upwright Trophies    890        
Summer Series 3                    920    
Summer Series 4                    924    
Summer Series 5                    930    
                                            [ average PY = 933 ]    

Now I'm sure someone will say that they must be sailing in an uncompetitive fleet.  Well that fleet contains regular participation of three of the other top 6 helms in the club, the top Hornet sailor in the country (multiple European/national champion), two other hornet sailors who have finished in the top 5 at the nationals, another recent hornet convert who was Laser 2 world champion (several times), a streaker and a wayfarer who have finished in the top 6 at their Nationals, and ~9 modern well sorted  Merlin Rockets, one of whom was second at the recent 100+ boat Salcombe Merlin week and several others that do well in open meetings and local regattas.  In all those races the Icon has only been beaten by the top Hornet once (by a few seconds) - the Hornet sails off 969 at our club. I can't recall any  Merlin beating the Icon on any occasion on any course, in any wind strength.

Since we have a 10 year online database of results at the club we can also take another look at the data by looking at personal "overachievement" for the same team in different boats over time (i.e. the % the average achieved PN is different from the allocated PN) .

RS200    +1.6%
B14        +2.1%
RS800    +1.8%
RS500    +2.4%
RS300    +1.9%
Laser    +0.8%
Icon    +4.6%

An average "overachievement" for a sailor of 2% is extremely good.  Note how consistent they are over time apart from the Icon which shows a dramatic performance jump.  Now there could be several reasons for this - I think we can discount that the team have suddenly improved dramatically.  It could be:
a) the Icon suits our sailing conditions (open water, bit tidal, bit lumpy, estuary courses (not W/L) ) better than all the other boats, and/or
b) The local PY is a bit generous

I reckon it is a bit of both.  Either way there is a general consensus that our local handicapping scheme (which includes crew skill factor analysis) will resolve the issue over time - and the resolution will still have the Icon winning lots of races (as they should as they are very good).  My guess however is that the local PN will not be going up!.

There is another recent data point on open water.  The Paignton Double Hander event was held in June and was won by the Starcross Icon sailing of a PN of 969.  They had a close tussle over the weekend with Malcolm/Fiona Davis - a top Taser sailor (3rd at the last Taser worlds in the UK - and top Taser World Master) - definitely a sailor at the same skill level.  Taser won 2, Icon won 3.  That event certainly didn't demonstrate that the EN was wrong.

I know GRF has given us another data point - i.e. if he hadn't hit a buoy, and had learned how to tack, and hadn't been struggling for grip, and had been given an EN of 1000 then he might have won a recent race.  I'm inclined not to give too high a weighting to that evidence.

Where is all the data (with suitable CSF applied) that the EN is wildly wrong - if there is data why isn't it on PYS (I can't find it).

The irony of this post is that I have been interested in the Icon for some time and it would really suit me and my current crew very nicely.  I sailed an NS14 about 10 years ago and it really was a lovely boat to sail.  I even have the money for one burning a hole in my boat fund and will give the Starcross one a go soon.  Like Jim, I am just struggling to get past the whinging and whining to try and get what would demonstrably be a bandit handicap (1000 would be laughable), and the continuing insults to volunteers and the RYA - not classy at all and not something I'm sure I want to be associated with. Given that what I want is a boat that goes faster than a Merlin without the complexity why doesn't the marketing reflect that great achievement, rather than telling me things that don't seem to be true.

P.S we will be submitting our returns for all classes to the PYS as normal.

Edited by marke - 29 Jul 14 at 3:43pm

Presumably the same reason you lot don't come down to Hythe then..

NE is just the other tack.

And I'll save myself the whining I'd get, " oh he only beat us cos he's got a bigger sail and his kite doesn't jam cos he's got that metal chute and he can wing his wang further than us.."



Edited by iGRF - 29 Jul 14 at 12:37pm

Originally posted by iGRF   In Medway bless them they sail a river, aligned perfectly with reaching angles of a South Westery Wind.

EN's !

The 'cloak' of constantly stating that they are the result of club returns does not enhance any debate on the general subject.  It is not sufficient justification.  It gives a misleading 'sense' that there were lots and lots of results and lends any resulting EN number a bit of erroneous credibility.  For Icon there are precious few ....  We know there are not enough results yet, that will always happen with new classes.  But regrettably the system cannot apply a common sense methodology when dealing with new classes.  In fact it appears to take a perverse pride in this inflexibility.  Fit for purpose ?  Well we are biased of course so step up to the plate and for Pete’s sake show us that '969' is a truly representative average against other classes  Can Icon be sailed to 969 ?  Yes of course ... but only on rare occasion, on the right courses and so on.   In wider competition and against good examples of other classes and against top quartile crews -  much much less likely my friends.   It is not slow for sure and Icon is the fastest 2-sail production hiker as far as we know but is it realistically all of nearly 50 PN points faster that a Tasar ?  (now the second fastest production 2-sailer in the world !) Faster - yes we agree of coure ... but ....          
 
Even my own club, Burghfield SC,  the one that possibly provided in excess of 50% of the individual  'club returns' used to generate the current EN of '969' for Icon runs us off 990 in 2014.  The local handicappers are not known for doing any favours whatsoever, so why on earth they might be bothered to do so in this instance despite the appearance of a fancy new 'EN' ? .....   might it just be because they have little faith in th enew EN either ?    Could it be some of the 'good'  and 'great' of the club are so easily persuaded to gentle with us ? ... or have a few actually tried it for themselves ?

Nobody is asking favours and I for one am certainly not suggesting bias but heaven above surely the Portsmouth system can manage and come up with a better and more appropriate approach to handicapping new classes ?  No class association or manufacturer really wants to set PNs - despite the odd lazy inferences they might want to do exactly that.  

So of course we prefer GL numbers - it is still not an ideal system (and yes we do know it rests in part on the methodology of the official PN approach) but it is more progressive for sure and getting 'there' quicker.  IMO PNs should only be based on the results of the front quartile of any fleet and at introduction new classes should be assessed with significant weighting given to results from ’ranking’ handicap events such as the sailjuice series in the first 2-3 years.  Thousands of club results but with numbers that include a rump of old and uncompetitive examples of any class are to a great extent a waste of time.  Larger samples lend credibility but only if they are all truly representative of what any particular boat is actually capable of.....  Get rid of the old/slow 'dilution' is part of the argument.

And in the meantime just sail 'it' cos you love it !  Just like we do .....

Mike L.