PY Inflation?

Originally posted by Rupert I'm not sure when the benchmark idea was scrapped - either 60s or 70s, I think, if it isn't just a sailing myth brought about because the Firefly was 100 and yardsticks barely moved due to the returns method. A benchmark makes little sense, despite other assertions on here over the years. If one boat stays the same, but the results don't bear that out, every other class would need to be altered to correct things.

Edited by Sam.Spoons - 26 Aug 22 at 5:44pm

I'm not sure when the benchmark idea was scrapped - either 60s or 70s, I think, if it isn't just a sailing myth brought about because the Firefly was 100 and yardsticks barely moved due to the returns method.

A benchmark makes little sense, despite other assertions on here over the years. If one boat stays the same, but the results don't bear that out, every other class would need to be altered to correct things.

As to the OP, 1, the Laser was hell on its pre-digital yardstick both radial and standard and 2, the Laser is boat of choice for many beginner racers on a budget, so the curve is weighted away from the usual mid fleet, mid level boat average.

No idea why fast boat yardstick are going down - maybe with reduced fleet numbers, more of the fast end are handicap racing?

.

Edited by A2Z - 03 Sep 22 at 9:44pm

[/QUOTE]
In reality this will never work for various reasons:Lack of expertise within the club.Over burdening the club with another volunteer job that needs doing. It then gets done for a season, the volunteer gets some grief and then gets fed up with it
[/QUOTE]

SL, I totally get where you are coming from on the extra burden/lack of expertise along with internal criticism/debates etc which are part of every club's life. Here on the tidal Thames we have been pulling the PY system apart in a sense with a much faster boat in the X1 than the presently sailed Lasers and Ents and we've certainly experienced this with ups and downs - e.g. at one stage our Club Dinghy Committee assigned us 850, not quite sure where from (...yes, for a 16ft non-trapeze monohull with sym spinnaker). But things are now a bit more sensible around 900 - being the tidal adjustment from the still water 942 that we arrived at following testing at QMSC (with Andrew from there's help on data crunching i.e. pretty much the same as an RS400). The HISC adjustment system for us would in fact be to 919 but I think this is probably not enough.... Unless of course we are doing the downriver races when even 942 you could claim would penalise us.

But then on our normal 2hrs before HW up and down racing when it's very light winds and a spring tide, when we are going forwards against a tide and the Lasers/Ents are going backwards we rather easily make our handicap

But having said all this I still think it should be the clubs taking responsibility for any tidal or other adjustments (as HISC and the Great Lakes groups indeed have done) as I can only see even greater problems with a variation formula imposed from above.

One idea to overcome individual club capacity/politics/debates could be, very much like the GL group, to link up with other clubs that you believe have very similar tidal waters and develop your own common adjustments to the PY numbers. Do you think that would be something your sailing committee would be up for?

One thing about the RYA PN is it basically works.. yep not for everyone and also not for everyone all of the time.. It is about averages for a season in all conditions.. I've won a race in my 1151 handicap boat against a 1036 handicap .. Once.. Why? high winds and they had to reef. Normally their larger and taller sail area overcomes anything I can do..