New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: Datchet Flyer
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Datchet Flyer

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 16>
Author
Chris 249 View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2041
Post Options Post Options   Quote Chris 249 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Datchet Flyer
    Posted: 19 Dec 13 at 11:02pm
So what do you do when some bright designer spends a few hours playing with the VPP and finds the inevitable weaknesses and designs or modifies a boat accordingly?

Or what about the boats with advantages that cannot be calculated by most VPPs? For example, Finns have a Lamboley test that measures and limits the amount of weight taken out of the ends. It was introduced to stop people spending big bucks to get light bows and sterns and packing the minimum weight into the middle of the boat. 

A VPP can't allow for that, unless you go through the enormous hassle of doing a Lamboley test on every boat. But unless you allow for it, you create an advantage for the big spender. Someone could get a Finn laid up with illegally light ends that would not allow it to be raced as a Finn, but it would have an advantage over a normal Finn (and therefore the rest of the fleet) that a VPP would not normally pick up.

Obviously building a special VPP cheater may not happen, but what about classes that have limits on weight corrector placing? The boat with the correctors spread out fore and aft according to class rules would have a small disadvantage over a boat taken out of class.

That's assuming you can get a VPP to work, which is extremely unlikely IMHO. Check out the later IMS boats and you will see some horrible craft designed to cheat a VPP. On a less ugly note, look at the Farr 39 or Robert Hick boats and you will see otherwise very nice boats designed to be rather underpowered (in stability and sail area) because if you have a faster boat you lose out every time you slow down through manoeuvres or calms.


Back to Top
iGRF View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 07 Mar 11
Location: Hythe
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6499
Post Options Post Options   Quote iGRF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 13 at 10:47pm
Originally posted by iGRF

Well I've now researched VPP and agree as that system stands with its correction for heel and whatever, it wouldn't be suitable, here am I trying to work out an algorithm that would explain the Solo v Laser in light wind conundrum, we know why it is, but just like handicaps, you can't factor wind speed into a calculation without giving tabulations to apply as a secondary calculation


Originally posted by Chris 249


So the fact is that even with yachts (which are much easier to assess via a VPP than dinghies) there ARE vociferous arguments - in fact probably worse ones than under yardsticks.


Yes but, the formula would be applied equally and fixed, so fair in a way that it is at least unfair to all, rather than the current system that is unfairer to some more than others depending more on wether your class face fits the current criterion set by the 'chattering' classes.
Back to Top
Chris 249 View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2041
Post Options Post Options   Quote Chris 249 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 13 at 10:47pm
A yacht club that had a pretty diverse fleet had an interesting system that (from my ignorant point of view) had a lot going for it. All classes would start and then sail a course of the correct size for the slowest boats. Let's call this the Base Course. The RC would take the times of all boats as they finished this Base Course.

The fast and medium boats would then continue racing after they had crossed the finish line for the Base Course. They would go on to do longer courses (normally just more laps of the Base Course IIRC). The smaller boats would finish racing once they had done the Base Course.

The overall result for the entire fleet was taken from the Base Course finish. The divisional result for the slow boats was also taken from the Base Course finish.

However, the divisional results for the faster boats were calculated from their elapsed times over the longer courses. So a division of 20 footers (or Optis/Mirrors etc) may just do the two lap Base Course before they finish and their divisional results are taken from the Base Course. A division of 30 footers (or Lasers/N12s etc) may do three laps before their division is finished and divisional results are calculated off those three laps. A division of big boats may do four laps before their division is finished and divisional results are calculated - but the overall fleet's results are still calculated just from the Base Course segment.

Everyone is racing around the same course at around the same time, but the faster boats still get to do a race that is long enough to be fun. You do have the problem that if conditions change during the Base Course then one group or the other will be favoured, but Average Laps also have their issues as noted.

I suppose with dinghies you get two further advantages. For one, once the Base Course (which would have to be designed to cater for all types) is finished then divisions could keep racing on a course that suited them. For example, you could have a race where the Base Course was a triangle and a WW/LW. After doing the Base Course, the 49er/RS800s/MPSs etc group could go on and do two more WW/LW laps whereas the 505/FD/Osprey etc group could go on and do two more triangles. That way the boats in the faster divisions get a nice long race on their favoured course. There are some other interesting (but complicated) variations available.

People would also have the option of dropping out after the Base Course if it was too light/too cold etc. I suppose this could be permitted at the discretion of the RC. If it was a nice day you could say that you would have to finish the full course for your division to be counted in the results. If the weather was dangerously bad, people could be given the option to finish just the Base Course and count only for overall honours and not for divisional honours. We do something similar in windsurfers and it works very well in terms of encouraging beginners to persevere and feel that they have achieved something.

There's probably some fatal flaws and the RC obviously have a lot of results to take and track, but it's an idea I would love to try.


Edited by Chris 249 - 19 Dec 13 at 10:50pm
Back to Top
iGRF View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 07 Mar 11
Location: Hythe
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6499
Post Options Post Options   Quote iGRF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 13 at 10:44pm
Well I've now researched VPP and agree as that system stands with its correction for heel and whatever, it wouldn't be suitable, here am I trying to work out an algorithm that would explain the Solo v Laser in light wind conundrum, we know why it is, but just like handicaps, you can't factor wind speed into a calculation without giving tabulations to apply as a secondary calculation
Back to Top
Chris 249 View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2041
Post Options Post Options   Quote Chris 249 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 13 at 10:01pm
Originally posted by iGRF

Originally posted by Daniel Holman


[QUOTE=2547]
Roll on Graeme's VPP based handicap system* * Although I admit that would be at least as flawed.


You need to help me make it happen.

Give me an algorithm, I'd happily finance the printing and promotion of leaflets, and whatever other things we'd need to make it happen, website maybe.

Although it would be equally flawed, there would not be the doubts of either agenda or buffer competence driven doubt that there is at present. Figures can't be made to lie, whatever 'they' decided to do after the event, there would at least be a firm base to fall back on which is what the current system lacks, they've messed about with it so much now, nobody knows where they are.

Sorry for the late reply, but there definitely can be "doubts of either agenda or incompetence" in relation to VPPs handicap systems. A classic example was the late '90s brouhaha in IMS - a very complicated VPP - with the measurement of depth 3/4 of the way aft. 

Designers found that boats that were had more volume and rocker (compared to earlier boats) under the cockpit area rated lower (ie better) compared to their real speed. This caused a significant stink between those who felt that the IMS VPP (based off the Delft series of tank tests IIRC) was wrong in the way it treated displacement in this area, and those who felt that the VPP was rating the boats correctly but that designers had been getting it wrong by making boats too flat in this section of the hull.

This was a major issue because once the "loophole/flaw in the VPP" (as some put it) or "flaw in other people designs" (as those on the other side saw it) was discovered, we had the spectacle of 47' offshore boats having their rigs, keels and rudders removed so that they could be taken into sheds and have extra volume added under the cockpit - an expensive and controversial exercise that lead to significant controversy about whether the VPP creators or the yacht designers were incompetent.

Because of my job at the time I was able to get info from Rolf Vrolijk (top designer and one of those running the VPP) and the Farr office (top designers) and they certainly DID make gentle claims of agenda or incompetence each way. The same sort of thing continued with later IMS boats that developed silly things like massive tumblehome and wooden keels.

So the fact is that even with yachts (which are much easier to assess via a VPP than dinghies) there ARE vociferous arguments - in fact probably worse ones than under yardsticks.
Back to Top
craiggo View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 01 Apr 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810
Post Options Post Options   Quote craiggo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 13 at 5:10pm
I think Rupert has got me wrong on this. I'm not claiming that race management will sort changeable winds, but a good PRO will be able to determine the right time to shorten course, or to stop the race if using average laps. The point made by someone else about finishing the boat that is leading on the water first, makes my point perfectly. A good race officer will determine likely times to complete another lap and finish the race such that all the competitors will finish as close together on the water as possible, irrespective of who actually gets a finish first.
I thought that it was pretty obviously the way to run average lap racing but clearly there are many who just don't get it. Good race management will manage the racing in whatever conditions materialise, to claim that you can't do anything and it's all down to the weather is in my opinion a cop out.
Back to Top
yellowwelly View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 24 May 13
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2003
Post Options Post Options   Quote yellowwelly Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 13 at 4:02pm
Clap
Back to Top
rogerd View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 25 May 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1076
Post Options Post Options   Quote rogerd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 13 at 3:21pm
Originally posted by maxibuddah

There's no point in coming up with anything too complicated, most of our clubs membership who do race officer can't work out the results in a simple py race, let alone anything like you are describing. And don't suggest using sailwave to them, that's devil talk that is.

Back to Top
maxibuddah View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 06 Mar 09
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1760
Post Options Post Options   Quote maxibuddah Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 13 at 11:07am
There's no point in coming up with anything too complicated, most of our clubs membership who do race officer can't work out the results in a simple py race, let alone anything like you are describing. And don't suggest using sailwave to them, that's devil talk that is.
Everything I say is my opinion, honest
Back to Top
yellowwelly View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 24 May 13
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2003
Post Options Post Options   Quote yellowwelly Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 13 at 10:25am
Originally posted by JimC

Originally posted by yellowwelly

I still think there's something in the mindset of quite a few sailors who would want to see the fastest sailed boat across the line first.


The biggest challenge in trying a radical format is explaining it to the sailors. It seems to be an ingrained human thing that, no matter how much they may whinge and rail about how unfair the results of an existing system are, any new system that changes those results is automatically wrong. You can see exactly the same thing in the pages of the Mail and the Guardian, both of whose readers seem equally conservative (small c) and resistant to new ideas, any time there are proposals for a change in the benefits system...

change is bad, fear change.... take comfort in the ability to whinge, but still turn up regardless because it gets you out the house.  I'm sure there are Golfers who fear their handicap shifting too.   
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 16>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.665y
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz
Change your personal settings, or read our privacy policy