PY changes for 2014

Originally posted by iGRF The proof of that is exactly the Alto, it's been around now since 2007, it's been raced all over the place at all sorts of venues, high and low profile, yet only now 7 years later has it shown up on the 'experimental' list, I don't even care why, but immediately it's wrong, they've positioned it within a point or two of a 505 a very similar boat with square yards more canvas and at least 5% more speed on all points of sailing.

Just realised who you are Slooow! Annoyed about Weymouth? - it was a light winds, and we all know what a bandit the Phantom is in those conditions. 

Originally posted by mongrel How about separating coastal clubs data from lake/reservoir data and seeing if a separate sea and inland py would be much different? There's no ambiguity about whether you're on a lake or the sea like there would be with a wind strength py.

Plenty of ambiguity about sea venues - compare the Solent, Poole Harbour, Salcombe, Shoreham, Hayling. All salty but all VERY different in terms of waves, tidal effect, etc.

Inland venues can also be very different - the only common factors are no salt and no waves big enough to surf of, but Grafham or Rutland are worlds away from little puddles like Frensham.

PYS is about averages - and the nut on the tiller has as big an impact on results as the PY number.

So... you're saying that the PYAG should put more weight on personal opinions about how fast different boats ought to be, and less weight on what the actual data coming back from the clubs says?

In the USA their major cruiser handicapping rule, PHRF, has a much greater amount of input from local handicapping committees on how fast they think the boats should be than we have here. Its not always a recipe for sailors content about their handicaps.

Originally posted by JimC So... you're saying that the PYAG should put more weight on personal opinions about how fast different boats ought to be, and less weight on what the actual data coming back from the clubs says?

Yes, absolutely yes, if as you well know the data is skewed.

Take that little conversation above as an example.

Two near identical hulls, one detuned by the designer to be easier to use, the other tried and tested with more sail area, but because the data is being submitted presumably by a venue that constrains the faster features of the one over the other, your programme receives inaccurate data.

The Same with the Icon

Definitely the case with the Laser & Phantom and sounds like something weird going on with Teltales Wanderer.

It's clearly the data that is wrong, or the computer programme, but surely some basis in actual fact when one boat is clearly faster than another, not only in fact but design, should be taken into consideration by human input and the data anomaly corrected. Hence my calls for the factual boat data be part of the correlation.

It is a Fact that the 505 is a faster boat by at least 5% than an Alto, it is also a fact that the Merlin Rocket is similarly faster than an Icon when all its facets come into play, relying on data derived from venues when all facets of any given craft do not come into play is wrong, it is that simple.

Edited by iGRF - 28 Feb 14 at 9:44am