New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: Farr 3.7
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Farr 3.7
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 8384858687 112>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
iiiiitick View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 19 May 15
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240 		Post Options Post Options   Quote iiiiitick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Farr 3.7
    Posted: 17 Dec 15 at 9:48pm
I have had a bad week and this old chestnut turns up again. What are some of you talking about? A sport without regulation? You want to build an out and out speed machine? Do it then tell us all about it. You want a trap boat for lightweights? There is this Farr thing. You are overweight? Sail a Finn or a Phant. You are a midget then get a Byte. A development class is your bottle? Sail Cherub......there is something out there for everyone. You want fleet racing? Fit a towbar. You want handicap racing then club or Bloody Mary et al. And do you know to help us along with this eclectic turmoil we have a nice handicap system to make it all possible. Not perfect, nothing is perfect but just shut up and let me get on with my being fed up.

i feel better now, Merry Christmas.
Back to Top
iiiiitick View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 19 May 15
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240 		Post Options Post Options   Quote iiiiitick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Dec 15 at 9:52pm
Originally posted by realnutter

It's impossible, really, to please everybody.. I sail single handed, so what should I sail?
Laser? I'd love to, but nope, I'm too light, at 65kg...
Contender? I'd love to, but at 50, probably not agile enough, and too light...
Farr 3.7?  I'd love to, but not agile or rich enough... 
D Zero , Phantom, etc. see above...
Moff? Hahahahaha
Solo... hey! I'm not that old!
Comet? 
Topper?
British Moth?
Lightning?
Byte C2?

At the end of the day, who cares? I sail for fun... I've no pretensions to being national champion. Handicap racing lets me have my fun, and race on some sort of even basis with others who have had to do exactly the same, complex, juggling act... and ended up with a different answer...


Get a Byte, you'l love it and lots of us are women.
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: 17 Dec 15 at 9:53pm
Originally posted by Riv

And just look at Cycling, still riding diamond frames which originated in the 1880s and real development stopped by the old cycling bufffers.

Imagine if sailing was cycling, we would still with Gaff rig, bronze plates and Yachting caps! 



I don't know what you're riding, but some of us are using aero carbon frames, aero carbon wheels, aero carbon bars and helmets that look very different to the cloth caps of the 1880s!

IMHO cycling has strong lessons for sailing.  No one stops development in cycling.  You can always go and ride in unrestricted human power vehicle events if you don't want the UCI's "buffers rules".  It's just that very, very few people do so obviously it's not that attractive to most.

"Conventional" cycling is about the 4th most popular sport in major English speaking countries and huge in many other places as well.  It is the most popular "gear intensive" sport almost everywhere as far as I can find out, and it has the world's  biggest annual sporting event.  So it seems obvious that cycling's approach is highly likely to be much better than that of any other similar sport.  Certainly if cycling's approach was disastrously wrong, the sport would not be so big.

As Grumpf points out there's also some areas of cycling where there are very few rules that are also popular.  Then there's similar forms of cycling that have very restrictive gear rules (like CX) that are becoming enormously popular in some places.  Obviously there's not any one single route to popularity but we can see that some routes work better in some situations than others.

Looking at sports like road cycling and mountain biking, windsurfing and surfing it seems that there are some disciplines where the activity itself moulds the design in a way that the most "efficient" gear is also pretty accessible; even most world-class racing MTBs can be pulled out of the garage and ridden by a weekend warrior.  On the other hand, in other disciplines with different physics the most "efficient" gear is ridiculously costly and inaccessible.  To continue the bike example, if there were no "old buffer" rules then anyone who wanted to race would have to own a carbon fibre fully-enclosed recumbent that would be extremely expensive and impractical to use.

IMHO dinghy sailing and road cycling disciplines are where the faster gear is too complex and expensive to be popular, and therefore tighter rules are required to keep the kit reasonably accessible.  It's not a case of being old buffers but of being practical.

The funny thing is that the whole area of the effect of gear restrictions on the popularity of a sport has basically been ignored as far as formal and far-reaching studies go.  There's a lot to be learned from other sports (rowing, kayaking, surfing, windsurfing, motor racing) and they seem to show that "old buffer's rules" work better than a free for all in terms of increasing participation.


Edited by Chris 249 - 17 Dec 15 at 10:09pm
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Dec 15 at 10:21pm
I think the mistake is to think of Lasers, Solos, Aeros, Zero's, Supernovas etc as seperate classes. Think of them instead as alternative designs within a Singlehander Class, much like NSMs and Canterbury Tales are different designs of Merlin Rocket. That way you can rationalise the number of classes whilst still allowing (even encouraging) new designs.
Back to Top
RS400atC View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 04 Dec 08
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3011 		Post Options Post Options   Quote RS400atC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Dec 15 at 10:06am
Originally posted by Chris 24.....and they seem to show that old buffer's rules work better than a free for all in terms of increasing participation.
[/QUOTE


There's more to life than 'increasing participation' or we'd just be playing football in the dinghy park.

There's more to life than 'increasing participation' or we'd just be playing football in the dinghy park.
Back to Top
iiiiitick View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 19 May 15
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240 		Post Options Post Options   Quote iiiiitick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Dec 15 at 10:17am
Originally posted by Peaky

I think the mistake is to think of Lasers, Solos, Aeros, Zero's, Supernovas etc as seperate classes. Think of them instead as alternative designs within a Singlehander Class, much like NSMs and Canterbury Tales are different designs of Merlin Rocket. That way you can rationalise the number of classes whilst still allowing (even encouraging) new designs.

I like that idea. One could say that differences in design that suit different physiques say...Phantom/fat to Byte/thin are no more than an Aero with 5,7or 9 rigs, 300 with A or B, 600 with wide or narrow racks and reefable? sail. 
Back to Top
turnturtle View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 05 Dec 14
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2538 		Post Options Post Options   Quote turnturtle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Dec 15 at 10:30am
Originally posted by Peaky

I think the mistake is to think of Lasers, Solos, Aeros, Zero's, Supernovas etc as seperate classes. Think of them instead as alternative designs within a Singlehander Class, much like NSMs and Canterbury Tales are different designs of Merlin Rocket. That way you can rationalise the number of classes whilst still allowing (even encouraging) new designs.

I've suggested this in the past, and had it torn apart.  Even at club level when the 700 and MPS were the same handicap a few years back, I suggested a 'HP class' with Cherubs and B14s joining in... no PY.  It got zero buy in and the majority thought it a rubbish idea- you have to know when you're outgunned and out of step with the groupthink.

I'm afraid dinghy racing at club level is rapidly becoming handicap only, unless the club you are at happens to have a strong ethos the other way.  From my POV, I plan to use it for 'training only' next year, and given that I will be racing on a board against boats, I really do know not to bother looking at the results and 'self judge' my performance by what happens on the water.  But if that was it, handicap racing only, then I know that would be the end of competitive sailing for me... in some ways that wouldn't be a bad thing, then I could focus on sailing boats just for fun and recreation, and that's where something like the Farr comes into its own.    
Back to Top
TheObsessed View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 17 Dec 15
Location: Dorset
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1 		Post Options Post Options   Quote TheObsessed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Dec 15 at 12:14pm
Perhaps like many of you, I have tried supporting some of the established fleets and in fact at one time it was almost a requirement at my current club for securing a space in the dinghy park.    It wasn’t ideal for me personally however and so I moved on to boats I enjoy sailing.
My circumstances are very similar to those of Van Mentz and so I am now happy to accept Salmon80’s suggestion and again “do my bit to support fleets”. In this case the the small, but perfectly formed, Farr 3.7 fleet. My previous boat is sold, the Farr is ordered and the spars are on their way (just landed in Hong Kong according to DHL).
Back to Top
Rupert View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 11 Aug 04
Location: Whitefriars sc
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8956 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Rupert Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Dec 15 at 1:51pm
Originally posted by TheObsessed

Perhaps like many of you, I have tried supporting some of the established fleets and in fact at one time it was almost a requirement at my current club for securing a space in the dinghy park.    It wasn’t ideal for me personally however and so I moved on to boats I enjoy sailing.
My circumstances are very similar to those of Van Mentz and so I am now happy to accept Salmon80’s suggestion and again “do my bit to support fleets”. In this case the the small, but perfectly formed, Farr 3.7 fleet. My previous boat is sold, the Farr is ordered and the spars are on their way (just landed in Hong Kong according to DHL).


Great to hear that.
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686
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: 20 Dec 15 at 11:27am
Originally posted by RS400atC

Originally posted by Chris 24.....and they seem to show that old buffer's rules work better than a free for all in terms of increasing participation.

There's more to life than 'increasing participation' or we'd just be playing football in the dinghy park.
[/QUOTE


True, there has to be a balance - but I don't think that the idea of balance came up in the post I responded to. 

True, there has to be a balance - but I don't think that the idea of balance came up in the post I responded to. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 8384858687 112>

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