D-Zero

Originally posted by iGRF Originally posted by Rupert Originally posted by JimC Speaking completely personally. A purist point of view would be that without observed performance it's absurd to issue corrected times. So for classes where a club has no satisfactory handicap perhaps the purist would say the best thing is to only publish elapsed times for those boats, and no corrected times or placings. But I want a number NOW. And if the number doesn't mean I beat the Streakers, who are all sailed by numpties for whom I have no respect, then the number is WRONG, and I want a better one NOW. Says the man in the biggest bandit of them all

Which one of mine is the biggest bandit? Interested to see if your thoughts on that match mine?

Them all be bandits... 

Hell, who do I sue because the handicap of my phantom has dropped from 1053 to 1002 (or whatever it is) and now for some reason no one wants them anymore?

You should all buy D-One's and stop d1cking around

We volunteered on several occasions to be excluded from any potential 'chocolates' at larger open handicap events in the first couple of years with ICON. 

Defuses the accusations of those with any axe to grind, allows everyone to race together and helps establish a more reliable number.  Forget about club return in the first year of so - far too many 'other' variables at play plus sample size limitations.  What everyone wants to know is POTENTIAL OF THE BOAT ... and far far less about the cobbled 'average' performance of any class with minute sample sizes ... but we do want them to be involved..

Yes we know it is not straightforward and would require a carefuly considered overhaul of handicapping....  But in a world where handicap racing is now so much more important perhaps it is time for the RYA to question their own orthadoxy on this one. 

We, the people, want numbers that reflect the POTENTIAL of boats much more directly.   We the people pay RYA affiliation fees and the system as currently run appears to be a 'take it or leave it' one.  Smell the coffee guys ..... most major handicpa events ALREADY  use a heavily modified version of 'the' system because 'regular' PNs do not really measure POTENTIAL - now why on earth would anyone bother to go to all the trouble of developing their own adjustments on such a scale ?  Heck this year it was even used by some sailing weeks.

For new classes is a total nightmare - we the owners and producers really do not want to get involved despite what is all too casually thrown around occasionally in conversation.  We get damned if the 'do' and of course damned if the 'don't' ...

Surely a measure of 'assessment' must be involved for any class with less than say 250 recorded races each year ?  especially applicable for new classes.    'Eliminate' any from a purely 'numbers' approach with less than 'n' races each and augment with assessment would seem reasonable. 

In the meantime and to help any process - why does'nt everyone 'chill' and just go race whatever you like ... if 'the' system does not / cannot change  I can see the more reactive and different approach of the GL one being developed further and becoming in time the main handicap approach.  I'd pay ... perhaps other CA's and producers would as well. 

Mike L.