Precisly Worthy.  To put it another way.

The formula 18 rule was created to allow boats of a certain size with a certain sail area to race together without any handicaping between them. The dart hawk was one of the first of those. All F18's are therefore technically one boat and are assigned a SCHRS ( small cat handicap racing system) handicap and they also have a PY number. Technically I could build an F18 in my shed and race it against all the big manufacturers assuming it met all the measurement rules. Some of the big manufactureres ie Dart ( Laser ) and  Hobie also set up one design racing for their respective boats, so say Hobie has events where only Tigers race against each other.

What this means for you is...  The Dart hawk is one of the very early F18's and they do not class race them anymore. The racing you will get is as an F18!! This means that you can use any sails from any other F18, or rudders or anything as long as it meets F18. This is good because you may be able to pick up second hand sails from one of the topp guys. The problem you will have is there are better hull shapes out there and that will cause problems keeping up.

The Hurricane SX is a derivative of the Hurricane5.9 fleet. The 5.9 is a one design class so all boats are built exactly the same. The SX is supposed to follow the same rules. This means that if you go to an event you don't have the excuse that you don't have the latest sail or the mark VIIIIIIX rudders. The problem is that SX racing is pretty much UK based, whereas F18 is trully global.

Moral of the story!  Buy a boat and have fun with it. It's a hobby

Is this correct?

SCHRS is a “measurement based” handicap system so an F18 is an F18 no matter how much refinement has been carried out on it so long as it still measures and weighs as an F18.

Portsmouth Yardstick is a “returns based” handicap system and as very few Cats are raced under PY’s are these returns sent in?

I can find no mention of and F18, or even a Dart Hawk come to that,on the latest Portsmouth Yardstick Numbers at –

  http://www.rya.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/C4B7A55A-EE46-4C29-884F-8E1952A62B31/0/7PNList2006webversion.pdf - http://www.rya.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/C4B7A55A-EE46-4C29-884F-8 E1952A62B31/0/7PNList2006webversion.pdf

However they do say that a full list is available on CD – Cost? – maybe they are listed as Recorded Numbers on there?

Someone call ?

Yes SCHRS is a measurement based handicapping system and it is possible to approx convert an SCHRS number to a PY - it is not an exact science as worthy says because PY is returns (and so rates the boat and the sailors of the boat).  Worthy is also correct in that (currently I believe) that the F18 is usually races of 691.

Worthy is also correct that there are a number of people working on refining the SCHRS rule.

OK if the Hurricane and Hawk were raced some years back before the advent of SCHRS and returns were sent in then the PY of 691 is surely justified, if fact the best Cat sailors were sailing Hurricanes then so its PY may well be at bit harsh today?

To say that the F18 inherited a PY of 691 due to the fact of returns for the Hawk and now all F18’s race of this (if racing off PY) although no, or not enough, PY returns have been sent in for these newer and faster developments, is surely stretching the rules of fair sailing!

Worthy said that a Hawk is no longer competitive against today’s F18’s, and if today’s F18 PY returns were going in based on the very good sailors in the F18 fleet now then almost with out doubt that rating would have dropped as PY is a results based handicap! Surely it is very much as if the Hurricane SX boats claimed a PY of 691 as they also rate the same as a Hurricane with out a kite by SCHRS measurement rules, but current results appear to show the SX as faster.

As PY is results based then the only fair way to sail off this system is to put in the correct and up-to-date returns or not race off this system at all?

Therein the problem with PY. 

The Hurricane 59sx was designed very carefully, and extra weight was added to the boat to ensure it measured to 1.01.  Just enough weight was added to tip the rounding (of the rule) over from 1.00 to 1.01.  If you use the SCHRS calculator (which provides a good approximation of what the SCHRS will come out at) on http://www.schrs.com - www.schrs.com you will see the rounding in action.

Every thing you say is correct Port end flyer. The correlation between SCHRS and PY is pretty flawed, but unless people publish returns there will never be an accurate PY number.

All handicap systems have flaws, some are worse than others. Scooby Simon and his team are working on ironing out some of SCHRS's. The only way to be 100% fair is to race a strict one design with all boats of an equal age etc etc. The tolerances in manufacturing make even one design racing a bit of a farce, remember back to the days of Dart 18 sailors going to the laser centre with scales and weighing all the mast so they could get a light one.

A while ago Worthy was also correct - however we did not agree

But I take your points on the fairness (or lack of!) of handicap systems. Must say reading on this forum the SCHRS and its development appears more open than the way the RYA kept the PY system firmly behind closed doors.

That's true, you can look at the formula and see how it works. Therefore you can also tweak a class ( Hurricane SX) or design a class ( Spitfire) to make sure you get the best out of the rule. Something like a Dart 18 that will not fundamentally change it's class rules will therefore become out of date as other boats are " built " to the rule. A formula is also not real world, for example, SCHRS assumes each crew member is 75 Kg. In reality a Hobie Dragoon sailor will be a lot lighter and your average club Tornado sailor will be heavier.

In the ideal world PY has got to be better because it takes actual results by actual sailors in real world conditions and adjusts accordingly. Unfortunately there are not enough classes and clubs providing results for the established dinghy classes, so there is no way it would work with cats.

In essence Handicaps suck! 

At heart I am a one design sailor.

I'm not having a go at any particular system, I just think you need to have a good understanding of the game you are playing. The guys who spend hours working the systems making sure they are as fair as they can be can only be applauded . They will never be thanked by everyone

At the end of the day I would rather be on the water, zooming around, than in the office.

As I see it, the problem is that completion of a RYA YR2 return is a non-trivial exercise; clubs must process their results to the YR2 spec and derive recommended PNs that are then returned to the RYA.   As well as the burden this places on clubs, it also reduces the richness of the data available to the RYA for mining. 

In the 'States they run a PY system with clubs simply sending back class elapsed times(*) that USSA can then mine as they like to derive new numbers.  It works.  There are PNs for all cats because the exercise is trivial from a club's perspective and no more onerous from USSA's perspective.

http://www.ussailing.org/portsmouth/pyindex.htm - http://www.ussailing.org/portsmouth/pyindex.htm
http://www.ussailing.org/portsmouth/tables06/tables06mh.htm - http://www.ussailing.org/portsmouth/tables06/tables06mh.htm

USSA accepts the results as HTML, so essentially every time you upload final event results to a website, you just forward them to a very nice lady called Darlene at USSA too; that's it...

-----
(*)USSA also request a per-race average wind strength with the elapsed times so that they can derive wind indexed values to qualify the wind-independent values for clubs that wish to include a wind component in their events.

Thanks,  But I only do SCHRS stuff (usually ) when it's dark, or when I cannot go sailing anyway.  There are other people involved in the (large) amount of work that is going on in the background.  I guess I can just type faster and spend more time on sailing forums !

Ta Sailwave

Not sure about the technical stuff but interesting results (And totally free not like the RYA)

Perhaps we should just cut and post the relevant classes that are sailed in the UK here?

Interesting that the Hawk is much faster than a Hurricane over the pond!

And an A is slower than a F18...

Far as I can see all different F18’s are exactly the same!

This identifies the problem with returns based systems, only as good as the data they get back.

Same can be said for measurement based systems if they don't evolve to keep pace with the developments, but we are working on that.

My point entirely! All the f18’s get tarred with the same brush – as they develop and get faster so their handicap goes down! Bit like golf! But over here the F18’s want to develop and still keep the nice safe 691 they had as a Hawk, can’t be right can it?  I can see the logic (just about) when using SCHRS because they are still within the 1.01 roundings that ScoobySi was on about, but what a difference between a Hawk and a Capricorn!

Anybody from the Hurricane world know how many boats are in the USA?

These results may not mean much if only going on a couple of older boats with worn out sails etc

Sorry didn’t think I was!  But as usual you know best?   Thought this was a discussion forum where discussions take place online?   I feel that I and everybody else is entitled to their opinion if that is OK with you?

I thought we were all having a discussion regarding the PY of a Dart Hawk for lostatsea who was interested in buying a Hawk, F18 or other Cat to race at his/her club under PY, that has not altered! You mention that it is the same for Int 14 & Int Moth etc, clearly they do not race under SCHRS nor are they Primary or Secondary yardsticks therefore their PY will alter with development and their subsequent results via returns to the RYA. My point was that this has not happened to the F18 since the Hawk’s time therefore 691 maybe correct for the Hawk but in my opinion it is not correct for all F18’s should they race under PY.

Darline tells me that they are they are all assigned the same rating.  Note however that the Tiger also has a 'one-design' rating; which it sailes under in handicap events.  Not sure I really follow why, but is presumably something to do with its ISAF class status and/or class rules. 

And maybe because Hobie have some influence.

I can be a problem with returns systems, what are you really measuring ?

It is also a problem with Formula classes, those with old/obsolete boats / sails end up sailing on the same handicap as the fast / new boats.  Blanket ratings from measurement rules also have the same problem, "if it measures (and sign's on as a F18, it rates as an F18). 

A stick has to go in the sand somewhere and so diffucult decisions need to be made.  As Worthy says, F18's (and Cats in general) don't do that much PY Handicap racing in the UK.  The only ones I do are a couple of persuit races at Grafham, and then the Duke of Ed and the GGP.

Not really a good basis for PY, but then that is all we have.   

A couple of points - we race at our club off 691 as do a couple of A's and race against monos as well.  Against the A's this gives a pretty fair set of results for round the cans but when it's more windward/leeward we probably have an advantage in all bar the really light stuff.  While I'd love to see them sail off the PY equivalent of 97 I can't actually say it would seem right.

With regard to the Hawk I think that it is worth mentioning that 2 have raced on the F18 circuit over the last few years with very good helms and they have achieved top half placings (I think they were both S2's though).  Downwind I would say that they were as quick as any.  In terms of bang for your buck you won't go far wrong and for club racing it will be a hoot which is, after all, what most of us do it for.

One last note on the Tiger rating. For Hobie Tiger events the boat has to be as supplied by hobie with all hobie kit. To race under F18 they can use whatever bits they want. This would explain the different handicapping.

whatever boat you have sail hard, sail fair and have a damn good time doing it.

Interesting that by putting all the go faster bits on a Tiger actually makes it go slower!

I realise that’s not the case – just the returns from the slower F18’s like the Hawk averaging things out - this probably shows that the system works.

This averaging effect gives the up-to-date f18’s a slight handicap advantage when sailing under the F18 banner, and is what you see in most classes like the Int14 etc before anybody else says it.

Makes we wonder if it were possible to "borrow" the software from Darlene and enter the last few year’s big events like the Piers, Forts, RTI etc (hopefully they would have kept elapsed times?) and see what happens relative to the SCHRS system, sounds like a job for Sailwave methinks?

We are changing the proposed changes to SCHRS by doing this.

The above should read "We are testing the proposed changes to SCHRS by doing this."

Thanks Port End Flyer

?????????

Ta ScoobySi that makes more sense now! Will you be making the results known?

Lostatsea, in your original post you haven’t said whether you have a Hawk or are considering one?

Grant Piggott tried modifying a Dart Hawk earlier this year and even with his access to sail making materials etc and his experience couldn’t make it competitive against the newer generation F18’s!

After trying a Hurricane SX at Bala he bought an old’ish Hurricane and bought a one design SX kit from Andy Webb and won the Hurricane SX Nationals this year.

The Hurricane SX also rates pretty well on SCHRS now (refer to Scooby-Simon’s earlier post) so perhaps, you should consider this route instead of the Hawk!

You will get access to regular one-design racing, an active Association, good resale value and a great all-round boat that also has a competitive two sail option, all of which are unlike the Hawk.

The only draw back I can see is that you may not be able to claim a PY of 691 like the Hawk but as Worthy said lots of clubs allow all F18’s and most other Cats to sail off 691 if they are SCHRS 1.01 the same as the Hawk and Hurricane 5.9 which the SX is!

Andy Webb is here-

http://www.hurricane59.com/awsailboats.php?id=awsailboats - http://www.hurricane59.com/awsailboats.php?id=awsailboats

Hurricane 5.9 Association is here-

http://www.hurricane59.com/default.php - http://www.hurricane59.com/default.php

The Hurricane Forum is here-

http://hurricane59.myfreeforum.org/index.php - http://hurricane59.myfreeforum.org/index.php

But have you checked out the Hobie Miracle 20 , spooky or what !!

(sorry to jump back in thread)

as for Hawks , seem good for a blast , but  H 5.9 better idea , both seem to resell anyway , Hawks because a lot of kit for not a lot and 5.9's because of crackin class association and longevity of boats.

Yes, they are remarkably similar !  Surprisingly so (don't ask Reg about it)

Hadn’t come across that one myself but found this link pages 20 & 21

http://www.hobiecat.com/media/pdf/Hobie_Sailing.pdf - http://www.hobiecat.com/media/pdf/Hobie_Sailing.pdf

Hurricane 59 with modified Nacra 6.0 sail and dagger boards?

Edit - Agree with ScoobySi that is what I meant to say sorry

More like a modified Hurricane 5.9 with  a Carbon mast and Daggerboards.  You put the two boats side by side and there is very little difference. (allegedly)

Sorry Rob but having trouble with that link, could you please check and try again or is it me?

The recent Forts race results also appears to show that the F18's (Read Capricorn's!) have definitely gained some ground on the benchmark set by the Tornado’s!

http://www.vic.yachting.org.au/site/yachting/vic/downloads/Y ardsticks05_06%20new3.pdf

try removing the space

http://www.vic.yachting.org.au/site/yachting/vic/downloads/Y <space> ardsticks05_06%20new3.pdf

Thanks! - Embarrassingly obvious in the end

Thanks Rob shame some of our “benchmark” boats like the Dart and Hurricane are not there to allow for % comparisons not sure that using a Nacra 5.8 is much use for that purpose.

Anybody know if a full set of results with elapsed times and handicaps used is available rather than the WYC handout that I have seen?