Reply | Post New Message | All Messages | this message is spam
Author: Jason Crowson (2crows...@comcast.net) contact the author
Subject: Update, Problem & Solutions
Info: (16807 views) Posted: Sunday 2-10-08 01:58:02 PM
Mike,

I am always in favor of doing things to improve the fleet turnout. But I also believe in keeping things simple! So, give me some real proof that changing the crew weight limit will increase participation and I will consider backing your proposal. I want you to get names of boats that are not coming out sailing because they are over the crew weight limit!

By the way, I am at 210 and have another crew at 195 and we still manage to sail below the crew weight limit.

-Jason

:: Hi Everyone:
::
:: FInally, one of the class's top scorers caves. Their
:: response; keep it a class framework.
::
:: The problems:
::
:: #1 The current weight limit of 880#s with its176 pound
:: median prejudices crew above 176#, penalizes in excess
:: of 200#s and discriminates in excess of 220#s.
::
:: #2 The fine grainularity of the 176 pound filter
:: restricts participation in the fleet among real and
:: existing crew choices that are in the tens of people at
:: 200#s and above.
::
:: #3 Based on conferring with seven owners who are turning
:: away crew; there is a projected surplus of at least 16
:: and likely more than 32 real and exiting crew choices
:: who want to sail on these boats and cannot because the
:: 176 pound filter prevents their participation within the
:: current 880# weight limit.
::
:: Ask yourself; do I know two people who've wanted to sail
:: on my boat but because they are 190 pounds and above I
:: have trouble fitting them in within the existing 880#
:: limit?
::
:: If you're consistent with the sampled owners your answer
:: will be yes.
::
:: #4 Real Fleet Racers concerned with this weight limit
:: issue want this issue resolved before National's this
:: year; not next year.
::
:: The potential solutions:
::
:: Solution A) Larry proposed and Paul calculated a metric
:: allowing an owners weight allowance; 880# + .04 (driver
:: weight - 160). With owner's weight differences
:: cancelling each other out by a fraction, this alllowance
:: gains virtually nothing in terms of allowance. More
:: important it does not open up the filter sufficiently to
:: enable the surplus of crew who want to sail on these
:: boats too sail on them. Some of those people are the
:: future owners. In fact one could add they are the best
:: prospects for ownership. I was a crew before I was an
:: owner.
::
:: You could spin this owner weight allowance another way
:: and just say the owner(s) get their weight free above
:: 176 pounds. This opens up the filter just a little bit
:: more, however, violates that area which concerns
:: everyone who wants a level fleet metric.
::
:: For the reasons cited above; less than optimum solution
:: in relation to the problem & not maintaining a level
:: fleet metric this solution of an owner's weight
:: allowance must be disqualified.
::
:: Solution B) Take the Moore 24 example given the only
:: mathematical solution supported by empirical evidence
:: and make the fleet weight limit 980#. This solution
:: opens the grainularity of the weight filter to a median
:: of 196#s. And enables some latitude in reaching out into
:: the 210#+ crew surplus waiting to sail on these boats.
::
:: However, after having considered this 980# solution that
:: I have in fact championed, I believe its median is still
:: too low in relation to the surplus of crew waiting to
:: get on these boats. More so it allienates crews at 880#
:: because now those owners would have re-shuffle their
:: existing crews. This is the key problem with the 980#
:: solution. Its a move in the right direction but not
:: enough of a move.
::
:: For the reasons cited above while 980# opens the filter
:: enabling selection of a greater distribution of crew
:: choices by weight, it also addresses a majority of the
:: concerned owners who find themselves having to leave
:: people on the dock because so many of their fifth
:: choices would have made their total crew weight over the
:: 880# limit.
::
:: More so, it will make some existing 880# crews resuffle
:: and does not address the problems of the tens of people
:: over 200#s who want to sail on these boats and cannot
:: becuase they are bared from doing so by the current
:: limit itself.
::
:: For these reasons cited above, solution B must be
:: disqualified.
::
:: Solution C
::
:: Move the median crew filter to 210#s for a total crew
:: weight of 1050. This finally starts letting in the
:: surplus of real and existing crew choices who want to
:: sail on these boats who are now restricted and going
:: elsewhere because their % distrubution falls into a
:: no-mans land given the current median filter at 176#s.
::
:: More so, Solution C simple enables those boats at 880#,
:: to just add one 170#er (near the current median).
:: Subsequently, they easily remain at their optimum total
:: weight but now at 1050#.
::
:: Note that this weight of 1050 is what Desperado sailed
:: at for years before the 1000# weight limit was
:: introduced. I can assure you it is the easist weight
:: limit to administer in terms of recruiting from a very
:: broad range of crew weight choices. Also, I think it is
:: the boats best all round performing total crew weight
:: for the broadest range of wind conditions.

:: You can also take this Solution C and go to a median of
:: 215# for a total weight of 1075 . . . if we really want
:: to address the issue of this surplus crew where the
:: weight distribution skews above 200#. Because this is
:: where the highest percent of new crew choices (the
:: surplus) exist.
::
:: I have no objection to this 215# median, although, It
:: would likely mean that Desperado would always sail a bit
:: on the light side by 25 to 40 pounds. Which I did for
:: years when top scorers were sailing at 1100#. It was
:: simplly easier to adminmister my boat at between 1030
:: and 1065#s. There was no crew juggling, no having to
:: leave anyone who wanted to go at the dock. There were
:: always plenyy of crew choices and it never forced me to
:: sail with any less than five total.
::
:: So ask yourself. At 880# currently how many boats have a
:: 200 pounder in the address book but cannot take them
:: because of the current weight limit. The sample of seven
:: says everyone does and they probably have two.
::
:: For the reasons cited above 1050 to 1075 is the optimum
:: solution. It addrersses the vast reserves of crew
:: waiting to sail on these boats. Encourages
:: participation, ownership and the value of the boat. Its
:: is sensitive to the optimizations of the fleet's top
:: scorers because this option does not mean a crew
:: resuffle. And It moves the weight distribution up to
:: eliminate the inequitities in the currernt mean of 176#s
:: which can be a discriminatory mean.
::
:: Solution D
::
:: There is one last option, a proposal by Paul suggesting
:: crew of four, however, at the 176 median. The issue here
:: again is the median which is the problem. Of course the
:: median could be uped and we could be sailing at four or
:: 820#s which is the Moore 24 median of 205#.
::
:: I personally would prefer to sail with more than four.
:: Again and again when racing competitive with; four
:: against five, its tough if not inequitable. Givne the
:: inherent physics advantages of a total of five verses
:: four's physical placement on the boat; five is always an
:: advantage.
::
:: For this final reason Solution D must be disqualified.
::
:: The answer is Solution C 1050 to 1075 pounds.
::
:: Now who's going to champion this fleet rule change
:: before Nationals this year?
::
:: Remember, I'm only proposing the change in the Fun
:: Series to test the soltution. Also so the fleet can
:: start accessing all the real and existing crew waiting
:: to get on these boats before they go somewhere else.
::
:: But the issue remains. Its most of the real fleet racers
:: who recognize and even want this change as soon as
:: possible.

:: Mike
:: :: WTF!!!!!!
:: ::
:: :: :: Hi Tom:
:: :: ::
:: :: :: Yes I appreciate you backing down on suggesting that we
:: :: :: censor our open discussions on this board concerning all
:: :: :: issues of the fleet metric.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: Again, I'm only concerned personally about the weight
:: :: :: limit filter which I believe is too fine because it
:: :: :: filters out vast numbers of real and existing crew
:: :: :: choices. More so, this finding has been substantiated
:: :: :: through one on one conference with multiple owners over
:: :: :: the prior two months.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: Based on these conversations I believe the weight limit
:: :: :: will change by next season. I am personally advocvating
:: :: :: for its test adoption in the Fun Series this year.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: I also believe if a vote were called now, that crew
:: :: :: weight result would be substanitally different one from
:: :: :: the vote earllier in the year, now that a certain number
:: :: :: of the factors and issues are better understood by the
:: :: :: majority who have seen their real crew choices limited
:: :: :: by a rule that filters for less than 176 pound crew
:: :: :: members.
:: ::
:: :: :: More so, I have only been an advocate of this opening of
:: :: :: the weight limit to a more granular filter in the Fun
:: :: :: Series. Which I think is a Fun idea supporting ease of
:: :: :: administration, ease of crew placement, encouraging more
:: :: :: outside particiaption in the fleet. A good first to
:: :: :: opening up for more crew participation and regardless if
:: :: :: such a weight increrase is ever adopted in the real
:: :: :: fleet series. Although I will inform everyone reading
:: :: :: here that most of the concern for opening the filter
:: :: :: exists among those racing in the real fleet series.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: Again, I'm the only one who has cited a scientific way
:: :: :: to measure and distinguish why this visual annomaly
:: :: :: apparent between the diverse weight make-up of E27 and
:: :: :: M24 crews. And that annomally exists because the M24
:: :: :: weight limit opens the gates to the vast numbers of crew
:: :: :: in excess of 200#s.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: If you have a similar scientifc means to justify not
:: :: :: opening the gates to more particiaption in the fleet, or
:: :: :: somehow a metric that justifies the currentl 880# weight
:: :: :: limit; do so. Then we can do the statistical analysis.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: Regardess, the constituent sounding has made the answer
:: :: :: obvious. The current filter progressively skews the
:: :: :: weeding out of real and existing crew choices the
:: :: :: heavier they weigh. And certainly hits its stride in
:: :: :: acting as a limiter for choices over 210#.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: In summary pursuant to my adovacy and continued
:: :: :: diplomacy.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: 1) I noticed the anomally in the M24 fleet as a
:: :: :: repeating pattern of more diverse crews.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: 2) I figured out why matematically. No one else has done
:: :: :: this.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: 3) I then took this information and begun to champion it
:: :: :: personally owner to owner, and found that the real issue
:: :: :: is that the current weight filter is not sufficiently
:: :: :: grainular to enable owners to choose from a much vaster
:: :: :: pool of real and existing crew choices; that in fact are
:: :: :: being turned away. Undoubtedly these crew choices will
:: :: :: go somewhere else if they can't find a ride on the boat
:: :: :: they'd rather be sailign on.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: 4) Specific to counterpoint. The opposition has offered
:: :: :: no result based on any empircal means to justify their
:: :: :: stance to keep the current weight limit. I will here in.
:: :: :: And this is not to detract from or keep people in the
:: :: :: dark as to these empirical findings as they surface and
:: :: :: become better understood.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: I did get one political reason for keeping the current
:: :: :: weight limit by one boat who was tired of PHRF poltiics
:: :: :: in Monterey. And I thought that was a good reason.
:: :: :: However, none of the other opposition to raising the
:: :: :: limit to more real and existing crew choices has been
:: :: :: offered. So counter to diplomacy there has been a level
:: :: :: of detraction from those opposing for some reason.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: Like in any fleet the detractors to change are its top
:: :: :: scorers where the boat envirnment is set and things are
:: :: :: working fine. I was one when the fleet had no weight
:: :: :: limit and all of a sudden had to modify my crew of 6
:: :: :: total at 1065. At the time that meant booting a crew
:: :: :: member.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: To avoid this breakdown this go round, the weight limit
:: :: :: should obviosuly be increased to 1100 poinds. Meaning
:: :: :: the top scorers simple add one 200 pounder to the crew.
:: :: :: Subsequently don't have to go through the radical crew
:: :: :: rework forced onto many when the weight went to 1000#s
:: :: :: way back when.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: Now, everyone knows I'm simply pressing for 980#s as
:: :: :: this total weight opens the filter to the 200#ers I'm
:: :: :: currently having to turn away. As are others. And there
:: :: :: are a lot of them that are being turned away.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: Why let them get away into other fleets? What's the cost
:: :: :: of one more sandwich? And even if that sixth persons job
:: :: :: is the boom vang and the cunningham, that spot opens a
:: :: :: spot for the novice which is almost an impossibility in
:: :: :: any racing fleet; yet here this opportunity exists.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: Finally this has nothing to do with detracting from
:: :: :: fleet racing or a fleet rule system. Simply that opening
:: :: :: up the weight limit and in the Fun Series certainly
:: :: :: offers one step, opens the doorway, to recruting more
:: :: :: real and existing crew choices into the fleet regardless
:: :: :: of what happens in the real fleet series. Makes racing
:: :: :: in what is supposed to be the Fun Series easier to
:: :: :: administer. Consider this Fun Series recruitment
:: :: :: transition a recruting and screening mechanism for the
:: :: :: real fleet racers. And if this results in a B fleet that
:: :: :: feeds into an A fleet more the good.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: Unlike you Tom, I don't have the time to administer or
:: :: :: even desire to manage a bouy racing program on my own
:: :: :: boat. Subsequently, the alternative schedule works for
:: :: :: me. I think it should be kept different from the real
:: :: :: fleet series, despite the bouy race slipped into its
:: :: :: schedule this year, by the real fleet racers who in my
:: :: :: opinion have an excellent round the bouys schedule this
:: :: :: year which liek the Fun Series; should distinguish the
:: :: :: fleet as as excellent chioce.
:: :: ::
:: :: :: Mike
:: :: ::
:: :: :: :: Well Mike I was trying to be diplomatic, but to put it
:: :: :: :: bluntly, you are beating a dead horse. Your arguments
:: :: :: :: are subjective arguments about balance/comparisons of
:: :: :: :: weights across different fleets, a case can be made and
:: :: :: :: argued for in opposition to yours using the same logic,
:: :: :: :: its just your point of view. The weight issue was voted
:: :: :: :: on as discussed here, and won with a wide margin.
:: :: :: :: Actually, I missed the vote at the 07’ Nationals Annual
:: :: :: :: Meeting, so you can figure that I would be one more to
:: :: :: :: vote to keep the weight where it stands for the 08’
:: :: :: :: meeting. With regard to the Distance Series (mellow
:: :: :: :: series) I personally own the boat to sail in a One
:: :: :: :: Design fleet, and I am guessing so do most of the rest
:: :: :: :: of the group. I am not sure of the origins of the
:: :: :: :: Distance High Point series, but I doubt that the
:: :: :: :: originators wanted the boats to sail out of One Design
:: :: :: :: for the trophy. That said, if the racing is One Design
:: :: :: :: and a boat is sailing in an illegal form, that gives
:: :: :: :: anyone else the right to pull the flag, that sure
:: :: :: :: doesn’t sound like much fun……
:: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: Lets all sail strict One Design, and use these forums
:: :: :: :: for constructive discussion to better the fleet and the
:: :: :: :: sailors.
:: :: :: ::
:: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: Hi Tom:
:: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: One more thought. I disagree with limiting an open
:: :: :: :: :: board. People need to know what they're opting into when
:: :: :: :: :: they consider crewing on an Express or joining our fleet
:: :: :: :: :: as an owner.
:: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: Further, we've got as good problem. First, there's a
:: :: :: :: :: surplus of real existing crew that raising the weight
:: :: :: :: :: limit opens the door to; including prospects that might
:: :: :: :: :: soemday own a boat. Second, market price remains at a
:: :: :: :: :: premium over introductory price. These two indicators
:: :: :: :: :: show demand and I don't think that information is worthy
:: :: :: :: :: of limiting within the reverberating reprecusions of a
:: :: :: :: :: closed environment limiting the openings.
:: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: On the other nonsense rules. Opening up these limits
:: :: :: :: :: means there will be some top boats intersted in pursuing
:: :: :: :: :: them. There always are and this core catalyst can act as
:: :: :: :: :: a growth accelerator for everything else.
:: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: MIke
:: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: Hi Tom:
:: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: Rants has nothing to do with it if you are really doing
:: :: :: :: :: :: your constituent homework. And I agree with you this is
:: :: :: :: :: :: all about enticing ownership in the e27; and the market
:: :: :: :: :: :: price seems to prove that over and over again.
:: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: Will suggested I not opt in to this delemma of the
:: :: :: :: :: :: weight malfunction. In fact I never did having owned the
:: :: :: :: :: :: boat since July 1984 when there were no limits and none
:: :: :: :: :: :: of this regulatory nonsense.
:: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: And while I belive the fleet has done well, grown, and
:: :: :: :: :: :: made the best out of the last ten years of exeuctive
:: :: :: :: :: :: leadership, its time for a change. The fleet lost at
:: :: :: :: :: :: least two boats to these nonsense rules. Those are Soren
:: :: :: :: :: :: & Lega on Attitude Adjustment and Scott Easom who wanted
:: :: :: :: :: :: to buy an Express and then bought a Moore 24 instead.
:: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: As everyone is aware I supported Lega & Soren, and Scott
:: :: :: :: :: :: indirectly, at the National meeting because I believe
:: :: :: :: :: :: creativity needs to find its place in the sense of
:: :: :: :: :: :: things. I had no objections. In turn the option remains
:: :: :: :: :: :: open to pursue. Recall through the fleets most rapid
:: :: :: :: :: :: growth stage in terms of quantiies of production there
:: :: :: :: :: :: were none of these nonsense regulations. Like hiking
:: :: :: :: :: :: lines noe when before there were no life lines at all?
:: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: Specific to the weight limit. Every engineer, scientist
:: :: :: :: :: :: or mathematician knows I offered the only rational
:: :: :: :: :: :: metric why the fleet needs to seriously consider moving
:: :: :: :: :: :: the weight limit to 980 pounds based on one example from
:: :: :: :: :: :: a similar boat; the Moore 24. This metric includes
:: :: :: :: :: :: empiracal visual proof of a mix of the crews, where
:: :: :: :: :: :: somehow this weight propotion in the M24 fleet better
:: :: :: :: :: :: does a better job of mixing up the bunch.
:: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: But there's still an issue.
:: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: Regardless of the math and empirical observations,
:: :: :: :: :: :: speaking about participation and encouraging ownership:
:: :: :: :: :: :: then move the weight limit to a range supporting six
:: :: :: :: :: :: crew members. For every one who has done their homework
:: :: :: :: :: :: there is a surplus of people waiting to crew on these
:: :: :: :: :: :: boats and their weight range is wide. The current weight
:: :: :: :: :: :: limit subsequently limits and in fact, according to many
:: :: :: :: :: :: owners, blocks their access to many of their real
:: :: :: :: :: :: existing crew choices. This is a bottleneck that reduces
:: :: :: :: :: :: exposure to the fleet, participation and can interfere
:: :: :: :: :: :: in what might follow.
:: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: Not interested in six, then at least open the
:: :: :: :: :: :: bottlenecks gate to allow more people above 200 pounds
:: :: :: :: :: :: to enter. There are a lot of us.
:: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: Mike
:: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: Mike-
:: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: Maybe you should remember that this is an open forum for
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: all to read. I have no problem discussing issues that
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: you have as a class owner however, some of these rants
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: should really not be out there for the public eye. If
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: you really want to make this more fun then think about
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: perspective owners reading our forum and thinking "why
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: should I get into this class?"
:: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: Eric Deeds, and Paul Deeds- is there any way you might
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: be willing to set up a ‘members only’ section with
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: privileges (password protection) so that the owners of
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: the boats can have discussions like the weight issue in
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: private? Many other classes have such capability for
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: their websites for just this reason. Let me just say
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: that I am concerned about this as a couple of people
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: have mentioned the forum rants, one a possible future
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: boat owner who really doesn’t care to get into a class
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: with these kinds of issues.
:: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: Tom Jenkins
:: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Hi Will:
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: As I recall on the windy LS of two years ago, which
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Desperado won overall (we were fith overall last year)
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Desperado won the North end of the line, the start, got
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: to the ebb elevator first as you were headed toward our
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: stearn from the inside. Outside the Gte we changed first
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: to the 4 and left you in the dust. We used an incredible
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: efficient Hogan main built flat and it was perfect for
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: this windy race.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: I have no problem with one design racing, except would
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: like the weight limit reasonable for big guys like me,
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: for ease of finding crew, to make races easier to
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: administer, to avoid the juggling I'm doing now locating
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: five crew that fit the framework. Plus opening up the
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: weight limit makes the boat faster. And there's less
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: need for a shy kite.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Until the weight limit is opened to a point people can
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: get a consistent crew easily, the same crew pretty
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: muchm, you light people sailed boats will keep your
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: multiple advantages inluding always having morer weight
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: in the right places at the right times.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: The minority is who needs to change. Not the majority.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: This is the Fun Series. My goal is to make it more Fun.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Mike
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Come on Mike. It is not about choice it is about even
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ONE DESIGN racing. Having extra weight on the rail is a
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: tremendous advantage- I remember the last windy light
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ship race you were over weight, started late behind
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: boats, and then sailed in a straight line through our
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: lee before the bridge. Why not loby for a motor
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: allowance? Enter your boat in a PHRF class if you must
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: sail with 6. Have your shot at the race overall trophy.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: What does competing in a one design race and not follow
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: the rules accomplish for you? Of course it could be
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: light and you could be bobbing far behind the fleet
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: because you would be underpowered- but then everyone
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: else would be bobbing next to you because they had to
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: bring 6 in order to keep up...
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: If the race rules allow you to sail in a one design
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: class without following the one design rules then I
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: guess we can't do anything about that- just volunteer to
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: opt out of the season scoring.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Hi Will:
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: I'll look forward to reading any of your proposals.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: My friends work schedule is such that if he's available,
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: he'd just jump on, subsequently would result in a sixth
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: . . . which I don't mind.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: So my complaint about the fleet rules in the fun series
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: is they don't allow an essential freedom of choice.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Which also seem to apply to others who were limitied in
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: their choices for the real fleet series.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Mike
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: The friggin shy kite is legal under the class rules if
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: it is not under the minimum size. The allowable size is
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: very small- can't imagine having one smaller. This rule
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: like all the others is enforced by the honor system.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Take your friend sailing when it is not a class race and
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: not a rule violation. I can recall many a fun non race
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: day cruise on your boat myself...
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Honest:
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: I'm open to anything. Even a shy kite (less than mid
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: girth max) because it can be an awesum advantage on a
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: windy reach coming back from the LightShip or Farallons.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: A BIG ADVANTAGE known to take home many a first place
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: cups.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: No doubt, I'd like to use my specialty ocean sails . . .
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: which do not include either a shy runner or reacher.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: But would like to take my frend who would like to make
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: the race . . .but only has time (with a new job) to make
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: maybe one race a year? Which is his record last year for
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: this one LS race. I'dust like to place him on the boat
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: with everyone else as a sixth.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: And yeah, we'd be overweight. But who in TFCares:-).
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Thats why the weight limit has to be changed in the Fun
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Series.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Because the round the bouy race rules ar not fun in the
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Fun Series.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: If the fleet allows shy kites . . . I want my sixth
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: person . . .becuase the moments on the boat with the
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: sixth and full kite are probabley about the same as five
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: and a shy kite.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Mike
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Shy kites or reachers are the same thing. There is a
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: minimum size written in the class rule. A small kite
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: conforming to the class rule would be totally legal for
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: any event. I would like to see the 'outside the gate'
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: sail rules opened up as well. The class is currently
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: writing up the procedure for revising the rules and I
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: intend to introduce my proposal then.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: The class maximum weight should still be followed. I'm
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: sure the SI's state that class rules apply to a given
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: one design class for OYRA. Certainly it would if you
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: want your score to count for the season trophy.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Otherwise we would all have to sail heavy, have heavy
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: designed sails, more lunches, ect...
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Will
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Hi Everyone:
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Desperado is doing LightShip and doublehanded
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Farallones.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: I don't have any problem with anyone bringing their
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ocean gear. Or shy kite.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: In fact, might I add the question are boats fully
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: compliant with all the safety gear? Its a lot of extra
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: weight that can also add inequity reqardless of the
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: safety requirement.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: I have a sixth crew that wants to go on LightShip does
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: anyone mind a little extra weight?
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Mike
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: From my recollection at the '07 Nationals Skipper's
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: meeting, shykites would be OK for class races scheduled
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: beyond Pt. Bonita, but that specialty kites like
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: reachers would not. Few opinions were that it would lead
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: to a cost prohibitive arms race. Those people wishing to
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: use the specialty kites could still race under their
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: regular PHRF. Is my recollection correct? Help me out
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: here, guys! But yes, nothing as been added to the
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: written rules yet.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Joe B.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Last year was the first time in the 8 years I've done
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: the doublehanded Farallones race that the class
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: disallowed shykites. It had always been agreed upon that
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: outside the gate we could sail with anything allowable
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: under PHRF, i.e. shykites, reachers, etc. This
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: arrangement was supposed to have been written into the
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: rules. I plan on going this year and ,would like to race
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: with the class and bring all my ocean equipment.

Reply | Post New Message | All Messages | this message is spam