• m = 2732
  • t = 1170
  • Cookie:
    Reply | Post New Message | All Messages | this message is spam
    Author: Jason Crowson (2crows...@comcast.net) contact the author
    Subject: Update, Problem & Solutions
    Info: (30418 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