Yacht Time Correction YTC rule

[dunedin]

So what do peeps make of this announcement by RORC and RYA ? RYA joins forces with RORC Rating Office and SW Yacht Time Correction Factor

 

[mrming]

Good to see. I helped run club racing under NHC & IRC for a few years. NHC was universally unpopular, but many boats also objected to getting an IRC cert. A more accessible, non-performance based alternative is definitely worth a shot imo.

 

[Birdseye]

As mrming says, NHC hasnt been popular. Most sailors dont understand the maths behind it and the concept of handicaps changing during a series is not popular - PY was supposed to be like that but it rarely happened. The gap has been filled by Byron who does a sterling job but again not universally accepted. Pity because NHC was developed based on RORC systems and with the objective of encouraging racers to move to IRC but casual racers dont want to cough up £70 when they can still use the old PY or Byron.

We do need a performance based system IMO. I have seen 2 Sigma 33s racing in a series, one with experienced crew, good sails, stripped out etc and the other with a few pals, old sails, lots of junk on board. All they could afford. On different performance based handicaps both boats were encouraged to improve. On bare handicaps one would simply have stopped casua;l racing.

The popular PY was of course a performance based system. Race committtees were supposed to alter base numbers in line with performance with the obvious complaints of bias fiddling etc. NHC made the adjustment automatic

Having said all the above, is the new system really aimed at replacing NHC or is it simply a base IRC without the £70. The handicap calculation looks very much like the one used for NHC ( which was done by RORC) so could the same result be achieved by simply using NHC base numbers without change race to race?

 

[Praxinoscope]

The PY system did have its faults, but it did sort of work in clubs where racing is not the majority activity, out of 22 yachts (I know fairly small sample) moored in Aberaeron, only 5 are really active in racing and have forked out for IRC, a further 4 can usually be counted upon to enter the Regatta and yearly club race (Aberaeron to Patches buoy and back),, but now rely upon NHC handicap.
Whilst I can see the concept behind the NHC , as Birdseye has commented it doesn’t seem to be popular, the complexity of computation if a series of races is to be covered is as far as I am concerned a major disadvantage, not to mention some of the rather strange anomalies in the listed base numbers. (Just one example Sadler 25 fin keel .836 Sadler 25 bilge keel .841)
The PY system provided a simple base number adjustment method for variations such as propeller type, keel configuration etc (occasionally provoking some interesting discussions) but was simple to operate, just an OOD, a sheet of paper, a stopwatch and a calculator, a big advantage for smaller clubs which can in turn assists in encouraging those non- racing sailors to have a go at the odd round the cans and club regatta.

 

[DFL1010]

As mrming says, NHC hasnt been popular. Most sailors dont understand the maths behind it and the concept of handicaps changing during a series is not popular - PY was supposed to be like that but it rarely happened. The gap has been filled by Byron who does a sterling job but again not universally accepted. Pity because NHC was developed based on RORC systems and with the objective of encouraging racers to move to IRC but casual racers dont want to cough up £70 when they can still use the old PY or Byron.

We do need a performance based system IMO. I have seen 2 Sigma 33s racing in a series, one with experienced crew, good sails, stripped out etc and the other with a few pals, old sails, lots of junk on board. All they could afford. On different performance based handicaps both boats were encouraged to improve. On bare handicaps one would simply have stopped casua;l racing.

The popular PY was of course a performance based system. Race committtees were supposed to alter base numbers in line with performance with the obvious complaints of bias fiddling etc. NHC made the adjustment automatic

Having said all the above, is the new system really aimed at replacing NHC or is it simply a base IRC without the £70. The handicap calculation looks very much like the one used for NHC ( which was done by RORC) so could the same result be achieved by simply using NHC base numbers without change race to race?

This is the logic with which I disagree to an extent.
Certainly it's fair to assume that the boat taking it seriously will win a statistically significant proportion of the races. However, is this a bad thing?

If it leads to fewer boats on the water, then yes. However, that's only the case if the mates with a tired boat will stop racing simply because they're not winning, and I'm not convinced that's the case: if it's an excuse to go out with mates after work and have a bit of fun, then the result doesn't really matter, no?


Second, and this is a bit more of a philosophical point about competition, is it right that a boat that's not prepped for racing, full of weight and with baggy sails beats a boat with experienced crew, new rags etc regularly?
Under a performance based system, spending money on new sails is penalised, as is going out outside of racing to practice, or spending an evening with the textbooks, or learning the tides, or...

I get the desire to reward progress, but I'm not convinced that it should be at the expense of those that do the hard yards.
For example, in most fleets those at the front are only to happy to share their tuning numbers, strategies, boat bimbling tips and the like. To me, that's a more useful way of building a fleet.

 

[Birdseye]

This is the logic with which I disagree to an extent.
Certainly it's fair to assume that the boat taking it seriously will win a statistically significant proportion of the races. However, is this a bad thing?

If it leads to fewer boats on the water, then yes. However, that's only the case if the mates with a tired boat will stop racing simply because they're not winning, and I'm not convinced that's the case: if it's an excuse to go out with mates after work and have a bit of fun, then the result doesn't really matter, no?


Second, and this is a bit more of a philosophical point about competition, is it right that a boat that's not prepped for racing, full of weight and with baggy sails beats a boat with experienced crew, new rags etc regularly?
Under a performance based system, spending money on new sails is penalised, as is going out outside of racing to practice, or spending an evening with the textbooks, or learning the tides, or...

I get the desire to reward progress, but I'm not convinced that it should be at the expense of those that do the hard yards.
For example, in most fleets those at the front are only to happy to share their tuning numbers, strategies, boat bimbling tips and the like. To me, that's a more useful way of building a fleet.

You are making two assumptions that are IMO wrong. Firstly you are assuming that there is only one choice when there isnt. The keen serious racer can use IRC whilst the occasional family racer in his old bilge keeler can go NHC ( or PY as was). The second is the hard yards comment - is having a lot of money and spending it on all the latest kit plus even hiring hot shot crew really the "hard yards" ? IMO its simply buying to silver ware which in those circumstances is really worthless. You see this approach most obviously in the likes of the Smericas cup or the Sidney Hobart but it does exist at club level in the richer areas like the Solent.

In reality there is a spectrum and always will be. Our club results for our NHC fleet are just as close at the end of a series as they are for the IRC. Races are won often by a few seconds. And of course at the keener end of NHC, sailors dont have full water tanks etc. So its not really a comparison of a try hard IRC fleet against a cant be bothered NHC fleet - its more a case of a big spend IRC fleet against a not willing to spend NHC fleet. A sweeping generalisation if ever there was one, I accept.

And the proof of the validity of this performance based handicap is its relative popularity with fleets always bigger than IRC. True people dont like NHC but where it is used as intended, at my club for example, there are almost no complaints. Ask yourself why other sports, golf, horse racing etc all use performance based handicaps.

 

[st599]

No that the equation is available, I have two questions that I can't work out:

1. There's an equation to measure Spinnaker Area Allowance, but it's not used in either the fin keel or bilge keel equations nor the white sail equation nor is it mentioned anywhere in the text. Any idea what it's for?
2. There's a random value assigned for keel flare (kg ranges from 1 for a slight flare or bulb to 5 for a winged keel), but there's no calculation method nor guidance. I had a look at some of the values from Dartmouth last year and this value seems a bit arbitrary, even between boats in the same class.

 

[MikeCC]

No that the equation is available, I have two questions that I can't work out:

1. There's an equation to measure Spinnaker Area Allowance, but it's not used in either the fin keel or bilge keel equations nor the white sail equation nor is it mentioned anywhere in the text. Any idea what it's for?
2. There's a random value assigned for keel flare (kg ranges from 1 for a slight flare or bulb to 5 for a winged keel), but there's no calculation method nor guidance. I had a look at some of the values from Dartmouth last year and this value seems a bit arbitrary, even between boats in the same class.

It's easier if you have some YTC certs with the submitted measurements to check against.

I guess they left spinnaker adjustment off the main formula for simplicity. The notes say to apply the adjustment percentage for spinnaker area to the figure produced from other measurements. It may be positive or negative depending on downwind/upwind ratio. For white sails you reverse it and add the general 'no spinnaker' percentage. It's definitely used in official calcs.

For keel adjustment, I could only get figures to work by using 4 for a bulb type. It does seem a bit subjective but a fairly small effect.

 

[tsekul]

guess I won’t be prioritising racing this year. The roller caster that has been my swytc handicap has reared its ugly head Again.
After a few years of sanity and good fun close racing the powers that be have decided to cut my handicap by thirteen points. Since having our current boat our handicap has been anywhere between 847 and 913 depending on who’s turn it is to do the back of a cigarette packet calculation. None of those figures bear much resemblance to the actual formula .

onwards and upwards

 

[Birdseye]

guess I won’t be prioritising racing this year. The roller caster that has been my swytc handicap has reared its ugly head Again.
After a few years of sanity and good fun close racing the powers that be have decided to cut my handicap by thirteen points. Since having our current boat our handicap has been anywhere between 847 and 913 depending on who’s turn it is to do the back of a cigarette packet calculation. None of those figures bear much resemblance to the actual formula .

onwards and upwards

One of the objectives of NHC and its associated calculations was that any handicap adjustment would be out of the hands of the race officer / committee etc since this was one of the most contentious areas.

 

[Fraz]

Has anyone understood how to apply the YTC Non Spinnaker correction formula please??
i.e 1.75-(DSA/SA) THS IS WHAT IS PUBLISHED BUT IS THERE AN ERROR MAYBE
Example to test it
Dehler 34 1.76 (101) DSA 103.6SQM (Downwind sail area) SA 55.90 SQM (Upwind sail area)
so you get 1.75 - (103.6/55.90) = -0.1046366 do i then need to add 1 to this number to make 0.895 ??

Its wrong i need to get approx 2.59% difference to apply the YTC rating for 2023 is 925 and white sail 949 (24 points difference)
So ideally i need to multiply 925 by 1.025 = 949

I have got the 1st part of the formula working well, then i apply any Propeller change from fixed 2 blade and this works fine.
I just do not understand how to calculate the Spinnaker % change and apply it....
Can anyone help please
Also noted the formula for calculating YTC has changed from 2023 to 2024

 

[Birdseye]

I wasnt aware that there is a non spinnaker correction factor. I have applied for a YTC certificate and the ones I have seen give you two handicaps - one with spinny, one without. No calc involved.

 

[Chiara’s slave]

The YTC measurements are way too onerous for the casual racer. Is there really room for a IRC lite rule? Or will some boats no longer bother to do IRC, and some of the more serious guys from NHC fleets go YTC, meaning there will be 3 smaller fleets rather than 2 larger ones? And if clubs decide to discontinue NHC, the current fleet will most probably not go to the trouble of measuring for YTC.

Perhaps I should also declare an interest, I have an NHC number, I cannot have a YTC number. I race casually at my club. If I want to get serious I’ll race under MOCRA, but if my club goes YTC, I will lose the facility to race there at all..

 

[st599]

YTC isn't measured, it's taken from the sales brochure.

You can completely strip the boat out of all woodwork, change the sail size, etc. doesn't affect your rating.

 

[Chiara’s slave]

YTC isn't measured, it's taken from the sales brochure.

You can completely strip the boat out of all woodwork, change the sail size, etc. doesn't affect your rating.

That’s if theres a sales brochure. If you sail somewhere where everyone has new boats, maybe.

 

[Birdseye]

YTC isn't measured, it's taken from the sales brochure.

You can completely strip the boat out of all woodwork, change the sail size, etc. doesn't affect your rating.

True, you can. It would be called cheating but I m sure that some people do that and think its clever / crafty.

 

[bedouin]

YTC isn't measured, it's taken from the sales brochure.

You can completely strip the boat out of all woodwork, change the sail size, etc. doesn't affect your rating.

They have 6 contessa 32s and they all have (marginally) different ratings.

 

[Birdseye]

If you are inclined to cheat, (and several people I know would consider it to be "gaming" ) then the system is wide open. Yes you can strip the boat out - the builders weight is likely to be lighter than reality anyway. But you can also claim smaller sails up to a point. Not to mention things like props.

I once won a series which used Byrons handicaps, and to me the margin of winning didnt tie in with my judgement of how well we sailed. So I queried the data and found that Byron had got the wrong basic info. I gave him the right info, and got a new more challenging handicap. I was surprised to be told by several people, both crew and competitors, that I was an idiot to do so.

I dont see the value of a win when the data has been gamed. Maybe I am naive.

In a way, this sort of thing makes NHC more honest

 

[st599]

Indeed, we did a regatta using Byron (which became YTC). We were on a school boat which had all the gear the RYA require a school to carry. Raced a boat which had the same Byron number but had removed all the interior woodwork, changed the rig to carbon fibre and had bigger racing sails. When we queried we were told that that was correct as it was based on builders spec numbers.

He even sent us the formula to check. (Which was an Excel solver curve fitting)

 

[Chiara’s slave]

Glad our club is sticking with NHC at least for now. Our NHC number is quite painful, but at least we have one. We’d thought to enter the Needles relief race last year but they've switched to YTC.