anyone using the RYA's new YTC handicap system

[Birdseye]

wondering how well it is going because it looks to me to be similar in application to the old PY system with the same problem issue - few clubs will bother to send back the data so the handicaps where wrong will remain wrong.

one good thing about NHC was that adjustments to handicaps were done on the fly in the club but by a computer system that wasnt subject to race committees and faces that fit. OK the starting handicaps were cruder even than PY numbers with for example no recognition of twin keels vs fin

 

[Birdseye]

Surprised no one is familiar from using the system - the RYA site has a fair few boats on it.

Its all a bit of a mess really. The true racers are OK with their IRC but for the casual racers there is a complete mish mash from people using their local system to py to byron to nhc and now to YTC. No one system that everyone seems to like. My club uses all of the above!

Once it has run for more than say 5 races, NHC is producing quite close corrected times. Marginally closer in fact than our IRC boats manage. Same day same race but with a slightly longer IRC course, the spread for NHC was 15 mins in 2.5 hours whilst for IRC it was 26 mins in 2 3/4 hrs

 

[Praxinoscope]

We are going to use our regatta in August as a trial run for YTC. so will report back.
It does seem to have aspects similar to PY which to be honest I used to like, but it does seem to have been 'tweeked'.
There seemed to be some considerable deviations in NHC, and I never really appreciated the concept of the extensive calculations after each race.

 

[flaming]

Once it has run for more than say 5 races, NHC is producing quite close corrected times. Marginally closer in fact than our IRC boats manage. Same day same race but with a slightly longer IRC course, the spread for NHC was 15 mins in 2.5 hours whilst for IRC it was 26 mins in 2 3/4 hrs

Isn't that the point of a handicap system though? To correct the handicaps to both the boat type, boat preparedness and crew skill so that the corrected times are close?

 

[The Q]

I've a spreadsheet with various versions of YTC in its original form from Professor Linda Wolstenholm.
It's also got Broads Handicap, PY and PY-DN figures for comparison.
It was used to generate a handicap for my one off small sailing keel boat.
The club handicapper accepted the results...

One day there'll be a way to scan a boat, and a computer will generate a perfect handicap figure for that boat. What it can never do is account for crew, how many beers they've had, and the weather.

 

[st599]

Isn't that the point of a handicap system though? To correct the handicaps to both the boat type, boat preparedness and crew skill so that the corrected times are close?

That's not what the YTC does. Someone has attempted to curve fit with some features of a boat - some measurable, some done by eye by the ratings office (like ranking the curviness of a keel from a photo).

Dartmouth the other year had 2 boats - one a visiting training boat with all the requirements of coding on board, one a local stripped out hull, no engine, no cabins/woodwork, carbon fibre mast replacement, black sails. Because they were the same when they left the factory 30 years ago, same number.

 

[flaming]

That's not what the YTC does. Someone has attempted to curve fit with some features of a boat - some measurable, some done by eye by the ratings office (like ranking the curviness of a keel from a photo).

Dartmouth the other year had 2 boats - one a visiting training boat with all the requirements of coding on board, one a local stripped out hull, no engine, no cabins/woodwork, carbon fibre mast replacement, black sails. Because they were the same when they left the factory 30 years ago, same number.

I was replying to Birdseye's point about NHC, which I understand to be a handicapping system, rather than a measurement system.

And what was that second yacht doing in the cruiser class? Sounds like they're taking things pretty seriously so should be in the IRC class to me....

 

[st599]

I was replying to Birdseye's point about NHC, which I understand to be a handicapping system, rather than a measurement system.

And what was that second yacht doing in the cruiser class? Sounds like they're taking things pretty seriously so should be in the IRC class to me....

I think they knew they could win in the cruiser class. The result, a fair few of the actual cruisers aren't going this year as they had no chance of winning.

 

[flaming]

I think they knew they could win in the cruiser class. The result, a fair few of the actual cruisers aren't going this year as they had no chance of winning.

So frustrating... You see this at all levels.

A few years back there was a well campaigned IRC boat that won events under IRC, but once a year entered the ISC class for the round the island race, and usually won it... I never saw the point in that....

Quite a few race committees are putting things in their NOR that state that if you have an IRC rating you should normally race in the IRC class, but exceptions could be made at the discretion of the committee. For example if you were a regular IRC boat but decided to do a regatta not with your regular crew but with a load of kids on board etc. That seems fair to me...

 

[Praxinoscope]

One of the noticeable 'oddities' in the base NHC numbers had the fin keel Sadler 25 with a lower h/c (0.836) than my bilge keel version (0.855)
The great advantage we see of using a system such as NHC, PY is that there is a base list for most yachts (even if it is suspect), so for small clubs with small racing fleets its easy for non-racers to join in, which systems such as IRC tend to preclude, YTC has the slight disadvantage that there is no base list, it is possible to calculate a h/c for any yacht, which takes into account a string of variables, but it isn't a straightforward calculation, which is where PY was easy to calculate..
We are however experimenting with YTC for this years regatta so will see how things go.

 

[flaming]

I absolutely agree that cruiser racing needs something less complicated and easier to access than IRC.

The issue with any handicap system always come when people expect too much from it, and push it's limits.

I've always said that you get the best racing when everyone is competing on the same basis. By which I mean that the effort being put in is similar. So if every boat is kept afloat, has a full set of cruising goods aboard, uses dacron sails and 1 spinnaker, then the racing will be good.
Equally if all the boats are dry sailed, are stripped out and have carbon sails, then the racing will be good.

Where the 2 meet, it does not work, and just puts those "just having a go for a laugh" off.

 

[Ingwe]

We used YTC for our first club series this year and there are a couple of definite outliers on the ratings the one that will crop up most often (because there are a lot of them) is the very favorable J24 rating.

My bigger issue with YTC and IRC though is that they are really rating boats for their all-round performance which means that anything that is fairly good at reaching (whether due to overlapping headsails or asymmetric kites) ends up with too high a rating on an inshore course as even if you are given a triangle to do it's very difficult to overtake on reaching legs unless there is a vast speed differential. It would be fairly simple to give an inshore and an offshore number for each boat and would encourage especially some of the offshore optimised boats to do more inshore events.

 

[flaming]

My bigger issue with YTC and IRC though is that they are really rating boats for their all-round performance which means that anything that is fairly good at reaching (whether due to overlapping headsails or asymmetric kites) ends up with too high a rating on an inshore course as even if you are given a triangle to do it's very difficult to overtake on reaching legs unless there is a vast speed differential. It would be fairly simple to give an inshore and an offshore number for each boat and would encourage especially some of the offshore optimised boats to do more inshore events.

Amen to that!

 

[The Q]

That's not what the YTC does. Someone has attempted to curve fit with some features of a boat - some measurable, some done by eye by the ratings office (like ranking the curviness of a keel from a photo).

Dartmouth the other year had 2 boats - one a visiting training boat with all the requirements of coding on board, one a local stripped out hull, no engine, no cabins/woodwork, carbon fibre mast replacement, black sails. Because they were the same when they left the factory 30 years ago, same number.

If dartmouth was raced under YTC then they should not have the same number. YTC includes the mass weight of the boat, so a lightened boat would not be in class.

 

[st599]

If dartmouth was raced under YTC then they should not have the same number. YTC includes the mass weight of the boat, so a lightened boat would not be in class.

It's the mass as it left the factory. Takes no account of the required additions made for coding or removals.

This is the weight of the boat dry, as it came out of the manufacturer's premises, with no fuel, water and no other gear.

 

[The Q]

Therefore if you read the professor's text. You will not get a correct handicap, the race organisers should have just started the stripped out boat was out of class.

 

[Daydream believer]

Where the 2 meet, it does not work, and just puts those "just having a go for a laugh" off.

Seems odd to me that those " just having a go for a laugh" should expect to win in the first place. Why complain if they come nowhere? What are they expecting? If they are racing to win then they should act as such.

 

[flaming]

Seems odd to me that those " just having a go for a laugh" should expect to win in the first place. Why complain if they come nowhere? What are they expecting? If they are racing to win then they should act as such.

There's a big difference between not winning because the other bloke is a better sailor, and not winning because you stand no chance because of the difference in the boat. Especially if the feeling is that the other person is winning because they've thrown money at it.

Generally speaking there are two types of people who go racing - those for whom it is the main reason to sail and then those who mostly cruise but like to do the odd regatta etc.

If the feeling amongst the latter is that when they turn up to a regatta they are largely sailing against the same sort of people, in the same sort of boats, then that is fun. Doesn't really matter if they don't win, providing the consensus is that it was pretty fair.

If you can look at the boats entered into the "cruising class" and know exactly who is going to win before they've left the dock.... That's not fun.

I think when you have a fleet in a location, the important thing to encourage participation is that everyone is on the same page regarding what level of prep etc is going on. And that is way more important than what handicap system you choose to use.

 

[Daydream believer]

There's a big difference between not winning because the other bloke is a better sailor, and not winning because you stand no chance because of the difference in the boat. Especially if the feeling is that the other person is winning because they've thrown money at it.

in#4 you said
"Isn't that the point of a handicap system though? To correct the handicaps to both the boat type, boat preparedness and crew skill so that the corrected times are close?"

.Your 2 posts seem to suggest a slight contradiction. On one you are saying it is OK for a better sailor to win & in the next he should be penalized within the handicap system for being better. Surely a handicap system should not handicap someone for being a better sailor.
The handicap should only be applied to the boat. Perhaps that should also take into account the money thrown at it. Although I do not think that having a tidy yacht should be penalised. Nor should ie, a new set of sails. Class racing may restrict sail buying, but that is not handicap racing

 

[flaming]

in#4 you said
"Isn't that the point of a handicap system though? To correct the handicaps to both the boat type, boat preparedness and crew skill so that the corrected times are close?"

.Your 2 posts seem to suggest a slight contradiction. On one you are saying it is OK for a better sailor to win & in the next he should be penalized within the handicap system for being better. Surely a handicap system should not handicap someone for being a better sailor.
The handicap should only be applied to the boat. Perhaps that should also take into account the money thrown at it. Although I do not think that having a tidy yacht should be penalised. Nor should ie, a new set of sails. Class racing may restrict sail buying, but that is not handicap racing

Well if you think that, then you are at home with IRC, but it's not IRC that Birdseye etc are talking about.... For what it's worth I agree that for anything calling itself remotely serious racing, a handicap system is not suitable, and a rating system is preferred. (The difference being a handicap adjusts based on results, a rating is fixed by measurements etc)

My point is #4 was to question why Birdseye was surprised by the closer result under NHC, since that is what the system is specifically designed to do... Adjust the handicaps based on past results to make the corrected results closer. I don't think it is necessarily indicative of "fairer" racing, but it seems like NHC was doing the job it was designed to do...

The wider point though is that all these discussions about handicaps and ratings etc take place against a backdrop of declining fleets. And my point is that to get close racing that is fun and makes people want to join in, you don't need to mess about with the handicaps, but ensure that everyone is on the same page with how you are going racing. I'm not at all suggesting that should be part of the handicap, but that the fleet needs to agree, formally or informally, that "this" is the level of prep. Whatever "this" is.