Disclaimer: It should be understood that the views expressed herein are those of Tony Lamb alone, and are therefore correct and not in need of disclaimer. He reserves the right to be in touch with his feminine side and change his views as needed
THE NEW FACE OF PHRF
HAKA PHRF
By
Tony Lamb
In response to complaints that our PHRF system is unfair I have researched other systems. The result is Haka PHRF my version of a handicapping system used in Australia and New Zealand. I have used the formulas from the “Yachting Victoria” website. http://www.vic.yachting.org.au/ My purpose is to use this “other” handicapping system to encourage conversations about handicaps and racing on Lake Champlain.
In essence the handicap is calculated based on your actual performance against the fleet you normally race in. Very good and very bad results are thrown out and a calculation is made as to what adjustment would need to be made to have all boats finish at the same time. All boats are normed against a boat that finishes 45% down the list of boats. In short, a percentage adjustment to your times is calculated. I have used the sixth place boat in our fleet (I will experiment with this over the course of the season.) The last five valid results are averaged to give you your handicap. Thus every aspect of your boat is taken into consideration in providing an actual handicap.
From my brief conversations with a handicapper down there, it appears that the handicapper has a great deal of discretion to make corrections. If you buy new sails or add ringers to your crew you are expected to notify them and the handicapper can make immediate adjustments.
This post contains various observations about ratings.
PHRF RATES BOATS WELL EQUIPED AND WELL SAILED.
But who sails to their rating?
It is standard language in PHRF by laws that the boat is rated not the skipper. Not only that but the assumption is that the boat is well equipped-e.g. a good set of sails. The differences between boats is meant to reflect the differences between boats that are both well equipped and well sailed, not the crews or the Skippers.
In reviewing PHRF handicaps a large data base of boats is necessary. This is why the PHRF committee looks to larger fleets like that on the Chesapeake Bay for relative handicaps. When looking at handicaps the difficulty is knowing when the number is unfair and when the boat simply has a case of the “slows” (a problem with equipment, tuning or the skipper and/or crew).
I had always believed that I sailed my Beneteau 36.7 reasonably well for a club racer. I have a wall of plaques to support that belief. I have not done as well as I hoped and it would be easy to ask, is my rating fair or do I have a case of the “slows”?
On our lake there is no way to accurately make that judgment. It is possible to look at the larger fleets and see that the boat is consistently rated at 78. (I receive a 3 second penalty for a less than full sized mast head spinnaker and have a handicap of 75.) So why does K-2 consistently finish so far ahead of me?
I found some of the answers when I raced in the 2007 Beneteau 36.7 North Americans in Buffalo, New York against 47 identical boats. I did not expect to be in the top ten. I knew there were some great boats coming over. I did expect to be middle of the pack. After all almost 20% of all these racer/cruisers built would be there and it is considered a family racer rather than a grand prix boat.
In fact I was last. And not by just a little. No “if only’s” to assuage my pain. I was slow. A company called Kattach puts a gps on each boat and then down loads the data after the race and shows the race and data on a big screen during the cocktail party. A review of the race results showed that I was consistently a half knot slow going to weather compared to the fastest part of the fleet. I have a case of the “slows.” There are cures for the “slows”.
Weight Matters?
Sundance weighs 2,000 pounds more than Magic, so what?
PHRF assumes that all boats are standard. This means that two boats of the same type are given the same handicap unless one or both have changes to the basic configuration.
One of the more interesting situations is when two one design boats have different weights. Under PHRF, if one weighs more, say because it added dingy davits, it would receive no credit. On the other hand if one weighed less because it removed standard equipment, e.g. the doors, table, cushions, berths, it would receive a penalty.
Under a measurement system there would automatically be an allowance for weight differences. Under IRC it is not uncommon for different boats of a “one design” fleet to have different handicaps, based in part on the weight variants resulting from standard construction processes.
In the case of Magic and Sundance (seemingly identical Pearson 37s), Sundance is reportedly 2,000 pounds heavier. If Magic is lighter because they removed the “wine cellar”, (standard on the Pearson 37), she would be penalized. On the other hand if Sundance is heavier because they replaced the standard washer/dryer with the much heavier sauna, they would not receive credit.
Note that the rating committee relies on the voluntary disclosure of changes in configuration. In this case Sundance has not yet realized that for years the crew of Magic has been coming over for post race beers and putting lead shot in every nook and cranny they can find. If the mast is ever lifted out of place the flow of shot will be amazing.
