2006 PHRF Fall Review Meeting
10/18/06
Attendees: Brian Dowling, Rod Carr, Geoff Halsted, Walt Marti, John O’Rourke and Gene Cloutier
Item 1: Identify boats to review from comments heard throughout the year and discuss any rating changes:
Boats Identified Curr Rating Revised Rating Comments
1. C&C 99 102 105 considered phrf ratings using regular formula and modified by comparisons to Pearson 37 rating. Discovered that there was a mixture of same rating and also 3 seconds variance in both directions. RESOLVED to make the two boats equal in rating.
2. J92 105 105 Gene & Rod abstained from discussion. Validated current formula to confirm 105 rating. Researched Jboats web site and validated that every boat on Lake Champlain matches the Jboats web site PHRF recommendation and checked delta between J29 FR OB to confirm deltas throughout the country. Finally check w/Johnstone to validate configuration of J92 on Jboats web site includes 155% jib. RESOLVED to maintain current rating.
3. J80 120 120 Reviewed phrf book that beginning to show trend of raising the rating of the ODR configuration which calculated would raise the rating 3 seconds from current 120. There have been no comments from fleet and Jboats site has rating at 120 RESOLVED to leave rating at 120 for right now.
4. Tartan 33 153 156 Dale Hyerstay asked us to review the rating and discussed comments of boat design. John O’Rourke said that Chuck has not complained about rating and races occasionally. Reviewed formula in book and delta to Tartan 31 and J24 and RESOLVED to increase rating 3 seconds.
5. Tartan 34 174 174 Again Dale Hyerstay asked us to review rating on this boat due to winning ways of Wingdam. Discussion in meeting is that PHRF does NOT rate sailors it rates boats. Discussion about starting line observations of Wingdam on the line and rest of cruisers 30 sec plus late on line. John O’Rourke commented on perfect preparation of boat bottom and boat in general as well as observations of Mike Barker tactics. We lowered this boat last year and it is already 3 seconds lower than current formula. RESOLVED to leave rating at 174.
Item 2: Review new boats rated during 2006
Boats Provisional Rating Revised Rating Comments
1. C&C 115 either 66 or 69 N/A Brian presented Craig Meyerson data from Craigs email that everyone had reviewed and also presented his research of ratings (including J35 specs) on the boats and race results performance around the country and google searches during the meeting. Also discussed that this would be the first boat on the lake and we needed to be sensitive to not killing the boats rating at introduction. RESOLVED that this is a new boat rating between 63-72 and seems to be moving lower as more data is revealed and we will wait for spring PHRF book for more data. Group seemed to be leaning to 66 base rating
2. J109 78 odr 78 odr Boat appears to be right on rating from observations of both J109’s and other A class boats. RESOLVED to leave as is.
3. Ericson 38-2 Wing keel 118 118 Only raced one race and RESOLVED to leave as is.
4. Albin Express 24 ___ ___ Could not find original rating but discussion that boat appears to be in range.
5. J100 81 ___ Brian shared comments from racing on boat and Rod discussed boat in MBBC. Appears to be learning curve boat and need of constant crew in MBBC for more data. RESOLVED to review again in spring.
6. Alerion Express 28 ___ ____ Comments seemed to indicate that boat is ok w/current rating but RESOLVED to review in spring.
7. Colgate 26 ___ ____ Only raced one race waiting for more data.
8. Capri 25 174 174 This makes 2 boats in MBBC and discussion and review of results appear in line. Only 3 boats in class w/Wavelength 24.
9. Pearson 34 144 ___ Review in spring
10. Pearson Triton ___ ___ Review in spring
11. Pearson 32 ___ ___ Review in spring
12. Pearson 35 183 ___ Review in spring
13. Beneteau ___ 63 ___ Gene left rating request at home and will review again at spring meeting.
14. J92s Recognition that this will be new lake on the boat and will need to give rating but no current data to go by at this time.
15. Beneteau 36.7 Not discussed at the meeting but need to review
Item 3: Overall view was the generally ratings appear to be in line.
PHRF Fall Meeting Minutes
John
Thanks for posting the minutes of the LCPHRF meeting. Would it be possible to post them on the LCPHRF website as well?
Regarding my boat, the C&C 115 (non-sprit model), why is a 63 base rating being considered? Not one of 15 to 20 sailing clubs in which the 115 regularly races rates it at a 63 base. All clubs north of the Chesapeake that have recently rated the non-sprit 115 have rated it at 69 or 72 base. The LCPHRF reference clubs rate the 115 at 66, 69, and 72 base, with the 69 being the median and average.
The same LCPHRF reference clubs rate the J 109 at 72 or 75 ODR. No clubs that rate both the 115 & 109, rate the 109 above 75. So why is LCPHRF assigning a 78 for the 109 and considering a 63 or even a 66 for the 115? If LCPHRF keeps the 109 at 78 ODR, 3 points higher than any other club rates it, then LCPHRF should comparably rate the 115 at 75 base and certainly no lower than a 72 base.
I have raced on 115s against 109s and sailed 115s straight line next to the 109s. The 115 is slightly faster than the 109, but no more than 3 to 6 sec. faster.
The statement that the 115’s rating “seems to be moving lower as more data is revealed†is not accurate. The opposite is true. The clubs that rated the 115 when first introduced rated it at 54 & 60 base. The most recent club ratings for the 115 are 69 and 72 base.