'new' Bluto PHRF rating

[darkstar32170]

The PHRF-NB website shows that "Bluto" rates 92. The base rating is 99. The get a 3 sec/mi headsail credit (probably for a headsail less than 145%) and a 10 sec/mi penalty for "misc." I'd be interested in how much added rig (I and E dimensions) there is. There are specific penalties for added boom length and masts height. Neither are specifically listed on ratings list and the carbon fibre/pbo rig should come under "misc."

[musicman]

making friends is easy...

[Motorboat!!]

Wow, all those mods and it only costs 10 seconds? Sign me up! If there is an extra carbon oversized rig laying around somewhere, send it on down to new orleans. I thought the carbon rig would have cost them more than 3 sec. I mean, removing the inboard cost 6 sec. and I thing a new rig would have more of an effect.

[darkstar32170]

I'M REALLY NOT COMPLAINING BUT --- Notice in the PHRF-NB meeting minutes (http://www.phrf-nb.org/) where the meeting took place (Hall Spars & Rigging). Also I think that Skip Mattos the chair of the meeting works for Hall Spars and Rigging (remember they're ruling on rating adjustments to a boat owned by Ben Hall). There are others in the list of members present who are industry pros who profit from mods like these. I know its difficult to regulate things when without any conflicts of interest when the community is so small, but it would be seem less like a back room deal if the process was more transparent. The actual rig dimensions and any discussions that took place should be in the meeting minutes, not just the end result.

I'M REALLY NOT COMPLAINING BUT --- Aside for the penalty for the increased "E" I notice that the penalty for the carbon rig is not specifically mentioned in the minutes either. Also the penalty for the increase rig height seems to have been taken as separate penalties for increased "P" and "ISP" and not the overall penalty for increased "I" Does this mean its a fractional rig (I haven't seen any full height photos)?

I'M REALLY NOT COMPLAINING BUT --- Also, with all the money that was spent (really everything from the deck up modified: mast, standing rigging, running rigging, sails) you would expect a rating hit of more than 10 sec/mi. It seems like not much bang for the buck.

Just my worthless two cents.

[darkstar32170]

Just two more worthless pennies out of my pocket: On a tender boat like a E32-2 I would think that the carbon rig would be worth the weight of at least one body on the rail, if not more, and we all know how effective rail weight is on the E32-2. On a heavier, stiffer boat a carbon rig would not be as effective but PHRF likes to issue credits and penalties on a fixed number basis even when its not specifically listed in the rating adjustments.

I know that this has seemingly turned into a ratings rant, but let me say, "I like PHRF." I've yet to really see a race outcome that was entirely attributed to the rating and not the sailing done on the water. I remember one sail (I won't name him but he's on the PHRF-NB board) complaining about his rating --- but he was behind the leaders by more than 1 minute per mile. A rating change was not going to help him. I posted an article here a while back with a statistical analysis that showed that ratings within 9 sec/mi were as accurate as we needed. I also like the single number handicap. I bought an E32-2 particularly for its light air superiority for my area. Anyone who doesn't tailor their purchase to their area is foolish.

I do think its funny that under PHRF an E32-2 gives a Tartan 10 about 30 sec/mi and a Santana 35 about 21 sec/mi but is rated level (or gets a little bit) with them under IRC (at least without the carbon rig and extra rig height).

[BLUTO]

The decision to put a carbon rig in Bluto came from the idea to increase the ISP. Bluto is heavy @ 4975# IRC weight, no running rigging, sails, safety equip etc.. Which is 700 # more than the Airex cored Darkstar with an aluminum rig. Remember Ben built your boat. We felt Bluto needed more power down wind, it wouldn't quite break loose. The foretriangle is unchanged (yes, Frac). With the 145% and + 3' P, upwind sail area remains the same as the old rig with 13.8 E and 155 %.
Rating was not of much concern, we wanted to make the boat more fun. If its blowing 35 the spin goes up. Bob Evelyn thought Ben and I were crazy making the changes and that we would get killed in IRC. He argued as I think the PHRF committee fiqured upwind performance is not improved, water line and sail area did not increase. Bluto has to make up the rating difference off the wind. For what we all spend on sails, I think the benefits of the carbon frac rig (approx 10K)and getting bigger spins is worth it. Added panels to the existing chutes. The ratings IRC or PHRF are a toss up, you have to sail the boat well.


Regards, Bill Berges

[admin]

I'm not really comfortable with the allegations you have made, David. I do not think they are really in the spirit of what this board was set up to accomplish. If you have issues along these lines in the future, I think it's best you take them to the source rather than this forum. It's one thing to have some thoughts about someone's rating...it's another to suggest that a cozy relationship with a rating authority influenced the handicap decision.

thanks
admin

[smattos]

Mr. Lodge,
I have just joined the Evelyn 32 forum to directly respond to comments made by you, that are without base. I think it is in very poor form to air your grievances on a public forum without first making a phone call or emailing you inquiries.

To address your first non complaint. I do work for Ben Hall, yes its true. Do I receive any financial or other compensation based on how his boat performs, No.
Do we have our meetings at Hall Spars? Yes, it is a location that is convenient for the committee; there is a nice large conference room with internet access and sometimes we use the copier, all free of charge. This space is allotted to us whenever we need. If you think this is an issue, please provide us with a location that has the same amenities and flexibility and we can change our meeting location.

For your next non complaint the E Dimension was changed last year and the rating adjusted. I am awaiting confirmation to see if there was a clerical error on the rating certificate and will confirm. You are correct in your guess that the rig is fractional

For your next non complaint,
Across the board the rating adjustment for a carbon spar is -3
Across the board the rating adjustment for composite rigging is -1

For your next non complaint, regardless of his financial out lay, he posed the question to the committee prior to starting any work to see what his expected rating change would be.

Now my non complaints:
1. On the top of every PHRF certificate and the online form there is a sentence stating that ANYONE can purchase ANYONE’S rating certificate for a fee of $4.00. This can typically be sorted in a few days.
2. Our standard adjustments are listed online (http://www.phrf-nb.org). If you had the certificate from the manner mentioned above, you could have done your own calculations.
3. You made an accusation without even seeing the boat, you yourself admit you didn’t know the rig type, i.e. fractional/masthead
4. You did not call or email with your questions. Instead, you made slanderous postings on a public forum uses user agreement states it is specifically against the policy of the forum.
5. You haven’t even gotten your boat in the water nor are you racing it. You should race against Ben and then have some facts to base your opinion on. The truth is, his changes may have cost more in rating than his speed gain. Better yet trade boats and race him, see how you end up.
6. I am the commodore, not the rating chair.
7. Finally, Myself, Ken Madeiro and Phil Garland who all work at Hall, did not vote on Ben’s rating.

As a group we try to be as level headed and fair as possible. This is a volunteer job that is minimally thankful at the best of times. I invite you to step up and join the committee, see what really happens and then make an informed opinion based on fact.


END

Skip Mattos

[peter ross]

Only way to divert the quite reasonable thought that there might be favored slants would be to RELOCATE those meetings and stop bashing David!
I can go on, but out of respect for Tim Ford I will not.........................MOVE THE MEETINGS!

PS my fingers are still twitching after reading the garbage that followed his thoughts................

[musicman]

the E Dimension was changed last year and the rating adjusted. I am awaiting confirmation to see if there was a clerical error on the rating certificate and will confirm.

Was this ever answered?

[smattos]

The rating was correct as it stood. That was cleared up at the meeting following it coming into question. Just so everyone is aware, I am no longer working for Hall Spars, so hopefully the location issue is a little more cleared up.

Skip Mattos