US club class definition

I have avoided participation in handicap yacht racing events for over 20 years, but returned to sail with an old friend on his 33 foot boat in Michigan last summer for a few "handicap" races. My wife wanted to go sailing, so I agreed. It's always fun to go sailing on a nice afternoon. Other than these few times last summer, I have vigorously refused invitations based on my feelings about handicap racing. For my friend, the local handicap committee had hammered him so badly that he had already sold the boat. It was comical and a fun conversation. But the experience has some potential lessons surrounding it.

When the boat was delivered (4 year old design from England) a rating was formally requested. My friend had been out of sailing for awhile but was a former top sailor, last winning several season championships and many regattas before leaving the sport for roughly 10 years ago to focus on his young kids. The initial handicap estimate (before buying, via casual conversation with the handicap committee head and based on other popular boats which rated equal with it in England) was reasonable, so my friend felt comfortable (huge mistake) that the boat would have a competitive chance despite the usual handicap fear "tax" that is commonly added by corrupt local handicap committees to top sailors boats based on their skill as sailors.

So my friend decided to buy the boat and return to the sport in order to introduce his kids to sailing and take friends and family out for daysails. The boat was designed for the Solent (England, strong winds) and was overly stable (very heavy keel bulb with a smaller sail plan) for the generally light air conditions of the Great Lakes. But for my friend this would also provide a very stable sailing platform for teaching (not frightening) his kids. Very heavy boats generally get a small break on handicaps in the Great Lakes for this reason (uncompetitive)

So he invested 120k (a major investment for my friend) including some normal maintenance and shipped the boat to MI from England. Then the real "fun" began! Word got out and other owners clearly started getting nervous. A bunch of geniuses sat around a table at some yacht club, otherwise known as the "handicap committee annual meeting" (drinking cheap beer to embolden their "wisdom") and decided to give my friends boat a rating that was equivalent to modern 40+ boats with waterlines over 20% longer (think wingspan). They just pulled this rating out of thin air based on their "view" of what "believed" and not the enormous amount of VPP (velocity prediction program) data available (objective) showing the boats performance (vs other similar boats) at all wind speeds and angles, accurate to .001 knots! This boat was going to be a "good boat" but was not going to be "over performing" its waterline limitations in the slightest. In fact, it probably underperforms slighly in most conditions due to its extreme weight (nearly 12,000 pounds, which is very heavy for a 33 ft racing sailboat). The rating the committee enacted for my friend was ridiculous. It was clearly based on their fear of my friends sailing skill, not the boats performance. The rating was roughly 25% too strong and was an apparent effort to ensure that my friend was unable to compete. This proved true except for one of the races I attended and due to a tactical miracle. The boat performed exactly like a similar 33 footer but owed an extra 15-20 seconds a mile.

Of course, the handicap committee meeting included many of my friends "future competitors" (what a shock, eh?). All kinds of bogus "research" (see personal fantasy) was submitted by several of the other yacht owners explaining how fast (over embellished to say the least) this 4 year old English yacht design "might" be in. Of course they asked the committee to provide a ridiculous rating, strongly in their favor, which assumed all their "research" (counter to VPP data) was accurate. And of course the committee, desperate to win themselves as always, accommodated the subjective opinions of the other frightened competitors and approved a rating that turned heads globally per it's obvious incompetence and/or corruption. Personal opinion built the rating, not objective data. But the committee, uncomfortable with such attention, just didn't care about anything other then their own small world and potential to win $4 flags, and they stayed hidden under their rocks unwilling to budge.

This is the way, for the most part, that the handicap game has been played for 40 years (in sailing). Cheating, lying, manipulation and good old boy influence drives the handicap list. It's more a game of who you know on the committee (orngetting on it yourself) and of leveraging who you know to your personal advantage (hmm, sounds somewhat familiar...but I just can't place it...). I find such handicap processes to be shameful, ridiculous, disgusting and corrupt.

Of course, after conversation with the family and only half a season of sailing, my friend sold his new boat (nice profit) and reinvested the money in other family activities with absolutely no regrets. He was relieved to be out of that ugly system of corruption and bad sportsmanship. This was a moment of clarity for him, and for many around him. The fact that he knows not to be involved, ever again, was worth the hassle and will pay dividends to his family for years to come in terms of where to spend their time and money. It was a teachable moment. ;-). It was also a shame.

And they (the big boat handicap racing community) wonder why their "big boat" fleet has eroded by nearly 50% in the past 20 years. The corrupt, self serving process by which the handicaps are subjectively "determined." The scenario above is also quite common.

Of course small one design racing (boats of higher performance and a fraction of the cost) is growing as a result of this consistently ridiculous committee behavior, as is cruising boat sailing to some extent (people who like sailing with friends and family but have abandoned handicap racing entirely, allowing them to invest in more comfortable boats).

In my opinion handicaps are a poison to sport and should be avoided at all cost. And there seem to be similarities in soaring.

This is why I don't compete in sports class. Everyone knows what gliders are required to compete (or to have an advantage). This tells us immediately that existing handicaps are somewhat flawed. Any pilot should be equally competitive in any glider. That's the point, right? If that's not the case then their is more work to do, no? So why has this not been solved? See the Duo Discus for Sports or the Standard Cirrus for Club. We all know what certain gliders are considered to have the best handicaps. Of course a dry 18m ASG29 is generally considered to be uncompetitive. If able, ASG29 pilots use 15m for a more favorable handicap. But flapped ships are generally not competitive in sports class. An LS8 is often considered ideal. That's a problem to be solved, is it not? Yet it remains. Or, why is there no handicap for an FES equipped glider. Clearly FES results in significant additional drag vs the pure glider. Studies say 2-4%. These are simple facts. Unfortunately, as with sailing, glider handicaps are not based on facts and data but instead on some level of subjective opinion which influences or acts to retain them as is, even if obviously flawed. Ridiculous. Why is this allowed to continue?

Anyway enough about this. Handicaps are, IMO, really bad news. Imperfect and impure. I just thought I would mention why I, for one, have no interest in handicap soaring (or sailing) "competition."

If more effort was put into recognizing and solving this problem, I might change my opinion but I'm not holding my breath.

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 6:05:23 AM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
I have avoided participation in handicap yacht racing events for over 20 years, but returned to sail with an old friend on his 33 foot boat in Michigan last summer for a few "handicap" races. My wife wanted to go sailing, so I agreed. It's always fun to go sailing on a nice afternoon. Other than these few times last summer, I have vigorously refused invitations based on my feelings about handicap racing. For my friend, the local handicap committee had hammered him so badly that he had already sold the boat. It was comical and a fun conversation. But the experience has some potential lessons surrounding it.

When the boat was delivered (4 year old design from England) a rating was formally requested. My friend had been out of sailing for awhile but was a former top sailor, last winning several season championships and many regattas before leaving the sport for roughly 10 years ago to focus on his young kids. The initial handicap estimate (before buying, via casual conversation with the handicap committee head and based on other popular boats which rated equal with it in England) was reasonable, so my friend felt comfortable (huge mistake) that the boat would have a competitive chance despite the usual handicap fear "tax" that is commonly added by corrupt local handicap committees to top sailors boats based on their skill as sailors.

So my friend decided to buy the boat and return to the sport in order to introduce his kids to sailing and take friends and family out for daysails. The boat was designed for the Solent (England, strong winds) and was overly stable (very heavy keel bulb with a smaller sail plan) for the generally light air conditions of the Great Lakes. But for my friend this would also provide a very stable sailing platform for teaching (not frightening) his kids. Very heavy boats generally get a small break on handicaps in the Great Lakes for this reason (uncompetitive)

So he invested 120k (a major investment for my friend) including some normal maintenance and shipped the boat to MI from England. Then the real "fun" began! Word got out and other owners clearly started getting nervous. A bunch of geniuses sat around a table at some yacht club, otherwise known as the "handicap committee annual meeting" (drinking cheap beer to embolden their "wisdom") and decided to give my friends boat a rating that was equivalent to modern 40+ boats with waterlines over 20% longer (think wingspan).. They just pulled this rating out of thin air based on their "view" of what "believed" and not the enormous amount of VPP (velocity prediction program) data available (objective) showing the boats performance (vs other similar boats) at all wind speeds and angles, accurate to .001 knots! This boat was going to be a "good boat" but was not going to be "over performing" its waterline limitations in the slightest. In fact, it probably underperforms slighly in most conditions due to its extreme weight (nearly 12,000 pounds, which is very heavy for a 33 ft racing sailboat). The rating the committee enacted for my friend was ridiculous. It was clearly based on their fear of my friends sailing skill, not the boats performance. The rating was roughly 25% too strong and was an apparent effort to ensure that my friend was unable to compete. This proved true except for one of the races I attended and due to a tactical miracle. The boat performed exactly like a similar 33 footer but owed an extra 15-20 seconds a mile.

Of course, the handicap committee meeting included many of my friends "future competitors" (what a shock, eh?). All kinds of bogus "research" (see personal fantasy) was submitted by several of the other yacht owners explaining how fast (over embellished to say the least) this 4 year old English yacht design "might" be in. Of course they asked the committee to provide a ridiculous rating, strongly in their favor, which assumed all their "research" (counter to VPP data) was accurate. And of course the committee, desperate to win themselves as always, accommodated the subjective opinions of the other frightened competitors and approved a rating that turned heads globally per it's obvious incompetence and/or corruption. Personal opinion built the rating, not objective data. But the committee, uncomfortable with such attention, just didn't care about anything other then their own small world and potential to win $4 flags, and they stayed hidden under their rocks unwilling to budge.

This is the way, for the most part, that the handicap game has been played for 40 years (in sailing). Cheating, lying, manipulation and good old boy influence drives the handicap list. It's more a game of who you know on the committee (orngetting on it yourself) and of leveraging who you know to your personal advantage (hmm, sounds somewhat familiar...but I just can't place it...). I find such handicap processes to be shameful, ridiculous, disgusting and corrupt.

Of course, after conversation with the family and only half a season of sailing, my friend sold his new boat (nice profit) and reinvested the money in other family activities with absolutely no regrets. He was relieved to be out of that ugly system of corruption and bad sportsmanship. This was a moment of clarity for him, and for many around him. The fact that he knows not to be involved, ever again, was worth the hassle and will pay dividends to his family for years to come in terms of where to spend their time and money. It was a teachable moment. ;-). It was also a shame.

And they (the big boat handicap racing community) wonder why their "big boat" fleet has eroded by nearly 50% in the past 20 years. The corrupt, self serving process by which the handicaps are subjectively "determined." The scenario above is also quite common.

Of course small one design racing (boats of higher performance and a fraction of the cost) is growing as a result of this consistently ridiculous committee behavior, as is cruising boat sailing to some extent (people who like sailing with friends and family but have abandoned handicap racing entirely, allowing them to invest in more comfortable boats).

In my opinion handicaps are a poison to sport and should be avoided at all cost. And there seem to be similarities in soaring.

This is why I don't compete in sports class. Everyone knows what gliders are required to compete (or to have an advantage). This tells us immediately that existing handicaps are somewhat flawed. Any pilot should be equally competitive in any glider. That's the point, right? If that's not the case then their is more work to do, no? So why has this not been solved? See the Duo Discus for Sports or the Standard Cirrus for Club. We all know what certain gliders are considered to have the best handicaps. Of course a dry 18m ASG29 is generally considered to be uncompetitive. If able, ASG29 pilots use 15m for a more favorable handicap. But flapped ships are generally not competitive in sports class. An LS8 is often considered ideal. That's a problem to be solved, is it not? Yet it remains. Or, why is there no handicap for an FES equipped glider. Clearly FES results in significant additional drag vs the pure glider. Studies say 2-4%. These are simple facts. Unfortunately, as with sailing, glider handicaps are not based on facts and data but instead on some level of subjective opinion which influences or acts to retain them as is, even if obviously flawed. Ridiculous. Why is this allowed to continue?

Anyway enough about this. Handicaps are, IMO, really bad news. Imperfect and impure. I just thought I would mention why I, for one, have no interest in handicap soaring (or sailing) "competition."

If more effort was put into recognizing and solving this problem, I might change my opinion but I'm not holding my breath.

Sean tells us in another 1,326 word opus (I counted them) why he DOESN'T do something. The other day it was OLC flying how it's handicapped races. I gave up about half way through the painful read. Again my question, Sean: why **** on someone else's parade, can't we all decide how to spend our soaring time without you butting in? Please do hold your breath..

Sean, have you ever heard the story about Finnigan to Flannigan?

Superintindint was Flannigan;
Boss av th' siction wuz Finnigin.
Whiniver th' cyars got off th' thrack
An' muddled up things t' th' divvle an' back,
Finnigin writ it t' Flannigan,
Afther th' wrick wuz all on agin;
That is, this Finnigin
Repoorted t' Flannigan.
Whin Finnigin furrst writ t' Flannigan,
He writed tin pa-ages, did Finnigin;
An' he towld just how th' wrick occurred--
Yis, minny a tajus, blundherin' wurrd
Did Finnigin write t' Flannigan
After th' cyars had gone on agin--
That's th' way Finnigin
Repoorted t' Flannigan.
Now Flannigan knowed more than Finnigin--
He'd more idjucation, had Flannigan.
An' ut wore 'm clane an' complately out
T' tell what Finnigin writ about
In 's writin' t' Musther Flannigan.
So he writed this back. "Musther Finnigin--
Don't do sich a sin agin;
Make 'em brief, Finnigin!"
Whin Finnigin got that frum Flannigan
He blushed rosy-red, did Finnigin.
An' he said: "I'll gamble a whole month's pay
That ut'll be minny an' minny a day
Befure sup'rintindint--that's Flannigan--
Gits a whack at that very same sin agin.
Frum Finnigin to Flannigan
Repoorts won't be loong agin."
Wan day on th' siction av Finnigin,
On th' road sup'rintinded be Flannigan,
A ra-ail give way on a bit av a curve
An' some cyars wint off as they made th' shwarrve.
"They's nobody hurted," says Finnigin,
"But repoorts must be made t' Flannigan."
An' be winked at McGorrigan
Who married a Finnigin.
He was shantyin' thin, suz Finnigin,
As minny a railroader's been agin,
An' 'is shmokey ol' lamp wuz burnin' bright
In Finnigin' shanty all that night--
Bilin' down 's repoort, wuz Finnigin.
An' he writed this he "Musther Flannigan:--
Off agin, on agin,
Gone agin.--Finnigin."

-John, Q3

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 7:05:23 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
I have avoided participation in handicap yacht racing events for over 20 years, but returned to sail with an old friend on his 33 foot boat in Michigan last summer for a few "handicap" races. My wife wanted to go sailing, so I agreed. It's always fun to go sailing on a nice afternoon. Other than these few times last summer, I have vigorously refused invitations based on my feelings about handicap racing. For my friend, the local handicap committee had hammered him so badly that he had already sold the boat. It was comical and a fun conversation. But the experience has some potential lessons surrounding it.

When the boat was delivered (4 year old design from England) a rating was formally requested. My friend had been out of sailing for awhile but was a former top sailor, last winning several season championships and many regattas before leaving the sport for roughly 10 years ago to focus on his young kids. The initial handicap estimate (before buying, via casual conversation with the handicap committee head and based on other popular boats which rated equal with it in England) was reasonable, so my friend felt comfortable (huge mistake) that the boat would have a competitive chance despite the usual handicap fear "tax" that is commonly added by corrupt local handicap committees to top sailors boats based on their skill as sailors.

So my friend decided to buy the boat and return to the sport in order to introduce his kids to sailing and take friends and family out for daysails. The boat was designed for the Solent (England, strong winds) and was overly stable (very heavy keel bulb with a smaller sail plan) for the generally light air conditions of the Great Lakes. But for my friend this would also provide a very stable sailing platform for teaching (not frightening) his kids. Very heavy boats generally get a small break on handicaps in the Great Lakes for this reason (uncompetitive)

So he invested 120k (a major investment for my friend) including some normal maintenance and shipped the boat to MI from England. Then the real "fun" began! Word got out and other owners clearly started getting nervous. A bunch of geniuses sat around a table at some yacht club, otherwise known as the "handicap committee annual meeting" (drinking cheap beer to embolden their "wisdom") and decided to give my friends boat a rating that was equivalent to modern 40+ boats with waterlines over 20% longer (think wingspan).. They just pulled this rating out of thin air based on their "view" of what "believed" and not the enormous amount of VPP (velocity prediction program) data available (objective) showing the boats performance (vs other similar boats) at all wind speeds and angles, accurate to .001 knots! This boat was going to be a "good boat" but was not going to be "over performing" its waterline limitations in the slightest. In fact, it probably underperforms slighly in most conditions due to its extreme weight (nearly 12,000 pounds, which is very heavy for a 33 ft racing sailboat). The rating the committee enacted for my friend was ridiculous. It was clearly based on their fear of my friends sailing skill, not the boats performance. The rating was roughly 25% too strong and was an apparent effort to ensure that my friend was unable to compete. This proved true except for one of the races I attended and due to a tactical miracle. The boat performed exactly like a similar 33 footer but owed an extra 15-20 seconds a mile.

Of course, the handicap committee meeting included many of my friends "future competitors" (what a shock, eh?). All kinds of bogus "research" (see personal fantasy) was submitted by several of the other yacht owners explaining how fast (over embellished to say the least) this 4 year old English yacht design "might" be in. Of course they asked the committee to provide a ridiculous rating, strongly in their favor, which assumed all their "research" (counter to VPP data) was accurate. And of course the committee, desperate to win themselves as always, accommodated the subjective opinions of the other frightened competitors and approved a rating that turned heads globally per it's obvious incompetence and/or corruption. Personal opinion built the rating, not objective data. But the committee, uncomfortable with such attention, just didn't care about anything other then their own small world and potential to win $4 flags, and they stayed hidden under their rocks unwilling to budge.

This is the way, for the most part, that the handicap game has been played for 40 years (in sailing). Cheating, lying, manipulation and good old boy influence drives the handicap list. It's more a game of who you know on the committee (orngetting on it yourself) and of leveraging who you know to your personal advantage (hmm, sounds somewhat familiar...but I just can't place it...). I find such handicap processes to be shameful, ridiculous, disgusting and corrupt.

Of course, after conversation with the family and only half a season of sailing, my friend sold his new boat (nice profit) and reinvested the money in other family activities with absolutely no regrets. He was relieved to be out of that ugly system of corruption and bad sportsmanship. This was a moment of clarity for him, and for many around him. The fact that he knows not to be involved, ever again, was worth the hassle and will pay dividends to his family for years to come in terms of where to spend their time and money. It was a teachable moment. ;-). It was also a shame.

And they (the big boat handicap racing community) wonder why their "big boat" fleet has eroded by nearly 50% in the past 20 years. The corrupt, self serving process by which the handicaps are subjectively "determined." The scenario above is also quite common.

Of course small one design racing (boats of higher performance and a fraction of the cost) is growing as a result of this consistently ridiculous committee behavior, as is cruising boat sailing to some extent (people who like sailing with friends and family but have abandoned handicap racing entirely, allowing them to invest in more comfortable boats).

In my opinion handicaps are a poison to sport and should be avoided at all cost. And there seem to be similarities in soaring.

This is why I don't compete in sports class. Everyone knows what gliders are required to compete (or to have an advantage). This tells us immediately that existing handicaps are somewhat flawed. Any pilot should be equally competitive in any glider. That's the point, right? If that's not the case then their is more work to do, no? So why has this not been solved? See the Duo Discus for Sports or the Standard Cirrus for Club. We all know what certain gliders are considered to have the best handicaps. Of course a dry 18m ASG29 is generally considered to be uncompetitive. If able, ASG29 pilots use 15m for a more favorable handicap. But flapped ships are generally not competitive in sports class. An LS8 is often considered ideal. That's a problem to be solved, is it not? Yet it remains. Or, why is there no handicap for an FES equipped glider. Clearly FES results in significant additional drag vs the pure glider. Studies say 2-4%. These are simple facts. Unfortunately, as with sailing, glider handicaps are not based on facts and data but instead on some level of subjective opinion which influences or acts to retain them as is, even if obviously flawed. Ridiculous. Why is this allowed to continue?

Anyway enough about this. Handicaps are, IMO, really bad news. Imperfect and impure. I just thought I would mention why I, for one, have no interest in handicap soaring (or sailing) "competition."

If more effort was put into recognizing and solving this problem, I might change my opinion but I'm not holding my breath.

Sailing massacre- So Sad
UH

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 10:18:57 AM UTC-5, John Carlyle wrote:
Sean, have you ever heard the story about Finnigan to Flannigan?

Superintindint was Flannigan;
Boss av th' siction wuz Finnigin.
Whiniver th' cyars got off th' thrack
An' muddled up things t' th' divvle an' back,
Finnigin writ it t' Flannigan,
Afther th' wrick wuz all on agin;
That is, this Finnigin
Repoorted t' Flannigan.
Whin Finnigin furrst writ t' Flannigan,
He writed tin pa-ages, did Finnigin;
An' he towld just how th' wrick occurred--
Yis, minny a tajus, blundherin' wurrd
Did Finnigin write t' Flannigan
After th' cyars had gone on agin--
That's th' way Finnigin
Repoorted t' Flannigan.
Now Flannigan knowed more than Finnigin--
He'd more idjucation, had Flannigan.
An' ut wore 'm clane an' complately out
T' tell what Finnigin writ about
In 's writin' t' Musther Flannigan.
So he writed this back. "Musther Finnigin--
Don't do sich a sin agin;
Make 'em brief, Finnigin!"
Whin Finnigin got that frum Flannigan
He blushed rosy-red, did Finnigin.
An' he said: "I'll gamble a whole month's pay
That ut'll be minny an' minny a day
Befure sup'rintindint--that's Flannigan--
Gits a whack at that very same sin agin.
Frum Finnigin to Flannigan
Repoorts won't be loong agin."
Wan day on th' siction av Finnigin,
On th' road sup'rintinded be Flannigan,
A ra-ail give way on a bit av a curve
An' some cyars wint off as they made th' shwarrve.
"They's nobody hurted," says Finnigin,
"But repoorts must be made t' Flannigan."
An' be winked at McGorrigan
Who married a Finnigin.
He was shantyin' thin, suz Finnigin,
As minny a railroader's been agin,
An' 'is shmokey ol' lamp wuz burnin' bright
In Finnigin' shanty all that night--
Bilin' down 's repoort, wuz Finnigin.
An' he writed this he "Musther Flannigan:--
Off agin, on agin,
Gone agin.--Finnigin."

-John, Q3

And around and around went the big loco wheelw; and back and forth when the drivers of steel. Till suddenly Finnigin cried....

"... I, for one, have no interest in handicap soaring (or sailing) "competition."

Although this is a part of the tome on handicapping it is interesting that he is on the standby list for next month's Senior's.

Maybe he thinks running his ASG-29 against such as Silents without handicapping could improve his chances?

KS

Karl does your new duo have its nose wheel?

;-)

IIRC, years ago Dave Stevenson would select his Sports Class mount based on the published handicap values...and the site of the next national contest. Single-value handicaps can't theoretically apply equally for all days even at one location but knowing the expected weather helps narrow things down.

The problem I saw a while back was what I perceived as a sense with some that Sports and/or Club Class should exclude not just higher-performance gliders but better pilots. But being able to fly against some of the best pilots in the country--whether you have a state-of-the-art glider or something less cutting edge--is hugely appealing to me even if the handicap values are somewhat imprecise. In this case, with declining participation being perhaps the biggest problem we face in competitive soaring, the perfect is the enemy of the good.

Chip Bearden

On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 4:49:34 PM UTC-5, Sierra Whiskey wrote:
No argument there, it is difficult to quantify the climb performance utilizing upward moving air. This would take some evaluation of the wing loading and sink rate at thermaling speeds.

That in mind, the analysis of speed and sink comparisons does indicate that if those two gliders left the same thermal at the same altitude and at the same time, the lower performing glider would arrive at the same next thermal lower and after the higher performing glider. Any delta in the climb performance (if one could be accurately calculated) would be negated by the point of arrival in the next thermal. So in a way the climb performance of the glider is accounted for in the calculation, probably as an under-estimate.

The above is probably why it is also so difficult to handicap variable ballasted gliders!

A while back I developed a plan to create a variable handicap where a Contest Director (with the help of the Weather Adviser) would declare three components to the race: Task, MacCready Value for the day, and a wind value for the day. Each handicap for the day would be based on the sink rate of each glider at the given MC and Headwind Values defined for the day. The idea was to level the playing field between a PW-5 and an ASG-29 across the different soaring conditions.

Examples:
1) Strong Lift- ASG-29 will cruise much further and more efficiently than a PW-5
2) Weak Lift- PW-5 will climb and stay aloft much easier.
3) Heavy Wind- ASG-29 has much better penetration into a strong headwind.

The reality is that the development of this system would take a significant amount of time due to a lack of high resolution data for glide performance across the spectrum of aircraft. Though the solution is difficult to design and implement, it would provide a better system to handicap gliders based on the soaring conditions, and not just a single performance value. The negative impact of this system is the requirement for rules protecting the CD from making a less than desirable call on the day values, and would introduce some new soaring strategy to optimize the performance of each aircraft based on the variable handicap for the given conditions.

This all came about while I was trying to determine how each glider's handicap is calculated. Unfortunately I am still unclear on how that happens.

Why declare values for lift and wind ahead of time?
Just analyze the average lift and wind from the .igc files and then compute all the handicap factors. Not very transparent ahead of the day but all computable - and not left to poor weather forecasting. In the UK they have tried Windicaps in addition to handicaps.

I have sailed handicap yacht races for over 30 years, the reason it is fun and boats of various sizes, shapes, and vintages can race. We are not racing for money or livelihood, rather fun (same as in gliders, although there is big money in sailboat racing). Hell, I was on a boat that beat Dennis Connor, he was in a Farr 60 and I (along with rest of crew) were in a J-120, kind of like an /asw-15 vs asw -22bl. Which leads to another point Dennis Connor, pretty good sailor, is very active in the handicap racing (of sailboats).

No matter what your motivations are, it boils down to fun or some sort of personal achievement, or betterment. You will not support your family by racing sailplanes. Some have fun just boring hole in the sky, some want to race only against the best on a closed circuit, AST, some want to measure what a sailpane pilot must decided on XC days, planning, picking the right sector... Just because it does not float your boat, does not mean it is not attractive to others.

At the yacht club I avoid the complainers, and I have yet to hear someone bitching about their handicap.


On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 4:05:23 AM UTC-8, Sean Fidler wrote:
I have avoided participation in handicap yacht racing events for over 20 years, but returned to sail with an old friend on his 33 foot boat in Michigan last summer for a few "handicap" races. My wife wanted to go sailing, so I agreed. It's always fun to go sailing on a nice afternoon. Other than these few times last summer, I have vigorously refused invitations based on my feelings about handicap racing. For my friend, the local handicap committee had hammered him so badly that he had already sold the boat. It was comical and a fun conversation. But the experience has some potential lessons surrounding it.

When the boat was delivered (4 year old design from England) a rating was formally requested. My friend had been out of sailing for awhile but was a former top sailor, last winning several season championships and many regattas before leaving the sport for roughly 10 years ago to focus on his young kids. The initial handicap estimate (before buying, via casual conversation with the handicap committee head and based on other popular boats which rated equal with it in England) was reasonable, so my friend felt comfortable (huge mistake) that the boat would have a competitive chance despite the usual handicap fear "tax" that is commonly added by corrupt local handicap committees to top sailors boats based on their skill as sailors.

So my friend decided to buy the boat and return to the sport in order to introduce his kids to sailing and take friends and family out for daysails. The boat was designed for the Solent (England, strong winds) and was overly stable (very heavy keel bulb with a smaller sail plan) for the generally light air conditions of the Great Lakes. But for my friend this would also provide a very stable sailing platform for teaching (not frightening) his kids. Very heavy boats generally get a small break on handicaps in the Great Lakes for this reason (uncompetitive)

So he invested 120k (a major investment for my friend) including some normal maintenance and shipped the boat to MI from England. Then the real "fun" began! Word got out and other owners clearly started getting nervous. A bunch of geniuses sat around a table at some yacht club, otherwise known as the "handicap committee annual meeting" (drinking cheap beer to embolden their "wisdom") and decided to give my friends boat a rating that was equivalent to modern 40+ boats with waterlines over 20% longer (think wingspan).. They just pulled this rating out of thin air based on their "view" of what "believed" and not the enormous amount of VPP (velocity prediction program) data available (objective) showing the boats performance (vs other similar boats) at all wind speeds and angles, accurate to .001 knots! This boat was going to be a "good boat" but was not going to be "over performing" its waterline limitations in the slightest. In fact, it probably underperforms slighly in most conditions due to its extreme weight (nearly 12,000 pounds, which is very heavy for a 33 ft racing sailboat). The rating the committee enacted for my friend was ridiculous. It was clearly based on their fear of my friends sailing skill, not the boats performance. The rating was roughly 25% too strong and was an apparent effort to ensure that my friend was unable to compete. This proved true except for one of the races I attended and due to a tactical miracle. The boat performed exactly like a similar 33 footer but owed an extra 15-20 seconds a mile.

Of course, the handicap committee meeting included many of my friends "future competitors" (what a shock, eh?). All kinds of bogus "research" (see personal fantasy) was submitted by several of the other yacht owners explaining how fast (over embellished to say the least) this 4 year old English yacht design "might" be in. Of course they asked the committee to provide a ridiculous rating, strongly in their favor, which assumed all their "research" (counter to VPP data) was accurate. And of course the committee, desperate to win themselves as always, accommodated the subjective opinions of the other frightened competitors and approved a rating that turned heads globally per it's obvious incompetence and/or corruption. Personal opinion built the rating, not objective data. But the committee, uncomfortable with such attention, just didn't care about anything other then their own small world and potential to win $4 flags, and they stayed hidden under their rocks unwilling to budge.

This is the way, for the most part, that the handicap game has been played for 40 years (in sailing). Cheating, lying, manipulation and good old boy influence drives the handicap list. It's more a game of who you know on the committee (orngetting on it yourself) and of leveraging who you know to your personal advantage (hmm, sounds somewhat familiar...but I just can't place it...). I find such handicap processes to be shameful, ridiculous, disgusting and corrupt.

Of course, after conversation with the family and only half a season of sailing, my friend sold his new boat (nice profit) and reinvested the money in other family activities with absolutely no regrets. He was relieved to be out of that ugly system of corruption and bad sportsmanship. This was a moment of clarity for him, and for many around him. The fact that he knows not to be involved, ever again, was worth the hassle and will pay dividends to his family for years to come in terms of where to spend their time and money. It was a teachable moment. ;-). It was also a shame.

And they (the big boat handicap racing community) wonder why their "big boat" fleet has eroded by nearly 50% in the past 20 years. The corrupt, self serving process by which the handicaps are subjectively "determined." The scenario above is also quite common.

Of course small one design racing (boats of higher performance and a fraction of the cost) is growing as a result of this consistently ridiculous committee behavior, as is cruising boat sailing to some extent (people who like sailing with friends and family but have abandoned handicap racing entirely, allowing them to invest in more comfortable boats).

In my opinion handicaps are a poison to sport and should be avoided at all cost. And there seem to be similarities in soaring.

This is why I don't compete in sports class. Everyone knows what gliders are required to compete (or to have an advantage). This tells us immediately that existing handicaps are somewhat flawed. Any pilot should be equally competitive in any glider. That's the point, right? If that's not the case then their is more work to do, no? So why has this not been solved? See the Duo Discus for Sports or the Standard Cirrus for Club. We all know what certain gliders are considered to have the best handicaps. Of course a dry 18m ASG29 is generally considered to be uncompetitive. If able, ASG29 pilots use 15m for a more favorable handicap. But flapped ships are generally not competitive in sports class. An LS8 is often considered ideal. That's a problem to be solved, is it not? Yet it remains. Or, why is there no handicap for an FES equipped glider. Clearly FES results in significant additional drag vs the pure glider. Studies say 2-4%. These are simple facts. Unfortunately, as with sailing, glider handicaps are not based on facts and data but instead on some level of subjective opinion which influences or acts to retain them as is, even if obviously flawed. Ridiculous. Why is this allowed to continue?

Anyway enough about this. Handicaps are, IMO, really bad news. Imperfect and impure. I just thought I would mention why I, for one, have no interest in handicap soaring (or sailing) "competition."

If more effort was put into recognizing and solving this problem, I might change my opinion but I'm not holding my breath.