104 KG - FACT OR FICTION?

[George Love]

Mrs. Simon - you have hit the nail on the head. And Liam, in your response to Mrs. S., you too have hit the nail on the head by confirming your view that 6kgs. doesn't matter. Quote-"it's a long way down the list of things that make a boat go fast", unquote. So, rhetorical question - why are we going through all the pain that this this issue has raised when 'it doesn't matter'? If our members were all Olympic standard sailors it would matter. But we're not, and save for a few individuals who are always at the front of the fleet because they are the best sailors and as close to Olympic standard as we're ever likely to get in our fleet, we never will be.
In an effort to prove that 6kgs. matters, it's not the weight data that should be determining the issue. All that that proves is that the new boats are a few kgs. lighter than the lightest old boat we can find. So what?? It does not prove that the new boats have an 'unfair advantage' as well as the general agreement that weight alone is only a minor contributory factor to performance. What might prove an unfair advantage is a results based review e.g. are those with new boats winning everything when they weren't before or posting results that are significantly better than before. The answer to that is 'No'. Those that won before always did and would probably have done so whatever bathtub they were helming. Yes, my results have improved. I should hope so, sailing a new boat that works perfectly and has a one-piece mast that allows the sail to set better than I ever could in my old boat, etc., etc. It's not 6kgs. that have made the difference. It's a whole host of other things, not least of all the confidence that sailing a new boat engenders. But I don't expect to win any championships simply because I'm not consistent enough. Sometimes I sail well, sometimes really badly and often doing both in the same race. Look at those that win consistently. They do that because they are consistently good in almost EVERY race in every event.
The weight data has had the effect of skewing everyone's thinking because it was the wrong starting point. Rubbish in, rubbish out!
The damage that this has caused is immeasurable, and, I fear, it's not yet over. We have the benefit of new boats that are probably built as good as they've ever been and what do we do?-we rule them out of class on spurious grounds together with the fact that a minimum weight requirement has never been part of our rules.
Talk about hit the self destruct button! The future of this Class as a production one design boat rests to a great extent on the ability to buy a new boat. On that we're all agreed and on the record. But now a new boat is tarnished as a result. Talk about shoot ourselves in the foot!
We should forget it and GO SAILING! It wasn't broke, so stop fixing it.
The forgoing is my personal opinion.
Cheers

[Liam]

You must think it's important or otherwise you wouldn't be on this site complaining about it.

We're not asking you to take a foot off your mast or tow a sea anchor, we are asking you to sail a boat which is slightly less advantageous than it would be otherwise.

I don't see why you would want to race against us with an unfair advantage now that you know you have one.

[George Love]

I'm not complaining! I'm putting forward my opinion. Yes - it's important! The future of the Class means a lot to me.
As for unfair advantage - case not proven. So prove it.
Cheers

[Liam]

As for unfair advantage - case not proven. So prove it.
Cheers

http://www.sprint15.com/rules/sprint%2015-weights.pdf

[Erling]

Talk about hit the self destruct button! The future of this Class as a production one design boat rests to a great extent on the ability to buy a new boat. On that we're all agreed and on the record. But now a new boat is tarnished as a result. Talk about shoot ourselves in the foot!
We should forget it and GO SAILING! It wasn't broke, so stop fixing it.

George
Nick had the same problem in the eighties when Laser started making boats lighter and the committee decided it was more important to keep the boats all the same basic weight by having the new boats carry extra weight and in the end Laser agreed to go back to the original weight and sold another 800 boats. Do you want to take the risk of killing the class by doing the opposite this time?

[George Love]

Liam,
Many thanks for the link. But as you know, I am well aware of the information contained therein having had the benefit of it for more than a few weeks. It tells me nothing new. My posting was made on the basis of that information. Therefore, I can only conclude that, if this is the only response on offer, the case that a weight of 6 kgs. gives an unfair advantage, is not proven - to which you have already eluded in your reply to Mrs. S.
Erling,
You mention that there was the same problem in the 80's and Laser went back to the 'original weight'. Please publish that original weight backed up with corroborative data/evidence which, to my knowledge, has never been mentioned or made available as part of the current issue under debate. I may be misinformed and shall be pleased to be enlightened as I'm sure will many members be.
Cheers,

[Liam]

Sorry, I thought Bob's opus was fairly easy to understand.

There are no specific absolute weights mentioned by Nick Dewhirst in his class struggle http://www.sprint15.com/images/class-st ... ruggle.pdf but he does mention an up to 3kg/hull discrepancy. We are just revisiting history.

I have attached it here - 2nd paragraph.

[George Love]

Thanks, Liam.
Bob's data is perfectly clear. Never said it wasn't or that I had difficulty understanding it. It is and I don't.
The 'Class Struggle' exert which I serialised some time ago in the magazine - a great read I might add - just confirms my points - results, results, results. Then and now are not the same if you read it.
Case still not proven in my view.
Cheers,

[Erling]

George the only difference from when Laser did it, is that would of made 1100 boats obsolete and now it will make 2000 obsolete and in a couple of years theboats could be made even lighter making your boat obsolete.
I don't think we will ever agree on this and this could be because the three members that wanted to leave the boats as they our only sail handicap racing at there clubs whereas Liam and myself only sail class racing and that includes 2018 who as soon as he found out put the extra weight in at his own expense.

[Andrew Hannah]

About 45 years ago, I raced in a class that is now defunct. Among the class rules, was one that required boats to carry a cwt of movable ballast. In truth, the ballast was completely unnecessary. So one of the sailors removed it from his boat.

Nevertheless, there were howls of protest from the other sailors, believing removal undermined the concept of one-design racing. Fortunately, the offender was a good sportsman and he agreed to reinstate his ballast.

In our case, we are not talking about a hundredweight but a mere 7 kilos. Let's be sportsmanlike. It's not a big ask.

[Bob Carter]

I have been looking at the Laser class rules which is also a one design and I am impressed by the opening paragraphs which I copy here.

" Class Rules - One Design
One of the attractions of the Laser for most owners is that the class rules are very strict and that the boat is one design The Laser philosophy incorporated in the rules is that we want to go sailing, not waste time fiddling with boats. We want to win races on the water using our skill, not by trying to find a way round the rules that will give us an advantage
The class rules are written to prevent any changes from the standard boat that might affect performance, so that on the water each boat is the same The few changes to the standard boat that are allowed are minor and only to allow for a few options that make racing the Laser more comfortable and enjoyable
Over the years the class has refused to make changes to the rules that allow more expensive or complicated equipment or which makes older boats redundant "

This expresses very well the objectives of a one design class. When we were asked if we would allow boats to be built without cocktail cabinets we said yes provided that the boats weight would not be reduced as a consequence. We said this to preserve our one design credentials, to maintain fair class racing and not to make older boats redundant, just as is expressed above. We added rule 10y specifically to make sure that the weight was not reduced. Now that we find this has not been the case we are just trying to restore the situation.
I am flabbergasted the lengths that owners of new boats are prepared to go to argue that the 6Kg or so illicit weight gain is fair.
If I was in their position I would feel guilty, not argumentative.......
Regards
Bob

[George Love]

I must confess that I thought this forum was a place where one's opinions, thoughts, etc. may be aired/debated - (so long as they are not malicious, defamatory, etc., etc.). Have the rules changed?
If, in expressing said thoughts, etc. makes me "argumentative", then I stand guilty as charged. I don't feel guilty? Do others? If you don't, it appears you should.
Cheers,

[Liam]

As long as I am the admin of this site, you can express your feelings frankly here.

If the new owners don't feel guilty about sailing the new boats that's fair enough. However the committee has interpreted the existing rules to mean the new boats must carry 6kg of weight correctors if they want to take part in the 12 Sprint 15 Association events.

If people don't like it then they are at liberty to try to get the rules changed at the AGM. If the majority of the fleet are happy to allow new lighter boats to race against us without penalty then I will not argue with that. Personally I think most people would prefer fair racing.

Please can we move on from this, apply the weights if you have a new boat and get back out on the water. As Andrew says, "It's not a big ask".

[Gordon]

As far as I understand, the Laser is another manufacturer one design as we are and it also doesn’t have a minimum weight, they list only a nominal weight to allow for variations in build tolerances. The whole ethos is a fine aspiration, but you still don’t get many (if any) top Laser sailors in old boats.
They also have annual sales in the hundreds and no one would dream of trying to compare a 15-25 year old boat with a new one. For us to reach 800 new boats (Erling), is likely to take about 350 years at the current rate of sales!

I have some sympathy with what Jan says, because in that ideal world all the boats would be the same, but of course they’re not and newer boats are likely to be better, which is generally why we buy them.
And if I look at Bob’s all up weight charts, what stands out to me immediately is the enormous spread in the weights of the old boats we already have and that’s before you even look at the new boats. Turns out we’ve already got a spread of 15kg between just 28 boats at an average of nearly 119kg. So what are we planning to do about that? Looking at the chart there’s already 9 old boats that are below the class average weight. So do we tell them to add corrector weights and tell them they should feel guilty? They've had an advantage for years and nobody new.
We’re now planning on penalising the new boats but we’re going to just ignore the existing differences between the old boats, differences which we’ve put up with for years?
Is this a new boat witch hunt or is it a genuine quest for fair play for all our members? Because if it’s the latter, then we need to be seen to be fair to everyone, not just those at the front of the fleet.

Regarding the cocktail cabinets, this is an extract from the minutes of the Dinghy show meeting with Windsport and ourselves when this was agreed. Interestingly the idea of corrector weights was dismissed back then;

Cocktail cabinet. The proposal from Windsport is to retain the hatch, but to do away with the inner moulding of the cocktail cabinet, replaced by a mesh bag, fixed in place to the underside of the hatch cover frame. One option, to compensate for the weight saving by glassing in a corrector in each hull was rejected on the grounds that it can easily be removed. The weight saving (guess 2 kgs) will therefore be used to offset the small weight increase by adopting the 18 front beam, and also to selectively strengthen the hull where appropriate.

I find this dispute almost impossible to fathom because we have no specified minimum weight and nobody seems to know or will say what the weight of the boat is or what it’s actually meant to be. Then it turns out we’ve already got a vast spread in the weight of the existing old boats, which we're going to do nothing about. And we’re trying to compare the weight of something that’s been in use for 15-25 years with something that’s brand new and about which; no one has raised any complaint about for the last 4 years! That’s very difficult.
I also agree with Simon’s wife, because I’ve done a lot of events in the 4 years since the new boats have been out and I’ve never heard any complaints until now.

What really gets me though is what’s happening to our class. For the whole time I’ve sailed a Sprint 15 this class has always been the friendliest and most accommodating of any sailing class in the country. We all want to do well, but for me and I’m sure many others it hasn’t been all about the result, it’s as much about enjoying your sport with your friends. We seem to have lost that or maybe just thrown it away.

Regards
Gordon

[Liam]

and also to selectively strengthen the hull where appropriate.

That's the whole point. It wasn't done.