The Bloody Mary

[PiersHS]

Will there be any Cherubs at the Bloody Mary? Online entry has just opened.     

hxxp: www.  queenmary.  org.  uk/online-entry-now-available-for-the-bloody-mary-2012-.  aspx  

And if anybody needs a string puller for the day I am around.  .  .  .     :P

Cheers
PHS

EDIT- Seems newbie's can't post links without the spaces. . . .  sorry!

[Andrew Whapshott]

I may well be along with "This Way Up" but I think my sister will be crewing..   

[pratn0]

Phil and I are planning to attend on E-numbers.

[PaulJ]

Peter and I are planning to do it, as long as Ronin is back together

[andy_peters]

I see they have set the Chreub handicap at 880 - ouch!  I do wonder where that came from - surely the PY should be based upon returns.  Our racing at QMSC wouldn't support a handicap at that level - on the perfect course and wind yes, but over a series of some 21 races we were beaten by the 400's and the D1 when we were sailing of 930.   We did though do some horizon jobs on the 400's in the right conditions and that has us pegged back for 2012 club handicaps at QMSC to 919 - still no where near 880!

I wonder what other 'large open water' clubs have sent in returns to justify 880 - for those not aware the large inland clubs (QM, Draycote, Chew, Rutland, Grafham, Datchet) share returns and discuss PY handicaps as a group.  Or is this a shot in the dark handicaping us on our potential in perfect conditions - I think it is.

[Graham Bridle]

Do we think it warrants an email from the comittee, asking for justification of such a number ?

[andy_peters]

Does seem strange to have such a gulf between current PY and 880 - over 50 points.  Even given the localisation at QM there is still almost 40 points difference.

Might be our fault - QMSC holds several similar pursuit races on Bank Holidays.  We did the one in August and beat the 2nd boat (a member of the PY committee) by over 2 lengths of QMSC.  We should have sandbagged but were having too much fun.

[JimC]

I know they've done a lot of work on handicaps: I've given them a bunch of data from my club, although nothing relating to Cherubs. There are aspects of what they've done that I wouldn't personally be comfortable with, notably targeting the number at the top end of the fleet which means that you are on statistically rocky ground.

However after the 2004 Nationals, when we had two boats with Slug hulls and rigs approximating to the current size, I did some sums and I estimated a handicap for those boats. ISTR I got a number under 900. From the work I've done in the past the current RYA number looks generous.

You also need to avoid being too worried about handicaps. Often when you look at this big races you find the top end are a huge way away from the fleet. Even 50 points is only 5% when the difference between 1st and last in any class is over 20%

[Graham Bridle]

I'm still happy to question it. We are a boat of extremes, sometimes we can sail to 880 given a very favourable course, a very favourable constant windspeed and no wind shadows, no close tacking, no shallows blah blah.

Given unfavourable all of those sometimes I reckon I sail nearer to 990; however of course noone lets me sail off that.

Nearly all boats have their favourable conditions and can be a bandit on their day, its just that the swing is less [perhaps except for cats]. My understanding of the handicap system is that its supposed to represent a mean, with the ability for local variations to take place. If 880 is that then it would imply that on a good day we can sail faster than that, well only if its a drag race on a perfectly set reach in flat water for 6 miles, has QM changed shape since I last went ?

[Hayley_Trim]

Seems to me there is no harm in politely asking how they have reached that number. If there has been some mistake, it will inevitably be perpetuated.
Incidentally I have no personal interest as I do not plan to be racing in the Bloody insanely cold Mary. At least not in body. I may be there in spirit (ie being very supportive on shore with a hip flask of something warming).

[Andrew Whapshott]

Hmm.. So This Way Up would be sailing off 880!?  

   Even though its 91 rules; I do not see much chance of beating anyone, at all..  Ah well, will come along for grins ..  Bored of being trapped on a small puddle surrounded by trees!

  Need to build a new stock before then too..    

[andy_peters]

I will ask the question of QMSC in relation to the BM - seems only reasonable to ask given we don't sail of 880 at QMSC normally.

[TSC]

The current suggested numbers on the PYS system for Thornbury are:

917 for the new boats & 895 for the older boats.

The value of 895 is based on insufficient data to reveal a true number as it only represents 3 race finishes over 3year period. However the value of 917 is based on considerably more data, thanks to E-numbers, EJ and Antidote plus the regatta data.

I think 917 is probably fair if the upwind legs require lots of tacks, but if you are able to bang the corners in clear air then I think 880 is probably closer to being a true number.  The final answer is probably somewhere in between ie.900.

[andy_peters]

895 for older boats.  That's harsh.  Are you trying to get them to upgrade 

[roland_trim]

I'd love to claim that it is because the only 97 boat is Born Slippy.
Sadly I think it's a typo :-)