Where else… part of the 29-strong J/105 fleet beat towards the Golden Gate against San Francisco’s instantly recognisable skyline at the Rolex Big Boat Series. The J/105s once again made up the largest class this year, but for the first time in a long while the handicap classes are starting to look interesting again; this year’s line-up included the first West Coast Cape 31, a Fast40, two Santa Cruz 52s, a Reichel/Pugh ID48 and of course the grandaddy of the whole ULDB movement, Bill Lee’s Merlin; sadly the Bay is not the best hunting ground for any downwind flyer, after the fun bit you still have to get back uphill, frequently short-tacking along the City Front into 3-4kt of incoming tide…
part of the agenda but perhaps that’s our fault for simply not having enough fun ashore any more.
There are no longer big IOR monsters or slippery long, narrow Sleds at this event, but there is a sizeable mixed fleet of old and new boats that represent the current interests in big boat sailing in the region. This includes the usual groups of one-designs, common in all major US regattas since the IMS era faded away some 20 years ago, followed by a brief IRC era that eventually did the same.
Chief among the one-designs at this event are J/105s, with nearly 30 on the startline in this year’s regatta. This is a locals-only but serious fleet that has held onto its core no-pro Corinthian values and demon- strated a boat and racing concept that are near-perfect for this style of racing. J/105s are not the fastest boats to sail, nor are they particularly equal among all the fleet members (let’s just say some put more effort into being equal than others).
But in moderate to fresh breezes the J/105 is a solid platform to race compared to more sporty boats where greater athleticism is not just optional but required. Once again in San Francisco it is the slower boats that provide the closest tactical racing.
The two handicap classes used ORC scoring for the first time at this event, where the divide for its two classes was made according to some parametric values in measurement which boiled down to planing or non-planing in design… regardless of size! This is in stark contrast to how ORC classes are divided in other events where GPH or CDL is used to define classes, but the near-guarantee of moderate to fresh conditions had convinced the organisers that this was the best method of providing fair ratings and scoring. And so it proved. And the method they employed is interesting, a far better carry-over from the previous use here of the mind-frying ORR system. Three course models were crafted to condense the matrix of wind angles and speeds into a single-number TCC. These included a 50-50 windward-leeward model, a 60-40 model (three beats and two runs), and a SF Bay tour model, based on the geometry of the final day’s single long race. Each course type was calculated for a medium and heavy mix of wind speeds, so race managers could select the model that best matched the conditions of each race.
What’s interesting is this was a mix customised with the consent of the organisers and not found among the pre-selected course options on US ORC certificates. So custom scratch sheets were created for competitors to know their time allowances in each class. It’s a little more work using this approach, but the scheme seemed to work because corrected time deltas were close, often within seconds on corrected time after 1.5-2.5 hour races. One team did ask if current had been factored into the modelling, but not for this year: it’s another variable to track in the course model and within the timing of the long courses thought to be too complex to try this time out. Another interesting observation from the scoring was that maybe boat type does not have a strong effect on results after all. For example, in a 50-50 race scored in medium conditions on the second day of racing the top seven boats – the top two from the Class A performance boats and the top five from the Class B cruiser/racers – finished within two minutes in corrected time on the same 10.3nm course. This is encouraging news for many organisers elsewhere who would still like to try to distil an overall regatta winner from multiple classes. Of course the real fix for this is to have greater participation to populate the classes, to get more ‘big’ back into the Big Boat Series. A start would be to lure back those teams in So Cal who, while they do have some great racing in their own region, would once again consider a trip up the coast to experience some windier racing in one of the most spectacular sailing venues in the world… Something the locals have long known, respected and enjoyed. Dobbs Davis
SEAHORSE 27
Anzeige_HIA_1_2_Hoch_engl_vertuscht4.indd 1 08.09.20 11:35
With the HIA Integral Backstay Adjuster you have exactly the right tool in your armoury: it’s simultaneously powerful, robust and sensitive. The hydraulicly- generated pressure reaches an unparalleled 440 bar while its output is infinitely variable and adjustable. Its components are CNC-machined and the materials for the HIA Integral Backstay Adjuster are of extremely high quality, offering long service life. Valves and lines are housed inside the main body, a perfect combination of detailed design and performance. The HIA Integral Backstay Adjuster is available in several sizes.
WWW.RECKMANN.COM
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130
