Classic Boat – May 2018

3

18 CLASSIC BOAT APRIL 2018 CLASSIC BOAT APRIL 2018 19

TELL TALES TELL TALES

Amidst recent animated debate on the pros and cons of the handicaps used at most classic yacht regattas in the Mediterranean [see last month's issue], and some in England, it's worth noting that

one system, originated in Germany but increasingly used elsewhere in Europe, has gone about its business quietly, efor almost 25 years: Klassiker-Rennwertformel, better known as KLR. ciently and simply

keen racing sailor Enno Thyen, KLR has amassed a database of over 1,000 yachts as its use spread beyond its original German Devised by Lübeck-based classic yacht owner, enthusiast and

Baltic waters base. A version has been in operation in Norway for many years; in Scotland on the Clyde it's been the system of choice at The Fife Regatta since 2003, and used by Crinan

Classics, the 2009 Mylne Regatta, the 2012 McGruer Regatta and the 2013 Clyde Classic; in Ireland it's been used at Glandore Classic Regatta. On the Solent, at the Royal London Yacht Club's popular

Cowes Classics Week, KLR has been applied to its Cruisers, Classic Dayboats and Spirit of Tradition divisions since 2013, and this year's inaugural Cowes Spring Classics will use KLR similarly. It has

even been used to handicap International 8-Metres with ages ranging over 100 years racing in a one-fl eet, one-start, tune-up prior to their European Championship.

monohull yacht, ancient or not; KLR could easily be applied to very modern yachts. But what makes it so user-friendly for classics is a At KLR's heart are sensible ratios that can assimilate any

set of factors tailored to the often unique confiand equipment that only classic regattas attract. KLR's default mean is a moderate displacement hull with sloop rig, wood mast, gurations of hull, rig

Dacron sails and carrying a normal-sized symmetrical, pole-set spinnaker. Downwind sail area is not measured, but use of

In the article on CIM vs IRC published in your March issue, you speak about various aspects of the future of the CIM. The subject is very interesting and I wish, as president of the Jauge Classique Handicap

(JCH), to draw your attention to this handicap system which is gaining in international usage on the Atlantic coasts of France and Spain and in the English Channel.

circuits for classics are respectively the CIM and the JCH.The two most widely used rating systems in use on the European The JCH, created in 1997 at the initiative of the Musée Maritime de

La Rochelle, is now run on a voluntary basis by an independent association whose council members include French, British and Spanish representatives. It has seen signifi cant growth and manages

more than 700 rating certifion the Atlantic and English Channel coasts of France, on the Spanish Atlantic coast, in Portugal, in the UK for the Classic Channel Regatta, cates. It is used for all regattas of classics

the Dartmouth Classics and, as of this year, for the Falmouth Classics bermudan flalso expect it to be adopted in Holland this year. eet, as well as the 2015 and 2019 Transat Classique. We

origin and will continue to do so, based on the analysis of data from regatta results and thanks to the skill of those working on their Both CIM and JCH systems have evolved considerably since their

evolution. The common point they have is to take into account, in addition to measurements, several parameters totally specificlassic yachts, such as age, type of construction and rigging, and they c to

discourage inappropriate modernisation that disregards the spirit of classic boats.The seven core principles of the JCH are:

„time-deficonstruction Adaptability to the requirements of classics: it is designed for a ned fl eet emphasising fi delity to the original design and

„„„ Equality: to give each boat an equal chance Self-certifi Free certifi cation using straightforward measurements cate

„individual race result, either time-on-time or time-on-distance, for all sizes and types of classic boats Universality: designed for regattas utilising an

„online and is in constant evolution Transparency: the formula is in the public domain

L = LOA (m) R = L^6 FDS S = SGV + 0.7 x SVP + 0.1xSVL + 0.3 x SVGLFD = Displacement FactorWhere L = L +0.3x (L -L) in metres

LWL = LWL (m)B = beam (m)T = draft (m) incl centreboardV = displacement (t)S = sailarea (ef ective)

The case for KLR The case for JCH

Iain McAllister responds to our CIM vs IRC debate last month President of the JCH Council François Séruzier offers his view

THE

RATING DEBATE

ratios that can assimilate any “At KLR's heart are sensible

monohull yacht, old or not”IAIN MCALLISTER

THE DEBATE

CIMB

IRC

VS

“No handicap system is perfect, but the JCH is

producing good results”FRANÇOIS SÉRUZIER

non-symmetric, not pole-set sails receives a factor benefiand use of wider than normal downwind sails is penalised. Anything dif erent is factorised – so, for example, t,

schooners, ketches, gaf rig and non-spinnaker use, to name just a few, receive factor benefi ts, while use of non-classic features and materials such as carbon masts and non-Dacron

sails is penalised. KLR uses actual rather than potential sail area as an average of full sail upwind and reefed upwind, so applicants supply their vessel's actual sail areas rather than rig

measurements. The condition of the boat is not considered as the decision was taken to keep KLR as a simple measure of potential performance, and leave appearance to a highly

valued restoration prize or Concours d'Elegance. But KLR does take into consideration the real age of hull and spars – ie, has the hull been totally rebuilt and is therefore like new, or is

it the original hull maintained and repaired along the years? (I’ll stop there before entering Theseus' paradox territory...)Enno's aim always was to keep it simple as the original task

was to handicap upwards of 200 yachts – including many that do not normally race – arriving at weekend events like

Flensburg Classics and German Classics at Laboe near Kiel. It depends on owner/skipper declaration of the normal yacht numbers to a knowledgeable data gatherer, who

in an ideal world will also recommend class divisions for good sport. KLR's simplicity and increasing popularity suggests that he got it right.

View the Freundeskreis Klassische Yachten KLR handicapping page with formula details at fky.org/regatta/klr-engl.htm

KLR = 6[(LB)++ (^5) LT))(( SV](2.43 LWL cb r)
„The benefi ts we see that JCH has over CIM are: Objectivity: based on strictly measurable criteria.
„yacht’s degree of conformity to her original design and construction Its objectivity: there are no subjective coe cients evaluating a
„certifieligibility rules There are no eligibility rules, so allowing any boat to get a JCH cate – it is for each regatta organiser to specify its own
„either penalised or awarded an allowance depending on their speed potential. All types of equipment (sails, hardware, etc) are allowed and
range of boats racing in classic events, but the JCH is producing good results. From statistics we have from regatta results using the No handicap system can be perfect, especially with the diverse
JCH, the dif erence between the time corrected factor and actual performance for the great majority of boats is less than 5%, and for a high proportion it is less than 2%.
continual evolution, we fi rmly believe it can only continue to improve further.As the JCH becomes more widely used, and with its policy of
boats, but trying to adapt it to classic yachts would be a mistake.IRC is recognised as a high quality rating system for modern
View the JCH formula and details at jch-online.org
Letters
Send your letters (and any replies, please) to:
Classic Boat, Jubilee House, 2 Jubilee Place,
London SW3 3TQ
email: [email protected]
CIM was the right fi t
for the classic
revival and the
proof is in the
extraordinarily
healthy classic fl eet
you can see there
today. There are
other rating systems
that would have
been equally
successful, had they
been in existence,
but IRC is not one
of them. It was
developed for
modern yacht
racing and with the
measurement of
performance
potential at its core.
Classics need
something more
nuanced, something
that does not
promote being fi rst
over the line as the
main aim.
Hector de Laurent,
via email
SOME OF YOUR LETTERS AND EMAILS
FOLLOWING THE ARTICLES IN THE MARCH
AND APRIL ISSUES ON RATING SYSTEMS
The classic fl eet in the Mediterranean has slowly
blossomed over the last 30 years; the standard of the
boats has got steadily higher and owners, their families
and friends have enjoyed the regattas – it has been great
fun. The CIM rating rule is not perfect but it has
encouraged owners to keep the boats pure and unspoilt

• authentic in their detail and true to their origins. In my
  view this is why that fl eet is so magical to watch out on
  the water and why so many classic boats have been
  saved. CIM rewards authenticity – so very dif erent from
  the alternative rating rule options I have seen so far. In
  optimizing your yacht to get a better rating – you will
  make her more authentic, surely the best result for yacht
  and owner!
  There will always be an alternative and there will always
  be super competitive sailors; perhaps for them modern
  one-design fl eet racing will bring greater fulfi lment.
  If we are to change the rating rules for racing classic
  yachts, we need to be mindful that in doing this we are not
  altering/spoiling the boats to end up totally compromised,
  to use a classic car analogy, creating a 1950s Jaguar XK
  150 with a plastic spoiler and extra wide tyres!
  I recently watched the UK classic fl eet racing with its
  IRC sail plans which encourages small jibs as this rule
  punishes large jibs/genoas; they looked ridiculous in my
  view in 6 knots of breeze struggling to go upwind against
  the tide. The irony here is in the original photos and sail
  plans of these boats – you will see massive genoas that
  these classic rigs were designed to carry, and should carry.
  I noted also a lack of the vintage gaf class out on the
  water as the IRC rule does not seem to work for this fl eet.
  Some owners have gone further in search of optimising
  their classic boats for IRC, with larger rigs and carbon
  spars – taking their vessels down a modern classic route.
  In my view modern yachts are becoming more and
  more beautiful, fast and e cient. Clean decks and low
  profi le deck structures and exotic composite construction
  have changed the game: will it be long before some of
  these are called classics? I know many will disagree but will
  our children? I believe if we become distracted by changing
  the rules and therefore the boats to satisfy a few of us, we
  may well be left with yachts that will perhaps sail a few
  degrees higher, half a knot faster in some conditions – but
  for what? The ghosts and the magic of the original boat
  will be gone and once these boats fail to inspire us or the
  next generation of sailors, a sailor
  might choose the speed of a boat
  that foils upwind and that you can
  sail with just a few crew rather
  than the grace and surefootedness
  of an old yacht. I do not think we
  should let this happen.
  Barney Sandeman,
  Sandeman Yacht Company

That ‘No handicap system can be perfect’ is an

irrefutable statement in the ‘Rating Debate’ (CB 357

and 358) and an interesting test of KLR, JCH, CIM and

IRC would be to run trial certifi cates for a diverse set

of classic yachts to see how they are treated under

each system. It’s not hard to spot anomalies in a rating

list but nothing can be done if the numbers are set in

stone and so it’s important to pick the right system for

your regatta. Although IRC does not reward classic

authenticity it has, despite some notable criticism,

proved to be a reliable benchmark across a wide

range of boats and events. Factoring period deck gear,

rig and sail materials etc, if needed, could be applied

to a boat’s standard rating, if the RORC chose to allow

that. Yacht owners invest a lot in their sailing and they

like the assurance of a well-proven formula, but the

age-old low-tech method based on empirical race

data can also be remarkably satisfactory – an example

is the Hamble Classics ‘Regatta’ class.

Jonty Sherwill, Hamble Classics

CIM the

right fi t

Changing the rules

to please a few

Trial certifi cates

RATING RESPONSE