IOR to IMS

I suspect racing saiboat rating rules tend to fade in and out as an older rule falls from favor and a new rule moves up to take its place. So that, for a while, the two rules exhist simultaniously.

My questions are:

1.) Did this happen with the IOR and The IMS?
2.) Did the two overlap for awhile, or was there an interim rule that came after the IOR and before the IMS?
3.) If the IOR was directly replaced by the IMS, during what years did this happen?

Just curious.

Bob

 

IMS really started in the early 90's. Early IMS boats like the FARR 44 Gaucho, Nelson/Marek 46 Collaboration, N/M 40 Sensation, Tripp 50 Falcon and the FARR 40 High Five all came out at this time. These boats where powerful and well mannered boats that had huge speed increased due to fair hulls and wide powerful transoms. IOR at that time was seeing stranger and less sea worthy designs as the rule was pushed to its limit, with hull "bumps", internal ballast and very unstable hull forms. Last IOR Admiral's Cup was 91or 92? i believe.

No one likes getting passed and the new IMS developed boats where much quicker and easier to sail. As IMS has developed we have seen it take the same road as IOR with constant changes to the rule, which has develop slab sided boats with light keels and internal ballast. These hull forms rated so well under IMS that the older designs could not compete.

The problem with these types of rules is that there is always someone trying to push the limits of the rules, sometimes for better and sometimes for worst. As the limits are pushed we start to seeing all boats being designed start looking the same to capitalize on the rating benefits. There comes a point where the rating benefits outweigh the seaworthiness, sailability, and overall performance of the boat. At that point, in my mind, the rating rule is doomed.

Solution, race one-design as that is the true mark of a sailors performance. Or build something that is just fast and screw the rating rules all together.

Cheers

 

Bob,

The way I see it, IOR was one of many attempts by the geeks involved in sailing to rate diverse boats fairly in order to level the playing field. It failed miserably, mostly on account of the rapid rate of obsolecence it produced. IMS was a more elaborate form of the same basic receipe, trying to level diverse boats to where they could race with an even chance of winning. Of course, the entire notion behind it is, (and always was) flawed. Just for kicks, imagine racing a motor-home against an F-1 car, ridiculous isn't it? even if you had a sizable head-start, would it be the same ratio for every track?

Yes, I do recognize that I'm stretching my analogy pretty thin here, (think rubber-band) but I think the basic premise still holds. (Please do see my missive in the materials section regarding the fallacy of beliveing ones own BS)

My favorite rule is the Sonder boat rule, WL length, WL beam, and draft added up cannot exceed 10 meters, utterly arbitrary, but yet, it works.

Well, that's my view of the situation, so naturally it has to be correct, and thus, don't bother me with your own (by definition) ill-informed opinions.

Yoke(silly)butt.

 

To directly answer the questions, IOR was starting to wane are IMS grew part of the driver for IMS was the odds contortions of IOR. The brief period of late '80s and early 90's they co-existed. The big years were 90-92 if I recall.

 

The way I see it, IOR was one of many attempts by the geeks involved in sailing to rate diverse boats fairly in order to level the playing field. It failed miserably, mostly on account of the rapid rate of obsolecence it produced.

These foolish and many attempts can be traced to controversy over centerboards and in particular one vessel.

In 1954 the Olin Stephens designed yacht Finisterre was launched, to late for the Bermuda race that year. She was a 38 foot centerboarder and there is no more accomplished racing yacht. She ranks as one of the most significant yachts in the history of the sport. And we do not discuss her enough.

Carleton Mitchell, the owner of Finisterre, is the author of the book Islands to Windward. He had developed a sailing style that was not in concert with the era of the deep-keeled, long-ended windward-leeward oriented ocean racers. An era that had just started and would gain momentum with the revitalizatoin of the Americas Cup and the 12 meter vessels. Mitchell had previously owned a 58-foot centerboarder, the Rodes-designed Caribbee. Michell wanted to prove something by racing.

With Finisterre, he humiliated hundreds of deep fixed keel race boat owners by holding the honor mooring spot off the Royal Bermuda Yacht Club from 1956 to 1962, a spot envisioned for a much much larger and deep draft vessel.

Finisterre was widely copied but these copies did not produce wins like those obtained by Finisterre. This immitation lead to rule changes tending to reduce the success of her type. That success should spawn rules limiting progress in design is a tradgedy. But training has something to do with the sad story. Finisterre's crew had perfected the use of the centerboard as an ocean racing tool. They knew that the faster the boat went the less centerboard was required and they knew that they could eliminate rudder drag by using the centerboard to steer, as today's sailors steer with the sheets. They also knew that retracting the board helped the vessel surf. But this knowledge was not passed on as it should have been. Instead, the progress in design so well represented by the Mitchell/Stephens collaberation and so well proven on the race course was just ignored and designers wishing to appear as authorities started developing and promoting various box rules. I see this really as the cause of the end of the custom build shops and not the fiberglass era. Few want race boats designed by someone who didn't design the box rule as well.

 

Frank, your post is 100% misinformation. Go back to your cage.

 

Spin

Shife. Nonesense. This is not my spin.

Prior to the build of Finisterre, Mitchell put his ideas in articles which were criticized, putting him in the awkward position of potential publicized failure, not unlike myself Finisterre was built at the height of custom yacht design. His notion of a vessel that would be like having your cake and eating it to, that would be small enough for single handling, comfortable enough for luxurious cruising, able to cross oceans and fast enough to win races was not popular among the "all boats are compromises mindset." The fact that the vessel would be a centerboarder undoubtedly angered many who had worked for years to discredit this foil type.

Here are some conclusions that I am coming to regarding modern ocean sail boat design. Vessels under 30 foot should be designed with planing/surfing in mind. Speed is the number one item necessary for safety. That was not the case prior to say 1960 when there were not excellent reporting systems. Prior to the 1960s you could expect that at least one time in a vessel's life it would be storm sailed. Today no fast sailboat, competently crewed and of shallow enough draft to take advantage of all-weather-moorings need ever ride out a storm at sea. Vessels between 30 foot and 37 foot should be twin keeled.

"No other nation has put so much faith in bilge (or twin) keels as the British. Other countries have flirted with them, but we became so enamored with the concept that they were the first choice for anything less than about 36 feet."

Practical Boat Owner
Buying A Second Hand Boat, April 2005, pg 54

Designers of Vessels over 36 feet should learn from Finisterre. At that size all you need compromise on is transportability and that is only the case if you design a beamy vessel. Finisterre is said to be beamy. But that is hardly the case when you look at other vessels. The notions that vessels like Finisterre are sailed differently than IOR and IMS oriented vessels explains why copies, crewed by the experienced, were not successful. They had not been trained to take advantage of the technology. So does the notion that racing rules discriminated against such designs but I find that less convincing because there are venues that do not discriminate, such as PHRF.

 

Yes Frank, it IS your spin. You take information that you barely understand out of context and then mold it to fit your warped idea of what a sailboat design should look like. All because you are desperately searching for a design that somewhat resembles the pile of crap you own. The only thing your boat and the Olin Stephens design you mention above have in common is a centerboard. Your notion of a racing sailboat never needing to ride out a storm is completely false. While you run for cover, the rest of us continue racing. That is part of racing. Running for a anchorage at the first sign of bad weather is called cruising. The boat you mention above has absolutely nothing to do with IOR or IMS. You are looking for connections where there are none.

"They knew that the faster the boat went the less centerboard was required and they knew that they could eliminate rudder drag by using the centerboard to steer, as today's sailors steer with the sheets."

You can not use the centerboard as a replacement for a rudder. Your lack of knowledge on the subject is embarrassing. Try sailing upwind with your centerboard retracted. Not going to happen. Do you have any clue what XTE is and how a centerboard effects it? When will you finally admit that you have no clue what you're talking about?

BTW...Thanks for ruining what could have been an informative thread.

 

Yes Frank, it IS your spin. You take information that you barely understand out of context and then mold it to fit your warped idea of what a sailboat design should look like. All because you are desperately searching for a design that somewhat resembles the pile of crap you own.

I think it has more to do with growing up on the left coast. When I started sailing the books we used were Royce Sailing Illustrated and those from the Red Cross. Not those from US Sailing or Mystic Seaport. This was 1973. Owing to that training when I decided to graduate from power boating and go back to sailing, the POC that I selected fit with my understanding of how things should have been working in the year 2000. Plus I was always impressed with the Costa Mesa built vessels.

The only thing your boat and the Olin Stephens design you mention above have in common is a centerboard. Your notion of a racing sailboat never needing to ride out a storm is completely false. While you run for cover, the rest of us continue racing.

You misunderstand. My favorite sailor is Larry Ellison. Larry knows the designer game. The game goes as follows: Get the owner to contribute as much as he can to customizing the boat because then if something goes wrong the owner is at fault and not the designer. Larry was a newbe to the sport when he did his Hobart race. The vessel he sailed did not weather the storm - it flew ahead of it and it was speed, not size, that saved his life. His designer was ultimately responsible because Larry refused to be conned into making decisions regarding sailboat design that would absolve him from that responsibilty. He had a great designer. Larry to this day still thinks size is what matters.

That is part of racing. Running for a anchorage at the first sign of bad weather is called cruising.

And yet you are required to carry anchoring tackle. Sorry anchoring is as much a part of racing as it is a part of cruising, at least here in the pacific northwest. My arch rival, Tripp Gal, thinks as you do. Her vessel must be brideled to be anchored. So what do you do when the wind dies, and the tide changes during Swiftsure? Sail backwards for several hours. Yep that is what the fools in the boats built for fools do and it is why Hunters beat them.

The boat you mention above has absolutely nothing to do with IOR or IMS. You are looking for connections where there are none.

Perhaps. I see a time period, the 1960s, I see recognition that boats as small as 19 foot are viewed as perfectly capable of circumnavigating the globe at that time. Then I get back into sailing in the late 1990s and nothing under 40 (really 60) foot is considered safe. What happened? IOR and IMS.

"They knew that the faster the boat went the less centerboard was required and they knew that they could eliminate rudder drag by using the centerboard to steer, as today's sailors steer with the sheets."

You can not use the centerboard as a replacement for a rudder.

Pat Royce is a fellow who somehow was diplomatic enough to get his material put into print (the most recent printing is 2000) but he knows as I do that sailors have always been opinionated cussers. You most certainly can steer by centerboard, just as you can steer by using your Genoa Sheets. Retracting and extending foils - especially ones that pivot and twist is steering. But I think I know where you are going. If a centerboard can by reclassified as a trim tab or a rudder; it suddenly is not illegal under many racing rules.

Your lack of knowledge on the subject is embarrassing. Try sailing upwind with your centerboard retracted. Not going to happen.

This depends on the side chines of the craft and on its speed. On vessels with hard side chines the sides dig in providing lateral resistance and upwind sailing is still possible. We haven't seen examples of this in ocean racing until just recently. See http://boatdesign.net/forums/showpost.php?p=53355&postcount=19

Ecover's canting keel fell off. Golding was still able to sail upwind to finish the race. Well perhaps a poor example because canting keels do not provide much lateral resistance, if any. But on the other hand, sailing surf boards do not have much fin either. Nore do multis. The faster the boat goes the less fin is needed. If that fin can not be retracted, it becomes drag and the faster the boat goes the more drag. Common Sense is represented in Finisterre. The fact that she won 3 Burmuda races and it proved nothing is just troubling. 50 years of advancement in monohull sailboat design has been lost. Olin is also distressed by this. He lives you know. I am confident he sees IMS as counter productive.

Do you have any clue what XTE is and how a centerboard effects it? When will you finally admit that you have no clue what you're talking about?

I am talking about http://www.sailtexas.com/handicaparticlepart2.html

The Cruising Yacht Club of Australia announced that the Overall Winner of the 2004 Rolex Sydney Hobart Yacht Race will be the boat that wins the IRC (International Rule Club) handicap category overall on corrected time. The Tattersalls Cup has for the past ten years been presented to the boat that wins the IMS (International Measurement System) handicap category. Prior to that, the trophy was awarded to the boat that won the IOR (International Offshore Rule) handicap category.

Design rules are being abandoned. And I am talking about the theory that first was presented a few months back by Seahorse international. That theory is that if a designer wants to be viewed as an authority, he/she must have his or her own box rule. By coming up with a box rule they become the authority on sailboat design. They also get a franchise with monopoly power which eventually closes down the smaller design shops and builders.

I am clueless on XTE unless you are chatting about Autopilots. If so then you probably do know that it is perfectly possible to design a boat that will self steer and that autopilots are necessary owing to box design rules.

BTW...Thanks for ruining what could have been an informative thread.

I would say that sailing in the US was ruined long before I started posting. 100,000 sailors abandon this sport per year according to US Sailing's consultants. The country hasn't put a competitive team together for the AC for seven years and even in the Olympics we are a joke. You should start thinking perhaps we have been snookered into being the dumping ground for the rest of the world. The dumping ground for vessels that are not only not competitive but also foolish.

 

"I am clueless on XTE unless you are chatting about Autopilots. If so then you probably do know that it is perfectly possible to design a boat that will self steer and that autopilots are necessary owing to box design rules."

You are clueless Frank. Clueless about everything you've just written. You spout this crap as if it were truth and then show a complete lack of understanding about everything related to racing a sailboat. Just try to sail your Mac upwind with the board retracted. Your XTE (cross track error) will go off the chart. You do understand how to use a gps don't you? This is because without that board down to create lift, you will at best move mostly sideways through the water. Yes you can steer a boat with it's sails. Trying to steer a boat by retracting the board is just stupid. Yes, some centerboard boats partially retract the board when running downwind to reduce drag. You have taken this common practice and mutated it to work in your demented mind. You are wrong, you are a troll, and I'm done feeding you.

 

I am clueless on XTE unless you are chatting about Autopilots. If so then you probably do know that it is perfectly possible to design a boat that will self steer and that autopilots are necessary owing to box design rules."

You are clueless Frank. Clueless about everything you've just written. You spout this crap as if it were truth and then show a complete lack of understanding about everything related to racing a sailboat.

All sailors have a clue - for example on the end of their jib We are both truth seakers. The URL I provided http://www.sailtexas.com/handicaparticlepart2.html was not written by me. However, its author did contact me recently to thank me for posts here and on Sailing Anarchy and an email I sent him. I love his tag line

Since we never reckon that we understand a thing till we can give an account of its "how and why", it is clear that we must look into the "how and why" of things."

Aristotle.

Just try to sail your Mac upwind with the board retracted. Your XTE (cross track error) will go off the chart.

Why would you assume that I had not tried this. Of course I have and as long as the optimum heel is maintained (10 to 17 degrees) Murrelet will sail upwind without the benefit of an extended centerboard. Practical Boat Owner has an article about this. It was about a cruise from Salcombe across the English Channel to the canals of France then through the Bay of Biscay to more canals and then the Mediterranean and on to La Manga del Mar Menor (close to Cartagena) by a Mac26x without the benefit of a centerboard.

You do understand how to use a gps don't you? This is because without that board down to create lift, you will at best move mostly sideways through the water. Yes you can steer a boat with it's sails. Trying to steer a boat by retracting the board is just stupid.

Well I do know about velocity made good. VMG. You have to recognize that you do not just sail wind; there is also current. Does it make sence to sail wind with sails fixed in only one possition? Of course it does not. It makes just as little sense to fix your keel foil. Of course for a beginner the fewer controls the better; perhaps a centerboard is an advanced skill

Yes, some centerboard boats partially retract the board when running downwind to reduce drag. You have taken this common practice and mutated it to work in your demented mind.

"In light to moderate conditions (when power to carry sail is not an issue), a center boarder or lee boarder has the advantage of more efficient and lower-drag lateral plane. All else being similar, it will point and foot better than a deep keel-ballasted boat"

Phil Bolger and Susanne Altenburger
Wooden Boats
November/December 2000 issue

"When racing, if the course is all to windward and the wind is strong and the boats are big enough to make live ballast a minor issue, an efficient deep-ballasted boat will win. The shoal-draft boat will hold her own reaching, and will outrun the deep boat off the wind by hauling up the board(s) to reduce wetted surface" according to Bolger and Altenburger.

Phil Bolger and Susanne Altenburger
Wooden Boats
November/December 2000 issue


You are wrong, you are a troll, and I'm done feeding you.

If it were only so simple. As the above quotes show we can both be correct given certain assumpions regarding wind conditions. I think now I get to remind the IMS IOR and IRC folks that we do not actually race but rather play a racing game. Two sailboats going in the same direction unconstrained by such rules is a race. In the 05-08 Racing Rules of Sailing that are distributed by US Sailing, Janet Baxter - president of US Sailing, states. US Sailing and the International Sailing Federation (ISAF) are commited to providing simple rules that describe the game you want.

Box design rules are no longer wanted. This is a good thing for amature and professional designers who did not have a monopoly owing to connections with IMS or IOR. It is bad for wolf units whos VPP and Polars have perverted design to the point where multi-hulls actually look good.

 

Frank,

How many races have you sailed with your boat? How many did you finish? And, finally, how did you place and correct out, and out of how many boats? (For the sake of argument, let's just take PHRF or whatever rating rule at face-value, they may not be perfect, but they're good enough to give a rough indication of the skill of a sailor)

Yoke.

 

frank-
the CCA rule encouraged boats like Finisterre so whatever you say is essentially bull.

 

alemeda bound

I grew up in your area racing 26 footers. These had sails but we rowed them. The whale boats became a very big deal and in fact are still competing in your area of the world. We have something similar in the pacific northwest called the butterfly fleet and they were salmon fisher vessels. I have yet to find one in operation but expect to this summer. To handle the ocean swells of the columbia large sprit sails were set becase speed is what got them over the bar safely if they could surf the waves as the grady white and boston whalers do today. It may distress you to find out how few designers, amature or otherwise race and how poorly those who race design. Or that olin stephens did not believe naval archetecture worthy of devoting school time to. But you miss the point. We do not race in PHRF or IRC. We play a race game.

Every time two boats sail in the same direction it is a race. I sailed to intermediate level on Omega 18s while attending Santa Barbara. UCSB.

I bring up the whale boats by way of indicating knowledge of race competition. We had our equivalent of amatures and profesionals as well as ringers. We put the weakest member on the bow, the fellow we cared least about, just like they do on the TP52s. And eventually things got so competitive that we tried drawing lots for each others vessels. The idea was that the older heaver 26 footers would be selected last only it didn't work out that way. Teams that trained on the heavy vessels prefered the heavy race boats and selected them in spite of newer light vessels. My point is that the crew and the boat became a unit. It didn't work to swap crews. I have a background and perspective that fellows learn from, just as I am sure you do. We all grew up going to yacht clubs where "gentile only" signs were still displayed and were actively recruited for the military. It was not so different a time.

Captain Harburger, do you want to hoist the colors? You have permision to use the avitar. SA is part of the race game. The SSSS board room and boat design.net should not be. I have no problem with PHRF outside of the arbitrary way lifting foils are handled. IRC will help to change that. I have only come to view regional ratings as a problem recently. I could still be persuaded otherwise. But just like ballast is ballast, I suspect the wind is the wind and the sea is the sea all over.

 

Frank,

That's a very interesting perspective you have there, but, what about the answers to my three simple questions?

Yoke.