HMS at IOM worlds 2007

awallin · Post by **awallin** » 28 Nov 2006, 13:30

Hi All, it looks like we're going to have a new kind of HMS event next year at the worlds with 6 boats moving up and down from each heat, and with 5 heats and max 20 boats/heat that means a maximum of 76 competitors.

I met Eero Laurila, the finnish NCA representative, during the weekend, and he has given some thought to the 6-up/down idea and 76 maximum number of boats. He came to the conclusion that the scheduling for race 1 is not as simple as it seems.

The idea I guess is that based on finishing places in race 1 all skippers are divided fairly into heats A-E for race 2. Based on this the only viable solution Eero found with 76 boats is to have seven heats in race 1:
11-11-11-11-11-11-10
1A - 1B - 1C - 1D - 1E - 1F - 1G

from these heats the division into race 2 is as follows:
1. and 2. -> 2A
3. and 4. -> 2B
5. and 6. -> 2C
7. and 8. -> 2D
9. and 10. and 11. -> 2E (in heat 1G there is no 11th)

race 2 and all following races are run with the logical
14-14-14-14-20 configuration

If someone can find a simpler solution (smaller number of heats in race 1) that is also fair in the sense that an indentical finish in any heat in race 1 gives an identical heat assignment for race 2, then I'm sure Eero would be interested in hearing about it !

regards,

Anders Wallin

Lester · Post by **Lester** » 28 Nov 2006, 22:01

VCinfocomms wrote:... scheduling for race 1 is not as simple as it seems

Hi Anders

The Race 1 schedule is independent of the number of boats promoted and demoted, so that isn't an issue. All that is required is that (almost) the same number of boats sail in each heat of Race 1... So the current HMS suggests the following for a 76-boat fleet:

15, 15, 15, 15 ,16

This looks fine for me. I don't see the problem...?!?

Post by **Chairman** » 29 Nov 2006, 04:01

I have just been informed that MYA will have a updated HMS to cover 6 up/down before the January deadline for the WC.
Greg

awallin · Post by **awallin** » 29 Nov 2006, 12:28

Lester wrote:
VCinfocomms wrote:... scheduling for race 1 is not as simple as it seems
Hi Anders
The Race 1 schedule is independent of the number of boats promoted and demoted, so that isn't an issue. All that is required is that (almost) the same number of boats sail in each heat of Race 1... So the current HMS suggests the following for a 76-boat fleet:
15, 15, 15, 15 ,16
This looks fine for me. I don't see the problem...?!?

Hi Lester,

the calculation below assumed that a 'fair' division for race 2 is needed where race 2 is run as
14-14-14-14-20

your suggestion for race 1: 15, 15, 15, 15 ,16
will require race 2 to be run in the same configuration: 15, 15, 15, 15 ,16

and for race 3 the config would be the 'normal'
14-14-14-14-20

So I guess it's a question of how fast one wants to switch into the normal 6up/down mode.

Wtih seven seeding heats you can do 6up/down in race 2.

With five seeding heats you need a 'special' race 2 and switch to 6up/down by race 3.

Anders

Steve Landeau · Post by **Steve Landeau** » 30 Nov 2006, 05:39

I agree with Lester.
Race 1: 15, 15, 15, 15 ,16
Then in race 2 you'll move 5 up, and 6 down to have everything sorted for race 3 to be 14-14-14-14-20 .
I would not be too worried about one seeding race with 16 and the rest 15. It is what it is, and we all understand that it will not be perfect. It would be no different if we used HMS with 4 up/down, but did not have a full entry list. I don't think seven seeding races is the right way to go.

awallin · Post by **awallin** » 30 Nov 2006, 12:03

I guess it's a question of where to put the complexity.

The current system distributes it among race 1 and 2 for wich special rules apply.

With a larger number of seeding races only race 1 is special and race 2 is already 'normal'.

Anders

Steve Landeau · Post by **Steve Landeau** » 30 Nov 2006, 19:20

VCinfocomms wrote:
With a larger number of seeding races only race 1 is special and race 2 is already 'normal'.
Anders

My concern would be burning 2 extra heats at the very beginning of the week. That "could" be the deciding factor of a full race in the end.
On that note, has anyone ever thought of staggering the seeding starts so there are 2 heats on the water at the same time? It could be tough for the umpires, but it might be feasible. Any thoughts?

awallin · Post by **awallin** » 01 Dec 2006, 09:35

Hi All,

I still don't see how starting from a seeding race with the configuratio 15-15-15-15-16 the races will proceed.

the logical and fair division for race 2 would be identical: 15-15-15-15-16, but there is no provision in the current HMS for moving up/down a variable amount of boats - so I don't see how we get from race 2 into race 3 where the config needs to be 14-14-14-14-20 for the races to continue.

IF we would allow a variable number of boats to be promoted and demoted then the best I've come up for in race 2 would be the following:

2E sails (16 boats), two boats get promoted
2D sails (17 boats), three boats get promoted, six demoted
2C sails (18 boats), four promoted, six demoted
2B (19 boats), five promoted, six demoted
2A (20 boats), six demoted

This results in the desired 14-14-14-14-20 config for race 3, but requires a HMS rule change that would allow the number of boats promoted to vary.

Comments ??

Anders

soeren_andresen · Post by **soeren_andresen** » 01 Dec 2006, 11:37

Hi

â€œthe logical and fair division for race 2 would be identical: 15-15-15-15-16, but there is no provision in the current HMS for moving up/down a variable amount of boats - so I don't see how we get from race 2 into race 3 where the config needs to be 14-14-14-14-20 for the races to continue. â€œ

Well as I read the HMS rules, you can have a variable moving up and down. Because the race office is allowed to rearrange the heats, for example because of withdrawn boat or other changes. I think this option could be used for heat sizing after the seeding races.

One problem I had was that I only thinking of heats, and not on races made up of heats. I agree that it is necessary to have seeding rounds (races), but the order where the boats finishes, seen as a hole, should be the base for where they are put in race 3. It should not be based on where they are placed in the individual heats.
Maybe it would be better giving it as an example.

Race 1: 15-15-15-15-16 (only way to divide it)

Division for race 2:
1-3 to A-heat (15 places)
4-6 to B-heat (15 places)
7-9 to C-heat (15 places)
10-12 to D heat (15 places)
13-16 to E-heat (16 places)

So race 2 looks like this: 15-15-15-15-16
So fare so good, but now I differ.

As normal heat the E-heat starts, here with 16 boats. 5 boats are promoted.
D-heat 15 + 5 promoted from E-heat, total 20 boats. 5 boats promoted.
C-heat 15 + 5 from D-heat. 5 boats promoted.
B-heat 15 + 5 from C-heat. 5 boats promoted.
A-heat 15 + 5 from B-heat.

Race 3: Division for race 3 should be done be listing the boats in there finishing order in race 2, starting with the number one in the A-heat. This list is then used to divide the fleet.
Place 1-14 goes in to A-heat
Place 15-28 goes in to B-heat
And so on, and you end up with the following heat sizes: 14-14-14-14-20

I hope you understand what I mean, I have tried my best to explain it, but it is hard when you have to do in an other langue

.

Best regards

Lester · Post by **Lester** » 01 Dec 2006, 17:55

VCinfocomms wrote:I still don't see how starting from a seeding race with the configuratio 15-15-15-15-16 the races will proceed

Hi Anders

I think Soeren has explained one possibility. Here is another, where there is no need to change the number of boats promoted (but the number demoted *will* change in the following race) and the higher heats of Race 2 are sailed with 21 boats:

Race 1: 15 15 15 15 16

Race 2: 15 15 15 15 16
Boats placed 1, 2, or 3 in their Race 1 heat go into A heat, boats placed 4, 5, or 6 go into B heat, and so on.

Then during the race, 6 are promoted from E heat into D, making D heat 21 boats. 6 promoted from D into C, making 21 boats, and so on.

Race 3 and following: 14 14 14 14 20
All the boats are listed in order of their heat finishing positions from Race 2, and the heat assignments for Race 3 re-computed. So 7 boats are demoted from Race 2 heat A into Race 3 heat B, and so on.

Olivier Cohen · Post by **Olivier Cohen** » 03 Jan 2007, 13:32

It seems difficult to get a solution with 6 boats promoted...as HMS 2007 still not validated...

A proposal from France :
80 boats, 5 promoted

- race 1 : 16, 16, 16, 16, 16
- race 2 : 15, 15, 15, 15, 20
- race 3 : 15, 15, 15, 15, 20
....

Opinions?

Post by **Chairman** » 03 Jan 2007, 22:40

The proposed HMS 2007 provides for both 4 (84 entries) and 6 (76 entries) promotion RSD have not rejected but neither have they been approved. Zoren has concerns about the 6 promotions that was pushed by the IOMICA executive. He has some valid points but from forum discussions etc it would appear that the IOM skippers prefer the 6 promotion. Our options are to run with the proposed HMS 2007 with 6 promotions or revert to HMS 2006 with 4 promotions. The mechanics and time outs etc will be consistant with HMS 2006. Your prefrances please. We need to make a decission within the next 48 hours.
Greg

Steve Landeau · Post by **Steve Landeau** » 04 Jan 2007, 00:09

USA has been promoting 6 when the fleets are on the larger side for over 2 years, with 100% positive comments. The only "complaint" was that everyone got to sail more races...

It takes 2 races to sort out the heat numbers properly, but it's easy to follow and seems to be as fair as any other option. The fact that one heat may have one more skipper is out of our control. If there were only 79 entries in a normal HMS regatta, the same situation would occur.

RoyL · Post by **RoyL** » 04 Jan 2007, 01:01

I agree with Steve 100%. The only people who I think would object to "six up/six down" are those who haven't tried it. Here in the US everyone (including our foreing visitors) found the racing much more satisfying.

Post by **Chairman** » 04 Jan 2007, 03:25

Just to get some balance. We are racing. with a 5 heat race and 6 promotions we infact have the first 5 in the bottom 4 heats holding station, just to promote.( the real race is for 6th place same as 4th I'm no sure we really get a benefit) thats 20 boats out of 76 that do not have to race. A great way to reduce the competitive stress and good for club and regional championships. But Nation and international championships are all about competing for every spot.
food for thought.
Cheers
Greg

Steve Landeau · Post by **Steve Landeau** » 04 Jan 2007, 03:39

Chairman wrote: .( the real race is for 6th place same as 4th I'm no sure we really get a benefit) Cheers
Greg

I see what you are saying, but you're only looking at the advancing boats. Keep in mind, 6 go down as well, not just 4, so those 2 boats that used to be content with lower-middle finishing have nippers at their heels now! That's what I think it's all about. More middle finishers getting bumped down, then have to prove that they deserved to be in the upper class by earning their way back up more often! As mentioned before, it's much easier staying up in a heat than getting there to begin with. This is the field we are trying to equal out.

Olivier Cohen · Post by **Olivier Cohen** » 04 Jan 2007, 10:02

6 => 76 boats, and 2 preliminary races
5=> 80 boats and only one preliminary race
4=> 84 boats and one also...

I think it's better to get an event with more boats, and more "real" racing, not seeding races...

So 4 or 5.

Best Regards

Steve Landeau · Post by **Steve Landeau** » 04 Jan 2007, 17:34

OC44 wrote:6 => 76 boats, and 2 preliminary races

Even with 6, there is only one "preliminary" seeding race. In race 2, the promotion/relegation is slightly different to sort the proper numbers between heats, not any different than when the scoring committee needs to rearrange due to dropped out skippers.

Lester · Post by **Lester** » 04 Jan 2007, 20:52

I think it is fair to say that the previous IOMICA Exec was strongly in favour of trying 6 up and 6 down, and gave the USA NCA (and any other NCA which seemed similarly interested in positively developing the IOM class) every encouragement to try it out. All the reports I have heard are that it is a more satisfying system in almost every respect.

Specifically, 6 up/6 down makes it 50% easier for sailors and boats who are currently competitive to move up, and for sailors and boats who are currently less competitive to move down -- pretty much what we want, I guess. This change in relative competitiveness is typically what happens during the day of most regattas. Narrower boats will tend to do better (other things being equal!) in the lighter winds of the morning, and will be able to position themselves in higher fleets. Defensive sailing will then see them stay there, as the wind rises during the day, while the wider beam boats struggle to earn promotion in conditions which turn their way.

This is a generalization, of course, but I think a racing system which is more responsive to subtle changes in competitiveness is better than one which, as we know already, tends to cast the results into stone early on.

But what, exactly, are Zoran's concerns about 6 up/6 down?

Zoran · Post by **Zoran** » 05 Jan 2007, 10:42

Sorry that I did not read IOMICA Forum in last few days, but I see that I was called several times in this discussion, so I would like to give some explanations.

First of all, IOMICA can accept whatever racing system they want and RSD approval is not needed for them. Greg Willis clearly pointed that in his last e-mail. So, I see no rush or urgency of RSD approval of HMS. In fact RSD approved system should be used only at RSD approved events i.e. World and continental championships of international classes except IOM. All other events are under jurisdiction of Division Members or NCAs and probably if RSD will approve completely new racing system, MYA will still use HMS 2007 just as HMS is still not accepted in all DMs/NCAs or already changed to have 6 boats promoted.

I agree that RSD have nothing to lose by approving HMS 2007 as proposed by MYA, but I think that RSD also have nothing to get. That's why I proposed to see how 6 boats promotion will work in France and then we can decide what to do for the future RSD events. Better to wait than make changes now and than make it again if we see that 6 boats promoted is not the best option.

I am not saying that I am totaly against 6 boats promoted but my main concern is that within the HMS places of boats promoted in lower heat are ignored.

With 6 boats being promoted there will be no any competition for top places in lower heat as it will be the same if you win the heat or finish 6th. The closest competition will probably be for 6th place and first place that keep you in same heat i.e. the most important places will be those in the middle in a heat. Don't we want to have competition to win the race regardless of heat and racing system?

At the IOM Croatian National championship I had a chance to talk with Graham Bantock and Ken Binks. We agreed that current HMS with 4 boats going up can be lots of pressure and increasing this number may help, but then we really come to the problem described above. On this event, we just had situation where first two boats had a nice lead and sailed just to finish without any racing.

On the other hand, if want to increase that number, why going to 6, why not make it 7 or 8 or where is a line? Can we have half of fleet going up and down and no one remaining in the same heat except upper half of A and lower half of lowest heat?

In fact I found this as interesting idea, and to avoid â€žno competitionâ€œ in the first half of heat maybe there is simple solution. To have promotion and relegation in next race, just as we had before with HRS. The big and important difference is that half of the fleet is promoted and half of the fleet is relegated. The main problem with HRS was that it needed time for someone dropping to lower heats to go up. If we have half of fleet promoting than it will be easy to go up in next heat and with number of discards adjusted to let's say every 8 races dropping to lower heat for any reason can be easy recovered. With this system 80 boats can be sailed in 5 heats of 16. I still believe that 16 is maximum number of boats for successful umpiring and HMS is someone pushing too much pressure on umpiring with 20 boats in a heat. Whole system can be easily described as a part of sailing instructions; maybe there is no need for separate document. This is an idea.

Other solution is to try to simplify HMS and make it even more flexible.
Obviously the main problem is Race 2. Can we solve this by increasing
the number of preliminary races to 2 or 3? This will give us overall
results based on which it will be easier to select the heats for Race
3 and after. This will also make possible to avoid HMS 1.5(d), 2.2.
Than we can also make an option for RC to choose how many boats want
promoted in range of 4 - 6 or even 3 - 6 depending on the size of the fleet.

Than we can replace Table for schedule of Race 3 and following races by:

Number of boats in each heat will be defined as follows:
a) Deduct number of boats that will be promoted from total number of boats ready to race
b) Result of a) will be divided equally from heat A to last heat with very
extra boat going in heat A, than in heat B etc.
c) The number of boats in last heat will be increased by the number of
promoted boats

Example: 76 boats, 4 promoted, 5 heats

a) 76 - 4 = 72
b) 72/5 = A-15, B-15, C-14, D-14, E-14
c) E = 14+4 = 18

Result: A-15, B-15, C-14, D-14, E-18

This scheme may be applied each time where there is any re-scheduling due to withdrawals or returns of any boats.

Hope that anything of this will be useful to IOMICA.

MINAUD Marc · Post by **MINAUD Marc** » 05 Jan 2007, 11:29

Hi all,
We just want to inform you that NCA for France dont agree with a reduct of number of skippers for the 2007 WC.
We think that is more important to permit a lot of skipper to acceed to the event (also for the host country !).
We prefere to use HMS2005.
It's our opinion on the subject and perhaps the opinion of the host country may be considered.
Many thanks

Marc MINAUD Chairman NCA for France

Olivier Cohen · Post by **Olivier Cohen** » 07 Feb 2007, 23:53

HMS 2007 :

http://www.ycpr.net/datas/docs/11708813 ... lingue.pdf

IOMICA Forum

HMS at IOM worlds 2007

HMS at IOM worlds 2007

Re: HMS at IOM worlds 2007

Re: HMS at IOM worlds 2007