Changes to Constitution for 10year anniversary?

[Pat]

It's a quandary really. I like what we've got, but I'd like some changes and I'd also like to do something - not necessarily mainstream cvrda - for the outclassed and most of all I'd like to get larger turnouts at events.
Merlins have been a majority class at events because we have combined with the class Vintage wing for the event and counted it towards their travellers' trophy. Can we get other classes to do the same? How about encouraging those eligible classes which don't have a "Classic" or "Vintage" wing to form one and join with us - I'm thinking of GP14, Enterprise, Albacore and Graduate here for example.

I think we should extend the "Vintage" wing away from clinker to cover such beauties as Shoestring. How do we word the new definition though? Must be pretty much original so the souped up clinker Merlin doesn't fit.
Someone said putting a starter on a vintage Rolls Royce was regarded as an acceptable convenience so why not new sails? Well, that would be equal to putting a modern Rolls Royce engine in a vintage car - unacceptable. The starter's only equivalent to a new block or jib sheet.
Maybe the wing should be the "Original" wing for unmodernised boats before 19xx.

The Classic wing needs redefining somewhat, maybe 1965 generally and specifically class by class, as for handicap, we include Merlins under about 6ft wide (Proctors and pre-1969 ish) and I expect the same kind of change can be applied to other development classes such as N12.

The old wing is spanning too large a period now and puts an up-together 1989 boat against an unmodernised late sixties one on theoretically the same handicap. Putting something in the rules that formalises giving these a different handicap may be advisable otherwise the boats aren't competing on equal terms.

Lost classes will never be more than fun boats and so let's keep the age limit much lower on them and include any unsupported class. There aren't that many of each class around or they wouldn't be a lost class and it isn't as if many actually appear at events. By all means have separate starts/events for them as at Whitefriars but let's be inclusive - they are as much part of dinghy racing history as the I14 or N12.
And they are probably derided when racing at the home club on an arbitrary handicap set by someone who has never heard of the boat.

As for the outclassed of current classes, let's work with the class associations to get them a favourable handicap system that's as recognised as the Merlin one and to get the class to award them prizes at events for first old boat etc. It would be good to have the occasional event to which they could be invited, such as a lost classes event or an old plastic event but keep the constitution and main events as pre-65 designs.

That's my carefully considered tenpenn'orth and in government time too!

[LarFinn]

It wouldn't be a change to the Constitution specifically, but how about adding an automatic age related handicap advantage. - i.e. for every 5 years older than 25yrs, one number higher on the handicap? So the older the boat the better the handicap, even within the same class and with similar levels of "bits and bobs".

[Ancient Geek]

Here is my Euros worth!

I would not tinker with the constitution written or otherwise, the CVRDA does not need a bill of rights, there is far too much goodwill and commonsense about, besides this forum would not have as much to write about!

However I WOULD appoint a handicapper (Not a committee but a handicapper with helpers if he could get one!) just like Horse Racing or Golf. (Not sure how you get a Golf handicap but its performance based I do know.) The said handicapper to give Handicap (Portsmouth?) numbers to individual boats and helmsmen varied as to equipment carried, crew etc., it'll not be Rocket Science. I recall that a cousin explained National Hunt handicapping to me in the 60's that there were two sets of weights one if Arkle was running another if not! Handicap racing is always unsatisfactory there will always be tha man/woman with a smile at a generous handicap and the converse who is being robbed, of course the hadicaps would vary with experience. Several sailing classes do this already, The Broads River Cruiser Class, Broads Mixed Dinghies and the Scandinavian "Scandicap" all designed for very different boats of very different skills to race together.

It might be an idea to begin to plan that big event over a long weekend for next year. The venue is difficult with members/contributors stretched from Lands End to John O'Groats (Metaphorically.) but I suggest that rather than pure Geography a look at a road map would aid planners.
Bala or one of the bigger Northern Reservoirs?

[Pat]

The handicap committee already handicaps boats (not helms) individually at the nationals and I keep the records. Handicap committee is preferrable as it is a consulted decision and not relying on one person being present to see boats.

[Ed]

OK,

we have had a week to discuss this, so I will quickly try to answer some of the points raised and then I will start another thread with some ideas that we can discuss.

Voting:

You will need to be a paid up member to vote for any changes to the constitution. We will need to agree here on the forum any new wording, which will then be presented to the AGM at the Nats for voting by membership. We will need 2/3rds of those present to get changes ratified.

You do not need to be a member to discuss it or vote on the forum.


I think we should broaden the vintage wing to include any classic wing boat that has been kept "within the Spirit" of originality.

Yes, this makes sense and am looking at how we do this. Problem with it is that we introduce a rule, that needs to be deduced by someone or some set of rules. This ain't so good. We can discuss later

why not just define the old wing as "a dinghy over 25 years old

Well we can discuss this. It would not get my vote though. The CVRDA was established for pre-65 boats and I just don't think that if we allowed any 25 year old boat, we would retain the same feeling and provide good racing for pre-65 boats.

Not having an overall champion - only wing champions.

Always wanted to do that.....we did originally at the nats....but does not work for small events....and people want an overall winner.

How about scrapping the "old" wing altogether, and setting up a sister association to run alongside (and with) the CVRDA. It could be the ORDA (Old Racing Dinghy Association).

Or KNOBS (Knackered Old Boat Society)....we did consider this at time of setting up the CVRDA. I would not be against it....but who is going to run it? What numbers of boats would we get? The original reason for allowing 'old' boats to paly at all was to give us slightly bigger fleets.

Agamemnon was built in 1965, so does she scrape in or not?

The rules are pretty clear about this.

Agamemnon is over 25 years old from a class established before 1965. She is in.

Whether she is in the 'classic' wing or the 'old' wing, depends on date of build. 65 and before - Classic, 66 and beyond - old. In reality what is much more likely is that she would go with the 'classic' fleet, if that is where she fits best. the date has best been used as a guide in the past. For instance all Fairey Fireflies have normally been put in the classic wing, even if they were built up to 1970. Why would we want to split them.

'Lost Classes not in Constitution'

True, We didn't have 'lost classes' for the first 4 or 5 years. it wasn't till Mark Jones brought along a Illusion 2 that we decided that although it wasn't within our rules, it kind of fitted in with the ethos and so we came up with the idea of 'lost classes'. We do have to consider how we now deal with them.

For myself, I think that any rules we come up to try and define a lost class will be a joke. Better to keep it as loose as possible, to be decided locally by race officers of the day.

Personally I'm a tad unhappy with the "lost" class bit if it otherwise evades our limits...
Totally agree! It has always been a bit vague.....but my presumption was certainly that it was a currently a 'lost class over 25 years old'. I don't think that any of the latest batch of lost classes would be considered CVRDAable.

The opinion on this may of changed, but my presumption was always that 'lost classes' were not a 'core' part of the cvrda racing, but more an extension to the 'old' wing to allow a few classes in that are not allowed under the 'class must be pre-65' part of rules.

Regarding moving between vintage, classic, old, fleets etc. perhaps easing the dates and using build method/materials to differentiate might be a way to consider.

Indeed it may.....could you come up with some suggestions?

So it's just a handicap problem with all its attendant problems and controversies.

Totally agree! To be pragmatic, this is the easiest way to sort out all the perceived worries of the class about bandits etc.

veto asymetric spinnakers

would not get my vote.....if the boat is in class by cvrda rules, I don't think it should be out of class on this basis. The only possible quandry would be a in-class boat that has been retrofitted with asymetric within 25 years....that might make me scratch my head a bit.

i was pondering, reading the discussion on flow charts (otherwise known as decision trees) - if we should have a discussion about an 'immigration points system'?

Could work.....but who would design it? who would do the upkeep? who would run a boat through it? who would record the results, what do you do when the original data changes?

My money goes on the simplest rules you can design.....backed up with simple subjective decisions by race officers.

" the committee has the power to make decisions on eligabilty, classes and handicaps"

Well that would be simple....but hard to sell. you really need a simple rule that you can use to explain what the CVRDA is about.

Our rule is simply "A 25 year old boat from a class established before 1965"......but as simple as that is, many people simplify it further to 'Any 25 year old boat'. Complicated rules will just become a mess.

The old wing is spanning too large a period now and puts an up-together 1989 boat against an unmodernised late sixties one on theoretically the same handicap.

I agree, this is in my mind, one of the two big problems - but I would say that of course their handicap is only a 'guide' and the handicap committee would certainly adjust as necessary to provide fair racing between the 1066 boat and the 1989 one

It wouldn't be a change to the Constitution specifically, but how about adding an automatic age related handicap advantage. - i.e. for every 5 years older than 25yrs, one number higher on the handicap? So the older the boat the better the handicap, even within the same class and with similar levels of "bits and bobs".

We have tried this, but 5 years of development in a one-design does not equal 5 years in a dev class. This has to be taken into account. However handicaps are adjusted within the wings. The Wing handicap figure should (is) only seen as a starting guide to give a figure from which to work. (like all PY handicaps).

However I WOULD appoint a handicapper

We do. Although not one person. We have in the past tried to be a little quiet about it as a little mystery seemed to help with the process, but most everyone knows know that the handicap committee has pretty much always consisted of 3 or 4 of the following Rupert, Myself, a guest/expert from the host club, the Commodore and another respected helm in the fleet - mainly to observer for fairness. We normally presume to need 3 to be quorate - but sometimes decisions have to be made on the 'hoof'. We have found this works well. We only meet at the nats, but discuss results and particular boats as and when they come up during the year.


I hope these answers go some way to clarify some of the points raised.

Please do continue to discuss

cheers

eib

[Nigel]

Hi Ed.

Regarding moving between vintage, classic, old, fleets etc. perhaps easing the dates and using build method/materials to differentiate might be a way to consider.

Indeed it may.....could you come up with some suggestions?

this was my thought but I am probably not the best person to propose the detail. One of the more knowledgable boat historians would be better doing that.

My simplistic view on this was:

Real wood
Cold moulded ply
Hot moulded ply
Ply Sheet methods (e.g. stitch & glue)
GRP/other

And just assign each method to one or other fleet

I haven't tried to apply it to current boats but that would be an easy next step to see what the fleets would look like and see if it fits the bill.

What exactly is a "paid up member"?

Nigel

[Ed]

Thanks for those.

A paid up member is someone who has attended a CVRDA regatta and paid a membership fee.

this is normally done at the Nats.

If you are not attending the nats and still wish to pay your membership, then please just contact the membership secretary who I am sure will be able to sort you out.

cheers

eib

[chris]

Nigel, what about glued ply clinker hulls? (as opposed to true clinker hulls ie ribbed and riveted no glue) For instance Nat 12 define their vintage boats as 'Clinker Hulls' which includes glued and riveted boats. There are also examples of hulls with glued solid planking (not ply) and I'm sure there are a few other variations too. You can also have new ribbed boats so should a 25year old Tideway, for instance be in vintage section when merlin 507 (a first glued ply clinker hull built 1954) is in the classic section?
Just building method may throw up problems I think.

I would certainly vote for a system that saw boats beyond a certain age that were sailing in something very close to original condition in a group together. Not only to get a better (fairer??) race but to encourage people that certain boats are worth restoring/conserving rather than renovating. As time passes these will become valuable as historic documents. i see this in my work with musical instruments. Many in museums have been renovated in the past and say very little now about the maker's original intentions. A broken, dusty old instrument that has never been altered since the day it left the maker's workshop is a much more useful research tool - except you can't hear what it sounded like!

This year I have provide Iska with a mast of the height she would have originally have had and even using 63year old cotton sails of the tall thin variety and a smaller square footage than the other ones she suddenly feels 'right' and I'm sure sails better. Which, at least to me, suggests originallity makes sense and should be encouraged.

[Nigel]

Nigel, what about glued ply clinker hulls?

Hi Chris,

I guess that would be a separate category to allocate to a wing.

My thinking was along the lines of what has already been done with the Tideways. Where does something fit best based upon its construction, spars, sails and general character rather than solely on one date. If people are worried about opening the floodgates, we can categorise a wing along the lines of "before 19nn or before 19nn+10 as long as it is constructed out of xxx with yyy spars and zzz sails".

Someone more knowledgable would need to fill in the details.

Nigel

[Rupert]

Not sure why the construction thing is necessary? A GRP boat earlier than 65 is in the classic wing, later it is in the 25 years and older Old wing. Can't see why, especially allowing for race committee fudging (2 identical GRP boats, one from 64, the other from 66, would be put together) and handicapping allowances, we need another layer of sorting?
I thought Ed's post made a lot of sense, and cut to what matters in a vote at the AGM, rather than wandering around in circles like the rest of us have a habit of doing.
I guess that any member can propose a change to the constitution, which will then get voted on. Do proposed changes get sent to the secretary via email? It would then, I guess, need a seconder, and then be voted on as Ed said?

[LarFinn]

Ref: ORDA,

If it makes any difference to any of the other discussions, I would be happy enough to run this. (As long as it came within/alongside the CVRDA. i.e. I don't mind being the point of contact and co-ordinator of "old" boat questions/racing/etc that come through the CVRDA.)
Personally I could see the ORDA being more "open" and using boat age as the defining factor and not design date. This would let the CVRDA focus on Vintage and Classic boats. ORDA could race at the same events and use the same handicap system. (With a seperate start at large events/ combined start at smaller events?) All 25 yr old (or 30?) boats would qualify for ORDA but only those genuinely classic or vintage would qualify for the CVRDA. That way the classic and vintage rules could be tight and quite specific because any boat not quite eligible would still qualify for ORDA and could still race against other like minded boat owners.

Andi
Larfinn
K465

[MartinH]

I have been reading this topic with interest and although I have only attended two events thought I would put in my two pen'orth. There are two questions that should be asked;
a) Are there owners entering boats that don't fit the ethos of the CVRDA?
b) Are there any boats out there that do fit the ethos but are excluded under the current constitution?

If the answer to either or both of these is a definite "yes" then the matter needs to be addressed, if not then the constitution is probably fit for purpose.

Yes, the boundary of the Old Wing needs to be monitored and as the size of the wing grows consideration could be given to splitting it into two sub-divisions (the young Olds and the old Olds? )

[Pat]

I absolutely do not, not, NOT want the split that the ORDA would cause. One united organisation is what we need not a pocketful of small competing factions. New wings yes, that could be tried but keep it together - united we stand, divided we fall.

[Nessa]

I agree with Pat. Better to keep it all under the same roof.

[Rupert]

I think I quite like the concept of the old wing taking classes "under its wing" that the classic side of things doesn't deal with, such as non qualifying rare beasts, like Phantom 87, but maybe Pat is right and changing the name would cause too much of a shift in perception.
Maybe each wing should have its own committee member looking after its interests and helping to make decisions about which wing a boat would go into.
My other thought is that if we allow rare beasts in, we could end up with more boats racing (would be nice) which would make dividing things up into the wings for racing that much more worthwhile, so meaning we would be able to keep wildly disparate boats apart.