In 1996, a number of different groups were contacted via the Internet to see how they were scoring their club racing. That information and the MAST racing data from that year were entered into a spreadsheet. The idea was to look at different scoring systems to see how they would affect the results from that year. Evaluations were made of straight PHRF ratings with no change, the 9-6-3-0-2 system that we ended up choosing, as well as systems with smaller and larger modifications. Overall, there was no difference in the results until you went to very large modifications. Other folks had reported similar findings, and the reason is that most racing at the club level is not that close. The average margin of victory is 1 - 2 minutes and gets larger as the wind geets less. It takes a large rating modification to change the outcome of a race.

  Having done that, we felt we could be somewhat flexible in choosing a system. We wanted to encourage the folks who race 'for fun' as well as those new to racing to come out every week and race. At the same time we wanted to present a sufficient challenge to those who were experienced racers to do their best. Since everyone who races enjoys the competition, it was also important for the program as a whole, that there be good competition throughout the season.

  The 9-6-3-0-2 system seemed to address all these points. It starts out rating all the boats at their PHRF rating. This was something everyone seemed to favor. Once the initial rating is established, it and the elapsed time are used in a time-on-time formula to yield the corrected time. After each race the ratings are adjusted based on how a boat placed in the race. The adjustments are as follows.

  Every time a boat races and doesn't finish in the top 4 in its division, the system increases the boat's rating by 2. This is done to encourage folks to come out and race. Wherever you are in the standings, there's someone close to you with whom you're competing. Even if you don't finish high in a race, your rating improves a little if you come out and race. So you have a little better chance with the next race. If you don't come out and race, your rating stays the same. So it pays to come out and race.

  Every time a boat finishes 1, 2, or 3, it's rating is reduced by 9, 6, or 3 respectively. The system assumes that since the boat placed well, it's either faster, or sailed better (or maybe both) than other boats.  Since it's now going to be a little more difficult to get the same result, this reduction challenges the better skippers/boats to continue to try to improve. A fourth place finish results in no change.

  Week to week, the competition and adjustments are only within each division. After the adjustment process has started, comparing a division 2 rating to a division 1 rating isn't meaningful. Since the boats don't compete head to head it's apples and oranges. The only meaningful comparison of ratings is within a division. If a boat is giving time to another boat, it's because it started with a lower rating and/or  placed better than the other boat in one or more races. The reason the fleet is split into two divisions is that actual PHRF spreads of more than 50 points don't really work well.

  The number of races needed to qualify for the standings is based on 1/2 the races, rounded down, + 2. For 14 races that would be 9; 13,12 - 8, etc. There are a lot of throwouts if you do all the races, and this again is incentive to come out and race. Since the number of 'best' races needed to qualify for the standings is small, finishing 1, 2, or 3 in any particular race is like money in the bank. Boat-of-the-year is based on the lowest point total for the year across divisions.

  The hope was that the rating adjustments, both up and down, would result in good competition throughout the season. For the last few years that has proved to be the case. Most of the trophy positions were determined in the last race of the season.

.