Every spring you haul the boat and face the truth: whatever speed you had last season is living under a layer of slime and barnacles. So you grind it back and start over. No rocket science. Just willingness to spend time in the shed. Or to get help.
Grinding with water sanding paper: 360; 500; 600; 1000
New season we should be ok with step 5 & 6.
One note: this isn’t a one-time commitment. Every 2-3 weeks during the season, you’ll be back down there with a polishing pad, buying yourself another week of speed before the water takes it back.
If you race offshore in the Baltic, Gotland Runt is a rite of passage. Like the Fastnet, the Bermuda Race or the Sydney–Hobart, it’s one of those races you have to do at some point, and everyone walks away with their own story.
I did my first one in 1991, on a tricked-out Sweden Yachts 38. I suppose that was also my first proper pro gig – Pär Lindforss and I were brought in to make the boat perform. We came second in class and the owner was delighted. Since then I’ve done it on just about everything, from an Albin Nova to a Swan 65 (I’ll admit I really enjoyed having my own cabin and a chef aboard).
And I’ve always had a love/hate relationship with the race. It’s not long enough to get you into the “600-mile bubble,” and the legs have felt too short to make any real strategic gains – yet still long enough to get boring. KSSS captured it pretty well in an article this year, What is the deal with Gotland Runt, really?, which calls offshore racing “perhaps the world’s most uncomfortable way to get completely exhausted.” The line that stuck with me, though, is the one that sums up doublehanded racing perfectly: “Onboard, the individual is erased. You become completely dependent on the person next to you making the right decision in the middle of the night while you yourself are asleep.”
But this year was different. Full on from the gun, with three genuinely challenging weather transitions to solve along the way.
For us, Peter Gustafsson and Mattias Bodlund, it was our first real offshore race with the J/99, and a good chance to find out whether all the preparation and the new sail inventory actually added up.
It turned out to be one of the most fun races we’ve done offshore.
Preparations and the start
We used our delivery from Gothenburg to Stockholm as preparation, sailing a lot of it in race mode – about 500 miles, non-stop, first with three aboard and then two-handed from Simrishamn. We tested the boat, our watch system, sleep, food. It made us feel genuinely well prepared, and it also shrank the mental size of the thing: 350 miles around Gotland feels a lot more manageable once you’ve just done a delivery like that.
These days I try not to look at the forecast too early. I used to study it days out, and the only thing it ever bought me was stress: first a few days of worrying it would blow too hard, then a few days of worrying it wouldn’t blow at all. An emotional rollercoaster with no upside. So now we’ve built a little tool that logs observations and compares them against the different weather models, which means we don’t miss the data – but I deliberately leave it alone until three or four days before a race. Then I look at what actually happened over the past week, which models seem to be tracking reality, and how the macro picture looks.
For this year’s Gotland Runt the macro picture was clear: a huge high had parked itself over a Europe that had been baking for a week, with record temperatures in Sweden too. The one thing trying to disturb it was a low over Iceland, but the high held its ground beautifully. In a flat high like that the isobars spread out, you get little wind, and – importantly – there are no stable low-pressure tracks to forecast against. Weather just forms. So the fundamental uncertainty was which models would be right: we had several running in parallel, and none of them quite agreed. That left three unanswered questions:
Should we expect a sea breeze on the east side of Gotland?
How easily would we be able to switch from offshore night tactics to daytime mode closer to shore?
What would happen with the trough that had already hit Copenhagen and southern Sweden with record thunderstorms?
We’d been through this before. The year before, a similar system had threatened the start and Race Management made the right call to postpone – a front came through with +20 m/s in Sandhamn and total chaos. This year looked identical, so we expected delays. They came. The first postponement pushed the start two hours; the second, as the rain intensified and lightning lit the harbour, pushed it to 17:00. We sat on the boat watching the radar, adjusting mentally with each announcement. By 15:00 the trough had passed and the rain eased. The wind on the back of it was light and uncertain, but at least startable.
We motored out to the line, and at 17:00 we finally got to sail.
The start
The doublehanded fleet started first, 33 boats on the line, and because it was so soft everyone stayed close. It was a running start eastward from the new start line south of Sandhamn – a bit of a scramble, with maybe 60% taking the favored port gybe and the other 40% holding starboard for right of way.
We managed to thread our way through and find some clear space in a group of boats at the northern end of the line.
A few boats got away nicely: the XP-44 Xar from Skåne, big, fast, symmetric kite; a Whitbread 30; a couple of others with pace in the light. We came away okay, maybe sixth or seventh of 33 at the first gybe, which we were happy with.
The start isn’t the most important thing in a 350-mile race, but it’s still nice to be in it from the gun and not have to claw your way back.
Leg 1: Start → Svenska Högarna
Sun 28/06 17:00 → Sun 28/06 21:44 CET. Weather: Light to moderate southwest, 11 knots (6–13) and gradually backing after morning rain. No frontal weather yet, pressure flat around 1013–1014 hPa.
Photo: Christofer Haux, J/111 Elva.
After the opening run and a short jib reach, it turned into a long run north toward Svenska Högarna.
We ran a geometric S2 and did the leg generally well, passing a few boats and holding level with others.
This is where it became clear who we’d be fighting: right from here we were sitting very close to the J/11S Sleeper (the shorthanded version of the J/111), XP-33 Tärna, plus the usual Figaros and a few other very active Stockholm doublehanded boats we’d end up racing the whole way round.
We also had an early eye on the Pogo 36 Boxer – a boat that’s gone well for years and knows what it’s doing, but a lot faster than us.
Boxer pulled away in the freshening breeze and led on the water, Figaro 2 Amazigh second. We rounded Svenska Högarna in third, at 21:44 – just ahead of Tärna at 21:46. A little bad luck with the wind shifts right at the end didn’t go our way, but on corrected time we’d actually sailed the leg fastest in class, and led on handicap. Happy with that.
Photo: Juho Siipo, J/11S Sleeper.
Here are the times for this leg.
#
Boat
Elapsed
Corrected
Cum.
1
J/99 Blur
4:44
4:53
1
2
Xp 33 Tärna
4:46
4:54
2
3
Figaro 2 Amazigh
4:39
4:56
3
4
J/99 Joyride
4:48
4:57
4
5
Pogo 36 Boxer
4:35
5:00
5
Leg 2: Svenska Högarna → Fårö
Sun 28/06 21:44 → Mon 29/06 11:35 CET. Long night leg. SW 10 knots veered gradually to NW (+90°) and died away in a dawn lull down to 4 knots near Gotska Sandön. Pressure crept upward (1014→1016) as the high took over.
A long starboard leg down toward the north end of Gotland. We started out with jib, then code, then alternated jib and code as the wind came and went. Some boats had it easier than others: the XP-33 went well against us here because they had a narrower Code – a 65% half-width, which rates very well in SRS. We carry a 75% IRC code, technically bigger, but the shape isn’t optimal for the angles we had. Against the JPK and a few others, though, we did well and pulled away.
Being too close to Gotska Sandön cost Joyride, Tenet and a few other boats the race. Amazigh was quickest on the water through the dark. Tärna found a better lane and sailed past us early morning. They rounded Fårö third to our fourth, and won the leg on corrected time too, though we stayed close. Third on handicap now.
#
Boat
Elapsed
Corrected
Cum.
1
Xp 33 Tärna
13:37
14:00
1
2
Figaro 2 Amazigh
13:18
14:08
2
3
J/99 Blur
13:51
14:18
3
4
Pogo 36 Boxer
13:13
14:24
4
5
J/99 Joyride
14:54
15:20
5
Leg 3: Fårö → Östergarn
Mon 29/06 11:35 → Mon 29/06 18:00 CET. West wind backed hard to SE and then SSW and collapsed to a 4-knot hole mid-leg before a new southern gradient filled in.
This was the first real transition, and our best leg of the race.
Coming in toward Fårö we could see on AIS that the boats ahead had suddenly slowed, with a lot of them tucking in tight to land and a few sitting completely stopped further out to sea. The rule of thumb, especially in daylight, is that you want to be in toward Gotland to catch any sea breeze, so we committed fairly hard to staying close to the coast – or at least staying right of the fleet and not drifting too far east.
Through a series of small transitions with bands of calm to punch through, the boats furthest west and closest to the coast were clearly the ones going best.
We also knew that down at Östergarn it might fill in from the southwest, so we badly wanted to stay right – to be among the first into the new wind.
Just north of Östergarn there was a very clear transition: everyone ahead had to tack to get through the sound inside Östergarn, while by the time we arrived, first Tärna and then we could hook straight into fresh breeze. I think managing that one transition well is a big reason we placed so high overall. On corrected time we sailed the leg fastest in class through the collapse; on the water Tärna still held us off and Boxer got punished hardest.
#
Boat
Elapsed
Corrected
Cum.
1
J/99 Blur
6:25
6:38
2
2
J/99 Joyride
6:30
6:41
5
3
Xp 33 Tärna
6:36
6:46
1
4
Figaro 2 Amazigh
6:34
6:58
3
5
Pogo 36 Boxer
6:50
7:27
4
Leg 4: Östergarn → Hoburg
Mon 29/06 18:00 → Tue 30/06 01:07 CET. The passage — the turning point of the race. A trough passed during the evening: S 10 knots veered to NW and built toward 20 knots while pressure rose sharply (1016→1020).
On the far side of Östergarn it turned into a beat, and here we showed we had a small speed edge on Tärna. We caught them and passed, and were careful to stay right, because at some point the southwesterly would let us crack off toward Hoburg, and we absolutely wanted that shift before Tärna so we could use it to extend. So we had a proper tacking duel, tight in on land – we ducked them, they ducked us. Fantastic racing.
We got a little lucky and took the shift when we were furthest inshore, which bought us a couple of hundred metres.
Then a long leg south with code, very even with Tärna – sometimes a tenth or two to us, sometimes to them.
First 40 Almaviva passing us to leeward.
Another amazing sunset.
It lightened right up near Hoburg and turned into a beat that slowly built from 2–3 m/s to 7–8. It had gone dark by then, close to midnight, and this is where we discovered that the J/99 is a genuinely happy boat on this kind of beat. It felt great, and we pulled out a decent margin, which was fun.
The fast boats got paid in the fresh NW – Amazigh and Boxer quickest on the water, and Joyride actually won the leg on corrected time — but the thing that mattered was that we passed Tärna on the water at Hoburg (01:07 to their 01:15) and took third back. Second on handicap.
Looking back, we should have tacked in as soon as we had some decent breeze. You’ll quite often get lifted on starboard closer to land, and the Mumm 36 Shogun played that well. But we chose to stay with Tärna and consolidate our lead instead.
#
Boat
Elapsed
Corrected
Cum.
1
J/99 Joyride
6:40
6:52
4
2
Figaro 2 Amazigh
6:46
7:11
3
3
J/99 Blur
7:06
7:20
2
4
Pogo 36 Boxer
6:49
7:26
5
5
Xp 33 Tärna
7:14
7:26
1
Leg 5: Hoburg → Visby
Tue 30/06 01:07 → Tue 30/06 08:04 CET. Post-frontal northwest. Steady W/NW 16 knots (12–20), steady direction and rising pressure toward 1022 hPa as the high-pressure ridge built – the hardest and most predictable weather of the race.
Here’s where I badly misjudged what came after Hoburg.
I’d run a bunch of routings and knew it would be a reach, and there was a debate about how good it would be. I had it up, but I never expected it to be that windy. So the plan had been to push hard to the rounding and then rest, eat, relax on the way up from Hoburg toward Visby. Instead we came round into 10 m/s at TWA 60–70; brutal, wet sailing where there was no resting and no eating, and we both had the feeling of, okay, we’re going to get soaked and stay soaked.
We talked about it: should we take a reef, go to the J3.5? Make it more comfortable? But the boat was flying. It felt like a great angle for us, just miserable, so we did another weather analysis, saw it would probably blow hard until around four in the morning, and decided to just grind it out – a couple of really overpowered hours before it would ease as we came up toward Stora Karlsö and bent in toward Visby.
Somewhere in there is the whole point of offshore sailing: there are stretches where you just want to quit, sell the boat and never touch the sea again, and this was one of them. Amazigh flew in the NW and won the leg. We held third on the water, stretched on Tärna and now moved ahead of them on corrected time too. Second into the return.
#
Boat
Elapsed
Corrected
Cum.
1
Figaro 2 Amazigh
6:37
7:02
1
2
Pogo 36 Boxer
6:32
7:07
4
3
J/99 Blur
6:57
7:11
2
4
Xp 33 Tärna
7:34
7:46
3
5
J/99 Joyride
7:34
7:47
5
Leg 6: Visby → Almagrundet
Tue 30/06 08:04 → Wed 01/07 02:10 CET. Long light return. The high-pressure ridge suffocated the wind and it backed throughout the leg from W to SE (−133°) in just 4–11 knots. The decisive leg.
Exactly as forecast, the wind dropped as we came up on Visby. We could crack off – but our energy was completely gone, because the rest we’d planned simply hadn’t happened. We’d just gassed it the whole way. We looked at each other and wondered whether we had it in us. We got the code up, sailed in past the Visby buoy and started north.
Between Visby and Almagrundet we knew there’d be an interesting picture: the wind going from west to some flavour of southeast/east/northeast – something from a completely different direction – and obviously you badly want to nail that. It was also clear by now that the Figaro 2 Amazigh had gone brilliantly when it blew harder, so they were well ahead and leading the class comfortably. Our whole job on this leg was to close the gap to them intelligently.
For an hour or two we more or less just sailed straight around under Code while we worked to understand the weather, and we each got an hour’s sleep to be a bit sharper and think straight.
Then we went into attack mode.
It became a question of where and when that shift would happen. The routing looked very clear to me: at some point you’d cut a long way west to get the shift cleanly, then gybe and reach into Almagrundet in the new wind. We had one priority – minimise the distance to Amazigh – because we knew that if we could get within range and sail roughly the same weather as them, we had a good chance on corrected time.
Tärna was maybe an hour behind us, which felt reasonably safe. And, like every transition, we didn’t want to do this one half-heartedly. To get full value from a routing or a shift you have to commit fairly hard. There’s a version where you just sit on the rhumb line and take whatever weather you’re given, and a version where you’ve got a clear idea and commit to the corner. The common mistake is landing somewhere in between: not quite trusting the routing, not quite trusting the model, so you end up between the rhumb line and the optimal – which is often the worst of both. It feels safe, but it’s neither the shortest way nor of any real use in the weather.
We found several models that all said roughly the same thing, and settled on two we trusted – the Finnish one and a Nordic model. Both pointed the same way, and in hindsight we sailed almost exactly on those routing lines. When it lines up that well it’s extra satisfying. We chose not to go quite as far west as the routing wanted – that probably would have been faster to the finish – but our strategy was Amazigh and the gap to them, so we took maybe 80% out to the corner and then aimed hard at them. By the end of that manoeuvre we’d gone from 10–12 miles behind to 5–6, and it felt like we were now inside an hour, which would beat them on corrected time.
Nice to hear afterward from Odd Lindqvist and Roger Nilsson – both of whom have sailed Gotland Runt more times than anyone can count – that from the outside it was obvious we’d committed to a strategy and executed it. Getting that feedback from two legends was a real kick.
From there to Almagrundet the wind was all over the place; code and A3 at TWA 90/100/110, shifting constantly – so it was a running question of whether to let the pilot steer to compass and re-trim continually, or steer to wind angle so we could rest a little while the boat wandered ten degrees high and low. We tried both and found something that worked.
On corrected time we won this leg by 24 minutes over Tärna and more than an hour over Amazigh, and took the class lead on handicap. I’m super proud of the team for staying 100% focused this late in the race, after the grueling stage up to Visby.
#
Boat
Elapsed
Corrected
Cum.
1
J/99 Blur
18:05
18:41
1
2
Xp 33 Tärna
18:35
19:05
3
3
J/99 Joyride
19:05
19:39
4
4
Figaro 2 Amazigh
18:33
19:42
2
5
Pogo 36 Boxer
18:14
19:52
5
Leg 7: Almagrundet → Finish
Wed 01/07 02:10 → Wed 01/07 05:13 CET. Final stretch into Sandhamn in light southeast, 5 knots (3–7). A short, nervous finish leg.
As everyone who’s sailed Gotland Runt knows, the thing is very often decided between Almagrundet and the finish, and it’s fatally easy to arrive at Alma and think the job’s done.
For us it was a genuine nail-biter.
The wind shifted a lot and, worse, it lightened right off.
We had good boatspeed most of the way, but 300–400 metres from the line – after the whole pack ahead had already finished – the wind basically died.
We were doing about a knot, sitting there with the KSSS photo boat, the clock running, and what had looked like a safe class win a hundred metres earlier suddenly felt thrown away.
But there was just enough breeze to creep across.
We knew Amazigh was about an hour ahead on the water and that we’d taken them on corrected time, and on AIS we could see Tärna five miles back – they had to give us about 20 minutes and wouldn’t make it. So it felt reasonably safe.
But as always, you don’t actually know until the results are up and every boat is in. So we waited.
#
Boat
Elapsed
Corrected
Cum.
1
Xp 33 Tärna
2:22
2:26
2
2
Figaro 2 Amazigh
2:20
2:29
3
3
J/99 Joyride
2:35
2:39
4
4
Pogo 36 Boxer
2:29
2:42
5
5
J/99 Blur
2:43
2:49
1
Results
First in Double Handed (SRS) and first cruiser/racer in SRS.
Huge thanks to KSSS and everyone who organised, and to everyone who followed along. And thanks to those who make it possible: B&G, Happy Yachting, Henri Lloyd, J/Boats, J/Composites, North Sails, Liros and Spinlock.
#
Boat type
Boat name
Skipper
SRS
Elapsed
Corrected
1
J/99
Blur
Peter Gustafsson & Mattias Bodlund
1.033
59:54:00
61:52:36
2
Xp33
Tärna
Johan Söderström & Alex Ekberg
1.027
60:47:35
62:26:04
3
Figaro 2
Amazigh
Andreas Hamrin & Karl Jungstedt
1.062
58:50:09
62:29:01
4
J/99
Joyride
Timo Kairama & Assi Kairama
1.029
62:09:48
63:57:58
5
Pogo 36
Boxer
Mats Victorin & Nils Englund
1.090
58:45:00
64:02:15
6
JPK 10.30
Spirit
Louise Edgren
1.055
61:11:15
64:33:10
7
J/97
Jolly
Per Tengå
1.003
64:28:57
64:40:33
8
Figaro 2 Beneteau
Belly of Tea Solo
Emely Hagen
1.057
61:25:14
64:55:17
9
Whitbread 30
Monday Never
Perry Jönsson
1.018
64:01:52
65:11:01
10
JPK 1030
Tenet
Perttu Monthan
1.073
60:49:20
65:15:44
11
Dehler 36SQ
Rut
Jonas Svensson
1.035
63:29:05
65:42:24
12
Bavaria 38 Match
Mathilda
Ulf Lindner
1.074
61:24:37
65:57:17
13
J/11s
Sleeper
Juho Siipo
1.076
61:21:03
66:00:49
14
J/111
Elva
Christofer Haux
1.103
59:59:50
66:10:37
15
Beneteau Figaro 2
Spjut
Olof Bratthall
1.062
62:56:17
66:50:25
16
Rogers 10M
Kaminami
Antti Niiniranta
1.143
59:34:29
68:05:38
17
Elan 340
Grey-San
Gunnar Bridell
0.991
68:59:12
68:21:57
18
B&C
Krasotka
Fredrik Filander
1.148
59:42:25
68:32:37
19
XP-44
Xar
Rikard Roth
1.183
58:34:52
69:18:05
20
SunFast 3200
Devotion
Paul Gaskell-Brown
1.005
69:28:24
69:49:15
21
J80
Hysteria
Jakob Wikström
0.954
73:47:45
70:24:04
22
X-332
Pippi
Lars Westman
0.999
72:16:28
72:12:08
23
X 302
Hux Flux
Anders Rehn
0.925
78:41:53
72:47:45
24
Elan 310
Groundbreaker
Christian Harding
0.948
79:13:10
75:06:00
25
X-34
Snövit
Dan Reuterswärd
1.017
73:54:37
75:10:00
26
Norlin 34
Farmor Anka
Jan Orest
0.933
81:18:00
75:51:10
27
Dehler 29 MkII
Moana
Guy Taylor
0.927
86:52:17
80:31:47
DNF
YD-41
Miriam
Zbigniew Pawlowski
1.171
—
—
DNF
Harmony 38
Harmony Sister
Patrik Montenius
0.968
—
—
DNF
Elan Impression 434
Lady D’or
Pär Sydow
1.051
—
—
DNF
Elan 40
Unplugged
Toni Blomkvist
1.061
—
—
DNF
Sun Odyssey 42i Performance
Murphy
Jan Haraldsson
1.067
—
—
DNF
J99
Vivian
Adam Gillberg
1.038
—
—
Our class position on corrected time, mark by mark: 1st at Svenska Högarna, 3rd at Fårö, 2nd at Östergarn, 2nd at Hoburg, 2nd at Visby, 1st at Almagrundet, 1st at the finish. A race with two faces – two faster boats (Amazigh, Boxer) led on the water almost the whole way while Tärna and BLUR traded blows again and again- and it came down to the long, light return, where the light air suited us and we could finally make it stick.
Gap to the class leader – the whole fleet
Each boat’s deficit to the class leader on corrected time at every mark. The higher the line, the closer to the front — a line touching the top is leading.
Corrected-time splits derived from the TracTrac tracks, anchored to the official Gotland Runt 2026 Double Handed (SRS) result. Gaps in minutes.
The story is in the shape. BLUR led out of the opening leg, then paid for the light dawn passage to Fårö and slipped to 17 minutes behind Tärna — the only real dip of the race. From the east coast of Gotland onward the line climbs back toward zero, and at Almagrundet BLUR and Tärna finally swap for good. The two genuinely fast boats, Joyride and Boxer, run away toward the bottom: quick on the water, but never able to save their rating in the light.
Blur vs Tärna – the match within the race
The gap between the two boats that traded blows all the way round. Bars above the line: BLUR ahead on corrected time. Below: Tärna ahead.
BLUR aheadTärna ahead
Corrected-time splits derived from the TracTrac tracks, anchored to the official Gotland Runt 2026 Double Handed (SRS) result. Gaps in minutes.
For four marks Tärna had us – never by much, a couple of minutes at Hoburg – but they were in front. We lost them at Gotska Sandön but then reeled them in. Equal at Hoburgen, 32 minutes ahead at Visby, 56 at Almagrundet after the routing paid off, and 33 minutes at the finish.
What we learned – and tips for next time
On the weather models. The regional, higher-resolution models earned their keep. FMI HARMONIE and MET Nordic were consistently the best on the legs that mattered, often 1–3 knots and several degrees closer to reality than the global models. In light air below about 4 knots, resolution is everything. Two caveats we’d write on the bulkhead: no model caught the light hole on the east coast of Gotland — there, local knowledge beat every GRIB – and the models systematically under-read the wind, so in open water it’s worth mentally adding a couple of knots. Run several models in parallel to see the spread, and get comfortable sailing under uncertainty. It’s the messy, shifty, transitional stuff – “this is going to get really tricky up here at Östergarn, good” – where we tend to make our gains.
If I had to put my finger on the three things that made us sail well, it’d be these.
One: we always drive the boat hard.
Doublehanded you’ve got less muscle aboard and have to do more with fewer people – but a lot of things also get simpler with two. It’s completely clear who’s responsible for sailing the boat, and usually there’s one person on deck sailing it actively with no doubt that that’s their only job. We’ve moved away from rigid two-on/two-off toward something much more dynamic – the way a lot of the French sail. Rather than watching the clock, we talk constantly about how much rest we need and how much is left in the tank. Sometimes it’s I sleep two, Mattias sleeps two; sometimes we both push hard on deck for four hours and only then start trading sleep, whether that’s 2+2 or 1+1 to keep it fair. We have different needs – Mattias often needs a bit more sleep, and I can run a long time on very little- but you have to be careful not to drive yourself into the wall entirely. And we protect time together: breakfast, lunch, dinner where we can, because that’s when the tactical conversations happen.
Two: we’re offensive with routing and shifts.
We’re always trying to identify the zones where the race will actually be decided, and we want a distinct strategy for them. It isn’t about taking a lot of risk – we’ve got a quick boat and don’t need anything spectacular – it’s about being on the right side when things happen and not getting stuck in a hole. Commit to the analysis and sail it cleanly. The half-committed middle ground is usually the slowest place to be.
Three: sail inventory.
None of this is new, but anyone who’s built a wardrobe knows it’s a pile of compromises – which jibs, which downwind sails, staysail or not, where each sail’s sweet spot is, and where the crossovers fall. The J/111 had a few sharp peaks where, with the right kite and angle, it would just take off. The J/99 is rounder and duller in the polar; I can rarely bear away ten degrees for a big gain, so we wanted a wardrobe that plays to that. We think we got the overlaps right – at 5 m/s and TWA 80 the jib works, the Code works, and it’s fine to sit with those sails without swapping – which meant we weren’t constantly changing to keep the boat in the groove. Also, we’re able to sail most angles without compromising performance, which makes routing easier. Between the French wardrobe the boat came with and the winter’s work with North Sails, especially on the downwind inventory, we pretty much nailed it in the conditions we had. I’ll write a separate piece on this later.
The last thing worth saying: the reason we sail well here is the fleet.
The Stockholm east-coast doublehanded scene is genuinely active, with a number of boats sailed at a very high level – people who know their boats, keep them tidy, have sailed together for years and done Gotland Runt many times over. Getting to benchmark yourself against them is fantastic.
Vi är nu redo för start i Gotland Runt. Superkul att vara tillbaka då vi seglade senast 2016. Extra kul att man har gjort det enklare att följa racet. Kan framför allt rekommendera de Race Updates som kommer löpande på YouTube.
If you’ve been involved in offshore racing for a while, you’ve probably come across the new way of calculating results: Weather Routing Scoring (WRS). The idea: combine a boat’s theoretical performance (the VPP polars on its certificate) with a weather model for the actual race, then measure how close each boat got to its possible performance under the conditions.
Sounds good in theory. In practice – as we all know – this is not an exact science. The VPP isn’t really your boat’s true performance, it’s an approximation with some pretty large holes in it. And the weather rarely behaves the way the models think it should.
As the method has become more widely used, we’ve started to see some nasty side effects. At the recent ORC DH Worlds in Scheveningen, several results were very surprising. In Norway, sailors in this year’s Færderseilasen want their money back. There’s been talk of a bug for some time, but ORC has not responded – and as with the XR-41 case, it’s once again the tech-savvy designers and navigators doing the heavy lifting to actually figure out what’s going on.
The deeper question isn’t only the bug. It’s about transparency: should sailors be able to understand their relative rating before, during and after the race? And how much should the race committee’s choice of weather model, routing algorithm and scoring method really affect the result? At some point you have to ask whether a less scientifically ambitious rule that sailors actually understand is the better trade-off.
A small but telling data point from home: our last offshore race at Sandhamn Open. Not a single sailor I spoke to understood the results. And if you re-score the same race with different ORC methods, the order changes a lot – see the table below, scored five different ORC ways. Most boats shift one to four places depending on which method you pick. For a fleet of twelve, that’s not a rounding error – that’s the gap between a podium finish and the back of the pack.
Pos
Båt
Elapsed
Orig
a) CLD ToT
a) CLD ToD
b) TN Med ToT
b) TN Med ToD
1
Pro4u
16:56:12
1
17:00:52 (1)
−32:15 (1)
18:34:27 (1)
55:51 (1)
2
Blur
17:00:59
3
17:19:21 (2)
−13:36 (2)
18:53:05 (2)
1:12:03 (3)
3
Pandion
15:27:48
2
17:20:20 (3)
−11:28 (3)
19:00:43 (3)
1:11:11 (2)
4
Oxygen
15:58:18
4
17:31:32 (4)
−01:30 (4)
19:08:37 (4)
1:19:34 (4)
5
Joint Venture
16:04:51
5
17:35:09 (5)
01:52 (5)
19:14:03 (6)
1:24:22 (5)
6
AlmaViva
16:15:25
7
17:36:51 (6)
03:18 (6)
19:14:53 (7)
1:25:48 (7)
7
Yrsa
17:35:28
8
17:40:31 (7)
07:21 (7)
19:18:28 (8)
1:36:00 (9)
8
Andiamo
16:56:12
6
17:42:20 (8)
08:38 (8)
19:09:13 (5)
1:24:49 (6)
9
Matador
14:26:19
12
17:53:21 (9)
16:12 (9)
19:30:23 (9)
1:26:46 (8)
10
Heist
14:44:04
9
18:06:57 (10)
27:27 (10)
19:42:15 (11)
1:36:26 (10)
11
The Trooper
17:21:52
10
18:08:57 (11)
34:07 (12)
19:38:33 (10)
1:50:50 (12)
12
Nemo Rosso
15:00:08
11
18:14:12 (12)
33:42 (11)
19:49:09 (12)
1:42:51 (11)
Sandhamn Open Hav, 105.32 NM, originally scored by WRS, comparison to (a) Coastal/Long Distance and (b) Triple Number CLD Medium – both methods in ToT och ToD.. ToD corrected in mm:ss; negative = faster than cert-implied.
To see what this can look like from the inside, here’s what happened to Team Gaia at the DH Worlds – finishing second across the line, scored last in the results. That’s what it looks like from a competing team in the middle of the storm. The frustration is justified . but it doesn’t tell us why the numbers behave the way they do.
For that, Nils Melsom Kristensen has done his homework. He sailed the recent Færderseilasen on the X-41 Saillogic, works as a scientist at MET Norway, and produced the official weather briefing for the event. He has dug into the actual mechanism behind the WRS output – and what he’s found is worth reading carefully.
Over to Nils.
How can we fix the ORC WRS?
by Nils Melsom Kristensen (nilsmk@duck.com)
Weather routing scoring could have been one of the best things that has happened to handicap racing in ages, but unfortunately it seems to be failing. Surprise surprise, it’s not primarily due to unreliable weather models, it’s a fundamental flaw in the weather routing module. Here is my humble attempt at explaining the problem in a way that is understandable to most sailors. All the work below is based on the recent Færder race in Norway.
Disclaimer: I was sailing the race onboard the X-41 Saillogic. I also work as a scientist at MET Norway and produced the official weather briefing for the event, but I am not directly connected to any of the weather models used in the WRS. So even if I might have a personal interest in the case, my only agenda is to fix the WRS, which is currently not working as intended.
To explain this, I will use the case of four X-41 sailing in the same class, same course, same start. Here are some facts about the boats and rating. All percentage differences below use Saillogic as reference.
It is expected to have some differences in the rating relatively between boats when moving from APH to WRS, since the polar diagrams are not exactly the same. However, to have One Design boats (like the X-41) with only slightly different sail configurations to change by 8% when moving from one system to another is something that should be grounds for a more thorough examination.
Let’s first look at the measurement certificates (link in table above). The VPP performance number (polars) can be found below.
Then, let us compare these two. See both absolute and relative differences in speed in the tables below. Positive numbers means Saillogic is faster, negative numbers means BarX is faster.
As we can see, Saillogic is generally faster than BarX, which is also expected since the APH of BarX is 0.8% less than Saillogic. The largest relative difference in predicted speed is 8.8%. This is reaching in 24kt TWS. The Færder race saw a maximum wind of about 16kt for a few hours, while the boats were sailing upwind or very tight reaching at TWA 50-90 deg.
Then, looking at the relative differences in less than 10kt TWS above, we see the maximum difference is 5.1% in 4kt TWS.
Again looking at the WRS prediction, we see both boats should spend no more than about 2 hours in wind below 5kt, and when taking into account that the predicted total sailing time for Saillogic is about 16 hours, and BarX about 17.5 hours, this accounts for very small parts of the race, and no difference in performance between the boats for the wind range used in WRS is remotely close to the 8.8% difference in rating.
So, let us continue the search.
As was said during the official weather briefing, the weather was very uncertain due to the passing of a small local low pressure system that was passing over the race course during the race. In hindsight, the weather development was very close to the latest forecast that was used in the WRS scoring for the race. The low probably passed a bit further south than expected, giving a more stable breeze than expected, but directions were very close to the forecasted weather. It is common knowledge that forecasting weather is not a precise science due to a number of reasons, something every meteorologist is open and honest about. However, the forecast was generally in good agreement with the actual weather for the race. And, the real weather has no impact on the rating we have discussed so far…
There is no perfect forecast, no perfect weather routing, and no perfect rating system, but the WRS should theoretically be one of the better “simple” systems we can come up with, and it is therefore very surprising that the rating behaves so unpredictable.
Let us dig deeper…
If we look at the WRS output for the Færder race, and the four X-41’s, we can view their predicted courses in the map below.
Unfortunately, there is a lot of clutter from the mark names, but trust me when I say that the predicted optimal routes align very well.
So, why would the WRS predict that almost identical boats, sailing the same route, in the same wind perform so differently?
If we zoom in on the predicted routes, we see something strange. This is the crux of the matter. We can clearly see that the wind barbs are placed at different positions along the optimal routes. When using a grid-based routine algorithm, these wind barbs are usually placed at the start and end of the route segments, so we assume the same is the case here. In the example below, I have zoomed in on the part of the course between Moss and almost Færder. Now, take a close look at the “brownish” optimal route, and then the white, light grey and purple. The routes on the left are the ones going south, while the ones on the right are the ones returning north. On the southward routes, there are clearly very few wind barbs on the brown route. In fact, going south in this area, I can only spot two (I tried to mark them with red dots), whereas the purple have at least eight.
Why does this matter, you say? Well it does. The wind at the start and end of the routing segment is the wind used to calculate the time spent for that segment based on the boat’s performance prediction. Either the wind at the start of the segment is used on the entire segment, or the wind is linearly interpolated between the two.
If the wind was stable, and did not change in time or space, then it would not matter how many of these routing points you had, since the sum of the predicted times for each segment would be the same as the value for the very long segment. But when the wind is changing, we get a kind of aliasing that would give a different sum of time for the same route depending on where, and how many routing segments you have. See a simplified example in the appendix below.
This type of behaviour in the routing algorithm is common knowledge among offshore navigators who use grid based routing software. When these long jumps occur, it is common to make small changes in the routing settings to try to avoid them. Why they happen, I don’t really know, but I guess there is a bug somewhere… As far as I know, these jumps do not appear commonly in isochronal based routing algorithms.
So, where do we go from here, how do we fix it? Well, only the provider of the routing can do that, but they should start by ensuring that the routing segments have a more evenly distributed length, and that they are not too long. Additionally, it would be wise of the ORC to admit the problem, and how this may have influenced the results of races that have been scored using WRS.
As I final note, even if I am very certain that this is the problem, I can be wrong, and I am definitely open to other explanations if anyone has one.
Appendix
Comparing the yachts that sailed the longest course, APH on x-axis, WRS on y-axis. Red line is linear regression, while the yellow are +/- 1 standard deviation and the green +/- 2 standard deviations. Yachts that fall below the red line have “better WRS than APH” , while the yachts above the red line “have worse”. Boats in blue generally behave as expected, while the red and orange are some that should be looked into.
Overall, it is expected that relatively similar boats that are considered “all-round boats”, should have a similar relative relation between them if it is APH or WRS.
Average leg length (of the predicted route) vs absolute deviation from the regression line, minimum leg length vs abs_deviation and maximum leg length vs abs_deviation. See e.g. BarX has the longest leg of all yachts, over 18nm on a 88nm race…
Efter Marstrand Big Boat så var det dags att ta båten till Östersjön för Gotland Runt och RORC Baltic Sea Race. Ett bra sätt att värma upp, och att få segla lite mer tillsammans med hela teamet (de långa racen kör vi doublehanded) var att segla Sandhamn Open som också var SM i ORCi.
Eftersom offshore-racet startade 20:00 så hade vi dagen på oss att kolla så att allt funkade. Efter en kort kryss med J1.5 och en repa tillbaka med Code 0 så kändes allt på plats och vi kunde belöna oss själva med en tidig middag på Seglarhotellet.
Sedan dags för skepparmöte. Efter en vecka med ostadigt väder såg det ut bli fina förutsättningar för ett race på havet. Förutom vi som körde ORCi, fanns det två klasser i SRS; en för full besättning och en för doublehandedseglarna.
Samma startområde som Gotland Runt, söder om Sandön. Vi gjorde en bra start i lovart, men vinden vred med strax efter start och vi hade nog hellre haft vår A3 än Code 0. Det är också svårt att vara en av de långsammaste båterna, då man blir ifrånseglad av allt och alla. Och man vet inte riktigt om det är rätt eller om man skall göra något annorlunda 😀
Fin kryss söderut mot Dämban. Vi visste att det skulle vrida vänster, och ville hålla oss till vänster om fleeten. Här hade det antagligen varit bättre att segla på skiften, då vridet kom senare än vad vi hade gissat. Här tappade vi en del på Pro4U som rundade någon distans före.
Vi hade också svårt att nå våra targets i den korta sjön. Verkade som vi inte var ensamma dock.
Sedan en reachingbog tillbaka till Revenge (typ). Fantastisk nattsegling som alla borde få uppleva någon gång.
Perfekt för vår A3 där vi nu fått massa data att analysera. Men väldigt jämnt mot andra team. Bra fight mot Mumm 36 Shogun och Farr 30 Andiamo. Mycket nyttigt att försöka hänga med snabbare båtar.
Sedan ytterligare en bra kryss mot SO och Väderbojen. Här seglade vi mycket bra och halverade avståndet till Pro4U.
Soluppgång och lång läns norrut mot Svenska Högarna. Här mötte vi Pogo 36 Boxer som till slut blev 2:a i doublehandedklassen.
Kul också att se flera J/111 på banan. En sån skulle man ha 🤣
Innan rundningen vid Svenska Högarna försökte jag lista ut hur vi låg till. Vi visste att vi var efter Pro4U eftersom vi skall slå dem på vattnet (nu var de ca 0.6 distans före), men vilka andra fightades vi med? Den officiella trackingen var TracTrac, men det funkade inte alls, vare sig för SRS eller ORCi. Vad säger resultatlistan ovan? Ingen aning. Värdelöst.
Med lite jobb med Excel och andra båtars mätbrev kändes som vi hade bra koll och jag gissade att vi var 2:a i vår klass.
Lång bog med TWA 75-90 där vi fick utväxling på vår Code. När det var brant så seglade vi jämt med Pro4U som körde jibtop och stagsegel, men när det gick över TWA 85 så var vi snabbare.
Avslutningsvis en kort läns in till mållinjen vid Skanskobb. Vi kände oss nöjda med vår insats och ytterligare ett bevis på att Pro4U inte gör särskilt många misstag.
Resultatrapporteringen dröjde eftersom KSSS också hade strul med TracTrac. 18:30, dvs nästan 5 timmar efter att sista båt gått i mål kom detta screenshot i WhatsApp-gruppen. Jag vet inte hur resultathantering kan vara ett problem 2026?
Det var samma issues på Marstrand Big Boat. Och på Færdern i år. Att seglarna inte har en aning om hur det går, vare sig på havet eller efter målgång kan inte vara så det är tänkt? Kommer nog ett separat inlägg om detta.
Så här blev det till slut:
Pos
Yacht Name
Sail No
Type
Finish Time
Elapsed
Delta
1
Garmin Team Pro4u
SWE 88
FIRST 36.7 MOD
+1 13:01:12
16:56:12
0:00:00
2
Pandion
FRA 017
XR 41
+1 11:32:48
15:27:48
0:09:28
3
Blur
SWE 53435
J 99 FIN KEEL
+1 13:05:59
17:00:59
0:15:45
4
Oxygen
SWE 44
X 41 OD
+1 12:03:18
15:58:18
0:26:29
5
Joint Venture 4.0
SWE 4991
X 41
+1 12:09:51
16:04:51
0:28:56
6
Andiamo
SWE 659
FARR 30 OD
+1 13:01:12
16:56:12
0:30:23
7
AlmaViva
SWE 70
First 40
+1 12:20:25
16:15:25
0:31:15
8
YRSA
SWE 345
ARCONA 340
+1 13:40:28
17:35:28
0:38:12
9
Heist
SWE 53205
KER 40 CUSTOM KEEL
+1 10:49:04
14:44:04
0:39:37
10
THE TROOPER
SWE 91811
FARR 30 OD
+1 13:26:52
17:21:52
0:49:27
11
Nemo Rosso
SWE 981
KER 40
+1 11:05:08
15:00:08
0:54:37
12
MATADOR
SWE 15
ELLIOTT 44 – CUSTOM
+1 10:31:19
Eftersom vi skall segla Gotland Runt på SRS, och inte alls är optimerade för ORCi, så räknade jag om alla båtars tider enligt SRS för att se hur vi presterat. Ganska bra visade det sig 🤣
Pos
Båt
Klass
SRS
Seglad
Korrigerad
Δ
1
Blur
ORCi
1.054
17:00:59
17:56:06
—
2
Pro4u
ORCi
1.065*
16:56:12
18:02:15
06:08
3
Amazigh
SRS DH
1.062
16:59:56
18:03:10
07:03
4
Boxer
SRS DH
1.090
16:43:51
18:14:11
18:04
5
Amarone
SRS FC
1.046
17:26:14
18:14:21
18:14
6
Jolene
SRS DH
1.167
15:38:29
18:15:12
19:05
7
CAG
SRS FC
1.127
16:13:58
18:17:39
21:32
8
Elva
SRS DH
1.103
16:39:07
18:22:01
25:54
9
Swee
SRS FC
1.280
14:26:25
18:29:00
32:53
10
Shogun
SRS FC
1.105
16:45:38
18:31:13
35:06
11
Oriole
SRS FC
1.032
18:05:59
18:40:44
44:37
12
Alapocas
SRS FC
0.949
19:41:38
18:41:22
45:15
13
Joint Venture
ORCi
1.164
16:04:51
18:43:05
46:58
14
Imperiet II
SRS FC
1.100
17:01:02
18:43:08
47:01
15
MATADOR
ORCi
1.299
14:26:19
18:45:20
49:13
16
YRSA
ORCi
1.067
17:35:28
18:46:10
50:03
17
Andiamo
ORCi
1.109
16:56:12
18:46:57
50:50
18
Heist
ORCi
1.275
14:44:04
18:47:11
51:04
19
Spirit
SRS DH
1.055
17:49:25
18:48:14
52:07
20
Pandion
ORCi
1.218
15:27:48
18:50:03
53:56
21
AlmaViva
ORCi
1.162
16:15:25
18:53:26
57:19
22
Malva
SRS FC
1.065
17:44:54
18:54:07
58:00
23
Oxygen
ORCi
1.187
15:58:18
18:57:30
1:01:23
24
Happy Yachting
SRS FC
1.238
15:21:48
19:01:11
1:05:04
25
CAP
SRS FC
1.076
17:44:39
19:05:33
1:09:26
26
Nemo Rosso
ORCi
1.280
15:00:08
19:12:10
1:16:03
27
Blåvinge
SRS FC
1.096
17:32:39
19:13:42
1:17:35
28
The Trooper
ORCi
1.111
17:21:52
19:17:30
1:21:23
29
Ellen
SRS FC
1.158
16:59:52
19:41:00
1:44:53
30
Axioma
SRS FC
1.133
17:44:49
20:06:26
2:10:19
31
Iris
SRS FC
1.183
18:01:16
21:19:08
3:23:01
32
Stora Blå
SRS FC
1.204
17:52:13
21:30:56
3:34:49
*) SRS från 2025.
Belöning!
Under söndagen planerades 3-4 banseglingar utanför Sandhamn. Prognosen var utmanande för tävlingsledningen då vindar skulle ticka från NV till S i samband med att en liten front passerade. Och massor av regn. Men det blev fyra riktigt bra race, där egentligen bara det sista blev riktigt skevt.
Framförallt starterna var svåra, med kort linje och massor av snabba båtar. Men vi gjorde det bästa av situationen och lyckades ofta ta oss ut rimligt ok i lovart.
Rent racingmässigt var det nästan en kopia av Marstrand Big Boat, väldigt jämnt på havet med Pro4U och massor av kul dueller. Men på korrigerad tid rår vi inte på dem. I alla fall inte under ORCi.
Men det är sjukt lärorikt att få sparra mot världens bästa båt!
Glatt gäng efter sista racet: Mats Björk (keyboard), Wille Eriksson (trim), Peter Gustafsson (rorsman), Mattias Bodlund (mast), Simon Kindt (fördäck) & Pelle Pedersen (storskot).
Stort grattis till Patrik och hela teamet på Pro4U. Kul att få hänga med er både på bryggan och i rundningarna. Även Pandion & Heist gjorde bra insatser i helt nya båtar.
Stort tack också till KSSS som arrade på ett fantastiskt sätt. Resultatrapporteringen var väl enda plumpen i protokollet. Annars perfekt.
Tack B&G, Henri Lloyd, J/boats, J/Composites, Maurten, North Sails, Liros, Spinlock och alla andra som stöttar oss.
Profilen SWE 8971 is the world’s first extruded yacht. SAPA, Scandinavian Aluminum Profiles AB produced it in 1981. The initiator of Profilen, creative impact photographer and sailor Lennart Hyse, initiated the idea, collected a crew, took the role as the project manager, documented the story and created a classic slideshow of the unique story. Here is the filmed version, with a Swedish voice-over by Lennart Lundh and Bengt Kviberg.
Producer: Lennar Hyse Photo: Lennart Hyse Yacht design: Peter Norlin Yacht construction: Anders Löfqvist Racing crew members: Peter Norlin, Peter Sundin, Roger Nilsson, Lennart Hyse (and more) Assisting Crew & Maintenance: Bjorn Bertoft Owner, developer, marketing: SAPA (2026: Hydro www.hydro.com)
Efter förra årets övertygande serie 1-1-1-1-1 så var nog andras förväntningar ganska höga. Men vi visste också att nivån på fältet var ganska mycket högre i år. En annan faktor var att vi skulle segla ORCi, något som vår båt inte alls är optimerad för.
Ready to race.
Fredagen inleddes med North Sails Clinic. Mycket nyttigt att få se bilder på sina segel utifrån, och kunna ha en diskussion om hur stor och fock samverkar på ett bra sätt. Vi var ganska rätt ute med de referenser vi hade förra året, och som vi nu har justerat för vår nya garderob.
Nu fick vi också känna på First 36.7 Pro4U. De är ju regerande världsmästare i ORCi, kan sin båt utan och innan och har varit i en egen klass här hemma under många år. De är benchmarket som vi andra kan mäta oss mot. Och jag hade inga illusioner om att vi skulle rå på dem i deras paradgren.
På träningen kändes det som vi hade lite edge på kryss, men hade svårt att hänga med dem utför.
Kul att se Kwanza tillbaka. Nu i en FarEast 28R på hemmaplan (när man inte seglar ClubSwan 43 i Medelhavet).
Tätt även i träningsracen.
Skepparmöte och en prognos som kunde innehålla mycket vind.
Våra prognoser pekade på en sydvästlig gradient byggande till 14–17 kt över lunch, följt av en kallfrontpassage runt 15:30 med en dramatisk vridning från SSW till WSW och tryckfall. Sju av åtta vädermodeller var överens om mönstret.
Vinden byggde precis enligt prognos och toppade strax efter kl 12. Men fronten kom aldrig – den passerade någon gång under kvällen/natten som en utdragen process istället för det dramatiska skiftet vi var preppade för. Pre-frontal vridning började anas mot slutet av sista racet, men det blev aldrig något stort vrid.
Fantastiska förhållanden där vi seglade bra. När vi inte ställde till det för oss själva. Jag hade väldiga problem i starterna då det var en relativt kort linje och massor av stora båtar. Man undrar lite vad vitsen är att dela in i klasser om alla ändå skall starta samtidigt? Nu kunde ingen båt i Klass C starta vettigt. Visst, det är samma för alla, men jag hade tyckt det var tråkigt att transportera hit från Tyskland för att inte få en egen start…
Tack till Anna-Lena Elled och Search för fina bilder.
En annan sak som var klurigt var att man körde kryss-gate i stället för ett märke med spread. Vi upplevde att detta gav upphov till fler farliga situationer där framförallt de snabbare båtarna ofta rundade det fördelaktiga högra märket och gippsatte vilket gjorde att det blev svårhanterliga situationer ett par gånger.
Dagens tema. Vi var före Pro4U i ett race, och tätt efter i de flesta. Men vi mäter högre än vad de gör, så de slog oss på korrigerat i alla race.
Vår serie efter första dagen: 2-2-3-2.
Klassisk regattamiddag på Såsen. Skönt att ingen blivit äldre sedan vi var här förra gången.
Fighting faces på Xp-33 Vindrus.
Äntligen en bra start… Då vart det så klart allmän omstart.
Mer på samma tema. Race 5 tyckte vi att vi seglade närmast perfekt och var var 1:24 före Patrik Forsgren i mål. Men ändå förlorade vi det racet med 17 sekunder.
Sista racet tappade vi skärpan lite och hade problem med farten ett par tillfällen. Dagens resultat: 2-5.
Totalt en andraplats efter världens bästa Class C-båt. Det måste vi vara nöjda med. Vi skulle säkert kunna optimera båten bättre om vi skulle segla mer ORCi. Nu är ju planen att segla doublehanded i IRC, så vi låter nog bli det.
Kunde inte låta bli att räkna om resultaten i SRS. Då hade vi slagit dem 🤣
Stort tack till hela gänget; Wille Eriksson (trim), Johan Fredriksson (stor), Fredrik Roos (mast), Mats Björk (keyboard), Jens Allroth (trim), Mattias Bodlund (fördäck), Pelle Pedersen (strategi) och Peter Gustafsson (rorsman)
Stort tack också till B&G, Henri Lloyd, J/boats, J/Composites, Maurten, North Sails, Liros, Spinlock och alla andra som stöttar oss.
Stort grattis till Patrik Forsgren och hans fantastiska gång. Vi ses igen på Sandhamn Open.
Stabil leverans av MSS och Lars Wilhelmsen. Mycket hög nivå på fleeten, så vi borde kunna locka ännu fler bra båtar nästa gång. Egen start och snabbare resultat var den enda feedbacken vi hade.
Följande propå damp ner i mailboxen. Låter ju superintressant för rätt team?
Ansökan att representera Sverige vid OFFSHORE DOUBLE HANDED WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP 2026 i Marseilles
Svenska Havskappseglinsförbundet öppnar ansökan om deltagande för att representera Sverige vid Offshore Double Handed World Championship 2026.
Mästerskapet går 2026 i Marseilles, Frankrike den 23 september till 2 oktober med av Svenska Havskappseglingsförbundet nominerat(de?) lag. Lagen ska bestå av en kvinna och en man. Båda med erfarenhet från liknande segling och skall som individ och lag uppfylla övriga ställda krav.
Arrangör är Union Nautique Marseillaise (UNM) tillsammans med Cap Regatta som förser evenemanget med båtar av typen C30 (Sun Fast 30 One Design) under World Sailings regi.
Nu finns den formella inbjudan ute och vi har i dagsläget en troika med intresserade team från Sverige till detta Världsmästerskap. SHF har fått i uppgift från SSF att nominera och anmäla upp till 2 Svenska lag!