Gänget på Pandeon får till sist ta emot sitt förstapris för ORC-klassen på Gotland Runt efter att det först delats ut till fel team. Foto: Daniel Stenholm.
Resultat är kanske inte det viktigaste med kappsegling.
Men att de stämmer, och att de kommer medans man fortfarande sitter i sittbrunnen och bryr sig – det är värt mer än vi låtsas om. I vilken annan sport väntar man ett par dygn på att få veta hur det gick?
Arrangörer brukar säga att det är krångligt och tar tid. Sant.
Men det går, om man vill.
På Marstrand Big Boat bestämde vi oss för att göra resultatrapportering till en grej. Med rätt setup kunde vi läsa upp resultat på VHF mellan seglingarna, ute på havet. Seglarna trodde inte det var sant. Vi hade också satt som mål att varje båt skulle få utskrivna resultatlistor i handen innan de hann kliva i land, och även det gick med lite logistik och en printer.
Dessutom visade det sig finnas en poäng i att hela teamet tittar på samma papperslista i stället för att var och en sitter böjd över sin mobil.
Nordön Race Week kör Google Sheets. Tävlingsledaren matar in målgångstider och alla seglare ser listan sorteras i realtid. Cred till Thomas Ottosson för. Ett kalkylark och viljan att visa vad man håller på med. Mer behövs inte.
Vad har hänt 2026?
I år har någonting hänt.
Eller snarare: en massa saker har hänt på olika ställen som tillsammans bildar ett mönster.
ORC Double Handed World Championship blev den första stora internationella smällen kring Weather Routing Scoring. Tyska GAIA gick i mål som tvåa och klassades sist efter WRS-korrigering. Protesten avslogs. Men diskussionen som följde handlade inte om räknefel — den handlade om att scoringmodellen kan producera utfall som seglare uppfattar som orimliga, utan att någon kan förklara varför.
Færderseilasen lyckades med konststycket att ha två olika resultatproblem samtidigt. Först administrativa fel: felregistrerade målgångstider och priser till fel båtar. Sedan en separat WRS-diskussion där KNS själva meddelade att valet av scoringsystem ska utvärderas: “Vi har fått tilbakemeldinger på en del feil i resultatene, og må bare beklage på det sterkeste at det har blitt slik.”
Sandhamn Open hade svårt att få fram resultat överhuvudtaget. Fyra timmar efter sista målgång kom en screenshot. De officiella resultaten dök upp dagen efter.
Gotland Runt funkade generellt bra – ända fram till prisutdelningen, där ORC-pokalen gick till fel team. Kalabalik på scen innan det rättades till. Man hade tittat på hur ORC-båtarna rankats i SRS.
Newport Bermuda Race toppade alltihop. Ett programvarufel i beräkningen av Forecast Time Correction Factor gav felaktiga resultat, flera omräkningar och en försenad prisutdelning. US Sailing var ovanligt öppna: “US Sailing recognizes that the software-related issue affecting the corrected-time calculations has had a significant impact on competitors.”
Så där står vi.
Vi har ambitiösa arrangörer och funktionärer. Vi har kommittéer som sitter och funderar på sådana här saker under vinterhalvåret. Vi har mer teknik och datorkraft än någonsin…
Men också en säsong full av sena, felaktiga, omräknade och obegripliga resultat.
Sex frågor jag inte kan släppa
Har vi blivit sämre trots bättre teknik? En klubbtävling på 80-talet med papper och penna levererade snabbare än flera stora event 2026. Den ekvationen stämmer inte?
Är scoringmodellerna för komplexa? När varken seglare, funktionärer eller jury kan förklara varför en båt vann – vad har vi då byggt? Observera att det inte handlar om matematiska fel. Modellen kan räkna helt rätt och ändå misslyckas, för att ingen förstår eller accepterar svaret.
Varför är resultatet en black box? Nordön visar att motsatsen går utmärkt. Så varför publiceras inte indata, mellanresultat och beräkningar löpande? Vad är det vi skyddar, egentligen?
Kan resultaten reproduceras? Om två personer tar samma målgångstider, samma väderdata och samma mätbrev – får de då exakt samma resultatlista? Om svaret är nej finns inget förtroende att bygga på.
Vad är rimlig ledtid? Klubbsegling inom tio minuter, SM inom en halvtimme, offshore inom några timmar. Orimliga krav? Eller har vi bara vant oss vid att vänta?
Hur mycket komplexitet tål sporten? Hela handikappidén bygger på att seglare accepterar att de inte alltid vinner på vattnet. Det är ett rätt stort mentalt åtagande redan där. Gränsen går inte där modellen räknar fel – den går där resultatet slutar kännas begripligt. Och jag tror vi passerat den gränsen?
Vad är egentligen viktigast?
Att resultatet är matematiskt så korrekt som möjligt?
Att det är begripligt?
Att det går att verifiera?
Att seglarna litar på det?
Vi har optimerat stenhårt för det första. De tre andra åkte ut på vägen.
Och en enklare modell som alla förstår slår antagligen en perfekt modell som ingen litar på.
Veckans läsarfråga kommer från Johan på Xp-33 Tärna, som vi hade en bra fight med under årets Gotland Runt.
Hej Peter,
Jag seglar och hobbyrejsar min Xp33 Tärna med stort nöje. Jag seglar nästan uteslutande shorthand, och anpassar gradvis båten för detta. Just nu är fokus på ergonomi för rorsman. Jag har precis gjort om arrangemanget för trim av vagn, fintrim storsegel och akterstag så att de är enkelt åtkomliga för rorsman sittandes på styrplatsen.
Co-pilot Alexander Ekberg på väg mot Svenska Högarna på Gotland Runt 2026.
Xp33ans sittbrunn är generös, men vid längre sträcker med lite stökigare förhållanden har jag svårt att hitta position där jag kan sitta säkert utan att det blir jobbigt. Det kokar ned till två sammanlänkade problem;
1) Vid krängning (särskilt när det är lite sjö) vill mantåget trycka ned rorsman i sittbrunn
2) För att motverka detta får en försöka sitta så långt in mot centrum som möjligt, vilket ger för liten sittyta och dessutom kommer en för nära fotstöden, vilket blir jobbigt för benen.
Nu är jag på jakt efter inspiration, tankar, åsikter på temat; Vad är viktigt för att få god ergonomi för rorsman på en rorkultsbåt? Vilken båt har den skönaste styrplatsen? Vad bör en undvika?
Är justerbara rörfotstöd som på Figaro 3 nåt att ha (eller blir det mest snubbelrisk)?
Är eluppvärmd sittdyna som på Aspect 45 ett måste?
Är JPK 1050 übergrova gummimönster flip eller flop?
Det 49:e Hermanö Runt seglas i år lördagen 1 augusti. Segling tillåts med både ”full crew” och shorthanded.
Välkommen med din anmälan på email till hans.abrahamsson@gknaerospace.com eller sms till 0709-743334. Uppge sedvanlig information (dvs rorsman, mobil nr, email, båttyp, segel nr, ev båtnamn, SRS tal, ev mätbrev, segelklubb). Anmälan fram till onsdag 29 juli. Anmälan efter tisdag 28 juli kl 10 (dvs 96 tim innan start) endast till fullt SRS (dvs med full crew och med undanvindsegel). Vid anmälan, sms’a gärna en bild på din båt, som kan användas för inlägg på Hermanö Runt Facebook.
Anmälningsavgiften är 450 kr, och betalas till pg 362688-4 eller swish till 1232904613, senast onsdag 29 juli.
Arrangemanget/seglingen kommer att vara likt föregående år, dvs jaktstart i Hälleviksstrand, segling runt Måseskär och Härmanö – för att gå i mål på Käringön ca kl 16:30. Banan är ca 21 Nm. Återkommer med uppdaterade/årets seglingsinstruktioner och ytterligare information om arrangemanget, som emailas till anmälda båtar och efter fråga. Frågor om arrangemanget/seglingen besvaras på 0709-743334.
Information/uppdateringar om Hermanö Runt kommer i huvudsak att ges på Hermanö Runt’s Facebook sida. Anmälningslistor kommer att anslås löpande på Facebook.
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.