Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • Casper Lyhne
    Said Created: Today 00:21

    Two situations for everybody. One is just the mirror of the other. I wonder how the rules apply. So on the first one green enters the zone well before pink. Both green and pink are sailing their proper course on position 1, that is down-wind VMG sailing.

    Both Scenarios

    Is green clear ahead?

    No.

    She entered the zone first, but pink has less distance to sail to the mark. But to me the seem to be overlapped since a perpendicular line off of each transom shows that no boat is clear astern.

    Yes.  That's exactly how the Definition Clear Astern and Clear Ahead; Overlap works.

    But under that definition boats quite far behind time-wise could be overlapped.

    Yes.

    Pink is a little ahead if she sailed her proper course.

    That's irrelevant.

     So here is my interpretation.

    When green enters the zone the boats are overlapped, so green is entitled to mark room.

    Yes.

    Green needs to gybe to sail round the mark, and she wants to gybe before the mark to sail her proper course, which would require more space than mere mark room.

    You need to get clear in your mind exactly what is the Mark-room to which G is entitled.

    Here are the relevant parts of the definition:

    Mark-Room Room for a boat to leave a mark on the required side. Also,
    (a) room to sail to the mark when her proper course is to sail close to it, and
    (b) room to round or pass the mark as necessary to sail the course without touching the mark.


    @1, P overlapped outside, begins to be required to give G mark-room. G's proper course is to sail close to the mark.  The mark-room that P was required to give G was the space G needed in the existing conditions to sail promptly to the mark in a seamanlike way. That space was a direct corridor from @1 to a position close to and alongside the mark on the required side (Case 75).

    Between @1+delta and @3, G is not sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled, but no rule says that G is required to sail within that mark-room. 
     
    @3+delta G is close to the mark, and is beginning to round the mark as necessary to sail the course.  G is now sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled.
     
     But 18.4 also states that it only applies to a ROW boats,

    Leave this aside for the discussion of the Right Hand Scenario later on, and now we're just talking about Left Hand Scenario.

     so proper course is not relevant to green and she is therefore violating rule 10 by taking more than mark room?

    Not exactly.

    Proper course was relevant to delineating the mark-room to which G was entitled, but she is not entitled to room to sail her proper course. 

    RRS 10 does no more than require G to keep clear of P.  The relevance of mark-room is that if G fails to keep clear but is sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled, she is exonerated by RRS 43.1(b).

    @2 There is 2BL of space between P and the mark and P and the direct corridor to the mark, so P is giving mark-room as required by RRS 18.2(b). 

    @2, with only 1BL between two assy boats, reaching towards each other, P changes course.  It would be reasonable for her to apprehend that if she didn't change course collision would result, so she needed to take avoiding action (Case 50, and thus G breaks RRS 10.

    @2 G is not sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled and is not exonerated for breaking RRS 10 by  RRS 43.1(b).

    On valid protest penalise G.

    Would she be required to sail straight to the mark when entering the zone?

    No, see above.  She is not required to sail within the mark-room to which she is entitled, but if she does not and fails to keep clear she is not exonerated.

    Pink is the ROW boat per rule 10, and at position 2 she is bearing away to let green sail what she thinks is greens proper course,

    P has no obligation to let G sail her proper course.  Her obligation is to give G mark-room, being space to sail in the direct corridor as described above.

    I would interpret the diagram as above, that is that P is bearing away to avoid contact with G.

     although green could easily have beared away and sail more slowly to the mark

    Not relevant.

    Right Hand Scenario

    For the right picture green is the ROW boat, so 18.4 does apply,

    Yes and Yes.

     but it states that "until she gybes she shall sail no farther from the mark than needed to sail that course" which she is not,

    After G gybes, her course to the mark is at the same wind angle as she was sailing up to @2, and the same as P was sailing before she reached the zone.  This indicates to me that that course is her proper course.   In fact, it is arguable that G is sailing 'in tight, out wide' which would usually be accepted as somewhat tighter and slower than her proper course.

     and so in the right picture both boats are doing what they are supposed to?

    Yes.  P is keeping clear and giving mark-room, G is gybing no farther from the mark than she needs to sail her proper course.

    Tbh i would be super stressed out if i was on board the pink boat in position 2 in the right picture.

    Well, you put yourself there.  But P is already bearing away, she can easily bear away more and wash off speed

     Because I have to somehow anticipate how far green wants to go until she gybes onto her proper course.

    Well, you need to visualise where G's proper course gybe needs to be.  If you are in doubt about your ability to do that, you should probably allow yourself more space to keep clear.

     Especially if green and pink are different types of boats, which would mean different optimal gybe angles. So as pink i would hesitate staying on the outside after it was too late to duck and while green has not started gybing yet.

    Did i get this right?

    Pretty much.

    Today 04:39
  • John re: “Little Notes”

    It is clear to me (maybe not to others) that the Q&A is saying that not taking a penalty promptly after the boat is aware, “which may be to retire”, breaks rule 2 (can’t wait until shore if this awareness happens on the water). The applicable penalty for a breach of rule 2 is DNE.  Therefore such a boat that retires when they know (they are aware) the appropriate penalty is DNE could be argued is committing a 2nd unsportsmanlike act .. trying to slip a fast one by … to retire (excludable) when a DNE is appropriate.

    As you say, a boat can not “take” a DNE, but a PC can protest a boat based on information from the boat’s representative.  Therefore, the boat-rep has to get this info to the PC (doesn’t have to be a note, but if verbal, the PC would likely ask for it in writing).  Once this info is in hand, the PC can quickly protest the boat, call a hearing and give the boat the appropriate DNE.

    I don’t think this is the way I’ve seen this applied in practice … with or without Appx T or V.  
    Today 00:13
  •  8.     Example 

    A more complicated example of transitions, involving right-of-way, room, and rules only transitions, happens with two boats reaching, both on starboard tack initially with Y clear ahead of B when B becomes overlapped to leeward of Y. 

     
    Consider Figure 8 

    Figure 8 

    @1, B, clear astern, is required by RRS 12 On the same tack, not overlapped to keep clear of Y, on the same tack. 

    @2, B becomes overlapped to leeward of Y on the same tack, and: 

    • Y is required to keep clear of B by RRS 11 On the same tack, overlapped
    This is a right-of-way transition. 
    • B, acquiring right of way not because of Y’s action is required initially to give Y room to keep clear by RRS 15 Acquiring right-of-way.
    This is a room transition 
    • B, becoming overlapped within two of her hull lengths to leeward of Y on the same tack is required to not sail above her proper course by RRS 17 On the same tack Proper Course. 
    This is a transition, other than right-of-way or room. 

    @3, B has borne away and given Y room to keep clear. 

    B’s course after becoming overlapped was consistent with her course before becoming overlapped and with Y’s course:  there is no evidence that she is sailing above her proper course. 

    @4, B has drawn clear ahead of Y, RRS 11 On the same tack, overlapped no longer applies, but B remains the right-of-way boat because Y is now required to keep clear by RRS 12 On the same tack, not overlapped. 

    This is a rules only transition. 

    @4, B is no longer overlapped on Y, RRS 17 On the same tack Proper Course ceases to apply and B is no longer required to not sail above her proper course. 

    This is a transition when RRS 17, a limitation other than right-of-way or room ceases to apply. 

    @4 B, now clear ahead and not limited by RRS 17, changes course to windward.  B, a right of way boat is changing courses and is required by RRS 16.1 Changing course to give Y room to keep clear, and does so. 

    This is a room transition 
    Yesterday 20:36
  • Gordon,  I agree with that general sense. We do however have those instances where a boat does not stop to establish themselves sailing on the close-hauled course. Once the boat reaches that angle, even if her sails are in flux and she continues to turn, rule 13 ends (Case 17 and US 35).

    It’s useful to have those numbers if they are knowable. 
    Mon 19:16
  • I don't agree that any more effort should be given to emphasising competitors in 'self-policing' themselves, in fact I would quite like to see it de-emphasised.

    I think it is possible to differentiate between:
    • the sport being self-policing, through the protest process, and
    • individual competitors self-policing, or self-censoring their own behaviour.
     
    It's certainly a principle on which the whole RRS rules set is based that competitors themselves are expected to enforce the rules through the protest process, although we have Match Racing, Team Racing, and Olympic Medal races, watched by thousands, that are fully chipping away at the principle.
     
    There's quite a good argument to be made that RRS 44 'a boat may take a penalty ...' confers a right or entitlement, and as a canon of statutory construction it's just completely impermissible to transform a right or entitlement into an obligation 
     
    While, since 1989, the rules have evolved to say that it is a principle that competitors will take a penalty, IMHO this is not necessary for the rules to work or to be 'self-enforcing'
     
    In fact the 'fundamental principle is problematical:
     
    1. has to be read down to read 'knowingly break', otherwise it is patently unfair and unreasonable.
    2. with the introduction of Appendix T PRP, and the ability of a boat to retire at any time, the word 'promptly' needs to be very elastically interpreted.
    3. it is designed to be enforced via RRS 2, but to enforce it via RRS 2, absent boastful admissions the protestee, it may be extremely difficult to get evidence to 'clearly establish' the mental element of knowingness, and the time that this mental state arises.
     
    I believe that the notions of 'sportsmanlike' and 'gentlemanlike' are often conflated. Gentlemanlike behaviour is a social or cultural norm, that is by no means universal and does not affect the fairness of competition.  The difference between gentlemanlike and sportsmanlike may be aligned with the separate phrases 'breach of good manners', and 'breach of good sportsmanship' in RRS 69.1.
     
    The function of the RRS is to enable athletic competition, it is not to teach or train competitors in moral or gentlemanlike behaviour, while this may or may not be a secondary outcome.
     
    While there are good logistical reasons for the self-policing principle in sailing, a large majority of sports and junior sports successfully run on a 'play to the whistle' basis.  The only particular virtue in self policing seems to be, in the physically complex and difficult environment of sailing racing, it removes the need for umpiring resources on the field of play.
     
    That is to say, self-policing is not a virtue in itself, but a 'cost saving' or practicality measure.
     
    I think the fundamental principle could well be amended for the better to read
     
    when a boat breaks a rule and is not exonerated she will promptly take or accept an appropriate penalty…”
     
    Otherwise a case saying expressly that, at least, RRS 44 penalties (except for retirement for injury, serious damage or significant advantage) are at the discretion of the boat (may  take a ...), and a boat cannot be protested or penalised for failing to take a penalty in accordance with RRs 44.
    Sun 20:36
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more