Recent Posts

• Mark Room at Windward Mark.
  8 Comments
  Phil Clinton Fri 00:30
• Rule 55 and technical committee
  5 Comments
  Stavros Kouris Thu 12:27
• Heard with...multiple times
  4 Comments
  Benjamin Harding Mon 16:09
• Thank You to Our Patrons
  0 Comments
  Paul Zupan 19-Aug-10 17:22
• hearing schedule
  11 Comments
  Marco Cimarosti 19-Aug-10 13:15

Recent Comments

• Mark Room at Windward Mark.
  Actually, Angelo is correct.  Boat 1 is entitled to mark-room but because there is no overlap to windward, is not entitled to room tack if doing so would break RRS 13.  See the last sentence of the definition of Mark-Room.  But the only way Boat 2 prevents Boat 1 from getting around the mark is if Boat 1 is below the mark and Boat 2 such that when she tacks, she is directly in front of Boat 2.
  Paul Zupan Yesterday 19:01
• Rule 55 and technical committee
  I also have a little trouble with "shall protest if it decides that a boat or personal equipment does not comply with the class rules or with rule 43." If the TC has already decided, what's the hearing for? If the TC is empowered to decide (based on some sort of due process, presumably) that a rule was broken then TC should be empowered to levy a penalty.
  
  Seems to me that it should read "shall (or may, either would be fine for me) protest if it believes...etc". That leaves it up to the Protest Committee to have a hearing, find facts and render a decision.
  Tim Hohmann Yesterday 04:05
• Rule 32.2 (Shortening Course) and Flag S
  "C" plus "-" at the leeward mark start of the shortened windward leg.
  "S" (plus Blue?) at the new line, opposite the new mark in the color described in SI for new marks - or a whaler or other object flying "M."
  Philip Hubbell Thu 22:57
• sportsmanship - maybe hit a mark
  64.1 Penalties and Exoneration does define the default penalty imposed by a PC as disqualification.
  
  I think sailboat racing tradition has been that competitors accused of breaking a rule are entitled to due process - a hearing (essentially a trial) after the fact with a decision rendered by a jury. Voluntary penalties and on-the-water judging/umpiring are modern attempts to address the shortcomings of this system. 
  
  Umpiring is great for immediate penalties on the water, but can you imagine trying to round up umpires for every beer can race? Although maybe where we're going is drone umpiring - that would be cool. 
  Tim Hohmann Tue 17:19
• Heard with...multiple times
  No.  It's not multiselect.   When you select one, it adds it next to Heard Jointly With.  You can then select another.  If you click on any that you have selected, you can delete them.
  Paul Zupan Mon 23:32