Note: This forum is not affiliated with World Sailing and comments on this forum do not represent an official interpretation of the rules, definitions, cases or regulations. The only official interpretations are those of World Sailing.
Case 87 with DAMAGE ( II° )
Catalan Benaros
Nationality: Argentina
1
In Case 87 we DSQ the Yellow boat. I wonder if Black did all the "reasonably possible" as rule 14 says.
. Black in position 2,5 may avoid contact 873.jpg125 KB
Created: 21-Aug-19 15:29
Rob Overton
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
National Judge
International Umpire
4
Black did not do all that was reasonably possible to avoid contact, but rule 14 does not require her to do so. The rule says "However, a right-of-way boat ... need not act to avoid contact until it is clear that the other boat is not keeping clear ... ." As shown in positions 1 and 2, it is reasonable for Black to anticipate that the port-tack boat will bear off and pass astern of her. When is it clear that Yellow would not do so? Your second diagram shows Black already luffed up at position 2,5; I think she must have begun that luff at position 2 or earlier. At position 2, Yellow was some 2 lengths away, much farther than Green was when she bore away to duck Black. At that point, why would Black anticipate Yellow will not duck, or even tack? In your second diagram, Yellow just sails straight. It's much more probable that, at the same moment Black begins her luff, Yellow bears off to duck her, in which case Black's luff may actually prevent Yellow from keeping clear!
In my opinion, in crossings like this there's nothing Black should do, other than maybe bearing off at the last moment to reduce the damage. She is not required to luff up to avoid every port-tack boat that will presumably duck her -- if she were required to do so, she would have luffed at position 1.5 and presumably at 0.5. A boat that did this for every port-tack boat would never get to the mark! And if Black were to luff up as shown in the second diagram just as Yellow bears off, she breaks rule 16.1 by preventing Yellow from keeping clear.
Created: 21-Aug-19 16:12
Mark Townsend
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
International Race Officer
International Umpire
International Judge
4
Rob O is spot on. Black is a right of way boat and need not act to avoid contact until it is clear that the other boat is not keeping clear. Read Case 26 and Case 87 they provide a good explanation of the difference. In Case 26 the right-of-way boat hits the keep clear boat, in Case 87 the keep clear boat hits the right-of-way boat.
I think of it as "hitor" and "hitee".
WS Case 26 - The boat that hits the other boats ("hitor") usually has time to avoid contact when it is clear that the other boat is not keeping clear.
WS Case 87 - The boat that is hit ("hitee") usually does not have time to avoid contact when it is clear that the other boat is not keeping clear.
You might find the following decision tree useful when deciding if a boat breaks rule 14. image.png81.5 KB
Created: 21-Aug-19 16:49
Al Sargent
Nationality: United States
0
Thanks Rob and Mark.
Mark, that decision tree is great! Do you have it for other rules as well?
Created: 21-Aug-19 16:58
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
Regional Judge
Fleet Measurer
0
Nice chart Mark. Is this something you've been working on or is this out of some handbook (or both)?
Ang
Created: 21-Aug-19 19:00
Catalan Benaros
Nationality: Argentina
0
So interesting !!! Thanks you so much !!!!
Cata
Created: 21-Aug-19 21:58
Mark Townsend
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
International Race Officer
International Umpire
International Judge
2
Angelo, I developed the rule 14 decision tree last year. It took several iterations before it reached its current form. Bruce Cook provided invaluable assistance in getting to the final version.
Al, I tried to create a decision tree for validity. However, it became overly complex and didn't seem to make it easier to understand. Fundamentally there are seven tests, but they change depending upon the type of hearing; protest, redress, support person, misconduct. Below are the seven tests, rules, WS Cases and US Appeals.
Are the contents adequate? (rule 61.2, 62.2, WS Case 22, WS Case 80, USA Appeal 46, USA Appeal 65)
Delivered in time? If not, is there good reason to extend? (rule M3.1, 61.3, 62.2, WS Case 102, USA Appeal 41, USA Appeal 90, USA Appeal 94)
When required, was the protestor involved in or witness to the incident? (rule 60.1(a),USA Appeal 116)
When necessary, was ‘Protest’ hailed? (rule 61.1(a), USA Appeal 61, USA Appeal 65, USA Appeal 122)
When necessary, was a red flag displayed correctly? (rule 61.1(a), WS Case 39, WS Case 72, WS Case 85, WS Case 104, USA Appeal 66, USA Appeal 67, USA Appeal 82, USA Appeal 124)
When the flag or hail was not necessary, was the protestee informed? (61.1, WS Case 19, WS Case 112, WS Case 141, USA Appeal 65, USA Appeal 84)
Did the Board inform the race committee of her intention to protest as soon as practicable after she finished or retired? (B5, No WS Cases or US Appeals)
Created: 21-Aug-20 00:04
Steven Hood
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
Club Judge
Umpire In Training
0
Case 107 clarifies the meaning of "need not act to avoid contact until it is clear that the other boat is not keeping clear or giving room or mark room. " from Case 107: "Until that moment, rule 14 allows a right-of-way boat to delay acting to avoid contact. It follows that at that moment she must begin to act in an effort to avoid contact. The word ‘act’ is not restricted to changing course or speed. Hailing was an action that Ephesian could and should have taken. Ephesian broke rule 14."
The facts from Case 87 includes the fact that P (Black) was hailing. Black was acting to avoid collision. So maybe Rob's " there's nothing Black should do, other than maybe bearing off at the last moment to reduce the damage." should be read as " there's nothing more Black should do, other than maybe bearing off at the last moment to reduce the damage." With out maintaining a lookout and hailing risky crossings Black is at risk if there is damage.
Created: 21-Aug-20 00:37
John Grace
Nationality: New Zealand
Certifications:
International Judge
National Umpire
1
That Rule 14 diagram looks amazing. However, what I would recommend to others is not to just copy Mark's diagrams but to make them for yourself. Most of the benefits of diagrams come from the process of identifying each ingredient of a rule and putting the information together, rather than looking at the results of someone else's work. At least, that is what I tell participants in the YNZ judging courses, where diagrams are often used.
Naturally different diagrams can be made of the same rule for different purposes. Some function as a checklist. Other's like Marks function like an index in a book. Others are to assist memory and contain memory aids. Others are a combination.
One thing I often do is bring out the structure of a rule by using one colour for or the pre-conditions of a rule (If .... and if ...), another for the actual obligation the rule creates, another for limitations (until ... happens) and other for exceptions (unless...).
Created: 21-Aug-20 01:16
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
National Judge
Regional Race Officer
0
I agree with Mark that flowcharting the entire validity process is difficult, and probably not worth while.
Here's a flowchart just for the informing the protestee part of validity.
The key thing for this flowchart is identifying straightforward matters of fact and what are matters for judgement by the protest committee.
Angelo, is there any mileage in moving resources like this into the Protest Hearing Procedures forum?
John and Mark, re: “Angelo, is there any mileage in moving resources like this into the Protest Hearing Procedures forum?”
Yes I think so. The key would be to have them someplace easily found, and buried in a thread as a reply isn’t the easiest to find or remember.
I think each chart deserves its own thread/topic. Also, if we are consistent with topic titles it can be easier to find. Though “Decision Tree” is more accurately descriptive, I think the shortness of “FlowChart-Rule # / Procedure” fits the bill and takes up less displayable characters (mobile phone considerations).
So, if you both wouldn’t mind posting your charts in individual topics under “Protest Hearing Procedures” that would be great. If others have charts that address the same rule/process, they can add them as a comment. If it is a rule/process not yet covered, please start a new topic.
Thanks!
Ang
Created: 21-Aug-20 11:48
Alvaro Garcia
Nationality: Argentina
0
Rule 14 in its first paragraph says:
"Every boat will avoid contact with another if reasonably possible"
So "Black didn't do everything reasonably possible to avoid contact, but rule 14 doesn't require him to" is the exact opposite, I'm not going to believe that.
Then rule 16.1 asks that when changing course black give yellow room to keep clear and give it to him. It gives more room than it already had to turn and perhaps less room to pass aft. The rule does not specify that it must give room to perform a particular maneuver as that analysis intends by saying that yellow does not have room to pass aft of black. The rule only asks for room to keep clear to yellow and the change of course from black allows it. For example yellow has more room to keep clear when tacking ahead. This also means that black is doing what is reasonably possible to avoid contact.
Created: 21-Aug-20 22:33
P
Benjamin Harding
Certifications:
Judge In Training
0
Alvaro,
Rob's opening sentence seems to contradict that first sentence of RRS14, but is precisely right when the whole rule is considered. There is more to RRS14 than just the first sentence.
The first sentence (you quoted) of RRS14 lays out the basic rule. We must all avoid contact!
The word, 'HOWEVER' signifies exceptions to the basic rule laid out in the first sentence. The rest of the rule is concerned with the crucial matter of 'drawing the line' when a boat with RoW must start acting to avoid contact. This was what Rob was referring to. The rules did not require Black to 'act' to avoid contact, due to the timings of critical moments.
The critical moment is the 'moment it is clear the other boat is not keeping clear'. Before that, the Right-of-Way/Room/Mark-Room boat does not have to 'act' to keep clear.
Stating this moment in the rules to trigger action is absolutely necessary, since without it the concept of 'right-of-way' becomes very grey!
Hope that helps.
Created: 21-Aug-21 02:32
Alvaro Garcia
Nationality: Argentina
0
Where 14 says "however" refers to the moment of acting not to stop doing it at any moment and establishes it that it is not necessary (but it can and still should) do so until it is clear that the other is not keeping clear.
Black in the second diagram does not break any rules.
In the first diagram we can indicate when yellow is breaking 10. At that moment, if black does not act to avoid it, he breaks 14.
Created: 21-Aug-21 14:39
P
Benjamin Harding
Certifications:
Judge In Training
1
I'm not sure I follow you.
Could you elaborate?
I think you're into an interesting interpretation, but I want to be clear what you are driving at. .
Created: 21-Aug-21 15:17
Alvaro Garcia
Nationality: Argentina
0
It is never necessary to reach the point of contact, there is always a moment quite earlier where if the boat that must keep clear did not do so, it would no longer be able to do so. It is at that moment that it is clear that the boat that must keep clear does not do so and at that moment there is also an opportunity for the other to avoid contact. In such a way the rules regulate that if one does not avoid it in contact, the other can avoid it. Sometimes the situation is unforeseen or accidental and it is not reasonably possible to do so but in crossover situations like this it is highly unlikely.
In the case 87 presented here, this is a diagram where A is the moment where it is clear that yellow is not kept clear since even if a tack starts, there will be contact between the boats. The boats in orange and green are other possible trajectories where it is shown that the black at that point must maneuver to avoid contact, otherwise he infringes 14.
It is seen how it is possible to avoid contact in these situations if the rules are followed.
I see. Hmm. I don't think that moment 'always' comes or comes 'always' as early as you think.
In your diagram just after Position A, the Yellow boat can simply bear away in Position 2.8, no? It would be an easier more appropriate way to keep clear. (Just like P2 in Case 87).
So right up to Position 2.8, Black (S) can still believe that Yellow (P) could 'keep clear'. But at Position 2.8, it is too close for Black (S) to avoid contact.
That is what Case 87 is saying. The 'Moment it became clear the other boat was not keeping clear' was too close to Black's 'Last Chance To Avoid Contact'.
Does this help anyone? Yet another way to try and visually dissect Rule 14! RRS14 Gantt-3.png40.7 KB
If it does help, then I could also share the other 3 Gantt charts in the set.
It is never necessary to reach the point of contact, there is always a moment quite earlier where if the boat that must keep clear did not do so, it would no longer be able to do so. It is at that moment that it is clear that the boat that must keep clear does not do so and at that moment there may be isalso may an opportunity for the other to avoid contact.
Created: 21-Aug-22 00:16
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
Regional Judge
Fleet Measurer
0
Ben, the exact situation happened to me 4 hrs ago as in your last drawing … except the boat didn’t turn.
I’m on a beat on starboard on the edge of the course, and another boat helmed by an experienced driver i know is heading my way on port. No other boats are around.
I’m watching him get closer and closer … we make eye contact.
In my head …
‘OK .. he sees me’ .., “OK .. getting close .. time to duck …TIME TO DUCK, CRAP! BANG! Hit me in my stern quarter.
I tried to swing my stern away last sec, but I could not do anything to get out of the way once it became clear to me that he wasn’t going to duck (his main sheet got jammed in the cleat).
I knew he saw me and it was such a slight course change required on his part ..there was no reason for me to anticipate that he wouldn’t execute.
Created: 21-Aug-22 01:08
Alvaro Garcia
Nationality: Argentina
0
Many things can happen from point A that the black boat cannot and should not guess at that point it acts according to rule 14 because it is clear (no absolute kinematic certainty is needed, just that it is clear) that yellow is not kept clear at that point.
On the other hand, my diagram shows that yellow has not maneuvered its bow being mid-length from the black bow, something very different to bear away to ONE length as in your drawing. In my diagram, the position A is different from P2 in the case 87 because P2, like your graph, maneuver at a length of black and in my graph at that distance it still does not do so and just at mid-length it act, while heading to the bow of black is unlikely that a boat can reach that point pass through the stern of black. No, there is no way from A for yellow CLEARLY to stay separate, see position C.CC.JPG30.4 KB
My diagram shows how it was possible for black to avoid contact and then black breaks the 14
Competitors are governed by the rules and the cases in the case book are not rules is one more important difference.
Created: 21-Aug-22 01:14
P
Benjamin Harding
Certifications:
Judge In Training
0
Alvaro,
A good discussion, but I'm not sure we are discussing the same issue!
The question of concept being discussed (as I see it) is:
If Yellow does nothing, and Black acts reasonably to avoid contact at the last point it is clear (say, 'A'), will there be a collision?
I think your diagram shows that there will still be a collision at Position 3, even if Black starts a turn at Position A.
So, if Black acts (reasonably) at the last point, and there is still a collision, Black did not break RRS14.
(Maybe the diagram for Case 87 creates confusion, since it appears that Black has made no attempt. Instead the diagram could show Black making an unsuccessful attempt, proving that it was not reasonably possible for Black to avoid contact, even though she tried.)
Anyway, let's see what the others think.
Created: 21-Aug-23 04:11
Alvaro Garcia
Nationality: Argentina
0
If so, black did not act on case 87 and that's what breaks 14.
Reasonably Possible refers to the entire sequence of positions in the incident, and not to a particular individual position. IF even unlikely black has a chance, reach A point diagram, black MUST TAKE IT, otherwise he breaks 14.
For these crossing situations already in 1951 Dr. Manfred Curry detailed the ways of acting of the two boats to avoid a contact at the last moment differentiating two cases
I) Boat A would contact in the center or further aft II) Boat A would make contact between the bow and the center.
Black in position 2,5 may avoid contact
In my opinion, in crossings like this there's nothing Black should do, other than maybe bearing off at the last moment to reduce the damage. She is not required to luff up to avoid every port-tack boat that will presumably duck her -- if she were required to do so, she would have luffed at position 1.5 and presumably at 0.5. A boat that did this for every port-tack boat would never get to the mark! And if Black were to luff up as shown in the second diagram just as Yellow bears off, she breaks rule 16.1 by preventing Yellow from keeping clear.
I think of it as "hitor" and "hitee".
You might find the following decision tree useful when deciding if a boat breaks rule 14.
Mark, that decision tree is great! Do you have it for other rules as well?
Ang
Thanks you so much !!!!
Cata
Al, I tried to create a decision tree for validity. However, it became overly complex and didn't seem to make it easier to understand. Fundamentally there are seven tests, but they change depending upon the type of hearing; protest, redress, support person, misconduct. Below are the seven tests, rules, WS Cases and US Appeals.
from Case 107:
"Until that moment, rule 14 allows a right-of-way boat to delay acting to avoid contact. It follows that at that moment she must begin to act in an effort to avoid contact. The word ‘act’ is not restricted to changing course or speed. Hailing was an action that Ephesian could and should have taken. Ephesian broke rule 14."
The facts from Case 87 includes the fact that P (Black) was hailing. Black was acting to avoid collision. So maybe Rob's " there's nothing Black should do, other than maybe bearing off at the last moment to reduce the damage." should be read as " there's nothing more Black should do, other than maybe bearing off at the last moment to reduce the damage." With out maintaining a lookout and hailing risky crossings Black is at risk if there is damage.
Naturally different diagrams can be made of the same rule for different purposes. Some function as a checklist. Other's like Marks function like an index in a book. Others are to assist memory and contain memory aids. Others are a combination.
One thing I often do is bring out the structure of a rule by using one colour for or the pre-conditions of a rule (If .... and if ...), another for the actual obligation the rule creates, another for limitations (until ... happens) and other for exceptions (unless...).
Here's a flowchart just for the informing the protestee part of validity.
The key thing for this flowchart is identifying straightforward matters of fact and what are matters for judgement by the protest committee.
Angelo, is there any mileage in moving resources like this into the Protest Hearing Procedures forum?
Yes I think so. The key would be to have them someplace easily found, and buried in a thread as a reply isn’t the easiest to find or remember.
I think each chart deserves its own thread/topic. Also, if we are consistent with topic titles it can be easier to find. Though “Decision Tree” is more accurately descriptive, I think the shortness of “FlowChart-Rule # / Procedure” fits the bill and takes up less displayable characters (mobile phone considerations).
So, if you both wouldn’t mind posting your charts in individual topics under “Protest Hearing Procedures” that would be great. If others have charts that address the same rule/process, they can add them as a comment. If it is a rule/process not yet covered, please start a new topic.
Thanks!
Ang
"Every boat will avoid contact with another if reasonably possible"
So "Black didn't do everything reasonably possible to avoid contact, but rule 14 doesn't require him to" is the exact opposite, I'm not going to believe that.
Then rule 16.1 asks that when changing course black give yellow room to keep clear and give it to him. It gives more room than it already had to turn and perhaps less room to pass aft. The rule does not specify that it must give room to perform a particular maneuver as that analysis intends by saying that yellow does not have room to pass aft of black. The rule only asks for room to keep clear to yellow and the change of course from black allows it.
For example yellow has more room to keep clear when tacking ahead.
This also means that black is doing what is reasonably possible to avoid contact.
Rob's opening sentence seems to contradict that first sentence of RRS14, but is precisely right when the whole rule is considered. There is more to RRS14 than just the first sentence.
The first sentence (you quoted) of RRS14 lays out the basic rule. We must all avoid contact!
The word, 'HOWEVER' signifies exceptions to the basic rule laid out in the first sentence. The rest of the rule is concerned with the crucial matter of 'drawing the line' when a boat with RoW must start acting to avoid contact. This was what Rob was referring to. The rules did not require Black to 'act' to avoid contact, due to the timings of critical moments.
The critical moment is the 'moment it is clear the other boat is not keeping clear'. Before that, the Right-of-Way/Room/Mark-Room boat does not have to 'act' to keep clear.
Stating this moment in the rules to trigger action is absolutely necessary, since without it the concept of 'right-of-way' becomes very grey!
Hope that helps.
Black in the second diagram does not break any rules.
In the first diagram we can indicate when yellow is breaking 10. At that moment, if black does not act to avoid it, he breaks 14.
Could you elaborate?
I think you're into an interesting interpretation, but I want to be clear what you are driving at. .
In such a way the rules regulate that if one does not avoid it in contact, the other can avoid it. Sometimes the situation is unforeseen or accidental and it is not reasonably possible to do so but in crossover situations like this it is highly unlikely.
In the case 87 presented here, this is a diagram where A is the moment where it is clear that yellow is not kept clear since even if a tack starts, there will be contact between the boats. The boats in orange and green are other possible trajectories where it is shown that the black at that point must maneuver to avoid contact, otherwise he infringes 14.
It is seen how it is possible to avoid contact in these situations if the rules are followed.
In your diagram just after Position A, the Yellow boat can simply bear away in Position 2.8, no? It would be an easier more appropriate way to keep clear. (Just like P2 in Case 87).
So right up to Position 2.8, Black (S) can still believe that Yellow (P) could 'keep clear'. But at Position 2.8, it is too close for Black (S) to avoid contact.
That is what Case 87 is saying. The 'Moment it became clear the other boat was not keeping clear' was too close to Black's 'Last Chance To Avoid Contact'.
Does this help anyone? Yet another way to try and visually dissect Rule 14!
If it does help, then I could also share the other 3 Gantt charts in the set.
I’m on a beat on starboard on the edge of the course, and another boat helmed by an experienced driver i know is heading my way on port. No other boats are around.
I’m watching him get closer and closer … we make eye contact.
In my head …
‘OK .. he sees me’ .., “OK .. getting close .. time to duck …TIME TO DUCK, CRAP! BANG! Hit me in my stern quarter.
I tried to swing my stern away last sec, but I could not do anything to get out of the way once it became clear to me that he wasn’t going to duck (his main sheet got jammed in the cleat).
I knew he saw me and it was such a slight course change required on his part ..there was no reason for me to anticipate that he wouldn’t execute.
On the other hand, my diagram shows that yellow has not maneuvered its bow being mid-length from the black bow, something very different to bear away to ONE length as in your drawing.
In my diagram, the position A is different from P2 in the case 87 because P2, like your graph, maneuver at a length of black and in my graph at that distance it still does not do so and just at mid-length it act, while heading to the bow of black is unlikely that a boat can reach that point pass through the stern of black. No, there is no way from A for yellow CLEARLY to stay separate, see position C.
My diagram shows how it was possible for black to avoid contact and then black breaks the 14
A good discussion, but I'm not sure we are discussing the same issue!
The question of concept being discussed (as I see it) is:
I think your diagram shows that there will still be a collision at Position 3, even if Black starts a turn at Position A.
So, if Black acts (reasonably) at the last point, and there is still a collision, Black did not break RRS14.
(Maybe the diagram for Case 87 creates confusion, since it appears that Black has made no attempt. Instead the diagram could show Black making an unsuccessful attempt, proving that it was not reasonably possible for Black to avoid contact, even though she tried.)
Anyway, let's see what the others think.
Reasonably Possible refers to the entire sequence of positions in the incident, and not to a particular individual position. IF even unlikely black has a chance, reach A point diagram, black MUST TAKE IT, otherwise he breaks 14.
For these crossing situations already in 1951 Dr. Manfred Curry detailed the ways of acting of the two boats to avoid a contact at the last moment differentiating two cases
I) Boat A would contact in the center or further aft
II) Boat A would make contact between the bow and the center.
In case I both must bear away
In case II both must luff
These two only of the eight possible combinations could avoid contact in those circumstances but they must be taken or 14 breaks.