Translation missing: en.posts.shared.post_not_found

Powered by
WIND


Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • Rrs 69 is against a competitoror suoport person, not a raceofficial. 
    Today 08:16
  • I must have been referring to the right subparagraph:  Jim understood.

    Fixed.
    Tue 13:39
  • Thanks John...even then with "...bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation." (seriousness being the operative word), there is an educated [jurisdictional] assesssment of sorts to be made.
    Tue 03:37
  • Rob .. I like it. It captures the "obvious contact" condition and ties it up nicely. 
    Sun 20:09
  • Thank you for your reply born of direct experience. Long ago I ran a national championship with 6 races (one scheduled per day – those were the days) and a four race minimum. We got the required four in, but only just, and on the final day; nail-biting stuff in a light-wind week at a normally-windy venue. The concept of event sponsors, let alone personal ones, was pretty alien, limited to whether we could get the club's brewery to subsidise the bar. 

    I still say that, to be a series, you need at least two data points, but if the RRS (which does not define a series) allows the minimum number of races to be set to one, that part of the sentence in RRS A1 – 'and the number required to be scored to constitute a series' can be rendered ineffective. The RRS rule-drafters cannot have had this in mind when they made this condition compulsory. Perhaps RRS A1 should be amended to make this requirement optional. Nevertheless, deciding an event, let alone a championship, on the basis of one race would be farcical.

Forums Leader Board

This Month

1 John Allan 4.85K
2 Michael Butterfield 3.85K
3 Michael Moradzadeh 3.6K
4 Jim Champ 3.45K
5 Benjamin Harding 2.5K
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more