David, we had a thread not too long ago which explored "entered".  You might find some useful thoughts there.

https://www.racingrulesofsailing.org/posts/803-Enter-the-Zombies%3F

Ang

PS:  Peter submitted a Q&A for this issue: https://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/QA2021.003-[27253].pdf

Leaving the "entered" issue to the previous thread, each race is scored separately so every time a boat does not come to the line (DNC) comes to the line but does not start (DNC) or does not finish she takes the score spelled out in A5.2 or A5.3 depending on the sailing instructions.

As Angelo's linked thread indicates, among judges there's always a long, complicated answer. But the short answer is found in Rule 75: To enter an event, a boat shall comply with the requirements of the organizing authority...

Which should lead us to ensure that NORs express specific, unambiguous requirements for entry and differentiate them from other requirements. For example, sail measurement or declaration prior to racing may be a requirement for the competition, but is it a requirement for entry?

If I recall correctly most of the controversy in the previous thread revolved around how to treat a boat that had not completed all of the entry requirements but was allowed to race anyway.

I agree that the linked thread is focused on a different question.  But someone indicated another thread seems to address the question: https://www.racingrulesofsailing.org/cases/1880.
This thread agrees with my guess that any boat that meets the entry qualifications (entry form, fees paid, PHRF submitted) should be counted in the total entered with respect to DNS/DNF whether they sailed any race or not.

I think that's correct. Any boat that completed the entry requirements should be included for scoring purposes, whether they sail or not. 

But any boat that has not completed all of the entry requirements should not be included, even if the OA allowed them to sail and the RC gave them finishing positions. I believe this would be an error by the RC, and a boat disadvantaged (either because unentered boats finished ahead of her or she was awarded a larger scoring penalty) would have cause for redress.

I have found that, particularly in club races, where boats may only show up for a few races, or none at all, it's fairer to score as "starters" plus 1 or even "finishers" plus 1. The "entrants" plus 1 can be extremely harsh where five boats are actually racing but a dozen have entered.

I have found that, particularly in club races, where boats may only show up for a few races, or none at all, it's fairer to score as "starters" plus 1 or even "finishers" plus 1. The "entrants" plus 1 can be extremely harsh where five boats are actually racing but a dozen have entered.  I would add that an SI amending the RRS is required for this, of course.

Michael, we've dealt with that issue in a local series by scoring the series using a high points rubric. Each individual race gets scored according to Appendix A, but the contribution to the series score is based on your finish position and the number of boats you beat that day including OCS, NSC, DNS, DNF and DSQ but not DNC. Boats that DNC get a zero for the race and don't increase the score of boats that did race.

Tim, that's a neat way to deal with it.  Might be mathematically the same result.  Not sure.

The reason to use 'Entered' rather than 'Raced' is for fairness. Imagine 8 boats entered, but on a holiday weekend, only 3 show up. If it is a series, would the 4 that dropped that race get 4 points?  And then later on when one of those boats that DID race now dropped a race and the 7 others did race, should they get an 8?  Scoring dropped races should be fair across a series and not dependent on how many boats choose to head out.

I think "fairness" is subject to interpretation.  Should a boat that only raced one other boat get 8 points better than the others, for example?
IN any case, rule 1 is to have a clear rule and to disclose it to the entrants.
For a long series, such as a club series, things happen.  One ski weekend or sick child should not, perhaps, completely knock you out of the running.  More throwouts is another way to go.

FWIW .. one of the points I wanted to make in the older thread was that the unfortunate casual use of the word "entered" and "entry" can cause confusion.

Online scoring portals typically will provide a "scratch sheet" .. and at the top of that it will be titled "List of Entries" .. or maybe even call it LOE throughout the interface.  I think this can cause confusion.

It would be much better for websites, portals, etc to call it a "List of Registrants" or keep "Scratch Sheet", if what the list represents are the names of boats that have completed the initial online-registration process.  This would take away the argument that a boat might have that by listing them in something called "List of Entries" that this was providing confirmation that the boat was properly entered in the event.

Ang

Ang, I think another way to deal with that is to limit the entry requirements to those that would get a boat onto the scratch sheet (submit registration, pay fees). Is there a rationale for making the entry requirements more complicated than that?

Other requirements for competition (handicap certificate, sail measurement, etc) would still be subject to protest. 

My situation is that our weeknight season has a single registration/entry (there is no additional fee so registration is essentially entry) but we score 3 separate series within the season. We apply A5.3. There is a core of boats that show up all season and a quite a few that only sail in one or two series. The DNC results are skewed in the low turnout series. 
I thought of using some thing like "come to the starting area in at least one race in a series" as a requirement for entry?
In the past we used "Boats that did not come to the starting area will be scored for the finishing place one more than the largest number of boats who came to the starting area in any one race in the series."
Ideas? Comments?  

Hi guys, all the best for your 2023 as good as ever.

May I have your opinion on the following situations?
question no.1

a boat do not comply with entry, and the OA regurarly posted the reasons why she is not part of the game, before the first race.
But she raced anyway, somehow hindering/disturbing other boats. No damages.
PC want to protest the boat, say, for a  69.1 h 1,  and/or boats protesting for hindering or for an infraction to a RRS part 2.
Not being in the race, can she be called to an hearing? Is she subject to RRSS 23.1? In which way she might be penaized ?  Can apply 64.2 ....If a boat has broken a rule when not racing, her penalty shall apply to the race sailed nearest in time to that of the incident... and how?


question no.2
event with 3 races, 3 boats, A, B & C entered regularly
First day A: 2nd, B 3rd, C 1st.
on 2nd day, C realizes her borrowed sails were not complying with her certificate, so she retired.
So first day scores changes to A 1st, B 2nd C RET
second races : A 1st, B 2nd, C RET
third race : A DSQ, B 1st, C RET
final scores A = 1 + 1 + 4 = 6 points; B = 2 + 2 +1 = 5; C 4+4+4 = 12 points
B wins
C = 3rd places.
OA refuses to prize third places, pretending C to be "eliminated" from the entry. 
In my opinion, she complied with the entry; the boat can be penalized  by scores only, if there were only three boats in her class, is not her fault..
Plus, another issue: by "eliminating" C from the entry, DSQ =  3 points, so final scores would became:
A = 1 + 1 + 3 = 5 points; B2 + 2 + 1 = 5 points 
A wins.

What would be your decision?

Andrew, you can invoke  A5.3 with a slight modification and thus stay away from the “entry” issue. With the language below, all entires can sit in the score sheet as place holders. 

Look that over … as I did it on the fly. You can tailor it as you like.  For instance I’ve seen Finishers +1 and +2 instead of using starters as well.  - Ang