Julian re: “According to Definitions: Leeward and Windward, Boat A could possibly claim that they were sailing directly downwind so her leeward side (on which her mainsail lies) was her port side. ”

Your answer lives in your statement above, but you short-changed the definition.

Here it is in full with emphasis added.  Apply that and you’ll solve it. 

I think you stopped a little short in reading the definitions. Port and Starboard tack are defined based on which is the "windward side."
"Tack, Starboard or Port
A boat is on the tack, starboard or port, corresponding to her windward side." 

You took that to mean port and starboard were defined by which side the wind is coming over their boat (which makes sense, but is hard to tell when running). Instead, Windward and Leeward have definitions with a specific qualifier for running downwind. 
"However, when sailing by the lee or directly downwind, her leeward side is the side on which her mainsail lies."

In your scenario sailing downwind, Boat A is flying its main on port side. That makes her port side her leeward side by definition. Her starboard side is her windward side. So she is on Starboard tack. 
She was the ROW boat.

A is starboard ROW boat. Everything else is noise in the situation (in my opinion).

Boat A is sailing wing-on-wing - starboard tack.  Think of the a-kite like it's a jib in this situation.  Very common with J70s and similar boats.

Adrian, it may well be obvious to you that Boat A was on STB, but not to others … thus the benefit of helping fellow members work through the “noise” and helping them to see what you see. 

Julian, your error was in your statement below (emphasis added). 

You had concluded that neither boat was “by the lee”. That was the error that led you astray because Boat A was by the lee during the entire scenario. 

Julian, one other clarification in anticipation of anyone who thinks the definition of "leeward" being based on the position of the mainsail rather than where the wind is coming from is weird or silly. As I noted, it's hard to tell definitively which side the wind is coming from when boats are sailing downwind. Imagine a skipper claiming "a puff came from my starboard side, so I was instantly on starboard." The position of a sail is easy to detect. You realized that and used the position of the asymmetric to  show that boat A is on port with wind coming over her port side. But boats often sail "wing-on-wing" (as others have mentioned). Thus we are left with the question "which sail defines the side the wind is coming from?" The rules committee has for decades determined that it is the position of the mainsail that defines windward and leeward. 
Thus, A is sailing by-the-lee on Starboard tack through the whole interaction. 
Now, you may think: "That means a boat sailing downwind on port can just throw their main over to the port side and claim "Starboard!" You are correct. In dinghies we do it all the time. 
Another common use sailing downwind when a leeward overlap is obtained from clear astern (therefore the leeward boat is limited to proper course). Leeward will often throw their main over, then back to establish a new overlap with luffing rights. This is really common in team racing. 
(On that note, I'll plug the Hinman Team Racing Championship being sailed at Mission Bay Yacht Club here in San Diego).

Hello Everyone,

I’m reading the responses to Julian’s original post and I cannot see how Boat A could claim ROW under any circumstance.

In describing Boat A Julian wrote: “However, they have their mainsail out on their port side, with a crew member standing on deck leaning on the boom to hold it out.”

When reading Dave Perry’s discussion on Leeward and Windward in the RRS definitions he states: “When you are sailing directly downwind or by the lee, your leeward side is the side on which your mainsail “lies.” “Lies” is used intentionally to indicate that it is the side where your mainsail would naturally lie; i.e., be pushed by the wind, as opposed to by the control of some other force such as your arm, the mainsheet or gravity.”

To me it seems that if the crew member leaning on Boat A’s boom were to duck, the mainsail would jibe and lie on her starboard side, putting her on port tack like Boat B. If that’s the case, Boat A couldn’t claim ROW under either rule 10, since she’s not on starboard tack, or rule 11, since Boat B is on her leeward side, making Boat A the windward/keep clear boat. What am I missing here?

Thomas: I think you are putting too much emphasis on your interpretation of "lies," which is not defined in the rulebook. 
I understand your reading of it. But you are going against many decades of precedent. It is common for a crew member to  hold the main to prevent an accidental jibe when a wind shift of wave causes a small change in apparent wind angle. In dinghies such as FJs, it's the crew's job to hold the main when sailing wing-on-wing. 
On keelboats, I've seen many skippers use a preventer to keep the main from accidentally jibing (thought that has its own risks in rough seas). 

Well, Anthony's “Lies” is used intentionally to indicate that it is the side where your mainsail would naturally lie; i.e., be pushed by the wind, as opposed to by the control of some other force such as your arm, the mainsheet or gravity.” is a quote from Dave Perry's book.  Perry is quite an authority.  So I'm now left a little confused.  I had been convinced that A was Stbd, so very clear about rights.  But, I would offer that probably the crew's action is to assure that the boom continues to lie on that side.  He's not likely to be keeping it there if the main is backwinded.

And by the way,  it's "wing and wing", not "wing on wing".  That's not in the dictionary.

I've seen both "wing-on" and "wing-and" and even just "wing." But, that's not important. 
I agree that Perry is an authority. 
I'll do a little more looking through cases. I think it would be hard to determine what would happen if the person doing the preventing let go. Perhaps if one is so far by the lee that the sail is being backwinded severely and held in position, that would be obvious and not qualify for starboard tack. Next time I see Dave, I'll ask him about the use of hands to prevent the main. It's certainly true that every FJ crew holds the main when on wing. I find it hard to believe that this standard practice removes Starboard tack designation whenever someone sails wing on wing. 
We've got a big National Regatta in FJ's going on now and a couple of international judges working. If I get the chance, I'll pose the question. 

Thomas it’s OK to have someone leaning against the boom to prevent it from accidentally gybing.

An important point here is that we are talking about an asymmetrical spinnaker boat.  An asymmetric boat does not have a spin pole on the clew of the spin to hold it out, so when sailing wing-n-wing in an asymmetric, it is critical to lean the boat toward the spinnaker.  (this uses the weight of the spin and sheets to hold the clew away from the boat) 

This raises the tip of the boom skyward and the weight of the boom and sail will naturally want to swing to the low side of the boat and gybe. 

In my J/105, if I’m wing-n-wing in anything less than 12 kts, i put the lightest person to hold the boom and the rest of the crew on the “spin-side” rail. 

PS:  this is different than if the main was actually “back winded” and the crew is holding the main in a backwinded condition. 

Did not mean for my post to be dismissive or to stifle discussion, the "in my opinion" was meant to suggest that I am not certain rather than finding it obvious but more thinking that everything else was irrelevant as starboard trumped all. “When you are sailing directly downwind or by the lee, your leeward side is the side on which your mainsail “lies.”  is the rule and it does not mention anything about it not being held etc so I think that all of the discussion outside port and starboard serves to confuse rather than inform. My knowledge is significantly less than others though which is why I love following these discussions but rarely contribute.

When DDW the main can “lie” on either side. If sailing by the lee, which is allowed and the rule anticipates, it can lie on the “ wrong” side and still be legitimately on starboard. The only time I see a potential of this being a problem is if the main is backwinded. 
If the sail is full, it is being held by wind. 

Angelo

Regarding your comment "That was the error that led you astray because Boat A was by the lee during the entire scenario".

If Boat A was by the lee: 
1   How were they able to fly their asymmetric spinnaker on the starboard side without it being blanketed by the main?
2   How was Boat B able to alter course to parallel them without sailing by the lee?

Thanks
Julian

Julian, DEFINITIONS Leeward and Windward - where the mainsail lies.   Re: throwing main over and back, RRS 42.2 Prohibited Actions (e)  repeated tacks or gybes unrelated to changes in the wind or to tactical considerations.    

Kerri Hardisty

Said Created: Today 00:01

A single gybe from port onto starboard is not 'repeated' and thus does not break RRS 42.2(e).

A double gybe to terminate a RRS 17 obligation is nothing if not 'tactical', so it doesn't break RRS 42.2(e) either.

Julian Summers

Said Created: Yesterday 23:41

Exactly as you described in your OP

Boat A is flying an asymmetrical spinnaker which is full on their starboard side, confirming that wind is coming from their port side.  However, they have their mainsail out on their port side, with a crew member standing on deck leaning on the boom to hold it out.

While A's boom and main are lying on her port side making her on starboard tack, the wind coming over her port quarter is able to fully inflate her spinnaker on her starboard side.

If A is by the lee on starboard tack, any boat sailing  parallel to her on port tack will necessarily be running downwind without sailing by the lee.

Hi Everyone,

The original question posed is difficult to resolve on the water and it is gratifying that the incident was resolved seeming without arguement?
 
In match racing the umpires are often called to adjudicate difficult situations - say like whether a boat has passed head to wind and so changed tack, or like the subject scenario - would the boom lie on the port side without being held there? The umps make the call and flag accordingly -  In both instances, RRS C2.5 Last Point of Certainty would apply.
 
In the case of which side of boat A the boom lies (what tack is she on), if the umps are certain the sail would gybe if not held on the port side, the decision would be; the boom/sail is no longer lieing on the port side, and boat A is therefore windward give-way port tack boat (RRS 11).

But how in fleet racing, without umpires, can these decisions be made? As with all tactics, decisions have to be made early. That's the trick in dealing with such issues. Make decisions early enough so you have options other than the one hereunder.
 
        Apply RRS C2.5 (rule 7), and if certain the main on A would gybe if not held, protest, avoid contact at all cost, put the issue behind you and get on with the race. In the protest room the PC will "Find the Facts" and that will be that. Good luck.
       

Phil re: “In the case of which side of boat A the boom lies (what tack is she on), if the umps are certain the sail would gybe if not held on the port side, the decision would be; the boom/sail is no longer lieing on the port side, and boat A is therefore windward give-way port tack boat (RRS 11).”

In the situation I’m describing (holding the boom out to resist the weight of the boom from causing a gybe) at no time does the main get “back winded”, so to your description it would never be “obvious” I guess.  

Isn’t there a TR or MR call that talks exactly about this that includes a diagram of sail shapes both fore and back winded?

Julian, re: “If Boat A was by the lee:  (1)How were they able to fly their asymmetric spinnaker on the starboard side without it being blanketed by the main?

I’d imagine the max by-the-Lee angle will vary from boat to boat based on its geometry.  A boat can never be perfectly DDW … so it’s a bit of a wobble.  

On the 105, when sailing BTL, I might be BTL or above DDW as much as 10 deg on either side or DDW steady state and maybe higher for shorter periods.

It really doesn’t matter technically if the boat WNW was BTL or slightly to windward above DDW or DDW … all those conditions qualify as such to conclude that Boat A was on STB if her main is on the port side and isn’t back winded. 

Regarding Q2 … see Q1.  There is a margin on both sides of DDW that can be sailed in a WnW configuration in an asymmetric. 

Found the Call. It’s TR G1.  Sorry the pics aren’t showing … Paul’s been having issues with the server references for some older images.

Here is the diagram below.  In the meantime, I’ll try to update the site.

PS: Note that Q2 has backwinding as a condition (emphasis added)  “… because now her crew is holding it there while the wind is backing her mainsail.“

We had a fairly long thread about this here

Sailing "by the lee."

Thanks to everyone who responded after I jumped in on the thread; I really appreciate the inputs!

Phil Mostyn wrote: “Apply RRS C2.5 (rule 7), and if certain the main on A would gybe if not held, protest, avoid contact at all cost, put the issue behind you and get on with the race. In the protest room the PC will "Find the Facts" and that will be that.”

When I read these threads I ask myself how I would rule if I was a member of the PC. In the five years I’ve been racing both small and big boats at my club in FL we’ve actually never had a protest that I can remember. In this scenario, if B had protested A for breaking rule 11, believing they were actually on port, I’m not sure how either boat would convince the PC that they either were or were not holding the boom out unnaturally. I’d be interested to know what questions those of you with PC experience would ask in the protest room in order to find the facts in this scenario. Thanks.

Hi Ang, and Allan,

The Definition Leeward and Windward, were, as you know, changed in the 1997 Rule book revision, and as Dave Perry stated in his book on that years rules, (page 54) the word "lies" in the second sentence was used intentionally to
             ".........indicate that it is the side where your mainsail would naturally lie,i.e. be pushed by the wind,                    as opposed to the control of some other force such as your arm, the mainsheet, or gravity."

It was actually Marriane O'Middlethon IJ IU, God bless her soul, a doyen of the rules, who drummed the concept into our brains all those years ago.

And so it is, when a boat comes head to wind on say port tack, slows, and pushes her boom out on the port side to start sailing astern, that the boat hasn't changed tack, because the boom is not lieing naturally on the port side - it's being held in position and she's still on port.

Now Thomas, it's up to the parties to a protest, and the evidence of their witnesses, and its crediitability, to convince the PC what the facts were. It's not up to the PC to ask clever questions although they will certainly attempt to satisfy their curiosity. There are no "canned" Q & A's like there are in Salesmanship. Look, most protests are hard sells, because the parties disagree to the point of going to the umpires, either on what happened or rule interpretations. A sailing by the lee scenario is mostly going to be a hard sell, which is why I wished ''good luck'.

Phil re: ".........indicate that it is the side where your mainsail would naturally lie,i.e. be pushed by the wind,                    as opposed to the control of some other force such as your arm, the mainsheet, or gravity."

Looks to me like that is consistent with my understanding and the TR Call.  “…pushed by the wind” in Dave’s quote and not held “..while the wind is backing her mainsail” in the TR Call are describing congruent conditions. 

Also .. Dave negates gravity … “pushed by the wind, as opposed to … gravity”.   It’s gravity acting on the mass of the boom rotated upwards that crew are  opposing when sailing WnW, not the ‘pushing of the wind’ (as long as the main isn’t backwinded). 

Hey Ang,

I was never big on team racing and often came accross Calls with which I was uncomfortable.  Call G1 is one I think can be improved because Question 2 askes in part:
              "........while the wind is backing her mainsail."
which I am a bit uncomfortable with - the wind backing the sail bit - because it leads many to think that wind backing the mainsail is a requirement before ruling the boat has changed tack. I'm certain there are conditions that don't involve wind backing the sail - conditions in which umpires can be certain that the sail would gybe if released from whatever is restricting it. It's issues like this that make judging and umpiring so interesting.

I remember back in the 70's & early 80's, when sailing off-shore, on long boards, we used to tie the boom down with a preventer from the bow, because our "Peterson' was tender and in a big following sea, had a tendency to death-roll if you weren't careful and Chinese gybe if you weren't - but nobody ever thought we had changed tack when we did a Chinese. We thought a lot of things of course. I think Dave's "gravity' may have referred to a boat being suddenly back-winded, causing a dramatic heal to windward with the crews bottoms in the water and the boom in their faces momentarily - due to .........'gravity' not wind pressure.

Ahhh, sailing. Great fun. Incidently Ang, you'll have noticed I'm no longer IJ having retired it last December. I'm really missing the involvement, but one doesnt get younger.  Cheers Phil.

Thanks for the response Phil; much appreciated!
Cheers. Thomas

Phil re: “ Ang, you'll have noticed I'm no longer IJ having retired it last December. ”

We appreciate your contributions even though your knowledge and experience exceed your title!  LOL