Forum: The Racing Rules of Sailing

SI change to Rule 31

Mike Forbes
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • National Judge
If the SI's change R31 to allow a boat to touch a mark of the course (other than a start/finish mark), does that allow an outside boat to force an inside boat (with mark room) into the mark so slowing it down or possibly fouling the mooring line of the mark ?
The inside boat would not break a rule, but would the outside boat break R2?   
Mark Room (def) is Room to leave the mark on the correct side and round the mark as necessary to sail the course, both of which are complied with by the inside boat. 
Created: 19-Aug-30 13:13

Comments

P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Q&A 2018-17

PS: Note the Q&A pulls its punch by using “seamanlike” and not “sportsmanlike”. 
Created: 19-Aug-30 13:16
Charles Darley
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • Regional Umpire
2
I think not.  Assuming the outside boat is RoW and inside has mark room, if it changes course to force inside into the mark, she has not given room to keep clear because hitting a mark is not seamanlike.  See rule 16.1 and definitions.  If the outside boat does not change course but does not give room, Inside's remedy is to sail the wrong side of the mark and protest.
Created: 19-Aug-30 14:01
Greg Dargavel
Nationality: Canada
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
  • National Judge
1
WHY would an event have this SI???
Created: 19-Aug-30 14:22
John Ball
Nationality: Canada
1
The IRSA Case Book (Radio Sailing) has Case B11which covers R 31 override, and which says in part...

At a leeward gate mark to be left to port, OL is overlapped on the outside of IW at the
zone. As the boats round the mark, OL gives IW room such that IW must either touch
the mark or make contact with OL. IW avoids OL but touches the mark. IW protests.
Question 1
Which rule, if any, has been broken?
Answer 1
At the zone, IW is a keep clear boat (rule 11) entitled to mark-room under rule 18.2(b).
Mark-room entitles IW to be given the space needed in the existing conditions to round
the mark while manoeuvring promptly in a seamanlike way. It is not seamanlike to touch
a mark.
OL did not give IW room to round the mark in a seamanlike way. OL broke rule 18.2(b). 
 
So just because you are allowed to touch a mark, it does not allow another boat to force you into the mark.

John
Created: 19-Aug-30 14:23
Charles Darley
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • Regional Umpire
0
Greg, I know.  However, the match racing rules let you touch a mark (except for the cute boat) with a sail or spar.  If you wish to dance on the head of a pin, can you touch the protective buoy attached to the back of the cttee boat with a sail or spar?
Created: 19-Aug-30 14:30
Charles Darley
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • Regional Umpire
0
Auto correct got me.  'except for the cttee boat'
Created: 19-Aug-30 14:32
Mike Forbes
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • National Judge
0
Where do the Rules say it is not Seamanlike to hit a mark if the Rules allow you to do so.    Assuming the mark is an inflatable race mark where no damage would occur.  
Created: 19-Aug-30 16:28
Tim Hohmann
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Judge
0
Re Q&A 2018-17 I disagree with the premise of the question. Rule 31 is pretty straightforward, touching a mark breaks the rule. 

A boat may be exonerated, but "exonerated" is not the same as "did not break the rule". 

And re the original post I'd say that turning off rule 31 (why, again?) doesn't change 18 any more than rule 21 exoneration does. Failing to give mark room per the definition breaks 18 unless the SI changes that too. 
Created: 19-Aug-30 17:35
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Re Q&A 2018-17 I disagree with the premise of the question

Tim, I’m not following you there.  Can you put what you are saying another way?

BTW, I agree with your other point. Changing 31 such that touching a mark does not break a rule is completely separate from 18 obligating a boat to give room.  18’s room is still the same geometry with RRS 31 modified or in the original, and not providing it to a room-entitled-boat still breaks a rule.  
Created: 19-Aug-30 21:23
P
John Eilers
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
0
I am with Greg, why does this race committee think it is smarter then the committee that wrote rule 31?  The effort should be not to change the Rules.
Created: 19-Aug-30 22:13
Charles Darley
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • Regional Umpire
0
It is written that it is not seamanlike to hit a mark. Match racing call D1. I feel sure I have seen it elsewhere but cannot find it.
Created: 19-Aug-30 22:49
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Charles, I know what you are referring to (but I can’t put my finger on it either).  The Case/Appeal goes on a bit talking about the risk of damage to both boat and equipment, etc.  I know I’ve referenced it before in one of my posts. 
Created: 19-Aug-30 23:08
John Ball
Nationality: Canada
0
The issue here is not about hitting the mark - the issue is that an SI override to R 31 to permit hitting a mark has no effect on R 18 and the rights and obligations in 'Mark Room'. So even if an inside boat may hit a mark as permitted in the SI, the boat obligated to give mark room and fails, breaks some part of R 18.

John
Created: 19-Aug-31 00:00
Tim Hohmann
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Judge
0
Angel, my issue was with "In some situations, a boat does not break rule 31 by touching a mark". 

On second thought I guess if you include match racing rules that may be true, but not in fleet racing. I believe in fleet racing a boat may be exonerated for breaking 31 but she still breaks it if she touches the mark. 
Created: 19-Aug-31 01:49
Mike Forbes
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • National Judge
0
I'm talking Fleet Racing, not Match Racing. 

 If the SI's allow touching a mark, then surely def Mark Room is complied with "room to round the mark as necessary.....".

 R18 has NOT been broken if the SI's change R31 to read that a boat shall not touch a Start of Finish mark, omitting to mention any other mark. Touching a mark is then allowed by default of not mentioning it in the amended R31. 

Surely R18 has NOT been broken, so Exhoneration is not an issue. 

I think this is a really bad change to Rules via the SI's, but I have been asked to comment by an RO on a proposed change in a regatta SI, requested by the competitors.   

Created: 19-Aug-31 11:42
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Mike, the SI change doesn't give me as much heartache. 

Match Racing, Kiteboarding, Windsurfing .. all those appendices change RRS 31 to allow touching a mark one way or another.

I agree with your analysis of how you would apply it.  The 18 room doesn't change at all because of a lack of 31.  A fact found that a boat was compelled to touch a mark due to another boat not giving her the room she was entitled to, is still evidence that 18 was broken.  It seems nothing else changes except the  31 penalty.
Created: 19-Aug-31 11:53
Tim Hohmann
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Judge
0
I think the logic Mike is going for is that if a boat is able to round the mark on the correct side, albeit touching the mark (which has been made allowable by the SI) then mark room has been given and rule 18 isn't broken. I could see a jury interpreting it that way. 

Mike, still curious what the rationale is for this change? It doesn't seem like it would improve safety or competition. Why do the competitors want it? 

Perhaps if they want something it might be better to adopt the match racing version of 31 which as I read it allows contact by equipment or sails but not hull or crew. 
Created: 19-Aug-31 12:56
Mike Forbes
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • National Judge
0
Tim, your interpretation is correct.  

I have no idea why the competitors want this change.  I will not be at the Regatta, but the RO has asked me to comment on the competitors request. 
I had not heard of this particular change to R31, but Googling around, I have found a number of Regatta SI's that include the proposed change. 
Created: 19-Aug-31 13:31
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Mike, it’s a backdoor right through the “seamanlike way” application. 

I think it goes something like this...

  1. 18 provides mark room
  2. Mark room includes room (it's "room" that's important .. any rule that provides "room" follows the same below)
  3. Room includes maneuvering in a seamanlike way
  4. It’s not seamanlike to hit objects, including marks
  5. Thus, if a boat is forced to touch a mark
    1. They were not able to maneuver in a seamanlike way
    2. Therefore, they were  not given room
    3. Therefore, they were not given Mark room
    4. Therefore the other boat broke 18. 

The Q&A 2018-17 I posted earlier states it very clearly. “It is not seamanlike to compel a boat to touch a mark even if she does not break a rule by doing so. ”

From CAN 35 “It is not seamanlike to be forced to contact objects such as, in this case, a mark or its ground tackle”

This seamanlike application is not limited to 18 applications. The  Call D1 involves “mark L, an inflatable buoy that is not a mark on this leg,”, therefore 18 can not apply.  Even so, in Call D1 the room to not-touch the mark is granted by 16.1.

Created: 19-Aug-31 13:54
Mike Forbes
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • National Judge
0
A very nice deduction.  Thankyou Angelo.  

Created: 19-Aug-31 14:04
Philip Hubbell
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
  • Judge In Training
0
This change to RRS 31 would also have to be announced in the NOR, as it is a "contract" matter that involves the decision whether to enter a regatta.
Created: 19-Sep-02 23:55
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Philip, any Rule 86 RRS change “shall” be included in the NOR by J1.2(1).  Are you trying to make some other or a more specific point about “this change to RRS 31..” and emphasizing “contract matter”?
Created: 19-Sep-03 12:50
Philip Hubbell
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
  • Judge In Training
0
"Contract" being the Race Officer Training expression used to explain the relationship of NOR to SI.
Not all changes are required by J 1.2 to be in NOR.
For sailors who feel that R31 has a safety, seamanship, or sportsmanship importance, knowing in advance that a regatta will delete it is "important information they will need before the SI become available" (J1.2) and before registering and traveling.
Created: 19-Sep-03 20:27
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
OK .. 
  1. Are specific RRS’s listed as required to be announced in the NOR if changed?
  2. If so, what are they? If not is it just left up to the RC’s judgement?
  3. If a Rule is changed in the SI’s but not in the NOR and the competitor believes it should have been, does that constitute a breach of contract?  Do the request for redress prior to the race claiming an improper action?  Sue the RC?
Created: 19-Sep-04 00:45
Philip Hubbell
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
  • Judge In Training
0
Following the request for redress line:
When there is a conflict between NOR and SI, we are obliged to arrive at a fair conclusion.
The choices here are either to grant redress and require everyone to sail by WS's racing rules, as advertised in the NOR,
or to require a subset who object to the change, after committing resources to attend, suddenly to go against the WS rules.
I cannot see that requiring rules compliance is unfair to anyone.
Best avenue is simply to include it in the NOR.
Created: 19-Sep-04 01:24
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
IMO, I’m having a hard time seeing this 31 change rising to this ‘decision to compete’ level. 

For instance I was just involved in helping craft NOR for a race that changed CRs and SERs. Those items had a drastic impact on who was eligible to race and what safety equipment would be required onboard, which in many cases represented new investments in equipment as well as some minor boat modification. That’s the sort of change that can’t just show-up 3 days before that race in the SI’s. 

I think we have already established in our discussion that this 31 change does not change the room one boat owes another in mark roundings and therefore does not ‘change the game’. To me, this 31 change is akin to replacing 2-turn with 1. 

You didn’t answer my Q1-2 above (I haven’t gone thru the RO training).  Is there a list of rules in your training materials that you can share?
Created: 19-Sep-04 12:31
Philip Hubbell
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
  • Judge In Training
0
It becomes a decision to whether to compete and how to train.
Here is a comment from Seattle RS Aero fleet, which is currently "voting" what the rule is to be  locally:
.
"Assuming it is going to be the rule for the worlds and other major regattas, [deleting R31] would help our members who are making the effort to attend those events, to be more competitive. It was in the NOR for the NA’s, but I could not find it in the NOR for Melbourne. Not that I am going, but if I was, and touching marks was going to be allowed, I would want to know about it well in advance and begin to prepare with that in mind. The question is not whether it is a good idea or  not, since the decision may have already been made, but how best to deal with it."
Created: 19-Sep-05 00:01
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
1
 if [...] touching marks was going to be allowed, I would want to know about it well in advance and begin to prepare with that in mind. 

FINALLY!  I found a sailing-skill where my natural "abilities" put me at an advantage! ;-)
Created: 19-Sep-05 14:33
[You must be signed in to add a comment]
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more