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.
US Appeal 130 - Interpretations of Mark Room (Hot off the presses!)
The USS Appeals Comm addresses some of the topics we have discussed since the new quad. Specifically they address "leave astern" and how to interpret mark-room after the removal of "as necessary to sail the course" (they don't address the removal directly, but rather apply the rule in its absence).
Answers in Question 1, dealing with cases where the course to the next mark is either a beat or a square run, but does not deal with the case where, because of observed wind gusts or shifts, or tide effects, a boat's proper course is to gybe or tack immediately at the mark to secure the wind/water advantage.
Interesting John. The appeal seems to differentiate between the course one has to sail, for which mark room to gybe is available, and the course one would like to sail, for which it is not.
Given a leg on which boats will need to sail on both gybes then there will normally be a proper course leaving the mark on either gybe. But although there may be more than one proper course, there's a very sound argument that on one side of a big shift everyone would gybe in the absence of other boats. Is that enough?
To me the appeal suggests that if there's a reasonable chance of reaching the next mark without gybing again then one is entitled to room to gybe. But that seems to suggest that if a shift making the leg one sided is permanent then one is entitled to room to gybe, but if it shifts back then not. Rather messy!
Jim re: "The appeal seems to differentiate between the course one has to sail, for which mark room to gybe is available, and the course one would like to sail, for which it is not. "
To my mind (though there may be some subtle difference that I have yet to discover) this Appeal supports USS Judges and racers to go back to "as necessary to sail the course" (basically) when thinking about MR.
In the previous quad, we applied that exact standard to differentiate the difference between "need" and "want" on be part of the MR entitled boat. I think their interpretation and application examples shake out the same as in the previous quad (in other words ... no game-change)
In Diagram 1 of US Sailing Appeal 130, we see how important the word "to" is, in the definition of Mark-Room: "Room for a boat (a) to sail TO the mark...."
Does sailing TO the mark mean pointing your bow at the next mark of the course, absent any current, or with taking current into effect?
This scenario comes up frequently in places with lots of tidal current, especially in light air, where the course to sail a straight to the mark (i.e., sail the rhumbline) might be with your bow pointed 20 to 40 degrees away from the mark. In these cases, does Mark-Room mean room to point your bow at the next mark, or room to sail the rhumbline with current factored in?
A little wordy in places (the free tactical advice pumps this up a couple of pages) and perhaps missing or possibly slightly confusing interpretations in other places, but I'd say that it's quite a good clear interpretation.
If this appeal is being considered for WS casebook, I wonder if they'll trim the free advice and improve it first. I hope so. Six pages for one Case would almost bring the sport into disrepute!
But let me reiterate - - I think it's workable, clear and useable.
-------------- My thoughts in summary.
Q1
I agree with Ang, the word 'needs' in the meaning of 'seamanlike' comes into play strongly, while 'want' does not come into it.
So the interpretation by US sailing is no gybe allowed, even if mark has not been left behind yet. Fine.
Al just asks a question regarding whether 'Course TO' is based on heading or rhumb-line or Course-to-steer. JohnA notes this is missing from the interpretation too. I agree.
Given the explanations in Answer 1, I'd say Answer 1 indirectly suggests that mark-room is based on the resultant course-to-steer. e.g. Taking into account the 'existing conditions (current/tides)' what CTS is required to make good towards the next mark? If it is on the other tack, then a gybe is part of mark-room.
I'm happy to draw that from Answer 1, but I can see how the question is not directly answered.
Q2
No comment. Pretty obvious really, since 18 is off when she passes HTW. Again, I'm not sure if the free-advice should be there, but whatever.
Q3
I quite like the interpretation - but I would see that some might find it a little confusing. The question being based on a 'manoeuvre' gives expectation of P doing something clever here.
And I guess the question remains, whether Starboard breaks rule 18 if she luffs.
Q4
I like this. Makes sense.
-------------- The interpretation is quite black and white.
Let's see if WS include similar in the WS Casebook. (They may not agree fully with US Sailing. Also, US Sailing appeals don't have weight anywhere but US.) So it's not done and dusted just yet.
We should be due a Casebook soon - Its been half a year! It would be nice to be able to move on either way finally.
Any comments?
Given a leg on which boats will need to sail on both gybes then there will normally be a proper course leaving the mark on either gybe. But although there may be more than one proper course, there's a very sound argument that on one side of a big shift everyone would gybe in the absence of other boats. Is that enough?
To me the appeal suggests that if there's a reasonable chance of reaching the next mark without gybing again then one is entitled to room to gybe. But that seems to suggest that if a shift making the leg one sided is permanent then one is entitled to room to gybe, but if it shifts back then not. Rather messy!
To my mind (though there may be some subtle difference that I have yet to discover) this Appeal supports USS Judges and racers to go back to "as necessary to sail the course" (basically) when thinking about MR.
In the previous quad, we applied that exact standard to differentiate the difference between "need" and "want" on be part of the MR entitled boat. I think their interpretation and application examples shake out the same as in the previous quad (in other words ... no game-change)
In Diagram 1 of US Sailing Appeal 130, we see how important the word "to" is, in the definition of Mark-Room: "Room for a boat (a) to sail TO the mark...."
Does sailing TO the mark mean pointing your bow at the next mark of the course, absent any current, or with taking current into effect?
This scenario comes up frequently in places with lots of tidal current, especially in light air, where the course to sail a straight to the mark (i.e., sail the rhumbline) might be with your bow pointed 20 to 40 degrees away from the mark. In these cases, does Mark-Room mean room to point your bow at the next mark, or room to sail the rhumbline with current factored in?
A little wordy in places (the free tactical advice pumps this up a couple of pages) and perhaps missing or possibly slightly confusing interpretations in other places, but I'd say that it's quite a good clear interpretation.
If this appeal is being considered for WS casebook, I wonder if they'll trim the free advice and improve it first. I hope so. Six pages for one Case would almost bring the sport into disrepute!
But let me reiterate - - I think it's workable, clear and useable.
--------------
My thoughts in summary.
Q1
I agree with Ang, the word 'needs' in the meaning of 'seamanlike' comes into play strongly, while 'want' does not come into it.
So the interpretation by US sailing is no gybe allowed, even if mark has not been left behind yet. Fine.
Al just asks a question regarding whether 'Course TO' is based on heading or rhumb-line or Course-to-steer. JohnA notes this is missing from the interpretation too. I agree.
Given the explanations in Answer 1, I'd say Answer 1 indirectly suggests that mark-room is based on the resultant course-to-steer. e.g. Taking into account the 'existing conditions (current/tides)' what CTS is required to make good towards the next mark? If it is on the other tack, then a gybe is part of mark-room.
I'm happy to draw that from Answer 1, but I can see how the question is not directly answered.
Q2
No comment. Pretty obvious really, since 18 is off when she passes HTW. Again, I'm not sure if the free-advice should be there, but whatever.
Q3
I quite like the interpretation - but I would see that some might find it a little confusing. The question being based on a 'manoeuvre' gives expectation of P doing something clever here.
And I guess the question remains, whether Starboard breaks rule 18 if she luffs.
Q4
I like this. Makes sense.
--------------
The interpretation is quite black and white.
Let's see if WS include similar in the WS Casebook. (They may not agree fully with US Sailing. Also, US Sailing appeals don't have weight anywhere but US.) So it's not done and dusted just yet.
We should be due a Casebook soon - Its been half a year! It would be nice to be able to move on either way finally.
The rule would not otherwise.
Tide mist be included in seamanlike.