Forum: Rule 18 and Room at the Mark

Mark Room at the Finish

Mark Townsend
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • International Race Officer
  • National Umpire
Two boats, Yellow and Blue, close-hauled on port tack, approached the starboard end of the finish line. Neither boat is fetching the Mark. Yellow was clear ahead of Blue when she reached the Zone. Blue became overlapped to windward of Yellow inside the Zone. The wind shifted left 15 degrees. Yellow and Blue tacked simultaneously in the Zone with Yellow becoming overlapped to windward of Blue. Blue finished ahead of Yellow about ¼ of the way down the finish line from the starboard end finish boat.
image.png 19.9 KB

1) At position 1 does Yellow have Mark-Room
2) Is Blue required to tack to give Yellow Mark-Room?
3) Does either boat break a rule?

Created: 19-Sep-30 04:45

Comments

John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
1
1.  Yes.  Rule 18.2b.  Why ever not?
2.  Don't know, don't care. At no stage in the diagram are boats close enough for there to be any question about room of any kind.  In particular @2 when Y hails protest, B is not failing to give Y room.  But if B does tack before Y, the instant B passes head to wind, she ceases to be required to give Y mark-room, because rule 18 no longer applies (rule 18.1a or b).  B is, of course required to keep clear of Y (rule 13).
3.  Once both boats were on starboard tack, rule 18.3 does not apply, rule 18.2b does not apply, so rule 18.2a applies and Y, overlapped inside is entitled to mark-room.  Apparently Y did not hit either B or the RC vessel, so B gave her the mark-room to which she was entitled.  No boat broke a rule.
Created: 19-Sep-30 05:17
Juuso Leivonen
Nationality: Finland
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • National Umpire
1
The last sentence of the definition “mark-room” says
mark-room for a boat does not include room to tack unless she is overlapped inside and to windward of the boat required to give mark-room and she would be fetching the mark after her tack.” Here Y is would be inside, but not overlapped, or to windward, so the tack is not included in her mark-room. 

And 19.1.a and def “mark” tells that 19 doesn’t apply here either. 

Like john said, after tack, in pos 3 18.2a applies. But if no contact with anything happened, no rule was broken in my view.
Created: 19-Sep-30 05:55
Warren Nethercote
Nationality: Canada
0
I get to the same place as Juuso and John.

Yellow is clear ahead when she gets to the zone and blue owes her mark room but that mark room does not include room to tack (definition).

But both boats tack, and 18(b) and 18(c) cease to apply thereafter, according to 18(d).  Rule 18(a) still applies (or applies anew?) and as they pass the mark yellow has mark room on blue.  There is no restriction on the timeliness of Yellow's 18(a) overlap after the tack beyond the limitations of 18(f), but the diagram indicates no issues.

So "yes, no (but it's moot), no."  
Created: 19-Sep-30 12:33
Philip Hubbell
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
  • Judge In Training
0
What was Yellow's protest at 2?
Obviously these were children in Opti equivalents.
A knowledgeable racer protesting at position 2 would be violating RRS 2.
Created: 19-Sep-30 20:28
Mark Townsend
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • International Race Officer
  • National Umpire
0
Yellow felt they were entitled to Mark-Room and Blue was denying them Mark-Room. Would your answer be any different if Blue continues on port tack another boat length?

image.png 20.2 KB


Created: 19-Sep-30 22:35
Warren Nethercote
Nationality: Canada
0
No change.  Yellow was entitled to mark room which includes room to 'sail to the mark' but not room to tack.  So Yellow's expectation that Blue should tack to give her room to tack was unsupported by the rules.  Rule 17 was not in effect so there was no proper  course requirement i effect.  Blue has been to team racing school I think.
Created: 19-Oct-01 00:11
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
0
If Y continues to play the marshmallow and remains 3/4 boat length to leeward of B, she's not looking good to prove that she hasn't been given room, nor, unless these little Optis are in big seas, is she good to claim that B is not keeping clear.

If Y had pinched a little and closed the gap, in either case, her prospects would be much better.
Created: 19-Oct-01 01:01
Juuso Leivonen
Nationality: Finland
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • National Umpire
0
As said, also in the second scenario, no rules broken. As it is, Y has real problems winning this. She can shoot up head to wind, but once she starts tacking, mark room ends and she needs to keep clear under 13. Only thing to do, is to go down a bit and throw in a quick tack, hope to be able to finish the tack and hope that there is enough time for B keep clear after the tack is done (15). B only needs to start doing things, after Y has finished with the tack (keeping in mind 14). But even then, I would guess that B would finish ahead. Or then Y could shoot up head to wind and hope she can glide to the finishing line before B. 

As a side note, if this would be match race, then Y's mark-room would include the tack and B would need to keep clear through out the whole situation :)
Created: 19-Oct-01 08:22
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
1
Philip Hubbell
said Created: Yesterday 20:28
What was Yellow's protest at 2?
...
A knowledgeable racer protesting at position 2 would be violating RRS 2.
I don't think that's right at all.

There is no principle of sportsmanship that says it is unsportsmanlike to make a mistake in applying the rules.
Created: 19-Oct-01 10:24
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
I'm definitely with John A on this one.

Case 138 Answer 3 is clear that "A misjudgment [..] is common during a race and is not unfair sailing or an act of misconduct.".

Also .. Case 47 discusses  "A boat that deliberately hails “Starboard” when she knows she is on port tack has not acted fairly, and has broken rule 2.".   In the OP, yelling "protest" does not do anything to cause avoiding action or confusion on the part of the other boat.  A boat can protest another boat, misjudging the situation and the rules, without breaking Rule 2.

Now, if the Yellow had yelled "Room to Tack!", that would have been another story.   Blue would have had no choice but to tack or reply "you tack", but then Blue would be in the right to protest Yellow. (see Case 10) and could protest Yellow on 20.1(a). I think only if it was determined by the PC that Yellow knew Rule 20 did not apply and called for room-to-tack anyway, that it could break Rule 2. 
Created: 19-Oct-01 17:52
Philip Hubbell
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
  • Judge In Training
0
At major Opti races I have witnessed "older" skippers screaming at newer ones to do this or that. Clear violations.
Deliberately calling mark room + protest, pretty much in one breath, in such a relationship would deserve a close RRS 2 examination, in my book.
Created: 19-Oct-01 21:59
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
0
Phil,

I don't think scrabbling after rule 2 at every opportunity does the game any good.

Could you please state the 'recognised principle of sportsmanship and fair play' to you think is 'violated' by:
  1. a boat 'calling mark-room', whatever that may mean?  and
  2. hailing 'protest'?
What evidence do you have to offer that whatever 'principle' you have stated is 'recognised'.

Given the cases and arguement Ang has cited, what argument do you present that the 'violation' you allege is 'clearly established' as required by rule 2?

Obviously enough, I don't agree that the behaviour you have describes 'deserves a close RRS 2 examination', or in fact, any examination at all, unless and until a valid protest comes before a protest committee.
Created: 19-Oct-01 22:57
Philip Hubbell
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
  • Judge In Training
0
Clearly.
And if I were serving on the fantail of the finish line boat and felt a Case 47-style episode occurred, I would file that protest.
The violation of "recognized" principle of sportsmanship I would invoke is "bullying." 
Also see your SafeSport guidelines.
Created: 19-Oct-02 01:53
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Philip, the bullying guidelines in the US Sailing SafeSport would not cover a Case 47 episode. 

Bullying involves an intentional, persistent or repeated pattern of committing or willfully tolerating physical and non-physical behaviors that are intended to cause fear, humiliation or physical harm in an attempt to socially exclude, diminish or isolate another person. Bullying can occur through written, verbal or electronically-transmitted expression or by means of physical acts or gestures. Bullying in any manner is prohibited in connection with all US Sailing sanctioned activities or events.

PS: The important point above ... “Bullying involves a(n) ..... pattern ...”, and a pattern takes more than 1 incident or element  to establish.
Created: 19-Oct-02 02:47
Philip Hubbell
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
  • Judge In Training
0
"Intentionally committing non-physical behavior intended to cause fear through verbal expression."
We are SO close!
Your job and mine is to report even marginal episodes and let experts diagnose and resolve them.
You have mis-read "or" for "and." A pattern is not required.
Still, RRS 2 is not as specific. And I would apply it in the scenario I described.
Created: 19-Oct-02 16:52
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
It's a poorly constructed sentence (and you cheated by changing "intentional" to "intentionally").  "Pattern" is stressed throughout the SafeSport guidelines.

Philip, I can agree that a single incident can constitute "bullying", but that single incident would have to be quite significant and overtly abusive ..   yelling a derogatory slur, belittling and insulting language, etc. 

One opti sailor calling "starboard" when they know they are on port or "room to tack" when they know they aren't entitled to it, does not constitute bullying unless it is part of an ongoing pattern of intimidation.  It's just trying to trick someone into doing something instinctively out of a sense of danger/safety, which is simply unsportsmanlike.

I don't think that using the socially-charged-term "bullying" so quickly serves the youth in the sport.  IMO it's an unnecessary escalation in the instances sited unless part of a larger picture of behavior.
Created: 19-Oct-02 18:41
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Warren wrote: "There is no restriction on the timeliness of Yellow's 18(a) overlap after the tack beyond the limitations of 18(f)"

Warren, looking at the original-post-drawing, would you say Yellow is "tacking to windward" of Blue? .. 

What is the test to determine if a boat is "tacking to windward"? 
  1. only that the boat tacking is windward of another boat at the moment the one boat passes HTW?, or
  2. does the use of the form "tacking" instead of "tacks" imply the test covers a longer span of time beyond the single moment when the boat passes HTW and thus includes the time from passing HTW until the boat reaches close-hauled?


Created: 19-Oct-03 15:42
Warren Nethercote
Nationality: Canada
0
Ang, where is your question coming from?  If you are referencing the last para of the definition mark room, then natural reading of the last para of the definition mark room makes clear that the boat needs to be overlapped inside and to windward before tacking (however tacking is defined).  Before tacking Yellow was either clear ahead or to leeward.  Additionally, the definition requires that she be fetching the mark after the tack, which by definition she was not.  Both Blue and Yellow had to sail below the mark in order to finish, not to windward of it.
Created: 19-Oct-03 16:33
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Warren  ... 18(f) .. (since you referenced it in your post)
 If a boat obtained an inside overlap from clear astern or by tacking to windward of the other boat and, from the time the overlap begins, the outside boat has been unable to give mark-room, she is not required to give it. 
Created: 19-Oct-03 16:40
Warren Nethercote
Nationality: Canada
0
My understanding of the term tacking to windward  in this ruleis that it ordinarily applies to a boat that crosses the other and then tacks on top of her.  Tacking is not a defined term so general understanding applies.  If I apply my general understanding, and note that yellow started out clear ahead, maybe 18.2(f) doesn't apply at all here.  Fortunately it's moot in this case.
Created: 19-Oct-03 17:07
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
 My understanding of the term tacking to windward  in this rule is that it ordinarily applies to a boat that crosses the other and then tacks on top of her.  

Yea .. that's the first image that comes to my mind as well, but 18(f) doesn't say ... "by tacking to windward [from the opposite tack to the same tack] of the other boat .."

Interesting .. I really hadn't thought hard about how to interpret that phase before.  It may be that the other conditions spelled-out in 18.2(f) make it such that our first intuitions are the only cases that satisfy the entirety of the requirements.
Created: 19-Oct-03 17:21
[You must be signed in to add a comment]