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.
Most significant cases that changed in the 2025 case book?
I thought a thread on the biggest changes in the cases might be interesting, now that the case book is out. We can all have different opinions on "biggest change," and learn something from each other.
====
The biggest difference I see in the new case book is Case 145, which used to say the sail the course string was in navigable water, then was withdrawn, and now has been revised to ignore shallows or land.
So we've gone from this in early versions of the 2021 case book:
I asume this means the finish pictured in the original version of Case 145 should now be crossed from the bottom of the picture to the top, if the sailing instructions do not specify a rounding direction. (Which they can do in the 2025 rules, per new last sentance in the definition of finish.)
It's the sort of thing that makes you want to think about a long race on a winding river, like the 65 NM Delta Ditch Run. (I think Ditch is fine.) But for sake of discussion, I think some of the local races to Half Moon Bay could need to be careful. At least one used to have no marks, and the course was "start on the San Francisco Cityfront (at the extreme top-right edge of this chartlet), finish on a line that starts at Pillar Point B3 and goes South by East (using a landmark ashore as a range)." In the last two years, the race added PP-B1 as mark rather than the end of a prohibited line, but if someone simplified back to the classic course that could have unintended consequences. Especially as PP-B3 marks a shoal to the north of it, so a loop around that to compily with the 2025 version of Case 145 (in absence of any marks from start to finish) would be not so good.
Both rule 28 and the definition of sail the course have changed from the 2021-2024 rule book to the 2025-2028 rule book, but the change in the case is not obviously related to a rule change. Instead, the prior withdrawal of the case suggests it is unrelated.
The 2021 Case 145 was plain silly. Suppose a mark (let's call it "A") is in 2 metres of water and the boat Hard Aground draws 2.5 metres. According to the 2021 case, if Hard Aground ever raced in a race in which A was a turning mark, she could be protested successfully for not sailing the course, because her string would run, well, hard aground, some distance from A.
Richard, I don't understand the problem you see, in the Half-Moon Bay race. Why are you worried about those marks down south -- if a boat were to sail her tightened string, she would sail right over the Presidio, which is 120 metres high, and that would clearly be dangerous!
The point made in the case is important: The string in the test isn't the boat's course, but an instrument in a hypothetical test. Nobody says you have to sail the string, and clearly most boats don't ever do so (for example, sailboats zigzag to windward but the string goes straight). So dangers that might be involved by sailing the string are irrelevant.
Rob made a good point, and a lengthy exp lamination (sorry Rob). I prefer the simple explanation of going around tff he e mg arks on the correct side and finishing. Why do we always need to make things so complicated?
Answer 3 and Answer 4 appear to be saying that whenever a boat fails to give mark-room or room at an obstruction, and the boat entitled to room touches the mark or obstruction, the outside boat also automatically breaks RRS 14(c).
For reference, the list of cases that have been revised along with a brief note on the nature of the revision:
Case 2 - First to the zone gets mark room
Case 22 - Protest forms no longer require that the protestor identify which rule(s) they believe have been broken
Case 25 - New definition of mark room
Case 32 - SIs can now specify direction in which boats are required to cross the finish line
Case 49 - PL has now broken RRS 14(b). No commentary on the word "cause" though.
Case 114 - Now incorporates RRS 14(c). Also makes it clear that ANY mark is considered "an object that should be avoided"
Case 118 - New definition of mark room
Case 124 - Split into two questions, but I don't yet see any relevant rules changes
Case 128 - Q1 modified to specify that the SIs did not change the direction of the finish
Case 143 - Reference to RRS 70.3 changed to 70.4
Case 145 - The conclusion is fully reversed - the "string test" is now bound only by marks and is not required to lie in "navigable water" only. Notably, it does NOT address the issue of how this affects the definition of the "course side" (which was a significant component in the prior version of this case).
Please let me know if I've missed or misstated anything.
And in answer to the OP: I agree, the most significant change is Case 145 as it is the only case that was fully reversed in the new version.
Richard, I don't understand the problem you see, in the Half-Moon Bay race. Why are you worried about those marks down south -- if a boat were to sail her tightened string, she would sail right over the Presidio, which is 120 metres high, and that would clearly be dangerous!
The point made in the case is important: The string in the test isn't the boat's course, but an instrument in a hypothetical test. Nobody says you have to sail the string, and clearly most boats don't ever do so (for example, sailboats zigzag to windward but the string goes straight). So dangers that might be involved by sailing the string are irrelevant.
Still nothing much about the meaning of 'cause'.
Please let me know if I've missed or misstated anything.
And in answer to the OP: I agree, the most significant change is Case 145 as it is the only case that was fully reversed in the new version.
There seems to be a lot of the later!