Skip to main content

Forums

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.

Powered by WIND


Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • I fully endorse John Standley's summary.
    And I add this:
    Neither boat was required to act to avoid contact until it became clear that the other was not keeping clear.
    There was no action that W could have taken in time before L's contact.
    And L undoubtedly began trimming her main back in before contact occurred as fast as possible.
    Hence, neither boat violated RRS 14.
    Today 17:51
  • Indeed! Love it.
    Today 17:21
  • Jim Champ Reply to: 22039 - John Quirk: furthermore, in CASE 50, in the first sentence, it actually uses the term "genuine and reasonable apprehension" (this of course a standard used by courts with applications for an arrest in connection with non-bailable offences), and in the second sentence 'reasonable doubt' (again, a well-tested legal / court term). Quite some complexity for a competitor and PC to become acquainted with :).
    CASE 50.jpg
    CASE 50.jpg 135 KB



    Yesterday 02:01
  • Ang I as well .. was just trying to clearly describe where/how the ambiguity resides that you pointed out. 

    And I appreciate it.

    (Why do I suddenly feel like I'm Charlie Brown and you're Lucy holding the ball! <g>). 

    I never called you a blockhead.
    Mon 19:26
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more