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

  • There were a couple of interesting questions raised above.  
    1) If you were to provide advice with AI what would you train it with.   
    I would train it first with the rule book, then I would give it the World Sailing Casebook, then I would give it any national authority Appeal books available online (RYA, US Sailing, Sail Canada).  I would probably add written decisions from major regattas with experienced trusted juries (Olympics, Olympic Class World Championships).  If I were training it to write decisions I would give it the Standard Wording document.  I would consider what other resources were available online and use them as well.  One of the reasons that we are behind on this is that not many articles are available online for AI to digest.  In other fields there is a lot more published.  I would consider some of the Sailing World rules articles, some of the articles on the rules in Dave Dellenbaugh's newsletter.  If I were doing it myself I would add my own articles (https://rcyc.ca/Sailing/Racing/Know_Your_Rules)
    2) What have you used it for
    I have done a quick experiment with this.  I don't know remember whether it was Claude or CoPilot.  I gave it the RRS and the standard wording.  I then gave it the facts founds by a fairly experienced protest committee and asked AI to write the conclusions.  Some parts were correct and in fact did better than the original protest committee.  Some parts need correction.  
    I have used AI to help me review NoR and SIs.  For example I have asked "For major regatta's for xyz class do they modify such and such in the NoR"  I have been returned NoRs with and without the modification.  This can be very helpful.
    I did try to use it to generate a pairing list for match racing.  It didn't do well at all.  
    Today 03:42
  • Rule 89.2 provides the option to change the NoR provided adequate notice is given.

    As brought out by John d Farris, any change needs to be communicated to all stakeholders.
    Yesterday 04:57
  • I was responding to your question about QR codes.
    Fri 20:01
  • John,
    Thank you for providing the link to the article posted by Graeme Hayward and originally written by Mary Pera.  It is sad that neither of them are with us any more.  
    Wed 02:56
  • I think I probably hint at it in my OP, but I think some of these shifts are fully appropriate, while others are maybe appropriate, even if potentially at odds with the phrasing in Case 103:
    1. IMO, age restrictions of the fleet mathematically shift the level of competency we're looking for. A 10yo will not be at the same level as a 25yo.
    2. same here, except I think the only difference between a 20yo and an adult is the level of athleticism expected... we should expect a high level of athleticism in racing where all sailors are college-aged
    3. same again for me. If we limit boats to 2 people, then we must also force them to give each other extra room for a douse. Indeed, 2 people is BY DEFINITION appropriate for the boat, as no more are allowed in that event!!!! To say otherwise would be to force collisions at leeward marks!
    4. Same. If you are required to have no more than two people, then you are only required to have two competent people, and room needs to account for that.
    5. Trickier, but easy to handle. I wouldn't go to the group average, but I would definitely want at least a percentage of the participants to be capable of sailing within the definition of room... otherwise what are we doing?
    6. Yeah. I think we need to hold championship sailors to a higher standard. If you're going to show up and compete for a high level national or world championship, then you're agreeing that you can sail above the level of "competent".
    7. same as #6

    TLDR:
    • IMO it is appropriate within the statements from Case 103 to adjust "competent crew" to fit age and other crew restrictions as required by the event/fleet/SI's, etc. (statements 1-4)
    • I also feel it makes sense to do so for statements 5-7, but I'm not sure that syncs up with Case 103.


    Mon 19:08
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more