Anthony, I think your analysis is spot on.

David re: Sea Anchor - interesting question.

A drogue/sea-anchor doesn't seem to conflict with 42.1 ... deploying such a device might fall within "other acts of seamanship". 

A drogue uses the water to decrease a boat's speed relative to the water (increase the boat's water-drag).  Unless otherwise forbidden in the class rules or the race-docs for the event, using a drogue would seem fine. 

PS: that said .. I think 45 is about fixing a boat's position relative to the bottom ... not slowing a boat's movement relative to the water, as the water may be moving (current).   Though a sea-anchor uses the term "anchor" .. it's a water-drag increasing device .. not a position-fixing device. 

Phil, How do you conclude that W was not required to act to avoid contact until it became clear that L was not keeping clear?

L was the right of way boat.  She was not  required to keep clear.

W was not entitled to room.

Niko: I like your "the RC should always work to have an appropriate level of management commensurate with the competition level/importance" comment.

There is one event that may partner and I run every year ... the Warneet Around French Island race. While Monica runs the briefing giving numerous examples of the flags used during the start sequence there is usually an America's Cup skipper sitting quietly and respectfully at the back of the room with his family or mates. At the other end of the spectrum we have some who have NEVER raced before or perhaps doing their second race since last year.

During this race I tend to be very chatty on the radio to be sure that even those with the least experience have a great day on the water.

One boat in his first year actually missed the starting line, but we considered him a starter. The next year his missed the finishing line but we gave him a finish regardless. He was so pleased that he got the start right the second year ;-)

That said, it is quite a different matter if I am running a one-design race.

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 :).