Source: http://rrsstudy.blogspot.de/2010/02/
Timestamp: 2017-04-26 00:18:23
Document Index: 631142833

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2']

Racing Rules of Sailing - Look to Windward: February 2010
Some time ago Menno send me a mail about a curious rules issue he had seen on the internet: On the Sailgroove-website in the series Technique Tuesdays, Val Smith explains a ‘loophole’ exploiting the new definition of fetching in the rulebook.
My question to all LTW readers: Has anybody ever come across this on the water (umpiring) or in the room? Is it being done?
Most regatta’s in my neck of the woods are done in non-tidal waters so there’s very little – if any – current to be exploited. But there must be sailing waters around the world were this kind of ‘fetching’ is possible…..
Thanks Menno, for your contribution. Please keep sending them in.
LTW Readers Q&A | 035; Port is slow to respond please be patient
From a Sunny Sydney – (b@b#s!h%sot) – a question from Neil, about that bloody windward mark – again (*^%#(*@)&@!#!!)
During Club racing this situation has recently raised much debate and I would appreciate your thoughts. With many hours researching on the net I have never found this issue discussed.
A windward mark to be passed and cleared to starboard (a clockwise direction). Boat A has entered the zone on port and will fetch the mark and with no others boats in the zone. Due to an adverse tide and a drop in the wind, Boat A slows at the mark and is still fetching the mark and does not need to tack for rounding. Boat B enters the zone on starboard (with a slight increase in wind strength) and hails Boat A to tack while barging inside Boat A at the mark and then Boat B tacks to round the mark forcing Boat A onto starboard and eventually Boat A tacking back on to port to round the mark. Thanks,
Neil, this is what I came up with for the facts you’ve described:
Boat Scenario file 100227LTWR035.xbs and animation: 100227LTWR035.gif
By your use of the word ‘barging’ I deduce that you might think that Yellow (Port)has some sort of protection from the Purple (SB) boat, by entering the zone so far ‘ahead’?
I’m afraid I must disappoint you. Rule 18 does not switch on, until position 6 (and there the Purple boat is inside boat with mark-room). The fact that Yellow has an adverse current and has trouble or is slow rounding the mark has no ‘standing’ in the rulebook. She must keep clear as port boat!
NO buts, maybees or otherwise.
And once she’s passed head to wind she must keep clear under rule 13 (tacking boat). Purple gains an inside overlap and is therefore entitled to mark-room under 18.2(a) – not 18.3, because she’s not fetching the mark – including room to tack because she’s overlapped to windward and on the inside of a boat required to give mark-room.
I would understand if you now started cursing yourself, but please keep it civilized. Nanny Ogg would say: “Bugger all that, lets curse someone”
Thanks for you contribution to LTW!
Next time in LTW Readers Q&A: Sheeting in a Laser
The Racing Rules of Sailing 1.0 | Score: NR | Price: $5.99
Release Date : Feb 27 , 2010
The United States Sailing Association (US SAILING) is proud to present
the official iPhone application for The Racing Rules of Sailing for
2009-2012 Including the US SAILING Prescriptions.
The Racing Rules of Sailing app is for you if you are an avid sailor
looking for instant access to the official rules and signals.
With this application you will be prepared to answer any rules or signal questions that arise.
The only rules app approved by US SAILING Every rule, appendix and definition available at the touch of a finger
Simple navigation Images and descriptions of all the signal flags
Convenient word, numeric and phrase search function Bookmarking feature for your most referenced to rules and
definitions US SAILING is the national governing body for sailing in
ISAF is the governing body for the rules of sailing in other jurisdictions.
Please contact the appropriate governing body in your jurisdiction with questions regarding the Rules of Sailing.
From: The Racing Rules of Sailing 1.0 for iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad | iPhoneapps360.net (bekijken via Google Sidewiki)
Update 10-03-2010
Received an Email from Brass about this app: Dear Jos, I just saw this on SA:
It was pointed out to me by a friend last night that the US Sailing Rules app has some incorrect definitions under 'postponements': AP over A and AP over N the defs are wrong. The app is great how it hyperlinks words to other pages. My bro wants his $5.99 back. I'll buy it when it gets fixed. If you want to go to the forum: Go here
I wonder what on earth the Americans think AP over N means? Regards, Brass Can anybody tell me what the app says AP over A and AP over N means?
Just when you think you got your head wrapped around the 2010 RRS changes, the RR-panel throws you out of whack. These situations might happen most often in team racing, but it is also true in Fleet Racing. Not so much in Match racing - but that is because seldom are there more then two boats - I think.... <G>
A new RRTR Call on the ISAF site today, about when an obstruction suddenly ceases to be an obstruction.
Or when a 'right-of-way'-boat that is an obstruction, becomes a 'keep-clear'-boat that isn't (by definition).
RAPID RESPONSE TEAM RACING CALL 2010/002
Rule 11 On the Same Tack, OverlappedRule 12 On the Same Tack, Not OverlappedRule 19 Room to Pass an Obstruction
A and X are sailing on a broad-reach leg and are approaching Y, who is moving slowly. A’s bow is about half of a boat-length behind X’s bow and X is steering a course to pass to leeward of Y. At position 1, A hails for room to pass to leeward of Y. At position 2, X is overlapped to leeward of Y and there is no longer room for A to pass between them. A luffs to keep clear of Y and protests. What should the call be?
Situation RRTRCall 2010-002 ANI a.gif
No penalty. When, after position 1, boats A and X are at the obstruction Y, rule 19 requires the outside boat X to give the inside boat A room between X and Y. However, at position 2, X is no longer required to keep clear of Y and, as a result, Y is no longer an obstruction. Because Y is not an obstruction, rule 19 no longer applies between A and X, and X is therefore no longer required to give A room to pass to leeward of Y. A keeps clear of X and Y as required by rules 11 and 12, respectively.
Similar to question 1, except that A’s bow is about half of a boat-length ahead of X’s bow and X is steering a course directly toward Y’s transom. At position 2, A becomes overlapped to windward of Y. Shortly thereafter, X bears away and passes to leeward of Y. A protests. What should the call be?
Situation RRTRCall 2010-002 ANI b.gif
No penalty. Rule 19 begins to apply between positions 1 and 2 when A and X are at the obstruction Y. Rule 19.1(a) gives X the right to choose which side to pass the obstruction. At the time rule 19 begins to apply, neither A nor X is outside or inside with respect to Y, and therefore rule 19.2(b) is not applicable.
At position 2, A becomes overlapped to windward of Y. A is now the outside boat, and must give X room between her and the obstruction under rule 19.2(b) if X chooses to do so. However, X chooses to go below Y. When X becomes overlapped to leeward of Y, X becomes an obstruction to A and Y and, accordingly, A must give Y room between her and X. A gives Y room as required by rule 19.2(b) and keeps clear of her as required by rule 11.
Similar to question 2, except that A and X are steering a course to pass to leeward of Y. At position 2, A becomes overlapped to leeward of Y. Y luffs to keep clear and protests. What should the call be?
Situation RRTRCall 2010-002 ANI c.gif
No penalty. A and X are sailing a proper course and therefore do not break rule 17. At position 1, A keeps clear of X as required by rule 11. At position 2, A becomes overlapped to leeward of Y. X is now an obstruction to A and Y. As the outside boat, Y must give A room between her and X, provided that she is able to do so from the time the overlap began. Y must also keep clear of A under rule 11. Y gives room and keeps clear by luffing.
Published February 25, 2010 This call is valid until 1 January 2011
In case you are wondering why X already becomes an obstruction to Y in position 2 - remember the definition of overlap. Ooh, and in all animations the coloured boats are my additions. I used TSS this time. Although the animations have improved on the screen, it doesn't translate in the gifs as of yet.
For those of you who want to download the pdf: RRTR Call 2010-002
RRS 2010 changes,
This you need to see!
Rainbow 114 does NOT want to wait any longer and starts breaking the ice....
The communication between Protest-Committees / Juries in different events has been difficult at best. Only a few issues ever get discussed on a wider scale. Mostly it is the individual panels who have to decide the problems as best as they can.
A few bigger events - particularly World Cup events - have the luxury of a large group of IJs, NJs, IUs and NUs who can discuss issues, they have encountered in the past.
It is however expected that every IJ and IU hands in a report to the ISAF about an event he or she has attended. These reports are not only used to assist the ROC in finding difficulties with individual ROs, but also to have some feedback from the actual events under the ISAF-umbrella.
Since a couple of years excerpts of these Jury Reports are published on the Internet: ISAF JURY REPORT.
And instead of sending in a paper you can fill in the public sheet of the ISAF IJ Report directly on-line.
Every report is checked by the site-administrator (IJ-Report Editor) and a member of the International Judges Sub Committee before it is posted on-line. The site is also used to create a database with the numbers. (So and so many Request for Redress for OCS, or total number of hearings, etc.)
Example: From 2010 Rolex Miami OCR:
Judges were split on the new definition of party: does this new definition allow a jury to make a boat that may be affected by a redress decision a party to the hearing, when the jury is not considering redress for this boat? Requirement for the three highest-ranked boats to wear coloured bibs: one team requested to be exempted from this requirement because of an existing contract with a team sponsor. There were difficulties in some hearings to get in due time the race committee staff involved in the situation in question. Too many support boats were not properly identified with national letters. The requirement for coach boats to stay clear of the starting line and its extensions was not popular but we believe this should be applied in all other Sailing World Cup regattas. The course designation based on the number of beats to windward to be sailed should be a standard. When three fleets are racing simultaneously on a trapezoid course the race committee decided to start them on an Outer-Inner-Inner sequence and this caused delays. If you want to know what is happening at events and what special issues the Juries encounter, have a browse trough the reports. At least it is a glimpse into the IJ-world.
By clicking on the text on the front page you get specific information and wich officials attended.
In case you want to keep up-to-date on the latest, (at least those of you who are using Google-reader) fill in this in your RSS reader: http://www.ijreport.org/ Google feed. This is a new feature of Google-Reader: You can track any changes to a website by letting Google create a feed for it
The first one is easy enough. For boats on different tack on a beat, approaching a windward mark, there's no rule 18, until one of them changes tack The third one has been added in the latest rule cycle, but most people already applied it before. No rule 18 between a boat approaching and a boat leaving a mark.
That leaves the second one, rule 18.1(b): Rule 18 does not apply between boats on opposite tacks when the proper course at the mark for one but not both of them is to tack.
The one I came up with was a starboard tack boat on a reach toward a mark and a port tack boat on a beat about to round the same mark. Something like this: Rule 18 is off until the Orange boat passes head to wind. Then she becomes inside boat entitled to mark-room. If Purple has to avoid Orange before she's passed head to wind; penalty on Orange
READ UPDATE in Comments! (J. 23/02/10; 21:33 h)
Just a heads up -- Matt Knowles just posted three new videos on Sailgroove about the latest calls for 2010:
Team Race Call E10, Rapid Response Team Race Call 2010/001 and
Rapid Response Match Race Call 2010/001
Or have a look at: New Rules Calls for 2010 at Sailgroove.org.
Particularly the last one - about what is sailing "to the mark" and being "at the mark" is also of interest for Fleet and Team racers.
If you want to read the official text of the publications go to new Team Race Call Book for E10, the RR Team Call 2010/001 and the RR Match Race Call 2010/001 on the ISAF Site.
The only thing I wish - as being an umpire/judge active in all disciplines - that what is applicable for one is also applicable for the other. For instance: the situation in RRTR Call 2010/001 is NOT applicable in Match Racing because of the new rule C2.12. which states that if the outside boat is not able to give mark room she does not have to.
But then again if sailing wasn't complicated - it wouldn't be half the fun it is now.
Oooh, thanks Chris, for your heads up!
In a blogpost on SailRaceWin published today, a couple nice pictures were posted: Dubai Traditional 60ft Dhow Sailing Championships: Heat One.
Since I spend half a year in Dubai as a trainee, my interest was peeked.
I know (very) little about the traditional Dhows that are sailed there, but they sure are beautiful. I never got the chance to sail on one, only visited a builders-yard to see the frame, alas.
Image copyright Ashraf Al Amra. This particular photo struck me as a Port - Starboard situation between the 'softes' sail possible and the ultimate wing!
Since I'm a civil engineer it also is a picture of the two things that take much of my time...
And it sure makes me wish this FFing winter comes to an end....
When AC 33 match two was postponed again and again last Sunday, everybody was dreading the moment that the PRO Harold Bennett would have to pull the plug and send the boats back in. Fortunately the wind filled in and just before the cut-off time of 16:30 he was able to start the match. But it took some doing!
For those of you who haven't heard about the difficulties he faced and what happened, here are some excerpts from different sources:
Later in the evening Scuttlebutt came out with an extra edition with some astonishing news:
SCUTTLEBUTT EXTRA 3 - Sunday, February 14, 2010 (An update to supplement Scuttlebutt 3028 (and Extra 1 and 2)
SCUTTLEBUTT EXCLUSIVE - BENNETT RISES ABOVE RIFF By Cory E. Friedman, America’s Cup analyst Valencia, Spain (February 14, 2010) - By now many ‘Buttheads know that challenger USA 17 crushed defender Alinghi 5 in both races to win the 33rd America’s Cup. However, reliable sources tell Scuttlebutt that even when you thought it could not get any worse - it did. The defense club – Société Nautique De Genève’s (SNG) - had their Race Committee actually go on strike and refuse to start Sunday’s race ordered by ISAF approved PRO Harold Bennett. To begin the second race of the Match, Bennett was forced to draft Golden Gate Yacht Club (GGYC) observer Tom Ehman and a Guardia Civil cop on board the RC boat and ordered them to run the flags as Bennett counted down himself. FROM SCUTTLEBUTT 3029
* From Thomas C. Price, Annapolis, MD: I'm sorry but if what your Scuttlebutt Extra says is true, (SNG tried to manipulate the RC to their advantage) that calls for sanction by ISAF against Mr Bertarelli. This absolutely cannot be allowed to pass without resolution and it's clear that it's he ISAF who must resolve it! If true, no Alinghi team should ever sail a sanctioned event again! What a shame. After the awkward "Cumbaya" moment at the press conference, where the parties shook hands, this news is reprehensible.
* From George Morris, Inverness, Scotland, UK: If the SNG race committee really did behave as described then this will surely require a Rule 69 referral to ISAF. If the RC members who refused to raise the flags are members of SNG then that club would surely be banned from holding any more yacht races and if they were acting on instructions from Alinghi then surely that team would be banned from all future competition. AC events are not quite the same thing as ordinary sailing club regattas but there is a point at which the two sports touch each other, and that is on the racecourse. If Alinghi attempted to fix the result by buying the race committee, then they have disqualified themselves from future competition. Tell me it isn't true. From an interview with Harold Bennett in Sailingworld: The 33rd Americas Cup Lawyers, Guns and Money.
Harold, what happened on the boat when
you tried to start Race 2? Is it true that the SNG members on the boat
refused to perform their jobs?
We had a bit of a mutiny. I
don't think SNG wanted to go, so they decided they weren't going to do
flags. So Tom [Ehman, BMW Oracle Racing's head of external affairs]
took the AP down and my boat driver, who's also an international
umpire, he shot up forward and did the rest of the signals.
Does this stray into Rule 69 territory. Would you normal write a report for ISAF?
I do have to and obviously that's going to be included in any report.
That's what you do, you've got outline what's going on on the boat,
What could've been their motivation? The wind was as light as it could get and still be stable.
had a perfect breeze the way I saw it. I had good weather information
from the Alinghi weather team. It was perfect, everything lined up, 8,
9 knots up the course. And it was like, well, let's do it.
Have you heard of a race committee at any regatta deciding they want to prevent the race being run?
No. Well I've certainly never experienced it. No. I've never heard of that before.
It has been a week since the match and some lively discussions have begun on the sailing forums. In this post I'll give you some of my personal notes and thoughts on this subject:
Lets have a look at the rules.
There's rule 85; Governing Rules
"The organizing authority, race committee and protest committee shall be governed by the rules in the conduct and judging of races" And if you look at the definition of rules, they include: (g) any other document that govern the event.
Any, in the NoR, SI or other relevant document, regulated boundaries for wave and wind, become therefore rules according to the definition.
And rule 90.1; Race Committee
"The race committee shall conduct races as directed by the organizing authority and as required by the rules."
There are no individual Race Committee members in the rules. The RC may consist of many people, doing different things, but in the rules they are all considered part on one ‘entity’, which is called the Race Committee.
The PRO/RO is responsible for everything his team does. If the mark
boat has not recorded the rounding correctly – the RO gets the blame.
If a flag setter on the committee boat doesn’t want to put up the flag,
the PRO is the only one who can ‘fire’ him and find someone else to do
The wave and wind limitations are part of the rules and should be discussed on the RC-boat. But in the end, only one person takes the decision - simply because it is his responsibility, and that is the RO.
If an individual RC-member does something that has an influence on the race – positive or negative - you cannot protest that individual. In fact, you cannot protest the RC at all. If you disagree with something that has happened because of the RC, the only thing you can do is request redress. And we all know that getting redress is not only depending on "The RC made a mistake or did not do something they should have done". There are other 'demands' before redress can be granted.
But if anything outside the rules in the RRS or the instructions in the NoR & SI is done by an individual RC-member, that has significantly influenced the results/score in a race or series, your only recourse is to request for redress. The Jury might find that you are indeed disadvantaged without any fault of your own and grant redress, but it cannot punish the RC as a whole nor the individual in question.
There is no provision in the rules to start an individual hearing against any member of the RC. You cannot disqualify a member of the RC. You cannot hold a rule 69 hearing against that person.
It becomes complicated if a connection between a competing boat and a RC-committee member can be found as fact. Then the Jury of that event can start a investigation and if appropriate start a rule 69 hearing, but only against the boat or persons competing, not against the RC-member.
An International Jury must be absolutely sure of the facts before it can decide in a
rule 69 hearing against the competitor. And again, if appropriate, the Jury
can only penalize the competitor, not the RC-member. What about Interested Party?
The definition of Interested Party is only
about a person who may gain or lose as a result of a protest
committee's decision, or who has a close personal interest in the
decision. The definition does not include someone on the race committee
boat who has ties with a team or competitor.
Only when an actions
or non actions influences the score in a significant way, and without any
fault of the boat, that boat can request redress and get 'compensated' if necessary.
Since the match was sailed and the 'other' boat won, there's no redress possible. That leaves only one rule.
That is rule 69.2; Action by a National Authority or Initial Action by the ISAF
When someone - RC-member, coach, parent, or anybody who has anything to do with the event - does something that could be a gross breach of a rule, good manners or sportsmanship, or might have conducted him/herself in such a manner that it brings the sport into disrepute, rule 69.2 gives the possibility to write a report and send it to the National Authority or to ISAF.
The MNA and/or ISAF can start an investigation and, when appropriate, conduct a hearing. It may then take any disciplinary action they think is appropriate against that person(s), team, or club.
Like Harold Bennett stated in the interview, a report will be send and the conduct of RC-members will be included. It is now up to the MNA or ISAF to decide what to do with that report.
Rule 69.2 gives them a choice. They may or they may not conduct an investigation and take this matter further.....
"¿Dónde están mis fresas?"
De uitspraken van de Zeilraad zijn door Henk Botterweg opnieuw gerubriceerd en geactualiseerd, en vanaf heden staan ze de site van het Watersportverbond. Vanaf het jaar 2000 zijn ze per jaar gebundeld, bovenaan staan de samenvattingen gevolgd door de volledige uitspraak. De actuele stand van zaken van de hoger beroepen die in behandeling zijn kunt u vinden in de rubriek "Samenvattingen 2009". Bovendien staat in rubriek "Uitsprakenregister" een lijst met hoger beroepen en de daarbij behorende regels uit de Regels voor Wedstrijdzeilen.De hoger beroepen staan als PDF op de site waardoor ze eenvoudig te raadplegen zijn en gemakkelijk te printen. U vindt de uitspraken van de Zeilraad via deze link.
Hieronder vindt u per jaar de samenvattingen van de hogerberoepen.
Uitsprakenbundel 2000 (Appeal decisions 2000)
Uitsprakenbundel 2001 (Appeal decisions 2001)
Uitsprakenbundel 2002 (Appeal decisions 2002)
Uitsprakenbundel 2003 (Appeal decisions 2003)
Uitsprakenbundel 2004 (Appeal decisions 2004) Uitsprakenbundel 2005 (Appeal decisions 2005)
Uitsprakenbundel 2006 (Appeal decisions 2006) Uitsprakenbundel 2007 (Appeal decisions 2007) Uitsprakenbundel 2008 (Appeal decisions 2008) Samenvattingen 2009 (Summaries 2009) (uitsprakenregister) (Appeal decisions register)
Binnenkort kunt u de uitspraken overzichtelijk terugvinden op www.watersportverbond.nl/wedstrijdzeilen. Op die nieuwe website zal dan ook de rubriek "Schorsingen" te vinden zijn, hierin staan de personen vermeld die op dit moment door de zeilraad voor een bepaalde periode zijn geschorst. Voor nadere inlichtingen of vragen kunt u contact opnemen met de secretaris van de Zeilraad Henk Plaatje.
The above posted text is about the Dutch National Appeal Committee: "de Zeilraad". They've reorganized and published their decisions in a pdf-archive going back to 2000.
With internet translation possibilities you should be able to translate the general gist of the 'verdicts'. If you come across a case you need clarification about, you can either ask Henk Plaatje (mail address above) or send me an Email.
Ramps is a database-driven application that provides the fastest way to
locate boat ramp and launching facilities. Boat Ramps provides an easy
to use interface that places a database of over 45,000 ramps at your
With ease Boat Ramps will provide a list of ramps in
proximity to your current location. The proximity and number of results
can be configured to fine tune the results of your search.
away from your current location? No problem. Simply enter the desired
location's zip code or select a city and Boat Ramps will provide you a
list of possible ramps to launch your vessel.
Once a ramp of interest is located its location can be fed to the
built-in Maps application to obtain directions. Currently Boat Ramps
provides boat ramp / launch locations for the United States, United
Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. Ramp / launch locations for additional
countries may be added at a later date. Boat Ramps requires the iPhone
OS 3.0 to run.
* Added Icons to Results to Identify Ramps, Marinas and Marinas with
This is what happened (as far as I can reconstruct from videos): Picture: AC33 SUI-USA M2 Layline Cross.png
GIF- Animation: AC33 SUI-USA M2 Layline Cross Dial down.gif Boat Scenario file: AC33 SUI-USA M2 Layline Cross Dail down.xbs
You want to try to get a lee-bow position. There are two drawbacks: Tacking that low would mean that you do it barely on the lay-line, perhaps you are even not yet on the lay-line. With that shifty wind and still 2 miles to go, you might not fetch the mark. And secondly there's a big chance that USA - with her superior speed - simply would pass to windward and roll you. Picture: AC33 SUI-USA M2 Layline Cross Lee-bow.png
GIF- Animation: AC33 SUI-USA M2 Layline Cross Lee-bow.gif Boat Scenario file: AC33 SUI-USA M2 Layline Cross Lee-bow.xbs
GIF- Animation: AC33 SUI-USA M2 Layline Cross Front tack.gif Boat Scenario file: AC33 SUI-USA M2 Layline Cross Front tack.xbs
If you don't know what the title means - I suggest you do some research.
Been fiddling around with the layout a little bit, last couple of weeks, but still am not completely happy with the results. I think I'll do some spring cleaning next. Getting rid of the side-clutter to the fixed pages in the top horizontal bar, some more. That will reduce loading time, which has gone up again, since I last checked. Suggestions are welcome.
The AC posts - still running - have generated an increase in traffic with an new LTW record of 1855 visits on a single day last Tuesday. And total visits have passed the 100.000 mark. To keep the average of one post a day before my next year-day, I'll have to post 1.623 posts/day. Well, this month it looks like that will succeed.
Please keep sending in your Sunday rules - snaps. The crew hanging outside the lifelines was a hit!
The list of ten highest referring sites to LTW: 1 http://blogger.com 2
http://sailingscuttlebutt.com
3 http://propercourse.blogspot.com
http://destinationonedesign.com
http://wayfarer-international.org
http://ukhalsey.com
My thanks to you all, but particularly to "Lord T' who celebrated his fifth B'day only yesterday! Congrats with that, indeed!
Google ranks LTW as fourth with "Racing Rules of Sailing" as search, after ISAF, US Sailing and Wikipedia. I can live with that.
We've had a couple of months winter here, with lots of ice and snow - on and off. And it doesn't look like it is going to let up anytime soon. So, no winter sailing, alas. Maybe in April. Cheers,
The third post in this series is about the red flag on SUI and the penalty they received in the prestart.
To explain the latter I will have to show you a diagram of the start area. But first a few words on Match Racing.
Because of the special nature of a match race – being one on one – its is not important to finish as fast as possible, as in a fleet race, it is only important to finish first. Finish first is key, however long that may take!
Match race is about control. If you control your opponent, you can win. A controlling position is therefore paramount. In the AC 33 dogfight we see little of this because the boats are all about speed. But – yes – if you are ahead far enough, you control the race. And in Match 1 USA managed to control SUI for a couple of minutes in the prestart.
To get that control you need to engage your opponent. And that engagement begins well before the start. Now if we do anything like a conventional start as in fleet racing, the two boats in a match race will never know when to begin looking for each other to gain that control.
Therefore in match racing there’s a special procedure in the rules which allows a controlled beginning of the pre start manoeuvres. We have a sort of ‘start’ before the actual start line crossing.
To get there, each boats is assigned to a side. The Yellow side next to the RC-boat and a Blue side next to the pin end of the start line
Picture from a presentation by Henk Plaatje; http://www.plaatje.info/
In the AC33 Match 2, SUI was assigned the Yellow boat and USA the Blue boat.
At her preparatory signal (five minutes in AC33) each boat shall be outside the line that is at a 90 degrees angle to the starting line through the starting mark at her assigned end. …. (C4.1)
Within the two minute period following her preparatory signal, a boat shall cross and clear the starting line, the first time from the course side to the pre-start side. (C4.2)
To check that precise line the umpire boat and the wing boat each place themselves on that line, one below and one above the starting line. If a boat is anywhere else then in its “box” when the preparatory signal is given, she gets a penalty. Be it still sailing to get there or be it sailing too soon over the line to get to the other boat. Outside your box equals penalty.
In match 2 of AC 33, SUI was still sailing below the starting line towards her assigned end, when the five minute preparatory signal was given. That is the reason SUI was given a penalty. The wing boat signalled this to the umpire boat and they switched on the yellow light.
Why, you might ask? Why was SUI not there?
Remember the red flag SUI tied to a back stay halfway up the beat? Brad Butterworth declared in the subsequent press-conference, that SUI felt that there where too many spectator boats in that area. They felt that they could not safely navigate and therefore where outside. A red flag for a request for redress.
Looking at the videos specifically, you can see some spectator boats on that side, but they are at least a couple of hundred meters away from the committee boat. Plenty of room to sail there. Might it be that they were not fully prepared to race so late in the afternoon? With a start only five minutes before the official cut-off time? I can only speculate.
Fact is that earning that penalty was unnecessary. SUI should have been in her yellow box. An unforced error, which most match racers make only once. Unfortunately AC33 does not give you second chances……
If SUI had felt that a crucial factor in loosing this match was because of the penalty in the pre-start, I’m sure she would have gone trough with her request for redress. As it was, the difference in boat speed between her and USA was so big, that it was not a deciding factor. Besides, getting redress would be next to impossible.
To conclude this post I have a question for the rules-nerds among you: (Don’t blame me, blame Tillerman for introducing this wording into the AC33, I would not have dared to use it otherwise.)
WHAT IF there were too many spectator boats in Yellow box and SUI could not safely navigate there? How would you decide in the subsequent request for redress?
Next time in AC 33 | Rules en explanations: the Cross on the Port lay-line.
This is the second post in our series explaining some of the rules-issues in the America’s Cup 33. Go back to the first post - AC 33 | Rules and explanations – part 1 – if you want to be reminded.
Before I can start to explain our first issue – the additional five minutes delta SUI earned in the first match - I’ll have to go into the rulebook a little bit. Specifically the definition of finish and the change to that definition that has been done in the Match Racing rules (App. C rule 2.1 & 7.2(d))
According to the changed definition, SUI could take that penalty anytime provided she did so before finishing. The wording in the rulebook says she could only finish after completing any penalties. (Unless that penalty is cancelled under rule C7.2(d). I.e. the other boat is also been given a penalty just before or after the boat crosses the line.)
In Match 1 SUI trailed USA, still carrying a penalty (from the prestart dail-up).
According to the video’s and virtual eye recordings I’ve seen, SUI crossed the line the first time – about ten minutes after USA - without having taken that penalty, but started to do so just after her bows crossed the line. SUI luffed below the line and turned up straight away into a tack. A penalty on a downwind leg, as defined in the rulebook states:
(2) When on a leg of course to a leeward mark or the finishing line, she shall tack and, as soon as reasonable possible, bear away to a course that is more than ninety degrees from true wind. The penalty starts! when the boat passes head to wind and ends! when the boat has turned downwind. (More then ninety degrees from true wind). Just after her tack SUI turned downwind and thereby completed her penalty. That was signaled by the umpires by blowing a whistle and turning of the yellow flicker-light. BUT – and this is crucial for the explanation, SUI did so while the boat was still – perhaps completely, but at least partly - below the line. Going back to rule C7.2(d):
A penalized boat shall not be recorded as having finished until she takes her penalty and sails completely to the course side of the line and then finishes, unless the penalty is canceled before or after she crosses the finishing line.
So the penalty was completed, but the boat had not returned completely to the course side of the line. I can understand that with a boat of that magnitude you make a mistake in judging if you are over or not-over the finishing line. But not heading the signal of the RC indicating that you have finished? Or taking that kind of risk in trailing position by doing your penalty turn on the line?
I can only explain this maneuver by guessing that SUI wanted to make the delta as small as possible. That is: crossing the line immediately after having turned more then ninety degrees from true wind. Match Racers do this often, by using one of the finishing marks as a turning point. With that mark they can at least be sure they return to the course side of the line!
But SUI sailed downwind without having any doubt of having finished. Only a radio-communication from the RC made them aware that in fact SUI was still not finished! After that SUI sailed back upwind, passed the line and then crossed the line according to the rules to finish. This was the mistake that cost them an additional five minute delta in the first match. Instead of 9 minutes 56 second or about, the delta became 15 minutes and 25 seconds!
Before you start about the communication from the RC over the radio, that part of rule 41 was changed in the NoR/SI – and it is a moot point whether that is meant to cover information pertinent to one boat only…….
In our next installment of AC 33 | Rules and explanations we will have a look at the second match. Specifically about the prestart penalty and the red flag on SUI.
The AC33 has been sailed and USA-17 managed to win both matches.
Congratulations to the whole BMW Oracle Racing - team.
In a couple of posts in the coming week, I want to take you back to several rules issues in those two matches. I already posted about the first penalty in the first match in this post Rules picture of the year?, so we'll leave that one. But in both matches there were other - be it less deciding - issues.
I'll try to explain the following subjects: SUI lost the first match with a delta of over 15 minutes, although she crossed the finish line within 10 minutes of USA-17. How is that possible?
In the second match SUI again received a penalty in the pre-start. This time not because of a boat to boat incident, but because of an 'unforced' error on her part. Or was it really 'unforced'?
Although SUI managed to lead for most of the windward beat to mark 1 and crossed USA in front in the second match, she did not round the first mark as the leading boat. The rules play a big part in why that happened.
Half way up the beat in the second match SUI tied a red protest-flag in one of her back-stays. What was that all about? Could she have influenced the outcome had the hearing been held?
And finally a very difficult issue. A major conflict between OA and RC - both represented in the committee boat on the water. With that we drift into a subject the ISAF is also working on: Interested Party.
If you have other issues you want to have explained about the rules, drop me an Email and I'll endeavour to find an answer.
CASE 109Part 2 Preamble Rule 48, Fog Signals and Lights International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea
The IRPCAS or government right-of-way rules apply between boats that are racing only if the sailing instructions say so, and in that case all of the Part 2 rules are replaced. An IRPCAS or government rule may be made to apply by including it in the sailing instructions or in another document governing the event.Question 1 What are the ‘government rules’ to which the preamble to Part 2 and rule 48 refer? How do those rules differ from the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (IRPCAS)?
Answer 1 The IRPCAS apply only ‘upon the high seas and in all waters connected therewith navigable by seagoing vessels’ (IRPCAS Rule 1(a)). On a country’s harbours, rivers, lakes and other inland waters, governments and other government authorities may establish other rules. Those other rules are the ‘government rules’ to which the Part 2 preamble and rule 48 refer. Such rules, which may apply nationally on all inland waters or only on specific inland waters, may restate, replace, change or add to the IRPCAS (IRPCAS Rules 1(b) and 1(c)). Question 2 When the notice of race, sailing instructions and other documents that govern an event do not mention the IRPCAS or government rules, do any rules of the IRPCAS or government rules apply to a boat racing under The Racing Rules of Sailing? Answer 2 Yes. When safety requires, a boat racing shall sound fog signals and show lights as required by the IRPCAS or applicable government rules (rule 48). Also, when a boat sailing under the Part 2 rules meets a vessel that is not, the IRPCAS or government right-of-way rules apply between them (Part2 preamble).
Question 3 May the notice of race, sailing instructions or another document that governs the event make the IRPCAS or government right-of-way rules or other rules of the IRPCAS or government rules applicable? Answer 3 Yes, in three ways: The sailing instructions may state that the right-of-way rules of the IRPCAS or government rules replace all of the rules of Part 2 (Part 2 preamble and rule J2.2(2)). This is often done for oceanic races and also for racing at night. The sailing instructions may state that a particular rule from the IRPCAS or government rules (other than a right-of-way rule) will apply to the event and include the text of that rule (rule J2.2(38)).
The definition Rule includes ‘(g) any other document governing the event.’ Such a document may include the text of a particular rule or rules from the IRPCAS or government rules (other than a right-of-way rule) that will apply to the event. Rules for crossing shipping lanes are often made available in such a document. To govern an event, a document must be listed in the notice of race (rule J1.1(3)), stating where or how it may be seen, and in the sailing instructions (rule J2.1(2)). A boat that breaks a rule of the IRPCAS or a government rule can always be prosecuted by an authority responsible for its enforcement, but a protest may be made under such a rule only when the rule concerned ‘governs the event’. Question 4 If the sailing instructions state that the right-of-way rules of the IRPCAS replace the rules of Part 2, which rules of Part 2 are replaced by which rules of the IRPCAS? Answer 4 All the rules of Part 2 are replaced. Part B of the IRPCAS contains the IRPCAS ‘Steering and Sailing Rules’, which are, in effect, ‘right-of-way rules’. However, Part B of the IRPCAS must be read in conjunction with the whole of the IRPCAS, particularly Part A. For example, many terms used in Part B are defined in Part A.
Question 5 Is it possible to provide for a wider or narrower range of replacements of right-of-way rules that apply between competing boats? Answer 5 A sailing instruction may only replace all the rules of Part 2 with all the right-of-way rules of the IRPCAS or government rules. Rule 86.1 states that the sailing instructions shall not change Part 2, which includes its preamble. Therefore, a wider or narrower range of replacements of right-of-way rules that apply between competing boats is not permitted. RYA 2005/1
Because the rules depend on each other to get a level playing field you can't use parts of one and parts of the other at the same time. .
The penalty was a simple port and starboard going 13.1, no 16 involved and the give way boat turned across the ROW boat. She had 2 avenues of escape, took the wrong one, if they had gone down, 16 would have applied to USA's course alteration to follow and the call would have gone green. (red: 13.1 = keeping clear while tacking, from App C; Match Racing)
Judging 2 boat lengths separation for 17 or not, after the start
when they were straight lining, was difficult, but unless it was USA to
leeward, it was only academic in those conditions.
(red: for those of you who don't speak umpire speak: Rule 17 restricts the leeward boat from sailing above her proper course (after the start-signal) if she established a leeward overlap within two hull lengths of the windward boat. Bill is explaining he found it difficult to judge a distance of 200 feet accurately - which is completely understandable, in my opinion) Are you planning to change the system now you've umpired the first match?
No, just rotate the personnel a
little and refine some of the communications with the RC, especially
the penalty taking where the RC came over our radio transmission
inadvertently. Will the team record and document all calls? If so, will these be published?
What you got above will be the sole extent probably, unless there is something of interest, a learning point. What strikes you as the biggest difference between AC33 and AC32 - from an umpire point of view?
The boats, obviously. The atmosphere is very different, for instance they don't have joint press conference. But our relationship with the sailors though, is as good always. The delays between races mean more careful management of the team to make sure cabin fever doesn't strike, though the team we have here, is very experienced and time management is one of the skills you develop.
Many thanks Bill, Any chance of an updated picture with Graig in the frame? It was him that umpired yesterday, was it not? I heard some comments on the broadcast about you changing the decision process after a call? Taking more time to get consensus? Can you tell me anything about that? Did you change 17 overlap with only the hulls or is the bowsprit the complicating factor? How are the umpire boats? Yesterday was only between 4-10 knots and you seemed to be going flat out at times. Will you be able to keep up when it's blowing 16 knots? I've analysed your call yesterday by the published pictures and put them on the blog It seems to be complying with your answer, but if you have any comments, please send them. http://rrsstudy.blogspot.com/2010/02/rules-picture-of-year.html SUI lost five minutes at the finish after completing the penalty. The commentators and journalist all seem to have different answers as to why. Can you enlighten me? What happened? Good luck Sunday! And my regards to your team. Thanks again . Jos
If you have additional questions- be quick - it all could be over tomorrow! (Sunday February 14th)
Van : rrs-study at home.nl verzonden : vrijdag, februari 12, 2010 12:27 Aan : Raceday at BMWOracleRacing.com Onderwerp : AC33 Competition Martin,
Forgot to include the penalties by the umpires: Two Green, two Blue and one Yellow. (The second Blue for infringing rule 18.3 as changed by C2.6)
Therefore I predict a win for USA 17 with a delta of 7 min 27 seconds.
RACING RULES OF SAILING: LOOK TO WINDWARD: http://rrsstudy.blogspot.com/
Get your prediction in! It looks like they are going.....
International 420 Class - 2010 Class Rules permit use of Electronic Compasses
The International 420 Class Association has published Amendments to the Class Rules for 2010.
Of interest for sailors and officials is that electronic compasses are now permitted! N.B: These class rules go into effect 1st March 2010. You still have a couple of weeks to go shopping.
From the amended class rules: Rule C.5.1 (a)(2) – Permit Electronic Compasses
Amendment: Replace existing rule with:
“C.5.1. a.2) One compass fixed to a mounting bracket. The compass shall not recess into either side tank or deck. The mounting bracket may be attached on the mast or may be used to close the mast gate. If electronic, only a compass with heading, heading memory and timing functions is permitted.”
Better make sure that your new compass does not exceed the limitations.
The 420 is still a pretty big class, with over 56.000 registered boats. I wonder how long it will take to trickle down to other dinghy classes?
What do you think? Do you want an electronic compass on your boat?
Check out the Extreme match-racing action from Muscat last week - double Olympic Gold Medallist Shirley Robertson takes on Youth World Match Racing Silver Medallist Paul Campbell-James. DOWNLOAD THE HIGHLIGHTS VIDEO FOR THE MATCH RACING AT MUSCAT BELOW (84.5MB) No match racing in Valencia on Monday, but multihulls have been match racing recently! Check out the action in Muscat last week when double Olympic Gold Medallist Shirley Robertson (Rumbo Almería) faced up against World Match Racing Youth Championship silver medallist Paul Campbell-James (The Wave, Muscat) in two Extreme 40s at the final event of the Extreme Sailing Series Asia. The fleet of six boats in Muscat spent an afternoon match racing - a new addition to the usual short - course Extreme 40 fleet racing format. With the teams racing metres from the shoreline and with commentary throughout the afternoon by Olympic silver medallist Mark Covell, the crowds, most of whom were watching sailing for the first time, were entertained and excited by the easy to understand, head to head racing.
Ian Walker, onboard Rumbo Almería gave us his thoughts: "It was very interesting. Having skippered and been a tactician in the America's Cup, I was interested to see how it would work in catamarans, particularly with the America's Cup being in multihulls this time. I actually think it can work. We don't get that many passing manoeuvres anyway in the slower, heavier boats and what we saw was a real premium boat handling. But the most important thing is setting the course so the boats can split at the leeward mark. If it was a one way track, it wouldn't work. But it was an excellent course and there was a lot of over-taking, from what we saw in these conditions and these boats, I think thumbs up.
Here's to more wind in Valencia tomorrow and Mr Ellison's prediction "It should be quite a spectacle of extreme sailing" will hopefully come true. If not ... hold out for the start of the Extreme Sailing Series Europe in May - it promises to be a spectacular series.
Download Video (.mov format) View Videos Online
See also a LTW-blogpost with some notes from CU Ewan McEwan: Extreme 40 racing in Muskat