At 3 boat lengths Blue is overlapped inside Yellow on a course directly to the mark. At position 2, Blue heads up slightly to make more room to make a tactical rounding. At position 4 as Blue heads down to gybe Yellow heads up to pass head to wind and tack. At position 6 Yellow hails, “I NEED ROOM!” and Blue hails, “NO ROOM!” At position 7 there is contact between Yellow and Blue and Yellow hits the mark. There is no damage or injury as a result of the contact.1. At position 1 who is entitled to mark-room?
2. At Position 6 who is entitled to mark-room?
3. At Position 7 what rule(s) does Blue break?
4. At Position 7 what rule(s) does Yellow break?
5. Who should be DSQ: Yellow, Blue, Neither, Both?
1. Blue
ReplyDelete2. Blue
3. 14
4. 18.2
5. Both: Blue also broke 18.4 earlier
Q1. Blue 18.2(b)
ReplyDeleteQ2. My answer here is two questions. Since yellow has passed head to wind does that mean 18.2(b) no longer applies per 18.2(c)? In which case is it proper to apply 18.2(a) and Blue will have to give mark room to yellow under 18.2(a)?
Q3. Then, if blue has to give yellow mark room per 18.2(a) blue breaks 18.2(a) and of course 14 but cannot be penalized for 14 because she is ROW boat under rule 11, and there is no damage or injury. It does not appear that blue broke 16.1.
But if blue is not required to give yellow mark room under 18.2(a) as I hop is the case, then. As Anon has said blue only breaks 14 but will n be penalized.
However I cannot seem to answer Q3, Q4, and Q5 until I resolve the following issues in my mind.
Is there a conflict between 18.2(b) which says, “…shall thereafter give the inside boat mark room” and 18.2(c) which says 18.2(b) ceases to apply if either boat passes head to wind?
Unlike 18.2(a) which says, “…unless rule 18.2(b) applies”. Is it of any significance that 18.2(b) does not say,.. unless 18.2(c) applies?
What would be wrong with an interpretation that says; Under 18.2(c), 18.2(b) ceases to apply to NEW overlaps between blue and yellow after a boat passes head to wind but that yellow is still obligated to give blue mark room under it’s original obligation when blue first entered the zone? In which case we can just forget about the mention of 18.2(a) applying.
5. I would disagree with Anon regarding 18.4. It appears from the diagram that blue did gybe at a point that would be her proper course, to come close by the mark on the leaving side.
Q1:Blue
ReplyDeleteQ2:Yellow
Rule 18.2(c):As soon as either of the boats passes head to wind, rule 18.2(b) is switched off. So that leaves only 18.2(a). Yellow has an overlap and is the inside boat, therefore entitled to mark-room.
There is no need for "unless 18.2(c) applies" in the wording off rule 18.2(b) because the two conditions that switch off rule 18.2(b) are specifically mentioned in rule 18.2(c)
Rule 18.2(a) is always applicable unless....
Rule 18.2(b) is only applicable when one of the boats has entered the zone.. and then switched off again, if the conditions in 18.2(c) are met
Q3: Blue DSQ for 18.2(a) but also breaks rule 14
Q4: Yellow breaks rule 11 and 31
Yellow is exonerated for breaking rule 11 and 31 under rule 18.5(b)
Blue breaks 14 but is not penalised because she's row boat and there's no damage or injury.
I don't think Yellow broke 14, she could do nothing to prevent the contact
Agree with Jos.
ReplyDeleteUnder what circumstances is it sensible for Y to do a one turn penalty?
Very nice explanation by Jos. Though it does seem really unfair to blue that yellow has taken away his entitlement to mark room by doing a quick turn and passing head to wind. Will this be a tactic all the match and team racers will be using?
ReplyDeleteI wonder if that is what the rule makers intended, and for what reason?
Also, can yellow be exonerated for hitting the mark, rule 31, a rule of part 3, under 18.5? Or rather under 64.1(c)?
And my answer to Brass as to when yellow might be wise to do a turn would be in the event that blue is able to convince a jury that yellow had time and opportunity to avoid sailing between blue and the mark and so was not compelled to sail there. Could we say yellow was "barging" at the mark?
How in the world do you give rights to yellow in this case. When upon entering the zone blue had an inside overlap over yellow. This is a lock. PLease quote the rule that would allow this. If you stand back and look at this example it would be chaos in real life.
ReplyDeleteDick and Anon2,
ReplyDeleteSet your minds at ease. This is a very contrived situation to demonstrate the 'pass head to wind' switch off in rule 18.2(c).
In real life it would be very difficult for Y to come up to head to wind, tack, then bear away into space between B and the mark. B would normally be long gone. Circumstances that might make it happen would be a strong downwind current or tide, that would sweep B, hardening up at or below the mark away from the mark, while sweeping Y, tacking above the mark down to it. It would be a blunder on B's part to let it happen.
I think the application of the head to wind switch off was applied to boat boats to improve the game in match racing and/or team racing, or maybe just conceptually that a boat tacking at a leeward mark isn't 'rounding' it.
Dick has a good point. Jos and I got it wrong. Y cannot be exonerated for hitting the mark under rule 18.5, which only gives exoneratino from some Part 2 rules. Y is exonerated under rule 62.1(c) because she was compelled to hit the mark by B breaking rule 18.2(a).
Dick, you can't wait to see whether B has convinced the jury before doing turns: turns have to be done as soon after the incident as possible. Try again. Anyone else want to try this risk/reward management question?
Barging, when the word was in the rules, meant demanding what we would now call mark-room to round a starting mark while starting.
Not so contrived as you think Brass watch the video on the side bar. This is where I got the idea for the scenario
ReplyDeleteThe video differs from the illustration. The ROW boat luffs up the trailing boat, rather than jibing immediately.
ReplyDeleteI had the inside boat luff up, at least that was my intent. The boat tacking needs to do it just before the boat that is going wide turns down to gybe.
ReplyDeleteI will admit this is probably more doable in a team race when 18.4 is turned off, and the inside boat is going perhaps wider than 18.4 would allow. But, I think it can happen in other circumstances if the opportunity arises on someone going a little wider than necessary at the leeward mark. To say the least this is something that will not happen except with small maneuverable boats like Lasers or FJs. I'm not sure our Stars could spin fast enough.
I still haven't found a good reason why the rule writers decided to change it from the clear ahead boat passing head to wind in the old rules, to 'either' boat in the new. I'm still not sure what they were trying to fix.
Imagine you are rounding a mark with a dozen boats with no rights and then you tack around going for the inside spot. Seems like it will produce more collisions and chaos. Tactically this could have a tremendous advantage in a big fleet.
ReplyDelete@Brass & Dick, you are right about Yellow being exonerated under 62.1(c)and not 18.2(b). Good catch!
ReplyDelete@Anonymous. With more boats all in overlap approaching a leeward mark the ones on the outside will be most surely all be outside the zone. The will have obligation to give mark room to the inside boats who enter the zone first, but are not themselves in the zone to get rights over boats coming from behind.
Rule 18.2(b) only switches on between two boats, when one of them enters the zone. The fact that an outside boat has to give mark room to another inside boat, does not govern the relationship between that outside boat and a third boat.
I am joining sides with Anon on this one. To turn off the rights of blue with yellow will be chaotic. What if there were 4 overlapped boats and 2 clear astern boats owing rights to blue under 18.2(b) and 3 of them did quick turns after they entered the zone. How the heck would blue keep track of who he has rights with and who may have turned off those rights? Does he need to have one of his crew keep an eye on everybody that owe him rights and those that now don’t?
ReplyDeleteAfter re-reading the new rule 18 comments of Dick Rose in his “White Paper” and Dave Dellenbaugh in his Speed and Smarts, and Dave Perry’s Understanding The Racing Rules of Sailing, I find that they do talk about 18.2(c) as it applies to a boat leaving the zone and, a boat passing head to wind at the windward mark.
But, none seem to speak directly to the issue of a boat passing head to wind at the leeward mark, before passing or rounding the mark. I wonder why they have chose not to address it?
In his remarks, Dick Rose says the following.
"Rule 18.2(b) ceases to apply if the boat entitled to mark-room leaves the zone. When she reenters the zone, rule 18.2 will apply to her afresh”.
I am making a stretch here in trying to resolve blue’s delima but is there any chance that we could use this comment by Dick Rose to say that only the boat that passes head to wind looses their rights under 18.2(b) so that blue will not lose hers if she is not the one that passes head to wind?
And to try Brass’s question again with out the “B” word. From the diagram it seems that at position 6 blue has "shut the door" on yellow.
If in a protest, filed by blue or the race committee, blue or the RC convinces the PC that yellow had no room to sail between blue and the mark and could have opted to pass the mark on the wrong side then yellow will not be exonerated under 64.1(c). Of course this would be a suicidal tactic for blue as blue would likewise be DSQ’ed for breaking 18.2(a).
Dick,
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting how they are not bringing this situation up much. Dick Rose wouldn't even talk about it when I asked him about it during his seminar. I believe this is an unintended consequence of the new rules. I'm sure it will change if it becomes a problem. But, honestly not many boats will be able to take advantage of this due to maneuverability. However, it will be a game changer in team racing where 18.4 is deleted, and they used to "own the zone" and setting a trap if you are Blue.
You have hit on the defense for this move. 18.2(e) says she doesn't need to give room if the overlap was from clear astern and from the time it began she was unable to give room. As Blue you need to make sure to stay closer to the mark and are not able to give room when the new overlap is established.
From Brass: "Dick has a good point. Jos and I got it wrong. Y cannot be exonerated for hitting the mark under rule 18.5, which only gives exoneratino from some Part 2 rules. Y is exonerated under rule 62.1(c) because she was compelled to hit the mark by B breaking rule 18.2(a)."
ReplyDeleteThis is something I, and many of my fellow radio sailors, dislike about the new rules. If you are denied mark-room to which you are entitled, and hit a boat, you are exonerated on the spot. If you hit the mark you have to go to the protest committee and take a chance on being out-lawyered and getting a DSQ. So the rules favor hitting boats over hitting marks, which is pretty silly IMHO.
One judge we asked about this said basically if you know you're in the right, just sail on -- and hope nobody protests you.
Luckily, rule 31 is in Part 3 can be (and in my club is) modified by Sailing Instructions to include on-th-spot exoneration when illegally forced into a mark.
BISF Ed said:
ReplyDelete"You have hit on the defense for this move. 18.2(e) says she doesn't need to give room if the overlap was from clear astern and from the time it began she was unable to give room. As Blue you need to make sure to stay closer to the mark and are not able to give room when the new overlap is established."
Blue had better have evidence that he had the tiller all the way up in his ribcage and the main all the way out if he wants to get away with this defence in the situation shown.
Anon Radio Sailor said:
"If you are denied mark-room to which you are entitled, and hit a boat, you are exonerated on the spot. If you hit the mark you have to go to the protest committee and take a chance on being out-lawyered and getting a DSQ. So the rules favor hitting boats over hitting marks, which is pretty silly IMHO."
No-one gets 'exonerated on the spot' except in match racing (rule C8.1(b), but before exoneration under either rule 18.5 or 64.1(c) comes into play, there has to be a valid protest and PC must find that a rule has been broken.
What can happen is that a boat can hit a mark, and, in the belief that she was compelled to do so by another boat breaking a rule, quite properly refrain from taking a one turn penalty.
Anon Radio Sailor said:
"One judge we asked about this said basically if you know you're in the right, just sail on -- and hope nobody protests you."
May be a vain hope.
Would you or anyone else care to answer my little extra question:
In the illustrated situation under what circumstances is it sensible for Y to do a one turn penalty?
You didn't understand my point. Blue has to be carful about going as wide as I've shown here. Her only defense it to say closer to the mark.
ReplyDeleteBrass,
ReplyDeleteAs to your last question. In this case I don't see what doing one turn will do. She would have to do two turns to be exonerated for the foul of Blue. If there is a protest and she loses the protest she will be DSQ if she only does one turn. If she wins the protest she is exonerated for Rule 31. What does she gain? If she has doubt she should do two turns and then protest Blue
BISF Star Site said...
ReplyDeleteYou didn't understand my point. Blue has to be carful about going as wide as I've shown here. Her only defense it to say closer to the mark.
Gotcha. Agree.
I thought you were saying that B could argue @7 that she couldn't possibly bear away quickly enough to give Y room.
I suggest that Y should take an 'insurance' one turn penalty for hitting the mark if:
ReplyDelete* she thinks that, despite what is shown in the diagram @7, that there was actually a little more room between B and the mark, and that B can argue that Y could possibly have avoided hitting the mark, that is, that Y was not compelled to hit the mark; and
* if the places she is likely to lose by doing a penalty will have less of an impact on her pointscore than taking the chance of losing a protest because the PC is not convinced that she was compelled to hit the mark;
BUT
* she should ONLY take a penalty if there is a timely hail of protest and if necessary a protest flag: she believes she is in the right, but may take turns as insurance against losing a valid protest: no valid protest no turns.
Y could, indeed take two turns penalty, which would cover her if she lost a protest on 'the Move' as a whole, but I was focusing on the different standards for exoneration between rule 64.1(c) compelled, applicable to hitting the mark, and rule 18.5 applicable to the rule 11 breach, which only requires that she be taking mark-room to which she is entitled for her to be exonerated.
Brass said:
ReplyDelete"No-one gets 'exonerated on the spot' except in match racing (rule C8.1(b), but before exoneration under either rule 18.5 or 64.1(c) comes into play, there has to be a valid protest and PC must find that a rule has been broken."
There seems to be a difference of opinion about that. I have a private email (which I'm enough of a stickler on netiquette to not cite) from a UK judge which contains the phrase "immediate exoneration" when referring to 18.5. It is clear from the context (exoneration as another way of saying a rule was shut off) that he meant "on the water."
I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to explain this stuff to R/C airplane guys who are tired of sweeping up after crashes :-)
Anon Radio Sailor
Anon Radio Sailor,
ReplyDeleteI don't know how to help you with your electronic friends, but as far as the rules are concerned:
If you know you have broken a rule and you know that you are not entitled to exoneration under either rule 18.5 or rule 64.1(c) you must take your penalty. (So much for what goes on inside your head.)
OTHERWISE
You cannot be penalised without a protest hearing (rule 63.1)
No-one can fairly decide that you have broken a rule without a proper hearing of a valid protest.
Therefore exoneration does not arise until there is a protest committee conclusion that you broke a rule.
There is no warrant in the text of rule 18.5 to suggest anything different from rule 64.1(c). Rule 18.5 says 'she shall be exonerated', not 'is exonerated' or 'will be exonerated without a hearing'.
I took a US Sailing Judging Seminar last weekend and was discussing this scenario with the attendees. I received the following note after they checked with others in the Judging community:
ReplyDelete"Regarding Scenario 4, this was an event call (i.e., how the umpires are supposed to rule on this sort of incident) at the recently concluded Team Racing Worlds, that Yellow (which tacked) gets mark-room, and the manoeuvre occurred a couple of times - probably after having learned of it from the published event call! I have also been informed that US Sailing is currently in the process of deliberating about making a submission to the ISAF Racing Rules Committee to change the wording in the second sentence of rule 18.2(c), so stay tuned, this is a hot topic!"
There may yet be a change to 18.2(c) to fix this.
Ok this will be my third and final try to answer Brass's question as to when will it be sensible for yellow to do a turn?
ReplyDeleteAnd it is Anon's comments that made me think of it.
The answer. When yellow hits the mark but does not hit blue. Ta Daaa!
Dick,
ReplyDeleteIf Y hits the mark without contact between B and Y, what else does Y need to do?
See also my suggested answer to the one-turn penalty posted at February 11, 2009 6:17 PM
Ok, my forth and final try. Yellow should hail protest for blue for breaking 16.1?
ReplyDeleteYes, a defensive protest was what I had in mind, but on reflection, that is not a good idea. Same logic as applies to doing 'insurance' turns. If Y does not believe that she has broken a rule, and there is no protest from another boat, Y does not want to go to the room: she should sail on without turns or protest.
ReplyDeleteSorry for the red herring.
nike air force 1
ReplyDeletetory burch shoes
kobe basketball shoes
michael kors handbags
nike air huarache
Kanye West shoes
adidas ultra boost uncaged
nike huarache
cheap jordans
reebok outlet