SailNet Community - Reply to Topic

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > Out There > Racing > racing rules question narrow channel
 Not a Member? 


Thread: racing rules question narrow channel Reply to Thread
Title:
  

By choosing to post the reply below you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the
'Submit Reply' button below


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the
'Submit Reply' button below


Topic Review (Newest First)
06-29-2013 09:45 PM
Peter06420
Re: racing rules question narrow channel

The best strategy would have been to duck if you couldn't cross. that would hav put him at the disadvantage at the next cross.

But, if you tacked & got down to close hauled _course_ while the other boat was clear astern, (providing, of course that you allowed him the opportunity to keep clear - e.g. your track was to leeward of his, not right on his bow) then you had the right to luff him up (again, allowing him the opportunity to keep clear)

If you hail for room to tack, the other boat has 2 options; tack immediately or respond "You Tack!" & give you room. Failing to do either is a foul and warrants DSQ.

It has nothing to do with your previous tack into a lee-bow or clear-ahead position. the protest is about rules, not good or bad strategy. You had every right to tack in mid-channel as long as he could keep clear and you don't foul him before getting down to close-hauled.

However if you tacked and _immediately had to hail for room to tack, well, that _is_ questionable and risky. However, I know of no rule that says how long you have to be on that tack to qualify for room to tack.

Assuming he was windward or astern, His putting hands on your boat was a subsequent foul and also warrants DSQ - or taking turns.
04-01-2013 05:59 AM
bobbylockes
Re: racing rules question narrow channel

The jury did nothing. Blue wasn't disqualified and I never went back. It was the last race I sailed with them.
08-24-2012 01:10 AM
paulk
Re: racing rules question narrow channel

This rules discussion is intriguing for its lack of reference to any actual rules. What rule requires a boat to duck another, instead of tacking below them? This is apparently the rule that the "committee" is using to penalize Red, the Original Poster, advising him that he should not have tacked below Blue, but should have ducked him mid-channel. When Blue reaches out to leeward and pushes Red into the reeds, (even while Red is calling for obstruction room) isn't that a breech of rule 11? No one seems to be following (or mentioning) the actual rules here very much.

Based on the original post, it would appear that Red is entitled to obstruction room under rule 19.2.b: Red, to leeward of Blue, was almost touching the reeds. (Please note these are reeds - indicating unnavigable areas and thus an obstruction, not weeds like seaweed that grow in deep water which would be an annoyance, but not necessarily an obstruction. Some posters appear to be confused about this.) Did Blue not have steerage, and was therefore unable to provide room? In any case, rule 20 comes into play. Rule 20 says you have to hail for room, which Red did. Red then has to give Blue time to respond. (rule 20.1(b)). It seems Red did give Blue time to respond. Blue's response seems to have been to push Red into the obstruction. As mentioned above, this is a breech of rule 11. After being hailed, rule 20.1(b) requires Blue to either tack herself as soon as possible (to get out of the way) or to tell Red to tack and then stay out of Red's way. After Blue responds, Red has to tack as soon as possible (rule 20.1(c). If Blue doesn't respond quickly enough, rule 20.2 exonerates Red if she "breaks a rule of section A, or rule 15 or 16." This means that Red, coming up to an obstruction, can essentially hail for room and after waiting (a reasonable period, eh?) for a response, tack to avoid the obstruction, regardless of where Blue happens to be.
Red is entitled to avoid the obstruction, and can tack. If she is "tacking too close" - that is a Right of Way rule (rules 10, 11, 12, & 13) from Section A, and Red is exonerated; there is no penalty on Red. Rule 15 does not apply here, since Red was tacking onto Port. Rule 20.2 says that Red does not have to worry about giving Blue room to keep clear (rule 16) either; Red is exonerated because of her need to tack due to the obstruction. If Red HITS Blue when tacking to avoid the obstruction, rule 14 states that Red SHALL NOT be penalized unless there is contact that causes damage or injury. The light conditions suggest no damage, and the only injury appears to have been to Blue's pride.
All this makes me think that the rules may have changed a good deal since Blue sat on an actual Protest Committee. What was the actual outcome of the protest? The posts state that Red "shouldn't have tacked" mid-channel. Was he scored DSQ? Was the protest disallowed? Did the gentlemen sweep it under the rug with tacit nods & wags? What appears to be happening does not seem to be paying any attention to the rules. Read rules 2 and 69. I know of sailors who have been tossed from a series for swearing at fellow competitors. Ben Ainslie is a good example of what should happen when you lay hands on another's boat.
08-18-2012 06:18 PM
svzephyr44
Re: racing rules question narrow channel

Just as a aside I find Racing Rules of Sailing - Look to Windward a great site for racing rules discussions
08-18-2012 05:15 PM
rgscpat
Re: racing rules question narrow channel

I wonder: Might the other skipper's behavior improve if you had a GoPro or similar video camera on your boat?

I do not understand the title "referee" although ISAF does have the very similar title of "International Umpire" along with international race officers, judges, and measurers. Holland has only one international umpire, but does have several international race officers and more than a dozen judges. National authorities such as the watersportverbond.nl can also appoint national, regional, or local race officials; I don't know how this is organized in Holland. Jos Spijkerman's rrsstudy blog at blogspot.com might be a good place to find out what is the actual status is of the person on the other boat.
08-10-2012 05:16 PM
MITBeta
Re: racing rules question narrow channel

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVAuspicious View Post
My understanding is that if a burdened vessel changes course to become the stand-on vessel, the previously-burdened vessel needs to BE the stand-on vessel for two boat lengths before actually privileged.
I don't think there's anything in the rules about boat lengths, but the privileged boat definitely needs to give the give way boat time to react when asserting that privilege. I was in a race a month or two ago where I was downwind of another boat on the downwind leg of the race, both of us on port tack. The boat upwind of me jibed, called "STARBOARD TACK" and immediately banged into me. In his defense, he apologized and claims the boat got away from him in the jibe, but the point is the same: he didn't give me time to react to his jibe. (No damage done, by the way...)
08-10-2012 01:07 PM
SVAuspicious
Re: racing rules question narrow channel

Which returns me to my original reaction. He was 1. rude and 2. wrong.
08-10-2012 10:29 AM
bobbylockes
Re: racing rules question narrow channel

Thats why I aborted the idea of luffing up, I give him the benefit of the doubt. I decided just concentrate on getting speed up, ready for a tack at the reeds. What bugs me the most is that if he'd have been in my position and I'd been in his position, I would've expected him to tack under, and like him I would not have protested. Yet unlike him I would've certainly have given room. And rightly so.

He didn't just want the lead, he wanted to dominate. The arrogance bugs me as well as the unsportsman-like behaviour.
08-10-2012 09:30 AM
SVAuspicious
Re: racing rules question narrow channel

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbylockes View Post
I understand the rules such that the 2 boat lengths between boats during luffing up is irrelevant when sailing upwind. 2 boat lengths is only relevent when sailing correcct course downwind.
Sorry - I wasn't clear.

My understanding is that if a burdened vessel changes course to become the stand-on vessel, the previously-burdened vessel needs to BE the stand-on vessel for two boat lengths before actually privileged.

My understanding could easily be dated as I race with pretty laid-back people and I haven't been in a protest room for a long time.
08-09-2012 09:51 PM
bobbylockes
Re: racing rules question narrow channel

luffing up is something the blue bost skipper has never done. He always comes out with the infamous excuse that he wasnt given enough time to luff up. as the rules dont stipulate a time he always gets the benefot of the doubt due to his knowedge of the rules.

I understand the rules such that the 2 boat lengths between boats during luffing up is irrelevant when sailing upwind. 2 boat lengths is only relevent when sailing correcct course downwind. but anyway when I started the tack I was clear ahead and he didnt acquire overlap by the time my boom was on starboard tack, which means I was clear ahead and had luffing rights. Upwind the correct course is sailing as close to the wind as you like as possible. However it's another vague gentlemanly aspect to the rule that the windward boat has enough time to luff up. A gentlemen has patience and takes his time obviously and that is the explanation the blue boat skipper uses when saying he doesnt have time to luff up.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:50 PM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012

The SailNet.com store is owned and operated by a company independent of the SailNet.com forum. You are now leaving the SailNet forum. Click OK to continue or Cancel to return to the SailNet forum.