He's not, you are reading it that way.
What he IS supporting is the following:
- There is no evidence to suggest that the losses that occurred in the SDR were a result of inexperience by the skippers and/or crew.
- There is no evidence to suggest that the losses that occurred in the SDR would have been prevented by a safety inspection or required equipment as per the 1500
- There is no evidence to suggest that the SDR allowed skippers with insufficient experience to participate.
Therefore blaming the SDR rally for the losses because of lack of safety requirements and inexperienced skippers is not appropriate.
I think that sums up his position.
Thanks, B.J.... You just saved me a lot of typing - which would have been all for naught, anyway :-)
Look, BJ you can't have it both ways. The USCG thought enough of this SDR incident to specifically point it out in a MSA.
Still waiting for you to point out where the CG says the organizers bear any responsibility for what happened last November, or that those SARs were in any way a result of the manner in which the SDR is organized or managed...
John Harries wrote a very good article regarding the problems with the SDR ("Salty Dawg Rally - What The Hell?")
And, he specifically stated this, which you continue to ignore at your convenience:
While I particularly singled out the Salty Dawg because of what happened this year, I believe that everything I wrote in this post applies equally to all rallies, including the 1500.
Charlie Doane wrote a couple of articles (here's a highlight from "WEATHER WINDOW ROULETTE: Races and Rallies and Rolling the Dice")...
Did you guys notice that? Is he laying it all on the skipper like you guys are arguing is the implied case here? No. Think about that.
Well, speaking of wanting to "have it both ways", it's laughable that you should cite both Harries and Doane in support of your position... Because, they are coming from opposite sides of the fence in in terms of the benefits of "adult supervision" for rally participants...
Doane is lauding the excellent call of the 1500's weather router to "set his ducks loose upon the waters" when they did... Presumably by relying on "adult supervision", he means someone other than each individual skipper making the call on when to go:
This, I think, says something about group psychology. That is: if you are determined to sail in a group offshore, you should understand that a group of people can make a bad decision as easily as an individual can (see, e.g., the U.S. Congress), and that it therefore might be wise to join a group that enjoys some adult supervision.
Harries strenuously disagrees with this position...
I also think that rallies, together with overly controlling weather routers, have, over the years, eroded the basic decision making and risk management skills of offshore sailors by propagating the illusion that someone off the boat can be responsible for said boat’s safety.
So, while Harries sees very deep and fundamental flaws in the notion of organized rallies to the Caribbean in the fall (as I do, as well), he obviously comes down firmly in favor of one of the guiding principles of the SDR - namely, that each skipper, and no one else, is solely responsible for making their own decisions and preparations for the passage...
It's remarkable, your refusal to see the fundamental - and quite likely only - reason why the SDR fleet was the one to experience trouble last fall... THE MAJORITY OF THE PARTICIPANTS PICKED WHAT TURNED OUT TO BE THE WRONG DAMN TIME TO LEAVE...
In passagemaking, that happens sometimes :-) No doubt about it, the 1500's router made a better call than Chris Parker, apparently, and the weather did not develop as Chris had predicted...
So, where was Charlie Doane, calling for more "adult supervision", in the wake of the 2011 NARC debacle? Oh, wait - that rally had the adult supervision provided by Susan Gennett of RealWeather, who gave them the green light to sail off into what turned into Tropical Storm Sean... Then, in the unseemly aftermath of that tragedy, the effort was made to shift the blame to Herb Hilgenberg...
...and others like Mike Hixenbaug, Peter Nielsen, etc. Granted, much of their focus was on weather and the herd-mentality (there are obviously many problems here) - but they cdertainly don't speak glowingly of the SDR.
Again, you obviously have no clue regarding the sort of 'herd mentality' that can arise wherever sailors may gather prior to making an offshore passage. As I've already explained hundreds of posts ago, travel back to Beaufort, NC 25 years ago... before fingertip access to Passageweather on your iPad, before the Weather Channel, the daily routine of the informal gathering of cruisers waiting to jump off for the islands revolved around the Offshore/High Seas forecast broadcast 4 times daily... Clusters of skippers would gather to listen around the few boats that might have even been equipped with SSB, and the "So, what do you think?" conversation that followed would be an example of 'group think' at its finest...
To argue that because "there is no evidence" nothing needs to change is seriously weak. Here is the evidence:
1. The SDR allows entry to skippers that Jon (and I think most very experienced sailors) would consider not ready for a fall trip like this - based purely on their inexperience.
Uhhh, and your "evidence" for that assertion would be ???
Congrats, that may be the most laughable, nonsensical use of "facts" you've yet to make in the course of this thread... :-)
Seriously, you should think about lightening up on this Crusade of yours against the SDR... I swear, you'll probably encourage some folks around here to be secretly hoping it's the 1500 fleet that gets their butts kicked next fall, just to prove how wrongheaded your position is... :-)