(pillow)Case of the week (06/12) – 24

(This is an instalment in a series of blogposts about the ISAF Case book 2009-2012 with amendments for 2010. All cases are official interpretations by the ISAF committees on how the Racing Rules of Sailing should be used or interpreted. The cases are copied from the Casebook, only the comments are written by me.)

CASE 24

Rule 11, On the Same Tack, Overlapped
Rule 12, On the Same Tack, Not Overlapped
Rule 15, Acquiring Right of Way

When a boat becomes overlapped to leeward from clear astern, the other boat must act promptly to keep clear. When she cannot do so in a seamanlike way, she has not been given sufficient room. If she takes unnecessary action that causes contact, she fails to keep clear as required.

Assumed Facts
Two boats, A and B, are on a broad reach on starboard tack in a light breeze on their proper courses for the next mark some distance away. Initially, B is clear astern of and directly behind A but is travelling slightly faster and becomes overlapped close to leeward of A’s stern.
Questions

1. When are B’s obligations under rule 12 replaced by her rights as leeward boat under rule 11?
2. What are B’s obligations under rule 15?
3. What are A’s obligations under rule 11?

Answers As soon as B becomes overlapped, rule 12 ceases to apply. A becomes bound by rule 11, and B by rule 15, which embodies the principle in the rules that when the right of way suddenly shifts from one boat to another, the boat with the newly acquired right of way must give the other boat space and time for response and thus a fair opportunity to keep clear.

B’s obligation under rule 15 is not a continuing one; it protects A only temporarily, and only if she responds promptly after the overlap begins.

Rule 11 requires A to keep clear and, if this requires her to luff, she must do so promptly. If A does so in a seamanlike way but some part of her hull, crew or equipment touches any part of B’s hull, crew or equipment, B has broken rule 15 by not giving A enough room to keep clear. However, if A luffs higher than is necessary to keep clear of B and, as a result, causes contact with B, A breaks rule 11.

Although B obtains right of way under rule 11 as soon as the overlap begins, her right of way is limited during the time that rule 15 applies.

RYA 1970/2



In these low number cases we get back to the basics. The rules have been set up to clearly define the right-of-way boat and the keep clear boat, by giving four BASIC row rules.
If those four were the only ones sailors had to apply, the game would drastically change. The right-of-way boat would be master in all things, could change course as she pleased and the keep clear boat would be forced to anticipate and stay far away.

If we would not have a couple of LIMITATIONS on the right-of-way boat, the situation described in this case would quickly become very ‘unfair’ to the keep clear boat. As soon as B gets the overlap A would break rule 11. Anticipating this and trying to luff to create more space wouldn’t help much, because B would simply chase and head up as well.

This is the reason we have those LIMITATION rules; RRS 15, 16 and 17. To give the keep clear boat a fair opportunity to fulfil it’s obligation. These rules do not negate (switch off) the basic row rules, they only limit them. The keep clear boat must respond quickly and in a seamanlike manner. If she does that, but still fails to keep clear, it is usually because the right-of-way boat didn’t apply one of the limitation rules.

If the argument in the hearing between two boats hinges on the balance between 11 and 15, you can ask the helmsman of the keep clear boat where he was looking, at the moment the boat started to change course. If the answer is: “at the bow of the leeward boat” that might be a good indication it must have been very close. If the helmsman was looking ahead, that usually indicates he felt comfortable changing course without immediately hitting the leeward boat.

Score 27/01 in LTW 2012 Winter Challenge

Episode 27/01 has been scored. There are a couple of late entries added.

This was an interesting exercise.
I will not post my view, because the challenge was not to find out what happened, but to see how consistent the challengers wrote. The readers of LTW can pick the one they think most came near what actually happened. As long as they are aware that finding facts out of a 43 second video is very tricky without any statements from sailors involved. That is more than obvious, after you’ve read the different facts found, the challengers came up with.

Instead of publishing the specific entries in the comments after the LTW 2012 Winter Challenge 27/01: Rolex Miami OCR 49er Crash post, I’ve copied them all in this post and commented on them as well.
That way I can add the pictures that were send in by some of the challengers.
(There are a couple of comments in the original post, but those are from non contestants and published after the deadline)

So in order to read what the Challengers send in for this episode:

Dark Side of the Moon

A picture in our "Heineken Green Photo Competition", send in by Gus from Massapequa, NY.:

Here's a picture of my Buccaneer 18, "Lunatic".
Am I advertising Pink Floyd??!!
No-one's ever said anything regarding advertising, but I get a lot of people who tell me they love it!  The prism is also on the transom with the name. I'd love to see her picture on your blog.

I wrote to Gus, that it's certainly within the definition of advertising as written in regulation 20!
He's on the Dark Side of the Moon with this spinnaker....


Does anybody else have examples?

LTW 2012 Winter Challenge - Episode 03/02

Below you'll find a protest form from TUR, delivered at the desk. You are member of the panel who has to decide this. All parties are present.

You are allowed to ask TWO questions. but not to the same party!

Protest No. 23
Event: Laser; Provincial Championship Fryslân
Race: 5
End of Protest time: 17:34
Protestor: TUR
Protestee: BRA
Witness: DEN
Protest delivered at desk: 17:36
Protest details:

On the first beat to windward I almost hit DEN because BRA did not give me room to pass behind. Although I slowed down, I could not prevent from hitting BRA. I lost three places.

Place of incident: First beat to mark 1.

Rules broken: 10 en 19

 

Facts found:
.
.
.
.
Conclusion:
.
.
.
Rule(s) applicable:
.
Decision:
.

Fill in the blanks. The challenger who uses the least number of words - without compromising any detail - gets two bonus points!

Deadline for Episode 27/01; Rolex Miami OCR 49er Crash is today at 23:59 hours. Scoring will be per usual, on Sunday.



Previous Episodes:
LTW 2012 Winter Challenge 27/01: Rolex Miami OCR 49er Crash
LTW 2012 Winter Challenge 20/01
LTW 2012 Winter Challenge 13/01

BLOG Layout and Design

I'm changing the design and layout of Look to Windward. In the last week I've been fiddling with a testblog to get it done with a minimum of interference, but it still needs some adjustments in width and colour.
Please bear with me.

If you have comments or remarks, don't hesitate to make them.

Heineken Green Photo competition.

I don't know about you, but when the word 'advertising' is written on a protest form, I always hope it goes away, before my panel has to deal with it. You can argue that this is an "Ostrich reflex", but there you have it, I'm flawed.

From: cokethai.com

In the Netherlands there's a prescription in the RRS about boats that want to display advertising. They need a certificate from our MNA, the "Watersportverbond". That part can be checked relatively easy. But it gets tricky when a boat claims it is not advertisement. They just painted their boat "Heineken Green".

If you look at the definition on regulation 20:

20. ISAF ADVERTISING CODE
20.1 Definitions
20.1.1 The following definitions shall apply to this ISAF Advertising Code only:
"Advertising" a name, logo, slogan, description, depiction, a variation or distortion thereof, or any other form of communication that promotes an organization, person, product, service, brand or idea so as to call attention to it or to persuade persons or organizations to buy, approve or otherwise support it.

In order to be able to keep my head ABOVE the sand, I have a request.
Do you have a picture of a boat where advertising is implied but not actually displayed?

Dog food?

Irish Luck?

Please send me your picture(s) together with your opinion whether it is or is not, 'advertising' according to the definition. If you don't have one now, keep your eyes peeled this year and make the photo.
I'll repeat this request every month or so. At the end of the year I'll raffle a prize among the senders.

J.

LTW Readers Q&A (59): ORC and stamped sails

Manuel from Portugal has the following questions:
(I've edited some of his text for clarity)

I was asked to say my opinion about the following issues:
Type of regatta: ORC cruisers racing (club regatta) around an island.
1st question: Is the direction of rounding the island free, if nothing is stated in Sailing Instructions?
The SI only describe the starting line, the finishing line and the words “rounding the island”.

My answer was YES (RRS 28.1)

2nd question. After finishing (the ORC event only had one regatta) a boat presented a measurement protest against another boat referring to the main sail as being not measured (the sail did not have the normal stamp/signature of any measurer person). Before the regatta the boats were not supervised by any Measuring Committee. The Protest Committee accepted the protest (no red flag was displayed on board of the boat) and confirmed the non existent stamp/signature.
The protested boat confirmed the measurer forgot to indicate on the sail any reference to proof that the sail was really measured. There are serious doubts if the sail was measured by anyone. The protested boat says that the protested sail has a smaller area than the sail expressed in the boat certificate.

To answer I looked at:

ORC Rating System 2010
304 Owner’s Responsibility
304.1 The owner or his representative shall be responsible for:

• a) Preparing the boat for the measurement in accordance with the IMS
• b) Declaring any required data to the measurer
• c) Ensuring compliance of any measurement data to those printed on certificate. Measurement shall be deemed to comply with the one printed on the certificate if all the measurements are smaller or equal to those on the certificate, except MSW, that shall be bigger or equal. Sails shall be deemed to comply if the sail area is smaller or equal to the respective one printed on the certificate.
• d) Using the boat and equipment as prescribed by the RRS, IMS Rules and ORC Rating systems.

The owner or his representative shall sign the statement on the certificate: “I certify that I understand my responsibilities under ORC Rules and Regulations”.

And also at:

305 Measurement Protests
305.1 When, as a result of any pre-race inspection or measurement, it is determined that a boat does not comply with her certificate:

• a) When the non-compliance is considered to be minor and can be easily corrected, the boat may be brought into compliance with her certificate, and, when necessary, a new certificate may be issued. The Measurer shall inform of such correction to the Race Committee who shall approve a new certificate issue.
• b) When the non-compliance is major (even if it can be corrected) or if it cannot be corrected without requiring significant re-measurement, a boat shall not be eligible to enter a regatta. The Measurer shall inform the Race Committee who shall act in accordance with RRS and inform the Rating authority.

RRS 2 and 3 may also apply

My answer was to suggest the following decision: The protested boat must be DSQ under ORC Rating System 2010 (rule 305.1b). The red flag was not necessary in that case .

Can you comment?

I wrote back to Manuel asking him if I could get some help from my readers, since my experience with ORC is very limited. I would appreciate any and all comments - specially on the second question.

Here are my thoughts:

ONE
If there's no direction stated in the SI and the description of the starting line or the finishing line do not give any indication about which side is the course side, I think that the Race Committee has a big problem. There will be boats starting on both sides of the line. I wouldn't know how to solve the problems between the rules in section A, B, C and D. Is a boat returning to start? Is a boat OCS?
Any boat who got into trouble over this and could show it considerably effected her score, would have a good chance to get redress.

If there was an indication in the description of the starting line about which side was pre-start and which was course side, but that line was laid out so, that it did not give any indication about in which direction the island should be rounded, then I agree with your answer.

TWO
The second answer is harder. 305.1 states ..., as a result of any pre-race inspection or measurement, .....
This protest was AFTER the race, and - if you don't assume the "pre-race" should also be applied to measurement in this sentence - the sail was never actually measured at the event. Therefore I'm not sure you can use it to decide a protest after the race, without getting a measurer to actually measure the sail.

If you do get a measurer to come to the event and have a look at the sail, then you can use 304.1(c) to decide if the boat should be DSQed or not.

Does the OCR Rating System have a rule stating that a sail must have a stamp or signature? Or is it in the Portuguese RRS? In the Netherlands this done by a MNA prescription. Is that also done in Portugal?
If it is, then the protest is about rule 78.1. And rule 61.1 should be on the table and validity is an issue.

When did the protesting boat became aware of the lack of stamp/signature?
Did he see this on the water? If so, then a Red flag is necessary to make it a valid protest.
If he saw this after racing on shore, what did she do to inform the other boat?

Provided the protest was valid, then any DSQ should be for failing to comply with rule 78.1.

 
I've also had a look at the latest ORC Rating System 2012 and found this:

305.2 When, as a result of any measurement protest by a boat or by the race committee, it is determined that a boat does not comply with her certificate, the non-compliance shall be calculated as a difference in percentage of GPH:
a) If the difference is less than or equal to 0.1%, the original certificate will be maintained, the protest will be dismissed and the protestor will have to cover any cost involved. RRS 64.3(a)  will apply but no corrections are needed.
b) If the difference is more than 0.1% but less than 0.25%, no penalty shall apply, but a new certificate shall be issued based on the new measurement data and all races of the series shall be rescored using the new certificate data. The Protest will be considered accepted and the protestee will have to cover any cost involved.
c) If the difference is 0.25% or more, a boat shall receive a 50% place penalty in any race in which her rating was incorrect. The Protest will be considered accepted and the protestee will have to cover any cost involved and the yacht shall not race again until all non-compliance issues are corrected to the limit defined in a) above.

Was 305.2 in the 2010 ORC Rating System? Problem solved.

Anybody else?

(pillow)Case of the week (05/12) – 25

(This is an instalment in a series of blogposts about the ISAF Case book 2009-2012 with amendments for 2011. All cases are official interpretations by the ISAF committees on how the Racing Rules of Sailing should be used or interpreted. The cases are copied from the Casebook, only the comments are written by me.)

CASE 25

Rule 11, On the Same Tack, Overlapped
Rule 14, Avoiding Contact
Rule 16.1, Changing Course
Rule 18.2(b), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room

When an inside overlapped windward boat that is entitled to mark-room sails below her proper course while at the mark, she must keep clear of the outside leeward boat, and the outside boat may luff provided that she gives the inside boat room to keep clear.

Summary of the Facts
Two 15-foot (3.5 m) dinghies, IW and OL, were approaching a leeward port-hand mark. IW established an inside overlap on OL well before the boats reached the zone, and OL gave IW space to sail to the mark and then to sail her proper course while at the mark. After IW passed the mark, OL began to luff to her course to the next mark. IW was slower in heading up, and her boom, still well out, touched OL’s helmsman and shrouds. At the time of the contact IW was a hull length from the mark and over 45 degrees below close-hauled. No damage or injury occurred. IW protested OL under rule 18.2(b), and OL protested IW under rule 11.

The protest committee decided that, because IW did not luff to a close hauled course while she was at the mark, she did not sail her proper course during that time. IW did not deny this but attributed it to her boom-end mainsheet rig as compared to the centre-lead rig used by OL.

The protest committee dismissed IW’s protest, upheld OL’s, and disqualified IW for breaking rule 11. IW appealed.

Decision

Rule 18.2(b) required OL to give IW room to sail to the mark and then room to sail her proper course while at the mark. Clearly, between positions 1 and 2 OL gave IW room to sail to the mark. At position 2, IW was ‘at the mark’ and between positions 2 and 3 she was entitled to room to sail her proper course. Her proper course during that time was to luff onto a close-hauled course, and OL gave her room to do so. Therefore, OL did not break rule 18.2(b).

When OL luffed between positions 2 and 3, IW was required by rule 11 to keep clear of OL, and OL was required by rule 16.1 to give her room to do so. OL luffed approximately 30 degrees while moving forward two hull lengths. Even with a boom-end mainsheet rig, a boat sailed in a seamanlike way can turn through 30 degrees and trim her mainsail appropriately while moving forward two hull lengths. Therefore, OL gave IW room to keep clear and OL did not break rule 16.1.

OL could easily have avoided contact with IW, and so OL broke rule 14. However, she is not penalized for doing so because neither boat was damaged, nor was there any injury. IW sailed well below her proper course; in fact she sailed a hull length away from the mark on a course over 45 degrees below close-hauled and, as a result, took much more space than rule 18.2(b) entitled her to take.

Throughout the incident IW was required by rule 11 to keep clear of OL.
Shortly before the contact, IW broke rule 11 by failing to keep clear. It was possible for IW to have avoided the contact, and therefore IW also broke rule 14. However, because IW was entitled to mark-room and the contact resulted in neither damage nor injury, she too can not be penalized for breaking rule 14.

W’s appeal is dismissed. The protest committee’s decision to disqualify
IW under rule 11 is upheld.

Noteworthy: IW was not penalized for taking “too much mark-room”, she was penalized for failing to keep-clear under 11. If she had been failing to keep clear within the space mark-room provided, she would have been exonerated for that. She failed to keep clear outside the room that mark-room provides and therefore was NOT exonerated.

Although the exoneration under 18.5 depends on the boat’s actions, the ‘exoneration’ under rule 14 does not. All boats – r.o.w, with room or with mark-room – regardless of there actions, get a freebie if there’s no damage or injury.

In this rulebook the wording is still ‘a boat will not be penalized’, but in the next rulebook (2013-2016) it will be brought in line with the other rules and ‘a boat will be exonerated’ for breaking rule 14 if there’s no damage or injury.

Score 20/01 in LTW 2012 Winter Challenge

Episode 20/01 has been scored:

The entries are getting very good already.

Several of the challengers have not send in a entry. Please don't quit so soon. I'm sure you can learn a lot by participating. I've asked for nicknames so you can remain anonymous.


This is what I came up with:

Conclusions

• Blue on Port tack is keeping clear under rule 10, by passing in front of Orange on Starboard tack.
• Blue continues to keep clear, first under 13 and then under rule 11 until position 4.
• Blue is subject to rule 18.3, because she was subject to rule 13 in the zone and Orange is fetching the mark. Boats are overlapped as soon as Blue passes head to wind with Orange as inside boat and entitled to mark-room under rule 18.3(b). Rule 18.2 does not apply. Orange's luff above close hauled was to fetch the mark, not to avoid Blue, therefore Blue did not infringe 18.3. It was also a proper course for Orange therefore any 16.1 infringements are exonerated under rule 18.5
• Orange is right-of-way boat under rule 11, Blue is not keeping clear in position 5
• Blue could have avoided the contact, therefore breaks rule 14
• Orange could not avoid the contact, after it became clear that Blue would not keep clear, so does not break rule 14

Decision

Protest upheld
DSQ Blue

J.


A final question to think over:
What would change if Orange had passed head to wind, just after position 4?

LTW 2012 Winter Challenge 27/01: Rolex Miami OCR 49er Crash

Right, this episode of the LTW 2012 Winter Challenge,  I'm using a You-Tube video of an incident in a 49er race at the Rolex Miami OCR.

I've checked and although there's is a protest on the board with AUT 070, I do not think it was this incident. BER 1042 is not mentioned and although the black spinnaker is an USA boat, I don't think it's 1222.
Anyway that protest was denied.

found on You Tube: HERE by asht2p

The film is short and taken from an aerial view (probably a helicopter) so you will need to see it several times.
The challenge is to write down the facts found, draw a conclusion and take a decision.
Don't get stuck in validity; assume all requirements have been fulfilled.

I also don't mind if different people have different set of facts found. The challenge is to write the facts as you see them and then draw consistent conclusions and decision. There was contact, so don't forget 14!

If you make a TSS or Boat Scenario file, send me a (one!) picture and I'll try to incorporate that into the posting. Since you can "make up" your own facts this time, there will be no questions. But the challengers who send me a picture of the situation, corresponding with their facts found, can earn two bonus points!

Deadline next Friday 03/02/12 23:59 (GMT+1) as per usual.

Scoring of Episode 20/01 to follow - probably Sunday.
Good luck,
J.

NoR Dutch Championship Matchracing 2012

Team Heiner has found a sponsor, fixed a date and published the Notice of Race!
(Click on hier on Team Heiner webpage)

On the 20th, 21st and 22nd of April 2012 in Lelystad the
BATAVIA STAD DUTCH CHAMPIONSHIP MATCH RACING 2012
will be held.

We are doing the qualifying events during this winter season (weather permitting) for 6 teams, but the OA has also 2 wildcards to give out.  In total 8 teams will sail to win the honors.

From the NoR: 

INVITATIONS
Skippers will only be invited from the open entry list. If you wish to be invited please register your request for an invitation as soon as possible with the OA by completing the attached form.

If you are a team that might be interested, please consider coming to the very very low p(h)art (Lelystad is a new town in the reclaimed part (polder)) of the Netherlands.
Or if you know of such a Match Race team; please tel them about this - or better - forward this post.
There's a mailing button below.

Hope to see you there.
J.

ISAF Q&A 2011 - 027 M014: Eats, shoots and leaves

This Q&A reminded me of the Book of the Year 2004:
Eats, Shoots & Leaves -  The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation
by Lynne Truss.

From the back cover:

Maybe the title of this Q&A should be: Mark to round; to pass or to leave?



ISAF Q&A 2011 - 027 M014

Question 4
What are the fundaments of the difference between rules 18.5 (a) and 18.5 (b) with regard to rules 15 and 16?

Answer 4
When a boat entitled to mark-room is sailing to the mark, she must comply with rules 15 and 16. However, sometimes complying with these rules means that the boat entitled to mark-room will not be able to actually round the mark. This is why rule 18.5(b), contrary to rule 18.5(a), provides for exoneration for a boat entitled to mark-room that breaks either of those rules while rounding the mark on her proper course.

I thought the best way to illustrate this was by a couple of examples:
Example 1: rule 16

Two boats, Red and Green approach a windward mark to left to port. Red is inside boat, entitled to mark-room, has trouble getting to the mark. She luffs hard when she is at the mark and there's contact between the boats. Red is right-of-way boat, Green is keeping clear, and if Red wouldn't have changed course so rapidly, there would not have been contact. Green left enough room for a 'normal' luff.

Red breaks rule 16.1 by not giving enough room to Green to keep clear. Nevertheless she is exonerated under rule 18.5(b) because she was AT the mark when doing so. Had she done the same, just after position 1, she would not have been exonerated.

Example 2: rule 15

There are big waves on the course. Two boats, Blue and Purple sail toward the leeward mark to be left to starboard. Entering the 3BL zone Blue is clear ahead and gets mark-room.
While sailing toward the mark Purple becomes right-of-way boat under rule 11. Blue is not changing course but gybes between positions 2 and three. Blue becomes right-of-way starboard tack boat. Normally she would be penalized for breaking rule 15, because she does not initially give room to Purple to keep clear. But because she's AT the mark, she gets exoneration under 18.5(b). Had she done the same between position 1 and 2 she would have not been exonerated.


Ooh, before I sign off, if you ever have to change to pick up a copy of Lynne's book, please do. It will change your world forever.
And the panda will be grateful.
J.