In recent months another issue about the new rules has been surfacing. First discovered by Chris Love from Sailgroove and subject of intense discussions on several forums and blogs, now another twist has been added.
I'm referring to "The Move".
What is "the Move"
The second sentence of Rule 18.2(c) switches off rule 18.2(b) when the boat entitled to mark-room leaves the zone or either boat passes head to wind. In the RRS 2005-2008 it was only the boat who entered the zone as clear ahead boat - thereby gaining RoW - who could switch off rule 18 by passing head to wind. In the new RRS 2009-2012 that can be done by either boat. So if the clear astern boat somehow manages to tack AND establish an inside overlap she has the right to mark-room, if the outside boat is able to give it. Here's the situational diagram (from BI Star Fleet - Blog)
US College Racing does not wait for ISAF
With permission of US Sailing, RRS rule 18.2(c) has been changed for the competition. From the newly published 2009-2012 ICSA Procedural Rules and Collegiate Dinghy Class Rules:
7.5 OTHER RULES
7.5.1 In accordance with the US SAILING prescription to RRS rule 86.3, the second sentence of RRS rule 18.2(c) is changed to "However, if the boat entitled to mark-room passes head to wind or leaves the zone, rule 18.2(b) ceases to apply.” This proposed rule remains in effect unless rule 18.2(c) is changed in the RRS.
This is what Mitchell Brindley, President of ICSA said about it:
Please find the link at www.collegesailing.org for the 2009-2012 Procedural Rules. Everyone should review these, and if you are a hosting an event you need to have a printed copy available.
Also take note of the Class rule 7.5.1 on the last page. ICSA has chosen to be proactive concerning the unintended consequences of RRS 18.2(c). The essence of the problem is that rule 18.2(c) turns off rule 18.2(b) when either boat tacks. This allows a boat that is required to give mark-room under rule 18.2(b) to get out of that obligation by crossing head to wind, and then claim mark-room under rule 18.2(a) from boats that are already at the mark. In certain scenarios, this would have an outcome that runs counter to the general concept of rule 18.2(b), which "locks in" mark-rounding obligations early.
It is the feeling of the majority of the US Sailing Racing Rules Committee that ISAF will make a correction to the RRS later this spring. The ICSA executive committee did not want college sailing to have to accept what could amount to a significant game change in mid-season. ICSA is essentially "testing" an experimental rule prior to the expected implementation.
I do want to thank the ICSA Rules Committee and Chairman, Geoff Becker for their efforts.
http://www.collegesailing.org/archive/2009-2012_PR_And_2009_CDCR.pdf
It appears that the US SAILING RRS Committee is also expecting a change in the rules from ISAF.
What do you think? Should ISAF change 18.2(c)?
You can now also Vote on the new Poll in the sidebar.
.
I have never understood why they changed it to either boat passing head to wind. I wish someone could please tell me under what condition it is necessary to have the boat required to give mark-room pass head to wind and turn off 18.2(b). Not being able to figure out what the committee was trying to fix, I'm all in favor to changing it back.
ReplyDeleteI am hesitating between :
ReplyDelete- changing the rule as proposed, or something similar ;
- if the clear astern or outside boat manages to tack, keep clear whilst subject to rule 13 and establish an inside overlap without being subject to 18.2(e) then we should stand back, admire their boat handling, say "congratulations" and let them sail away untroubled by the umpires....
Gordon
I am with Gordon here. Although presumably some hot sailors in turn on a sixpence (dime) dinghies have tried it.
ReplyDeleteI guess saying 'if either boat passes head to wind' affects the situation where the boat clear astern positions herself to stop the other boat tacking at the mark. If the boat astern passes head to wind, he turns off 18.2b and for the moment, all of rule 18. If she then gets an inside overlap, 18.2a switches back on when the boat that was clear ahead passes head to wind.
There seems to be some poor drafting. 18.2.b switches off if either boat passes head to wind, yet Mark Room, by definition, can include room to tack. It cannot be the intention that a boat has room to tack but as soon as she starts to do it, the rule granting it switches off.
Wag
I have fired from the hip (again). Re my last comment on Mark Room including room to tack. If 18.2b turns off, 18.2a applies so its all OK. Sorry.
ReplyDeleteWag
From my point of view this isn't a smart move of US Sailing.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I do understand their reasoning, it seems that the USA want to be in an exceptional position once again. While the rest of the world uses the metric system, the USA clings to their measurement system and are to stubborn to switch. And now again, the whole world has agreed to play by a certain set of rules and the USA want to be the exception.
What's next? Do they want their own start procedure also? My opinion: use all of the RRS are nothing at all. This is just confusing for sailors, judges, umpires and the public.
18.2 (b) gives similar problems in Match racing when a boat that is clear astern as the boats enter the zone at a windward mark can luff and tack and then tack back and claim room on a boat setting a mark trap.
ReplyDeleteThis issue again highlights the difficulty in trying to apply Fleet racing rules to Team and Match racing. This sort of scenario is highly unlikely to occur in fleet racing but has and will cause problems in both the othjer disciplines. What is needed is seperate rules for each of the team and match race codes which could incorporate the seperate call books and the changes made in the current appendix C and D.
@ Anon
ReplyDeleteIn principle, if at all possible, we should not make different rules for match-, team and fleet racing. The rules are complicated enough as is.
Jos
ReplyDeleteBetter to have a sensible set of rules that work properly for each game than to need call books and case books and use them to adapt and in some cases change the rules.
The 'rules' in Fleet racing are generally used as a defence but in match and team racing they are used as a weapon. The same wording does not always suit the different application.
Jos,
ReplyDeleteI would appreciate it if someone could draw a scenario that shows the problem with the change proposed by the college sailors. I haven't found a good reason not to change 18.2(c)as they propose. Again, what were the rule writers fixing with the current wording to Rule 18.2(c)?
The boat handling required for this move is Not that difficult. And as for being used in a fleet race, imagine a light air race approaching the leeward mark. Everyone slows down. A boat approaching behind could easily pull this move off while boats ahead are waiting to round. This is especially true with the 3-boat length zone. If this rule isn't changed I can guarantee that it will happen.
ReplyDeleteI understand that it is now acknowledged that the bit about either boat passing head to wind is a mistake. What it should have said is if the boat entitled to mark room passes head to wind.
ReplyDeleteWag
This sort of scenario is highly unlikely to occur in fleet racing but has and will cause problems in both the othjer disciplines
ReplyDeletekral oyun
I am hesitating between :
ReplyDelete- changing the rule as proposed, or something similar ;
- if the clear astern or outside boat manages to tack, keep clear whilst subject to rule 13 and establish an inside overlap without being subject to 18.2(e) then we should stand back, admire their boat handling, say "congratulations" and let them sail away untroubled by the umpires....
kral oyun