Monday, 9 August 2010

(pillow)Case of the Week (32) – 81;

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


Case 81

Rule 14, Avoiding Contact
Rule 15, Acquiring Right of Way
Rule 18.2(b), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room
Rule 18.2(c), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room

When a boat entitled to mark-room under rule 18.2(b) passes head to wind, rule 18.2(b) ceases to apply and she must comply with the applicable rule of Section A.
Summary of the Facts

Two boats, A and B, close-hauled on starboard tack, approached a mark to be left to starboard. A entered the zone clear ahead and to leeward of B, and tacked onto a close-hauled port-tack course in order to round the mark. B, still on starboard tack, made contact with A, then on port tack, causing no damage or injury. Both boats protested.

Citing rule 18.1(b), the protest committee decided that rule 18 did not apply because just prior to the contact both boats were on opposite tacks and B had to tack to pass the mark on her proper course. Having decided that rule 18 did not apply, the protest committee disqualified A under rule 10. A appealed.



B was clear astern of A from position 1 to position 4. While B was clear astern, rule 12 required her to keep clear of A. Also, from the time A reached the zone until she passed head to wind, rule 18.2(b)’s second sentence applied, requiring B to give A mark-room. B fulfilled both these obligations. Shortly before position 5, when A passed head to wind, rule 18.2(b) ceased to apply (see rule 18.2(c)). At that time B acquired right of way and A became obligated to keep clear of B, first by rule 13 and later, after A was on a close-hauled course, by rule 10. Rule 15 did not apply because B acquired right of way as a result of A’s tack.

It is not clear from the facts whether B needed to act to avoid A before or after A assumed a close-hauled course on port tack. However, it is clear that B needed to act to avoid A while B held right of way. Therefore, A is disqualified, under either rule 13 or rule 10. Because it was possible for A to have avoided the contact, she also broke rule 14.

Rule 14 applied to B, but the facts do not enable a determination of whether it was reasonably possible for B, acting after it became clear that A was not keeping clear, to have avoided the contact. However, it is not necessary to make that determination because B had right of way and the contact did not cause damage or injury. Therefore, B could not be penalized under rule 14 (see rule 14(b)).

A’s appeal is dismissed. She remains disqualified, and B is not to be penalized.

USSA 1993/290


How could Boat A have avoided this?
How could she enter the zone clear ahead and not have to wait for B to be able to tack around the mark?
Do you know the answer?

Most match racers will have done this more then once already. A needs to ‘climb’ in front of B, on or even a little above the layline. Then she might have enough distance to tack in front.

But even if climbing has lost her some distance and boat A cannot tack in front (and keep clear) of B, she is in a much better position. By forcing B to the outside she becomes an inside windward boat with overlap and, if you have a look at the definition of markroom, gains the room to tack!



Post a Comment

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...