Friday, 30 March 2012

LTW 2012 Winter Challenge E03/30; Last Episode!

In all likelihood this will be the last in the series. Two contestants have a good chance to reach over 100 points if they participate in this one. I still have to score the previous episode but that should bring them over 90 points..... And looking at there average the 100 is within reach.

Today's episode is with an animation. There are three boats involved, but only Purple protests, against both others. Boats are 11:Metre One Design in a Class championship. The incident happens in race 2. One race is scheduled every day for a total of 6 days.
The Grey boat is called Banks, the Red has the name Tiger and the Purple one has been named Hamilton Eleven.

The skipper of  Hamilton Eleven writes on his protest form:
"I protest against Tiger and Banks for helping each other. Tiger prevented me from finishing, so that Banks could finish before me. This is team racing and very unsporting. I protest on rule 2 and rule 69."

The incident happened at the finish. The RC recorded Tiger as having finished 4th, Banks as 5th and Hamilton Eleven as 6th in race 2.

You are a member of the Protest Committee panel and have been assigned as scribe. All three parties come to the hearing and you are allowed to ask three questions. One question to each of the boats. All questions before Tuesday 23:59 hours. They will be answered ASAP.

Your assignment is to write Facts Found, Conclusions & rules involved and a Decision.
Deadline is THURSDAY 23:59 hours, so as to be able to score on Friday April 6th and announce a winner for the LTW 2012 Winter Challenge before Easter.
Good luck,

Animation LTW 2012 Challenge 03/23

Almost forgot. Grey Bear's mail reminded me, fortunately.
Here's the animation:
Deadline for the challenge is like always 23:59 tonight.

Thursday, 29 March 2012

ISAF Q&A-2012 L010

New on the ISAF Website, the second Q&A of 2012.
It is about when a (IRC) certificate is invalid: ISAF Q&A-2012 L010

Questions and answers about the peculiar dissonant between IRC rule 10.3 and Case 57.

IRC rule 10.3 states:
'A boat whose certificate is invalidated as a result of an error or omission by a Rule Authority or by the Rating Authority, of which the boat could not reasonably have been aware, may be penalised at the discretion of the protest committee. Additionally, a protest committee may order that races scored using the invalidated certificate shall be re-scored using the corrected TCC.'
 ISAF Case 57 states (in part):
'When a valid certificate is found to be defective, it may be withdrawn by the authority that issued it, but no retrospective action may be taken in regard to a completed series or any completed races in a series that is still in progress. Thus, when a current, properly authenticated certificate has been presented in good faith and a race or series has been completed, the results of that race or series must stand, even though at a later date the certificate is withdrawn.'

As I interpret the answers form the Q&A panel, they wanted the actual PC/Jury dealing with this issue, to have the greatest possible range of options available to them. Which - in case of a invalid certificate, trough no fault of the competitor - makes a lot of sense.

I'm very busy with taxes, so posting will be a little less this week.

Monday, 26 March 2012

(pillow)Case of the week (13/12) – 15

(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.)

(pillow)Case picture


Rule 12, On the Same Tack, Not Overlapped
Rule 13, While Tacking
Rule 18.1(b), Mark-Room: When Rule 18 Applies
Rule 18.2(b), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room
Rule 18.2(c), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room
Definitions, Mark-Room

In tacking to round a mark, a boat clear ahead must comply with rule 13; a boat clear astern is entitled to hold her course and thereby prevent the other from tacking.


Assumed Facts

A and B are approaching the windward mark which they are required to leave to port. They are close-hauled on parallel courses with A clear ahead. A expects B, when she can tack and fetch the mark, to tack to round it and head for the next mark. Instead, B holds her course as shown in the diagram and sails on well past the mark.


Has B the right to hold her course in this way and, thereby, prevent A from tacking?


Yes. While A remains on port tack, B is required to keep clear by rule 12 and, as A was clear ahead when she reached the zone, B is required by rule 18.2(b) to give A mark-room as well. Provided B keeps clear of A and gives A mark-room if A luffs (even if A luffs as high as head to wind), B is entitled to sail any course she chooses, including holding her course.

However, B is no longer required to give A mark-room after A leaves the zone (see rule 18.2(c)). If A were to pass head to wind, then at that moment all parts of rule 18 would cease to apply because the boats would be on opposite tacks (see rule 18.1(b)). In addition, A would no longer have right of way under rule 12, and B would become the right-of-way boat under rule 13.

RYA 1966/8


One  solution for Boat A to get out of this situation is to time his luff so that she will have enough speed to get head to wind next to the mark. Boat B will either have to luff and end up on the wrong side of the mark or bear down to behind A. If the latter happens boat A can safely tack while keeping clear.

120312 Case 15a

Boat B bears off behind A. She’s not entitled to mark-room although she get’s an inside overlap in position 3. RRS 18.2(c), first part.

120312 Case 15b

Boat B luff and finds herself on the wrong side of the mark. She can’t continue upwind to interfere with A, because A is already on the next leg and that means boat B would break rule 23.2.

She can also start pinching as soon as she’s entered the zone clear ahead to get closer to the mark that way. In both scenario’s boat B has to keep clear and has to give mark-room (until A passes head to wind_

120312 Case 15c

Boat B slows down between 2 and 3 to go behind A. And A can continue as lead boat, although she has lost some speed in doing so. The one thing boat A must not do is pass head to wind before boat B has committed to go behind. Rule 18.2(c), second part, also states that mark-room is lost once the boat having mark-room passes head to wind.

Sunday, 25 March 2012

Score LTW 2012 Winter Challenge 03/16

You are not making this easy!

First of all I must confess that I had some difficulties deciding this incident myself. I would have liked have had the opportunity to discuss the rules involved in a panel to reach the most equatable solution. By having a panel with more persons (read opinions) you get a better balance.

Most of you decided that Red's protest was invalid because she didn't hail 'protest'. I can't say that this is wrong, but would like to point out that the rule states she must do so 'at the first reasonable opportunity for each'. So my question to you is: "What has to happen before you decide that hailing has not to be done immediately?"

For instance: If both the helmsman and the crew were thrown overboard by the sudden deceleration, would any of you have insisted on Red yelling protest to Purple?
I think not. By the time they were able to get back on board Purple would have long gone and hailing would have been pointless. Then 61.1(a)(1) would have allowed the protest to be validated.

In our situation only the crew was thrown overboard. The skipper was still aboard. But picture what the situation was. A spinnaker flying in front of the boat, the mainsail full, the boat about to be smashed against the committee vessel, you crew in the water and you yourself recovering from having been thrown forward by the sudden deceleration. Would you have the wherewithal to clear your head and, before starting to keep your boat out of danger and check your crew was okay, yell protest?

At least a consideration.
In these circumstances it is in my view not 'wrong' to allow the validity to be decided in favor of the sailor.

Because of declaring the protest of Red invalid we never go to the issue if Purple did keep clear and or give enough mark-room. In my opinion she did. Boats should be able to pass marks - even if if they are committee boats -  very close. Or if that is not possible because of anchor-lines or such, at least clearly marked where or where not to pass.

In my opinion the shallowness of the anchor-rode coupled with the lack of clearly marking the save point of passage, was an improper action of the RC. So redress is possible for Red. She should have been able to pass the committee vessel safely without any chance of getting entangled in the line.

Did any of you ask if she wanted redress? It was not on the original protest-form.....
Most International Jury's have a policy decided beforehand. To offer redress if it is appropriate when not asked and talk with the representative of the boat what it should be. Or not to do this. It should be - at least - consistent for all competitors in the event.

Then there's the issue with rule 41. Rule 41(b) allows members of the RC-boat to help in getting clear. Most of you concluded this. Good. Then the rubber-boat brought back the rudder. Almost all of you concluded that was not permitted under rule 41. Also correct. But what about rule 1.1?
A boat or competitor shall give all possible help to any person or vessel in danger
Was Red in danger?
In my opinion you can answer with yes. Without her rudder there was a real possibility she would have ended up on the rocks. Could she continue in the race after getting that help? That is depending on what was written in the sailing instructions. Why do you think the RC brought this protest?

None of you asked if there was a provision in the SI allowing a boat to get help as long as it didn't involved progress in the race......

I was reminded not long ago by one of my friends (who's also a judge) that you are allowed to find a solution that is within the rules, that gives the best outcome for the competitor.

I've scored the entries according to this criteria:

  • Format and consistency between facts found and conclusion: 2 points;
  • Answer on finishing: 1 point;
  • Validity decision: 1 point for each protest;
  • Restricted the second protest on the issue: 1 point;
  • Decision on rule 41: 1 point.
  • Decision on redress: 1 points; Giving back finish position (2e) to Red: 1 point
  • Decision on rule 31 (mark touching) and exoneration: 1 point.
  • If you managed to get to rule 1.1 you earn 2 bonus points.

Except for the bonus points, I haven't looked at if you had the same outcome as me, only if your decision was based on valid grounds and arguments.

This has resulted in the following score:

Still very close at the top, but no ties at the moment.

Friday, 23 March 2012

LTW 2012 Winter Challenge E03/23

During a 6 day Tornado regatta, a protest is handed in at the race office on day four within the protest time limit. Blue protests against Yellow for failing to keep clear as windward boat (Rule 11)
The following diagram is attached to the paper.

Diagram by Blue
Yellow reads on the noticeboard she's being protested and asks for a protest form herself. She hands it in about fifteen minutes after protest time limit has passed.

The jury secretary schedules both protest simultaneously and all three parties come to the hearing.
You find out that Blue did hail protest and fly a red flag immediately after position 4, but Yellow never did.

The challenge as per usual:
Find facts, draw a conclusion and decide the protest(s).

You are all allowed one question. And only one. But to make it interesting, you can decide when to ask it, up until next Wednesday 23:59. Better make it a good one!
All questions will be answered ASAP. So you might want to wait until last. Or not. Maybe your one question will trigger a question by one of the other challengers that will really solve the problem. Or not. You decide.

As compensation for this one question limitation, I will post the animation on Thursday.
Good luck,

Thursday, 22 March 2012

Judges Manual 2012

Together with the Race Management Manual, ISAF also published a new Judges Manual 2012
You can find it on this page: IJ Manual 2012

Both manuals have a lot in common and relevant text is printed in both. That's logical - a lot of issues are event related and should be treated the same way by all International Race Officials

But there are specific Judges sections. A few titbits:

K.12 Cautions in Evaluating Evidence
Protest committees can make judgements about the credibility of evidence based on style and presentation of evidence. Witnesses who express their opinions confidently are often given more weight than someone who is less forceful and less believable.
You should be aware of speech patterns that could lead juries to erroneous conclusions:
  • Use of hedge words, such as “kind of”, “I think”, “If I’m not mistaken”, “it seems”; 
  • Use of rising intonation in a declarative statement, suggesting that the speaker is seeking approval for the answer, e.g. in response to the question of “how fast”, the response “5 knots?”
  • Repetition indicating insecurity;
  • Intensifiers, such as “very close”, instead of “close”;
  • High degree of direct quotation, indicating deference to authority; and
  • Use of empty adjectives, such as “charming”, “cute”, “interesting”. 
Do not confuse confident witnesses with accurate ones because their confidence is based on more information than simply the information that determines its accuracy. Their confidence may not be at all related to the accuracy of their recall.

Picture on page 128:


M.2 Damage
There is no definition of exactly what constitutes damage; however ISAF Case 19 makes some suggestions:

  • was the market value diminished? 
  • was an item or equipment made less functional? 
  • was a crew member injured?
Under the ISAF Racing Rules Question and Answer Service Q&A 2010-31 J 013, although not binding, unlike ISAF Cases provides the following definition of Damage: Damage means physical harm caused in such a way as to impair the boat’s value, usefulness, or normal function. The only limitation in rule 31.1(a)(3) regarding the damage is that the damage must be obvious to the boats involved.

M.3 Serious Damage
This is not possible to define but a protest committee should ask:
  • was the performance of the boat or crew seriously impaired? 
  • was the market value of the boat significantly diminished?
  • was a crew member seriously injured?

I did a quick search in both documents on 'social media' and on 'code of conduct'.
Results were 0 on the first one and 4 on the second. The latter all in either the coaches, parents or other support personal sections...... Nothing about blogging.

As with the RM-Manual, please inform me if you find content that is noteworthy.

Wednesday, 21 March 2012

OneOFive -system for Rule 42 and 63

News from Peter Scheuerl about his Rule 42 and Protest Hearing schedule system. I received an Email and asked to share with my readers. Peter is keen to hear comments and  suggestions for improvements. Mail him on info at juryboard dot org.

Hi All,

As many of you know, I developed an on-line Rule 42 and Protest Hearing schedule system.
I try to constantly fix all bugs, and it seems there are not many left...

The system got used at several bigger events now, and most judges were able to work with it without any training. I made the download version a little bit more streamlined, so that you don't have any test data with it any more, but it works 'out of the box' with little set up required.
I re-wrote the install instructions as well, so that it is less focused on the technical part and more on how to just make it work.

But mainly I just registered the domain
And as I have unlimited sub-domains there, I'm happy to offer anybody who wants to use it a free install there. So if you want to give it a try but don't want the hassle of installing it, just let me know.

105 PHSchedule

For any regatta the address then would be something like
It doesn't take me long to set it up, and I think it's a good service for the sailors to be able to check these things on-line.The instructions and download is still at:
Events hosted under  are listed under

Peter Scheuerl

Good job, Peter. I'll have a go at my next Rule 42 regatta. Only one suggestion at this time: Can we have a name for your program? A description as a name doesn't really work - for me. 

How about the '105-system' ? or the 'OneOFive' system
(adding 42 and 63)

or perhaps the 'PS-system' (I like abbreviations)

LTW Readers, any suggestions?

Tuesday, 20 March 2012

Score 03/09 LTW Winter Challenge

First of all I must apologies for not getting scoring and commenting sooner

It's tax-time in the Netherlands and I had an appointment with my bookkeeper today going over the results of my first year. That took all my time preparing. Luckily I had some post pre- prepared to go on the blog. But the LTW 2012 Winter Challenge got the short end of the stick. I'm satisfied with the comments of my bookkeeper and can do the changes in coming days, so this evening I'm catching up.

The case with the crew in the water was send to me by Jason, who told me it has really happened. Thanks Jason!

There are three rules to consider in this situation. In numerical order 42, 47.2 and 49.2

Most of the contestants went for 47.2, which is the obvious rule.  There is however one consideration to make. What is 'on board'? That is not defined in the rules. Can a person be on board while hanging onto it?
It is standard practice that if you need a definition of something that is not defined in the RRS, you go to the standard use/definition in the (nautical) dictionary.
Webster: On shipboard; in a ship or a boat; on board of; as, I came on board early; to be on board ship.
To me that means, the person should be at least 'out of the water'….
So the boat continues to race with a crew member not on board, therefore breaking rule 47.2 > DSQ.

There is also a breach of rule 42! The wording in the rule states: ......using only wind and water to increase, maintain or DECREASE her speed. Sticking an arm or a leg in the water to slow down for the start is breaking rule 42! Let alone a person.

Finally rule 49.2
You found out in the questions the boat has stanchions…. Logically that would mean that she also had lifelines, and one of you specifically asked this. In order to consider 49.2 you need to know this.
There is a case to be made that a person hanging onto the boat is positioning his body outside the lifelines, and certainly not performing a necessary task. But because of the other two infringed rules, you can also not use this at all.

Some of you also used rule 2. The skipper, by sailing on without recovering his crew, was deliberately breaking rule 47.2.

Hmm, I'm reluctant to go there. I think the skipper just didn't realise he was doing this. He should have, perhaps. But to find this a rule 2 issue I need to be sure. It must be clearly established, like the rule says. I don't blame anyone from bringing it up in the room, but my vote would be no.

I've scored the entries accordingly and commented individually.

The leader and runner up have only 1 point between them. It could be over in three episodes......

Taking a Penalty in Match Racing; (MR01)

This is the first post in a new series about Match Racing. I’ll try to post regularly, at least one a week – usually on Tuesdays. They will be about actual manoeuvres and the rules in Match Racing


This first post in the series is about taking a penalty.

Yellow has an outstanding penalty and decides to take it well in front of the other boat when almost on the port lay-line. She’s sailing on starboard and Blue is at least seven boat lengths behind. With some skill she should be able to cross ahead of Blue and get to the windward mark first.
(NB: this manoeuvre would be better done on the starboard lay-line, because once you’ve completed and are back on close hauled course, you have right of way)

In normal fleet racing she has to comply with rule 44.2 which says: Sailing well clear of other boats as soon after the incident as possible, by sailing a One-Turn or Two-Turn Penalty promptly, making the required number of turns in the same direction, each turn including one tack and one gybe.

Q&A 2010-010 B021 2011-010-B021 explains further that if a boat does its penalty and has to stop turning half way because of another boat, she's only doing a correct penalty when that other boat has changed course to achieve this.

If the other boat didn't change course and was always on an 'interfering' course to begin with, the boat with the penalty hasn't sailed well clear and the penalty is incorrect and should be done anew.

If the other boat changed course after the boat began to turn she's is allowed to curtail her turn, so as to not break rule 21.2 and finish the penalty as soon as the other boat has passed.

However in Mach Racing Rule 44 has been switched off by rule C7.1.
There is no obligation to sail well clear.

A boat can take a penalty in close proximity of another boat, by forcing the other boat in a tactical situation to stay 'behind' as long as she is keeping clear when she's doing the penalty bit (from head to wind to 90 degrees from true wind in a downwind leg, and from gybing to close hauled on an upwind leg).

In the animation Yellow doesn’t ‘make’ it. In position 6 she stops turning because there’s a chance she would not keep clear of Blue if she does. She sails straight on to go behind Blue. One boat length later Blue decides to tack to defend the right side and Yellow luffs up and gets to close hauled behind Blue.

Has Yellow done her penalty or not?

On the water we decided she had, reading Q&A 2010-010 B021 2011-010-B021, I doubted that, thinking about it a little more, I think she has, because of the change made by C7 that the ‘sailing well clear’ part in rule 44 is no longer applicable.

Please tell me your opinion.

Monday, 19 March 2012

(pillow)Case of the week (12/12) – 17

(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.)

(This weeks case is number 17, because Case 18 is deleted in the Casebook)

(pillow)Case picture


Rule 13, While Tacking

A boat is no longer subject to rule 13 when she is on a close-hauled course, regardless of her movement through the water or the sheeting of her sails.


Rule 13 applies until the tacking boat ‘is on a close-hauled course.’ However, the rule does not say whether the boat must be moving when she assumes a close-hauled course. Is it intended that, at the moment rule 13 ceases to apply, the boat must actually be moving through the water on a close-hauled course and not merely be on such a course?


A boat is no longer subject to rule 13 when she is on a close-hauled course, regardless of her movement through the water or the sheeting of her sails.

RYA 1967/8


Which makes it harder to see, sometimes. But that’s the way the rule is written and HAS to be used.
I always tell sailors who have a hard time recognizing if a boat has turned from head to wind enough, to use their own boat as reference. As most racing is done in one design classes, that should give them enough to work with.


In the Netherlands we race with ‘traditional’ boats who are equipped with leeboards. Those have a very big angle towards the wind, when sailing close hauled. Nevertheless the moment rule 13 switches off comes sooner than most sailors think. Err on the side of caution is a prudent strategy.

Sunday, 18 March 2012

Race Management Manual 2012

On the ISAF website I noticed the publication of the 'new' Race Management Manual and had quick look.

It is a whopper!

345 pages about Race Management, with subjects ranging from 'Dealing with the CAS, Crisis Management, Junior Sailors to Handling Misconduct and Dealing with the Media. A real big basic manual, covering everything, in first glance.

I'll be reading it in coming weeks - time permitting - and report back on interesting subjects, but it is already clear to me, that a lot of people have invested a lot of time to get it this extensive.

Illustration on page 335
If you are interested, you can download it on this page: RMManual2012.

Do me a favour, if you do and have read it, give me your tips on interesting parts....

I'm writing this post on Saturday evening, to be published on Sunday - after a day on the water. I was in Lelystad at the sailing centre of Team Heiner for stage 5 in their Match Race Winter series. Nice (and dry) sailing weather for the six teams participating. Tomorrow stage 6.

This means I will - in all likely hood - not be able to score the LTW 2012 Winter Challenge E 03/09 tomorrow. I did however publish the answers already - so you can have a look at what you fellow challengers wrote.

A hint, read rule 42 again and think about why you did not include that rule in your answer........ (save one)

Ohh, will the anonymous challenger who send me his/her answer already last Saturday, please tell me who you are? There are several possibilities and I hate to award a score to the wrong person.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...