Does Rule 17 apply?

During a Medal Race at the Delta Lloyd Regatta a three boat situation near the finish developed involving rule 17. Let me start by the 'classic' situation where the middle boat has a rule 17 limitation and the leeward boat has not.

Two boats overlapped with red as leeward boat encounter a third (grey) boat. Purple establishes an overlap to leeward of Grey within two boat lengths and has a rule 17 limitation. Red however does not have the same limitation. She has an overlap with Grey (because Purple in the middle has an overlap with both), but not within two boat lengths, so Red does not have a rule 17 limitation.
Grey must keep clear as windward boat, but Purple may not sail above her proper course. Because Purple has to keep clear of Red her proper course is to luff when Red luffs. She does not sail above her proper course, because she would have done the same, if Grey wasn't there and she must keep clear of Red.

With me so far?

Now almost the same situation.

In this the overlap was long standing on the downwind, without a rule 17 limitation. Red is within two boat lengths of Grey. Grey manages to get clear ahead and breaks the overlap. A few seconds later the overlap is re-establish.

My question to you: does Red have to Gybe immediately? In other words, does rule 17 now apply for Red?

And what if we added a fourth boat overlapped to leeward of Red?

J.

Traveling with an inflateble life-jacket

As an International Race Official I'm often travelling by air plane. It's hard enough to fit your gear into one bag and stay under the weight limit - and that's made harder because a lot of baggage handlers and air plane personnel don't understand an inflatable life-jacket with a CO2 gas cylinder.

It has been my experience a couple of times that I've been called into baggage handling areas, where I was asked to open my bag. The scanner found the cylinder and was flagged.
Usually it ended up me leaving the cylinder there, because the I was not allowed to take my bag on the plane otherwise. Besides being an inconvenience of having a life-jacket that wasn't functional at an event, it also meant I had to replace the cylinder every time and my own expense.

I always tried to explain that the cylinder wasn't dangerous, that it would not spontaneously open up and that I had detached it from the life-jacket itself, in the off change it would, that it only expell harmless CO2. And that the effing plane had hundreds of those cylinders on there own life jackets, under the seats......

No avail.

Lots of IRO take a non inflatable life-jacket because of this reason. But that is much bulkier and - to be perfectly honest - it is a drag wearing it, being three sizes to small for me.

One evening last week at the Delta Lloyd Regatta this subject came up during a jury discussion and one of the judges told us about a couple of papers she puts in the her bag together with her life-jacket explaining what it is and that it is allowed on planes by the IATA (International Air Transport Association).

I asked her to send me those papers so I could share them with you.

LINK: DGR IATA Table 23A CO2 Cylinder.pdf

The document contains the IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations Table 2.3.A in five languages (English, German, French, Spanish & Russia) and a detailed description of the CO2 Cylinder (drawing and specifications). It seems to work if you print it and put the papers with your life-jacket. Even if your bag gets flagged, you have papers to show that it is allowed by the IATA on planes.

If you need to proof the legitimacy of the papers send the person asking, to this link:
http://www.iata.org/whatwedo/cargo/dangerous_goods/Documents/DGR_EN_53rd_Table-23A.pdf.

If you use it and are flagged, please share your experiences.
Thanks Christine, for sending me the papers.

(pillow)Case of the week (22/12) – 11

(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 11

Rule 14, Avoiding Contact
Rule 19.2(b), Room to Pass an Obstruction: Giving Room at an Obstruction
Rule 20.1, Room to Tack at an Obstruction: Hailing and Responding
Rule 20.3, Room to Tack at an Obstruction: When Not to Hail
Rule 64.1(c), Decisions: Penalties and Exoneration

When boats are overlapped at an obstruction, including an obstruction that is a right-of-way boat, the outside boat must give the inside boat room to pass between her and the obstruction.

Summary of the Facts

PW and PL, close-hauled on port tack and overlapped, approached S on the windward leg. PL could pass safely astern of S. PW, on a collision course with S, hailed PL for room to pass astern of S when PW and PL were about three hull lengths from S. PL ignored the hail and maintained her course. When PW bore away to avoid S, she and PL had slight beam to beam contact. PW protested under rule 19.2 (b).

The protest committee held that rule 19.2(b) did not apply, stating that PW could easily have tacked into the open water to windward to keep clear, and should have done so. PW was disqualified under  rule 20.1 and appealed.

Decision

S was an obstruction that PW and PL were about to pass on the same side.
Therefore, rule 19 applied. Under rule 19.2(b) PW was entitled to room to pass between PL and the stern of S. PL did not give PW that room, so PL broke rule 19.2(b).
PL was subject to rule 14, but since she held right of way over PW and there was no damage or injury, she cannot be penalized for breaking that rule. PW could not have known that PL was not going to give sufficient room until she was committed to pass between S and PL. PW broke rule 11, but she was compelled to do so by PL’s failure to give room as required by rule 19.2(b). Therefore, as required by rule 64.1(c), PW is exonerated from breaking rule 11. Also, when it became clear that PL was not giving room, it was not reasonably possible for PW to avoid the contact that occurred, so PW did not break rule 14.
PW was not required to “tack into open water to windward to keep clear” because PL did not hail under rule 20.1 for room to tack and avoid S. Rule 20.3 prohibited PL from doing so because she did not have to make any change of course to avoid S. PW’s appeal is upheld. The decision of the protest  committee disqualifying PW is reversed. PW is reinstated, and  PL is disqualified.

RYA 1964/18

This case teaches that, although there is a perfect ‘alternative escape’ route for a keep clear boat to keep clear, it still may relay on the rules to give her the route those rules provide. If she wishes to take that route.

Because of the this and other limitation rules (15, 16, & 17) the right of way boat sometimes feels MORE restricted in her movements, than the keep clear boat. A keep clear boat can change course as fast as she likes, can tack or gybe or whatever – as long as she keeps clear. The right of way boat must always look ahead and calculate what consequences her actions have on the ability of the keep clear boat to keep clear.

Some sailors advocate a simpler way. To get rid of all those limitations on the right of way boat. I always urge them to consider the case of the faster boat catching up with them, who cries foul when the slightest bow point overlaps there stern or rudder……

National Doping regulations and rule 5

In the Netherlands we have - whatever you might think - a strict anti doping regulation in sports. Including in the sport of sailing. Most jury members will think first off, this already covered in the fundamental rules, particularly in rule 5, the Anti-Doping rule.

Recently however, our national doping agency has been investigating sports in our country, on compliance with the rules. Specifically the rules about their authority to inspect during an event.
Our MNA (Watersportverbond) has been made aware that most events do NOT comply with their rules.

In the Notice of Race and in the Sailing Instructions, the NATIONAL Anti- Doping regulations have to be declared as a governing document. In that regulation the way inspections are conducted are described and how competitors should act and what rights they have.
Our MNA has now amended all championship NOR and SI to comply. And make a room (toilet is enough) available for the Doping Authority during events.

You can find the Dutch regulations here: Nationaal Dopingreglement_2011
All competitors; helm and crews, have to adhere to it.

What about your country?
Do you have a anti-doping regulation on top of rule 5?

Betting and Anti-Corruption regulation is around the corner.

As a judge and umpire at events I’m privileged to hear a lot of information that is not (yet) readily available to the public. I must be aware of my limitations to blog about such information. I have made mistakes in that regard in the past.

That’s why I’m always on the look out for anything that is published or written by ISAF about this subject. In this years mid-year meeting a submission has been approved that has gone into effect on 05/04/2012: Betting and Anti-Corruption - New Appendix 5

Purpose or Objective of the submission: To establish rules on betting and anti-corruption. Proposal: To adopt the ASOIF Model rules on betting and anti-corruption as Appendix 5.
Notes: 1. The Constitution Committee to complete the relevant details. & 2. The Executive Committee to publish draft sanctions by the end of July 2012 for final consideration and ratification by Council in November 2012.

The approved text still has a lot of holes and still needs a lot of work before it is clear. But there are also paragraphs which raise more questions than answer them:

Lets have a look at ‘inside information’. This is defined as:

"Inside Information" means any information relating to any Competition or Event that a Participant possesses by virtue of his position within the sport. Such information includes, but is not limited to, factual information regarding the competitors, the conditions, tactical considerations or any other aspect of the Competition or Event, but does not include such information that is already published or a matter of public record, readily acquired by an interested member of the public or disclosed according to the rules and regulations governing the relevant Competition or Event;

Example: Racing has been postponed. But at one o’clock the jury is told racing will start at three. This is not yet announced on the noticeboard or anywhere else, in other words; it’s inside information.

Back to the text:

3. RULE VIOLATIONS
3.4 Inside Information
(a) Using Inside Information for Betting purposes or otherwise in relation to Betting.
(b) Disclosing Inside Information to any Person with or without Benefit where the Participant might reasonably be expected to know that its disclosure in such circumstances could be used in relation to Betting.
(c) Inducing, instructing, facilitating or encouraging a Participant to commit a Violation set out in this Rule 3.4.

I phone my brother, who’s watching the racing on the internet and tell him he can go and have lunch because racing will not start until three. Am I breaking rule 3.4(b)?
There are countries where they bet on anything. Is it reasonable for me to expect that they would bet on when racing starts?

Have a look at the document and tell me what your think.
Betting and Anti-Corruption - New Appendix 5

(pillow)Case of the week (21/12) - 12

(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 12

Rule 11, On the Same Tack, Overlapped
Rule 18.1, Mark-Room: When Rule 18 Applies
Rule 18.2(b), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room
Rule 18.5(b), Mark-Room: Exoneration
Definitions, Clear Astern and Clear Ahead; Overlap

In determining the right of an inside boat to mark-room under rule 18.2(b), it is irrelevant that boats are on widely differing courses, provided that an overlap exists when the first of them reaches the zone.

Summary of the Facts
OL and IW were approaching a mark to be left to starboard. The wind was light and there was a 2-knot current in the same direction as the wind. IW, which had sailed high on the course to the mark to offset the effect of the current, approached it with the current, almost on a run. OL, on the other hand, had been set to leeward and, at position 1, about three hull lengths from the mark, was sailing close-hauled slowly against the current. IW twice hailed for water, and OL twice replied ‘You can’t come in here.’ At the last moment, shortly after position 4 in the diagram, as IW luffed to begin her passing manoeuvre OL tried to give her room but the two dinghies made
contact. There was no damage or injury.

OL protested under rule 11 but was herself disqualified under rule 18.2(b). She appealed, asserting that it was illogical and beyond the intention of the definition Overlap and of rule 18 to consider as overlapped two boats whose headings differed by 90 degrees. She also asserted that the purpose of rule 18 was to protect a boat in danger of hitting the mark that was unable to go astern of the outside boat. She further argued that throughout IW’s approach to the mark until she finally luffed, she was easily able to pass astern of OL, and that IW was not an ‘inside’ boat until a moment before contact.

Decision
OL’s appeal is dismissed and her disqualification is confirmed.
The boats were required to leave the mark on the same side and were on the same tack, and so rule 18 applied after position 1 when OL reached the zone. The boats were overlapped from that time until contact occurred, and therefore the first sentence of rule 18.2(b) applied, limiting OL’s rights under rule 11 by requiring her to give IW mark-room. OL did not give IW mark-room, and so is disqualified under rule 18.2(b). It should be noted that OL also broke rule 14, as she could have avoided contact, but, because OL was the right-of-way boat and the contact caused neither damage nor injury, she could not have been penalized had rule 14 been the only rule she broke. As a result of OL’s failing to give IW mark-room to which IW was entitled,
IW broke rule 11 while trying to take that mark-room, and therefore is exonerated under rule 18.5(b). IW also broke rule 14, as she too could have avoided contact, but is not to be penalized, because she was a boat entitled to mark-room and the contact caused neither damage nor injury.

RYA 1964/19

Many sailors have a hard time understanding that they can be overlapped with a boat far away on a hugely different angle. This case makes it clear once and for all and has been doing it since 1964!

The most common example is not with two boats, but with multiple boats who stack up behind each other to go round the mark and are surprized by a later incoming boat who claims mark room.

When the pink boat enters as fourth boat, the light blue is overlapped on the inside. Before we had the three length zone, this was even more seen as unfair.
J.

Everything you wanted to know about Kiteboarding!

As you've heard by now, kiteboarding has been voted into the Olympics for 2016. This decision was reached partly based on the testing done this year in Santander in March this year.

There are two reports available from that evaluation, both can be downloaded from the ISAF site:
Kiteboarding Evaluation Report en Kiteboarding Technical Report.

A few key phrases:

• There are no race management or event organization issues. Kiteboarding could be immediately included in major ISAF events and the Olympic Sailing Regatta.
• The rules are well developed and follow the standard Racing Rules of Sailing with some discipline specific changes. No rule 42.
• Racing is close to the shore with an easy to follow competition format. Kiteboarding is colorful, attractive to spectators and media and especially appealing to youth.
• Equipment is readily available with worldwide distribution channels, production controlled and at a low price (cheapest entry into Olympic Sailing for emerging nations). 
• The class is growing fast. App. 60000 persons start kiteboarding every year. App. 180000 kites and 75000 hulls are sold every year with a yearly growth of 10%.
• Currently 14 builders are producing hulls and 19 builders produce kites. This competition between builders guarantees high quality at a low prize.
• Equipment is high-performance over a wide wind range (5 till 18 knots during the test event using one hull and one kite only).
• Equipment has a wide weight band – competitors from 55 to 90 kg used the same hulls in the test event and chose the kite size by body weight.
• Biggest growth rates are currently in Asia. Emerging nations can reach international competition level within a few months.
• Flexibility: Equipment is light weight (hull, kite and rigging less than 12 kg) and can be taken as standard luggage on planes. During the test event, the complete equipment of 17 competitors fit into one mini bus to shuttle to a nearby beach.
• Storage: Equipment Storage is minimized, complete equipment of 17 competitors easily fits into 50sqm with no additional requirements for storage facilities. Kiteboards are completely rigged and de-rigged every day (it takes 5 minutes to pump up the kite).
• Kiteboards are physically and technically challenging to sail, but not destructive to the body (no pumping, always trapezing).
• Youth Pathway: youth and junior competitors use the same hulls and only smaller kite sizes depending on the body weight.
• The competition format developed during the test event allows for short event duration, head to head competition and the winner of the final medal race winning the first place. Races are between 12 minutes (fleet race) and 4 minutes (medal race elimination)
• Identification of Sailors needs to be improved, e.g. by adding nationality flags to the kites
• There have been safety issues in the past which have been overcome since app. eight years. Safety standards are constantly improved in cooperation between class and national governments

With my limited experience I would agree with most of these evaluation points. but 5 knots as a lower wind limit is low, too low for some places. It depends on the place kiteboarders have to launch from. If the beach the big waves can be very challenging to overcome if you don't have power in your kite. Gradient and current is also a factor. The criteria should involve a lot more factors.

As for safety. Kiteboarders cannot paddle!. The newest generation kites do float but it is not easy to relaunch once they are in the water. If the conditions become unfavorable every kiteboarder has to be picket up and brought in. There is no way they can get back without help if they can't 'sail'

And please don't limit the riders in forcing them to choose only one size kite! The range is from 6 to 17, 18 m2, with many kites in between: 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 17 m2., depending on the brand.

Kitesurfing Rules! Part 2

Appendix BB is changing quit a lot of definitions;
For overlap the kite does count, but for finishing it doesn't. The competitor even has to be in contact with board to be able to finish according to the definition:

Finish  A kiteboard finishes when, while the competitor is in contact with the hull, any part of her hull, or the competitor in normal position, crosses the finishing line in the direction of the course from the last mark, either for the first time or after taking a Turn Penalty under rule 44 or correcting an error made at the finishing line under rule 28.1.

So if the rider gets separated from his board just before the finish line, he has to get it back before he can cross. Or cross again with the board. I think he can swim with it, over the line - or walk with the board over the line, if the water is shallow enough, as long as he's holding on to the board. But the experts next to me here say, he should be on top of it.... kiting. (That's not what the wording states, imho). But of course they are right, Appendix BB also changes rule 42:

42 PROPULSION
A kiteboard shall be propelled only by the action of the wind on the kite, by the action of the water on the hull and by the unassisted actions of the competitor. However, the competitor shall not make material forward progress by paddling, swimming or walking.

Another definition:

Start  A kiteboard starts when, her hull and the competitor having been entirely on the pre-start side of the starting line at or after her starting signal, and having complied with rule 30.1 if it applies, any part of her hull, or the competitor crosses the starting line in the direction of the first mark.

In this definition again the kite does not play any part. It may cross the line before the starting signal and may never come behind the line.

Not only many definitions have been changed. In the rules of Part 2 also a lot has been changed and/or added. For example rule 21,3 has been changed and a new rule 21.4 has been added:

21.3 During the last minute before her starting signal, a kiteboard that significantly slows down or stops, or one that is not making material forward progress, shall keep clear of all others unless she is accidentally capsized. 
21.4 A kiteboard that is jumping shall keep clear of a kiteboard that is not. During that time rules 10, 11 and 12 do not apply. If two kiteboards are jumping at the same time, then the kiteboard required to keep clear under rule 10, 11 or 12 shall do so.

In practice this means all starts are more or less flying starts. Combined with a permanent black flag starting penalty, it means riders have to stay well clear of the line in the last minute and time their approach very accurately.


We're preparing for the second race of the day. The wind has picked up and looks like it is holding steady. The finish is straight before my window in the RC-tower. I'm enjoying myself here......
Have look at the website and follow the action: Kite World Tour
J.

Kitesurf Rules! Appendix BB explained

For kiteboarding there is a separate appendix, just like for surfing, match racing and team racing. Since kiteboarding has been developing pretty rapidly in the last years, the rules also have been updated and brought into line with the 'normal'  racing rules of sailing.

The current Appendix BB has been changed on January 4th 2012. That is the version we are using here at the Worldcup in Scheveningen.

To determine 'Clear Ahead, Clear Astern and Overlap' the kite does count!

 The picture suggests that boards have to avoid the kite, but the distance between rider and kite is about 33 meters. And kiteboarders can control the height above the water pretty accurately, so usually one is just going over or under the other.

In order to get more speed the riders want to keep the kite lower rather then higher. Flying over an opponent is quite normal. And bringing your kite up to prevent the windward kite from passing is not changing direction and therefor not limited by rule 16! You can effectually prevent someone of passing you.

Oooh, in case you are wondering, looping is done when you are sailing downwind. In order to get more power the kite is turned clockwise or counterclockwise fast. That generates more flow and thus more power.

Download the complete rules on the ISAF Website:
Appendix BB Experimental Kiteboarding Competition Rules

O'Neill 2012 Worldcup Kite Boarding

I'm currently at the O'Neill 2012 Worldcup Kite Boarding event in The Hague as chairman of the PC.

Since kite-boarding has been part of the ISAF 'Family' there has to be at least one IJ at high level events.When I was invited I told the organizers that I knew nothing about kite-boarding and the rules involved.That was not a problem, they told me, the other judges would be knowledgeable. If I could be the chairman and help them with procedural issues.
I agreed and promised to study up on Appendix BB (recently changed on 4 January 2012).

I've been watching the freestyle competition and learned a couple new things.

Did you know:

- There are no metal or carbon parts stiffening a kite? It is all done by pumping air into tubes running along the front of a kite and as spokes in the wing.

- That the board has no stern? Both ends are the same and are alternately used as front or back.

- That there are four fins under a board? A pair on both ends, i.e. in all four corners.

- That the kite is controlled by three lines? One in the middle splitting out in the two going to the front of the wing, splitting out in four each divided along the length. It connects through the bar to the harness of the sailor. The two in the back going to each end of the bar the sailor handles. If he pulls the bar straight down along the center line, both back-lines are pulled and the kite-shape changes. The wing is pulled down in the back. If he pulls left or right, only one end is pulled and the kite changes direction.

- That a kite doesn't 'tack'. When changing from SB to P the kite is looped up and down the other side and the board starts sailing the other way. (I have to ask about this - tacking is still in App. BB)

We have not been racing yet - only freestyle. The wind direction is not suited for racing- being on shore at almost at a right angle. But nice and strong for jumping - which freestyle basically is.

I'm learning......