Back?

Published on the ISAF web site; 

International Sailing Federation
Guidelines for the Use of Social Media
by ISAF Race Officials 

I know it is hard in a "commission-run" federation, especially one that has to operate with people from all over the world and one that gets "new" commissions every four years. But I've been waiting for this since 2010. It took only four years to get to this one piece of paper.....
Here is the link: ROC Social Media Guidelines

Some excerpts:

1.2 Restricting the use of social media is not designed to inhibit freedom of speech or rights to privacy, but it is inevitable that appointment as a race official means the official must limit their use of such tools in order to comply with their duties as an official.

2.2 A competitor can say to the media that a decision is bad, the call was wrong, the race committee or the measurer made a mistake etc. But,except in authorised circumstances, a race official must not disclose confidential information. In particular:

(a) Except the official facts found, conclusion and decision, a judge serving on a panel should not disclose any other information about the hearing or the panel’s discussions.

3.1 The spirit of blogs in all sports should be to attract people towards our disciplines, explaining cases by authoritative judges, race officers, umpires and measurers, in order to offer a service at all level from the beginners to the professional competitors. Blogs are an interactive tool through which everybody can give an opinion and discuss interesting points (such as decisions or particular data) concerning the sport.
3.2 If an ISAF Race Official runs a blog, he should inform the ISAF Office of this fact.

4.4 It is acceptable for race officials to be Facebook friends with competitors (but not to be “fans” of their teams or organisations). However, race officials must be aware that information they put on their profile during an event must not give competitors who are Facebook friends an advantage or access to information which others do not have (see below).

4.5 No comments should be made about the performance of competitors at any time

List of things to do:

• Screen Facebook for "fanning". [check]
• Print these Guidelines and reread them before clicking on the Publish button of every post. [check]
• Never post about issues in a running regatta - wait until the issue has no longer any influence on the outcome - generalize the subject without revealing specific information (make it about the rules - not about the event) - and then write about it....
  Hmmm, I might run into some difficulty with 2.2(a), also in light of the "no time limit" in 2.1, because any opinion I might have, is coloured by the information, but I'll work on that. [......]
• Write to the ISAF office.(Guideline 3.2) [check]
• .....

Can I now get back to blogging, please?

J.

Is the definition finish done?

The 2013-2016 RRS has new wording for the definition: finish

A boat finishes when any part of her hull, or crew or equipment in normal position, crosses the finishing line from the course side. However, she has not finished if after crossing the finishing line she
(a) takes a penalty under rule 44.2,
(b) corrects an error under rule 28.2 made at the line, or
(c) continues to sail the course.

And in the new RRS, the time you have to inform a boat that makes an error in sailing the course, is now specified:

61.1 Informing the Protestee
(a) A boat intending to protest shall inform the other boat at the first reasonable opportunity. When her protest will concern an incident in the racing area that she was involved in or saw, she shall hail ‘Protest’ and conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity for each. She shall display the flag until she is no longer racing. However,

(1) if the other boat is beyond hailing distance, the protesting boat need not hail but she shall inform the other boat at the first reasonable opportunity;
(2) if the hull length of the protesting boat is less than 6 metres, she need not display a red flag;
(3) if the incident was an error by the other boat in sailing the course, she need not hail or display a red flag but she shall inform the other boat before that boat finishes or at the first reasonable opportunity after she finishes;

Let's have a look if we 'combine' these two. First of all, the informing part is mandatory; it says:"...but she SHALL inform…..". You must make a genuine effort to inform the other boat - but when? 

Now imagine this scenario:
A boat (call her CLEAVER) sails through the finish line, you are 20 meters behind. As soon as you also have finished, you manage to get closer to the first boat and tell her that she has missed the last mark before the finish. You don't need to hail protest or show a red flag, but you do anyway, to make sure you are seen 'informing' the other. After that you continue to shore, go to the race-office and fill in the protest form.

CLEAVER is scored in fifth position (you became third).

In the subsequent hearing you explain to the panel what you saw and did.

The representative of CLEAVER however, contents that she hadn't finished the first time. Because after you informed her she went back to the racing area, rounded the last mark and crossed the line again. And according to the definition, she only finished the second time crossing the line because she continued to sail the course. Whatever distances or where she sailed in between the second to last mark and the last mark before the finish, didn't matter. She sailed the course and should be scored.

What should the panel decide?
Can a boat still go back in this new definition?

J.

UMPIRE Call; Moving backwards through the water in 2013

Just below is an animation depicting a situation I encountered last weekend at our local match race winter series in Lelystad. Blue and Yellow do an normal dial-up after entry, but then get into a situation where I didn't know any more.

Before you read any further, take out your rulebook and read 22.3 and C2.9, please.

Wind fairly light, maybe 2 Beaufort; Boats heavy and big; J109's.
We start with 10 - P/SB - Yellow changing course 16 - giving room - Blue under 10 is doing everything she can.
Blue tacks - completes and becomes ROW under 11.
Yellow, to windward, is keeping clear.
Blue stops - does not push her boom, but uses her jib to stay head-to-wind and then starts moving backward.Yellow becomes ROW because Blue is moving backward - rule 22.3 as changed by C2.9 - no 15.
Blue moving backward swings her stern - and is effectively tacking, but still keep clear boat under C2.9. Yellow in the meantime stops and waits. But forces being as they are - even for heavy boats - eventually starts to move backwards. She's never changed tack, so still SB.
At the same time as Yellow is starting to move backward, Blue looses her backward momentum and starts to move forward again - Tack is complete, now on P.
Because Yellow moves backward Blue becomes ROW. Does Blue have a 15? No - she acquired ROW because of Yellow's actions. If Yellow hadn't started to move backward Blue would not have become ROW. Yellow realizing this is going to end in trouble, tries desperately - doing everything she can - to keep clear.
Blue, not wanting to get a collision either, bears away as hard as she can.
But we end up with contact anyway.


Before the 2013 rules, Yellow would have stayed ROW and only because she "changed course from going forward to going backward", with a 16 limitation. In the new rulebook she's keep clear boat.

In the old rulebook I would have penalized Blue for not keeping clear. Blue choose to do this risky manoeuvre and must bear the consequences if it didn't work. Only if Yellow had pushed her boom out, to get to move backwards she would have been penalized - then the situation becomes her "responsibility".

Under the 2013-2013 rules I'm not longer sure.

Does Blue have a 16? If yes, I would penalize Blue , if not - and by deduction Yellow had the 16 - perhaps Yellow should get the penalty. But what is the difference then between the old rule and the new?

If Blue started forward - as keep clear boat - before Yellow started to move backward, Blue does not have a 16. She "changed course" before she was ROW.
If Blue started forward, after Yellow was moving backward she does have a rule 16 limitation. But could she tell?
I couldn't say who started first, neither could my fellow umpire. And we were concentrating on that - not manoeuvring a sail boat.

Anyway, both boats where doing everything the could, once they realized the collision was going to happen.
Still penalize Blue for getting in this position? But she's ROW!
Penalize Yellow for not keeping clear? But she had no chance to so. She didn't push out her sail to go backwards…...

We ended up giving a green flag

But I'm not happy.
Should have been a yellow AND a blue…………
Or what?

Give me your opinion, please.

Nations Cup Regional Final & Batavia Stad NK Match Racing

P R E S S   R E L E A S E

Team Heiner hosts regional finals match racing of ISAF Nations Cup
Lelystad, 5 April 2013 – Team Heiner is proud to be the organizer of the regional finals for Northern Europe of the ISAF Nations Cup. This event will be combined with the Batavia Stad NK Match Racing, which takes place from 3 to 5 May 2013 in Lelystad.

The ISAF Nations Cup is the world championship match racing for national teams. Match racing teams – both men and women teams – from around the world compete in six regional finals against each other. The regional finals will take place between January and June 2013. The winning skippers from each division in the regional finals will qualify for the ISAF Nations Cup Grand Final in August in Copenhagen, where they will be joined by defending champions France (Women's) and New Zealand (Open) as well as host nation Denmark to battle for the 2013 ISAF Nations Cup trophies. The series is sailed every two years. ISAF Competitions Manager Antonio Gonzalez de la Madrid said: "Spread across six continents the ISAF Nations Cup is a fully inclusive event and gives wonderful opportunities for all nations and sailors a chance to test themselves against some of the best match racers in the world."

Northern European teams to Lelystad
Team Heiner is chosen by the ISAF (International Sailing Federation) to organize this year’s regional finals for Northern Europe. During this event, teams from eight countries compete against each other: Denmark, Germany, England, Finland, Norway, Poland, Sweden and The Netherlands. The competition format consists of a full round robin, followed by semi finals and finals. The teams will be sailing on B/Ones, which are equipped with main sail, jib and genaker. Jansma Jacht Almere BV supplies the boats in cooperation with B/One Class Assocation. Here with this new boat deserves its place on the Dutch competition water.

A lot of match racing at 3, 4 and 5 May
The event coincides with the Batavia Stad NK Match Racing, which is kept in May again for the second time. The place where sailors both fight for the Dutch Open Championships as the so-called Europe II qualification in the ISAF Nations Cup is the Markermeer west of the breakwater next to the Houtribsluizen in Lelystad.

Roy Heiner: “I have won the second edition of the ISAF Nations Cup in 1993. We have continued with ten editions now and the event has just become bigger and stronger. The fact that we may organize the regional finals is a great opportunity to expand match racing in The Netherlands. With three full days of action on the water and a shore program with facilities and activities for the audience, it promises from 3 to 5 May to be an amazing spectacle, which is great for the visitors coming to Lelystad”.
________________________________________________________________________________
Note to editors:
For further questions about the regional finals of the ISAF Nations Cup or the Batavia Stad NK Match Racing please contact Helga Oosterkamp of Team Heiner, phone +31 320 269 480 / +31 6 41 56 16 73 or by mail: Helga at teamheiner dot com.



I'm going as an umpire. Haven't given up altogether, boys and girls.....

Why Holland isn't the Netherlands

For everybody who was sick of me talking about Holland, The Netherlands and Dutch:





The next time I'll open my lap top and show you the video, okay?

Have a good Christmas!
Jos

UK Sailmakers: Rules Quiz program

Received the newsletter from UK Sailmakers and wanted to pass on their latest:
The NEW UK Sailmakers Rules Quiz program
An excerpt from the mail:

 


UK Sailmaker’s online Rules Quiz Program has been called “the easiest way to learn the Racing Rules of Sailing.” Every four years, when the International Sailing Federation updates the Racing Rules of Sailing, UK’s Rules experts go back to the drawing board and create a fresh collection of animated quizzes to test sailors’ knowledge of key Rules, providing interpretations of the Rules, and giving detailed answers to the question of “who was right and why.” This year, along with updating the content of the quizzes themselves, UK has revamped the technology driving the Rules Quiz, creating more informative and interesting interactive quizzes.

The new Rules Quiz Program has been retooled from stem to stern, reflecting the latest techniques in online learning tools. To help better understand the situations as they unfold and the ultimate answers, UK has added graphic teaching aids including overlap lines, a circle showing the zone, a rotatable grid in one-boatlength increments, the ability to see the past positions of the boats as they advance through the situation, and the ability to see the track lines of the boats. A user-friendly slide bar allows users to easily advance or reverse the animation to a precise position. The new animations are bigger, more colorful, and the boats moving across the screen are more realistic and lifelike. More info...

Click here for sample quiz.


Last minute Holiday Shopping! Pre-Sales Discount!
The program currently has 45 quizzes with more to come throughout the 2013-2016 quadrennial. UK is in the final stages of preparing the program and plans to have it finished by the middle of January 2013. The new Rules Quiz will be available for $55.00 U.S. through the UK Sailmakers online store, but you can purchase a pre-release copy thru December 31,, 2012 at a discounted price of only $40.00 U.S. Since the program lives in the Cloud and won’t come in a box, you can order the program now and still be able give an e-mail gift certificate to someone for Christmas. This is a great present and even better last-minute gift idea.

  

I've not run every quiz yet, but the ones I did are great! Clear animations with lots of cool additions. Overlap lines, tracks and other information to judge the situations.....

I only wish it was as clear as this in a hearing!

J.

Changes in Rule 69; part Two

The second change in rule 69 is about the 'standard of proof' that should be used on the evidence:

Rule 69.2(b):
……. If it is established to the comfortable satisfaction of the protest committee, bearing in mind the seriousness of the alleged misconduct, that the competitor has broken rule 69.1(a), it shall either…...

I have had a very hard time finding out what 'comfortable satisfaction' means. The Casebook working party is preparing a Case to explain to protest committees what the “comfortable satisfaction” standard means and how they should apply it. But that will take - according to my sources - several more weeks, before that is finalized.

Search results

A search on the Internet spewed out several doping cases where this 'standard of proof ' is discussed;

A couple of quotes from an article by Daniel Dawer, with the title: Leveling the Playing Field: Why the USADA Must Adopt a Criminal Burden of Proof in Anti-Doping Proceedings

Article 3.1 of the World Anti-Doping Code, states that such a standard "is greater than a mere balance of probability but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.“

Accordingly, the WADA established a burden of proof “greater than a mere balance of probability but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt”: namely, prosecutors must establish an athlete’s guilt “to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing body.” The standard’s ambiguity emerges from a failure to define “comfortable satisfaction.” Is it closer to preponderance of evidence—the evidentiary standard in civil proceedings—or closer to beyond reasonable doubt?

And from an article by Angel R. Puerta: Uncomfortable Satisfaction

Athletes need no longer be proven guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" in doping cases - a near impossibility in many instances - but rather they must be proven guilty "to the comfortable satisfaction" of the panels hearing their cases.

The new standard brings common sense into the pursuit of a level playing field. Obvious cheaters can no longer hide beyond a "we have never tested positive" gimmick that is built upon clever drugs and astute event and training schedules.

From an article on Velo News: Dick Pound talks Floyd Landis, Lance Armstrong and the system

“Absolutely,” Pound said. “You can do a lot more with a confession like that and allegations and information that they can provide than you can ever do with results that come from the odd guy who pees in a bottle. In principle, I am very comfortable with it.”

In criminal trials, he said, “you can hang people even without bloodstained clothes. It’s a matter of having the kind of panels and the people on those panels who are in a position to weigh the evidence and arrive at the level of proof — to the comfortable satisfaction of the panel — that CAS has adopted as the standard of proof.”

Pound added that the more rigorous “comfortable satisfaction” standard is applied to anti-doping authorities when presenting their evidence “but the athlete must only meet a ‘balance of probabilities’ standard (when submitting evidence in their defense). It really is all well calibrated.”

Citing a hypothetical example of someone charged with distribution of 300 syringes of Aranesp, Pound said: “You don’t need the actual syringes to make the case. Eyewitness testimony of a delivery, credit card receipts … all of that is admissible and it’s up to the panel to weigh that evidence.”

The legal standards of proof can be found on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_burden_of_proof
I've compiled a table and placed 'comfortable satisfaction' where I think it should be, which is level 8

Changes in RRS 69; part One

In the new RRS 2013-2016, Rule 69 has been extensively rewritten.

The main differences are:

1. It is now written in the rule that competitor may not commit gross misconduct - and for the purpose of this rule - what a competitor is.
2. The standard of proof in rule 69 hearings has been changed - in line with the doping rules and the practices of the CAS.
3. National Authorities have no longer a choice, they must start an investigation if they receive a report involving a rule 69 case.

Let's start with the first difference:
The change in wording makes it clear that committing gross misconduct breaks a rule in the RRS - something that was previously implied - but not actually written in so many words. And since 'breaking a rule in the RRS equals a penalty' is well established in other rules, the rule is now more consistent with the rest of the book.
 

It is now also made clear what is meant by 'competitor' in the rule 69:

Throughout rule 69, ‘competitor’ means a member of the crew, or the owner, of a boat.

There seems to be a typo in this sentence? Should it read 'or a boat'? Or perhaps the comma is misplaced and the sentence should read: 'or the owner of a boat'. I'll leave that one up to the rule makers…..

Several people, to whom I've had contact about this rule, expressed their disappointment that this last change is not nearly far (or good) enough.
Originally in the submission this sentence was:

For the purposes of rule 69, a competitor includes a person in charge, a boat owner and any other person who has agreed to be governed by the rules.

Let me put it this way, in asking this question:

If a parent of a sailor misbehaves, or a coach does something that is absolutely considered misconduct, can the PC or Jury start a rule 69 hearing? 

RRS 2013-2016; Rule 18.3

Rule 18.3 has been changed in the new RRS 2013-2016;
(duh, otherwise I wouldn't have had to write this)
I'm not quite sure if the chosen language does not have a much greater impact than first assumed;

Was it the intention of the Rulescommittee to change the rules for boats changing tack in the zone?

This is what the rule is now:
18.3 Tacking in the Zone

If two boats were approaching a mark on opposite tacks and one of them changes tack, and as a result is subject to rule 13 in the zone when the other is fetching the mark, rule 18.2 does not thereafter apply. The boat that changed tack
(a) shall not cause the other boat to sail above close-hauled to avoid contact or prevent
     the other boat from passing the mark on the required side, and
(b) shall give mark-room if the other boat becomes overlapped inside her.

This is what the rule in 2013-2016 is going to be:
18.3 Tacking in the Zone

If a boat in the zone passes head to wind and is then on the same tack as a boat that is fetching the mark, rule 18.2 does not thereafter apply between them. The boat that changed tack
(a) shall not cause the other boat to sail above close-hauled to avoid contact or prevent
     the other boat from passing the mark on the required side, and
(b) shall give mark-room if the other boat becomes overlapped inside her.

 I have two scenario's for your consideration:

Situation A

Situation B

The PC find as fact that Purple had completed her tack (was no longer subject to rule 13) when the other boats (Grey and/or Red) changed course.

Is in the new rules (RRS 2013-2016) the Purple boat breaking rule 18.3?

Leave a comment.
J.

DMTRA Wintertraining Matchracen en Teamzeilen.

De kans om een heel weekend te trainen in de disciplines matchracen en teamzeilen. In het weekend van 24/25 november organiseert de Dutch Match & Team Racing Association (DMTRA) een trainingsweekend voor matchracen en teamzeilen. Twee dagen lang wordt er getraind onder leiding van ervaren trainers en gasttrainers die hun sporen in deze takken van sport hebben verdiend. Het belooft een spetterend en leerzaam weekend te worden.

In hetzelfde weekend vindt, in samenwerking met het Watersportverbond, ook een umpire opleiding plaats.

 

Voor wie is het bedoeld
De DMTRA Wintertraining is zowel bedoeld voor zeilers die kennis willen maken met matchracen en teamzeilen als ook voor zeilers met al enige ervaring in deze disciplines die zich verder willen ontwikkelen. Verder is de Wintertraining bedoeld voor zeilers die willen worden opgeleid tot umpire. Een combinatie van zeiltraining en umpiretraining is ook mogelijk.

Matchrace/Teamzeiltraining
Korte wedstrijden, één tegen één of team tegen team, waarbij de adrenaline vol door de aderen stroomt. Niet op zoek naar vrije wind maar naar je tegenstander. Geen moeilijke situaties vermijden maar de regels ten volle uit nutten. Dat is matchracen en teamzeilen. Dat gaat niet vanzelf maar moet worden getraind. Alle fasen van een race, van prestart tot finish, zullen apart worden geoefend en getraind. Boot-handling, tactiek en regelkennis zullen zowel in de praktijk als in theorie ruimschoots aan bod komen.

Umpire-opleiding
De disciplines matchracen en teamzeilen zijn een jurysport. De sport kan alleen bestaan met de inzet van deskundige umpires. Daarom wordt tijdens de DMTRA Wintertraining, in samenwerking met het Watersportverbond, een umpireopleiding gegeven. Deze umpireopleiding maakt deel uit van de officiële opleiding tot umpire van het Watersportverbond. De opleiding zal voor het grootste deel in de praktijk worden gegeven door erkende umpires waarbij samen met de zeilers wordt getraind op specifieke situaties en fasen in de race. Onderdeel van de opleiding is een gezamenlijke dag met andere race officials in opleiding, later in het jaar.

Plaats & tijd
De trainingen zullen worden gehouden op zeilschool “Us Hiem” in Oudega(W) in Friesland in het weekend van 24/25 november. Iedereen wordt vrijdagavond al verwacht want op vrijdagavond om 20:00 uur gaan we van start.

Kosten
De kosten die verbonden zijn aan deze wintertraining zijn € 40,- voor (staf)leden Vinea/DMTRA en € 60,- voor niet leden. De kosten zijn all in.

Inschrijven
Inschrijven kan vanaf nu door een aanmeldingsformulier in te vullen. Je kunt je individueel inschrijven maar mocht je met je team willen trainen dan kan dat natuurlijk ook .Wij zorgen voor de juiste indeling.

Informatie
Voor informatie kun je terecht op de evenementenpagina van de website van DMTRA (www.dmtra.nl) of kun je contact opnemen via info@dmtra.nl