One thing should be pointed out regarding the Shockwave vs SI 'affaire'

The sails with the ilegal polyester patches(no carbon at all but not on the list) were only the sails of the Pro Teams, the others sails didn´t use these special patches.

The analogy should have been that the Pro teams of loday-white (Wilson-Lynch and the French top crew) getting Corecell and the rest PVC standard cores.

Sadly SI knew what they were doing as they separate their production -
They also report some ilegal patches on other sailmakers that is being analyzed.

The reported (onsite at Hungary) ilegal sails from Balaton were sold to club sailors afterwards too.

So is not that easy accusation on the class being influenced by other lofts lobbies.

If a cloth not on the list, it is an ilegal sail, end of discussion. (Applied to any loft of course)

Bout time we got the real story.

So clearly they were going after a performance advantage cause that stuff is light as a feather. Therefore they were cheating and have pretty much got away with it.

This whole story has been handled horribly.

Why was not something said during measuring. SI have been using that stuff for 2 years at least.

The SI team sails were made lighter than normal customer sails, they were of a lighter (approved cloth) with smaller patching. There is no rule that defines the primary or secondary patching size, So why even call it patching, it might as well be decorative. Could have even put a vinyl sticker there. The mistake SI made was by using something that was supplied by a sailcloth manufacturer.

As i said in my initial post: the sails were using cloth that was not on the main and jib approved list, and that was wrong for sure. My issue is with how it was dealt with and also why other more serious breaches of the current rules were left alone.

The last line of Martin's post (F18arg) says it all: "If a cloth not on the list, it is an ilegal sail, end of discussion. (Applied to any loft of course)"

Now all you F18 sailors, go and have a look at the your tack, head and clew of your kites, under the kite cloth. The patching in most of them (i'm not going to name lofts, but its the majority) is illegal. There is dacron patching in the corners and if anyone can find dacron on the cloth list for Spi's then you can keep using your kites. Again: those in glass houses

Sorry Macca Patches are Patches. The dacron that is in the very corner of the sail is called blocks or gumbies. Blocks are not reffered to in the rules so you should be able to build them out of whatever you want. You can have all patches you want but without a dacron block you wont be sailing very far.

I totally agree that it has been dealt with shockingly. It should have been caught out sooner in a protest room that wasn't at a world championship. And dealt with properly instead of letting them off with a slap on the wrist. The whole situation is very strange but intriguing.

But with no size for patches being determined, there is nothing to say what the stickyback cloth was for (maybe a patch, maybe a decorative feature) Similarly there are no limits on corner blocks, so what is to stop anyone building an entire sail from it??

The rules are ****, and even worse: they are being applied selectively.

I would love to see someone build a sail from stickyback. That would be classic. All most as funny as one built from 11 oz gumby dacron.

But with no defined cloth type, weight or area used, it's possible to build a sail out of anything or any weight and just claim it's the blocking.

Everyone is crying that the rules were broken and somebody must be punished, but every boat at the worlds broke the rules so what makes this issue different?

In the blog you have my attemtp to describe facts taking account on both sides and the actions made by the class.
As I'm reading here things without a base, so is better to have all the possible info on the table.

Is true that SI was false accused on using carbon, is true that some speculation was used too.


As Macca says , now some other sails must be checked, and the actions if those cloths are not on the list must be equal to those taken against si.


You can have real lobbies against you, but you need to comply the rules. Now if those accusing you are not following the rules , well that would be even more disastrous for them.

Martin, Im offended that yo seem to think my claims are without base. Maccas are without base.

From Isaf Measurement rules.

1.6.1 Primary reinforcement

An unrestricted number of additional Ply of Permitted Material.
At a corner
At a cunningham Point
at a reefing point adjacent to the luff or leech
at a spinniker recoverery point
Where permitted by class rules

Quite clear wouldn't you say. This is for the primary reinforcing.

Now for the block gumbys or tabling

Rule 1.5.8 Tabling

Additional ply or folded ply overlap(s) at the edge of a sail ( Tabling may be in addition to Permitted reinforcement)

So these 2 rules make it perfectly clear that primary reinforcing should be made from stuff permitted in the body of the sails (as permitted in class rules), and tabling is in addition to the primary reinforcement.

Any good sailmaker is aware of these rules. Its part of his job. SO ill say it again that they knew what they were doing was wrong and got away with it. Even got away with a world championship. And now seem to be pointing the finger at other sailmakers, whom i guarantee are doing the right thing, and saying "look he did it too" like some sort of spoilt brat. Disgraceful.

Just to make it clear, the Rules above mean your argument is bullshite Macca. Even if you do have a crap set of class rules (which the f18 is obviously not), you can revert to the ISAF rules that are there to cover all classes. Pretty cool hey. You should remember that. I know how much you love the room you might need it one day.

Actually, there is no provision in the class rules to use any other cloth that that specified in the sail cloth list. The wording in the cloth list is:- "Spinnaker Reinforcements: Any sail cloth on the spinnaker list" So feel free to take something from the list, but nothing else. Tabling is allowed at the sail edge, not as a corner patch (primary reinforcement) From what I have been informed there are a number of sails that have non listed cloth used in that application.

Maybe the intent of the rule is to allow the patching, but unfortunately the intent of the rule is worth nothing. It must state what is allowed and what is not.


Sure SI knew they were using a cloth that was not on the list, but if following the rules to the letter are what we all want enforced then there are many more areas that are of concern yet they go untouched.. And i'm not just referring to the patching on kites or dyneema trap lines.

Again, my main issue is with the way it was dealt with, and the motivation behind it.

Not sure where you are getting the above rules and rule numbers from, but the current 2009-2012 Equipment Rules of Sailing have the following:-

G.6 SAIL REINFORCEMENT
G.6.1 Primary Reinforcement
An unrestricted number of additional layers of ply of permitted material:
at a corner
at a adjustment point
at a reefing point adjacent to the luff
at a reefing point adjacent to the leech
at a sail recovery point
where permitted by the class rules

And Tabling:-

G.6.3 Tabling
Additional ply or folded ply overlap(s) at a sail edge.

Note: the Tabling rule falls clearly under G.6 Sail Reinforcement, and the Class rule approved cloth list refers to "Spinnaker Reinforcements,
Any sail cloth on the spinnaker list"

From the Class rules:-
G.5
G.5.1
(a) The ply fibres shall consist only of nylon or polyester materials as detailed in Spinnaker Sailcloth Appendix.
(b) Sail reinforcement shall comply with Spinnaker Sailcloth Appendix.

To be correct in allowing additional cloths to be used in Tabling then those cloths should be defined in the cloth list.

Aido, Take it easy! Where I did say anything about your claims?
I just clarified in my post above on the Shockwave comparison as before that I saw various arguments that needed more feedback.
Not yours.

The idea is to provide more info.That's all.

Macca is one of the most technical guys out there, his concern is why all came to the si issue and the answer for that is quite simple.

Cause it was put formally on the table at the running event in Balaton (and not before)with a request info that triggered a protest.

The consequences of this issue is that there will be no more margin for none. And I think is better this way.

Same rules Macca. Just the older version but nothing has changed.

Twist it any way you want. This is not the first time an issue like this has happened. There are many precedents and the intention of the rules have been established. Tabling is in addition to permited reinforcement.

The class rules are referring to primary reinforcing so that is where SI have messed up, or blatently cheated IMO.

Trying to suggest tabling material is part of the primary reinforcement is grasping at straws to say the least. And basically irrrelavent to the issue of illegal patches.

I would suggest SI are trying to muddy the waters to deflect some of the heat from their obvious indiscretions.

It doesn't wash with me.

All I'm trying to point out is that the rules are there perfectly clear for anyone to read or take action on. It is not up to the class association to police measurement issues.

The measurers measure the equipment and report what they find. It is up to the individual sailors to protest on any findings. This is where the process has fallen down.

You cannot blame the class rules as Macca is doing. They are fine. If there is a problem with the Shockwave or the SI sails or anything else. Then someone has to be the "bad guy" and file a protest. Forget the were all friends and no one wants to make enemies, these guys were cheating. What's worse?

It's not the fault of the class rules or the race commitee or the f18 council. It's the fault of every individual skipper who allow cheating to go unpunished.

Aido, have you seen the reinforcing in question? its certainly not primary.

The Class measurers are paid to do exactly what you say they are not... They are there to measure and approve equipment submitted to them. What if I asked my local measurer to certify my new 3.2m wide F18? should he issue the certificate or after measuring it to be outside the rules should he tell me to get the hacksaw out?
Sure the sailors have a responsibility to ensure their equipment is legal as it is also their right to question another teams equipment. But to do it on the second last day of a Worlds?? when you have been aware of it all week?

The class rules currently have several areas that are allowing issues to arise and they will continue to happen. What should be resolved (apart from the holes in the rules) is the process that class takes in these cases. I suggest that the Balaton affair was a perfect case in how not to do it.


The shockwave issue was raised at a TC meeting and not used as a weapon during a regatta, I know this because I was the one who brought the matter to the TC and presented it. That approach was not impacting on the results of an event and it was resolved in a way that rightly or wrongly protected the owners investments. This was the correct way to handle such an issue that was not really performance related (same as the SI sails) but more a heads up that there needs to be more attention paid to some areas.

Aido

If this is issue is so clear... Why did the protest committee give it a pass?

When you don't know the sailors, the lofts, and the internal class politics, your opinion is not shaped by ... XX is a good guy and YY is an A hole (and he won). From a distance, this looks like a pissing contest between the ins and the outs and nothing more and it looks unfair.

Setting the process BS aside. Is it even reasonable that this reinforcing material be banned in the first place? Was there a move to have this approved and it was denied and for what reason was it denied. Perhaps this is a long simmering battle between the ins and the outs and the material is just the latest weapon?

Since I am sure you buy these materials in bulk....It would be nice to know that the decision makers were not letting their inventory of material determine what is allowed and what's not. Who knows!

The T class joined/recruited the F18 class to ban the cuben fiber cloth because it was 4 x more expensive, short lived and had limited availability (unfair). It was a quick decision made by the F18 and T class and perhaps not well thought out. Does this reinforcing material come close to the impact of the Cuben fiber cloth on the game.


Going forward... would the class not allow this material?

Dynema traps are a good example of how in a controlled development class... the rules lag the reality on the water.
A rule that distorts the market and does not serve the game is a bad rule.

The Nacra 20 guys are trying to form a new set of class rules and obviously would like to learn from this FUBAR

Sunlight is the greatest disinfectant.

I have seen the patches in question. By definition they are primary. In practice hopelessly light and I would expect the sail to last 1 regatta at best.

On top of this I can add that the same cloth is made with a technora yarn. I promise that there is no way that you can tell the difference between the poly and technora yarn. So you have to take the manufacturers word for it. But we don't have to cause it's not on the list. The ****s illeagle.

I've already pointed out that there is no loop hole. The class rules a backed up by the rock solid ISAF rules. You may think you've discovered a loop hole but you haven't. You think this sort of stuff hasn't been thought about before your wrong.

Mark,

The class doesn't have to ban this material. If it's not on the list, you can't use it simple.

IMO the fact that someone would actually use this stuff as patch material is laughable. It would never be considered by the council which is full of reputable sailmakers.