Wouldn't be better as a "guideline" instead of a "rule"?
Most associations/events that I have ever seen where there is such a “rule" pertaining to a lower and upper limit, it has always been worded that the "race shall not start when the wind strength is under 5 knots or over 20 knots, at the judgement/discretion of the officer of the day". Nothing about what the wind strength does during the race. After the start it is up to the sailors whether they continue to race or not, with no come back on the RC etc,

Why put anything like that at all in writing? This kind of rule is an example of how the racing rules of sailing got so complicated. Every time there is a new rule, some people find a way to take advantage of the rule, and then you have to add clarifications and exceptions and sub-rules.

In this case the rule is not even necessary in the first place. Unless, of course, you think the PRO might be bribed by or has personal ties to some of the competitors who happen to be light-air specialists. In which case there will be a big scandal and that PRO will be banned from ever running another race and will lose his pension benefits.
Isn't it the job of the race committee to use their discretion and judgment? By putting something like that in writing and putting a number on the wind, you are just providing specific ammunition for some people to attack the race committee's "judgment" and fuel for controversy like the one on this thread.

Man, let me put it this way.

If I see such a water surface in a light wind race then I'm running for it. These are wavelets created by the turbulent nature of the windlayer above => ergo there is 5 knots of wind or more above that surface. Winds of less than 5 knots are laminair in nature and will leave the water surface glassy and flat, as in those spots we see on those light wind days ? The start line in the pictures is certainly NOT such a spot.

Wouter

Whether it is a drifter or a honkin' 25kts+, let us sail. Both are entertaining in their unique ways. Ultimately, it is up to the skipper to race.

It's MHO,

Bob Curry

I really was trying to be funny - seriously. You'll see what I mean in a little while.

LOL.. That's funny Jake...

Olli,

Call or email me please.

John Bauldry

Matt,

See that boat at the pin 1670? She finished a very close fourth, and she worked the left both times upwind! The second and third place finishers worked the right.

Got a picture to explain that?

Jake, Sure is impressive to hear how much you think of the event, considering all of the ones you've been to this year! WOW! Way to go Tacie and team! I really enjoyed following the races! Couldn't get enough! Thanks to Brian and his team too! I really enjoyed their coverage! "Windgate" had me LOL! Mary, I am sooo with you on the rules!

I am directing this explanation to all of those who do not understand, or feel that the sailors who filed for redress, are unsportsmanlike.

First of all we are talking about a North American Championhip that should be held to a higher standard than a week end regatta or a club race. Many of the individuals were very seriously trying to become the NAF18 champion. It was their goal for the event. The race committee then ran a race which some felt did not comply with the SI's, they still competed in and finished the race, because they did not know what the outcome of the race or redress would be. They did know that a score would be better then a DNS. You cannot protest the race committee (check your rule books) you can only file for redress which you do after racing and before the deadline. Which is what they did. A protest committee then determined that the race committee was in error and threw out the race. I do not know exactly what happened in the hearing, but it is niave to call names and insinuate they did something wrong when all they did was follow the rules.

This event was held to an extremely high standard in every single aspect.



So every other team that didn't file in the original redress shouldn't be considered because, in your opinion, they weren't seriously trying to become the NAF18 champion!? Come'on Rob - that's just flat out insulting. Talk about a higher standard will ya.

Hey Jake: and anyone else that sailed in the thrown out race.
I have a couple of questions (although afraid to ask).
When you were out on the water waiting for your class flag:
What did you think of the wind conditions at that time?
When the flag went up: Did you really feel as though there was enough wind to have a fair race? I know you stated that the wind was good during the race. I would like to hear some honest answers. My feeling, have been in that spot many times, is that the majority of the sailors would not have wanted to start a race. Just wondering.
Attachment: More than 5 knots

Relax Jake...

There is no question about the integrity of the event, organizers or the RC. This debate is a rules issue.

It is really no different from a Port Starboard protest that goes to the Jury. There can be different opinions, but the final say is the jury's decision. Anyone who has ever protested on a port starboard situation knows that it is often an interpetation of the rules and how you can express the facts (as you saw them) to the jury. I have lost what I saw as a clear cut situation because of a lack of proof on my side. Yeah, it sucks, but that is how the game goes. You learn to back yourself up with data and witnesses.

Back to the thread...

My opinion is for minimum and maximum wind speeds for major events. Actually maximums for any event. Take the Tiger Worlds. There were races run in conditions that were over the top. Usually RC's do not have enough chase boats to handle multiple problems at one time and are not as prepared for that as they should be, so a maximum is good for them as well.

Jake,
I was referring to the sailing conditions and the racing when I said the should be held to a higher standard. Sailing in 5 knots or less is very questionable. There is a book by Julian or Frank Bethwaite called High Speed Sailing which explains the reasons, I would quote it but I loaned the book to my brother, why winds under 5 knots are very inconsistent and unstable. It explains why it is a crap shoot under 5 knots but not when the winds are above 5 knots. I do not think a North Americans should be sailed in a crap shoot. The picture posted of the start with glass near the pin and dark water near the committe boat is indicative of winds less than 5 knots.

I was directing this post towards those who felt the protest was unsportsmanlike. Many of their comments make it sound like nothing was at stake, when in reality a championship was. I did not mean to say that everyone wasn't trying to win, but that some people may take winning more seriously than others, and this is not a bad thing. Seocndly, I was trying to get the point across that all the people who filed for redress did was follow the rules. And unfortunetly the rules make everything work from an after the fact perspective. You cannot file for redress until after the racing is over and the results are relatively known. This casts a shadow over the preceedings. I did not mean to be offensive and appologize if I was.

Ok...sorry I brought it up again.

Nothing I'm going to say here will surprise anyone I'm sure. As the class flag came up, I never really questioned whether or not we had enough breeze to race. I do remember hoping that it would stay filled in or get stronger because I don't like sailing amongst potholes anymore than anyone else. Looking up the course David and I saw that the wind was filled in evenly but with stripes inbetween (streaky) up the course indicating there were some pretty consistant shifts meaning that we need to wait a few seconds before tacking when we felt one (so we don't tack right on the edge of it and right back out of it again). As I'm sure most everyone did, we had our mind set to treat our momentum carefully and our placement on the course out of dirty air at a premium.

I'm sure it would be easy to fool myself into thinking there was enough breeze but I've been through it in my mind again and again and I certainly feel like there was. Not all of the 22 teams that filed the second redress did well in that race but all of them felt that it was a fair race and were dissapointed that it was thrown out. I've been asked if I would feel the same way had I placed in last place in the race and I can honestly say that I would. My dissapointment that the race was tossed might have been slightly lessened but I would not have participated in the original file for redress nor would I have supported the notion that it was "unfair" regardless.

I was in 5th place with a group of 4 boats about 20 feet in front of me and three boats about 10 feet behind as we all made the only rounding of C mark. The three boats behind me went way left while we went right with the boats in front of us. After sailing about half the way back to A feeling that we weren't going to outrun the boats in front of us we started to work back to the left to try and defend our position. We barely won those crossings and lost no distance on the pack in front of us. The breeze was quite steady all over the course (unless you got trapped in the shadow of other boats). I felt it was a fair race ... that really is my honest answer. I've done a lot of lake racing where the light air racing was NOT fair and where, in my opinion, luck had more to do with the outcome (but strangely Nigel Pitt still always comes out in front). This wasn't one of those....except for the Nigel part.

Lastly, and I promise it will be the last time I bring it up, the SI rule 11.5 is really quite clear in context and intent that there should be 5knots or better at all marks of the course at the start as determined by the Race Committee and that somehow this got over complicated and twisted into making the RC "prove" that he had 5 knots. That's not what it says. I honestly feel that there was enough wind, a fair race took place, and that even if there wasn't and it didn't, we had no room to toss it based on SI 11.5.

"somehow this got over complicated and twisted into making the RC "prove" that he had 5 knots"

This is not at all over-complicated Jake.

It is quite reasonable to expect the RC to take a wind reading before a start (with a knot meter). It is also good practice to take many wind readings before starts and to record them. They didn't and that made the difference in the hearing. Pretty simple.

Thanks Jake
Next question that I'm afraid to ask:
You must have done the results with that race.
Did it change the top 15 in any way?
I guess my opinion is that they should not have started the race,but once they did it should have counted.
Less than 5 knots

I'll try not to rant anymore!

I don't know what affect it would have had on the results. The results of that race were never posted. I suspect that it would have had little affect on the top 5 and might have shaken up 6 through 12 a little but that is only a faint guess.

Matt, I won't disagree with you there. This whole thing would have gone away with periodic wind readings near and at the start of the race and would be prudent to do so (you can probably count on it from Mark in the future!). However, I still don't see anywhere that he was required to take digital readings at any interval in the rules and that his not doing so would mean the race was invalid.

A big question is who were the judges on the Jury for this event?