I'd like to end this since I started it with the following summary.

1. It's easy to get pre-occupied with setting up the boat for downwind after you round the top mark(s) so even if you have the right of way, make sure you keep your head out of the boat especially if you are setting a chute and coming down into slower upwind boats. In gusty conditions, they may not be able to keep clear of you as well as you would like. You have control so communicate what you want the give way boat to do if you can.
2. The I-20 sailor in this instance was justifiably upset having to alter course with the slower H-16 but I believe he realized after the incident that the H-16 was not trying to purposely to get in his way and had reacted too late.
3. Boats coming in from the left on or near the port tack layline do so at great risk if boats are rounding. You have no recourse if you are hailed to do circles in the event you cause a right of way boat to alter course to avoid a collision.
4. And finally remember if you purposely try to pass a boat to weather on the same tack, he has every right to luff you to head to wind even if it causes you to capsize. It's your choice to risk passing to windward and getting luffed is part of the game.

Sail fast, sail smart, sail safe.

Bob Hodges

Good summary Bob. Just 1 small point with item 4. If you are not on the same leg as the one getting overtaken the boat that is behind may not purposly interfere with the overtaking boat. By that, he is free to sail his normal course but he may *NOT* dive into a luffing match with the overtaking boat.

Tiger Mike

While I agree that it would be unsportsman-like, where is this in the rule book?

RRS 22.2 states "A boat shall not change course if her only purpose is to interfere with a boat making a penalty turn or one on another leg or lap of the course."

The "another leg or lap of the course" part was added in 2005.

Regards,
Eric

Your points are excellent and well made, thank you. I do have a concern with point 4 though. While you are generally correct, your luffing maneuver must abide by RRS 16.1 "when a right-of-way boat changes course, she shall give the other boat room to keep clear". "Room" is defined as "the space a boat needs in the existing conditions while manoeuvring promptly in a seamanlike way." Capsizing is not seamanlike. If you round up so hard that the windward boat has to capsize in order to keep clear, then you are likely to get disqualified for breaking rule 16.1.

Regards,
Eric

Which is where I think Tad (MaughanH17) was trying to go with his arguments.

This is my LAST post and it concerns my statement regarding passing a boat to windward. It also applies to barging boats on starting lines.

If you CHOOSE (and that is a key word) to attempt to pass/overtake a boat to windward (that you are on the same leg with) than you are subject to being luffed. If you capsize in the luffing maneuver, you will have a very hard time proving that the leeward boat luffed you in an unseamanlike manner especially if the helmsman of the leeward boat hails you before the luff begins and turns his boat into you at a fast but steady rate. The onus is on you and usually you will lose in a protest hearing. If you choose to pass to windward, be ready for the consequences.

I have also seen many lame incidents where a barging boat on a start line tries to stop a luff by a leeward boat by claiming that they are being luffed too quickly and in an "unseamanlike" manner. At a multiclass event a couple of years ago, a sailor on a Hobie Tiger was reaching down the line towards me. I was defending the leeward end of the line so I hailed the sailor to take it up and began defending my position. The Hobie Tiger sailor responded that I was causing him to alter course too quickly and it was "unseamanlike". The fact that we had the conversation proved he had plenty of time to respond. I had to turn my bows down to prevent a collision. That same sailor was at the Deep South Regatta a few weeks ago. I had just turned upwind from the leeward mark in one race and had tacked on to starboard. This sailor was coming downwind also on starboard with his chute up on a collision course with me. I hailed him that I was leeward boat and he had to keep clear of me. This sailor again responded that I could not cause him to come up because it was "unseammanlike". I pinched up to slow down to let him cross my bow. In each case, I was not being scored with this sailor, only sharing the course so I did not pursue circles or a protest. But it's this kind of BS with ignorant sailors on the race course that is so frustrating and those sailors can be especially scary when they are flying a chute.

Read, understand, and live by the racing rules.

Bob Hodges

I agree that a port layline approcher is taking
a risk. But when rounding on starboard, always remember that there is no rule that prohibits this, and you
are bound by rule 16 not to change course in a way that
leaves him no opportunity to keep clear. That means
you can not round down without regard to the port tackers
ability to keep clear. I have seen a few protests from
starboard boats that fail to understand that they
are "changing course" when they round a mark.

So you can't throw a flag because a port tacker delayed
your round down slightly. He has a right to be there, and
is not required to anticipate your change of course.

Usually if the wind is up the closing speeds are
high enough that the delay in your round-down will
be a couple of seconds or less. Any more than that,
and you would be able to cross in front of the port tacker
leaving enough room for him to luff a bit.

I basically agree here, but if a boat below is planning to luff hard it is worth making this clear to the approaching boat if possible - "Room" for the approaching boat might mean time for the helm to pass the crew the tiller and then move forward and trip the Spi Halyard !

Passing to windward with the kite up is only for the very brave !

I agree that if you try to roll another boat, you should be prepared to be luffed. Hails are good practice, tend to prevent collisions, and support your position in the protest room, but (with the exception of rule 19) not part of the rules. As you say, the rate of turn is important. It has to be fast enough to be effective, but slow enough to give the other boat room to keep clear. That is a matter of interpretation, and whenever you go into the protest room over a matter of interpretation, you are in jeopardy. There is no "onus" in this situation. The only place in the rules that that presumes judgement one way or the other is RRS 18.2(e). Otherwise, the protest committee finds the facts and applies the rules based on them. If the PC finds that the windward boat capsized due to poor seamanship, then the leeward boat has not committed a foul. If they find that windward boat acted promptly with reasonable skill but was compelled to capsize, then the leeward boat broke RRS 16.1 and will be penalized.


Why not? The rules apply equally to all boats in a race, not just those in the same class. The Basic Principle of Sportsmanship and the Rules states "Competitors in the sport of sailing are governed by a body of rules
that they are expected to follow and enforce." When another boat fouls you, you are expected to protest. If you choose not to enforce the rules, then you shouldn't expect others to.


If you don't protest them, they won't learn.


Well, true. A catamaran flying a hull downwind under spinnaker is already on the edge. That is why the experienced sailors jealously guard their space to leeward. They know that it's their escape route should a gust hit.


Well, I do read the rules. I continue to learn new things about them, so I doubt I'll ever be able to claim that I understand them completely. Even the Senior Judges I know don't always agree with Dick Rose's rule interpretations. I don't live by the racing rules, but I do try to sail under them.

Bob, thanks for having the discussion, because it is important to understand and follow the rules. I think we are in much closer agreement than it appears.

Regards,
Eric

Agree with Eric here, Bob - if a calm talk on the beach doesn't convince someone that they have a poor understanding of a rule, then a protest will. By your giving the guy a pass at Deep South, you reinforced bad behaviour. I have allowed that myself, of course, so you may use the same rock I just threw at your glass house.

John:

That is why I just bought Dave Perry's "Understanding the Rules through 2008" Going to brush up before Ashleigh and I get out on the 4.3.

Doug Snell
Hobie 17
Sunfish
Soon to be Mystere 4.3
www.tcdyc.com

Great book, Doug. If you get the chance to catch Dave speaking somewhere, do it - he's hysterical and deeply knowledgable. I saw him at a GYA meeting in Mississippi a couple of years ago and have been trying to get him to an Alter Cup since...

This whole discussion has convinced me that I am right to be afraid to sail my slow and lowly Wave on the same course with the big, fast spinnaker boats.

I was scared off the course at Spring Fever last year by two near misses with spinnaker boats, and I doubt if I will ever again sail in a multiple-class regatta unless there is a separate course for the slower boats.

AND I think the fast boats will be happy to have one less obstacle to avoid.

Mary,

The real problem IMO is the poor understanding of the rules by some sailors on the race course and the hazard that poses to others. You could draw the same analogy to driving your compact car on a freeway filled with speeding SUV's driven by drivers talking on cell phones. Not a great place to be unless you are really doing some defensive driving!

OK, I keep saying I'm out of this one. Sayanora!

Bob Hodges

It is virtually impossible for a leeward boat with luffing rights to loose such a protest. Re-read rule 11. It is crystal clear. The leeward boat *CAN* change course and if the windward boat is forced to capsize or whatever he odviously hasn't satisfied the "Keeping clear" definition.

The leeward boat can't luff up and plow straight thru the side of another boat but they can put the flag up!

I have re-posted the rule for your reference:

rule 11: When boats are on the same tack and overlapped, a windward boat shall keep clear of a leeward boat.

The operative words here are "keep clear" as defined:

Keep clear: One boat keeps clear of another if the other can sail her course with no need to take avoiding action and when the boats are overlapped on the same tack, if the leeward boat can change course in both directions without immediatly making contact with the windward boat.

Reaper

Mary:

Don't let them scare you off. Carry a soft cooler with some ice ballons and bean there butt if they try to run over you. One bouncing off there sails will get there attention REAL fast. (LOL)

Doug

I would like to add one thing to this discussion. There is also a book of appeals that sets a precedence for judges on the interpretation of some of the rules based on past cases. If you are really interested on the rules you may want to look at a copy.

As I said earlier in this thread, with a Wave it is more like driving a TRACTOR on a freeway. And you are right, it is not a good place to be. And I won't be.

The US Sailing Appeals book can be purchased from US Sailing Store for $50.00. See item number 13045.

The Case Book, which is a set of definitive rule interpretations is available for download free from ISAF at http://www.sailing.org/rrs2005/casebook2005.pdf. Unfortunately, there is no case that exactly matches the hypothetical situation we are discussing here. Case 92 comes reasonably close though. It concerns two boats on opposite tacks, where the starboard tack boat broke rules 16.1 and 16.2 and was disqualified. If you substitue rule 11 for rule 10, and "contact" for "capsize", and leave out the hunting part, then it matches.

Happy reading,
Eric

P.S. Oh, and by the way, the appeals cases are not "precedent", in the same way that English (and US) commonlaw is. Appeals cases do not have the force of rule the way that legal precedent has the force of law. A protest hearing is independent of the hearings that have gone before (but the rule interpretations above are useful nonetheless).