Brass

Members
  • Content count

    2,504
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

42 Kiss-ass

2 Followers

About Brass

  • Rank
    Super Anarchist

Recent Profile Visitors

8,416 profile views
  1. Brass

    Scoring question

    What? Taking an action that favours a particular boat, while in a Conflict of Interest Situation with respect to that boat isn't unethical? Mate, I'm not a great fan of running after fairness and sportsmanship, but this is one of those times that you don't dodge the issue (subject, as I said before, to getting sufficient clear proof).
  2. Brass

    Scoring question

    I'm pretty confident that an action taken for an improper reason is an improper action. I don't dispute that there may be some considerable difficulty in proving: that there was an improper reason; and] that the improper reason caused the action.
  3. Brass

    Scoring question

    No, they're not . Race officials are subject to the misconduct provision of WS/MNA etc regulations and by-laws. But rule 69 provides us with a convenient specification of some elements of misconduct that are relevant. Certainly what you quoted was clear, but it is neither a rule nor a Case, so is not an authoritative interpretation of the rules. You're not seriously telling me that, in a clear case of an intentional unfair decision and action that benefited or disadvantaged some particular boats, you'd decline to give redress? That's the sort of legalistic nonsense that got US Sailing up in front of the USOC Arbitrator a couple of years ago.
  4. Brass

    Scoring question

    I don't want to go picking over endless variants of hypothetical detail. ISTM there are good reasons, bad reasons and improper reasons. Of COURSE race officers should avoid decisions based on bad reasons. ABSOLUTELY race officers must not make decisions based on improper reasons. And as Katydid said, what might be quite OK at one level might be completely unacceptable at a higher level.
  5. Brass

    Scoring question

    I don't think that's quite a carte blanche: I think anyone would agree that a race committee decision involving misconduct by a race official (see rule 69.1( a): breach of good sportsmanship or unethical behaviour, so that one or more competitors were favoured or disadvantaged would be improper. Well, a protest committee can try: You just ask the race officer 'why did you do that'. If he or she answers "I postponed the race to maximise the number of competitors participating in the race", then in the absence of the trusty Brain-o-Scope, you can't go much further. But if he or she answers "I postponed the race so that my good buddy, Fred, who I saw arriving late could get a start' (as some honest race officers might), then I think you've got an unfair, improper reason, and an improper action.
  6. Brass

    Best Race Committee Boats

    I nearly said the same thing until I checked. Not in written words, but see the picture in Section H1 of the Race Management Manual
  7. Brass

    Scoring question

    For me, much of this discussion has been about how to make that "mistake" most fairly, and therefore provide the least room for a successful redress request. As I said in my last, I also think one could make a colorable case that waiting for another competitor isn't "improper" and therefore isn't a mistake. I suppose the next question is, as a PC member, 1) How would you decide a redress request made over such a scenario, and why? Not keen to try to do this: there are too many variables that will be specific to a situation, in particular, the precise wording of the SI. 2) How is deciding in favor of a bigger race different from something else that might make an RC decide to wait 10-15 minutes to start, like adjusting the course or start line to the conditions better? There are some things that SI leave absolutely to the discretion of the race committee, and some things that the SI precisely specify (and sometimes there needs to be an inference drawn about precision or essentiality). That would be a protest committee's starting point. In each case, a) Has the RC made an "improper action or omission"? b) Was that "action or omission" starting the race after the scheduled starting time? Mere postponement, can almost never be improper. Rather let's consider changing the sequence of Classes to Start, so that, say a Division 4 boat, fourth in SI published order, who expects her warning signal 15 minutes after the first warning signal, has the Division 4 start bumped up to second in order. Boat hasn't even made it to the starting area when her Warning Signal is made .... c) Has anyone's score been made significantly worse? For mere postponement: No. I don't think a boat's score can be said to be made worse just by her being beaten by a better sailed competitor. In the above example, the late Div 4 boat may very well have had her score made worse. d) Was anyone's score made worse "through no fault of her own"? In the above example, If the SI said 'Starting Order may be changed at the discretion of the race committee': No, the Div 4 boat would have been at fault for not being in a position to respond to the change.. If, OTOH, the SI specified a starting order, without mentioning changes, then, there is no fault on the Div 4 boat in not coming to the starting area before her scheduled warning signal. e) Do boats that chose not to show up that day have the same grounds as those who were on the water? A boat that does not show up on the day will be scored DNC. Nothing can make that score worse. They can't get redress.
  8. Brass

    Scoring question

    Assuming that you are not contemplating redress for any thing other than rule 62.1( a) improper action or omission, what do you think is the impropriety? Ambiguity means having two possible meanings. What two different meanings are you saying are possible?
  9. Brass

    Scoring question

    Not 'almost any reason'. Rule 27.3 provides that before the starting signal the race committee may postpone for any reason implicitly, other than 'chicanery' or arbitrariness or caprice. And I'd expect that it would usually be pretty difficult to find that a reasonable postponement made any boat's score significantly worse.
  10. Brass

    Scoring question

    I agree that "some competitors" can't cut such a deal, which is why I said "all competitors" in my post. In truth, I'm not in love with making such changes either, but would probably do so if asked to by everyone competing that day (I'm assuming the OP's local beer can race, in which the competitors all know one another and a certain informality is usually permissible, in my view). I think there's a subtle difference between haggling and 'cutting deals' with competitors, and responding to requests or information from competitors. I'm dubious about how practical it is to consult with all competitors on the water. I think that almost inevitable, the RO will be approached, not by all, but by some 'squeaking wheels, like this guy There's also a difference between exercising flexibility in delaying or re-ordering class starts where this is permitted by the SI (or by the rules) (as referred to by TJSocal), and departing from or changing the SI. Rule 90.2( c ) does NOT permit oral changes to SI UNLESS there is a procedure for doing so stated in the SI, and it is done on the water (rule 90.2( c ), last sentence). Otherwise changes to the SI must be in writing, and, if on the water, may be communicated to each boat, by email, SMS, or handing a paper copy to the boat (clothes peg on a stick), maybe, just maybe, dictation from a written amendment over VHF. What I had in mind was the risk of setting a precedent that SI and RO decisions were 'not so much rules as guidelines', and were up for grabs and horsetrading whenever they didn't suit some particular competitors. Just sometimes it works quite well for the race committee to 'make a mistake' and if any competitor doesn't like it, get it sorted out afterwards through the avenue of redress.
  11. Brass

    Scoring question

    Not real thrilled with the idea of the race committee cutting deals to change the SI on the water after discussion with some competitors. Whatever happened to 'Verbal Changes to Sailing Instructions. There shall be no verbal changes to the Sailing Instructions'.
  12. First and foremost, it is boats that are entered in races under the RRS. The boat hasn't changed, just its configuration and (presumably) performance. You probably shouldn't 'create a new boat'. The appropriate course of action may well depend on the detail of the SI, and the yardstick system being used. If the boat's yardstick was promptly changed in response to the addition of the spinnaker, there should be no need to do anything. Problems may arise: if the boat did not notify the race committee of the change before racing under the new configuration it might be appropriate to rescore races, or, if there is a provision in the SI or Yardstick Rules to notify the race committee of changes likely to affect performance, to protest the boat in some races. if the yardstick system used is based on rolling changes of the yardsticks, using BCY etc, the change in performance will make a mess/nonsense of the boat's accumulated performance record. In this case, it may be necessary to allocate an arbitrary (or raw Yardstick List) yardstick for the boat in races sailed in the new configuration (if the SI/Yardstick rules permit this).
  13. Brass

    Scoring question

    yeah that was his fault, he should have blown the horn, of course the fleet race officer could have said something when he sailed past 2 minutes to the start.. Three boats come to the starting area at the time stated in the SI. Why should the RO do anything other than start the race on time?
  14. Brass

    Best Race Committee Boats

    Do not go for flags and halyards. Make flags on sticks (plastic electrical conduit), with fishing rod rocket launcher holders or sockets made out of larger diameter conduit, broomsticks and cable ties. Much quicker and neater for the race officers.
  15. Brass

    Dear Dr. Rules

    Nope - running aground going round an island is not touching a mark. Think about if you hit the ground tackle of a mark but not the mark itself you haven't touched the mark or if you anchor do you think the anchor has touched the isalnd - well I guess a good throw could get the anchor onto a beach at times. OK, I'll come around. I don't accept the anchor-line analogy: 'anchor-line', and 'object accidentally attached' are highly specific words of exception in a Definition. Analogy is not justified Don't agree with 'the water's surface' formulation either. I will agree that the 'island' is the land above the high water mark: that's the way 'land' in land-law works for land along a shore-line. So, if you drive up on the beach, you haven't touched the 'mark' until you get above the high-water mark. Pretty hypothetical: if you drive up like that, your race is pretty much over.