Sysfx

Members
  • Content Count

    314
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Sysfx

  • Rank
    Anarchist

Recent Profile Visitors

3,215 profile views
  1. Sysfx

    No flag, no foul!

    Yes, I was protested once, in 1984 or 5. It was withdrawn.
  2. Sysfx

    No flag, no foul!

    What I am against is precisely the oh so detailed knowledge of the RRS that you reveal when you misunderstand them. And also your will to use it to make a point against common sense. Pay atention: no corrupt sea lawying sport politician should be able to force one to enforce the arbitrary rules the same corrupts modify at their will. They will keep "expecting" forever! Do you know why they use that word, "expected"? It is because their intention is ilegal. They CANNOT make it any stronger. The fact is, only in THEIR court one can be expected to follow THEIR rule. We are all free to sail under the usual international treatys, which legaly prevail over racing rules. Anyway, those douchebags do not represent me. I do not accept them, therefore I rebel. I also rebel against other "expert" stupidities. What do you say about banning the use of "worlds"? What about your local federation banning the use of "nationals"? Nobody owns a word! What's the klingon word for world? That one IS copyrighted. What's the Mayan or Inca word? It cannot be copyrighted. Do we really have to worry about this type of idiocy? Those vain attempts to twist reality are what keeps me from non-anarchyc racing. It is just simpler to go around the cans with minimal rules with others who think like me. Or not to race and just sail for pleasure. Have you heard of the Wave class Intergalactics? What about the Byte regattas with mandatory capsizes? Have you asked any kiteboarder about the ilustrious sailing authorities and "their" copyrighted rules? I am not alone. Not at all.
  3. Sysfx

    No flag, no foul!

    Protesting is not a duty, it is a right. That said, without rules there's no game. When it comes to the rules of sailing, good or bad, it seems that the "authorities" lost contact with the most important part of the rule: the ultimate goal. The goal of sailboat racing is fun, not the strict adherence to rules, nor the assistence on the enforcement of said rules by mean of protests. If I don't like someone's behavior, I do not invite him a beer to celebrate his "win". That's it. In fact, those guys tend to lose, especially in the middle term. In the long term they tend to disappear. I hate sea lawyers, do not trust "authorities" and am not willing to spend my time fiddling with rules, protests, red tape and bureaucrats. Therefore, I sail one-design around the cans and do not protest. Also, I do not show up when I disapprove of the sponsors of an event. It is my way to do it. You don't like it? Your problem. Let's see who crosses the pond first. We will live to see IOC, World Sailing and national sailing federations fight money laundering authorities sooner or later. Cheers,
  4. Sysfx

    No flag, no foul!

    Sailing came to require lawyer's skills that I do not want to learn. I like sailing boats, not law games (nor politics) therefore, I do not protest. If you want to beat me infringing rules, be my guest. As Paul Elvstrom said: "“You haven't won if, in doing so, you have lost the respect of your competitors.”
  5. Sysfx

    No flag, no foul!

    I know enough to race under the RRS. If a sport requires protests to win, it is not a sport. Not for me, anyway. I am slowly abandoning sailling. Obviously.
  6. Sysfx

    No flag, no foul!

    (Long post, sorry) Without rules there is no game. The exception is when a game, by its own design, converges to equilibrium, such as driving on one side of the street, where you'll bump into the other car until both drive on the same side, after what there's no reason to change lane. Sailing is not designed this way, therefore, sailing requires rules. The same can be said about most of the games humankind plays. Rules are necessary. However relevant, let us avoid the issues regarding the quantity of rules needed, the frequency with which they should be changed, who should write them and others. The problem nowadays is the sheer number and complexity of the rules to read, memorize and comply with. Only a genius with prodigious memory and infinite time can claim that he knows each rule, updates his knowledge at each modification and complies with everything. Even with the mighty powers of search engines to support us, it is often impossible to find the time to read (not to mention understand and interpret) all the rules that apply to a situation. I believe that the geometric expansion of rules is caused by the existence of people dedicated solely to their creation. In a government with a legislative power politicians are elected to make rules and change them. Since their outcome is maximized if they are re-elected and re-election requires money, politicians have to pull strings with the only tool they have: changing the rules to favor their supporters. (This is the origin of both populism and campaign funding from pressure groups/corporations). After a few generations, the entire rule book becomes biased, too long, too complicated, restrictive, obsolete and, in general, unsuitable for its original purpose. This goes for governments resembling a republic with elected leaders as it goes for sport. Check anywhere and you will find the same phenomena: too many rules, too detailed, too complex, too restrictive, etc, etc. The situation is better where the Common Law applies, for it takes part of the power from legislators, but under the Roman law the situation is catastrophic and people avoid going to any court. For a government, the solution is complicated. An expert re-design is required of the game of government, of the game of selection of managers, and of other related games. Realistically, the task is herculean. Meanwhile, people will start to avoid the courts under the Roman Law. It is a silent protest. Likewise, skippers do not like to protest under IYRU ISAF World Sailing rules.
  7. Sysfx

    "fu ws" (from the front page)

    In Rhode Island, "UFO" one design carbon fiber foilers at $ 7,600 ready to sail. Check here: http://www.fulcrumspeedworks.com/UFO/
  8. Sysfx

    what is it?

    A communication problem. Humankind developed speech and then writing to keep records, so known errors are not repeated, but there are some who don't read nor listen.
  9. Sysfx

    shit show (front page)

    To some extent they are. Lower the jib, dial zero lift, partly raise the boards and sail like a normal cat.
  10. Sysfx

    shit show (front page)

    If it doesn't, it's not a test boat.
  11. Formula 40 reinvented.
  12. Sysfx

    Hobie 16's dropped from Pan Am Games

    I liked the changes and agree that the Sunfish, Lightning and Snipe are good candidates for replacement too.
  13. Sysfx

    F-22 Update

    As per Ian's response, fitting a boom is not a problem, but boomless is simpler, cheaper, lighter, safer and, therefore, better. I have been sailing boomless cats (Supercats) for two decades. You can set the angle of mast self-rotation simply moving the the mainsail to clew attachment forward or aft, you save weight, money and rigging time (boom, gooseneck, fittings, reinforcements, etc.), an inadvertent jibe will not hit your nearly as hard and rolling/storage of the sail is easier. The only possible downside is less control of sail curvature on the foot downwind, which requires a relatively stiffer lower batten with adjustable tension. Ian is fine tuning details like this now. The advantage of buying a great product from a great designer/builder is that all the thinking has been thoroughly done and do not have to change anything. Go boomless. Luiz Waiting for the one design version