dachopper

Sydney to Hobart 2017

Recommended Posts

Are some of  you really racing sailors or members of the Hail Fellow Well Met Yacht Club (HFWMYC). This isn't Opti Green Fleet sailing. There was an incident, a  protest flag was flown etc. etc..Options open to both parties were taken or not taken based on judgements made at the time. So now that incident can be examined by an independent (we hope ) I J. That's it fellas. Nothing to do with bad sportsmanship.  Protests are part of the way our sport is played.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, armchairadmiral said:

Are some of  you really racing sailors or members of the Hail Fellow Well Met Yacht Club (HFWMYC). This isn't Opti Green Fleet sailing. There was an incident, a  protest flag was flown etc. etc..Options open to both parties were taken or not taken based on judgements made at the time. So now that incident can be examined by an independent (we hope ) I J. That's it fellas. Nothing to do with bad sportsmanship.  Protests are part of the way our sport is played.

Exactally what I was about to say but you said it better than I could. 

There is nothing wrong with getting in a protest from either side and a win shouldn't be marred by it, protests are a very well established part of the sport, not a bad part, just a part. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOXI had only one choice after fouling Comanche, which I believe is near indisputable. Do their 720. Most exexperienced sailors would not gamble an entire 650 mile ocean race on a bet that on port tack they didn't foul a starboard tacker in that close a situation, period. Even if WOXI lost a mile doing their turns, the chances that mile in the beginning would make a difference in the end is near zero. Moreover, Richards and his crew will have to live with a tainted result, regardless of whether exonerated in the protest room or not, because a large cohort of witnesses to the incident, including me, will never accept such exoneration with I consider to be a mountain of video evidence to the contrary. I recognize there are politics and financial ramifications that regrettably may sway the IJ. I sincerely hope that I am wrong about this. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, gregwilkins said:

I'm guessing that WOXI will say they thought they tacked with plenty of time room and that it was only C's bare away that caused it to be close.

Why put your boat and the race at risk with this your best defense. If WO-XI had ducked or otherwise avoided a close encounter with C, they'd have won cleanly. 

Again, the risk of trying a port cross was much greater than any potential gain.

If the incident is close enough that it causes informed debate, then it's too close.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Tornado_ALIVE said:

That 10 minutes could have seen WO becalmed with Comanche at the finish.

Could've/ should've/ would've. I think people need to keep it in perspective. Wild Oats isn't losing this race over a Port/ Starboard situation. At most they will receive a time penalty. We can mull over the rules and their interpretations all we want, but as in any sport, when handing out a punishment, the punishment must fit the infringement. A disqualification does not fit the infringement. A time penalty is the only punishment that fits. Given there was no incident that resulted from the situation the time penalty will be minimal. If there was contact between the boats, and any damage resulted in an inability to race the boat at optimal, or worse, withdrawal from the race altogether, it would be different. Wild Oats would probably be disqualified outright. I think its highly unlikely Wild Oats XI will lose the race, and I think a lot of other people think its highly unlikely as well.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, mad said:

 

51 minutes ago, Monkey said:

I agree, but it would leave Cooney looking like a seriously classy boat owner. 

Exactly!.......he could walk out of the room with his head held high. 

 

And what would that achieve?  Does he get a trophy and a Rolex for that?

The best outcome after someone does not observe the rules, without protest, is for the other party to stick strictly to the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sclarke said:

Could've/ should've/ would've. I think people need to keep it in perspective. Wild Oats isn't losing this race over a Port/ Starboard situation. At most they will receive a time penalty. We can mull over the rules and their interpretations all we want, but as in any sport, when handing out a punishment, the punishment must fit the infringement. A disqualification does not fit the infringement. A time penalty is the only punishment that fits. Given there was no incident that resulted from the situation the time penalty will be minimal. If there was contact between the boats, and any damage resulted in an inability to race the boat at optimal, or worse, withdrawal from the race altogether, it would be different. Wild Oats would probably be disqualified outright. I think its highly unlikely Wild Oats XI will lose the race, and I think a lot of other people think its highly unlikely as well.

I’ve now realized you’re not just an idiot, but someone I would never wish to sail with. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, longy said:

Didnt Windward Passage lose a T-Pac win for hitting another boat's stern mounted ssb whip at the start??

Cost her the race & a record time. 2 hr penalty?. WO could have done circles, worry about battens breaking is not relevant - wasnt that windy, & they could have slowed down the turns to control the jibes properly. They made a gamble, now they'll face the jury.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, sclarke said:

Could've/ should've/ would've. I think people need to keep it in perspective. Wild Oats isn't losing this race over a Port/ Starboard situation. At most they will receive a time penalty. We can mull over the rules and their interpretations all we want, but as in any sport, when handing out a punishment, the punishment must fit the infringement. A disqualification does not fit the infringement. A time penalty is the only punishment that fits. Given there was no incident that resulted from the situation the time penalty will be minimal. If there was contact between the boats, and any damage resulted in an inability to race the boat at optimal, or worse, withdrawal from the race altogether, it would be different. Wild Oats would probably be disqualified outright. I think its highly unlikely Wild Oats XI will lose the race, and I think a lot of other people think its highly unlikely as well.

I fundamentally disagree. Two 100 footers should do whatever is in their collective power to avoid a collision, as should two Lasers. The only difference, and it is a big one, is that 100 footers colliding could put human lives at risk. As to punishment, I would argue WOXI's move was reckless at best and incredibly unseamanlike at worst. The punishment should both fit the foul and send a message that maybe the next time, one should be more prudent. 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry , I can not agree Wild Oats X1 holds 9 line honour wins . Wild Oats X1 has been radically modified many times (almost every year since launched) , so could not and should not be classed as the same yacht. I am sure she would not be given age allowance back to her original launch ????  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching Cooney's interview with Nic Douglas I have to say that I think he presented the motivation behind the protest in a very reasonable and sportsmanlike way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, axolotl said:

Race rules forbid private communications while racing.

Depends on which set of rules they’re playing to. :ph34r:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Student_Driver said:

However the protest gets resolved, it's hard to understand the risk-return analysis on WO-XI on the crossing/lee bow incident. The gain from crossing at the start of a 600+ mile race compared to the downside is so hugely asymmetrical that it makes no sense at all. WO-XI should have stayed clear. Furthermore, there is no sensible reason to take the risk of a close cross and possible collision when you have 40+ souls on two boats who could face serious injury or worse in a collision. When big boys try to turn/tack super-maxi yachts as if they were Laser dinghies, bad things can happen. 

I doubt there was any risk-return analysis; it looks like pure ego.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, SCANAS said:

LB & Lydia your club RQ just posted that Comanche won Line Honours. 

My club? Fuck that place! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's 13 boats in IRC Div 0, a 20% position penalty is 2.6 places. That's equal to a 90 minute elapsed time penalty (SIs specify the penalty applied to elapsed time), as the difference between 2 spots and 3 spots is only 2 minutes. 90 minutes seems reasonable alternative to dsq. If WO thinks it's too harsh, they should have done their turns.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, sclarke said:

Could've/ should've/ would've. I think people need to keep it in perspective. Wild Oats isn't losing this race over a Port/ Starboard situation. At most they will receive a time penalty. We can mull over the rules and their interpretations all we want, but as in any sport, when handing out a punishment, the punishment must fit the infringement. A disqualification does not fit the infringement. A time penalty is the only punishment that fits. Given there was no incident that resulted from the situation the time penalty will be minimal. If there was contact between the boats, and any damage resulted in an inability to race the boat at optimal, or worse, withdrawal from the race altogether, it would be different. Wild Oats would probably be disqualified outright. I think its highly unlikely Wild Oats XI will lose the race, and I think a lot of other people think its highly unlikely as well.

You do not understand the RRS. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, gesail1 said:

I fundamentally disagree. Two 100 footers should do whatever is in their collective power to avoid a collision, as should two Lasers. The only difference, and it is a big one, is that 100 footers colliding could put human lives at risk. As to punishment, I would argue WOXI's move was reckless at best and incredibly unseamanlike at worst. The punishment should both fit the foul and send a message that maybe the next time, one should be more prudent. 

I agree, however, if either boat did not do everything in their power to avoid, they would have hit each other. The fact that there was no contact between the boats is proof enough that there was enough room to keep clear of each other. If the boats had've hit each other, then we would see a much harsher penalty, probably an outright disqualification. IMO I think those who think WOXI should be disqualified or placed back to 3rd or fourth are howling at the moon. If you're going to place WO back in 3rd or 4th, you might as well disqualify her altogether, as she would have been last to finish out of all the supermaxis anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, sclarke said:

I agree, however, if either boat did not do everything in their power to avoid, they would have hit each other. The fact that there was no contact between the boats is proof enough that there was enough room to keep clear of each other. If the boats had've hit each other, then we would see a much harsher penalty, probably an outright disqualification. IMO I think those who think WOXI should be disqualified or placed back to 3rd or fourth are howling at the moon. If you're going to place WO back in 3rd or 4th, you might as well disqualify her altogether, as she would have been last to finish out of all the supermaxis anyway.

No. A 90 minute penalty drops them to second in line honors, drops them 3 spots in Div 0 (about 20%), and several spots IRC overall (so many boats not finished, but it would be somewhere between 10 and 20%).  That  seems a reasonable penalty.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, sclarke said:

I agree, however, if either boat did not do everything in their power to avoid, they would have hit each other. The fact that there was no contact between the boats is proof enough that there was enough room to keep clear of each other. If the boats had've hit each other, then we would see a much harsher penalty, probably an outright disqualification. IMO I think those who think WOXI should be disqualified or placed back to 3rd or fourth are howling at the moon. If you're going to place WO back in 3rd or 4th, you might as well disqualify her altogether, as she would have been last to finish out of all the supermaxis anyway.

You are a complete homer.

  look in the mirror and ask yourself if you would feel the same if the rolls were reversed??

 

  I thought not...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T. Spithill said that WOX was an absolute submarine. Apparently the front hatch didn't seal especially well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I would go and give Richards an informal education and some summary jurisdiction if I were on Comanche.  Prat.  If there is no significant penalty here then people will do the same thing in future.  Aside from the RRoS, WO appears to have committed an offence in Maritime law.  We certainly don't want to show the Police that we support and encourage behaviour that would invite their interest.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ichiban nearing finish, has a 2 hour cushion for overall IRC win. Quest currently 3rd on IRC handicap, in storm bay with an hour and a half cushion.  Chutzpah currently second on handicap, nearly tied with Ichiban, but is 100 miles out and I think wind is going to go to shit on them. They'll still likely take Div 2, will probably be in top 5 overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you provide a link to the interview?  I looked on the Adventures of a Sailor Girl facebook page and skipped around in the posted vids but couldn't find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jah said:

Could you provide a link to the interview?  I looked on the Adventures of a Sailor Girl facebook page and skipped around in the posted vids but couldn't find it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Raked Aft\\ said:

You are a complete homer.

  look in the mirror and ask yourself if you would feel the same if the rolls were reversed??

 

  I thought not...

If the rolls were reversed? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, RKoch said:

Ichiban nearing finish, has a 2 hour cushion for overall IRC win. Quest currently 3rd on IRC handicap, in storm bay with an hour and a half cushion.  Chutzpah currently second on handicap, nearly tied with Ichiban, but is 100 miles out and I think wind is going to go to shit on them. They'll still likely take Div 2, will probably be in top 5 overall.

Not knowing any of them, I’ve gotta chear for Chutzpah, being the little guy. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ozmultis said:

Personally I would go and give Richards an informal education and some summary jurisdiction if I were on Comanche.  Prat.  If there is no significant penalty here then people will do the same thing in future.  Aside from the RRoS, WO appears to have committed an offence in Maritime law.  We certainly don't want to show the Police that we support and encourage behaviour that would invite their interest.  

Bloody hell, somebody call the Hague. There may even be Crimes Against Humanity involved.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ASP said:

That went to TS.  I think this is it.  Don't know why I couldn't find it before.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best solution IMHO is for WO to RAF, yet hold their heads high knowing the old girl still has legs and can hold her own against anyone including C. So much better than taking it the room and letting a jury decide.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Monkey said:

Not knowing any of them, I’ve gotta chear for Chutzpah, being the little guy. 

Yeah, I like to cheer for a well-sailed little boat also.  But the wind outside goes to shit in about 12 hours, and I don't think Chutzpah can hang on. They'll still score well, but overall it's not looking to be a good race for the little guys. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Varan said:

Best solution IMHO is for WO to RAF, yet hold their heads high knowing the old girl still has legs and can hold her own against anyone including C. So much better than taking it the room and letting a jury decide.

Once they decided not to do turns, their best bet is to admit guilt to the IJ and beg for mercy. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RKoch said:

Yeah, I like to cheer for a well-sailed little boat also.  But the wind outside goes to shit in about 12 hours, and I don't think Chutzpah can hang on. They'll still score well, but overall it's not looking to be a good race for the little guys. 

Chutzpah should be in storm bay in 5 hours. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Raked Aft\\ said:

You are a complete homer.

  look in the mirror and ask yourself if you would feel the same if the rolls were reversed??

 

  I thought not...

He wouldn't.  There is a whole forum (ACA) full of sclarke and his Kiwi friends bitching about much the same kind of stuff.  Shit goes back 10 years, at least.  :lol:  

WetHog  :ph34r:  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, ozmultis said:

 Aside from the RRoS, WO appears to have committed an offence in Maritime law

There is no "Aside from the RRoS", where the RRS is in force, COLREGS is not. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, WetHog said:

He wouldn't.  There is a whole forum (ACA) full of sclarke and his Kiwi friends bitching about much the same kind of stuff.  Shit goes back 10 years, at least.  :lol:  

WetHog  :ph34r:  

As opposed to those who bag everything Kiwi yet they were only Oracle fans when it suited them.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sclarke said:

The only ones who would lose the respect of their competitors are the ones who win an Ocean Race in the Jury room.

Go and play golf stupidclarke, no better cricket: Howzat, and you are out!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, random said:

There is no "Aside from the RRoS", where the RRS is in force, COLREGS is not. 

 

I wasnt referring to Colregs, there is more to sailing than the Colregs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, WetHog said:

He wouldn't.  There is a whole forum (ACA) full of sclarke and his Kiwi friends bitching about much the same kind of stuff.  Shit goes back 10 years, at least.  :lol:  

WetHog  :ph34r:  

I thought I’d seen him before. The rabid fanboy is strong in this one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ozmultis said:

I wasnt referring to Colregs

What were you alluding to then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For rules fans,

https://www.sailingillustrated.com/single-post/2017/12/27/Facebook-Live-Today-A-mock-protest-hearing-between-reps-of-LDV-COMANCHE-and-WILD-OATS-XI-moderated-by-TFE-with-our-viewers-as-the-Jury

Facebook Live Today: A mock protest hearing between "reps" of LDV COMANCHE and WILD OATS XI, moderated by TFE with our viewers as the Jury

Wednesday, December 27, 2017

TOM EHMAN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's clear to me that we need an international jury decision on this incident, not for the race result but for SA and other sailing forums....

Assuming the IJ do find an infringement (seems likely on my viewing) I'm not sure what I'd like to see as the penalty. If I consider the impact on the race results, I doubt anything would have changed if WOIX had tacked earlier or if they had done a couple of 360's. However, to risk breaking both boats forcing requirements, does seem to be an unnecessary risk and in that sense a harsh penalty (loose race/record or even disq) should be dealt out.

Then again shit happens in racing and do we want to nanny state yacht racing even more than it is now.

For the CYCA & 7, the incident has given them even more promotion.

Conflicted.... 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, sclarke said:

As opposed to those who bag everything Kiwi yet they were only Oracle fans when it suited them.

Suited them?  You mean having the integrity to call your favorite AC team for pulling shady shit?  Guilty.  When will you do the same of your beloved ETNZ?  I won't hold my breath.

I bag on fuckwit Kiwi's on ACA.  Hardly everything Kiwi.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sclarke said:

The only ones who would lose the respect of their competitors are the ones who win an Ocean Race in the Jury room.

You mean that those who follow and respect the rules are the ones who you lose respect for?

Me, I lose respect for those who have to be taken to the room to educated.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Ragtime wrote a great story about his Hobart experience that involved time redress. I liked it until I got to the end.

Here is no better example than his own words that respect for rules have gone out the window. 

He says instead of doing 2 spins and potentially breaking battens or worse (bearing in mind we are not out of Sydney Harbour yet, so not exactly the Southern Ocean) it was understandable WOXI, after nearly creating a pile up of biblical proportions, deciding to continue on as if nothing had happened. 

I can't believe people write stuff like this.

So Ragtime what are consequences of Richo's own actions under the rules, understandable actions or not? Does he pay the price just like everyone else or not.

Jack, you got me wrong, apologies - my point was a spin sounds like no big deal, but in reality could take a boat of this nature out, so it is not trivial to ignore a 720 - it's not like 5 minutes is equivalent to spinning - something could go wrong, and take a boat out, so 5 min and two spins are not the same penalty when you get down to it. I favor the spins, a real penalty and a corinthian solution that is much better than a protest room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ~Stingray~ said:

For rules fans,

https://www.sailingillustrated.com/single-post/2017/12/27/Facebook-Live-Today-A-mock-protest-hearing-between-reps-of-LDV-COMANCHE-and-WILD-OATS-XI-moderated-by-TFE-with-our-viewers-as-the-Jury

Facebook Live Today: A mock protest hearing between "reps" of LDV COMANCHE and WILD OATS XI, moderated by TFE with our viewers as the Jury

Wednesday, December 27, 2017

TOM EHMAN

Watching.. About to start the debate... roll tide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, hoppy said:

 

17 minutes ago, ozmultis said:

I wasnt referring to Colregs

What were you alluding to then?

 

Still waiting, I want to hear this ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, mad said:

I thought I’d seen him before. The rabid fanboy is strong in this one. 

Indeed.  His new choice of avatar picture is proof, but not sure rabid is the proper description for him.  Remember, people like him started the Black Heart movement.  No reasoning with those type of folk no matter how hard you thump their skulls with the truth.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ragtime said:

Jack, you got me wrong, apologies - my point was a spin sounds like no big deal, but in reality could take a boat of this nature out, so it is not trivial to ignore a 720 - it's not like 5 minutes is equivalent to spinning - something could go wrong, and take a boat out, so 5 min and two spins are not the same penalty when you get down to it. I favor the spins, a real penalty and a corinthian solution that is much better than a protest room.

If WO thought they might sustain damage doing circles, then an alternative would have been to admit fault during the sked  when C reported their intention to protest. That would have been honorable, and likely gotten mercy from the IJ with a minimal penalty. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, gregwilkins said:

I'm guessing that WOXI will say they thought they tacked with plenty of time room and that it was only C's bare away that caused it to be close.

C may argue they had to bare away for safety, but that is hard to square with the "we can have a piece of then" comment from the helm.  If it was a bare away for safety then they should have yelled protest at that point not after WOXIs tack

Too much shit coming out of your bare ass, my friend.

Bear with me, it's actually more like explosive verbal diarrhea ! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RKoch said:

The ones who commit a foul, don't do their turns, and force the fouled boat to protest, lose my respect. Doesn't matter if they win or not. 

And you're certain that it was a foul how? Why bother running the protest hearing if everyone already knows the outcome?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HardOnWind said:

And you're certain that it was a foul how? Why bother running the protest hearing if everyone already knows the outcome?

It looked from the video like a foul to me. And Comanche thinks so...they immediately flew a flag, they're not just being dicks after the finish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think the smartest would be for woxi to retire.  It would always leave an asterisk on the win* of Comanche.   Woxi is a legend already.  To add to this they sailed, without any doubt, the best elapsed time on this course. 

I think it was a foul.  I don't think any interpretation of the film evidence can say it wasn't, barring heavy 'financial' blindness.  I think it can only be answered with dsq now after the fact.  Time penalties are half measures at this point.   If the time is exactly the difference what is the point?   Just little enough to allow the win or just long enough to snub them.  It is the same as no penalty or dsq.

But I want to propose an interesting scenario.  The jury knew from the next sched  this could come.  What if they decided the penalty and recorded it before the conclusion.   As in 'the penalty shall be 10 minutes as of the info available on 27 Dec 1200, no matter the outcome of the race.'   That would be a nice piece of cover to have in their pocket. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Apparent Lee said:
This protest  is a storm in a tea cup, what most peeps fail to observe is that the Pit Bull did not maintain his course. he bore away a minute to 30 secs out and therefore did not give WO11 room and opportunity to keep clear, or in the old parlance he was "hunting" and setting  himself  a tactical advantage to have boat speed to point up after Oats had completed their tack and BTW Oats had completed their tack before Pit Bull was overlapped, .. International Jury will dismiss this... as fluff. Not BTW that I am an Oats or Pit Bull fan ... send it Kearney Alex and Jim ... altho Huey is not not loving small boats this year.

That's what I thought I saw too.  In support of that there is video out there which pretty clearly shows the wake on C bends 10 of 15 degrees bend away from close hauled about 1 minute out.  Earlier than that there is some more footage showing a lot of trees coming out in front of C's forestay which would indicate W/O crossing - the commentator even mentions that it looks like Oats will cross.  Admittedly helicopter (maybe moving) footage adds a third variable to the equation.  Neither were making the sea mark and so I expected W/O to lee bow, and gas C off, before both of them tacked.  Then pretty likely that W/O would roll C to windward.  Don't forget W/O just took something like 45 seconds out of Comanche in those about 4 minutes of sailing!  Hard to argue that W/O didn't had a speed advantage in those conditions.  It was the feeling I got watching the film.  I thought C put the bow down (hunted) W/O making it necessary for Oats to speed up their stay clear tack away.  I don't know how quickly those things happen on those monsters but I bet it takes some time and Oats didn't expect her clearing tack to be rushed by the Hunt.  If it was a last second panic decision to tack that's not what the crew movement on Oats looked like.  I noticed Oats did get a bad wave right at the wrong time.  It didn't feel to me like Oats completed their tack before C altered course but "zoomed in end on video" makes distance hard to measure.  I was not completely convinced that an overlap ever quite occurred either but that bow is a long ways away for a driver to reckon that.  But when they steered to avoid and when they had to are two different things.  It would be my opinion that C had the right to be nervous that Oats was not staying clear.  And another thing in the Oats cockpit footage I noticed how far C had to come back up on the wind before her jib started to cave in - kind of supports the Hunting theory.  It appears to me that there is blame to go around.  If it were me I would not throw Oats out for this.  There is enough question however that I might dock them the 5 minutes minimum - if I am understanding that amendment to SIs correctly.  Tie goes to the boat on starboard?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HardOnWind said:

And you're certain that it was a foul how? Why bother running the protest hearing if everyone already knows the outcome?

  1. It does not matter if anyone here is certain it was a foul, there is a protest.
  2. The other boat has not done a penalty and the protest stands.
  3. There is a process defined by the rules if that happens.

Fuck me there are some really stupid posts here

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Cap't Billy said:

That's what I thought I saw too.  In support of that there is video out there which pretty clearly shows the wake on C bends 10 of 15 degrees bend away from close hauled about 1 minute out.  Earlier than that there is some more footage showing a lot of trees coming out in front of C's forestay which would indicate W/O crossing - the commentator even mentions that it looks like Oats will cross.  Admittedly helicopter (maybe moving) footage adds a third variable to the equation.  Neither were making the sea mark and so I expected W/O to lee bow, and gas C off, before both of them tacked.  Then pretty likely that W/O would roll C to windward.  Don't forget W/O just took something like 45 seconds out of Comanche in those about 4 minutes of sailing!  Hard to argue that W/O didn't had a speed advantage in those conditions.  It was the feeling I got watching the film.  I thought C put the bow down (hunted) W/O making it necessary for Oats to speed up their stay clear tack away.  I don't know how quickly those things happen on those monsters but I bet it takes some time and Oats didn't expect her clearing tack to be rushed by the Hunt.  If it was a last second panic decision to tack that's not what the crew movement on Oats looked like.  I noticed Oats did get a bad wave right at the wrong time.  It didn't feel to me like Oats completed their tack before C altered course but "zoomed in end on video" makes distance hard to measure.  I was not completely convinced that an overlap ever quite occurred either but that bow is a long ways away for a driver to reckon that.  But when they steered to avoid and when they had to are two different things.  It would be my opinion that C had the right to be nervous that Oats was not staying clear.  And another thing in the Oats cockpit footage I noticed how far C had to come back up on the wind before her jib started to cave in - kind of supports the Hunting theory.  It appears to me that there is blame to go around.  If it were me I would not throw Oats out for this.  There is enough question however that I might dock them the 5 minutes minimum - if I am understanding that amendment to SIs correctly.  Tie goes to the boat on starboard?

 

The massive flaw with your theory is that by putting the bow down to “hunt”, it simply made the cross easier for WOXI. 

Comanche put her bow down when it looked like WOXI was going to hold course. That’s the responsible thing to do if you don’t want to crunch 200’ worth of billionaires’ money. 

Then numbnuts decided to tack....

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imamizard dismasted. 

IRC door closing on some of the 45-50's

TSA Management moving up but a long way out stil. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random said:

There is no "Aside from the RRoS", where the RRS is in force, COLREGS is not. 

 

Random, actually very tricky question.

In NSW there is a special rule in the Col Regs allowing for application of RRS where marine permit allows.

This special rule appears to exist nowhere else.

Not so in Tasmania or Queensland for that matter.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, trying to cut out all the misinformation in this thread..... here you go:   World Sailing published a guide to IJs for issuing Discretionary Penalties.  It breaks rules breaches into 4 Bands, 1 to 4, 4 being the worst.  What is rare for the RHSH race is that a breach of a boat on boat protest (Part 2 of RRS) has been subjected to the Discretionary Penalty world by the OA.   The IJ is bound by the RRS , the Case Book, and the Guidelines set by World Sailing.

Read and judge for yourself:  http://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/DiscretionaryPenaltyPolicySWCNov2014-[18029].pdf

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comanche is allowed to alter course- what some are calling "hunting"- to leeward. Rule 16.2 is applicable if the port tack boat is steering to pass astern of the starboard tack boat. And just says that the starboard tack boat shall not change course if the port tack boat keeping clear needs to immediately change course to continue keeping clear. 16.1 says that a right of way boat changing course shall give the other boat(s) room to keep clear. 

 

Unless the starboard tack boat does something epically stupid, port tack always goes to the room a step behind because they barely have any rights. These guys are pros and have a ton of experience but it still looks like a dumb move and I really don't understand the rationale of wanting to go to the room as a port tack boat and/or a boat that tacked too close. "Starboard" demands very little in the way of explanation, both on and off the water.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on the WS policy, a penalty of 20-30% would seem in line with WS guidelines.   WOXI elapsed time is approx. 33 hours.  Therefore, a 20% penalty would be 6 hours 36 minutes.

Pretty simple.

  • Like 4
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ichi’s gonna have this I reckon. Patrice has to average about 12sog to beat them..I don’t see anyone else further up the coast making a run..

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ASP said:

Ichi’s gonna have this I reckon. Patrice has to average about 12sog to beat them..I don’t see anyone else further up the coast making a run..

That's how I'm seeing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, axolotl said:

Race rules forbid private communications while racing.

 

2 hours ago, mad said:

Depends on which set of rules they’re playing to. :ph34r:

Jeezuz. The set of rules for the race is defined in the NOR, and changes to said rules are delineated in the NOR.  For this year's race, rule 41 has been changed:

9.3 Changes to the Racing Rules of Sailing

RRS 41: Whilst racing a boat may retrieve data from any page of the event website details of which are provided in the Sailing Instructions, even if that page is not publicly available. During the race a boat shall not contact, or be in contact with, any person or private entity using any medium to receive private meteorological forecasts, tactical advice or information customised for a particular boat or group of boats, however a boat may obtain assistance in the form of any readily available commercial meteorological or hydrographical information regardless of cost. Amends RRS 41(c).

Clearly, consulting with your shoreside rules guru by satphone during the race is prohibited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sclarke said:

WOXI The greatest 100 footer in the world today. She is the only boat to beat Comanche, and she's done it twice! I just love the fact that teams and boats have come and gone, new designs have been built/ bought and raced, they've broken records, and some have been called "The fastest Monohull in the world today" and the old girl has come out and beat them all. I'm no fan of the Oatley family, but damn that boat is something special! 

Which part of the boat is old?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, lydia said:

Random, actually very tricky question.

In NSW there is a special rule in the Col Regs allowing for application of RRS where marine permit allows.

This special rule appears to exist nowhere else.

Not so in Tasmania or Queensland for that matter.

 

 

Yes interesting, all good, not tricky.  All that means is that if there is a permit to run an event under RRS then RRS applies.  Still one or the other.

Still does not matter if the other states do not have the same clause, as RRS covers the interaction between competing and non-competing boats.  Where there is a sanctioned RRS race then Colregs does not apply at all to vessels that have accepted RRS Rule 3.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RealEstateBroker said:

Based on the WS policy, a penalty of 20-30% would seem in line with WS guidelines.   WOXI elapsed time is approx. 33 hours.  Therefore, a 20% penalty would be 6 hours 36 minutes.

Pretty simple.

I think the percentage is supposed to be positions, not time. SIs specify an elapsed time penalty, greater than 5 minutes.  If we assume WO is guilty, the foul was deliberate (not accidental), it did hinder C to a small extent, and WO did not accept blame; then a time penalty that results in 10-20% drop of position seems appropriate. That's something like 90 minutes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

Which part of the boat is old?

The head might still be original.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, axolotl said:

 

Jeezuz. The set of rules for the race is defined in the NOR, and changes to said rules are delineated in the NOR.  For this year's race, rule 41 has been changed:

9.3 Changes to the Racing Rules of Sailing

RRS 41: Whilst racing a boat may retrieve data from any page of the event website details of which are provided in the Sailing Instructions, even if that page is not publicly available. During the race a boat shall not contact, or be in contact with, any person or private entity using any medium to receive private meteorological forecasts, tactical advice or information customised for a particular boat or group of boats, however a boat may obtain assistance in the form of any readily available commercial meteorological or hydrographical information regardless of cost. Amends RRS 41(c).

Clearly, consulting with your shoreside rules guru by satphone during the race is prohibited.

Did you want me to use the sarcasm font for you next time??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, random said:

Yes interesting, all good, not tricky.  All that means is that if there is a permit to run an event under RRS then RRS applies.  Still one or the other.

Still does not matter if the other states do not have the same clause, as RRS covers the interaction between competing and non-competing boats.  Where there is a sanctioned RRS race then Colregs does not apply at all to vessels that have accepted RRS Rule 3.

 

Yes, tricky, this is an interstate voyage with 2 permits in different jurisdictions.

But I am not answering that question here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lydia said:

Yes, tricky, this is an interstate voyage with 2 permits in different jurisdictions.

But I am not answering that question here.

 

Where is the conflict?  I don't see what this has to do with the 2017 S2H.  What am I missing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, RKoch said:

The head might still be original.

The wheels are probably original too.

But there's just as much crap going on at the wheels as in the head. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, random said:

Yes interesting, all good, not tricky.  All that means is that if there is a permit to run an event under RRS then RRS applies.  Still one or the other.

Still does not matter if the other states do not have the same clause, as RRS covers the interaction between competing and non-competing boats.  Where there is a sanctioned RRS race then Colregs does not apply at all to vessels that have accepted RRS Rule 3.

 

WTF? Where do you get the notion that non-competing boats are subject to RRS? That's completely not the case,  and a boat racing is subject to Colregs when interacting with a non-competing boat, just as they would be with a freighter, fishing boat engaged in fishing, or a human-powered boat.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brucey Boy has just gybed for the corner.

looks like great pressure but.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SCANAS said:

Protest set down for 3pm. 

Midnight here. Don't think I'll stay up...will look for decision in AM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, RKoch said:

WTF? Where do you get the notion that non-competing boats are subject to RRS?

Where did I say it did?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ~Stingray~ said:

For rules fans,

https://www.sailingillustrated.com/single-post/2017/12/27/Facebook-Live-Today-A-mock-protest-hearing-between-reps-of-LDV-COMANCHE-and-WILD-OATS-XI-moderated-by-TFE-with-our-viewers-as-the-Jury

Facebook Live Today: A mock protest hearing between "reps" of LDV COMANCHE and WILD OATS XI, moderated by TFE with our viewers as the Jury

Wednesday, December 27, 2017

TOM EHMAN

Good conversation but over an hour. Here is the summary.

Best defense, but a weak one, for WO-XI is that they'd completed their turn and had rights before C had to alter course.

Unless additional/better video evidence is available to the IJ, most felt that a penalty should be handed down.

Interesting discussion about the evolution of RRS and the old 'hard on' rule which would have made this a clear cut case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, mad said:

Did you want me to use the sarcasm font for you next time??

Yup.  Or write in plain language so there's no confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, jackolantern said:

 

33 minutes ago, RKoch said:

The head might still be original.

The wheels are probably original too.

But there's just as much crap going on at the wheels as in the head. 

 

And before they leave the dock it is "gentlemen, start your engines".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, RKoch said:

I think the percentage is supposed to be positions, not time. SIs specify an elapsed time penalty, greater than 5 minutes.  If we assume WO is guilty, the foul was deliberate (not accidental), it did hinder C to a small extent, and WO did not accept blame; then a time penalty that results in 10-20% drop of position seems appropriate. That's something like 90 minutes.

<