Speng

Remove DSQ boat from race?

Recommended Posts

So I was watching this race, it's a 49er medal race and the ESP team have to put a boat between themselves and GBR to get the gold. During the race AUT is OCS but they continue racing. In the end ESP crosses the line first, then AUT (but they're DSQ), and GBR crosses third so GBR is 2nd in the race and wins. My question is: why isn't AUT notified say at the first windward mark that they're OCS so they can get off the race course and not interfere with anyone else? Throughout the race they didn't interfere with anyone but GBR did keep their kite up on the reach to the finish (presumably to try to pip AUT) which was hairy and if they'd stuffed it in or hit the pin the final medal standings could have been affected. I assume there are mark boats that could signal them.

)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OCS isn't a DSQ. A sailor can correct an OCS long after the start of the race, therefore, the RC can't tell them to leave the race course. Unlike a Black Flag, that in most fleets, a board of all Black flagged boats will be posted at the windward mark.

If a boat is OCS, they still have rights and are allowed to mess with other boats, as long as it helps their own standings in the race or series.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was OCS last race in a CoC regatta a number of years ago. I wasn't sure the individual recall flag was for me, and kept sailing.  The windward mark stake boat attempted to hail me at first Mark, but I couldn't understand them. Second time around the mark they were able to get closer, where I could hear them. I acknowledged the hail and retired. Bit of a bummer, as it was the best race I'd had in regatta.  If I'd thought the R/C was in error, I'd be perfectly within rights to continue sailing as a competing yacht, and request a post-race hearing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a screwed up situation similar to this.  We were doing a 3 day regatta.  On day two for the first race we did not see the boat that was second behind us at the start.  But 1/2 way up the beat we see them over on the right side of the course.  So we start discussing did they start did they not start but we are unsure.  They cross over form the right side to the left side through the course and tack on our hip.  They must be racing right?  As we get closer we are shouting asking did they or did they not start eventually they say they did not start.  We tell them to get off the course.  They follow us into the mark ehind with us yelling to get off the course.  They round the weather mark and set right behind us we say Protest you are interfering with our race.  They sail high forcing us to sail higher then we would and eventually with a lot of yelling we jibe away.  So we protested them.  The thought being they could throw out a DNS but not a DSQ.  The finding form the race committee and I still do not believe it to be correct was that they did interfere with us and were in the wrong. But and this was the big but they could not DSQ them from the race because they were not racing in the race.  But they are in a multi day regatta there must be some recourse?  We were told our choice was to file a rule 69 or forget about it.  I was red faced asking how as a competitor who had interfered with another competitor who they raced against yesterday and would race against later the same could there be no way to protest them if they broke the rules?

Share this post


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

I had a screwed up situation similar to this.  We were doing a 3 day regatta.  On day two for the first race we did not see the boat that was second behind us at the start.  But 1/2 way up the beat we see them over on the right side of the course.  So we start discussing did they start did they not start but we are unsure.  They cross over form the right side to the left side through the course and tack on our hip.  They must be racing right?  As we get closer we are shouting asking did they or did they not start eventually they say they did not start.  We tell them to get off the course.  They follow us into the mark ehind with us yelling to get off the course.  They round the weather mark and set right behind us we say Protest you are interfering with our race.  They sail high forcing us to sail higher then we would and eventually with a lot of yelling we jibe away.  So we protested them.  The thought being they could throw out a DNS but not a DSQ.  The finding form the race committee and I still do not believe it to be correct was that they did interfere with us and were in the wrong. But and this was the big but they could not DSQ them from the race because they were not racing in the race.  But they are in a multi day regatta there must be some recourse?  We were told our choice was to file a rule 69 or forget about it.  I was red faced asking how as a competitor who had interfered with another competitor who they raced against yesterday and would race against later the same could there be no way to protest them if they broke the rules?

What rule do you feel they broke? Did you cite one on the protest form?

And, did the sailing instructions specify that any DSQ was not excludable?

Share this post


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

OCS isn't a DSQ. A sailor can correct an OCS long after the start of the race, therefore, the RC can't tell them to leave the race course. Unlike a Black Flag, that in most fleets, a board of all Black flagged boats will be posted at the windward mark.

If a boat is OCS, they still have rights and are allowed to mess with other boats, as long as it helps their own standings in the race or series.  

Only if written into the SI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, TJSoCal said:

What rule do you feel they broke? Did you cite one on the protest form?

And, did the sailing instructions specify that any DSQ was not excludable?

they broke r24.1, it doesn't matter whether this was cited or not, especially if the PC found that they did interfere while not racing.

 

the penalty. a DSQ should be applied to the nearest in time. (see 64.1)

Quote

If a boat has broken a rule when not racing her penalty shall apply to the race sailed nearest in time to that of the incident.

 

I.e. they keep the DNS and get a DSQ from another race, most likely a race in the same regatta.)

 

Share this post


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

they broke r24.1, it doesn't matter whether this was cited or not, especially if the PC found that they did interfere while not racing.

But if they "came to the starting area" (so not scored DNC) they were racing (see the definition) from their prep signal, and they couldn't officially be scored as OCS/DNF until they retired or crossed the finish line - up until then they could have unwound their course and started properly (absent any other provisions for starting time limits in the SI). So they didn't break rule 24.1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Former MDR Vandal 1 said:

1984 US Olympic Finn Trials

Yes, I agree. That could be a rule 2 violation and DNE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Port Phillip Sailor said:

I'm not sure but I don't think DNE existed back in 1984.

Most of these acronyms didn't exist then. Then again there was a more melodious acronym for the organization then too.

Share this post


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

But if they "came to the starting area" (so not scored DNC) they were racing (see the definition) from their prep signal, and they couldn't officially be scored as OCS/DNF until they retired or crossed the finish line - up until then they could have unwound their course and started properly (absent any other provisions for starting time limits in the SI). So they didn't break rule 24.1.

I was going with the statement that the poster did not see them at the start. And that the PC found that the boat was not racing.

If they came to the starting area but did not actually cross the start line then they break R24.2 not 24.1.

Occam's razor suggests that the poster used the wrong acronym.

Share this post


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

I was going with the statement that the poster did not see them at the start. And that the PC found that the boat was not racing.

If they came to the starting area but did not actually cross the start line then they break R24.2 not 24.1.

Occam's razor suggests that the poster used the wrong acronym.

24.2 in that situation was covered in another thread recently and I think the Brass answer was that there was a case (ETA: Case 126) that said that would not have been a violation. Although in the case the OCS boat wasn't aware that she was OCS - so in this case where the OCS boat knew it I suppose a PC might find that 24.2 applied.

At least as Fan described it, it sounds to me like the PC erred in saying the boat was not racing. I'd still like to hear from Fan what rule was alleged to have been broken on the protest form as the basis for their protest.

Share this post


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

24.2 in that situation was covered in another thread recently and I think the Brass answer was that there was a case (ETA: Case 126) that said that would not have been a violation. Although in the case the OCS boat wasn't aware that she was OCS - so in this case where the OCS boat knew it I suppose a PC might find that 24.2 applied.

At least as Fan described it, it sounds to me like the PC erred in saying the boat was not racing. I'd still like to hear from Fan what rule was alleged to have been broken on the protest form as the basis for their protest.

That can be changed at any time thru the hearing. What is important is that the protest contain the gist of the alleged incident.

Share this post


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

they broke r24.1, it doesn't matter whether this was cited or not, especially if the PC found that they did interfere while not racing.

But if they "came to the starting area" (so not scored DNC) they were racing (see the definition) from their prep signal, and they couldn't officially be scored as OCS/DNF until they retired or crossed the finish line - up until then they could have unwound their course and started properly (absent any other provisions for starting time limits in the SI). So they didn't break rule 24.1.

Good point.

Rule 24.1 applies between a boat that is racing and a boat that is not racing, but the boat not racing, must be subject to the rules.

The rules, in general apply to a boat that is participating or intending to participate in a race (rule 3).

Normally, it would be inferred that a boat that is entered in a race and is sailing about in the racing area at about the time of the start was intending to participate in the race, and, if she continues to sail about in the starting area during the starting sequence she was participating in the race, and from her preparatory signal, is racing. 

This inference would not hold if, for example a boat came to the racing area dressed with flags and a mixed cocktail set of passengers and crew.  This would be pretty clear evidence that she did not intend to race in that race.

On the other hand, a boat, rigged and crewed for racing coming to the racing area is pretty clearly intending to participate in the race, although possibly, say in the event of a breakdown before the preparatory signal, this intention may change

In the case of a boat that was entered and came to the starting area, unless there was evidence to prove that she was not intending to participate in the race:

  • the rules in general apply to that boat (rule 3),
  • the rules of Part 2 apply to that boat (Preamble to Part 2);  and
  • that boat is racing from her preparatory signal until she until she finishes and clears the finishing line and marks or retires, or until the race committee signals a general recall, postponement or abandonment.  She is racing, whether she crosses the starting line or not.  Seemingly, once she is there at her preparatory signal, unless one of those things happens, she goes on racing forever.
  • If that boat has an incident with another boat that is racing, she does NOT break rule 24.1:  both boats are racing.

In this case, in contrast to my view in the OCS case, I could be persuaded that she breaks rule 24.2:  her ‘reasons’ for sailing on the leg of the course where the incident occurred (Case 126) cannot be that she thought she was fairly sailing in the race because she never crossed the starting line.

But I think this DNS case is sufficiently similar to the OCS case and a protest committee could well find a breach of rule 2.

In the case of a boat that was ostensibly not racing (with the flags and the cocktail dresses and all) if she sails on the race course and interferes with another boat that is racing, I think that a protest committee might:

  • find that she was ‘participating’ and subject to the rules, and mistakenly conclude that she was not racing, interfered with a boat that was, and broke rule 24.1;  or
  • find that she was competing (in the series, if not necessarily in that race) and that she broke rule 2;  or
  • decide that she was a competitor that may have committed an act of misconduct and call a hearing under rule 69.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if we are considering the various possibilities we should also consider the possibility of a boat that leaves the dock late and doesn't come to the start area, but arrives on course while the race is underway and decides to 'practice' on the course.

i had always understood that a boat doing this was not 'racing', but I'm not totally sure on this.

Share this post


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

I think if we are considering the various possibilities we should also consider the possibility of a boat that leaves the dock late and doesn't come to the start area, but arrives on course while the race is underway and decides to 'practice' on the course.

i had always understood that a boat doing this was not 'racing', but I'm not totally sure on this.

24.1 covers that.

If a boat has entered a series and infringes 24.1, they can be penalized according to 64.1. And, if found by the PC to have infringed 69 or/and  2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Port Phillip Sailor said:

24.1 covers that.

If a boat has entered a series and infringes 24.1, they can be penalized according to 64.1. And, if found by the PC to have infringed 69 or/and  2.

dude,

 read the thread, maybe start with my post #8. the current discussion is about whether they are racing or not, 24.1 only applies if not.

 

 

Share this post


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

dude,

 read the thread, maybe start with my post #8. the current discussion is about whether they are racing or not, 24.1 only applies if not.

 

 

It's pretty damn obvious that if they have not come near the start line then they are NOT racing. Unless you interpret the meaning of the definition to include a boat still on it's trailer as racing from it's prep signal. Do you?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Port Phillip Sailor said:

It's pretty damn obvious that if they have not come near the start line then they are NOT racing. Unless you interpret the meaning of the definition to include a boat still on it's trailer as racing from it's prep signal. Do you?

 

That's the question I'm asking, I had always assumed that that was the case (as stated in my post), but after reading Brass's post and the definition again I was less sure.

Did you read Brass's post and TJSoCals? Again if you read the discussion you will find that my starting point on this was identical to yours, the discussion evolved and I'm trying to learn something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Port Phillip Sailor said:

That can be changed at any time thru the hearing. What is important is that the protest contain the gist of the alleged incident.

True, but there's a spot on the form for "rules alleged to have been broken". I suppose you could leave that blank and leave it up to the PC to figure out which if any rules were broken from your description but that seems like a pretty lazy protest. 

And I know that the PC can decide rules were broken that were not alleged by the protestor. 

Share this post


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

That's the question I'm asking, I had always assumed that that was the case (as stated in my post), but after reading Brass's post and the definition again I was less sure.

Did you read Brass's post and TJSoCals? Again if you read the discussion you will find that my starting point on this was identical to yours, the discussion evolved and I'm trying to learn something.

Technically, according to the definition racing, a boat is racing from it's prep signal regardless of the boat being on the water or on it's mooring or being out of sight from the RC boat.

Ridiculous as that is - it's the rules.

Share this post


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

True, but there's a spot on the form for "rules alleged to have been broken". I suppose you could leave that blank and leave it up to the PC to figure out which if any rules were broken from your description but that seems like a pretty lazy protest. 

And I know that the PC can decide rules were broken that were not alleged by the protestor. 

You could leave it blank if unsure, or could  have written in the wrong rule number.

You (or the PC) can change that after the hearing starts.

Share this post


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

I think if we are considering the various possibilities we should also consider the possibility of a boat that leaves the dock late and doesn't come to the start area, but arrives on course while the race is underway and decides to 'practice' on the course.

i had always understood that a boat doing this was not 'racing', but I'm not totally sure on this.

A11 Scoring Abbreviations defines DNC as "Did not start; did not come to the starting area" and DNS as "Did not start (other than DNC and OCS)", which I think infers that a DNS boat did come to the starting area (although it doesn't say that explicitly, I'll grant).

"Start" is a defined term. "Starting area" is not. So I guess it would be up to a PC to take evidence and decide whether a boat was in the starting area or not. If a boat comes within hail of the committee boat, checks in, participates in starting maneuvers, it seems obvious that she has come to the starting area and is therefor racing. A boat that enters the course at the windward mark having made no attempt to properly start, probably not racing. Came within say 500 yards of the committee boat but not closer, within say half an hour of the starting sequence, and enters the course from that general area - gray area in my opinion.

Personally, I think it can be inferred that a boat that is scored DNC was never racing in that race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, TJSoCal said:

A11 Scoring Abbreviations defines DNC as "Did not start; did not come to the starting area" and DNS as "Did not start (other than DNC and OCS)", which I think infers that a DNS boat did come to the starting area (although it doesn't say that explicitly, I'll grant).

"Start" is a defined term. "Starting area" is not. So I guess it would be up to a PC to take evidence and decide whether a boat was in the starting area or not. If a boat comes within hail of the committee boat, checks in, participates in starting maneuvers, it seems obvious that she has come to the starting area and is therefor racing. A boat that enters the course at the windward mark having made no attempt to properly start, probably not racing. Came within say 500 yards of the committee boat but not closer, within say half an hour of the starting sequence, and enters the course from that general area - gray area in my opinion.

Personally, I think it can be inferred that a boat that is scored DNC was never racing in that race.

Unfortunately a boat has to be found NOT to be racing BEFORE it can be scored DNC.

Under the rules a boat is racing (according to the definition) even if it did not (or was not observed to have) come to the starting area.

A boat still on the trailer IS racing until the time limit expires (if any) if it has entered the race. Ridiculous ain't it!

Some people , when there is a grey area or a gaping hole in the rules, will read between the lines and produce "rules" that don't exist to back up their arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Port Phillip Sailor said:

Unfortunately a boat has to be found NOT to be racing BEFORE it can be scored DNC.

Under the rules a boat is racing (according to the definition) even if it did not (or was not observed to have) come to the starting area.

Some people , when there is a grey area or a gaping hole in the rules, will read between the lines and produce "rules" that don't exist to back up their arguments.

Fair enough, but by the time a protest is heard the race is over and DNC boats have been scored as such. This is starting to take on the flavor of the "can something be an obstruction if it's 10 miles away" discussion...

Share this post


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

Fair enough, but by the time a protest is heard the race is over and DNC boats have been scored as such.

In theory the time limit would expire (if there is one) and the boat scored DNF. There would be no need for a hearing.

It matters not what a boat is scored as the scores are all the same, unless the SI change that (and some stupidly do) and except for SCP & ZFP

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Brass said:

Rule 24.1 applies between a boat that is racing and a boat that is not racing, but the boat not racing, must be subject to the rules.

The rules, in general apply to a boat that is participating or intending to participate in a race (rule 3).

Normally, it would be inferred that a boat that is entered in a race and is sailing about in the racing area at about the time of the start was intending to participate in the race, and, if she continues to sail about in the starting area during the starting sequence she was participating in the race, and from her preparatory signal, is racing. 

This inference would not hold if, for example a boat came to the racing area dressed with flags and a mixed cocktail set of passengers and crew.  This would be pretty clear evidence that she did not intend to race in that race.

In reflection, I think I got this wrong.

Basic Principles - Sportsmanship and the Rules says

Competitors in the sport of sailing are governed by a body of rules,

Competitors agree to be governed by the rules in two ways:

  • by signing an entry form saying that they agree to be bound by the rules in accordance with rule J1.2(6);  and
  • by participating or intending to participate in a race conducted under the rules in accordance with rule 3( a ).

Lack of intention to participate in a particular race does not excuse a competitor who has entered an event from an obligation to obey the rules.

The definition of racing says:

Racing A boat is racing from her preparatory signal until she finishes and clears the finishing line and marks or retires, or until the race committee signals a general recall, postponement or abandonment.

It would appear from this definition that even a boat that does not come to the starting area, or a boat that does not start, or does not finish is racing from the time of her preparatory signal forever more.

As PP Sailor says

8 hours ago, Port Phillip Sailor said:

Ridiculous as that is - it's the rules.

I don't think it stops there.

Rules must be construed so as to avoid absurdity.  If it is necessary to imply a condition into the rule that is not written in it, so as to avoid absurdity, then that condition must be implied.

I think that it is unavoidably necessary to imply the condition that the definition of racing apples only to a boat that is intending to race.

Applying this implied condition, now makes rule 24.1 work for the case of the competitor who decides to spectate for a race or one who arrives too late to start and decides to 'practice' on the race course, which is the way, until TJSocal and I started to pick the definition of racing apart, I think we all expected it to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TJSoCal said:
10 hours ago, JohnMB said:

I think if we are considering the various possibilities we should also consider the possibility of a boat that leaves the dock late and doesn't come to the start area, but arrives on course while the race is underway and decides to 'practice' on the course.

i had always understood that a boat doing this was not 'racing', but I'm not totally sure on this.

See my previous post.  I think you're right because it's nonsense to say that a boat that has no intention of racing is racing, but she is still bound by the rules.

A11 Scoring Abbreviations defines DNC as "Did not start; did not come to the starting area" and DNS as "Did not start (other than DNC and OCS)", which I think infers that a DNS boat did come to the starting area (although it doesn't say that explicitly, I'll grant).

I think the text of the definitions of DNC and OCS, each starting 'Did not start ...' makes it clear that DNC and OCS are subsets of the set Did Not Start, and DNS covers the remainder.

"Start" is a defined term. "Starting area" is not. So I guess it would be up to a PC to take evidence and decide whether a boat was in the starting area or not. If a boat comes within hail of the committee boat, checks in, participates in starting maneuvers, it seems obvious that she has come to the starting area and is therefor racing.

I don't think that's quite the right logic.  By coming to the starting area and participating in starting manoeuvres, she is providing evidence of her intention to race, and, then, from her preparatory signal she is racing

A boat that enters the course at the windward mark having made no attempt to properly start, probably not racing.

I think that pretty clearly evidences an intention not to race.

Came within say 500 yards of the committee boat but not closer, within say half an hour of the starting sequence, and enters the course from that general area - gray area in my opinion.

I think this envelope is clearly too big.  Try 100m of the committtee vessel and within 10 minutes of the starting time and it's getting closer.  I would put much weight on whether she crossed the starting line or not, or, if the race committee had pulled the starting line, did the boat sail through the place where the line had been in the direction of the first mark.

Personally, I think it can be inferred that a boat that is scored DNC was never racing in that race.

The words in the rules don't make that connection between DNC and racing, but it seems logical.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Port Phillip Sailor said:
8 hours ago, TJSoCal said:

Personally, I think it can be inferred that a boat that is scored DNC was never racing in that race.

Unfortunately a boat has to be found NOT to be racing BEFORE it can be scored DNC.

No rule says this.

I think what you are getting at is that a boat that is scored DNC is, nevertheless, according to the definition, racing, whether she 's there or not.

I've shifted my ground on this, in the post above:  I now think that the definition of racing should only be applied to boats that intend to race.

Under the rules a boat is racing (according to the definition) even if it did not (or was not observed to have) come to the starting area.

A boat still on the trailer IS racing until the time limit expires (if any) if it has entered the race. Ridiculous ain't it!

If a rule is genuinely ridiculous (absurd), and I agree that this one is, then it must be construed so as to make it not absurd.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Port Phillip Sailor said:
8 hours ago, TJSoCal said:

Fair enough, but by the time a protest is heard the race is over and DNC boats have been scored as such.

In theory the time limit would expire (if there is one) and the boat scored DNF. There would be no need for a hearing.

It matters not what a boat is scored as the scores are all the same, unless the SI change that (and some stupidly do) and except for SCP & ZFP

Indeed, and if the series is longer than a regatta, a DSQ would actually be a better score than DNC.

So of some bozo who didn't start is crawling all over you on the racetrack, best you protest under rule 2 as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Port Phillip Sailor said:

It matters not what a boat is scored as the scores are all the same, unless the SI change that (and some stupidly do) and except for SCP & ZFP

 

I think that the only reason for the distinction between DNC and other forms of not starting is that DNC is referenced in  A9. DNC can make a difference to scores (Goes to Entries +1 instead of Finishers + 1 for a series longer than a regatta.)

Share this post


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

I think that the only reason for the distinction between DNC and other forms of not starting is that DNC is referenced in  A9. DNC can make a difference to scores (Goes to Entries +1 instead of Finishers + 1 for a series longer than a regatta.)

 

A9 - - -  DNC = points 1 more than the number of boats ENTERED in the series - not finishers. No scores relate to the number of Finishers in the RRS. (some SIs do change scores to relate to number of finishers)

The drawback is that the number of entries usually increases over a long series - such as a club's season aggregate. 

Would the race score for a DNC be the boats entered up to that race? or would the number of boats entered be finalized at the last race of the series?

The remedy would be to write that in the SI for the series before the first race of the series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Port Phillip Sailor said:

 

A9 - - -  DNC = points 1 more than the number of boats ENTERED in the series - not finishers. No scores relate to the number of Finishers in the RRS. (some SIs do change scores to relate to number of finishers)

The drawback is that the number of entries usually increases over a long series - such as a club's season aggregate. 

Would the race score for a DNC be the boats entered up to that race? or would the number of boats entered be finalized at the last race of the series?

The remedy would be to write that in the SI for the series before the first race of the series.

Yes DNC is boats entered plus 1

DNS (and others) is boats which came to the start area plus 1. my bad.

This primarily makes a difference in a long series as it is encouragement to show up to race.

 

Not sure whether it is boats entered at time of race of boats entered at end of series. I would imagine that boats entered at end of series makes most sense, it may be something that has to be controlled through the NoR

Share this post


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

 

Not sure whether it is boats entered at time of race of boats entered at end of series. I would imagine that boats entered at end of series makes most sense, it may be something that has to be controlled through the NoR

It probably should be clarified in the NOR or SI.

And in the interests of fairness, be based on the last race of the series OR based on an expected/chosen number for the whole series.

If you wait for the final race, many will not know their final score until the last race.

If you use number of entries in the series at each race, the points for a DNC early in a series could be as little as half the points for DNC by the end of a series.

 

Share this post


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

 

 

 I would imagine that boats entered at end of series makes most sense, it may be something that has to be controlled through the NoR

Correct.

Any changes made to the scoring system should be in the NOR and not necessarily repeated in the SI 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Port Phillip Sailor said:

It probably should be clarified in the NOR or SI.

And in the interests of fairness, be based on the last race of the series OR based on an expected/chosen number for the whole series.

If you wait for the final race, many will not know their final score until the last race.

If you use number of entries in the series at each race, the points for a DNC early in a series could be as little as half the points for DNC by the end of a series.

 

I would think it would have to be the number of boats entered in the series at the time of the race being scored. Otherwise you'd have to go back and adjust scores for previous races as new boats entered the series.

Share this post


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

I would think it would have to be the number of boats entered in the series at the time of the race being scored. Otherwise you'd have to go back and adjust scores for previous races as new boats entered the series.

Series score prior to the last race are preliminary. 

Share this post


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

I would think it would have to be the number of boats entered in the series at the time of the race being scored. Otherwise you'd have to go back and adjust scores for previous races as new boats entered the series.

The drawback with that is a boat that is DNC at the beginning of a series would have a much better score than a boat DNC at the end of a series - bearing in mind that a club aggregate or club championships might span 6 - 7 months.

Might be better to choose a number based on historic data. e.g. DNC = 25 points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, TJSoCal said:

I would think it would have to be the number of boats entered in the series at the time of the race being scored. Otherwise you'd have to go back and adjust scores for previous races as new boats entered the series.

Scarcely a problem these days when so many use IT scoring programs that recalculate after every race as a matter of course. With most systems it would be considerably harder *not* to recalculate the DNCs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now