Mid

2018 Rolex Sydney Hobart Yacht Race: The Race Committee has lodged a protest against Wild Oats XI

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, random said:

So they are incompetant

No.

Do try to keep up.

I think they cheated.

I was sarcasticually summerising the logic as presented in order to show how farcical it is.

Surely there cannot be anybody who believes this story?

(but this is a pointless discussion now. The fat lady has sung, WO 11 won, CYCA and the sport of sailing lost)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Se7en said:

No.

Do try to keep up.

I think they cheated.

I was sarcasticually summerising the logic as presented in order to show how farcical it is.

Surely there cannot be anybody who believes this story?

Somebody will believe anything. 

Faith is belief in the absence of proof. Denial is belief in the presence of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Se7en said:

No.

Do try to keep up.

I think they cheated.

I was sarcasticually summerising the logic as presented in order to show how farcical it is.

Surely there cannot be anybody who believes this story?

This is the nub of it.

There is not one story but multiple stories (excuses) which only surface when an uncomfortable question arises.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still working through all the onboard systems trying to work out how a cameraman can fry my AIS TX. 

I've trying everything and I cant work out how he did it.

Unless you unscrew the ground for the antenna and use the PC USB port, and then I have to create an earth....nope, that's not it......

Fuck this is hard.

 

Maybe the cameraman picked up a megger instead of the camera? And screwed it in situ sans the VHF? That would do it. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

You're possibly right but my guess is that Harburg wanted the RC to do the dirty work so it wasn't him who shafted WOXI

True,  they are naive enough not to realise that the protestor does not DSQ anyone, the PC do.

How many fucking times have I said on these boards that rule infractions must be protested by anyone aware of them.  I have been howled down by most.

But this is what happens when you do not follow the rules.

Share this post


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

Before you get anymore off the track .... Read the fucking rules!   You have no excuse not to understand them, but you do not.

3.3
Acceptance of the rules includes agreement
  1. to be governed by the rules;
  2. to accept the penalties imposed and other action taken under the rules, subject to the appeal and review procedures provided in them, as the final determination of any matter arising under the rules;
  3. with respect to any such determination, not to resort to any court of law or tribunal not provided for in the rules; and
  4. by each competitor and boat owner to ensure that their support persons are aware of the rules.

Edit: There is no requirement for you or anyone else to agree with the Rules.  If you do not, do not sign on to the race, if you do then in effect it is a legally binding contract between you and the Organising Authority.  It is the law.

I see why most of the people in this forum think you are an asshole. Because you are. Your reply has nothing whatsoever to do with my post. 

Racing Rules are also not “the law”. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OKAY. The victory of WOXI is tainted with a hint of cheating, the attitude of Black Jack is incomprehensible and that of the jury is shameful. But it seems to me that someone is forgotten in that story: Comanche. Because, if a boat has been fucked in this story, it's Comanche. If I have understood the race, Comanche was leading by 3 NM, she fell in a hole with no wind and ended up with 3NM late. But why did they not cover their opponent? Did they make a tactical error or did they not know where WOXI was? If so, why did they not put a protest? The fact they did not is in favour of WOXI, don't you think so?
 

Share this post


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

Fuck, another oats sock. 

Get this through your thick skull.  It's about compliance to the rules.  They did not comply.

I do not give a fuck if it was deliberate or not.  They did not comply form before they started and should not have been allowed to take line honours.

It's that fucking simple.

I bet you were a fucking litter monitor or prefect at school and still have the blind focus on exclusively what is in front of your snotty nose. 

I’m so far from an Oats sock it’s beyond your grasp of numeracy. A rule is introduced this year for the first time. Arrogant fuck breaks it. Sure, simplistically he deserves a size 11 up the arse. But all 4 boats sailed the most exciting race we have seen possibly ever, so get over the need to tell the teacher that someone pulled some other girls hair and enjoy the brilliant sailing for which that each of them deserve to be congratulated. It gave no disadvantage to anyone whatsoever. Unlike last year when he nearly took both boats out of the race and genuinely deserved what he got. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4. I believe it was stupidity, then they lied about it and did not RAF asvthey should have, which makes them cheats

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

They incompetently cheated or cheated incompetently. . Most probably cheated by incompetence. I suspect that they did not understand that the AIS  requirements of the SI’s require the unit to be Tx and Rx at all times, not just as per special regs which require the capability to do so. They then hit the silent button and submitted a valid declaration in accordance with their own incorrect understanding.of SI.

From then it’s all make it up as they go.

I think we agree completely, but I have the advantage of having just consumed a nice bottle of Shiraz.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

It gave no disadvantage to anyone whatsoever.

I hate fucking shills.

It's about rules, they did not comply with the rules.  Sailors get that,  shills just repeat the mantra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have races against boats who did not carry all of the required equipment, and who had Spinnakers of questionable size and number appear during races, and never did anything about it. For some reason, only boats known for their strict adherence to the rules ever seemed to be audited post race . . . 

Given this steaming turd of an outcome, what is the proper process for ensuring a boat you suspect does not comply is investigated? Is it a protest? What about a boat who has never taken the required water and fuel, same steps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, marcoo said:
OKAY. The victory of WOXI is tainted with a hint of cheating, the attitude of Black Jack is incomprehensible and that of the jury is shameful. But it seems to me that someone is forgotten in that story: Comanche. Because, if a boat has been fucked in this story, it's Comanche. If I have understood the race, Comanche was leading by 3 NM, she fell in a hole with no wind and ended up with 3NM late. But why did they not cover their opponent? Did they make a tactical error or did they not know where WOXI was? If so, why did they not put a protest? The fact they did not is in favour of WOXI, don't you think so?
 

So you joined in 2009, your post count says 10, but your profile only has two posts.

How the fuck does that work?

Share this post


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

I have races against boats who did not carry all of the required equipment, and who had Spinnakers of questionable size and number appear during races, and never did anything about it. For

If you did not protest then you are the problem.

Share this post


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

So you joined in 2009, your post count says 10, but your profile only has two posts.

How the fuck does that work?

I don't talk very much. :+))  But that doesn't answer to my question.

Share this post


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

 

I’m so far from an Oats sock it’s beyond your grasp of numeracy. A rule is introduced this year for the first time. 

Was it? 

Share this post


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

It gave no disadvantage to anyone whatsoever.

Of course it disadvantaged everyone who played by the rules and left their AIS transmitting! If you really think having AIS info of your opponents whilst hiding your own is no advantage you can't have done much racing since it was invented!

If it was a genuine mistake and it was all about what a jolly good fun race it was (as you seem to think) Woxi could and should have retired after the finish and just enjoyed being first over the line. Picking up the first prize when you know you have not won it is what I find so mind boggling.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2018 at 3:38 AM, Rail Meat said:

Sad day and wrong outcome in my view. WOXI crew should be embarrassed - there is no honor in this outcome. 

 

On 12/29/2018 at 4:36 AM, HILLY said:

Mark Richards in the interview says that it was a gruelling race, 2 days with no sleep..

If he sticks around in Hobart long enough maybe he could buy the guys of Gun Runnner a few beers, and find out what gruelling really is....

 

6 hours ago, trisail said:

Paul Elvstrom said it all.

image.jpg

These three are it for me.

(Apart from the misplaced apostrophe in the last one.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Picking up the first prize when you know you have not won it is what I find so mind boggling.

It would be sweet if the room went silent when they pick up the prize at the ceremony....

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

You're possibly right but my guess is that Harburg wanted the RC to do the dirty work so it wasn't him who shafted WOXI

Snowflakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, staysail said:

Of course it disadvantaged everyone who played by the rules and left their AIS transmitting! If you really think having AIS info of your opponents whilst hiding your own is no advantage you can't have done much racing since it was invented!

If it was a genuine mistake and it was all about what a jolly good fun race it was (as you seem to think) Woxi could and should have retired after the finish and just enjoyed being first over the line. Picking up the first prize when you know you have not won it is what I find so mind boggling.

My point (partially) was that every boat has access to the Yellowbrick data which provides more info than rolling your mouse over the boats AIS icon. So isn’t it a bit like missing the weather on the radio sked but still having access to the  BOM weather on your laptop?

Share this post


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

My point (partially) was that every boat has access to the Yellowbrick data which provides more info than rolling your mouse over the boats AIS icon. So isn’t it a bit like missing the weather on the radio sked but still having access to the  BOM weather on your laptop?

Not really.  Yellow Brick tracking is a better source than no source, but three factors make it less powerful than using AIS. 

  1. First, many races don't show heading or even speed on their tracker page.  The data is there, its up to the race to display it.  AIS always shows it
  2. Yellow Brick is very, very, very rarely real time.  Their pricing model is based on a per transmission model, and as a result the refresh rate is stretched out to economize.  I don't know what it was for SH, but it felt like 5 or 10 minutes. Lots of decisions can be made in those windows between transmissions where if I was looking at AIS there would be the option to react immediately to a competitors actions.
  3. Pulling down position data via your sat phone is expensive.  If you try to look at the race tracker on the race web site, it is ghastly expensive.  Many races offer a download, either through Expedition or through an FTP site.  But the update of the data on those downloads will never be more frequent than what you see on the race website, and often can be less frequent.  And will still cost money to do.  Its useful simply because it will give you fleet information for boats out of AIS range, but still not as good as having a target up on AIS.

 Mind you, I personally don't like the outcome of having AIS data available since it tends to turn racing into an exercise of "follow the leader and wait for mistakes".  Just look at the Volvo race or the start of the RdR for examples.  But if it is going to be mandated then I am sure as shit going to use the data to make decisions.  And if one boat is not transmitting then the other boats are disadvantaged.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

My point (partially) was that every boat has access to the Yellowbrick data which provides more info than rolling your mouse over the boats AIS icon. So isn’t it a bit like missing the weather on the radio sked but still having access to the  BOM weather on your laptop?

I don't know what sort of kit you are using with your AIS but mine gives me a continuous, almost real time, plot of the other boats tracks on my nav pc screen from which I can see the instantaneous COG, SOG, and the historic tracks plotted out, for all boats within a few miles of me. Courses accurate to one degree and speeds to a small fraction of a knot. Enables me to see if they have better (or worse) wind speed, wind angle, boat speed etc. where they are compared with what I have at my location, and I can see how the wind has been shifting where they all are, and it even helps me guess what the wind will do where I am in the near future. Pretty handy data to have, and even more beneficial for me, and a big disadvantage for them, when I can switch off my transmit switch and prevent them from seeing all the same data from me at my location. And I don't even need an internet connection. Don't quite see how I could get equivalent data from the other boats yellowbrick transmissions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Crazy Cat said:

Yes. It has never been mandatory before this year. 

MelbourneA31 wrote, in post 975, that it has been mandatory for 3 years already. Discuss.

Share this post


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

Not really.  Yellow Brick tracking is a better source than no source, but three factors make it less powerful than using AIS. 

  1. First, many races don't show heading or even speed on their tracker page.  The data is there, its up to the race to display it.  AIS always shows it
  2. Yellow Brick is very, very, very rarely real time.  Their pricing model is based on a per transmission model, and as a result the refresh rate is stretched out to economize.  I don't know what it was for SH, but it felt like 5 or 10 minutes. Lots of decisions can be made in those windows between transmissions where if I was looking at AIS there would be the option to react immediately to a competitors actions.
  3. Pulling down position data via your sat phone is expensive.  If you try to look at the race tracker on the race web site, it is ghastly expensive.  Many races offer a download, either through Expedition or through an FTP site.  But the update of the data on those downloads will never be more frequent than what you see on the race website, and often can be less frequent.  And will still cost money to do.  Its useful simply because it will give you fleet information for boats out of AIS range, but still not as good as having a target up on AIS.

 Mind you, I personally don't like the outcome of having AIS data available since it tends to turn racing into an exercise of "follow the leader and wait for mistakes".  Just look at the Volvo race or the start of the RdR for examples.  But if it is going to be mandated then I am sure as shit going to use the data to make decisions.  And if one boat is not transmitting then the other boats are disadvantaged.

 

Your points RM:

1. Confining the discussion to this race only, the YB data shows SOG & COG over previous 1m, 5m& 10m intervals. 

2. Agree. 10m updates this race for data listed above. 

3. Not advocating using sat phone to look at CYCA tracker, that will cost a bomb. However for the data above (no graphics) which Expedition can then store and present as tracks. 

Your summary - spot on. Last few years in our fleets many of the leaders have turned off their transmitters (not mandatory) simply because the bunnies were following them and cashing in on their hard fought gains and risks. 

Share this post


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

MelbourneA31 wrote, in post 975, that it has been mandatory for 3 years already. Discuss.

He was pretty clear. It has been mandatory that it be carried and that it worked if and when turned on. This year that was extended to be always on and both receiving and transmitting.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

It would be sweet if the room went silent when they pick up the prize at the ceremony....

Even better if it was to an empty room. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

 

It would be most unlikely for any of the smaller boats to be carrying internet capabilities beyond a weather service.

On top of that there would be no reason for any of them to monitor the AIS transmission of any of the maxis.

Now don't you forget to keep feeding those reindeer. A visit to Rovaniemi is on my bucket list and I also want to buy a Marrtiini knife while I'm there. Some things must be earned..

They most likely have several mobile phones with internet capabilities near stat and finish. Maybe even some other part of the race. Why wouldn't they be interested in the results, protests and what is written about the race? They may even look how far ahead the maxis are after the start and wonder why WOXI is not shown.

I live about 1000 km south from Rovaniemi. No reindeers around here. AFAIK they don't need to be fed, they find their food (lichen) from nature. Haven't used the Marttiini knives I have for ages. Sorry to disappoint you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rantifarian said:

I have races against boats who did not carry all of the required equipment, and who had Spinnakers of questionable size and number appear during races, and never did anything about it. For some reason, only boats known for their strict adherence to the rules ever seemed to be audited post race . . . 

Given this steaming turd of an outcome, what is the proper process for ensuring a boat you suspect does not comply is investigated? Is it a protest? What about a boat who has never taken the required water and fuel, same steps?

I raced in a class where crew weight was paramount.  On the last day of the regatta, one of the boats had 2 or 3 more bodies than the rest of us.  The boat Captain on one of the competitors met them at the dock with a scale...they RAF'd.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a lot of people on here that are fully butt hurt over this, however none of the other competitors obviously gave a shit as they didn't protest. If they don't care about it, which they obviously don't, why are all of you so angry.

If you want to see WOXI bought to justice, enter your boat next year and protest whatever dastardly thing they do next race. 

Not a WOXI fanboy, actually backing BJ, but BJ didn't care enough about the breech of rules to lodge a protest, so why should I? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Alcatraz5768 said:

There are a lot of people on here that are fully butt hurt over this, however none of the other competitors obviously gave a shit as they didn't protest. If they don't care about it, which they obviously don't, why are all of you so angry.

If you want to see WOXI bought to justice, enter your boat next year and protest whatever dastardly thing they do next race. 

Not a WOXI fanboy, actually backing BJ, but BJ didn't care enough about the breech of rules to lodge a protest, so why should I? 

I believe in living by the rules.  Not losing sleep over this one but someone should.  

Share this post


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

What's that saying? Ignorance and stupidity VS malice and all that?

I meant that if you are disposed to cheat by not running transmit for the whole race then there is a high likelihood that you will be caught.  And that risk does not nearly offset the advantage gained by being invisible for the whole race.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, random said:

If anyone ever doubted that organised social media and forum whitewashing can be bought if you have the cash ... check out this thread.

I want what you're smoking!  But I'll check my mailbox for the next few days just in case......B)

 

Share this post


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

I meant that if you are disposed to cheat by not running transmit for the whole race then there is a high likelihood that you will be caught.  And that risk does not nearly offset the advantage gained by being invisible for the whole race.   

And that my friend is why many of us cannot wrap our heads around it.  Is anybody that arrogant or that stupid?  Doesn't matter, a sportsman would have RAF'd.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was Rolex I’d not be pleased with all this controversy.

Fake winner, might as well buy one of those Malaysian knock off Molex watches.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Crazy Cat said:

Yes. It has never been mandatory before this year. 

"Excuse me Mr Race Committee ...  Sir? ... can I say some thing?  Look it's a new rule it's OK that we fucked up, cause it's just a new rule right?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, dash34 said:

I want what you're smoking!  But I'll check my mailbox for the next few days just in case......B)

 

Exhibit II-6: How Social Media Spending Compares to Big Data and Mobility Investments

Exhibit 2-6: How Social Media Spending Compares to Big Data and Mobility Investments

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

And that my friend is why many of us cannot wrap our heads around it.  Is anybody that arrogant or that stupid?  Doesn't matter, a sportsman would have RAF'd.  

I think you and Billy have the right of it.  I think WOXI just screwed up and shut transmit off before the race like they always do because they forgot about the rule that says they have to keep it on.  They probably even filed their finishing report saying they were compliant, once again in ignorance, and later on discovered they had screwed up.  

But yes, they should have RAF'd after that, and they will have to hang their heads in shame from now on for not doing so.  

I do not have hard evidence for my opinion.  Note that I am not screaming "cheaters" from the rooftops, because I think they made an honest but stupid mistake.  Doesn't excuse that they didn't RAF, however.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Exhibit II-6: How Social Media Spending Compares to Big Data and Mobility Investments

Exhibit 2-6: How Social Media Spending Compares to Big Data and Mobility Investments

Troll post is troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, TPG said:
20 minutes ago, random said:

Exhibit II-6: How Social Media Spending Compares to Big Data and Mobility Investments

Exhibit 2-6: How Social Media Spending Compares to Big Data and Mobility Investments

Troll post is troll.

image.png.a55fe7cde50adc704ef5727e26645024.png

"We also asked companies how big their social media staff was across their entire organizations (not just in their divisions). The average number of social media employees working full-time across respondents’ companies was 56; the median was 19. These figures also demonstrate a big gulf between the respondents with a large social media staff and those with a small one.(See Exhibit II-7) About one-third of respondents totaled up 10 or fewer employees working full-time on social media across their entire company. At the other end were the 17% of respondents with more than 100 full-time social media staff across the organization."

Share this post


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

You are just digging a deeper hole. The other boats or Black Jack in particular have navigators that use AIS for tactical as  well as straight out vessel proximity management. It beggars belief that the navigator on WOXI could go the whole race without “noticing” that he was not receiving AIS from his competitors. 

Further if you sign a declaration then it must be correct or did an amended declaration get submitted with a mea culpa when the error was discovered?

This question kind of gets to the heart of it.  I suppose (but have no way of knowing) WOXI contends that their AIS was working perfectly all the way along - as far as they knew.  And they filed their Post Race Report along those lines.  Then on the strength of a suggestion that their AIS was not transmitting they should amend their report?  I would want to know myself, for sure and so perhaps (I have no way of knowing) they cranked it back up in Hobart (Cold Boot) and presto they popped right up on the net.  There is speculation about the Cameraman in Sydney taking it out but how can they know that?  Maybe they have been unable to repeat the problem and so never discovered an error.

There is the rub.  Are they responsible for a good faith effort or the outcome?  It's like putting the right postage on a correctly addressed letter and sending it off.  Something can go wrong after its out of your hands.  You don't have complete control over whether it gets where its going - the outcome.

And I am still struck by how this online inquisition is directed at only one boat.  It is said that as many as 30 percent of the fleet had AIS irregularities on the course.  If this is about safety or the proper application of the rules and fairness then why is no one demanding that these boats tracks be examined, their post race reports be reviewed and/or amended, or extraordinary protests be commenced by sailors sitting in an armchair half way around the world - to preserve the integrity of the sport?

It starts to sound personal - like a Witch Hunt - if we are not asking those boats to meet the same standards of rules compliance. 

Share this post


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

image.png.a55fe7cde50adc704ef5727e26645024.png

"We also asked companies how big their social media staff was across their entire organizations (not just in their divisions). The average number of social media employees working full-time across respondents’ companies was 56; the median was 19. These figures also demonstrate a big gulf between the respondents with a large social media staff and those with a small one.(See Exhibit II-7) About one-third of respondents totaled up 10 or fewer employees working full-time on social media across their entire company. At the other end were the 17% of respondents with more than 100 full-time social media staff across the organization."

Which companies were those and what was their marketing budget? I mean it's cool, you found an article about billion dollar corps using social media to market like a machine, and you have a hardon for comparing woxi's response to the hot mess that is this years SH, but your obsession here is like woody's obsession with the nursing home. Robert Oatley wines probably employs as many total as the companies you reference have running their daycare departments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, random said:

Fuck, another oats sock. 

Get this through your thick skull.  It's about compliance to the rules.  They did not comply.

I do not give a fuck if it was deliberate or not.  They did not comply form before they started and should not have been allowed to take line honours.

It's that fucking simple.

Amen

Share this post


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

Which companies were those and what was their marketing budget? I mean it's cool, you found an article about billion dollar corps using social media to market like a machine, and you have a hardon for comparing woxi's response to the hot mess that is this years SH, but your obsession here is like woody's obsession with the nursing home. Robert Oatley wines probably employs as many total as the companies you reference have running their daycare departments.

"Forbes magazine last year estimated his net (Bob Oatley) worth to be $910 million, while he was listed at number 49 on last year's BRW Rich List, with an estimated wealth of $1 billion."

Can't see them going without a Social Media Team.  Maybe you can, you on the payroll?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ukuri said:

Except by their own admission they knew about it BEFORE they started and still chose to start knowing full well that they were non-compliant.

Post 797

"Just seen this facebook post from one of the crew on wild oats. 

Saddened by the fact a few of my old mates would have thought we would use our AIS system onboard to our advantage by turning it off during the great race.
The fact is the system got fried when our onboard cameraman went live at the start, we had no idea at all during the race till we finished .
The Wild Oats team is one of the best loyalist teams I have sailed with in my whole sailing career ."

Emphasis mine.

That is not how I read this.

Share this post


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

This question kind of gets to the heart of it.  I suppose (but have no way of knowing) WOXI contends that their AIS was working perfectly all the way along - as far as they knew.  And they filed their Post Race Report along those lines

But they were not in compliance.  Is that too fucking hard for you to grasp such a simple concept?

They did not comply, they got the trophy!  How is that a good thing for the sport of yachting?

They showed arrogance and poor sportsmanship by not withdrawing from the race as soon as it was pointed out to them that they were non-compliant.

That's cheating.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

"Forbes magazine last year estimated his net (Bob Oatley) worth to be $910 million, while he was listed at number 49 on last year's BRW Rich List, with an estimated wealth of $1 billion."

Can't see them going without a Social Media Team.  Maybe you can, you on the payroll?

 

 

I'm sure it's a great gig but sadly they have no presence in seppo land. I'm sure they have a huge social media team comprising of whatever industry outsourced marketing  company they use. That has zero interest in the owners toys.

So tell me, what's the average value of the companies your study has? Not their owners net worth, the companies net worth.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cap't Billy said:

Post 797

"Just seen this facebook post from one of the crew on wild oats. 

Saddened by the fact a few of my old mates would have thought we would use our AIS system onboard to our advantage by turning it off during the great race.
The fact is the system got fried when our onboard cameraman went live at the start, we had no idea at all during the race till we finished .
The Wild Oats team is one of the best loyalist teams I have sailed with in my whole sailing career ."

Emphasis mine.

That is not how I read this.

So they should have retired.  "oh please sir it wasn't my fault the dog ate my homework!"

Arrogant cunts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

So they should have retired.  "oh please sir it wasn't my fault the dog ate my homework!"

Arrogant cunts.

Maybe someone should have stepped up and protested them.

Share this post


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

Post 797

"Just seen this facebook post from one of the crew on wild oats. 

Saddened by the fact a few of my old mates would have thought we would use our AIS system onboard to our advantage by turning it off during the great race.
The fact is the system got fried when our onboard cameraman went live at the start, we had no idea at all during the race till we finished .
The Wild Oats team is one of the best loyalist teams I have sailed with in my whole sailing career ."

Emphasis mine.

That is not how I read this.

I'm not sure if I'm arguing with you or the quote, but there is absolutely NOTHING a cameraman working on batteries could do to fry anything.  Please stop the stupidity.  

Share this post


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

I'm sure it's a great gig but sadly they have no presence in seppo land.

So tell me, what's the average value of the companies your study has? Not their owners net worth, the companies net worth.

 

I'm sure it's a great gig but sadly they have no presence in seppo land.

So tell me, what's the average value of the companies your study has? Not their owners net worth, the companies net worth.

 

https://sites.tcs.com/social-business-study/social-media-spending-staff/

So are you prosecuting the argument that the Oatley group of companies do not invest in responding to social media?

Share this post


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

Maybe someone should have stepped up and protested them.

Definitely.  But true sportsman should have retired.

BASIC PRINCIPLES
SPORTSMANSHIP AND THE RULES
Competitors in the sport of sailing are governed by a body of rules that they are expected to follow and enforce. A fundamental principle of sportsmanship is that when competitors break a rule they will promptly take a penalty, which may be to retire."
 
"2 FAIR SAILING
A boat and her owner shall compete in compliance with recognized principles of sportsmanship and fair play. A boat may be penalized under this rule only if it is clearly established that these principles have been violated. The penalty shall be either disqualification or disqualification that is not excludable."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will review the way the SI has been written and we all move on to the 2019 Sydney to Hobart, the decision has been made and if you still dont like it enter the Launceston to Hobart, thats what it all boils down too. complain all you like the decision wont change.

Share this post


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

Didn’t Comanches AIS proximity alarm go off near the start of last years race?

I’m not sure whether the AIS or the bowman went off first.

Share this post


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

Talk to me about AIS when you get some experience sailing in waters with shipping traffic

Talk to us when you understand Sailing Instructions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of which is relevant.  Rules say you must transmit.  If you don't you have not abided by the rules. 

To paraphrase.. If in winning you become an Internet laughing stock... 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, paps49 said:

Thats messing the waters Tricky.

 

Ok so what I believe is most concerning about this is not necessarily the safety compliance issue but the tactical advantage that may have been sort by WOXI in turning their AIS off. 

Watching a competitor find a hole and sailing around them is a wonderful new tactical input on a large scale that offshore racing navigators haven’t had before. Most race boats would decline having the drag and weight of radome and using a radar target to do calcs would be pretty furry at best)

If WOXI sort a competitive advantage through breaking rules ( and I’m not saying they did) then it’s cheating. Non compliance with a piece of safety equipment we didn’t know we needed in the last 60 odd years doesn’t bother me so much.

They sailed a bloody good race but Id hate to think the navigator turned the transmit off whilst staring at his competitors numbers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I'm sure the normal procedure for all of the serious racers is for someone to turn off a the AIS TX before the start of every race. That person possibly did it without being aware of or remembering the new SI. 

 

Could be the case....

Gross oversight if so.

edit: Someone upthread said it went off under Bradleys head where presumably they were hoisting the main. I agree... it all sounds like procedure.

However the navigator must have thought the rest of the fleet in entirety  were complete bunnies for leaving theirs on though.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

I'm sure the normal procedure for all of the serious racers is for someone to turn off a the AIS TX before the start of every race. That person possibly did it without being aware of or remembering the new SI. 

 

Maybe it’s on an old prestart checklist and someone forgot to cross it off.

I generally favour chaos over conspiracy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if so that oversight should have appeared in the post race declaration, no.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess we will never know for sure but as Tricky said, apart from this issue they sailed the pants off the old girl.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, paps49 said:

I guess we will never know for sure but as Tricky said, apart from this issue they sailed the pants off the old girl.

Yes!  There is no argument there.  But every boat needs to follow and respect the rules.  

Share this post


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

I understand them.

I understand that the CYCA made a dumbass decision to include mandatory transmission in the SI's

I understand that WOIX was no transmitting during the race (don't care about the reason)

I understand that BJ bitched and moaned about it in the media

I understand that BJ did not protest

I understand that the CYCA lodged the protest against WOIX

I understand that the IJ dismissed the protest because of "procedural reasons"

I understand that no other boat lodged a protest.

I understand that this is case closed and time to move on.

I understand that you are a dog with a bone and will not let go because you are a troll

You do not understand that this is now part of the zeitgeist.

It will never go away.   It is immortal and will be talked about for decades.  It is sailing history.

Only Oatley fanboys and trolls want it to be forgotten ... yesterday.

Social media campaigns are in damage control, obviously.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoppy - here's what you meant to have said, no?

I understand them.

I understand that the CYCA made a dumbass decision chose to include mandatory transmission in the SI's

I understand that WOIX was not transmitting during the race (don't care about the reason is immaterial)

I understand that BJ bitched and moaned expressed their dismay about it in the media

I understand that BJ did not protest

I understand that the CYCA lodged the protest against WOIX

I understand that the IJ dismissed the protest because of "procedural reasons"

I understand that no other boat lodged a protest.

I understand that this is case closed and time to move on.

I understand that you are a dog with a bone and will not let go because you are a troll

I understand that a competitor who learns that they were not in compliance with the rules should RAF

I understand that many, many sailors believe that by not being rule-compliant and not choosing to RAF casts our sport in a poor light

I personally believe that those at the forefront of our sport ought to lead by example and am dismayed that that has not (yet) happened in this instance

 

 

 
  • Like 4

Share this post


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

You do not understand that this is now part of the zeitgeist.

It will never go away.   It is immortal and will be talked about for decades.  It is sailing history.

Only Oatley fanboys and trolls want it to be forgotten ... yesterday.

Social media campaigns are in damage control, obviously.

Underarm...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, paps49 said:

And if so that oversight should have appeared in the post race declaration, no.

 

Not if AIS receive was still switched on, and you first became aware of the error after the declaration was submitted..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, a lot of conjecture here concerning this incident.  Here's what I "think" happened, just an opinion, nothing more:

  • WOXI has had a Class B AIS system aboard at least since the AUS RRSs began requiring them for CAT 1 races (2013?).
  • The AUS RRSs  do not require the device be on and transmitting during a race, just that it be in good working order.
  • Class B AISs transmit at a minimum a boat's SOG +- 0.1kn, COG +- 0.1 degree & position to GPS accuracy, a few meters, every 2 to 10 seconds depending on boatspeed.  They are very reliable if fed enough electricity and attached to a competent antenna system. They transmit at 2 watts in order to limit range to about 10 miles with (tall) masthead antennas, in order to make most efficient use of the bandwidth available.  The range can be considerably more than 10 miles if shoreside repeater stations are within range.  There are AIS implementations which essentially are unlimited in range (S-AIS) but that's not the situation in the S2H.
  •  AIS propagation is better than that of radar, due to the longer wavelength, so it is possible to reach around bends and behind islands if the land masses are not too high. Radar COG & SOG of target calculations involve integration which involve your SOG & COG which introduces inaccuracies.  Radar's main advantage is that the target is an unwilling partner; it is not transmitting information to the receiver so cannot hide itself.  It's main disadvantage is it becomes more inaccurate the further away the target, unlike a target that is actually transmitting its position ever 5 +- seconds directly to you real time.
  • Every AIS I'm aware of has a transmit on icon/light, etc.,  and the capability to operate in receive only mode controlled by a manual switch.
  • Race trackers (YellowBrick, etc.) are satellite based have a MAX transmission rate of every 1 1/2 minutes but for race rentals it's generally throttled to every 30 minutes +- to guarantee battery life on a several day race.  Two key aspects of the technology is that: only position is transmitted so SOG, COG is derived by integration with earlier positions which is less accurate and becomes very inaccurate at low speeds with such low update rates, and and data is not transmitted real time to nearby vessels,  instead a vessel must have an internet link of some sort and view the race's tracker webpage, entailing additional delays.

So there's the  playing field concerning electronic observations of competitors during a race.  Given that:

  • Knowing nearby competitor's precise position, SOG  & COG at a +-5 second integrated update rate (when they're not within yelling distance) can be immensely valuable and easily obtained using AIS.
  •  If not required by the RRS/SIs you'd be a fool to transmit on AIS but wise to receive AIS info from nearby competitors who are transmitting.
  • The 2018 S2H SIs required a vessel's AIS to be transmitting 24/7 during the race, an indisputable fact.

WOXIs actions are understandable:

  • They didn't notice that for this year's race AIS must be on & transmitting 24/7.  Hard to imagine such rock stars would miss it, but they've been doing this race for years with AIS in working order and maybe just got in to their pre-race routine and shut off the transmitter. Not helpful was NOC #2 (copy below)  which states "it is recommended that their AIS be turned on",  not that "their AIS shall be turned on ", a curious recommendation, should the AIS be turned on and transmitting during the race.  I could have stumbled over that and assumed AIS on is not mandatory during the race.
  • BlackJack in a media interview pointed out that WOXI's AIS was off,   pointed out it put them at a disadvantage and stated they did not intend to protest.
  • A WOXI spokesman stated that "having the tracker on was not mandatory".  Obviously, if a YellowBrick tracker was supplied it must be turned on for the duration of the race, so he was recollecting the 2017 SIs which only referred to the AUS RRS of sailing which stated AIS must be onboard but not necessarily turned on (transmitting). 
  • He also stated "we could see each other during the race so no disadvantage for BlackJack."  Bullocks; they were at times 5+ miles apart so determining exact SOG & COG was impossible through binoculars.
  • Once the press informed all parties of the "AIS shall be on 24/7 during the race" SI WOXIs story turned into "we didn't know it wasn't transmitting, a camera guy fried it at the start", "fixed it when we got to the finishing line dock", an unlikely chain of events.
  • Then somehow the RC informed the PC of the situation which rightly  dismissed hearing the protest, no valid protest lodged by a competitor.

So what's the upshot?  WOXI's main competition pointed out WOXI's transgression, didn't protest at the earliest opportunity, announced they weren't going to protest upon finishing, case closed.  WOXI most probably turned off AIS transmissions because they missed the new 2018 SI rule about it, wise if they thought  it wasn't mandatory but dumb if they didn't read the SIs; anybody could have nailed them, but chose to decide it on the water.   Race over, WOXI got line honors. 

  • rolex.thumb.gif.f7b06488692d6c31ef1b841d272d08e5.gif
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Wow, a lot of conjecture here concerning this incident.  Here's what I "think" happened, just an opinion, nothing more:

  • WOXI has had a Class B AIS system aboard at least since the AUS RRSs began requiring them for CAT 1 races (2013?).
  • The AUS RRSs  do not require the device be on and transmitting during a race, just that it be in good working order.
  • Class B AISs transmit at a minimum a boat's SOG +- 0.1kn, COG +- 0.1 degree & position to GPS accuracy, a few meters, every 2 to 10 seconds depending on boatspeed.  They are very reliable if fed enough electricity and attached to a competent antenna system. They transmit at 2 watts in order to limit range to about 10 miles with (tall) masthead antennas, in order to make most efficient use of the bandwidth available.  The range can be considerably more than 10 miles if shoreside repeater stations are within range.  There are AIS implementations which essentially are unlimited in range (S-AIS) but that's not the situation in the S2H.
  •  AIS propagation is better than that of radar, due to the longer wavelength, so it is possible to reach around bends and behind islands if the land masses are not too high. Radar COG & SOG of target calculations involve integration which involve your SOG & COG which introduces inaccuracies.  Radar's main advantage is that the target is an unwilling partner; it is not transmitting information to the receiver so cannot hide itself.  It's main disadvantage is it becomes more inaccurate the further away the target, unlike a target that is actually transmitting its position ever 5 +- seconds directly to you real time.
  • Every AIS I'm aware of has a transmit on icon/light, etc.,  and the capability to operate in receive only mode controlled by a manual switch.
  • Race trackers (YellowBrick, etc.) are satellite based have a MAX transmission rate of every 1 1/2 minutes but for race rentals it's generally throttled to every 30 minutes +- to guarantee battery life on a several day race.  Two key aspects of the technology is that: only position is transmitted so SOG, COG is derived by integration with earlier positions which is less accurate and becomes very inaccurate at low speeds with such low update rates, and and data is not transmitted real time to nearby vessels,  instead a vessel must have an internet link of some sort and view the race's tracker webpage, entailing additional delays.

So there's the  playing field concerning electronic observations of competitors during a race.  Given that:

  • Knowing nearby competitor's precise position, SOG  & COG at a +-5 second integrated update rate (when they're not within yelling distance) can be immensely valuable and easily obtained using AIS.
  •  If not required by the RRS/SIs you'd be a fool to transmit on AIS but wise to receive AIS info from nearby competitors who are transmitting.
  • The 2018 S2H SIs required a vessel's AIS to be transmitting 24/7 during the race, an indisputable fact.

WOXIs actions are understandable:

  • They didn't notice that for this year's race AIS must be on & transmitting 24/7.  Hard to imagine such rock stars would miss it, but they've been doing this race for years with AIS in working order and maybe just got in to their pre-race routine and shut off the transmitter. Not helpful was NOC #2 (copy below)  which states "it is recommended that their AIS be turned on",  not that "their AIS shall be turned on ", a curious recommendation, should the AIS be turned on and transmitting during the race.  I could have stumbled over that and assumed AIS on is not mandatory during the race.
  • BlackJack in a media interview pointed out that WOXI's AIS was off,   pointed out it put them at a disadvantage and stated they did not intend to protest.
  • A WOXI spokesman stated that "having the tracker on was not mandatory".  Obviously, if a YellowBrick tracker was supplied it must be turned on for the duration of the race, so he was recollecting the 2017 SIs which only referred to the AUS RRS of sailing which stated AIS must be onboard but not necessarily turned on (transmitting). 
  • He also stated "we could see each other during the race so no disadvantage for BlackJack."  Bullocks; they were at times 5+ miles apart so determining exact SOG & COG was impossible through binoculars.
  • Once the press informed all parties of the "AIS shall be on 24/7 during the race" SI WOXIs story turned into "we didn't know it wasn't transmitting, a camera guy fried it at the start", "fixed it when we got to the finishing line dock", an unlikely chain of events.
  • Then somehow the RC informed the PC of the situation which rightly  dismissed hearing the protest, no valid protest lodged by a competitor.

So what's the upshot?  WOXI's main competition pointed out WOXI's transgression, didn't protest at the earliest opportunity, announced they weren't going to protest upon finishing, case closed.  WOXI most probably turned off AIS transmissions because they missed the new 2018 SI rule about it, wise if they thought  it wasn't mandatory but dumb if they didn't read the SIs; anybody could have nailed them, but chose to decide it on the water.   Race over, WOXI got line honors. 

Wow, so many words "Me thinks the lady doth protestuth too much"

  • WOXI did not comply with the SIs
  • WOXI got the silver on a technicality
  • WOXI failed to withdraw from the event after they learned that they were non-compliant as is required,  the most basic rule in sailing.
BASIC PRINCIPLES
SPORTSMANSHIP AND THE RULES
Competitors in the sport of sailing are governed by a body of rules that they are expected to follow and enforce. A fundamental principle of sportsmanship is that when competitors break a rule they will promptly take a penalty, which may be to retire.

Can't get a more blatant breach than this.  Can't get a more blatant example of bad sportsmanship.

Fuck them I say.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole clusterfuck is another good example of trial by social media, like the Me Too stuff.

BJ owner has a whinge, media pick it up, BJ owner doesn’t protest, and Oats is fried in the court of public opinion.

A lesson for us all, don’t make a positive statement unless you have proof and are prepared to give evidence.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Not if AIS receive was still switched on, and you first became aware of the error after the declaration was submitted..

And take another step that it was turned off after the finish (likely).  Then they hear from someone on the dock that their transmissions were not received on the net (I put this in just to raise Random's blood pressure) or they were not transmitting and so they run back downstairs and switch AIS back on (the Cold Boot theory) - and up they come all fine on the net.  For all they knew or could test at that point it was working fine - not hard to make an "in compliance" post race report.

Share this post


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

Wow, so many words "Me thinks the lady doth protestuth too much"

  • WOXI did not comply with the SIs
  • WOXI got the silver on a technicality
  • WOXI failed to withdraw from the event after they learned that they were non-compliant as is required,  the most basic rule in sailing.
BASIC PRINCIPLES
SPORTSMANSHIP AND THE RULES
Competitors in the sport of sailing are governed by a body of rules that they are expected to follow and enforce. A fundamental principle of sportsmanship is that when competitors break a rule they will promptly take a penalty, which may be to retire.

Can't get a more blatant breach than this.  Can't get a more blatant example of bad sportsmanship.

Fuck them I say.

 

Guess what Wild Oats won Line Honors full stop, the history books will show Wild Oats 9th win

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Guess what Wild Oats won Line Honors full stop, the history books will show Wild Oats 9th win

Yes, and I bet they think it now was not worth it.

There is no excuse for being such a cunt that you break the most fundamental rule in the sport.

Share this post


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

I understand that this is case closed and time to move on.

 

I think not! More like this has the makings of becoming one of yacht racing's great all-time scandals.

One can but deliberate privately why the race organisers appeared so keen to "move on" in the face of what has been observed and reported, and did not feel obliged to determine for themselves if their quite high profile race has been fairly contested.

I am curious to see how the race will get reported in the sport's main monthly internationally circulated printed publications once their writers have had time to consider what has been going on down under. What will these publishers dare to print?

Share this post


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

Yes, and I bet they think it now was not worth it.

There is no excuse for being such a cunt that you break the most fundamental rule in the sport.

No one will remember in 10 years time, this just adds to the list of contention in Sydney to Hobart that dates back to the 60's

Share this post


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

Fuck them I say.

Every chance you get. Did MR cut your lunch at some point?

Share this post


Link to post