Veeger

Barge much? (FP)

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, mad said:

That had potential to be a lot worse!

Absolutely, and it looks like they hardly realized it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As noted a couple of times, not a "barge," which rarely works, but a "charge" or "Vande-dance." which works rarely, even when limited boats...the phrase "bailed out" is apt, and so is idea that no one considered "avoidance..., so "screw 'em all! 

Share this post


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

Sry, being very pedantic, there's no definition for when a tack is complete, there is a rule relating  to tacking (or tacking and gybing in appdxC) which makes you keep clear until you are on a close hauled course (or you mainsail is full if gybing under appdxC).

The definition is very clear you change tack as soon as your windward side changes.

The shorthand description of completing a tack (or gybe) comes from the rule and is useful in describing situations, but there are times when it can confuse people if you are not careful.

Very pedantic indeed.

There may be no "definition" for when a tack is complete in the definitions section of the rules book. However as Rule 13 'defines' a boat as tacking and having to keep clear under that rule until on a close hauled course it is safe to say they are considered (or defined as) tacking under rule13 until that moment.

You are clearly confusing the verb and the noun. "A tack" (noun) and "to tack" (a verb).

I give up.

SS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, shanghaisailor said:

Very pedantic indeed.

There may be no "definition" for when a tack is complete in the definitions section of the rules book. However as Rule 13 'defines' a boat as tacking and having to keep clear under that rule until on a close hauled course it is safe to say they are considered (or defined as) tacking under rule13 until that moment.

You are clearly confusing the verb and the noun. "A tack" (noun) and "to tack" (a verb).

I give up.

SS

I think that the resolution to this disagreement/confusion can be found in the realization that a boat is _always_ on a tack - port or starboard...

there is no time - say, while tacking - that a boat is not on a tack..,

there is no "in between" moment.., where a boat is not either on port or starboard, but is tacking..., rather, the boat is always on either port or starboard.

This is clear from the wording of rule 13.., where it says that when 13 applies, 10 does not

so, when a boat tacks from port to starboard.., she is on port tack while she luffs up.., and is on starboard tack immediately after she passes head to wind - but.., even though she is on starboard tack.., rule 13 says she has to keep clear of a port tack boat until she has completed her tack

Share this post


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

Hey, it's racing. Relax. In the competition sometimes people push too far or misjudge. Have you never bumped your boom into someone else's shroud while dinghy racing?
Still a good sport, laughing at it with some consternation. On the other hand I also get rather upset in the moment, when someone fouls me. Sometimes I remember the event, especially if it was wilfull (see above).

One thing is pretty clear. If you mix those two "fleets," you increase the chances of this sort of thing happening. Having raced on the same line with 90 foot WL boats, I can tell you it is nerve wracking while also thrilling. As long as everyone puts collision avoidance first, it can work, but not if it is all-out racing behavior.

And we accept that when we race. That's why we have to have insurance to enter. That's why we sign waivers. If you go into a sailboat race with scales over your eyes well then!

Fastyacht - this is NOT racing ..this is blatant infringement by people who are well paid to know better. And they are repeat offenders. The result is that unless they are held fully accountable, people will choose not to race and our sport suffers.

You say you've raced on lines with 90 footers....well so have I...repeatedly with 100 footers...and I know that when you mix these monsters with smaller boats there has to be some serious thought given to safety, contingency and good seamanship. Often It means NOT pushing the limits, regardless of the rules being in your favour. But here's the thing...Scallywank is a repeat offender that ignores this premise and the result will be serious injury or lives lost. It'll happen quickly, and there'll be remorse..and it'll be too late.

This was not an "accident"...this incident was a wilful act resulting in serious contact. There were bail-out opportunities that were ignored by professional sailors in clear breach of well understood rules.

You say "We accept that when we race"...and you are wrong! We accept that there are rules to protect us and reasonable risk...Scallywank has demonstrated again an attitude that should see them brought before the authority with a "show cause" as to why they shouldn't be suspended from the sport.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though at fault, I’m giving Scally a pass on this one. (Assuming they own up to it). I’ve been through a similar scenario being the smaller boat in the lee of a monster. It never occurred to them our rig would pop upright in the wind shadow. We cut their jib in half, took out all of the Port lifelines, and punched a good hole in the side, all while being towed by the top of our mast. Sometimes shit happens. 

Share this post


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

Even though at fault, I’m giving Scally a pass on this one. (Assuming they own up to it). I’ve been through a similar scenario being the smaller boat in the lee of a monster. It never occurred to them our rig would pop upright in the wind shadow. We cut their jib in half, took out all of the Port lifelines, and punched a good hole in the side, all while being towed by the top of our mast. Sometimes shit happens. 

Care to name the monster so everybody else knows to stay the fuck away from them??  

This isnt fucking rocket science, are there  really that many big boat owners and crew this unaware? 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Couta said:

Fastyacht - this is NOT racing ..this is blatant infringement by people who are well paid to know better. And they are repeat offenders. The result is that unless they are held fully accountable, people will choose not to race and our sport suffers.

You say you've raced on lines with 90 footers....well so have I...repeatedly with 100 footers...and I know that when you mix these monsters with smaller boats there has to be some serious thought given to safety, contingency and good seamanship. Often It means NOT pushing the limits, regardless of the rules being in your favour. But here's the thing...Scallywank is a repeat offender that ignores this premise and the result will be serious injury or lives lost. It'll happen quickly, and there'll be remorse..and it'll be too late.

This was not an "accident"...this incident was a wilful act resulting in serious contact. There were bail-out opportunities that were ignored by professional sailors in clear breach of well understood rules.

You say "We accept that when we race"...and you are wrong! We accept that there are rules to protect us and reasonable risk...Scallywank has demonstrated again an attitude that should see them brought before the authority with a "show cause" as to why they shouldn't be suspended from the sport.

Wild Oats usually starts the S2H at the pin, away from the clusterfuck at the committee boat... Not always the best end but it is safer for everyone.

Share this post


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

Even though at fault, I’m giving Scally a pass on this one. (Assuming they own up to it). I’ve been through a similar scenario being the smaller boat in the lee of a monster. It never occurred to them our rig would pop upright in the wind shadow. We cut their jib in half, took out all of the Port lifelines, and punched a good hole in the side, all while being towed by the top of our mast. Sometimes shit happens. 

if i were in a charitable mood.., i might be tempted to agree..., except that the contact w the 52 occurred when they were breaking another rule.., by taking room to which they were not entitled...

so.., no.., they do not get a pass.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the comment a bit pendantic, but...and I had thoughts like Mad...

Spending racing, indeed, which could not do with or without moola...no fun.

Share this post


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

Wild Oats usually starts the S2H at the pin, away from the clusterfuck at the committee boat... Not always the best end but it is safer for everyone.

Oui, exactement!...

Share this post


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

Wild Oats usually starts the S2H at the pin, away from the clusterfuck at the committee boat... Not always the best end but it is safer for everyone.

Apart from that time they went spear fishing at the start a couple of years ago     :P

Share this post


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

Even though at fault, I’m giving Scally a pass on this one. (Assuming they own up to it). I’ve been through a similar scenario being the smaller boat in the lee of a monster. It never occurred to them our rig would pop upright in the wind shadow. We cut their jib in half, took out all of the Port lifelines, and punched a good hole in the side, all while being towed by the top of our mast. Sometimes shit happens. 

 I have yet to see any video of the incident that makes me think that Scallywag had any reasonable expectation of starting cleanly. There simply wasn't room between where the 52 was going to be at the start and the buoy for them. It isn't a simple case of the wind shadow causing the 52 to pop up and the rigs coming into contact. Scallwag absolutely was going to hit the 52 with hard hull to hull contact if the 52 didn't bear off to give room that Scallywag wasn't entitled to. 

At least a minute from the start and probably much earlier it should have been clear to Scallywag that they were not going to be room at the starting mark for them. This was the start of a round the island race against much slower boats. It was foolish tactically to try for that start. And by sticking to it when it was clear that it wasn't there, Scallywag endangered both property, but, more importantly, the crews' health and lives. These boats are too big and powerful to be playing bumper boats with. 

  • Like 9
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amusingly enough, I had this drop into my email inbox this evening. This is a new normal for Scally? You might very well think that, I couldn't possibly comment...

Norths.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The TP52 "Conviction" as leeward boat had the right to call Scallywag up, having done that they are then required to give Scallywag room and opportunity.

Any helmsman who has sailed in fleets with dissimilar LOA yachts should know that once you've made the call for a much longer boat to luff, you MUST give them a lot more room than your boat would require to do so. Did Scallywag attempt to luff? She may have wanted to but could not turn up due the reduced room necessary. A 100ft LOA yacht when it turns slowly needs a MINIMUM 25ft clear space to leeward, a hard turn requires at least 50 feet.

Conviction does not appear to have provided room after calling for Scallywag to luff.

Conviction DSQ for not providing room, and not avoiding the collision which Conviction had every opportunity to do.

She should have called for the luff, held her course and waited for Scallywag's helm response, if it didn't happen immediately, stay clear and protest.

  • Downvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bill E Goat said:

From their Facebook page comments

image.png.379bfcc6b0e3c506ddcc857dc1ba6457.png

Very good of David to do this.

He could (and maybe should) have waited for the Protest Hearing outcome. Yes, Scallywag barged, but Conviction only needed to call, hold course, and protest, instead she increased the risk of collision initially with her mast tip ripping Scallywags mainsail.

I take my hat off to David Witt, a very gentlemanly response. 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


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

The TP52 "Conviction" as leeward boat had the right to call Scallywag up, having done that they are then required to give Scallywag room and opportunity.

Any helmsman who has sailed in fleets with dissimilar LOA yachts should know that once you've made the call for a much longer boat to luff, you MUST give them a lot more room than your boat would require to do so. Did Scallywag attempt to luff? She may have wanted to but could not turn up due the reduced room necessary. A 100ft LOA yacht when it turns slowly needs a MINIMUM 25ft clear space to leeward, a hard turn requires at least 50 feet.

Conviction does not appear to have provided room after calling for Scallywag to luff.

Conviction DSQ for not providing room, and not avoiding the collision which Conviction had every opportunity to do.

She should have called for the luff, held her course and waited for Scallywag's helm response, if it didn't happen immediately, stay clear and protest.

 

watch the video...

the TP52 does not luff Scallywag

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, us7070 said:

 

watch the video...

the TP52 does not luff Scallywag

I had not seen the video from onboard Conviction. I stand corrected.

It appears from Conviction's onboard that they did in fact hold course, then attempt to avoid.

In which case David Witt's acceptance of fault and personal apology to the Conviction crew, shows genuine remorse and was indeed the gentlemanly action to take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Don said:

I had not seen the video from onboard Conviction. I stand corrected.

It appears from Conviction's onboard that they did in fact hold course, then attempt to avoid.

In which case David Witt's acceptance of fault and personal apology to the Conviction crew, shows genuine remorse and was indeed the gentlemanly action to take.

Don, this isn't any weekend warrior barging at the start of a "wednesday wonder"...these are highly paid sailing professionals who wilfully put others at risk.....apologies don't cut it. Sanctions are required...but sadly won't happen

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got a particularly well timed email from Norths this morning head line. "A new normal for Scallywag" It certainly is normal for Scallywag, but not sure its new. Witt has been a dangerous idiot for as long as I can remember.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

wilfully put others at risk.

i think they just fucked up - it happens.., i will give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they did not deliberately put other at risk

but it was dangerous - the 52 could easily have lost the rig.., and when it got yanked and spun, someone could easily have been thrown into something, hard or gone off the boat.

Share this post


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

I had not seen the video from onboard Conviction. I stand corrected.

It appears from Conviction's onboard that they did in fact hold course, then attempt to avoid.

In which case David Witt's acceptance of fault and personal apology to the Conviction crew, shows genuine remorse and was indeed the gentlemanly action to take.

You could see everything in the first video.

You are a complete fucking idiot and a super troll.

Into my asylum collection you go, you will make new friends there.

mental-asylums-chair-straps.thumb.jpg.9d28f73a1e454d6cf5e91ae4b37bf869.jpg

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Don, this isn't any weekend warrior barging at the start of a "wednesday wonder"...these are highly paid sailing professionals who wilfully put others at risk.....apologies don't cut it. Sanctions are required...but sadly won't happen

Sanctions??? Wow, slightly massive overreaction perhaps.

They fucked up, have admitted it and appear to be offering to pay for the damage. Seems like the right thing to do.

Saying this was wilful and thus intentional seems like perhaps you have an axe to grind.

Its racing, not every mistake means that they  are attempting to kill the opposition.

Geez, have a lie down for a while

Share this post


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

You could see everything in the first video.

You are a complete fucking idiot and a super troll.

Into my asylum collection you go, you will make new friends there.

mental-asylums-chair-straps.thumb.jpg.9d28f73a1e454d6cf5e91ae4b37bf869.jpg

 

That's exactly how I look after an hour in PA. I think it may be bad for my health.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Sanctions??? Wow, slightly massive overreaction perhaps.

They fucked up, have admitted it and appear to be offering to pay for the damage. Seems like the right thing to do.

Saying this was wilful and thus intentional seems like perhaps you have an axe to grind.

Its racing, not every mistake means that they  are attempting to kill the opposition.

Geez, have a lie down for a while

Yes anyone who races and claims never to have fucked up is a liar. If this was a one off event, then I would agree, but there appears a pattern of behaviour of wilful disregard for the consequences of his actions. Admitting fault is laudable, but a professional sailor should not get himself into so many dangerous situations, not everything can be cured with cash. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 10:52 AM, Cement_Shoes said:

Even minus the contact it appeared that Scallywag committed a foul with that start. What were they thinking? There was no reason to be that aggressive at the start. There was literally no competition to keep them from getting off the line cleanly and being able to do whatever they wanted to do tactically in 2 minutes no matter where on the line they started.  "Don't be early, don't barge," were their only two concerns. Yet, they only managed to get it 50% right.

Thus further justifying his often applied nickname: Half-Witt!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2019 at 3:03 PM, Veeger said:

No worries!  I've raced my last some time ago.  Mostly due to idiots and assholes like are represented in this video.  Pracitically speaking however, one of the reasons that boats have luffing rights is, in part, due to the fact that the boat being luffed up is essentially 'overtaking'.  There is a certain symmetry to the rules. (but some more nuances as well)

Maybe you not knowing the rules hastened the end of your racing career?  Just wondering?  

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what i'm wondering is WHY he/they found the start so important to risk themselves and the other boats. maybe something with higher stakes, but a start with a few 50 footers in a feeder type race? really? that was stupid.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, us7070 said:

I think that the resolution to this disagreement/confusion can be found in the realization that a boat is _always_ on a tack - port or starboard...

there is no time - say, while tacking - that a boat is not on a tack..,

there is no "in between" moment.., where a boat is not either on port or starboard, but is tacking..., rather, the boat is always on either port or starboard.

This is clear from the wording of rule 13.., where it says that when 13 applies, 10 does not

so, when a boat tacks from port to starboard.., she is on port tack while she luffs up.., and is on starboard tack immediately after she passes head to wind - but.., even though she is on starboard tack.., rule 13 says she has to keep clear of a port tack boat until she has completed her tack

What disagreement/confusion? I'm not

 

1 hour ago, Bill E Goat said:

From their Facebook page comments

image.png.379bfcc6b0e3c506ddcc857dc1ba6457.png

 

3 minutes ago, stufishing said:

Sanctions??? Wow, slightly massive overreaction perhaps.

They fucked up, have admitted it and appear to be offering to pay for the damage. Seems like the right thing to do.

Saying this was wilful and thus intentional seems like perhaps you have an axe to grind.

Its racing, not every mistake means that they  are attempting to kill the opposition.

Geez, have a lie down for a while

I am not in the least bit surprised by Witty owning up and paying up. David may push it a bit and get it spectacularly right or spectacularly wrong and most certainly NOT evil.

When you get to know him a bit he's an alright guy and his 'rushes of blood' perhaps come from his dinghy sailing days (Sydney Harbour 18s). 

At least he admitted his error when getting into another boat's water without being dragged to the 'room' unlike at least one other 100 footer skipper. 

I bumped into him initially in Hong Kong right after his VOR leg win and when I introduced myself he clocked I had written a few 'direct' things about him on the FP, I told him if he didn't do those things I couldn't write about those things - he smiled.

The next day our paths crossed again, I got a huge cheery wave accompanied by "How's it going Shang?" I love people who don't hold a grudge.

He is definitely NOT the bad bastard some people try to paint him as. That reminds me, I owe him an interview.

He shouldn't have gone in there, the collision to leeward and the buoy to windward certainly proved that but c'mon?

I remember James Hunt back in the day in motor racing Formula One - Hunt the Shunt they called him he had crashed so many times often taking out others with him  - nobody vilified him to this sort of degree. 

That said, if Witty ever manages to 'tone it down a bit' I am sure he would be much more respected as a sailor.

Just speaking my mind.

SS

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if you put Julian Bethwaite at the helm of that beast, if his 18 footer beast mode would lead him to do dumb things. Something tells me probably not so much.

Share this post


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

...they are then required to give Scallywag room and opportunity...

why do people keep using this phrase? was it in some rule book back in the mast abeam days? 

didn’t look to me like the TP altered course... looked like they gained their leeward boat rights by Scallywag’s actions meaning they had no obligation to ‘initially give the other boat room to keep clear’ (oh hey, that language really IS in the rule book!)

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

why do people keep using this phrase? was it in some rule book back in the mast abeam days? 

didn’t look to me like the TP altered course... looked like they gained their leeward boat rights by Scallywag’s actions meaning they had no obligation to ‘initially give the other boat room to keep clear’ (oh hey, that language really IS in the rule book!)

 

Yep, it was.  Along with words like "barging", which popped up earlier in this thread.   Dick Rose, et al got rid of most of those old clumsy phrases, but he couldn't rewire old sailors brains at the same time.  Twenty years or more years later you still hear them out on the course.  And in SA threads.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DFL1010 said:

Amusingly enough, I had this drop into my email inbox this evening. This is a new normal for Scally? You might very well think that, I couldn't possibly comment...

Norths.PNG

I thought that was pretty funny! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DFL1010 said:

Amusingly enough, I had this drop into my email inbox this evening. This is a new normal for Scally? You might very well think that, I couldn't possibly comment...

Norths.PNG

Well the mainsail potential got “fully unzipped “

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 7:48 AM, Veeger said:

Didn't say it was a racing rule.  Since when do the RRS excuse one from the normal Rules of the Road?  Most RRS specify nuances for racers  in specific circumstances but don't truly change the responsibility to follow the Rules of the Road, Rule 13 in this case..  Please feel free to correct me if they also 'excuse' one from the normal rules of the road.

Since 1894. "The Satanita".

Share this post


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

why do people keep using this phrase? was it in some rule book back in the mast abeam days? 

didn’t look to me like the TP altered course... looked like they gained their leeward boat rights by Scallywag’s actions meaning they had no obligation to ‘initially give the other boat room to keep clear’ (oh hey, that language really IS in the rule book!)

 

not only that - people need to read rule 15

 

Share this post


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

Was Witty driving or on-board? 

For the less well informed, the monkey is David Witt. Should be put back in the zoo...

19 hours ago, Fiji Bitter said:

The organ grinder was definitely not steering himself, he would not have fucked up that badly. In one of the Volvo in-shores he proofed to be a pretty decent helmsman actually. Did not see him on board in any of the shots either.

Neither was the monkey steering, he was sitting on his arse, jumping up to look at the carnage under the boom.

That leaves a nervously steering baboon on the helm, who was that hotfuck, Mr Lee's son perhaps?

(There was no crew list for Scaly on the web site, like for some of the others.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 1:30 AM, Rushman said:

Looks like a pretty good time on distance start for the movable wind shadow

Shame that they forgot to leave enough distance to the TP which heeled to windward when they lost their wind!  Lucky the TP didn't lose their mast

It is not just in the boat park rigging your dinghy that you must look up.  Powerlines and mast head wind instruments can both ruin your day... One can be fatal!

Mast still up or no, I'll suggest that's a moderate 5 figure sum for the TP to: Pull the mast, get it NDTed, replace all (hi tech) standing rigging as a matter of course, probably just buff up the windex ;-)

Share this post


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

At least a minute from the start and probably much earlier it should have been clear to Scallywag that they were not going to be room at the starting mark for them. 

Not necessarily. If the other three looked early its not impossible they would have needed to bear away down the line which would have created room. There was loads of room to leeward. Not like a crowded dinghy start. Not an excuse of course.

Share this post


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

Was Witty driving or on-board? 

I dont think we know do we?

Will we see Witt get the flick after this??

Anyone got any more news on it, or are we happy to just keep running through the same old?

Share this post


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

Not necessarily. If the other three looked early its not impossible they would have needed to bear away down the line which would have created room. There was loads of room to leeward. Not like a crowded dinghy start. Not an excuse of course.

I assume you would do that? If you were setup nicely to win the pin?

Share this post


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

Yep, it was.  Along with words like "barging", which popped up earlier in this thread.   Dick Rose, et al got rid of most of those old clumsy phrases, but he couldn't rewire old sailors brains at the same time.  Twenty years or more years later you still hear them out on the course.  And in SA threads.  

So, you go to the bar after a race, and say "by golly, Mr David Witt breached rule 17 section C, rule 69 and most importantly the Suda rule. That was jolly naughty of him."

Or you say "the fucking arsehole was barging and we luffed him to God."

My brain may be cross wired, but you are brain dead it seems.

 

Racing Rules of Sailing, Rules Seminar 2017-2020

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://sscbc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Rules-seminar.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwja6su45fThAhVSfSsKHVLDAHEQFjARegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw1QZZ9uH6AS9GZEv-DNd1zc

With the preamble of Section C, we now have all of the ingredients to 
define Barging:
Proper Course - A boat has no proper course before her start 
signal.
Rule 17 – On The Same Tack; Proper Course
Section C With the preamble of Section C, we now have all of the ingredients to 
define Barging:
Proper Course - A boat has no proper course before her start 
signal.
Rule 17 – On The Same Tack; Proper Course
Section C Preamble – No mark room while boats are approaching 
starting marks surrounded by navigable water to start.Preamble – No mark room while boats are approaching 
starting marks surrounded by navigable water to start.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Even though at fault, I’m giving Scally a pass on this one. (Assuming they own up to it). I’ve been through a similar scenario being the smaller boat in the lee of a monster. It never occurred to them our rig would pop upright in the wind shadow. We cut their jib in half, took out all of the Port lifelines, and punched a good hole in the side, all while being towed by the top of our mast. Sometimes shit happens. 

Uh, if you took out all their port lifelines, that's a little bit more than a 'pop up''.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

I assume you would do that? If you were setup nicely to win the pin?

If I have the choice between "winning the pin" starting at half speed and in a cluster of boats, or slipping 25yards down the line and starting at full speed and clear air, I know which one I'll pick. However as they all ended up late anyway its beside the point.

Share this post


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

If I have the choice between "winning the pin" starting at half speed and in a cluster of boats, or slipping 25yards down the line and starting at full speed and clear air, I know which one I'll pick. However as they all ended up late anyway its beside the point.

It seems the cluster fuck of boats kept together so at that point if you could have held your lane off the start you would have been ok. This would have been even easier if the 100ft super maxi decided to take its avoiding action.

The TP52 was doing just fine and probably expected a pro boat to solve the problem they were in suitably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

I dont think we know do we?

I'm giving up.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, us7070 said:

if i were in a charitable mood.., i might be tempted to agree..., except that the contact w the 52 occurred when they were breaking another rule.., by taking room to which they were not entitled...

so.., no.., they do not get a pass.

Shit, I missed that part. You’re right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bill E Goat said:

From their Facebook page comments

image.png.379bfcc6b0e3c506ddcc857dc1ba6457.png

Is he paying for a new maxi 100 mainsail out of his own pocket as well? :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When there are professionals...(that's people being well paid for their sailing expertise)...involved in wilful dereliction of duty to keep clear of a right of way boat (they always had the opportunity to bail out above the mark, but chose not to) , with potential life threatening consequences, I believe sanctions are applicable. By definition, professionals should and do know better. In motor sport (quoted upthread) dangerous drivers are heavily fined or suspended.....and yes, I've been a sailing professional and I expect to be held to a higher standard. 

Oh...and yes I had a serious spinal injury that broke 5 vertebrae and took me out of action for a year (very nearly killed me) - the result of a sports boat racing collision where a competitor on another boat made a mistake that nearly killed a crew member, and could have crippled me ( I was lucky!) And despite the seriousness for me, I didn't sue anyone because I accept risks and it was an unintentional error, not a deliberate action. I'd have a very different view of this incident if injury occurred.

Anyway, my view has been stated and I'll stand by it. As for the Scallywank apologists - Too many excuses, too many armchair admirals, too little rules knowledge & too little common sense....

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

Is he paying for a new maxi 100 mainsail out of his own pocket as well? :huh:

Doubt he would have fleeced the owner for enough to cover that yet.

Share this post


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

Sanctions??? Wow, slightly massive overreaction perhaps.

They fucked up, have admitted it and appear to be offering to pay for the damage. Seems like the right thing to do.

Saying this was wilful and thus intentional seems like perhaps you have an axe to grind.

Its racing, not every mistake means that they  are attempting to kill the opposition.

Geez, have a lie down for a while

Well they didn't find themselves there by accident. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus, tough crowd. I've been there, and squeezed out of it, and bailed out, and hit the committee boat. All fuck ups, all taken responsibility for, all part of racing. He's apologised and taken responsibility, seems fair enough to me. 

Share this post


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

Is he paying for a new maxi 100 mainsail out of his own pocket as well? :huh:

If it is 3Di (as I think it is)  you would be amazed at some of the invisible mending North can do :-)

As it is apparently new last season and not terribly high mileage they might get away with it.

 

Share this post


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

why do people keep using this phrase? was it in some rule book back in the mast abeam days? 

didn’t look to me like the TP altered course... looked like they gained their leeward boat rights by Scallywag’s actions meaning they had no obligation to ‘initially give the other boat room to keep clear’ (oh hey, that language really IS in the rule book!)

 

And use 15 carefully because you would be surprised how short a time span "initially" actually is. It is measured in seconds and not a lot of them either.

Share this post


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

Well they didn't find themselves there by accident. :)

And I would imagine it spoiled the TP's day's racing too don't you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, shanghaisailor said:

Very pedantic indeed.

There may be no "definition" for when a tack is complete in the definitions section of the rules book. However as Rule 13 'defines' a boat as tacking and having to keep clear under that rule until on a close hauled course it is safe to say they are considered (or defined as) tacking under rule13 until that moment.

You are clearly confusing the verb and the noun. "A tack" (noun) and "to tack" (a verb).

I give up.

SS

No I wasn't.

I was being pedantic about the use of definition in the context of the RRS,  and then trying to indicate why i felt that it was important to only call things definitions when they are actually in the definitions section of the RRS.

The primary reason for being pedantic in this context I felt was to avoid misunderstandings between the verb and the noun.

Being less pedantic, a part of this is that I truly feel that R13 doesn't define a boat as tacking, it points out when during a tack a boat has to keep clear, and its only for a part of that process. When training crew do you tell them the tack is finished once you get to close hauled, or do you tell them that its finished when you are back up to speed at full trim?

I apologize for my poor explanation the first time, and hope that this one gets my point across better.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

And I would imagine it spoiled the TP's day's racing too don't you think?

Dear mr. @shanghaisailor, I do believe they managed to take victory in that race:

Looks scary and not an awful lot of fun. Not sure I would have happily continued for a round the island race.

Share this post


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

No I wasn't.

I was being pedantic about the use of definition in the context of the RRS,  and then trying to indicate why i felt that it was important to only call things definitions when they are actually in the definitions section of the RRS.

The primary reason for being pedantic in this context I felt was to avoid misunderstandings between the verb and the gerund. (since I'm still within the 'pedantic mode, the noun tack refers to a specific part of a sail.)

Being less pedantic, a part of this is that I truly feel that R13 doesn't define a boat as tacking, it points out when during a tack a boat has to keep clear, and its only for a part of that process. When training crew do you tell them the tack is finished once you get to close hauled, or do you tell them that its finished when you are back up to speed at full trim?

I apologize for my poor explanation the first time, and hope that this one gets my point across better.

Quite clearly a boat's obligations "while tacking" are to keep clear until on a close hauled course then the "tack" (not the participle in front of the word tack designating it as a noun).

The efficiency or otherwise of crew member(s) in settling the boat down (grinding in in the sheet and getting the boat level and properly trimmed after the tack is complete as per the rules (on a close hauled course) and the rate the boat accelerates once the tack is complete  (NOTE - "Complete") is NOT part of the tack according to the rules although I would admit it part  of the overall evolution and therefore part of the tactical  decisions to be made when deciding whether to tack (now that one is a verb - notice to "to" in front) or not.

Sorry, I am not deliberately tacking (sorry taking) the mickey but if you tack your boat and go down to a close hauled course and pull in no sheets at all and are stationary you have, according to Rule 13,  "completed your tack".

Anyway I need to eat.

Might I suggest a very good book published by Fernhurst (no, I am not on a commission) written by Bryan Willis who knows more about the rules than just about  anyone (including God). It is called "The Rules in Practice" It is a penny short of 17 quid or 28 bucks in Evanston and even includes the full set of rules in the back so you don't even have to buy a separate rule book

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Dear mr. @shanghaisailor, I do believe they managed to take victory in that race:

Looks scary and not an awful lot of fun. Not sure I would have happily continued for a round the island race.

Wow -good recovery AND I agree, brave racing after the rig was mauled like that. Not sure I would have continued without a thorough check of the mast and rigging.

I take my comment back then.

Share this post


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

 

Sorry, I am not deliberately tacking (sorry taking) the mickey but if you tack your boat and go down to a close hauled course and pull in no sheets at all and are stationary you have, according to Rule 13,  "completed your tack".

 

Thank you, that's a very nice explanation. And it makes sense - this is the only fair way to rule. Otherwise, it will be endless debates on whether you were finished trimming to the new course. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, shanghaisailor said:

And I would imagine it spoiled the TP's day's racing too don't you think?

Thanks for pointing out the blindingly obvious.

Share this post


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

Wow -good recovery AND I agree, brave racing after the rig was mauled like that. Not sure I would have continued without a thorough check of the mast and rigging.

I take my comment back then.

That's the great thing about charter boats...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some pro should have been at least demoted there!  Had the same situation a few years ago at a CRW race.  Sailing a 26 ft boat in heavy wind/seas and a big 50 footer come charging at us sailing about 5-10 degrees lower.  WON'T come up or respond to UP!!!! hails.  I'm not going to allow contact, but after thinking about us standing up when he blankets us and our rig gets into his rig I simply bear away and protest.  He takes 30% in arbitration, but to this day still doesn't think he did anything wrong.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big boat was wrong, we all know this. One could argue that this whole thing could have been prevented by having that big boat have it's own start 5 minutes later or 5 minutes before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a Pro doesn't make you immune to mistakes. Witty made a mistake, acknowledged it, apologised and says he'll put it right.

None one of you fuckers winging has never made a mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2019 at 5:45 PM, fastyacht said:

Reading some comments here, I'm glad we have protest committees.

 

Reading some comments here, it's not surprising that you can never tell what result you'll get from a protest committee...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THE BAD LUCK  CONTINUES  -

Laughter round the bar with that explanation

Why suprised ?? Scallywank is continung its inglorius record .The ego of wittless and the squeezes PR  machine continues to amaze one must wonder if he;s on something [ maybe its in the scrotum cream he uses ?] A world class starting helmsman ?? or a bully ? Just how many races has Witty won or even finished since the new owner took on Syd Fischers  Ragamuffin and then spent millions on an upgrade   [ pity about the bow though]

one day soon  mr lee the organ grinder is going to get sick of feeding the millions of bananas [ rumored to be $+5 mill ] to team scally dragon and co and wonder  why his investment in boats  : no hobart wins in 3 ; last in the volvo ; pulled out of HK - VIETNAM as beau geste hosed them ; had to pull the hk to san fernando or be 69'd ; came 5th in st barts and now ripped the brand new main and blew his chances of ever winning Antigua race week .........

Compare this shambles with Hong Kong's best yachtsman Karl Kwoks  Gavin Bradys managed Beau Geste Program  and you can see the difference . one wonders when the tyro will  wake up that Witty's snowing him  literally and figuratively 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony machine is hard at work as this hit my inbox yesterday:

image.thumb.png.f06ce1acf5f92da05d66d2db18e39b59.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Rushman said:

Wild Oats usually starts the S2H at the pin, away from the clusterfuck at the committee boat... Not always the best end but it is safer for everyone.

Oui, exactament!...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 6:07 AM, shanghaisailor said:

Actually no - it's the rule. If you look at the definitions (they are right at the start of the rule book and all the rules "hang off them".

Under the definition "Leeward & Windward" it states "her leeward side is the side on which the mainsail lies". Then when you couple that with the definition for "Tack" it states that a boats tack is "corresponding to her windward side" which is of course the side OPPOSITE "the side on which the mainsail lies".

 And of course that is the level of detail judges in the room or umpires on the race course have to get down to define, what are sometimes, tricky situations.

When I run any rules training sessions the definitions are what I always cover first because as the name suggests they DEFINE the Racing Rules of Sailing.

It may sound like horseshittery but they are the rules and as Rule 3.1 states all of us who go yacht racing agree to be bound by those rules.

And some people think being an umpire is easy - ha!

See you on the water - I will be the one with the flags :-)

SS

SS...I believe there is (or was in older rule sets) about this exact situation.  Where a boat "artificially" held their sail against the natural flow and claimed stbd rights.  I believe this was done with a preventer line and the vang, and that it was not just sailing by the lee but physically preventing the sail from moving.  My recollection of this was that this method was considered illegal in achieving rights, and that the boat who was claiming to be on starboard was found to be on port.  The reasoning was simple, that while the mainsail position defines the tack, the main cannot be artificially positioned against the natural lie of the sail.  Other boats cannot expect this and anticipate the "actual" point of sail, creating a situation where boats cannot keep clear of the other boat.  Essentially...you could get into a position where you cannot get out of the way of the boat who is now claiming rights over you.

Again, if I remember correctly, the reasoning was that this broke the fairness rule and that was the primary reason that this was illegal.

They specifically stated that it was ok to hold the boom to "prevent" gybing early, or to sail deep by the lee.  Those were valid tactical and sailing methods.  But to physically restrain the main well past this position was deemed to be a problem.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Complicated rules are flotsam, simple rules are jetsam, I quit the drudgery long ago and sailing has become what attracted me to it...majestic...again. Of course, back when sailing rules were simple, no one had the termerity to even try to make a living sailing; it was done for it's own sake...

Share this post


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

Thank you, that's a very nice explanation. And it makes sense - this is the only fair way to rule. Otherwise, it will be endless debates on whether you were finished trimming to the new course. 

Nevertheless, you would be amazed how this exact scenario plays out in high school and collegiate sailing on occasion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, theworm13 said:

SS...I believe there is (or was in older rule sets) about this exact situation.  Where a boat "artificially" held their sail against the natural flow and claimed stbd rights.  I believe this was done with a preventer line and the vang, and that it was not just sailing by the lee but physically preventing the sail from moving.  My recollection of this was that this method was considered illegal in achieving rights, and that the boat who was claiming to be on starboard was found to be on port.  The reasoning was simple, that while the mainsail position defines the tack, the main cannot be artificially positioned against the natural lie of the sail.  Other boats cannot expect this and anticipate the "actual" point of sail, creating a situation where boats cannot keep clear of the other boat.  Essentially...you could get into a position where you cannot get out of the way of the boat who is now claiming rights over you.

Again, if I remember correctly, the reasoning was that this broke the fairness rule and that was the primary reason that this was illegal.

They specifically stated that it was ok to hold the boom to "prevent" gybing early, or to sail deep by the lee.  Those were valid tactical and sailing methods.  But to physically restrain the main well past this position was deemed to be a problem.

 

It's too bad I didn't properly and clearly phrase my original post on that topic because that is exactly what happened--with the refinement that in fact the sail was filled on port gybe with the boom held against it. It was really quite shocking to watch. The best part was who was in charge when it happened. Nice guy but he was in a competitive mood. It is racing, after all.

Share this post


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

It's too bad I didn't properly and clearly phrase my original post on that topic because that is exactly what happened. It was really quite shocking to watch. The best part was who was in charge when it happened. Nice guy but he was in a competitive mood. It is racing, after all.

The difficulty is determining the difference between holding the main to prevent it from gybing (when sailing deep by the lee), vs physically restraining the boom from moving even though the main has actually filled on the other gybe.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, theworm13 said:

The difficulty is determining the difference between holding the main to prevent it from gybing (when sailing deep by the lee), vs physically restraining the boom from moving even though the main has actually filled on the other gybe.  

 

Well when a boat has already gybed to port and then they hold the boom up afterwards, it is pretty clear.

Share this post


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

 It is racing, after all.

Perhaps for the pros.  For the recreational sailer who wants to have a friendly competition on the merits of one's boat or skills, (such as they may be), I find that having the potential of thousands of dollars in repairs because '...it's racing, after all', is outside most folks range of desires.  My thoughts keep coming back to those 'other' threads about 'saving sailing' and 'what can we do to improve participation' and conclude that it's a hopeless disconnect...

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Sorry, I am not deliberately tacking (sorry taking) the mickey but if you tack your boat and go down to a close hauled course and pull in no sheets at all and are stationary you have, according to Rule 13,  "completed your tack".

I'm still clearly not explaining myself well enough. I understand the obligations and how the rule works.

I did not like your misuse of the term definition, when applied to something that wasn't a definition.

This example is perfect in this context. Personally I think any time you have to say 'according to the rules' you have done X, you are immediately implying that according to the common use of the term you have not. I do like the shorthand of 'completed your tack' but there are situations where it can be confusing.

I prefer:

-while tacking you have to keep clear once you pass head to wind until you reach a close hauled course

to:

-while tacking you have to keep clear, and under the rules you are tacking from when you pass head to wind until you reach a close hauled course.

To me the first is less likely to provoke confusion in the 'slack sheets' situation for example, because you separate the concept of 'tacking' which we all understand in a certain way, with the obligations under the rules, which have well defined start and end points.... (which don't actually coincide with the start and end of the tack when we teach people to tack. )

When discussing with people who know the rules the shorthand is effective and clear, but when people don't understand the rules it can lead to confusion.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, pudge said:

Once an asshole, always an asshole.

But once a night is quite enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I want to know is why a Zinga crew member decided to run to leeward to get a better view of their rig that could fall on him???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, bigrpowr said:

what i'm wondering is WHY he/they found the start so important to risk themselves and the other boats. maybe something with higher stakes, but a start with a few 50 footers in a feeder type race? really? that was stupid.

THIS.......really, wtf....only a couple boats, all massively smaller than you, go below them and blow through. Out the other side in seconds.

If you own a boat this big, you should be fully aware of the limits and complications you could have messing with the "little" big boats.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Thanks for pointing out the blindingly obvious.

and yet he was wrong. 

In a way it might have made their day. Not only did they win the race on handicap, they got an unexpected line honours win.

Share this post


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

Being a Pro doesn't make you immune to mistakes. Witty made a mistake, acknowledged it, apologised and says he'll put it right.

None one o