Grrr...

But in these monster cats, that's not really an option so you gotta stay ontop of the trim at a rate that is essentially impossible to do

 

Really?  Impossible?

 

Funny.  You better tell the sailors that, because I'm pretty sure that they've done it on 72's and their smaller cousins hundreds and hundreds of times.

 

Top Fuel dragsters are inherently unsafe.  Wingsuits are inherently unsafe.  Base jumping is inherently unsafe.  Hell, judging by the serious injuries that have been incurred, Football and Hockey are inherently unsafe too.  So is mountain climbing.  Yet people continue to perform all those unsafe activites because they love them.

 

Back to the original post, I agree sailing will never be mainstream.  That's no reason not to push as hard as we can to reach the technological pinnacle of the sport.  But an uninformed article by someone who is clearly trying to overstate the point using terms he doesn't fully understand is really pretty pointless.

Is this typical of a SA rant?  

 

Good to keep an eye on the facts:  The protest in question was filed by the Shields not by the boat that hit him.  The Shields was disqualified as a result of his own protest. 

 

The Shields (Mokey) appealed.  The questions for the group is what happened at the appeal and what was the basis of Mokey being disqualified.

 

My personal take on the situation was that the Shields tacked in front of Just Is and then steered erratically without making it clear which way Just Is should steer to clear them.  In addition, you can't just tack in front of someone and cause them to have to make an emergency maneuver to avoid you.  Remember, this is a GoPro camera and something that looks a long way in the distance might actually be very close.  It is not my intention to open a pissing match on the question of what we all think.  The question is what was the reason Mokey was disqualified and what happened to their subsequent appeal?  Apparently nobody knows so forgetaboutit (unless you know).

 

Allen

 

I think you need to reread your rules.

 

1.  The Shields has no obligation to steer any course at all.  As a boat clear ahead, you have no obligation to a boat astern.  In addition, should the boat behind gain overlap through their own actions (including going faster than you), they must give the boat formerly clear ahead time to keep clear - initially.

 

2.  The shields tack and completed that tack a metric mile away from the other boat.  There was no forced emergency maneuver.

 

The real problem was the driver of the filming boat.  He was spinning the wheel left and right with no clear idea of time or distance.  You can see his panic when he starts yelling about the boat to leeward.  The correct response, in this case, would have been to trim and go over the shields.  The difference in boatspeed would have made this whole incident moot.  The other option, if he really wanted to stay behind the shields, would have been to luff head to wind to stop, or blow both sails and stop.

 

The one things that is absolutely NOT an option is to spin the wheel back and forth, panic, then assrape a boat in front of you.  The helmsman's indecision caused that entire incident.

 

It's unfortunate the committee didn't watch the video.

 

That basic level of sailing is something that should be learned in dinghies, where colliding doesn't chance killing someone.

Good to see this bill go down.

 

For people like throatwarbler mangrove, I challenge you to actually learn about background checks and firearms.  There is no 'loophole' that the anti-gun lobby likes to go on about.

 

ALL gun dealers have to be licensed and handle background checks, even when they sell at gun shows.  The only time someone doesn't need a background check is when they are selling privately, person to person.

 

So this huge gun-show loophole people like to scream about is actually a contrivance of the anti-gun lobby.

 

Now, if you want to discuss private person-to-person sales requiring a background check, then you are, essentially, removing private sales all together.    The government would create a website (almost guaranteed) where you enter the individuals personal information to check their background.

 

What's that?  Not interested in giving another private individual your social security number and all identifying information?  Go figure.

 

You need to read between the media lines when they talk about this stuff.  But somehow, I don't think it would have mattered with you.  I suspect you'd be clapping at any restriction on firearms, regardless of the second amendment, which pretty much makes any rational discussion pointless.

That injury.  He'll never play again.  Coaches ate crying on the sidelines.

Also CBS announcers suck, something about going on about how great Florida is while they are getting out shot and hustled is irritating.

It was fairly disgusting today.  I particularly liked the graphic about how many leads Florida lost....... don't you actually have to lead at some point before you talk about that?

Michigan showed the ability to keep a lead, which was nice, but it was a sloppy game all around, and isn't a good indicator of how Michigan will play.  It did show how non representative Florida's weak schedule was.