Jump to content

Quagers

Members
  • Content Count

    430
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Quagers

  1. Yes, Someone has already posted a link to the NOR for one of them. https://www.rys.org.uk/assets/documents/nor-members-regatta-2019-v10.pdf So even if you buy the 'separate clubs' bullshit, its over anyway.
  2. Jeez, pass round what you are smoking please. If you tortured that interpretation anymore you'd be hauled in front of the Hague and hanged.
  3. Personally I think the majority of informed people will understand that just because the finishing port is different, doesn't negate the link to all that history. Which after all, is about the challenge, spirit, endeavour and competitive spirt of the competitors and the rounding of the rock itself. Its "The Fastnet Race" not the "Cowes to Plymouth via Ireland" race. If we adopt your interpretation then why limit it to the finish port? The "historic" fastnet didn't feature any boats with Carbon sails, autopilots, GPS, Weather GRIBS, Expedition, T-keels, or asymmetric kites. Are people on a
  4. Well not all of us can, given entires for that race are capped at 50. Good to see RWYC admitting that Plymouth doesn't have the capacity to accommodate a large fleet at the finish
  5. Jesus I've just seen that 'report', it doesn't sound like the author was even at the meeting. Prehaps they arent even a member. This group really is acting like children now, its a bit embarrassing. As should probably be obvious from the way its written, it bears little relation to the reality of what happened. At the end of the day, the RORC members don't agree with them, the people who actually do the race don't agree with them, and when entires open in Jan it'll sell out in minutes. Maybe its time to accept theirs is a minority view point and move on.
  6. Sounds like a great bunch of reasons to finish in Cherbourg. I agree. Fine, whatever, if they want to do that. No one sails RORCs Fastnet race because of one specific trophy avaliable to the winner.
  7. The idea that this is purely a money grab by RORC is, in my opinion, nonsense. As the commodores letter says, and I've personally experienced, Plymouth has been doing a disservice to finishers since the 2013 race. A tiny, poor, race village with limited facilities, in the middle of nowhere and without enough berths for the fleet. The race deserves better and will get better next year. Refusing to call the new race a Fastnet race is IMHO petty, RORC have been custodians of this race for almost 100 years and have undoubtedly made it what it is today. They absolutely have the right to d
  8. Frankly I think: 1) The commodore is right that Plymouth has been a shit finish since we got booted out of the town marina. 2) Like it or not, the French are a huge contributor to RORC racing and massive supporters of offshore racing. Undoubtedly the finish in Cherbourg will be better supported and better for competitors than Plymouth has been the last few additions. 3) The ACL's arguments are mostly poor: (i) the Fastnet is already full of tidal gates; (ii) Plymouth has paid to host sailing events before (notably the AC), so the suggestion that asking them do to better was alwa
  9. Getting into the finish line at Plymouth was always a massive tidal gate with fuck all wind so I don't see how this changes anything. Other than "don't change history" the arguments in the EGM letter were all extraordinary poor. I will be voting against them for their shitty attempt to invoke the memories of those lost in 79 for their own ends if nothing else.
  10. WHO Guidance on social distancing is 1m. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public The UK has adopted 2m where possible, 1m where not.
  11. Here is the RYA's Guidance on the matter, no mention of requiring facemasks for anyone other than those using coffee grinders. Everyone seemed to be being pretty responsible from what I saw. The wife of one of the guys in the North loft had COVID, so North pulled all their pros off boats until they'd had negative tests back. Crews were limited to 3 or 4, so well within the UK govt's guidelines for social interactions. A crew of 4 can sit inside facing each other round a pub table, but you are saying they can't sit outside side by side in 15knts of wind? I'm not sure I understand the compl
  12. Urm....not it can't. Except perhaps in some fairly limited circumstances (not sailing into a mark trap in front). It definitely does not include hitting back. From the rest of your post I think you have perhaps done fleet racing with rule 17 turned off. Because what you describe bears little relation to how R17 is applied in team racing (hint: There is no changes to R17, or alternative definitions of Proper Course, in Appendix D) No you can't. Not unless you have sailed past the layline for the windward mark. It doesn't in team racing either. This is not a common m
  13. This all sounds horribly complicated. Just delete the rule.
  14. We would still have R16.1, it sounds like the sort of thing you are suggesting would break that. But it has to be given time and space to do so under R16.1. So in practice any sharp quick luff which requires the downwind sails to be dropped will break it. Are we really expecting an outbreak of slow ponderous luffs which pause while windward drops its spinnaker in Fleet races if R17 is deleted? I'm not convinced.
  15. I'm not sure I understand your point here. If the idiot doesn't understand the rules, then the idiot doesn't know about R17, and so keeping R17 doesn't stop the idiot doing anything.
  16. But....why would anyone do this in a fleet race? As I said to Brass, all it does is guarantee you second last. Turning off R17 isn't suddenly going to make fleet race downwind legs like match races because the aims are completely different.
  17. Sure and I'm not saying it doesn't happen. But I'm not sure we need to keep the rule just to accommodate this idiot. Plenty of people likely to do this sort of nonsense won't even know about R17 anyway.
  18. Its also deleted for a lot of 2 boat team racing. However that is mostly done without kites. It makes no difference upwind. Downwind it very much changes the (team racing) game, gives the boat astern much more power and keeps races alive much longer than they would otherwise be. Personally I'd be in favour of binning it for fleet racing. No one knows the rule properly anyway, no one ever protests it successfully, and no one really uses it aggressively so I don't think it would make any difference. But why would you do that in a fleet race? It would just guarantee you second
  19. Sure yes, but the reference to forcing someone into the C boat suggests they are committed and tacking away isn't an option. In which case, you are only in the right if you don't alter course, and even then, you shouldn't force the collision.
  20. I sailed on a boat with a similar set up about 5 years ago, predominately Sym but we had a large A1 for light winds which we ran off the Sym pole set just above pulpit height, i was an absolute weapon and being able to pole it back gave us a lot of options. We were lucky to also have a short fixed sprit (for Code Zeros) so to gybe we: 1) eased off the guy and grind on the tack line to the fixed sprit 2) trip the pole and take the butt off the last (overlength pole) 3) gybe as normal Asym. 4) reattach pole to new guy, ease tackline to transfer over. Not the quickes
  21. I mean....in quite a few situations (most perhaps) you actually can't....... And in those that you can, you shouldn't. You should protest rather than force a collision.
  22. Their lawyers will probably tell them that since the race hasn't been run under the terms of the deed of gift for decades they have granted an implicit licence and RORC owe them butkiss. Also, licence what? My understanding is rorc own the rights to the name. And I doubt 99% of competitors care about a trophy they arent going to win anyway.
×
×
  • Create New...