Jump to content

TJSoCal

Members
  • Content Count

    924
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TJSoCal

  1. And I think the reason calling OCS is a RC function (I'm not sure I'd call it a "problem") is that RC views the line from a much better perspective than any competitor. I don't think eliminating the RC responsibility and asking competitors to call their own OCS and/or protest anyone else they think is OCS would make for better, fairer racing. In this particular instance it seems clear that RC made an error that unfairly impacted scores. Abandoning the race might also have unfairly impacted other boats so I think the redress given does represent the fairest result possible for all b
  2. What makes you think that? OP sounded to me like the X flag person was asleep at the switch. If the flag is late then even if the OCS competitor had seen it and restarted their score would still have arguably been made worse by an error of the RC and they'd have been entitled to redress. From my reading of the race policy if an X flag goes up, even if late, RC can't subsequently call a general recall. So what - abandon the race because of a late flag? And I think we're all in agreement that if the competitor knew they were OCS they should have called themselves. One would hope
  3. What standard of proof do you apply though? If you don't know beyond reasonable doubt that you're clean you take a penalty? Or conversely if you don't know beyond reasonable doubt that you broke a rule (as in there's a signal from the RC or someone protests you) then you're clean? I expect most use a "preponderance of evidence" (more likely than not) standard and that seems to me to fit the spirit of good sportsmanship. Not having seen all the evidence (and assuming the OCS was close, not blatant) I tend to agree with this ruling. Making a boat go back and restart in a high level o
  4. Not necessarily. They could intend to protest at the time they hailed but later change their minds. But I'm not saying my scenario should be be protestable either.
  5. Playing devil's advocate, a boat that intends to protest but fails to properly inform the other boat has broken a rule. Impulse, intending to protest (as proved by the fact that she did file a protest), did not display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity (per the appeal decision) breaking rule 61.1(a). Does good sportsmanship require that she retire? Could she be protested by another boat observing that she was late displaying her flag?
  6. You're not going to win that one -- COLREGS are less forgiving about collision than RRS are about contact. No Rule 14 exoneration just because you're stand-on vessel.
  7. I can't find a direct reference but I seem to recall from my training that the diagram that is endorsed by the PC ranks as a fact found. And given that protestors and protestees typically provide crappy diagrams (like, for example, showing the wrong wind direction or showing both boats' initial positions on the same side of the line when one of them was OCS) it's common practice for the PC to prepare its own diagram based on the testimony of both parties and witnesses, which this PC declined to do. And neither the protestor nor the PC has recorded what tack either boat was on at any point in t
  8. I think there are facts to support rule 22, if we assume the following are in chronological order: I bore away to gybe & return to start I crossed in front of AP AP altered course [if we presume that the alteration was necessary to avoid contact - would have been nice for PC to specify] However, the protestor's diagram which was endorsed by the committee: Does not show Impulse OCS Does not show a gybe by Impulse Appears to show Impulse sailing parallel to, not toward, the line when the cross occurred So the textual facts found don't match
  9. It's easy to say "15 minutes is too long," and the rules, cases, appeals, etc. are pretty clear that although there may be circumstances when some delay may be allowable, "first reasonable opportunity" is generally supposed to be close to immediate and 15 minutes would generally be too long. What we don't know is what let this particular PC to conclude that the time delay was reasonable. We didn't hear all the evidence or participate in the committee's deliberation on validity. Without that you can't really say whether 15 minutes is too long in this specific incident.
  10. "Invalid protest" is not a reason for redress (See RRS 62.1). Nor is doing penalty turns when you didn't really have to. Nor, for that matter, is being disadvantaged by another boat breaking a rule (like failing to give mark room and forcing you to the wrong side of a mark, for example) unless they also are found to have broken 2 or 69. Note also, according to the protest form (if I'm deciphering it correctly) words used in the hail were "you have no rights - protest" and on the decision form the PC did check the box for "'Protest' hailed at first opportunity." So it would appear that the
  11. If this is the situation and the protest is valid, then the PC could also have found, supported by Case 138, that if OP knew he broke rule 22.1 and failed to take a penalty he also broke rule 2. Which could turn his DSQ into a DNE.
  12. Particularly since the PC chose to document the "15 min?" comment on the decision form it would be nice if they found a fact or made a conclusion as to why 15 minutes constituted "first reasonable opportunity" to fly the flag in this specific incident. But they didn't. So there's your appeal, the original PC did not properly interpret "first reasonable opportunity", should have found the protest invalid and you should be restored to your finishing place. But: Continuing to "disagree strongly" multiple times with a PC after they've deliberated, delivered their decision and closed the
  13. Equipment Rules of Sailing define "hull", and it doesn't include bowsprits even if fixed.
  14. Enjoy that move while you can, it will go away with the 2021 rules new definition of finish: Finish: A boat finishes when, after starting and sailing the course, any part of her hull, or crew or equipment in normal position, crosses the finishing line from the course side.
  15. I agree with that as well. Boats shouldn't be afraid to protest if they think a rule has been broken, and a boat that gets protested, unless they're sure they didn't break a rule, should do her turns. If you find out later that you didn't break a rule and did turns unnecessarily, well there's a reason to go learn the rules better for next time.
  16. In your diagram it looks like the current took you below the mark and you weren't in a position to close the door on the faster boat. If that's so then I think the mark rounding was clean - he only took the room you gave him. If you were in position to make a wide-tight rounding and weren't able to because he stuck his nose in, then he broke 18.2(b) At 3 if you wanted to come up and he didn't keep clear he broke rule 11 and you could have protested him. But blanketing your wind didn't break any rule. If you think his yelling "starboard" was an intentional effort to confuse or intimid
  17. At point 2 the other boat is not entitled to mark room, but you've given it and she's allowed to take it, as mentioned, at her own risk (Case 63) - you can close the door if you're able and willing. From the diagram it looks like a clean rounding by both boats - how is it that you were "jacked around"? Why couldn't you simply continue on starboard?
  18. "Minimize" is not the same as "entirely preclude". In a small vessel (even 75 feet) it seems possible that the entire topside could become involved very quickly. And there are always tradeoffs - for example additional doors in bulkheads below the waterline that would improve fire egress would also increase the possibility of catastrophic progressive flooding. Interesting in paragraph (f) the spec for an escape hatch used exclusively by crew is smaller than a hatch to be used by passengers. I'm also guessing (just guessing) that most of the victims will be found to have quickly succum
  19. Yeah, Force 3 is accurate to 600/10ths of a knot...
  20. TWS would be hard to calibrate directly - what would you use as a reference? If you're using another wind instrument, how do you know that that one is correct? You don't have a navigational range like you might use to calibrate a compass or mile markers that you could use to calibrate speed over ground. But I'm not sure that 1 kt accuracy is that crucial, given that TWS is often varying over fairly short periods of time by that much or more. If you're on the edge between two sails I think it's a tossup with no wrong answer -- mainly based on whether you think it's going to die or build du
  21. That's not an unreasonable assumption in my opinion. If you don't think a modification is going to make you faster (either VMG-wise or at the corners), why would you do it? (Well, except for those race boats that make mods to go for a "corinthian" rating - which shouldn't be allowed)
×
×
  • Create New...