Jump to content

Sydney to Hobart 2017


dachopper

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

Audio, at http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/news/sport/kiwi-sailor-matt-manson-rips-into-jimmy-spithill-and-comanche-after-sydney-hobart/

... Matt Mason is dumbfounded by the one hour penalty they've been given as they feel it would have taken them five minutes to serve the penalty on the water.

While an idiot for saying that nonsence, it at least fills in some of the gaps behind Richard's thinking.

Richo stepping off in Hobart indicates they were 100% in the clear. This guy says that was based upon them completing their tack 4/5 metres clear of Comanche. So "100% in the clear" in Richo's mind is around 1 second from there being a collision. A collision that he set in train, didn't avoid and forced the other boat to avoid.

Based on that bizzare definition of "clear", he ignores the red hankerchief so making it "his sole decision" it will flutter all the way to Hobart and the incident going to the Jury Room with a potential "off water" penalty.

Then when they get to Hobart and see some video "100% in the clear" now becomes in their minds a "50/50" incident. So now they start bitching because Spithill won't withdraw and let them off the hook. In doing that they are also holding in contempt people like us watching on.

So coming out of a room that they elected to walk into, they then bitch the IJ's "off water" penalty  of 1 hour doesn't correspond to a "on water" penalty akin to the time taken to do a 720 or say 5  minutes, the minimum that a "off water" penalty can be. 

The extension of that is that back at Sydney Heads Richo deduced that penalty turns can be ignored because at worst all he had to do was beat Commanche by more than 5 minutes and he would be in the clear, and if he didn't, well he would accept defeat? He might also have deduced hitting the Derwent 5 minutes early might be of some greater advantage!!?

With that mindset being carried forward into the Jury Room there were probably Jury members fucking annoyed that they couldn't smack that arrogance with a DSQ.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
16 minutes ago, Philc said:

Well maybe they should have done the turns????

 

And how far do you think they would have had to sail to get clear of all other boats, plus the spectator fleet and get it all done before they got to Z buoy when the alternative penalty option ran out? New Zealand?

It is crazy and dangerous to expect a supermaxi to be doing consecutive 720 turns in a situation like that. It is mayhem on the water at a Sydney Hobart start.  Comanche would have lost all of 20 secs from their luff - a 15 minute time penalty is reasonable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, By the lee said:

Well go watch the video. It's on the front page, this thread and probably elsewhere. Simple really.

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

And how far do you think they would have had to sail to get clear of all other boats, plus the spectator fleet and get it all done before they got to Z buoy when the alternative penalty option ran out? New Zealand?

It is crazy and dangerous to expect a supermaxi to be doing consecutive 720 turns in a situation like that. It is mayhem on the water at a Sydney Hobart start.  Comanche would have lost all of 20 secs from their luff - a 15 minute time penalty is reasonable.

Another fanboy..

Or to put it another way - don't infringe, you know the rules and if you don't like them stay away from the party.

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

That would have to be in the top ten of the stupidest posts in this thread. 

Read the RRS, it's clear that you have not.

I am starting to wonder if we are talking to rail meat for beer can races..... may explain a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tornado & Random I've never said they didn't break rules or that the rules weren't applied properly. I agreed with the Penalty & said they got off lightly considering all possible results (for eg a DSQ) I said I support changes to not DSQ boats for what I consider minor incidents so that more owners race. 

Tornado I've had said numerous times I'm a club hack. 

Random I assume you'll be entering the 70th Gladstone & give us all a lesson. entries are open & it is is now easier at Cat3+ 

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

And how far do you think they would have had to sail to get clear of all other boats, plus the spectator fleet and get it all done before they got to Z buoy when the alternative penalty option ran out? New Zealand?

It is crazy and dangerous to expect a supermaxi to be doing consecutive 720 turns in a situation like that. It is mayhem on the water at a Sydney Hobart start.  Comanche would have lost all of 20 secs from their luff - a 15 minute time penalty is reasonable.

There was no one near them on the water. Watch the video. 

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

 

It is crazy and dangerous to expect a supermaxi to be doing consecutive 720 turns in a situation like that. It is mayhem on the water at a Sydney Hobart start.  Comanche would have lost all of 20 secs from their luff - a 15 minute time penalty is reasonable.

 

The owner of C reckons they were delayed 4-5 minutes by this incident

Quote

Mr Cooney said he thought the one-hour penalty given to Wild Oats XI was fair, even though it was hard to see the calculation behind it.

"The amount of time involved with taking an evasive manoeuvre like that isn't the issue. You probably saw from the footage that both boats recovered within a few minutes and set about safely sailing the rest of the race," he said.

"We were delayed by four minutes or five minutes while recovering and set about following our proper course.

"You could extend that and say had we arrived in the Derwent five minutes earlier than we did, we may not have had the same wind conditions.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-29/sydney-to-hobart-wild-oats-should-have-been-disqualified-expert/9291414

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Richo stepping off in Hobart indicates they were 100% in the clear. This guy says that was based upon them completing their tack 4/5 metres clear of Comanche. So "100% in the clear" in Richo's mind is around 1 second from there being a collision. A collision that he set in train, didn't avoid and forced the other boat to avoid.

 

and the only reason there was 4 or 5m (if there really was) between the boats when WO completed their tack..., was because C altered course a few seconds _before_ WO completed their tack - _that_ is the essence of the RRS 13 violation found by the jury.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Tornado_ALIVE said:

Tell me, what other race in the world does not DSQ a competitor after a protest for infringing and not completing their penalty.

I believe it's actually not uncommon for ocean races to have alternative penalties like this, rather than DSQ.  I haven't checked the Newport-Bermuda SI, but my recollection from the last time I did it (2012) was that it included something like that.

Think of it this way...  In a regatta where you sail 8 races, a DSQ in one race destroys that one race, but doesn't destroy your entire regatta.  An alternative penalty like this is comparable in that it hurts you tangibly more than doing the 720 you should have done to begin with, while also not destroying your entire experience.

I simply can't understand why WOXI didn't do a 720.  I think the incident was both an egregious foul and simply a mistake we've all made.  They thought they were crossing, and then decided too late that they weren't.  Embarrassing for sure, but get over it and do your 720.  If you don't want to do it with the whole world watching and spectator traffic, fine.  Do it half an hour later.  I doubt anyone would have an issue with a 100-footer arguing that it was unsafe to attempt a 720 in that traffic.

Just do the f'ing 720.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, By the lee said:

JFC  IT WAS THE RSHYR media     RELEASE CHERRY PICKED THEIR COMMENTS! 

NOT ME, I. DON'T. CARE. EH?

Then shut the fuck up and stop misrepresenting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Comanche are expected and obliged by the rules to ENFORCE them, e.g. protest

2. the gentlemanly option was for the infringing party to RETIRE after the incident.

RRS 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What would the consequence have been if in the post race declaration WOXI had declared the incident and admitted fault?  It seems that the decision on the penalty awarded would have gone to the RC, not the IJ. There seems to be an implicit idea that even here, an admission of guilt might attract a lesser penalty than a trip to the room.  However with a protest lodged, I am not sure that the resolution would or could have been. The SIs don't seem clear on this question.

But it does seem that there was still a last minute save if MR and company had decided that there was a real chance that they would lose the protest, which would be, even then, to admit guilt, and take an unknown penalty from the RC. IJs are renowned for a steely eyed view of the rules and their enforcement, but IMHO the chances of the RC having the cojones to deliver a penalty that overturned the LH result would be vastly less than the IJ.

Which isn't to say I don't support the decision.  I think the IJ got it exactly right.

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

And how far do you think they would have had to sail to get clear of all other boats, plus the spectator fleet and get it all done before they got to Z buoy when the alternative penalty option ran out? New Zealand?

It is crazy and dangerous to expect a supermaxi to be doing consecutive 720 turns in a situation like that. It is mayhem on the water at a Sydney Hobart start.  Comanche would have lost all of 20 secs from their luff - a 15 minute time penalty is reasonable.

Then perhaps they should have been more carefull with their tack. 

Plan B, if doing a 720 was 'dangerous' (lol!) would have been to radio acknowledgement of the foul and their reason for not doing 720.  The immediate admission of guilt likely would have resulted in a lesser penalty by IJ. 

Instead, they were arrogant from the foul to the protest room, and got smacked. Still got off easy b/c in normal circumstances the only penalty would be dsq.

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

How are the Sydney 38's doing. Other then Mondo, I don't know which yachts are S38's and I can't be bothered looking through the start list especially when you are probably keeping an eye on them ;)

TSA & Calibre. TSA winning no suprises there. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, By the lee said:

 :lol:

You misrepresent what I post and then accuse me of misrepresentation. 

Try and follow along will you? It's really not that hard.

Ask your mom for help if you need to.

 

Lets make this simple.

What do you think about the Oatley and MR post protest comments?

Video on the front page.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go TSA .....got a couple of mates on board....

Cheers,

Jim B)

 

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

1. Comanche are expected and obliged by the rules to ENFORCE them, e.g. protest

2. the gentlemanly option was for the infringing party to RETIRE after the incident.

RRS 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.

He returns! Welcome GS!

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

 

and the only reason there was 4 or 5m (if there really was) between the boats when WO completed their tack..., was because C altered course a few seconds _before_ WO completed their tack - _that_ is the essence of the RRS 13 violation found by the jury.

It wasn't my intention to judge the incident, only using their own words to define their view what "100% in the clear" was. A off boat view from the other boat of the incident is irrelevant in their mind (as signalled by the protest flag).

Waiting until Hobart to check if that assessment was right or not (to see it was a 50/50 call at best), is as dumb as it gets.

If it was done to chase 5 minutes less on water time at the other end, well that's cheating.

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

DSQ's cannot be dropped usually.  Someone I know went from 1st to 7th that way.  It still can ruin your weekend and State Title.

Alright Random.

Normally it's DNE that can't be discarded so providing the series permits one or more discards a DSQ can be.

However local rules may change a scoring system.

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

It wasn't my intention to judge the incident, only using their own words to define their view what "100% in the clear" was. A off boat view from the other boat is irrelevant in their mind, and as signalled by the protest flag.

Waiting until Hobart to check if that assessment was right or not (to see it was a 50/50 call at best), is as dumb as it gets.

my guess is that the view from on WO was good enough.., and that at least a few of the WO crew knew right away that they weren't "100% in the clear" and that they had broken a rule..,  and probably most of those that weren't sure they had broken a rule, knew that it was close enough that they would have a good chance of losing the protest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, By the lee said:

I. Don't. Care.

But I did think others here may have had an interest in the way  RSHYR media  presented (edited?) what was said for the readers of their web news page.

Okay - we leave your view re the video aside.

And on the RS... web news it's not a full representation hence the need to view the video and any other pertinent material as a whole before it's in any way possible to form a balanced view.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cooney said Wild Oats could have then completed the race comfortable in the knowledge there would be no protest hearing.

"I didn't pursue the protest expecting it would overturn the race result," he said.

That wasn't why I lodged the protest at all.

We are talking about the two most significant supermaxis in the world ... boats at that level and crews at that level should understand, respect and abide by the rules.

I think my action was purely to highlight that we all have obligations to keep ourselves and others in the race safe.

It wasn't a race-winning tactic to go into the protest room. It was something that I adopted as a matter of principle."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go the Dorade!!

Breeze finally filled in at the parking lot off Tasman Is. Big cluster fuck of Div 3,4 and the Clippers headed across Storm Bay. Dorade just rounded the turn, bringing breeze up with them. Currently on handicap 1st in Div 4 and 31st overall. 

Edit to add: Dorade is only a few miles b4b behind Kialoa II (72')

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good to see that just a little while ago someone brought up what had seemed obvious to me from the get-go: when WOXI Stuffed Comanche, she buried her. By the time it all sorted out, Comanche was quite a distance back around the mark. Then I see coverage of the finish, where the boats are sailing essentially neck-and-neck in no breeze, with WOXI pulling ahead to win. The 26 minutes wasn't physically that huge of a distance. Heck, I remember WINNING a race in the Coronado Roads where it took us nearly an hour to cover the last 200-300 feet. So who's to say WHAT would have happened had Comanche been able to keep on truckin' unimpeded out of the harbor?

Arguing that the penalty is excessive is pretty lame IMHO. That was a powerful dangerous maneuver and there was no excuse for it, as many have pointed out.

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

Cooney said Wild Oats could have then completed the race comfortable in the knowledge there would be no protest hearing.

"I didn't pursue the protest expecting it would overturn the race result," he said.

That wasn't why I lodged the protest at all.

We are talking about the two most significant supermaxis in the world ... boats at that level and crews at that level should understand, respect and abide by the rules.

I think my action was purely to highlight that we all have obligations to keep ourselves and others in the race safe.

It wasn't a race-winning tactic to go into the protest room. It was something that I adopted as a matter of principle."

 

As you know I think the jury got it right.

However do you believe the Cooney quote in totality?

I'd like to but I don't know the man. 

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

As you know I think the jury got it right.

However do you believe the Cooney quote in totality?

I'd like to but I don't know the man. 

Probably understated. He is in his rights to bang on about being obligated under the rules to protest, but elected not to.

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

Infotrack has just been penalized 20% of its time for not signing out correctly after finishing. There is apparently some kind of check out procedure and they didn't follow it. There isn't much point in having pros on board if they can't take care of that basic task for a new owner.

PYR-Wot Eva was hit with the same penalty, and they were all set to win the PHS fleet.  Ouch.

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

As you know I think the jury got it right.

However do you believe the Cooney quote in totality?

I'd like to but I don't know the man. 

The only people who will ever know that are Jesus Christ our lord and saviour. Jim Cooney & the FIFO pro crew. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Thats a good effort Kochie giving up 20' and over 30 years. They must be sailing it pretty hard to do that.

Kialoa broke their boom on Wednesday arvo so will be down on some major horsepower in the light stuff. Would love to see some photos of the old girls plowing through the piss when the breeze was on though.

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

Probably understated. He is in his rights to bang on about being obligated under the rules to protest, but elected not to.

Not sure they were obligated to lodge a protest. Correct that they did though, I think.

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

Audio, at http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/news/sport/kiwi-sailor-matt-manson-rips-into-jimmy-spithill-and-comanche-after-sydney-hobart/

... Matt Mason is dumbfounded by the one hour penalty they've been given as they feel it would have taken them five minutes to serve the penalty on the water.

Hey Matt.

Sad to hear you have been found dumb. If you are having no luck finding a cure try this.

 

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

Thats a good effort Kochie giving up 20' and over 30 years. They must be sailing it pretty hard to do that.

And Kialoa is projected to beat her 1971 line honors time by 6 hours.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, r22tahoe said:
 

"Edit to add: Dorade is only a few miles b4b behind Kialoa II (72')"

Kialoa II broke their boom and is proceeding under foresails, storm tri, and mizzen.

And still 6 hours ahead of their 1971 line honors time.

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

How are the Sydney 38's doing. Other then Mondo, I don't know which yachts are S38's and I can't be bothered looking through the start list especially when you are probably keeping an eye on them ;)

TSA Management and Calibre

TSA had the division win until the parking lot at Tasman now Mayfair which sailed up on the new pressure looks the goods.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Banque retaken Div 4 lead from Dorade, and nearing finish. Good job by them. Quick little boat.  Dorade has been closing on Mr Lucky and the other Div 4 boat, only a few miles back and they owe her time. Dorade has 2 hrs plus cushion on corrected time on them. Looking like 2nd Div 4 and 32d overall. Good job by the old girl.

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

Pray tell Woger

A well known name who may or may not be an impersonator.

Posted and rapidly hid it.

If he is genuine and want's to come back he will.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Thats a good effort Kochie giving up 20' and over 30 years. They must be sailing it pretty hard to do that.

Dorade is no slug. IIRC, when they won the Transatlantic race in 1931 they were the smallest boat and were first to finish by a day or more. Took the arctic route. Won Fastnet while in Europe that year.

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

Faaacking close between Mayfair and Ariel though for Div 3.

The Ox and Box show likely quicker in the river.

May come down to who can stay clear of the Clippers.  Can't imagine trying to pass one of those beasts to leeward.

Edit: It looks like the clippers are faster on this angle.  I should have said it would suck to get rolled by one while trying to win IRC3.

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

Probably understated. He is in his rights to bang on about being obligated under the rules to protest, but elected not to.

 

1 hour ago, rogerfal said:

As you know I think the jury got it right.

However do you believe the Cooney quote in totality?

I'd like to but I don't know the man. 

 

1 hour ago, rogerfal said:

Not sure they were obligated to lodge a protest. Correct that they did though, I think.

Yes he is if he believes a rule has been broken. Top of Page 11 in the Blue Book (my emphasis)

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.

The copy on board WOXI must have been eaten by moths for them to not take a on water penalty and then say the protest should have been withdrawn. 

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.sailing.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Sailing-v6.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwis8MOLua7YAhUMWbwKHTvJBqkQFghJMAM&usg=AOvVaw3SxSZqWQcQmD4DciHwKRZI

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

Banque's track is interesting.  WAY East.  I guess that's how the top IRC4 boat is getting to the finish before the first IRC3 boat.

just a much faster boat downwind.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:
1 hour ago, rogerfal said:

Not sure they were obligated to lodge a protest. Correct that they did though, I think.

Yes he is if he believes a rule has been broken. Top of Page 11 in the Blue Book (my emphasis)

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.

The copy on board WOXI must have been eaten by moths.

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.sailing.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Sailing-v6.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwis8MOLua7YAhUMWbwKHTvJBqkQFghJMAM&usg=AOvVaw3SxSZqWQcQmD4DciHw

Yep get that but am not 100% on enforce means must protest though for sure I understand you pointing out the inference.

Am wondering how that impacts on a third party who witnesses a non contact infringement.

I'll go do some reading.

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

When did Sydney Harbour shrink?

Despite what the armchair admirals will say, the place to have done the 720 would have been after the second mark. Plenty of room and only about 1/2 mile away from the incident.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who said there was one rule for the rich (& the 100'rs) ?

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has been issued a $250 fine by NSW Maritime Services this afternoon after he failed to don a life jacket on Sydney Harbour this week.

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

The sum of 2 or more times and then checksums including whether it was greater than Comanche's delta but less than BJ's is my guess.

Yes - a bit arbitary.

Clearly to penalise such that position is not lost is no penalty.

Beyond that I don't have a clue. Guess that's why I'm not an IJ.

I do however think the given penalty is adequate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, rogerfal said:

Yes - a bit arbitary.

Clearly to penalise such that position is not lost is no penalty.

Beyond that I don't have a clue. Guess that's why I'm not an IJ.

I do however think the given penalty is adequate.

He are the only two precedents for Line Honour stripping in the S2H and known by everyone before starting to be arguably arbitary. They has been one time/place penalty and one DSQ up to 2017.

1990 - Rothmans LH and 2nd HC.

Penalised  chain smoking Laurie Smith 10% of placings 20% on corrected time and stripped her of the line honours award for breaking Rule 26 (advertising) by flying a spinnaker with an illegal logo on it out of sight in the middle of Bass Strait.

IJ decision was Ragamuffin was awarded line honours, and first place overall on IOR corrected times went to Sagacious V.

1983 - Nirvana LH.

Bob Bell’s Condor of Bermuda and American Marvin Green’s Nirvana, were sailing side by side up the Derwent when Nirvana forced Condor into the shallows six nautical miles from the finish line.

Condor was stuck on a rock for five minutes and Nirvana won by two minutes and 16 seconds.

IJ ruled against Nirvana and she was disqualified and line honours awarded to Condor.

Anyone moaning and groaning about WOXI's 1 hour time or 1 place penalty need to give themselves an uppercut in light of the above precedents. There are many with some justification it should have been much stiffer.

PS. In light of failing to take a "on water" penalty in favour of risking a IJ "off water" penalty and looking to Spitball/Comanche to then withdraw their protest, both actions contry to the Rules, Richards needs to get his Blue Book and SI's out. Moaning then about the protest going to the IJ and blaming the other side for that, he should consult a head trauma specialist quick smart.

Then to boot moaning about the IJ penalty in light of the above LH penalty precedents and the rules, then Richo takes the 2017 Cunt Award and should think long and hard about luckily missing a Rule 69 bullet when accepting it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, By the lee said:

I. Don't. Care.

But I did think others here may have had an interest in the way  RSHYR media  presented (edited?) what was said for the readers of their web news page.

You posted it as fact dipstick.

2 hours ago, SCANAS said:

Cooney said Wild Oats could have then completed the race comfortable in the knowledge there would be no protest hearing.

"I didn't pursue the protest expecting it would overturn the race result," he said.

That wasn't why I lodged the protest at all.

We are talking about the two most significant supermaxis in the world ... boats at that level and crews at that level should understand, respect and abide by the rules.

I think my action was purely to highlight that we all have obligations to keep ourselves and others in the race safe.

It wasn't a race-winning tactic to go into the protest room. It was something that I adopted as a matter of principle."

 

Cooney is a classy guy who just schooled an obnoxious brat who had it coming. Just my 2c.

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

Banque's track is interesting.  WAY East.  I guess that's how the top IRC4 boat is getting to the finish before the first IRC3 boat.

The JPKs have been performing way above their ratings in Europe as well. Very quick well balanced boat for all conditions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, WOXI sailed a fantastic race and well deserved line honours.

Failing to give way on port, or do anything other than that horrible tack right there - and then not taking the penalty when clearly hailed to do so means they have to cop it sweet.  Any kid sailing in our club past Opti green fleet knows give way to the right and take the penalty when called for a stuff up.  So there it is.  A trophy on a shelf with line honours on it,  a million pages of rants and twaddle and a thousand drunken bar arguments for years to come - and hopefully a rematch without the bs next year...

Congratulations to Comanche, also a fantastic race and the winner of the 2017 S2H.

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

Well, WOXI sailed a fantastic race and well deserved line honours.

Failing to give way on port, or do anything other than that horrible tack right there - and then not taking the penalty when clearly hailed to do so means they have to cop it sweet.  Any kid sailing in our club past Opti green fleet knows give way to the right and take the penalty when called for a stuff up.  So there it is.  A trophy on a shelf with line honours on it,  a million pages of rants and twaddle and a thousand drunken bar arguments for years to come - and hopefully a rematch without the bs next year...

Congratulations to Comanche, also a fantastic race and the winner of the 2017 S2H.

Plus 1.

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

He are the only two precedents for Line Honour stripping in the S2H and known by everyone before starting to be arguably arbitary. They has been one time/place penalty and one DSQ up to 2017.

1990 - Rothmans LH and 2nd HC.

Penalised  chain smoking Laurie Smith 10% of placings 20% on corrected time and stripped her of the line honours award for breaking Rule 26 (advertising) by flying a spinnaker with an illegal logo on it out of sight in the middle of Bass Strait.

IJ decision was Ragamuffin was awarded line honours, and first place overall on IOR corrected times went to Sagacious V.

1983 - Nirvana LH.

Bob Bell’s Condor of Bermuda and American Marvin Green’s Nirvana, were sailing side by side up the Derwent when Nirvana forced Condor into the shallows six nautical miles from the finish line.

Condor was stuck on a rock for five minutes and Nirvana won by two minutes and 16 seconds.

IJ ruled against Nirvana and she was disqualified and line honours awarded to Condor.

Anyone moaning and groaning about WOXI's 1 hour time or 1 place penalty need to give themselves an uppercut in light of the above precedents. There are many with some justification it should have been much stiffer.

 

I had the pleasure of sailing with Chas aboard Rothmans in the Sydney Hobart Race of 1990. It was a race that none on board will ever forget. The race record was within our grasp and the wind shut off. We had earlier torn a three-quarter ounce spinnaker to shreds and when we needed another, it had a Rothmans logo (which was against the rules for this race) on it, but it was argued that it wouldn’t be seen by anyone. However, we had not considered the presence of a photographer in a helicopter and Rothmans was penalised ten places at the finish.

https://www.facebook.com/chasfromTas/posts/1726283837642442

12741961_1685200565084103_4878787950493679487_n.jpg

 

Rothmans roaring across Bass Strait in the 1990 Sydney Hobart Race. The Admiral, Don Buckley, broke his collar bone, the boat took on about seven tons or more of water through the domed hatchway, she lost the spinnaker, down below was chaos and waist deep, the sails were awash inside the boat and Speizy was swept out of his bunk and ended up in the bow. When Rothmans took a nose dive at 26 knots like a submarine the cameras on this film couldn't record the moment as they too were submerged. For all this she was the first yacht home.
Thanks to crew member and photographer Rick Tomlinson for the photo.
Amongst a bunch of great guys and august crew members were skipper Lawrie Smith, Shag, Bob Fisher, Don Buckley, Dave Powys, Gordon McGuire, Paul Stanbridge and Chas.
If you want to see that race from on board Rothmans go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7-JEL-LXAo
for some more great action shots
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mid said:

We had earlier torn a three-quarter ounce spinnaker to shreds and when we needed another, it had a Rothmans logo (which was against the rules for this race) on it, but it was argued that it wouldn’t be seen by anyone.

Thanks for mentioning that Mid, I didn't think to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There really are some stupid subjective, ingnorantly written or emotionally charged comments here.  OK -Time to put this to bed...

1.  The incident - A poorly executed leebow?  Hesitation during a cross?  Hesitation in a slam dunk?  Poor on board comms between the after guard?  Who knows?  Who cares?  We've all been there.  People make mistakes.  Get over it.

2 The rules - Rule 13, simple.  Only Rules 13, 14 and rule 16.1 are considered.  The jury concluded that LDVC did not change course, so 16.1 can be ruled out.  LDVC acted to avoid contact, and there was no collision, so rule 14 out.They concluded that LDVC had to take action to avoid while WOXI was tacking.  That's all.

No point in discussing rule 10 now.  That expired when WOXI passed HTW.  No point in discussing rule 15.  That only occurs after WOXI reached close-hauled.  No point in discussing 16.2.  At no time was WOXI sailing to pass astern of LDVC.

3.  Not taking a penalty - That is the right of any boat.  If they believe that they did not break a rule, or were not sure because it was close (and judging by this discussion it was), then they have a right to take their chances in the protest room.  This does not represent poor sportsmanship or even foolishness. It is in the rules for them to do.  Both parties (including WOXI agree that it was close, with WOXI crew proposing a 50/50 situation).   If they knew they had broken a rule, then yes, we could question sportsmanship.  In this case, no. Move along.

In reflection, they may have misjudged how close it was, and kick themselves for that.  We may all have acted differently.  It probably was a poor risk/reward judgement.  However, at the time, her decision to continue was justified and within the rules and principals of sportsmanship, since they thought they had not broken a rule, or were not convinced enough to take a penalty at the time.  Her right to make that call.

4 The Protest - Nothing wrong with LDVC's decision to take this to the room.  It is a fundimental principal of all competitors to enforce the rules.  That's all she did.  Not doing that is possibly more destructive to the sport.  Furthermore, if you believe in the rules and that they are a part of the sport, then you should fully support her decision to go ahead (for whatever motives - win, principals, morals, sponsor pressure, etc...) with the protest.  Both boats agreed to be bound by the rules; those rules include the protest and penalty procedure.

5.  The Time Penalty - Of course it needs to be more than 5 minutes in order to be a penalty! Duh!    The penalty must be in line with the penalty system of the event.  In the SIs for this event specify penalties ranging from 5 minutes minimum to DSQ.  In between those extremes are 20% for not submitting a declaration, 30% for an offshore breach of Part 2 and OCS, 40% as maximum time penalty, and then DSQ for the most heinous of crimes.  It stands to reason that the time penalty for an inshore breach of Part 2 should be somewhere between not submitting a declaration on time, and the offshore Part 2.  So 20-30% of position in her division.  That's what the jury did. Her time penalty worsened her IRC Div 0 position by about 20-30% of all the IRC Div 0 boats.

Discretionary Penalties (DPs) are becoming more popular.  There is even a new scoring code for it.  The principal suggests that not all rule breaches are the same.  That seems sensible.  Good practice is still being developed.  If DP is to be used, Race Organisers and Juries need to have a clear penalty structure for DPs, which is fair and well known.  Many events already have one, which they publish to competitors.  In this S2H, the SIs were a little ambiguous.  Maybe more structure and guidance could be given on the penalty system.

6.  Winning in the room - WTF?  No one has won in the room. The incident took place on the water in this case.

Those who think that this is sea-lawyering or 'winning in the room' are normally the ones who either don't know all the rules or don't fully respect the rules.  If they did, they would know that in this sport, there is no way to resolve some on-the-water conflicts, other than going to the room.  They would know that the rules are designed to give competitors the chance to exonerate OR to have the decision reached by an independent panel.  They would know that not enforcing the rules (including the 'Oh, forget about it!' approach) is not good for the sport.

7.  WOXI's Elapsed Time - Her RACE Elapsed Time is the time she took in this 'event/race/competition'.  In this race it was 01:09:15:24.  That is 33 minutes behind LDVC.  There is NO OTHER elapsed time. End Of.

8.  Race Record - Read it carefully...the 'RACE' record.  That is a record set during an edition of Sydney to Hobart Race.  The race record is only held by a boat who has sailed the course correctly, and complied with the rules or taken penalties under the rules for any breaches made during the race.  WOXI did not break any race record this year.  Unlucky.  LDVC did.

9.  'The Fastest Crossing Between Sydney and Hobart' - If someone wants to go and make a seperate unrelated trophy for 'The Fastest Crossing Between Sydney and Hobart', then go ahead and give it to WOXI! Well done her.

See how long it lasts though, before people abuse that trophy's lack of moderation.  The organised S2H race event is the moderator of that record for a reason.  It sets bounds within we can be comfortable that a boat has acheived that feat fairly and measurably.  In which case WOXI did not gain any known record.

10.  The messages this sends to kids and non-sailors - That sailing is a complex sport.  That even the best make mistakes.  That if you break a rule you may (and should) be penalised.  That even long races can be so close that a single penalty can make the difference between winning and losing.

11.  WOXI attitude after the decision? - Whatever!  Of course they will be disappointed!  They thought they were right!  Someone always goes away dissatisfied after a hearing.  Moral win?  Fine; let them enjoy the fact that they sailed very fast, if that is what they want to measure their success by.  Let's face it, they did sail fast and well.  Just from the 'race' point of view they did not beat LDVC (see #7).  Nothing in that interview suggested WOXI were not accepting the decision.

That's about it.

Well done to LDVC.  Well done to Ichi Ban and all the others who won divisions, got on the podium or achieved a personal best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These rules are so stupid.

 

Wild Oats should have kept the line honors and been penalized a fixed amount.

 

To have a penalty that is undefinable and ranges from a turn to 5 minutes to being banned from the sport.......... seems a little bronze aged to me.

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

Just saw that, what a stupid nanny state :ph34r:

Moving it from his private dock back to his beach - 20metres. Surely they can show some discretion, terrible.

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

These rules are so stupid.

 

Wild Oats should have kept the line honors and been penalized a fixed amount.

 

To have a penalty that is undefinable and ranges from a turn to 5 minutes to being banned from the sport.......... seems a little bronze aged to me.

5 pages or so of rabid discussion and character assassination and thats all you got?    "These rules are stupid" ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

TSA have been doing it a long time. If you look back to when they had the Syd38 one design division some goods teams came through. Scarlett Runner, Rupert Henry, Lou Abrams, Chutzpah, Goat Syndicate, Zen, Yeah baby guys & others shame it died out. 

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

Nothing in that interview suggested WOXI were not accepting the decision.

Great post up until this bit. WOXI accepting or not is irrelevant, the decision can't be appealed.

Outside the one post decision interview you refer to, their public comments including those of crew prior to and after the IJ decision are not accepting of the rules and the decision. Furthermore they are directed at diminishing Comanche's place in the record books.

Dog other than that ommision a damm fine read. Thank you.

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

Yeah, a fucking joke. It would be nice to think that they fined him because showing discretion would might appear to look bad, but I suspect that they'd nab anyone because they like to be dicks.

What is the law? The article I read seems to imply that you must wear the LJ because he was alone but it he was with someone, having LJ's onboard was sufficient. It makes me wonder if I must wear a LJ if I solo my yacht? 

Solo under 4.8m in NSW that article says. 

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

I see that TSA beat Calibre by 10min 22 seconds.

Mondo is expected to finish 3 hours later. Ray might need to drop the price a fair bit if he wants to sell Mondo.

Hoopy, put us all out our misery on the other thread.

Hop on a plane to Hobart this evening.

Offer Ray $70k at the dock.

Problem solved.

Ray does not have to deliver back to Qld and you don't exceed your budget.

The new mainsail is a glamour by the way so be sure to get it.

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

I guess as the boats get older and are in need of upgrades and refits, owners decide to spend money on equipment that might make the boat better for IRC racing or easier to race with smaller crews etc. rather than keeping it within strict one design rules?  Maybe the S38 OD fleet would have a resurgence if they eased off the OD rules and introduce handicapping to even out high and low budget teams.

Quite the opposite, sail restrictions are the harshest I have come across.

And for good reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the TV coverage of the WOXI-Comanche crossing on the day and to my eye it looked like a fairly straightforward port-starboard situation with WOXI the burdened vessel throughout the interaction.

I might have missed it but I saw nothing from that camera angle indicating Comanche was "hunting" WOXI.

Others have already noted the failure of WOXI to just do their 720 after the foul, which would have taken, I don't know, a few minutes, so would not have hurt their elapsed time win of 27 minutes.

What I am wondering is, seeing the close crossing situation developing, why didn't the WOXI afterguard just duck Comanche? A duck would have cost WOXI a few boatlengths. Certainly a lot less than a 720, and way less than what they were penalised. The video doesn't show the whole tactical situation so there may have something that made them decide not to duck that I couldn't see. (someone may have already commented on this but I'm not going to go through the whole thread)

I too was surprised at Richards' comment that somehow the rules are different in the S-H race. Really? Well he was right in one sense. In a regular round-the-buoys race WOXI would have been DSQ-ed not  given a time penalty.

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

What I am wondering is, seeing the close crossing situation developing, why didn't the WOXI afterguard just duck Comanche? A duck would have cost WOXI a few boatlengths.

Add by WOXI's judgement 4/5m gap at the incident plus say the same pre incident plus 35m of boat and prodder = say 45 metres. That is a big duck.

They thought they were safely through then weren't or knew they they were dead and fucked up execution of a lee bow.

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

In what way? Sail restrictions keep the cost down? 

I can understand that strict OD rules will keep the boats even and perhaps the costs down. However, I can imagine that owners might decide to buy new tech sails to make the boat faster for IRC, ORCi, AMS or PHS club racing and ocean races and not spend money on OD sails, so they quit the OD fleets. If they allow modified S38's in the regattas, suitably handicapped, then they should get more yachts in the fleets.

Hoppy

check you PMs

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, SCANAS said:

TSA have been doing it a long time. If you look back to when they had the Syd38 one design division some goods teams came through. Scarlett Runner, Rupert Henry, Lou Abrams, Chutzpah, Goat Syndicate, Zen, Yeah baby guys & others shame it died out. 

Not meaning to be prickly Scan but I think Lou got started a bit before that. The 38 was almost a retirement project.

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

Add by WOXI's judgement 4/5m gap at the incident plus say the same pre incident plus 35m of boat and prodder = say 45 metres. That is a big duck.

Perhaps.  But again as experienced a crew as WOXI's surely would have seen the crossing developing and anticipated? It's a long race, and surely they must have been weighing that against whatever tactical advantage they'd gain in a boat-to-boat tangle with Comanche so early in the race.

I wasn't there so I don't know what Richards and Murray were thinking. But they made mistakes in 1) misjudging the crossing and 2) not doing their turns. I've been there, done that. Taking a port-starboard situation to the protest room if you are the port boat is generally, in my experience, a loser. Better to do your turns.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Announcements