but wait, there's more!

[MikeN]

How can you not connect the dots?

The Sydney-Hobart plays out before a worldwide audience. It is a bucket list regatta that many around the world dream of sailing in. If a regatta such as this falls in disrepute, it jeapordizes the reputation of yacht racing in general.

Have a talk with non-racers at your club and ask them why they don't race? Read through the forums and ask yourself why people leave sailboat racing for less burdensome hobbies like golf.

You will find the reasons are cost, stress, yelling, cheating, lack of fun, petty politics, rating arguments, rule changes, etc. This instance calls into question all of those reasons.

The powers that be (Yacht Clubs, National Organizations, Rating Rules, Judges, etc.) operate with the wherewithal of a bunch of 12 year olds in a tree house, playing childish political games to fluff their egos rather than taking a broad and holistic look at what they can do to improve the sport for the all of the stakeholders. When you look deeply at the motivations of many at the helm of our sport, it is deeply saddening in many instances.

The stakeholders of sailing are not just yacht club members, boat owners, and people in board seats. Yachting as a whole has a history and prevelance that influences spectators, readers, dreamers, and more. This is the heartbeat of the industry that has long been forgotten.

So what is Mr. Beales valid interest? Ensuring the sport maintains its values, ethics, and place in history as an honorable and inspirational pastime worthy of participation.

If you ask me, Mr. Beale should be applauded for his willingness to stand up for the integrity of our game.

I suppose it is up to RORC how they interpret their own rule. Maybe the profile of the race could be something to be taken into account, though I don't think it would be a good idea. I suspect RORC did not intend the definition of valid interest to extend to permitting those who have no direct, or even indirect, involvement in a race involving a particular boat to initiate a review because they believe one to be in the interests of the sport generally.

 

[MR.CLEAN]

I suspect RORC did not intend the definition of valid interest to extend to permitting those who have no direct, or even indirect, involvement in a race involving a particular boat to initiate a review because they believe one to be in the interests of the sport generally.

Rules of contract construction dictate that terms left undefined are intended by the drafters to have their ordinary definitions.

 

[crankcall]

I'd get my boat voluntarily remeasured and end this nonsense. Who wants to be known as the boat that 'maybe' had a controverial win. I'd want to know I won it , for real.

 

[dchs89]

I suppose it is up to RORC how they interpret their own rule. Maybe the profile of the race could be something to be taken into account, though I don't think it would be a good idea. I suspect RORC did not intend the definition of valid interest to extend to permitting those who have no direct, or even indirect, involvement in a race involving a particular boat to initiate a review because they believe one to be in the interests of the sport generall

Rules of contract construction dictate that terms left undefined are intended by the drafters to have their ordinary definitions.

Are the IRC rules a contract with old mate in his basement? This is a moot point unless Russell is happy to comply with 9.10 and pay for the remeasurement himself.

Now that I read these rules I see that the measurements have to be more than just a bit wrong to change any result, so at least it's unlikely that some measuring tape errors will strip results from the boats being called into question.

 

[MikeN]

Rules of contract construction dictate that terms left undefined are intended by the drafters to have their ordinary definitions.

I don't really understand the relevance of this.

Even at that, "interest" in this context doesn't in my view mean anyone merely interested in the matter. It means someone with a stake or involvement in it. What exactly is his?

Btw, just for the sake of clarity and as someone who has barely ever posted here before, I have absolutely no direct or indirect interest in this dispute. Except maybe the same interest as Mr Beale ;-)

 

[RCD]

Let's move on. Congrats to Celestial.

 

[FlyingCircus2]

If they lied about the boats measurements, then they lied.

Handicap systems are an attempt to maintain fairness amongst unequal competitors, and they require good faith efforts from everyone involved.

Configuring your boat to get a favorable rating is a necessary (and to some, enjoyable) part of the sport. Everyone rates their boat first, then empties their tanks, stows their gear, removes lone covers etc. With a mind to get the most out of the rating.

It's entirely possible that some boats have stretched this from good faith, through tryharding all the way to cheating.

In my experience this usually isn't the case. The skill ceiling in ocean racing is really really high. Here in long island sound there was an express 37, Laura Anne, that would win 2/3 of the distance races every year for like 30 years. And they would win by an absurd margin. Nobody thought they were cheaters, they were just really good.

Digging into ratings is going to leave everyone feeling butthurt because ratings are only the best attempt to create a sense of fairness. They are not fair.

 

[climenuts]

So did I.
It seemed a bit pointless.

I tried explaining it to my friend from Mars. We overtake slower boats and get passed by faster boats. Not that different from real sail boat racing, but the difference is that we then argue that we beat the faster boat using something called a "handicap".

My friendly Martian asked " But why not simply get a faster boat?"

I acknowledged he had a good point and said that is what some people do for something called line honors...but the problem is that the fastest boats are not allowed to compete.

Resident Alien: "Why not?"

Me: "Because they are multihulls"

RA " Why cant multihulls compete?"

Me: "Because they are faster"

He shook his head and went back to Mars.

I don't grok. With so much water to grok thou art god.

 

[atwinda]

Leave it to the British to insert themselves into someone else's business.

 

[boots]

Beale ... but I would have hoped that maintaining the veracity, repeatability, and reliability of the IRC system would be a priority.”

Veracity ... conformity to facts; accuracy.

The ability of the IRC handicap model to accurately identify the relative performance of different yachts - both size and style - in a mixed fleet is potentially less capable/accurate than the ability of those doing the actual measuring.

 

[Reference]

Rules of contract construction dictate that terms left undefined are intended by the drafters to have their ordinary definitions.

What “contract” exists between some random UK spectator and RORC?

 

[mccroc]

If they lied about the boats measurements, then they lied.

No one has suggested they lied.

 

[IPLore]

Rules of contract construction dictate that terms left undefined are intended by the drafters to have their ordinary definitions.

Valid (Oxford Dictionary)

• Legally or officially acceptable. The officials governing these rules are RORC. They have determined that the his interest in the outcome is not an officially acceptable interest.
• Legally binding. There is no legal relationship between Mr. Beale and the S2H race.
• having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent. This is the more casual interpretation of the word. You would use it in the phrase "You have a valid point". It would not usually not apply to an inquiry as to whether a person has a "valid interest". For example if a class action was available to shareholders or bondholders with a "valid interest in the company" , we would expect that to mean that the shareholder could demonstrate a legal interest , we would not expect it to mean a cogent interest.
  Saying that any sailor has a cogent interest in the outcome of any measurement is not only abandoning the plain English intent of the phrase, it makes no sense from a regulatory intent. It would be a chaotic interpretation of the phrase On the other hand saying that the other TP52s have an officially acceptable interest in the outcome makes perfect sense.

Furthermore Mr. Beale and RORC have no contractual relationship. Mr. Beale is applying to RORC asking them to verify or determine if he has a valid interest. RORC are entitled to determine that Mr. Beale does not have a valid interest. Like any adjudicator, they can also use this opportunity to add some flesh to the definition of "valid interest" Which they do. They define a valid interest as : "an owner, fellow competitor, race organizer, designer, etc." We call this process precedent.

 

[IPLore]

I will not be satisfied until the ATO releases 10 years of Sam Haynes' tax returns and 2 NATA accredited laboratories conduct measurements of his cock. Why waste time with this sail racing, get straight to the dick measuring.

This raises more issues than it solves.

Are we talking about the dimensions of his cock before leaving Sydney or after winning the trophy? They will be quite different numbers.

 

[IPLore]

Leave it to the British to insert themselves into someone else's business.

This could go all the way to the Privy Council which means that eventually King Charles of Australia and the United Kingdom will have to make a decision.

 

[dchs89]

This raises more issues than it solves.

Are we talking about the dimensions of his cock before leaving Sydney or after winning the trophy? They will be quite different numbers.

If he has been reading any of the 'journalism' on the front page here or if anything written reflects what has been happening out in the real world I'm sure the post-race engorgement has subsided. Regardless we are all here to join Anarchist David in creating issues out of thin air, not solve them.

 

[IPLore]

If he has been reading any of the 'journalism' on the front page here or if anything written reflects what has been happening out in the real world I'm sure the post-race engorgement has subsided. Regardless we are all here to join Anarchist David in creating issues out of thin air, not solve them.

I agree. He is truly pathetic if he thinks this letter from a guy in the UK to RORC has any serious relevance to the matter in hand.

But the editor seems to enjoy holding David's geriatric dick and publishing his nonsense.

 

[jhc]

IRC, ORC, ORR, and PRC's, they are all including a myriad of "rules" they cannot enforce.

The premise, that our sport is self regulated, is a hold over, an anachronism of the "corinthian" attitudes of our predecessors.

My comment does not in any way justify the actions of the English gentleman.

He is not in any way a relevant witness to the issue.

 

[DickDastardly]

Except now IRC explicitly allows 2 certs, which lets anyone play the weather game.

All that is is an attempt to get a single number handicap to be fairer across very mixed fleets and very mixed weather patterns and course constructs. It's a kludge, always will be, and it's equally relevant to any other single number ToT handicap system, ORCi included.

The idea of using ORCi Polars and Routing algorithms before a race to set each participant's handicap for that race is about the only way I can think of to make it fairer. Either that or give up trying to fairly handicap mixed fleets.

 

[Jethrow]

The idea of using ORCi Polars and Routing algorithms before a race to set each participant's handicap for that race is about the only way I can think of to make it fairer

Imaging the joy & happiness that would abound if "they" decided to wait until all boats had finished and then used the polars and algorithms, along with the actual conditions, to back calculate the results!