Most egregious cheats?

The Italian team Scugnizza racing with their NM38S in the ORCi rule is one of the most recent and biggest cheating scandals here in Europe. They actually modified the boat to have hidden ballast tanks in the aft and filled them with water before being measured to get a much shorter water line, 1.4 tons (!) higher displacement and much better rating. But when racing they released out all of the water and the water line was increased, boat much faster with lighter displacement and sailed with a much better rating then the boat should have... Apparently the ballast tanks were made to look like big reinforcement pipes so they were hard to prove cheating. They won a lot of races/championships, but were finally proven to be cheating in 2016/2017 and banned from racing for a while...

Some info on the case,

https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2017/04/02/gross-misconduct-decision-orc-europeans/

https://www.orc.org/SH Columns/SH ORC 2016 Dec.pdf info from ORC rule themselves about the case and two pictures showing the "measurement trim" and "sailing trim" of the cheating boat Scugnizza

https://www.clubracer.eu/2017/4/2/2016-orc-european-class-c-champion-re-crowned
So did the owner actually serve a ban?  From what I can see, they got DSQ from the event but that was it.  They seemingly destroyed the evidence, because after the event the boat was remeasured and floated in on totally different lines and weighed a LOT less... and then some time later some pictures showed up purportedly showing the water tanks below and behind the wheel well before and after removal. 

But I cannot see a record of the owner or anyone involved serving a ban.  Did the Italian Sailing Federation do anything?  

He’s coming to Newport for the IRC/ORC worlds later this year.  Different boat, same name.  Scugnizza, Vincenzo di Blasio.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

mad

Super Anarchist
So did the owner actually serve a ban?  From what I can see, they got DSQ from the event but that was it.  They seemingly destroyed the evidence, because after the event the boat was remeasured and floated in on totally different lines and weighed a LOT less... and then some time later some pictures showed up purportedly showing the water tanks below and behind the wheel well before and after removal. 

But I cannot see a record of the owner or anyone involved serving a ban.  Did the Italian Sailing Federation do anything?  

He’s coming to Newport for the IRC/ORC worlds later this year.  Different boat, same name.  Scugnizza, Vincenzo di Blasio.
There’s no way the owner or any of the crew should be allowed to race in that or any other event!! 
 

and they wonder why people can’t be bothered to race anymore. 

 

12 metre

Super Anarchist
4,004
776
English Bay
Wait, adding weight to a boat sinks it down and increases waterline, no?
Translation issue i think.  Article and photos indicate a massive change in trim.  Bow knuckle way up out of the water.  Could have decreased waterline since a lot of volume in the stern and very steep and covex run aft.

Article said boat increased some 2600 lbs vs previous measurement.  They figured to get that trim, there had to be +500 lb ballast in the stern and the rest somewhere amidships.  That was a lot of additional water volume - over 40 cubic feet - or a 4'x5'x2' enclosure.  Pretty hard to hide I would think unless someone was choosing to ignore it.  even the trim would have looked ridiculous at the time of measurement.  I can see why it would confer a massive rating advantage - it looks super slow.

Even the keel is one of the most ridiculous I have seen.  Heck, the whole hull for that matter.  Certainly not a planing hull - for those who think that is the only thing that matters.

 And people thought IOR was bad.

Edit 500kg not lb ballast in stern

20170402-katariina-II-2.jpg

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Liquid

NFLTG
4,835
891
Over there
Translation issue i think.  Article and photos indicate a massive change in trim.  Bow knuckle way up out of the water.  Could have decreased waterline since a lot of volume in the stern and very steep and covex run aft.

Article said boat increased some 2600 lbs vs previous measurement.  They figured to get that trim, there had to be +500 lb ballast in the stern and the rest somewhere amidships.  That was a lot of additional water volume - over 40 cubic feet - or a 4'x5'x2' enclosure.  Pretty hard to hide I would think unless someone was choosing to ignore it.  even the trim would have looked ridiculous at the time of measurement.  I can see why it would confer a massive rating advantage - it looks super slow.

Even the keel is one of the most ridiculous I have seen.  Heck, the whole hull for that matter.  And people thought IOR was bad.
That makes sense. Surprised a measurer wouldn't notice the boat floating bow up...

 
Last edited by a moderator:

LionessRacing

Super Anarchist
4,364
598
Myrtle Beach,
That makes sense. Surprised a measurer wouldn't notice the boat floating bow up...
Measurer has to measure the boat as is. If it's not obviously loaded with visible crap, they might check bilge, won't check holding/fuel tanks. 

When was the last time you saw one look below or in a locker ? 

 

jesposito

Super Anarchist
Cristoforo said:
Know of a 3 blade prop deal  and the fact is the race organizers and regional authority who were fully informed  didn’t care.  Boat was never penalized and the race(s) weren't even rescored much less dsq.  Then the boat showed up at later races with -3 point rating change like nothing ever happened. Standard operating procedure more often than not. Most clubs  have zero interest to enforce anything especially when it’s their own member cheating or trophies have been handed out. Clubs also don’t cross check or question entry certificates even when a standard 30 year old one design enters with a rating 12 points off the standard rating. 
Sounds like YRALIS PHRF comm

 

Livia

Super Anarchist
4,038
1,103
Southern Ocean
Translation issue i think.  Article and photos indicate a massive change in trim.  Bow knuckle way up out of the water.  Could have decreased waterline since a lot of volume in the stern and very steep and covex run aft.

Article said boat increased some 2600 lbs vs previous measurement.  They figured to get that trim, there had to be +500 lb ballast in the stern and the rest somewhere amidships.  That was a lot of additional water volume - over 40 cubic feet - or a 4'x5'x2' enclosure.  Pretty hard to hide I would think unless someone was choosing to ignore it.  even the trim would have looked ridiculous at the time of measurement.  I can see why it would confer a massive rating advantage - it looks super slow.

Even the keel is one of the most ridiculous I have seen.  Heck, the whole hull for that matter.  Certainly not a planing hull - for those who think that is the only thing that matters.

 And people thought IOR was bad.

Edit 500kg not lb ballast in stern

View attachment 360329
The owner should be banned for life for having a boat that ugly

 
Measurer has to measure the boat as is. If it's not obviously loaded with visible crap, they might check bilge, won't check holding/fuel tanks. 

When was the last time you saw one look below or in a locker ? 
In Oz, last time boat was weighed!

Measurer came on board and did a couple of random checks on lockers & a quick look round prior to the lift.

 

Frick

New member
Translation issue i think.  Article and photos indicate a massive change in trim.  Bow knuckle way up out of the water.  Could have decreased waterline since a lot of volume in the stern and very steep and covex run aft.

Article said boat increased some 2600 lbs vs previous measurement.  They figured to get that trim, there had to be +500 lb ballast in the stern and the rest somewhere amidships.  That was a lot of additional water volume - over 40 cubic feet - or a 4'x5'x2' enclosure.  Pretty hard to hide I would think unless someone was choosing to ignore it.  even the trim would have looked ridiculous at the time of measurement.  I can see why it would confer a massive rating advantage - it looks super slow.

Even the keel is one of the most ridiculous I have seen.  Heck, the whole hull for that matter.  Certainly not a planing hull - for those who think that is the only thing that matters.

 And people thought IOR was bad.

Edit 500kg not lb ballast in stern

View attachment 360329
That boat is NOT the cheating MN38S..... That is the Katariina II special made One Off for ORCi. They later scrapped the pictured hull and keel since it was too slow, but kept the deck and rig while building a new hull and keel.

The increased/decreased water line you ask for is described from my side how the ORCi rule sees it. By trimming the weight aft and lift the stern the rule think you have a more "moderate" bow and gives you a shorter water line. In other words it gives you a more decreased water line according to the ORCi rule by lifting the bow then to trim down the bow and lift the aft like in the IRC rule.. For an example look at the new Italia 11.98, they have a modern bow but the rule think it's got a moderate bow because of the aft trim https://data.orc.org/public/WPub.dll/CC/122531.pdf and how it looks in reality https://www.giornaledellavela.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Schermata-2019-03-08-alle-09.17.06.png

 

12 metre

Super Anarchist
4,004
776
English Bay
That boat is NOT the cheating MN38S..... That is the Katariina II special made One Off for ORCi. They later scrapped the pictured hull and keel since it was too slow, but kept the deck and rig while building a new hull and keel.

The increased/decreased water line you ask for is described from my side how the ORCi rule sees it. By trimming the weight aft and lift the stern the rule think you have a more "moderate" bow and gives you a shorter water line. In other words it gives you a more decreased water line according to the ORCi rule by lifting the bow then to trim down the bow and lift the aft like in the IRC rule.. For an example look at the new Italia 11.98, they have a modern bow but the rule think it's got a moderate bow because of the aft trim https://data.orc.org/public/WPub.dll/CC/122531.pdf and how it looks in reality https://www.giornaledellavela.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Schermata-2019-03-08-alle-09.17.06.png
Yeah, I think I mentioned that trimming the boat bow up could decrease waterline- if it was just a trim issue.

However they also increased "displacement" by some 2600 lb according to the linked article.  A boat of this size would have roughly 1000 ppi - so the boat would "sink' roughly 2.6 inches.  That amount of "sinkage" would likely increase waterline overall even with the bow up trim.

But any rule would rate a boat of this size much slower if it "displaced" 2600 lb more even with a slightly longer sailing length.  So while the extreme trim probably helped in lowering the rating, the main issue is the amount of water ballast taken on for measurement.

Still, the keel in the photo is one of the most bizarre I've ever seen.  Hull actually isn't that bad.  Probably a decent upwind shape with a high Cp - but not likely a downwind flyer and certainly is not a planing type hull.

The photo that I attached was on the linked web page - so I assumed it was the boat in question.  My bad.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Whinging Pom

Super Anarchist
Measurer has to measure the boat as is. If it's not obviously loaded with visible crap, they might check bilge, won't check holding/fuel tanks. 

When was the last time you saw one look below or in a locker ? 
When I've had boats measured for an endorsed IRC rating the measurer took a good look for any crap on board.  Empty weight means what it says!  V. embarrassing he found a short length of chain hiding in a locker. 

 

DrWatson

Member
96
31
Switzerland
Two different races, Coastal Classic and a Tauranga race. 

Back end of the fleet, smallest boats. 

Second smallest boat, us, about 3-4 miles off the beach of Matakana island. Complete drifter. We see the smallest boat (theres a matter of a few inches between us), identified positively through binoculars, main only and making good progress close in, probably just outside the breakers... 

We finally make the finish, exhausted. And check finishing times. No mention of smallest boat. 

Prize giving next morning. Smallest boat takes prize as smallest finisher... with a self declared finish time faster than us. Given that the finish boat was still on station and recorded our finish time, it's kinda odd that they didn't see him cross the line...

On the Coastal, we're again ahead, and the wind drops out. anchoring 1 mile from the line. Eventually, faced with an agonising wait and exhaustion, the skipper pulls the plug. We motor to the finish recording a withdrawn (DNF). Next morning, we hear that smallest boat motored over the finish some 6h after us having motored from Brett. Gets prize (considerable value) as smallest finisher...

If you motor over the finish line, are you really a finisher? Even if you come last?

 

Latest posts




Top