R2AK 2022

shebeen

Super Anarchist
We’ve done a number of medium-distance races in these waters with mixed fleets (e.g. Swiftsure, Patos, Cascadia Convoy, Snakes and Ladders) on our F-82R (27’).

In lighter air (<5 knots) we’re literally racing boat-for-boat with the fast 30 and 40 foot monohulls (e.g. FT10, CM1200) and can’t really get away from them.

Once the wind picks up above 10 knots we are able to start pulling away.

Our maximum advantage versus the monos is probably in 15-20 knots of breeze, before the sea state builds too much.

Above 20 knots of breeze we’re still faster, but we have to start being wary of the sea state, which is less of a problem for the monos, so they can keep their foot on the gas, while we might have to slow down a bit.

If our boat is loaded down (e.g. with a third person and overnight gear) it’s much harder to get away from the monos.

I also owned a 42’ monohull for several years and did many of these very same races. It takes much more alertness to keep the smaller multihull on pace than a longer monohull, which is definitely a factor in longer races.

So all somebody really needs to do is show up with a 40’ multihull and it’s game over!


would be more applicable for the outside route with less tacking, but loaded 3 up but putting all possible supplies out of the mainhull and then able to shift the weight between the amas would help surely for the longer legs?
 

shebeen

Super Anarchist
Sure no problem. Several of us asked for clarification of that waypoint before the first race as “Either side of Hunter Island“ was not the original wording. The question was “ Do we have to sail the entire length of Lama Pass?“ The wording was then changed to allow us to enter Lama Pass from the west. It’s pretty clear that if sailing South to North through Lama Pass was not the intent, Lama Pass would not be mentioned. We all know where Bella Bella is. If there is an actual “rounding” mark there I am not aware of it. I love this race for it’s lack of rules and have completed it twice at the pointy end of the fleet, but I’m not sure I think turning a blind eye to the few rules that are there is the right thing to do. Not trying to be a Dick here. While we are at it, I’m also not sure that removing a human powered propulsion system to enhance performance and sailing into Victoria inner harbour is in the spirit of the race either. I know that had zero impact on the end result but still……………….
i agree. make the rules absolute, especially if it is just one or two of them.
the fact that this routing was used in an earlier race and passed surely makes this discussion moot.


people are forgetting that Elsewhere's route into Bella Bella was clearly way slower than just doing the pass.
They penalised themselves.
 

ProaSailor

Super Anarchist
5,925
702
Oregon
people are forgetting that Elsewhere's route into Bella Bella was clearly way slower than just doing the pass.
They penalised themselves.
That's your opinion, not a fact. Despite the casual "whatever" response to @valis' inquiry, the written rules clearly imply to me that a full transit is expected, not just a rounding of a mark that doesn't exist. Again:
Full race participants must go through the waypoint of Lama Passage (Bella Bella). Either side of Hunter Island is okay. See the later section about how to prove it, but other than that, you can choose your own course. (page 2)
Stage 2 From Victoria’s Inner Harbor to Ketchikan’s Thomas Basin: Any route between the two is acceptable as long as you pass through Lama Passage, in front of Bella Bella. (page 13)
Waypoint You must transit only one race waypoint—Lama Passage near Bella Bella. Why? Who knows… but that’s the deal. (page 16)
 

shebeen

Super Anarchist
That's your opinion, not a fact. Despite the casual "whatever" response to @valis' inquiry, the written rules clearly imply to me that a full transit is expected, not just a rounding of a mark that doesn't exist. Again:
Now we're really talking opinion. I'm open to the fact that them coming into Bella Bella from the north(west) was quicker than straight up the Lama Passage. It is unlikely due to considerable extra distance. P&W and KPW the other two outside route boats seem to handle up the channel just fine. They lost a huge amount of ground on FL by taking it.


but you're getting mixed up there.
"clearly imply" - that's an oxymoron if I ever saw one.
If a full transit was definitely required then a full transit would have been requested, the naming of Bella Bella would be redundant too.
 

ProaSailor

Super Anarchist
5,925
702
Oregon
but you're getting mixed up there.
"clearly imply" - that's an oxymoron if I ever saw one.
If a full transit was definitely required then a full transit would have been requested, the naming of Bella Bella would be redundant too.
Not at all. A full transit is clearly requested in the Race Rules.

If the race rules were unclear on the proper course then the blame lies with the R2AK rules, not with Elsewhere.
Agreed, absolutely!
 

Veeger

Super Anarchist
You all surely remember that the Organizers have always said something to the effect that if you have to bring a lawyer, you’re automatically disqualified. This discussion is trying to parse sentences like lawyers. You’re outta here!

Bella Bella was/is the intended waypoint. Doesn’t really matter how you got there or left there. Lama Passage is the body of water in front of Bella Bella. Full length? Give me a break, nothing requires that.

And to the other point above, coming from the N and swinging down to Bella Bella is clearly the longer route and a theoretical disadvantage (In distance at least).

As Dylan would say, ‘Good on ‘em!’
 

ProaSailor

Super Anarchist
5,925
702
Oregon
And to the other point above, coming from the N and swinging down to Bella Bella is clearly the longer route and a theoretical disadvantage (In distance at least).
In sailing, wind holes count. Team Elsewhere apparently made a deliberate gamble (rather than a mistake) because they perceived it to be an advantage. They also headed NW instead of NNE (straight for Bella Bella) from their position shown in this tracker image, because the wind was more favorable that way.
tracker_2022Jun23a.png

From their position in that image (51.2865,-128.5575), it is ~65 statute miles "straight" to Bella Bella and approximately 20 statute miles further via the entrance they chose instead - if they had gone "straight" to that entrance. But they didn't go due north, they went NNW for a better wind angle. so sailed even further out of their way compared to the direct route. It was a peculiar decision...
gmap_2022Jun23a.png
 

shebeen

Super Anarchist
Not at all. A full transit is clearly requested in the Race Rules.


Agreed, absolutely!
absolute rubbish, no it's not.
Where does it say that? If it clearly said that then we wouldn't be debating it, would we?

BUT,
It seems the whole point of the rules is to be a slightly obtuse so a bunch of keyboard warriors from yacht clubs sit on the internet debating the intentions of the rule writers. I call your bluff RaceBoss, touche, I'm out!
(i reserve the right to continue this mindless debate at some point later)
 

shebeen

Super Anarchist
In sailing, wind holes count. Team Elsewhere apparently made a deliberate gamble (rather than a mistake) because they perceived it to be an advantage. They also headed NW instead of NNE (straight for Bella Bella) from their position shown in this tracker image, because the wind was more favorable that way.
View attachment 524793
From their position in that image (51.2865,-128.5575), it is ~65 statute miles "straight" to Bella Bella and approximately 20 statute miles further via the entrance they chose instead - if they had gone "straight" to that entrance. But they didn't go due north, they went NNW for a better wind angle. so sailed even further out of their way compared to the direct route. It was a peculiar decision...
[only saw this one now] "apparently" - are you assuming things here? Their NW routing could have been chosen, or it could have just been one guy on watch (9pm) forgetting that he was supposed to wake the navigator sometime and when to tack. We don't really know.

At the time we mused why they were doing it, I figured tidal flow in lama passage could have been a reason, not sure if anyone has that data.

The one thing we know for as close as possible to sure is that when they approached Bella Bella from the west it involved multiple tacks. that is slow and more distance. That also tells me the wind there was coming from the east, so if that was the general direction a route up the passage would have been quicker. pure and wild and KTP both came that way and didn't have issues.
 

gspot

Anarchist
722
291
Victoria, BC
would be more applicable for the outside route with less tacking, but loaded 3 up but putting all possible supplies out of the mainhull and then able to shift the weight between the amas would help surely for the longer legs?
It's an interesting question!

I know some offshore racing monos shift the sail stacks and supplies from one side to the other for optimal weight placement, but that's probably easier and safer on a monohull because you can do it all from below decks.

We shift crew to the low side in light air, then to the main hull and windward hull as the wind builds. Conceivably you should shift supplies too, but that could get precarious in a building breeze because you're opening hatches in amas and having to work outside.

I haven't done it nor heard of it but doesn't mean it's not a thing. Anybody else done or heard of this?
 

munt

Anarchist
868
9
The belt
Never seen anybody store anything significant in the amas. Having to carry something back and forth across tramps, under boom etc. would be painful and precarious and anything other than fenders and docklines are rarely a good idea out there.
 
i agree. make the rules absolute, especially if it is just one or two of them.
the fact that this routing was used in an earlier race and passed surely makes this discussion moot.


people are forgetting that Elsewhere's route into Bella Bella was clearly way slower than just doing the pass.
They penalised themselves.
Question Sir. Have you actually done this race?
 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
9,134
2,324
PNW
Question Sir. Have you actually done this race?
Hats off to you and to everyone who has done the race.

Many of us have not had that opportunity but still enjoy the subject, shebeen included and I included but I enjoy both his posts and yours :)

Imo the rules could have been updated or further simplified once the outside passage option was opened up, maybe to just eliminate the debatable Lama Passage language altogether.
 

shebeen

Super Anarchist
Question Sir. Have you actually done this race?
No. Its on the bucket list.

Away from sailing I have done a considerable amount of expedition length adventure racing, as well as been part owner of a company putting on 100km+ races, many of which I directed.

I did ride a $25 MTB from Vancouver to Dawson city, using the AMH through many parts of this race course.
 

12 metre

Super Anarchist
3,746
615
English Bay
It's an interesting question!

I know some offshore racing monos shift the sail stacks and supplies from one side to the other for optimal weight placement, but that's probably easier and safer on a monohull because you can do it all from below decks.

We shift crew to the low side in light air, then to the main hull and windward hull as the wind builds. Conceivably you should shift supplies too, but that could get precarious in a building breeze because you're opening hatches in amas and having to work outside.

I haven't done it nor heard of it but doesn't mean it's not a thing. Anybody else done or heard of this?
I am curious about this because with the advent of canters and boats with transferable water ballast, I had assumed the rule disallowing movable ballast had been removed from RRS.

However, looking at the current RRS, Rule 51 is still in there:

51. MOVABLE BALLAST

All movable ballast, including sails that are not set, shall be properly stowed. Water, dead weight or ballast shall not be moved for the purpose of changing trim or stability. Floorboards, bulkheads, doors, stairs and water tanks shall be left in place and all cabin fixtures kept on board. However, bilge water may be bailed out.

I seem to recall canters and the like had to be given exemptions and so were not eligible to compete in every race. And they had to be rated for it of course.

I wonder how many boats race in violation of Rule 51?

Mind you, I'm an old curmudgeon who views stacking 6 bodies on the rail of a 30 footer as a violation of Rule 51 - at least in spirit.
 
Last edited:

valis

Super Anarchist
3,773
597
Friday Harbor, WA
[only saw this one now] "apparently" - are you assuming things here? Their NW routing could have been chosen, or it could have just been one guy on watch (9pm) forgetting that he was supposed to wake the navigator sometime and when to tack. We don't really know.
Since I've got nothing useful to do today, I took a look at the R2AK Team Elsewhere page, and from there to https://www.griffinbayadventures.co...xxXecjuyvWCMgIUbot614ZMPQu3Is6BqLLazzKHOelnFM. There, the Captain says:
we are heading with a VMG of 100% to a waypoint to the West of Bella Bella

So it sounds like this was a deliberate plan. But that doesn't necessarily make it a problem.
 

ProaSailor

Super Anarchist
5,925
702
Oregon
So it sounds like this was a deliberate plan. But that doesn't necessarily make it a problem.
I was thinking about this post (#479) where the option was discussed before the race started - by Team P&W:

Seems maybe I can help with the question of Elsewhere's northern dip and return at Bella Bella. I was talking to one of the Race Organizers on the docks before the Victoria start and the question actually came up in regards to Pure and Wild, they had asked if it was legal to come in from the north and head back out for the waypoint. The answer they were given at the time was that they basically had to pass through the Bella Bella waypoint "in a way that wouldn't make us doubt you had passed through the waypoint". That's probably not a word-perfect quote but it gives you the idea at least. Basically, the organizers want to keep as much of the simple, low rules approach as possible, so the fallback for any issues is rule 8: If we have to consult a lawyer, you're automatically out.

We already know the results of that conversation and the likely identical one Elsewhere must have had with them! Pure and Wild played it safe with the standard route and Elsewhere tried the new style. I highly doubt anyone will have an issue with it, honestly.
 

Autonomous

Super Anarchist
3,950
1,250
PNW
Long live rule 8!

A rules scrap is exactly what the R2AK is trying to avoid. Maybe the language can be cleaned up to prevent contestants from making onerous assumptions e.g. the Bella Bella waypoint.

After some thought about about vessels disabling and /or not using crew power and equipment to transit Victoria Harbor, I see how that can bring unwanted negative attention on the event.
There is the sportsmanship aspect as well, though the rules clearly say it's none of their business.

My sincere hope is R2AK can keep bureaucracy and rules conflict at bay.
 
Top