Rolex Big Joke Series

Rain Man

Super Anarchist
7,372
2,178
Wet coast.
All this is a very good example of why the RC should never call over early sail numbers on the radio. Just put up the flag and take it down when they've all come back. Or not.

 

Christian

Super Anarchist
Here's what happened in HPR.

Race 4, Hamachi is in the middle of the line. We can't see either end with boats on both sides. We know we're close to the line and take a big dip right before the start. We come up and start racing. Horn blows, X flag goes up. We know we were close. Someone is listening on the radio. Three numbers called, our number is not called (confirmed by RC but rules are clear RC is not required to hail all the OCS boats). We ask the bowman, he said he thought it was close but that we were clear. We keep racing. We finish with a horn. We're scored as starting and finishing 2nd. Scores stand for at least 3 hours after the race. We don't know there is a video. Then at dinner that night someone checks the results and we see our score has changed to OCS? What? How did they do that? We protest to find out how what happened.

In the hearing, RC says they did not see us over early, did not write down our sail number and they did not call our number. They saw the video and changed the results. This is not how the rules are written. The international jury (none of them local) decides unanimously in our favor. The RRS do not allow for protests or scoring changes based on a video shown in the bar 3 hours after the race.

Sunday morning we're tied with Whiplash. Most of the crew from Whiplash and a skipper from one other HPR boat come over and suggest we withdraw from Race 2. We asked if they would agree to throw out race 2 where Beecom was screwed by the lack of a leeward mark. Beecom was way ahead and past Treasure Island with no mark to be found where it should be. RC raced down with a temporary mark before the rest of us got there. There request for redress was denied because they apparently didn't sail to the last weather mark and finish. Their lead was so large, had the mark been there, it would have been Beecom's regatta (so of course, Whiplash didn't like our suggestion). Their response to our suggestion was, "That's totally different." Are we talking rules or fairness? If we're talking rules, we followed them to a T and the jury ruled correctly. If we're talking fairness, Beecom should have won.

Whiplash didn't tell us they had already filed a protest under Rule 2 nor did they ever tell us (bad form and I'm surprised they don't know the rules given who was sailing on the boat). We see Whiplash's protest posted on the board. They claim the RC called our sail number (RC had confirmed they did not). They implied that perhaps our blue on black sail numbers were intentionally done to make them hard to read. What? Look at Whiplash numbers, dark red on black. It never occurred to me that anyone would pick colors because they were hard to read. Apparently it had occurred to others. And besides we had the only light blue hull in the race. Easily distinguishable. This was the first regatta with the black main. We're going to change our sail numbers on the black main to white because in certain lighting angles, the numbers are hard to read.

Before the protest hearing someone talked to Whiplash (not from our crew) and said that the rules were followed, their protest is baseless. They withdrew it.

We had talked it over and had decided that we wanted to have a fun race on Sunday to see if we could win it. We had agreed that if we beat Whiplash and won our class, we would have withdrawn from race 4. It was a fun, close race. As it was, we finished that last race 3rd versus Whiplash 2nd and ended up in 2nd place. Had we withdrawn from race 4 we still would have had a podium finish (3rd instead of 2nd).

While there might have been some mistakes by the RC this year, Big Boat Series is a great regatta in one of the world’s greatest sailing venues.
Since you KNOW you were OCS - why didn't you retire from the race in question?

 

Christian

Super Anarchist
Here's what happened in HPR.

Race 4, Hamachi is in the middle of the line. We can't see either end with boats on both sides. We know we're close to the line and take a big dip right before the start. We come up and start racing. Horn blows, X flag goes up. We know we were close. Someone is listening on the radio. Three numbers called, our number is not called (confirmed by RC but rules are clear RC is not required to hail all the OCS boats). We ask the bowman, he said he thought it was close but that we were clear. We keep racing. We finish with a horn. We're scored as starting and finishing 2nd. Scores stand for at least 3 hours after the race. We don't know there is a video. Then at dinner that night someone checks the results and we see our score has changed to OCS? What? How did they do that? We protest to find out how what happened.

In the hearing, RC says they did not see us over early, did not write down our sail number and they did not call our number. They saw the video and changed the results. This is not how the rules are written. The international jury (none of them local) decides unanimously in our favor. The RRS do not allow for protests or scoring changes based on a video shown in the bar 3 hours after the race.

Sunday morning we're tied with Whiplash. Most of the crew from Whiplash and a skipper from one other HPR boat come over and suggest we withdraw from Race 2. We asked if they would agree to throw out race 2 where Beecom was screwed by the lack of a leeward mark. Beecom was way ahead and past Treasure Island with no mark to be found where it should be. RC raced down with a temporary mark before the rest of us got there. There request for redress was denied because they apparently didn't sail to the last weather mark and finish. Their lead was so large, had the mark been there, it would have been Beecom's regatta (so of course, Whiplash didn't like our suggestion). Their response to our suggestion was, "That's totally different." Are we talking rules or fairness? If we're talking rules, we followed them to a T and the jury ruled correctly. If we're talking fairness, Beecom should have won.

Whiplash didn't tell us they had already filed a protest under Rule 2 nor did they ever tell us (bad form and I'm surprised they don't know the rules given who was sailing on the boat). We see Whiplash's protest posted on the board. They claim the RC called our sail number (RC had confirmed they did not). They implied that perhaps our blue on black sail numbers were intentionally done to make them hard to read. What? Look at Whiplash numbers, dark red on black. It never occurred to me that anyone would pick colors because they were hard to read. Apparently it had occurred to others. And besides we had the only light blue hull in the race. Easily distinguishable. This was the first regatta with the black main. We're going to change our sail numbers on the black main to white because in certain lighting angles, the numbers are hard to read.

Before the protest hearing someone talked to Whiplash (not from our crew) and said that the rules were followed, their protest is baseless. They withdrew it.

We had talked it over and had decided that we wanted to have a fun race on Sunday to see if we could win it. We had agreed that if we beat Whiplash and won our class, we would have withdrawn from race 4. It was a fun, close race. As it was, we finished that last race 3rd versus Whiplash 2nd and ended up in 2nd place. Had we withdrawn from race 4 we still would have had a podium finish (3rd instead of 2nd).

While there might have been some mistakes by the RC this year, Big Boat Series is a great regatta in one of the worlds greatest sailing venues.
Thank you for that explanation.
Speaking only for myself, I carry around 60 years or so of Catholic guilt. Faced with incontrovertible evidence that I had been OCS, I would have withdrawn, regardless of the IJ decision.
Irrespective of catholic guilt you have to take your penalty no matter what the IJ says if you have committed a foul - being OCS is just that. Lat21 is positively aware of their OCS even if it was a video shown in a bar 3 hours later - shameful they didn't retire.

 

Monkey

Super Anarchist
11,058
2,689
Here's what happened in HPR.

Race 4, Hamachi is in the middle of the line. We can't see either end with boats on both sides. We know we're close to the line and take a big dip right before the start. We come up and start racing. Horn blows, X flag goes up. We know we were close. Someone is listening on the radio. Three numbers called, our number is not called (confirmed by RC but rules are clear RC is not required to hail all the OCS boats). We ask the bowman, he said he thought it was close but that we were clear. We keep racing. We finish with a horn. We're scored as starting and finishing 2nd. Scores stand for at least 3 hours after the race. We don't know there is a video. Then at dinner that night someone checks the results and we see our score has changed to OCS? What? How did they do that? We protest to find out how what happened.

In the hearing, RC says they did not see us over early, did not write down our sail number and they did not call our number. They saw the video and changed the results. This is not how the rules are written. The international jury (none of them local) decides unanimously in our favor. The RRS do not allow for protests or scoring changes based on a video shown in the bar 3 hours after the race.

Sunday morning we're tied with Whiplash. Most of the crew from Whiplash and a skipper from one other HPR boat come over and suggest we withdraw from Race 2. We asked if they would agree to throw out race 2 where Beecom was screwed by the lack of a leeward mark. Beecom was way ahead and past Treasure Island with no mark to be found where it should be. RC raced down with a temporary mark before the rest of us got there. There request for redress was denied because they apparently didn't sail to the last weather mark and finish. Their lead was so large, had the mark been there, it would have been Beecom's regatta (so of course, Whiplash didn't like our suggestion). Their response to our suggestion was, "That's totally different." Are we talking rules or fairness? If we're talking rules, we followed them to a T and the jury ruled correctly. If we're talking fairness, Beecom should have won.

Whiplash didn't tell us they had already filed a protest under Rule 2 nor did they ever tell us (bad form and I'm surprised they don't know the rules given who was sailing on the boat). We see Whiplash's protest posted on the board. They claim the RC called our sail number (RC had confirmed they did not). They implied that perhaps our blue on black sail numbers were intentionally done to make them hard to read. What? Look at Whiplash numbers, dark red on black. It never occurred to me that anyone would pick colors because they were hard to read. Apparently it had occurred to others. And besides we had the only light blue hull in the race. Easily distinguishable. This was the first regatta with the black main. We're going to change our sail numbers on the black main to white because in certain lighting angles, the numbers are hard to read.

Before the protest hearing someone talked to Whiplash (not from our crew) and said that the rules were followed, their protest is baseless. They withdrew it.

We had talked it over and had decided that we wanted to have a fun race on Sunday to see if we could win it. We had agreed that if we beat Whiplash and won our class, we would have withdrawn from race 4. It was a fun, close race. As it was, we finished that last race 3rd versus Whiplash 2nd and ended up in 2nd place. Had we withdrawn from race 4 we still would have had a podium finish (3rd instead of 2nd).

While there might have been some mistakes by the RC this year, Big Boat Series is a great regatta in one of the worlds greatest sailing venues.
Thank you for that explanation.
Speaking only for myself, I carry around 60 years or so of Catholic guilt. Faced with incontrovertible evidence that I had been OCS, I would have withdrawn, regardless of the IJ decision.
Irrespective of catholic guilt you have to take your penalty no matter what the IJ says if you have committed a foul - being OCS is just that. Lat21 is positively aware of their OCS even if it was a video shown in a bar 3 hours later - shameful they didn't retire.
Personally, I can respect their choice to fight back against the wacky rescoring hours afterwards, but I would've chosen to win that battle to make a point, then RAF'ed
Edit: I hate to say it Lat21, but you're currently content to admit you'll cheat if you can get away with it. I wouldn't be proud of that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

some dude

Super Anarchist
4,176
169
Here's what happened in HPR.

Race 4, Hamachi is in the middle of the line. We can't see either end with boats on both sides. We know we're close to the line and take a big dip right before the start. We come up and start racing. Horn blows, X flag goes up. We know we were close. Someone is listening on the radio. Three numbers called, our number is not called (confirmed by RC but rules are clear RC is not required to hail all the OCS boats). We ask the bowman, he said he thought it was close but that we were clear. We keep racing. We finish with a horn. We're scored as starting and finishing 2nd. Scores stand for at least 3 hours after the race. We don't know there is a video. Then at dinner that night someone checks the results and we see our score has changed to OCS? What? How did they do that? We protest to find out how what happened.

In the hearing, RC says they did not see us over early, did not write down our sail number and they did not call our number. They saw the video and changed the results. This is not how the rules are written. The international jury (none of them local) decides unanimously in our favor. The RRS do not allow for protests or scoring changes based on a video shown in the bar 3 hours after the race.

Sunday morning we're tied with Whiplash. Most of the crew from Whiplash and a skipper from one other HPR boat come over and suggest we withdraw from Race 2. We asked if they would agree to throw out race 2 where Beecom was screwed by the lack of a leeward mark. Beecom was way ahead and past Treasure Island with no mark to be found where it should be. RC raced down with a temporary mark before the rest of us got there. There request for redress was denied because they apparently didn't sail to the last weather mark and finish. Their lead was so large, had the mark been there, it would have been Beecom's regatta (so of course, Whiplash didn't like our suggestion). Their response to our suggestion was, "That's totally different." Are we talking rules or fairness? If we're talking rules, we followed them to a T and the jury ruled correctly. If we're talking fairness, Beecom should have won.

Whiplash didn't tell us they had already filed a protest under Rule 2 nor did they ever tell us (bad form and I'm surprised they don't know the rules given who was sailing on the boat). We see Whiplash's protest posted on the board. They claim the RC called our sail number (RC had confirmed they did not). They implied that perhaps our blue on black sail numbers were intentionally done to make them hard to read. What? Look at Whiplash numbers, dark red on black. It never occurred to me that anyone would pick colors because they were hard to read. Apparently it had occurred to others. And besides we had the only light blue hull in the race. Easily distinguishable. This was the first regatta with the black main. We're going to change our sail numbers on the black main to white because in certain lighting angles, the numbers are hard to read.

Before the protest hearing someone talked to Whiplash (not from our crew) and said that the rules were followed, their protest is baseless. They withdrew it.

We had talked it over and had decided that we wanted to have a fun race on Sunday to see if we could win it. We had agreed that if we beat Whiplash and won our class, we would have withdrawn from race 4. It was a fun, close race. As it was, we finished that last race 3rd versus Whiplash 2nd and ended up in 2nd place. Had we withdrawn from race 4 we still would have had a podium finish (3rd instead of 2nd).

While there might have been some mistakes by the RC this year, Big Boat Series is a great regatta in one of the worlds greatest sailing venues.
Thank you for that explanation.
Speaking only for myself, I carry around 60 years or so of Catholic guilt. Faced with incontrovertible evidence that I had been OCS, I would have withdrawn, regardless of the IJ decision.
Irrespective of catholic guilt you have to take your penalty no matter what the IJ says if you have committed a foul - being OCS is just that. Lat21 is positively aware of their OCS even if it was a video shown in a bar 3 hours later - shameful they didn't retire.
Personally, I can respect their choice to fight back against the wacky rescoring hours afterwards, but I would've chosen to win that battle to make a point, then RAF'ed
Regatta's over, right?

They're having it again next year? There may even be other events between now and then?

That's what I thought

Once we've hashed this race over a few thousand more times should we pick another to endlessly discuss, or should we just plug away at work until it's time to go sailing again?

That's what I thought

Now about that 4th race at the 1994 Etchells Worlds, there's a little something I'd like to get off my chest...

 

MauiPunter

Will sail for food
J70.......BBS?.......what a sad little regatta. It certainly demonstrates how one design philosophy has killed interest in racing which used to attract people with money and the desire to be unique with their own design and development.......we called it IOR. That was racing. This is shit.
+1.1 Billion
Spoken like someone who wasn't there.
I dont need to be there to know the days of IOR >>>>> OD.

 

Christian

Super Anarchist
Here's what happened in HPR.

Race 4, Hamachi is in the middle of the line. We can't see either end with boats on both sides. We know we're close to the line and take a big dip right before the start. We come up and start racing. Horn blows, X flag goes up. We know we were close. Someone is listening on the radio. Three numbers called, our number is not called (confirmed by RC but rules are clear RC is not required to hail all the OCS boats). We ask the bowman, he said he thought it was close but that we were clear. We keep racing. We finish with a horn. We're scored as starting and finishing 2nd. Scores stand for at least 3 hours after the race. We don't know there is a video. Then at dinner that night someone checks the results and we see our score has changed to OCS? What? How did they do that? We protest to find out how what happened.

In the hearing, RC says they did not see us over early, did not write down our sail number and they did not call our number. They saw the video and changed the results. This is not how the rules are written. The international jury (none of them local) decides unanimously in our favor. The RRS do not allow for protests or scoring changes based on a video shown in the bar 3 hours after the race.

Sunday morning we're tied with Whiplash. Most of the crew from Whiplash and a skipper from one other HPR boat come over and suggest we withdraw from Race 2. We asked if they would agree to throw out race 2 where Beecom was screwed by the lack of a leeward mark. Beecom was way ahead and past Treasure Island with no mark to be found where it should be. RC raced down with a temporary mark before the rest of us got there. There request for redress was denied because they apparently didn't sail to the last weather mark and finish. Their lead was so large, had the mark been there, it would have been Beecom's regatta (so of course, Whiplash didn't like our suggestion). Their response to our suggestion was, "That's totally different." Are we talking rules or fairness? If we're talking rules, we followed them to a T and the jury ruled correctly. If we're talking fairness, Beecom should have won.

Whiplash didn't tell us they had already filed a protest under Rule 2 nor did they ever tell us (bad form and I'm surprised they don't know the rules given who was sailing on the boat). We see Whiplash's protest posted on the board. They claim the RC called our sail number (RC had confirmed they did not). They implied that perhaps our blue on black sail numbers were intentionally done to make them hard to read. What? Look at Whiplash numbers, dark red on black. It never occurred to me that anyone would pick colors because they were hard to read. Apparently it had occurred to others. And besides we had the only light blue hull in the race. Easily distinguishable. This was the first regatta with the black main. We're going to change our sail numbers on the black main to white because in certain lighting angles, the numbers are hard to read.

Before the protest hearing someone talked to Whiplash (not from our crew) and said that the rules were followed, their protest is baseless. They withdrew it.

We had talked it over and had decided that we wanted to have a fun race on Sunday to see if we could win it. We had agreed that if we beat Whiplash and won our class, we would have withdrawn from race 4. It was a fun, close race. As it was, we finished that last race 3rd versus Whiplash 2nd and ended up in 2nd place. Had we withdrawn from race 4 we still would have had a podium finish (3rd instead of 2nd).

While there might have been some mistakes by the RC this year, Big Boat Series is a great regatta in one of the worlds greatest sailing venues.
Thank you for that explanation.
Speaking only for myself, I carry around 60 years or so of Catholic guilt. Faced with incontrovertible evidence that I had been OCS, I would have withdrawn, regardless of the IJ decision.
Irrespective of catholic guilt you have to take your penalty no matter what the IJ says if you have committed a foul - being OCS is just that. Lat21 is positively aware of their OCS even if it was a video shown in a bar 3 hours later - shameful they didn't retire.
Personally, I can respect their choice to fight back against the wacky rescoring hours afterwards, but I would've chosen to win that battle to make a point, then RAF'ed
Edit: I hate to say it Lat21, but you're currently content to admit you'll cheat if you can get away with it. I wouldn't be proud of that.
Sure, I can follow you there to a degree - I assume that at the time they were (maybe not following proper protocol) scored OCS they also knew that they were indeed OCS and should have retired on the spot - hence no real reason for fighting the OCS verdict just to subsequently retire

 

NoStrings

Super Anarchist
8,088
6
Richmond, CA
J70.......BBS?.......what a sad little regatta. It certainly demonstrates how one design philosophy has killed interest in racing which used to attract people with money and the desire to be unique with their own design and development.......we called it IOR. That was racing. This is shit.
+1.1 Billion
Spoken like someone who wasn't there.
Good lord, half of the J-111 owners can pull out pocket change and buy a mini maxi. They CHOOSE to race one design. You guys just don't get it.

 

Monkey

Super Anarchist
11,058
2,689
Here's what happened in HPR.

Race 4, Hamachi is in the middle of the line. We can't see either end with boats on both sides. We know we're close to the line and take a big dip right before the start. We come up and start racing. Horn blows, X flag goes up. We know we were close. Someone is listening on the radio. Three numbers called, our number is not called (confirmed by RC but rules are clear RC is not required to hail all the OCS boats). We ask the bowman, he said he thought it was close but that we were clear. We keep racing. We finish with a horn. We're scored as starting and finishing 2nd. Scores stand for at least 3 hours after the race. We don't know there is a video. Then at dinner that night someone checks the results and we see our score has changed to OCS? What? How did they do that? We protest to find out how what happened.

In the hearing, RC says they did not see us over early, did not write down our sail number and they did not call our number. They saw the video and changed the results. This is not how the rules are written. The international jury (none of them local) decides unanimously in our favor. The RRS do not allow for protests or scoring changes based on a video shown in the bar 3 hours after the race.

Sunday morning we're tied with Whiplash. Most of the crew from Whiplash and a skipper from one other HPR boat come over and suggest we withdraw from Race 2. We asked if they would agree to throw out race 2 where Beecom was screwed by the lack of a leeward mark. Beecom was way ahead and past Treasure Island with no mark to be found where it should be. RC raced down with a temporary mark before the rest of us got there. There request for redress was denied because they apparently didn't sail to the last weather mark and finish. Their lead was so large, had the mark been there, it would have been Beecom's regatta (so of course, Whiplash didn't like our suggestion). Their response to our suggestion was, "That's totally different." Are we talking rules or fairness? If we're talking rules, we followed them to a T and the jury ruled correctly. If we're talking fairness, Beecom should have won.

Whiplash didn't tell us they had already filed a protest under Rule 2 nor did they ever tell us (bad form and I'm surprised they don't know the rules given who was sailing on the boat). We see Whiplash's protest posted on the board. They claim the RC called our sail number (RC had confirmed they did not). They implied that perhaps our blue on black sail numbers were intentionally done to make them hard to read. What? Look at Whiplash numbers, dark red on black. It never occurred to me that anyone would pick colors because they were hard to read. Apparently it had occurred to others. And besides we had the only light blue hull in the race. Easily distinguishable. This was the first regatta with the black main. We're going to change our sail numbers on the black main to white because in certain lighting angles, the numbers are hard to read.

Before the protest hearing someone talked to Whiplash (not from our crew) and said that the rules were followed, their protest is baseless. They withdrew it.

We had talked it over and had decided that we wanted to have a fun race on Sunday to see if we could win it. We had agreed that if we beat Whiplash and won our class, we would have withdrawn from race 4. It was a fun, close race. As it was, we finished that last race 3rd versus Whiplash 2nd and ended up in 2nd place. Had we withdrawn from race 4 we still would have had a podium finish (3rd instead of 2nd).

While there might have been some mistakes by the RC this year, Big Boat Series is a great regatta in one of the worlds greatest sailing venues.
Thank you for that explanation.
Speaking only for myself, I carry around 60 years or so of Catholic guilt. Faced with incontrovertible evidence that I had been OCS, I would have withdrawn, regardless of the IJ decision.
Irrespective of catholic guilt you have to take your penalty no matter what the IJ says if you have committed a foul - being OCS is just that. Lat21 is positively aware of their OCS even if it was a video shown in a bar 3 hours later - shameful they didn't retire.
Personally, I can respect their choice to fight back against the wacky rescoring hours afterwards, but I would've chosen to win that battle to make a point, then RAF'ed
Edit: I hate to say it Lat21, but you're currently content to admit you'll cheat if you can get away with it. I wouldn't be proud of that.
Sure, I can follow you there to a degree - I assume that at the time they were (maybe not following proper protocol) scored OCS they also knew that they were indeed OCS and should have retired on the spot - hence no real reason for fighting the OCS verdict just to subsequently retire
I wasn't endorsing their fight against the OCS. I was only endorsing their fight against the RC not following the rules. It would've let them prove themselves twice.
 

NoStrings

Super Anarchist
8,088
6
Richmond, CA
Here's what happened in HPR.

Race 4, Hamachi is in the middle of the line. We can't see either end with boats on both sides. We know we're close to the line and take a big dip right before the start. We come up and start racing. Horn blows, X flag goes up. We know we were close. Someone is listening on the radio. Three numbers called, our number is not called (confirmed by RC but rules are clear RC is not required to hail all the OCS boats). We ask the bowman, he said he thought it was close but that we were clear. We keep racing. We finish with a horn. We're scored as starting and finishing 2nd. Scores stand for at least 3 hours after the race. We don't know there is a video. Then at dinner that night someone checks the results and we see our score has changed to OCS? What? How did they do that? We protest to find out how what happened.

In the hearing, RC says they did not see us over early, did not write down our sail number and they did not call our number. They saw the video and changed the results. This is not how the rules are written. The international jury (none of them local) decides unanimously in our favor. The RRS do not allow for protests or scoring changes based on a video shown in the bar 3 hours after the race.

Sunday morning we're tied with Whiplash. Most of the crew from Whiplash and a skipper from one other HPR boat come over and suggest we withdraw from Race 2. We asked if they would agree to throw out race 2 where Beecom was screwed by the lack of a leeward mark. Beecom was way ahead and past Treasure Island with no mark to be found where it should be. RC raced down with a temporary mark before the rest of us got there. There request for redress was denied because they apparently didn't sail to the last weather mark and finish. Their lead was so large, had the mark been there, it would have been Beecom's regatta (so of course, Whiplash didn't like our suggestion). Their response to our suggestion was, "That's totally different." Are we talking rules or fairness? If we're talking rules, we followed them to a T and the jury ruled correctly. If we're talking fairness, Beecom should have won.

Whiplash didn't tell us they had already filed a protest under Rule 2 nor did they ever tell us (bad form and I'm surprised they don't know the rules given who was sailing on the boat). We see Whiplash's protest posted on the board. They claim the RC called our sail number (RC had confirmed they did not). They implied that perhaps our blue on black sail numbers were intentionally done to make them hard to read. What? Look at Whiplash numbers, dark red on black. It never occurred to me that anyone would pick colors because they were hard to read. Apparently it had occurred to others. And besides we had the only light blue hull in the race. Easily distinguishable. This was the first regatta with the black main. We're going to change our sail numbers on the black main to white because in certain lighting angles, the numbers are hard to read.

Before the protest hearing someone talked to Whiplash (not from our crew) and said that the rules were followed, their protest is baseless. They withdrew it.

We had talked it over and had decided that we wanted to have a fun race on Sunday to see if we could win it. We had agreed that if we beat Whiplash and won our class, we would have withdrawn from race 4. It was a fun, close race. As it was, we finished that last race 3rd versus Whiplash 2nd and ended up in 2nd place. Had we withdrawn from race 4 we still would have had a podium finish (3rd instead of 2nd).

While there might have been some mistakes by the RC this year, Big Boat Series is a great regatta in one of the worlds greatest sailing venues.
Thank you for that explanation.Speaking only for myself, I carry around 60 years or so of Catholic guilt. Faced with incontrovertible evidence that I had been OCS, I would have withdrawn, regardless of the IJ decision.
Irrespective of catholic guilt you have to take your penalty no matter what the IJ says if you have committed a foul - being OCS is just that. Lat21 is positively aware of their OCS even if it was a video shown in a bar 3 hours later - shameful they didn't retire.
While thats what you or I would have done (I happen to count all of my golf strokes, and it isn't easy), some people seem to struggle with ethics. I would expect better, especially after the 2010 fiasco. Its sad really.

 

Abbo

Super Anarchist
Here's what happened in HPR.

Race 4, Hamachi is in the middle of the line. We can't see either end with boats on both sides. We know we're close to the line and take a big dip right before the start. We come up and start racing. Horn blows, X flag goes up. We know we were close. Someone is listening on the radio. Three numbers called, our number is not called (confirmed by RC but rules are clear RC is not required to hail all the OCS boats). We ask the bowman, he said he thought it was close but that we were clear. We keep racing. We finish with a horn. We're scored as starting and finishing 2nd. Scores stand for at least 3 hours after the race. We don't know there is a video. Then at dinner that night someone checks the results and we see our score has changed to OCS? What? How did they do that? We protest to find out how what happened.

In the hearing, RC says they did not see us over early, did not write down our sail number and they did not call our number. They saw the video and changed the results. This is not how the rules are written. The international jury (none of them local) decides unanimously in our favor. The RRS do not allow for protests or scoring changes based on a video shown in the bar 3 hours after the race.

Sunday morning we're tied with Whiplash. Most of the crew from Whiplash and a skipper from one other HPR boat come over and suggest we withdraw from Race 2. We asked if they would agree to throw out race 2 where Beecom was screwed by the lack of a leeward mark. Beecom was way ahead and past Treasure Island with no mark to be found where it should be. RC raced down with a temporary mark before the rest of us got there. There request for redress was denied because they apparently didn't sail to the last weather mark and finish. Their lead was so large, had the mark been there, it would have been Beecom's regatta (so of course, Whiplash didn't like our suggestion). Their response to our suggestion was, "That's totally different." Are we talking rules or fairness? If we're talking rules, we followed them to a T and the jury ruled correctly. If we're talking fairness, Beecom should have won.

Whiplash didn't tell us they had already filed a protest under Rule 2 nor did they ever tell us (bad form and I'm surprised they don't know the rules given who was sailing on the boat). We see Whiplash's protest posted on the board. They claim the RC called our sail number (RC had confirmed they did not). They implied that perhaps our blue on black sail numbers were intentionally done to make them hard to read. What? Look at Whiplash numbers, dark red on black. It never occurred to me that anyone would pick colors because they were hard to read. Apparently it had occurred to others. And besides we had the only light blue hull in the race. Easily distinguishable. This was the first regatta with the black main. We're going to change our sail numbers on the black main to white because in certain lighting angles, the numbers are hard to read.

Before the protest hearing someone talked to Whiplash (not from our crew) and said that the rules were followed, their protest is baseless. They withdrew it.

We had talked it over and had decided that we wanted to have a fun race on Sunday to see if we could win it. We had agreed that if we beat Whiplash and won our class, we would have withdrawn from race 4. It was a fun, close race. As it was, we finished that last race 3rd versus Whiplash 2nd and ended up in 2nd place. Had we withdrawn from race 4 we still would have had a podium finish (3rd instead of 2nd).

While there might have been some mistakes by the RC this year, Big Boat Series is a great regatta in one of the worlds greatest sailing venues.
Thank you for that explanation.Speaking only for myself, I carry around 60 years or so of Catholic guilt. Faced with incontrovertible evidence that I had been OCS, I would have withdrawn, regardless of the IJ decision.
Irrespective of catholic guilt you have to take your penalty no matter what the IJ says if you have committed a foul - being OCS is just that. Lat21 is positively aware of their OCS even if it was a video shown in a bar 3 hours later - shameful they didn't retire.
Personally, I can respect their choice to fight back against the wacky rescoring hours afterwards, but I would've chosen to win that battle to make a point, then RAF'ed
Regatta's over, right?

They're having it again next year? There may even be other events between now and then?

That's what I thought

Once we've hashed this race over a few thousand more times should we pick another to endlessly discuss, or should we just plug away at work until it's time to go sailing again?

That's what I thought

Now about that 4th race at the 1994 Etchells Worlds, there's a little something I'd like to get off my chest...
Lemme guess, you were ocs?

 

familysailor

Super Anarchist
3,739
146
San Francisco Bay
All this is a very good example of why the RC should never call over early sail numbers on the radio. Just put up the flag and take it down when they've all come back. Or not.
What's really weird is that the Rc didn't notice the J125 over early until they say the video....

Mind control... that's what it was!

 

NoStrings

Super Anarchist
8,088
6
Richmond, CA
All this is a very good example of why the RC should never call over early sail numbers on the radio. Just put up the flag and take it down when they've all come back. Or not.
What's really weird is that the Rc didn't notice the J125 over early until they say the video....Mind control... that's what it was!
I can see it happening..."holy crap, they're over...who is next?" Hamachi was so obvious the RC dropped them, focused on the next two or three, then forgot them.

 




Top