Throw/No Throw

[SemiSalt]

Seems to me that sealing the win before the last instant is the rule rather than the exception when there are multiple contests, e.g. baseball, football, etc.

Current scoring systems give a bigger benefit to going from 2nd to 1st than for going from 15th to 14th because it's harder.

I had never considered the application of F1-type scoring (only the top 6 get points) to sailing. That would make a DSQ no worse than a mid-pack finish and encourage a lot of risk-taking. (The scoring system could address that in some other way, e.g. you're tossed from the regatta for more than 1 DSQ.) Interesting idea.

 

[Cap'nSupaDupa]

I have often thought that the scoring system, as it applies to tiebreakers, also favors the inconsistent. The only part of the tie-breaking system that makes any sense is to reward the players who do better as the day progresses...and that's only in the final level of the tiebreaker.

 

[ChiGuy]

I have often thought that the scoring system, as it applies to tiebreakers, also favors the inconsistent. The only part of the tie-breaking system that makes any sense is to reward the players who do better as the day progresses...and that's only in the final level of the tiebreaker.

In a regatta where loaner boats are used, a throwout helps with breakdowns that may not be your fault.

What about a series of weekend races that's not a regatta? 6 weekends in a row, or a summer of beercan races? Often organizers count 1/2 + 1.

 

[squidly]

Personally I think a throw out is a reasonable thing in big fleet, long series racing. Too many variables out there.... Think of Ken Read winning the Etchel worlds a couple years back.. he had an OCS or something but won most of the other races. Should he have won the regatta? I think so... but that's just my opinion.

The other reason is you can sail a perfect regatta but some hack screws with you somewhere... we all know protest rooms are iffy at best. You can't control the guys you're racing against....

 

[walterbshaffer]

When you win the protest, the damage many times is already be done.

The concept here would be to encourage clean sailing; get involved in a protest, you can't throw that race out.

On the other hand, if you are fouled you should be allowed to throw that race, so the better rule is lose a protest, you can't throw that race.

This would not only encourage clean sailing, it would stop sailors who push the rules & protests from winning.

 

[Brian Pickton]

My point is that things change. In my young days, you hit a mark you dropped out - period, end of story. So I could say that a 360 for hitting a mark is a punk penalty that encourages risk taking at the marks. And there were no throw outs back then either. But things change. Today, things are a lot more serious in the competitive classes, and a lot more money is thrown at tiny boats, so maybe it is time to change back. But don't just think that one is better than the other, really the rules just meet the needs of their times. Does anybody remember turtling in the first race and being out of the Nationals by 2pm on the first day? That's harsh, but harshness may be what it's all about now.

Cruzist,

I am of your vintage and agree with your view. I've always thought throw outs were a way to forgive incompetence, and resulted in the scoring not truly reflecting what happened on the water. If you blow it badly, then you should own the mistake just as much as you own the things you did right. With respect to justifying the throw out as an opportunity to repair damage, how many would take the position that if the competitors did not suffer anything other then cosmetic damage, or no damage that caused them to miss a race, than there would be no throw outs for anybody?

On another note, it is one thing to justify throw outs in regattas that are compressed over a week so there is time to repair damage, but how do you justify that in a club racing series where the races are once a week?

If the damage is caused by a collision with another vessel, than presumably the vessel in the wrong is DSQ that race, while the damage has already been done to the vessel winning the protest in terms of position and damage, as noted elsewhere in this forum. It is bad enough that one competitor is damaged and may not be able to affect repairs in time to compete in the next race. Why should this situation result in an advantage to other competitors not involved in the incident? That is what a throw out for everyone means, the damaged vessel scrambles to put everything to rights and the others get to take advantage of the scoring system to fix their tactical errors.

I was surprised to read by inference in a couple of posts that if you are going to have throw outs then you cannot drop DSQ from your results. I would have thought having to count your DSQ as a result of a protest was pretty much universally applied. Are there competitions where this does not occur?

 

[bottlerocket]

Make the thowout equal to your second worst race. This favors the consistent and addresses the breakdown issue, although it probably is not a whole lot different than no throw outs.

 

[#13]

Interesting concept - throw out the hi, and low score?

That is interesting, as it seems as though it would reward consistency without punishing gear failure.

 

[Port Tack Rudder Rule]

I like the high and low throwout.

No throwouts do better reward consistency, but many times it's simply impossible to be consistent. As mentioned, there are situations that develop, completely out of our control, which leave even the best sailors in a bad spot. The reports I get from various olympic campaigns once in a while include something like "we were leading race three, but a [insert localised oddity] occured that no one could have predicted and we dropped to 14th."

As for the aggression factor, that's going to be there whatever we do. No throws, and people try to push others to an OCS. Throws, and people may be more willing to get into a collision.

Some protests already carry the penalty of not being discounted.

Breakdowns can't always be forseen either. Good boat maintenance is one thing, but if something fails that just isn't supposed to fail, is that your fault?

 

[#13]

As a competitor, race organizer, and PRO, I've got the following thoughts:

Long series over time: a throw out (or two) encourages participation. Miss a night / weekend due to travel and can no longer win? Well, in these hectic, always connected times, it gets real easy to do something else. Before anyone rants, the participation numbers for SF Bay events support that folks find something else to do when they get mathematically pushed out of contention. I'm also in favor for weekend type "long-series" (think local YRA) of back-loading the season with more races.

While it's true that most folks start the season with a lot of enthusiasm that may wane later, it will definitely wane faster if they are out of the podium places by the half way point.

Nationals or regional event involving loaner-boats: gotta have a throw out. All the best intentions in the world will not off-set a bad loaner, and I've seen some doozies, including "race ready" that had a wood burning stove below. "Hey, it's cold in Seattle, and she wins her club races, sometimes" was the explanation.

Nationals or regional event involving multiple-fleets: gotta have a throw-out. Getting fouled out of contention by a boat from a different class too busy eating lunch to notice your start or early weather leg, well, if I'm the lead boat I don't wanna hear the stories at the bar ("we woulda coulda shoulda if that OTHER boat...").

World or National events in which people bring their own or intentionally charter specific boats ahead of time: no throw outs. There are enough alternative penalties in play, and preparation is one of the primary keys to winning, IMHO.

At no point in any of the above situations should a DSQ due to protest be the throw-out. Gotta own your mistakes- if you really, really, really think you can barge in on the port layline at the weather mark, foul the starboard traffic, and ignore the 720 in the hopes of winning it in the room and don't- too damn bad for you. You get a DSQ to keep.

As noted in my earlier post, I think the concept of throwing out your worst AND best score is very interesting, perhaps even deserving it's own thread for discussion?

Final comment: having won a number of different series, as skipper and crew, over the years before the last race, I've typically sailed the event anyway. Respect to the competitors. That said, it once nearly cost us some expensive damage due to sailing up and into another fleet's 'cheap seats' as we lapped them (they had a shorter weather leg). At that moment, we all thought "why are we out here, potentially breaking the boat and spending the evening in the room, when we could be motoring home all put away with plenty of time to drive back to the awards ceremony?".

That situation is one in which I can see all sides of the argument(s).

Have fun gang!

#13

 

[SparxFly]

Regarding the whole issue of being on the wrong end of a collision, let's keep in mind that the penalized party is DSQ and the victim is given redress, usually the average of their scores. This does bring up a couple of interesting questions, though.

1) is the average applied before or after the throw-out?

2) what should happen if the fellow who wins the first race is taken out in the second to the point where he/she can't compete in the rest of the regatta? Would not the application of the rule (regardless of drops) give that competitor an automatic win of the regatta? (It's a hypothetical, unless someone knows of this happening.)

Thoughts?

Sparx

 

[Cooker]

People,

I think that you are all talking about something that you have complete control over. I think that many of the ideas put forward on the issue are good ones. The process is simple, change your local SI's to reflect the way you feel. By what I've read many of you are predominantly local sailors who are in a position to make these changes. It could be fun messing around with this stuff, I have personally changed scoring systems in training regattas that I have run.

As for international competitions, let the individual classes make their own decisions without broadstroking the whole of sailing into one format.

And finally as for the medal races and the comment that any idiot can win...I beg to differ, these are good sailors who have all made the top 10 at a major event.

 

[SparxFly]

Regarding throw outs, I'll agree it doesn't help those who are consistent as much as everyone else, but I am not sure that it's a bad thing, either. Let's face it, if you are in a duel for the silver you are going to be one of the better boats. The question then becomes how much you should be punished for your worst mistake, which may or may not involve the weather gods, other competitors or plain bad luck.

I think the only way to truly consider this question is ask the question: Consdering regattas, not club series, how many times does a throw-out change who wins which piece of silver? I think that vast majority of the time nothing changes and only when it does change can you look at the situation to decide whether it was fair. That class / reagatta can then look at how they score and make changes or not.

Bottom line, while no throw-outs is more "pure" (you are responsible for everything that happens to you, good, bad, or indifferent) I am reasonable certain that even with throw-outs the sailors present will agree the regatta scoring was fair and the top finishing boats deserving of the silver as they already agreed to the scoring system by participating.

I like 13's thoughts on the matter. It really does depend on the number of boats sailing and the number of races in the regatta.

FYI, the Bacardi Cup included a drop. 6 races were sailed and 75 boats participated. Had there been no drops the placing for the top 20 teams would have been reshuffled as follows: (Note, both sets of numbers are placings, I am not getting into personalities or anything else.) The large number of boats and small number of races probably overstates the place differntial. Non of the top 3 boats had an OCS or other penalty (2nd and 3rd trade spots), but 4th, 7th and 8th did, which dropped them 5, 6 and 7 places, respectively. The biggest positive jump came for the 20th place boat which jumped to 12th, followed by the 13th place boat which jumped to 6th. It is interesting to note that of the lowest rank boat to make it into the top 20 was the 24th place boat which ended up in 19th. This is one sample, but if other years show a similar shake-up then if I was regatta chair I would make a change to no drops because of the low number of races sailed.

No Drops Drops

1 1

2 3

3 2

4 6

5 5

6 13

7 9

8 14

9 4

10 11

11 10

12 20

13 7

14 21

15 8

16 23

17 12

18 17

19 24

20 22

This is one sample, but if other years show a similar shake-up then if I was regatta chair I would make a change to no drops because of the low number of races sailed.

I would suggest that a large number of better know one-design regattas should be analyzed and some sort of recommendation be drafted as to when drops should be instituted based on the number of participants and the number of races. Who know, maybe this has already been done.

Sparx

PS. Ed, is there a way to make this thing pay attention to spacing or tables??

 

[Positive Ape Index]

I agree with the premis and add my rant that in this politically correct skirt wearing world, race management decisions are strongly influenced by the least common denominator. Also they love to divide up the fleet, instead of letting everyone face off at once (maybe i speak of specific classes here.)

 

[cobutter]

The capricious nature of a change of season breeze or the local knowledge factor that elevates competitors on the non favoured side of a race course should not be grounds for relief for those who are on the wrong side of that course.

The failure of mechanical components or sail and rigging fabrics are events that should be regarded as fundamental to the racing environment and not provide an avenue of escape from a DNF

A furry brain developed through overtraining at the regatta "Welcome"cocktail party and which produces a bottom of the fleet result in the first race should not give the imbiber protection from recording that result

Pushing the envelope in respect to racing "rights" to vindictivelely disadvantage a competitor with the protection of a dropped race in the bag, is inconsistent with the spirit of the racing rules

For this correspondent every race in which you are entered is a counter in the overall result

 

[crashdog]

The throwout is part of a structure to minimize aggression and protests, not the other way around. I see two main purposes of the throwout:

1. Recovery from catastrophe, whether breakage or some other factor. For this alone, the throwout should be retained.

2. By providing a mechanism for withdrawing voluntarily after a major foul, and not having that foul apply in the score.

Let me explain #2. If you committ a foul but take it to the protest room, the negative outcome is a DSQ. In ISAF scoring, most DSQ, DNF, WD, or other such have the same score. However, if you commit a foul and thereafter voluntarily withdraw, then a protest is avoided and everyone is better served. The throwout rule facilitates better race management.

Withing the scoring section of the rules (89.3), there are provisions to make some DSQs survive the throwout. It seems to me that expanding these provisions to include all DSQs, including those arising from a protest, would be the best way to eliminate aggression against the rules. If you can't get rid of the DSQ from breaking the rule, but you can get rid of a foul by withdrawing, then sailors will take the penalty rather than risk the DSQ. This was the intent behind the development of the alternative penalty system, and it worked to reduce the amount of protests. What it did not do was reduce the aggression against the rules, since the cost of the alternative penalty was small, particularly in large fleets.

So, getting rid of the throwout will likely result in more protests, and the use of the protest as a tactical device to take down a competitor. It will be the bad old days all over again. What I find really interesting is that in the star fleet, whole piles of boats go around the marks within inches of each other, with a lot of the best sailors in the world aggressively trying to win, and there are a minimum of protests. There are throwouts in that fleet, and there are altnernative penalties, and all the rest. People know when they do something wrong, and are given the opportunity to accept the responsibility, and race some more. Its a good system, applied by good people.

 

[CAsailor]

I'm in favor of no throw outs, or, if that won't work, then throw the high and low score. Does the tour de france have throwouts if you get a flat tire? Can you throw out a mile in a marathon? Could the vor have throw out legs? No. Equipment breaks, and it sucks. you might even, gosh, lose. So you work harder next time, and keep your equipment in better shape. Screw the throwout, and if you must take a throwout ( a whale jumps out of the water, smacking the helmsman), then you loose your best score with it. I still think that's bullshit.

 

[Mark K]

Regarding the whole issue of being on the wrong end of a collision, let's keep in mind that the penalized party is DSQ and the victim is given redress, usually the average of their scores. This does bring up a couple of interesting questions, though. 1) is the average applied before or after the throw-out?

2) what should happen if the fellow who wins the first race is taken out in the second to the point where he/she can't compete in the rest of the regatta? Would not the application of the rule (regardless of drops) give that competitor an automatic win of the regatta? (It's a hypothetical, unless someone knows of this happening.)

Thoughts?

Sparx

The protest commitee has a free hand in granting redress. If they so decide they

can score the competitor the average of his completed race scores for

the rest of the regatta. So if only one race and he has a first, he can be

awarded the regatta.

 

[HSG]

No throwout in Class Championship. I have always thought the spoils should go to the most consistent across the board and that is usually the most prepared and talented team overall.

 

[Mark K]

I'm in favor of no throw outs, or, if that won't work, then throw the high and low score. Does the tour de france have throwouts if you get a flat tire? Can you throw out a mile in a marathon? Could the vor have throw out legs? No. Equipment breaks, and it sucks. you might even, gosh, lose. So you work harder next time, and keep your equipment in better shape. Screw the throwout, and if you must take a throwout ( a whale jumps out of the water, smacking the helmsman), then you loose your best score with it. I still think that's bullshit.

I agree that throwouts are BS, but how does thowing out the first with

the last help? It could make it worse. It increases the odds that one boat

is going to score over another boat that beat them on the course.

If two boats both toss a 50 and are tied, why should the boat whose

best finish is a 5 be scored over a boat whose best finish is a 4? Get rid

of the whole thing, I say.