Forum: Race Officers

Learning from Mistakes

John Palizza
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Race Officer
  • Regional Judge
I am compiling a booklet that I hope will be helpful for people who want to run sailboat races. It will be tentatively titled "Essays in Race Management: Sea Stories for Race Officers". One section will be subtitled "Learning From Mistakes", which comes out of an Advanced Race Management seminar where the participants were asked the question “What is the worst mistake you’ve made while running a sailboat race?” That question has stuck with me as I am a firm believer in the maxim that we learn more from our mistakes than we do when everything goes smoothly. We all make mistakes - goodness knows there are a thousand ways for a race officer to screw up on a race course. The important thing is to learn from the mistake and not repeat it; or, better yet, find a way to recover from the mistake so that the competitors are not disadvantaged. 
So, herewith, is my biggest mistake. I hope that you will share yours and the lessons you learned from it and allow me to compile it in my booklet.

John Palizza:

I was running a high school regatta a couple of years ago, and it was what is referred to as a Tier 3 event, which means that the teams racing were not attempting to qualify for any other event. As a consequence, things were a bit more relaxed and I was trying for a “kinder, gentler race committee” approach where we were responsive to the high schoolers’ questions and trying to not make the race committee as intimidating as it can be at times. 

Prior to the start of the first race, before the sequence began (i. e. the boats were not racing at that point), a competitor sailed past the committee boat and asked, “Do we have to sail through the gate before finishing?” The course was set up as a windward/leeward with a windward mark, an offset mark and a gate above the start/finish line, which was directly below the gate. Wanting to be helpful to the young high school sailor, I very cavalierly replied “No, you don’t have to go through the gate before finishing. Of course, in spite of the fact that I had written the sailing instructions, I got it wrong. The sailing instructions very clearly showed that you had to go through the gate prior to finishing. 

Then the inevitable happened: the competitor did not sail through the gate before finishing and was promptly protested by another boat. I had to go to the protest hearing and testify that it was my mistake that the competitor did not go through the gate. Redress was awarded to the competitor and they were allowed to retain their finishing position.

Talk about egg on your face. To this day my son, who is also a race officer, likes to remind me that I couldn’t remember the sailing instructions I had written.

Lesson learned:  When asked a question about the sailing instructions, before answering, ALWAYS LOOK IT UP! A corollary to this is what judges learn: whenever a rule comes into play, always pull out the rule book and read the rule before answering.
Created: 23-Nov-20 14:02

Comments

P
Niko Kotsatos
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
2
I'd like to purchase your booklet!
Created: 23-Nov-20 15:26
Ant Davey
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • International Judge
  • Umpire In Training
1
Technically, competitors have to read the SIs to know what course to sail They don't have to read any notices to competitors. So, please, never issue an amendment to the SIs (for example, a change to the course diagrams) as a notice to competitors.
Created: 23-Nov-20 16:30
Trisha McElroy
Certifications:
  • Measurer in Training
  • Club Race Officer
  • Regional Judge
0
check out 2020 Moosehead Show Channel: The Mooseheads
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Et_vNQBz84Q
ISPCRY
mooseheadcommittee@gmail.com
Created: 23-Nov-20 16:46
Roger Strube
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • National Classifier
3
When asked anything about the race while on the water my response has always been "Read your sailing instructions." This may sound a little heartless at a youth regatta, but it will keep you out of "The Room" and out of trouble on the water. At the skippers meeting, the competitors should have access to the SIs in paper form or on their smart phones. The response to any question at the meeting is again, "Read your sailing instructions." You should have a printed copy of the instructions in your hand at the meeting so you can add, "See finishing instructions number ....." Then read the SI paragraph so there is no misunderstanding. 
I always ask the competitors at the Skipper's Meeting: "How do you hide information about the regatta from the racers?" The answer is, of course, "Put it in the Sailing Instructions." 
Created: 23-Nov-20 18:43
Sue Reilly
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • National Umpire
  • Regional Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
1
Depending on the level of the event - if someone asks a question on the water, as long as the boats carry, and are told the RC communicates on the VHF, I'll make a general announcement to all boats,  Chances are if 1 boat has a question others do too.  I also remember to read the SI's the night before and the morning of an event so they are fresh in my mind.  
Created: 23-Nov-20 19:12
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Fleet Measurer
1
Ant re: “… So, please, never issue an amendment to the SIs (for example, a change to the course diagrams) as a notice to competitors.”

Is your point … ?

  • Posting a Notice to Competitors that an Amendemnt to the SI’s has been posted on the ONB = YES
  • Posting the Amendment to the SI’s as/in a Notice to Competitors = NO
Created: 23-Nov-20 19:18
John Palizza
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Race Officer
  • Regional Judge
1
Roger, I think you are missing the point here. I know how to do things "by the book". I also know that you stand a good chance of alienating young sailors if the RC is unhelpful. If the choice is between turning young sailors off from our sport or trying to be helpful, I'll take that chance every time. Would your advice be the same if the event was for very young opti sailors? Note a couple of things - the event was not a qualifier for anything, it was prior to the sequence starting and it was high school kids. Change anyone of those items and my answer changes to either "Read the sailing instructions", "Check with your coach" or something similar, but I will try to be helpful if I can be and we are outside of the start of the sequence. The days of the race committee standing silent on the RC boat with their arms folded are gone.
Created: 23-Nov-20 19:22
Trisha McElroy
Certifications:
  • Measurer in Training
  • Club Race Officer
  • Regional Judge
1
I think Sue Reilly has the right answer, you can be helpful by making the announcement to the whole fleet. Rule 41 will not be broken and maybe everyone will learn something. These are young sailors learning the ropes and I agree there are probably others with the same question. As long as you are fair to all and don't give an advantage to anyone sailor nothing should be protested. 
Created: 23-Nov-20 20:41
P
Niko Kotsatos
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
1
I've made the types of mistakes others are describing. When I've run junior regattas, I've tried to be pretty transparent and vocal with my advice to the fleet. That way a majority (hopefully all) of the fleet can hear what I'm saying. Sometimes I've had to correct myself, but at least everyone shares in the confusion, blame, correction, or knowledge gain, making it as fair as possible, while also providing support.

It's the same thing we do as managers when an employee has missed something. Generally, you can't pull them aside and tell them they're doing it wrong. Instead, we grab the group, note the issue, and ask everyone to work to clean it up. At least then if you have to repeat yourself, you've given everyone a chance.
Created: 23-Nov-20 20:46
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
0
This may well be a useful exercise for all of us.

I'm wondering whether the most useful outcome will be John's final booklet or just the process we have here discussing the anecdotes.

As to John's first incident, I wonder what the lessons we should learn are?

  • Read the SI before you give advice to competitors about what's in them?
  • As a race committee, promptly request redress for Competitors if you do give them wrong advice?
  • Don't put silly stuff that makes no sense to the RO in the SI?
  • Make sure the RO is involved in writing the SI?
  • What else? 
Created: 23-Nov-20 21:06
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
1
Angelo Guarino
Said Created: Today 19:18

Ant re: “… So, please, never issue an amendment to the SIs (for example, a change to the course diagrams) as a notice to competitors.”

Is your point … ?

  • Posting a Notice to Competitors that an Amendemnt to the SI’s has been posted on the ONB = YES
  • Posting the Amendment to the SI’s as/in a Notice to Competitors = NO

Are we somehow saying that a document headed  Notice to Competitors' advising a change to the SI is somehow different from a document just headed 'Amendment to the SI'?

How is any document posted on the Official Notice Board not a Notice to Competitors?

Or is Ant just saying that to change a course, the written document must say it is an Amendment to the SI, and amend the SI chapter and verse?

On reflection 

Ant Davey
Said Created: Today 16:30
Technically, competitors have to read the SIs to know what course to sail They don't have to read any notices to competitors. 

Technically no rule requires competitors to read the  SI or any other document.

But most protest committees would find it a fault of the boat's own if considering redress.
Created: 23-Nov-20 21:12
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
0
Roger 
Said Created: Today 18:43

When asked anything about the race while on the water my response has always been "Read your sailing instructions." This may sound a little heartless 
...
 You should have a printed copy of the instructions in your hand at the meeting so you can add, "See finishing instructions number ....." Then read the SI paragraph so there is no misunderstanding. 

How you say things can make a lot of difference.

'Read the Sailing Instructions' is notoriously unhelpful and sets a really bad tone for relations between the RO and competitors.

I'd suggest something like 

'Got your Sailing Instructions?   What part of SI nn is not clear to you please?'
Created: 23-Nov-20 21:32
Ant Davey
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • International Judge
  • Umpire In Training
0
My point about the difference between an amendment to sailing instructions and a notice to competitors is that the IJ manual and/or case book specifically state that a competitor need not read the notices to competitors, but should be able to rely on the SIs about details of the course(s) to be sailed. If a crew doesn't read an amendment to the SIs more fool them. Any additions to the notices to competitors are irrelevant when it comes to sailing the course. Unfortunately for a PC I was chairing earlier this year, the RC issued a change to the course for the next day as a notice to competitors. This caused a serious amount of confusion and upset for many of the competitors and stress for the PC across the rest of the event. So my point for the advice for ROs booklet is simply 'don't do that'.
Created: 23-Nov-20 21:47
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
1
Ant,

Just to clarify

A document on the ONB saying merely 'Course 1 is changed to ... ... .' is ineffective because of case 32.

But 

A document on the ONB saying 'SI nn is amended to read  "Course 1 Start - 1 - 1a - ... ... .' is effective?
Created: 23-Nov-20 22:18
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Fleet Measurer
2
SI’s are rules (def: rule). So as long as both 85.1 and 90.2(c) are followed, one should be good. 

A “post” to the Notice to Competitors on the ONB meets 2 criteria of 90.2(c):
  1. It’s in writting
  2. It’s on the ONB

The remaining criteria which needs satisfying:
  1. 85.1 “..shall refer specifically to the rule [SI] and state the change.”
  2. 90.2(c) “posted …. before the time stated in the sailing instructions“


PS: I’m not suggesting at all that it’s good practice to only do the above and not also upload/post the SI amendment alongside the original version of the SI’s, such that they can be located together in one place. 
Created: 23-Nov-21 04:09
Al Sargent
Nationality: United States
1
Hi John, thanks for writing that section on "Learning From Mistakes". I think this could be an excellent case-based approach to race management, similar in teaching style to Dave Perry's Rules Quizzes book. To add to that, here's my perspective, as a competitor in Lasers and small keelboats, on common race committee mistakes:

  • Taking too long to get races going. This can be due to the Wind Tunnel Fallacy, Markset Capacity, Over-Ambitious Regatta Chairs, all explained below.
  • The Wind Tunnel Fallacy: waiting for the wind to be absolutely perfectly steady before starting a race, or setting a far-away course where the breeze is just a bit steadier than closer to the host club/OA. Of course, no one wants races when a major transition is coming, e.g., a ~180 degree shift from offshore breeze to seabreeze, but too often, Race Committees wait for the current breeze to "settle down". Or requires competitors to sail for over an hour, sometimes going through hazardous shipping lanes (fun to explain that one to parents) or literally going into a different country (and getting stopped by the Coast Guard for illegal entry). Anticipating changes to the wind is part of our sport.
  • Markset Capacity. Sometimes race committees bite off more than they can chew, in terms of trying to set up an overly complex course that they cannot set with the -- and more importantly, adjust to wind changes -- given the number of markset boats, the skill of their market drivers, the topography/current of the course, etc. No competitor has every said back on shore, "Wow, that complex course was just amazing" -- so stick with just what's needed for traffic management, and no more.
  • Over-ambitious Regatta Chairs. These are people who ask for courses that are too complex to set and adjust. (I admit that I've been this person, multiple times.) If a regatta chair asks for a complex course, like a double trapezoid or slalom, and doesn't have a commensurately large and skilled markset team, the PRO/race committee should push back.
  • Skewed courses in current, due to not looking at competitors' upwind angles, and not understanding how current impacts those angles. This is more specific to places like San Francisco, but race committees need to understand that the wind they see at anchor can be quite different from what competitors see due to current. It's easy to solve: ask competitors at the sailors' meeting to regularly sail upwind past the committee boat on both port and starboard, and take wind shots (compass readings) next to the committee boat.
  • The Death March. Setting courses that are physically tortuous. Some boats, like the Laser, are very physical in almost all conditions, and a 20 minute beat is brutal. This can sometimes happen when there are multiple classes that sail at different speeds. For example, our Laser fleet recently shared a course with the 505 class in heavy adverse current; 505s did the upwind leg in maybe 15 minutes; it took the Lasers literally 60 minutes due to the current. Two weather marks would have been ideal.

It's possible that sailors in other classes would have a different set of common race committee mistakes. It'd therefore could be worth working with different classes to ask them to reach out to their members for input. 

By the way, I cringed a little when using the world "Mistake" since it sounds a bit harsh, and it's important to recognize that race committees do their best. It's hard to run races for classes you don't know, and competitors should keep that mind when giving feedback. 
Created: 23-Nov-21 22:25
Ant Davey
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • International Judge
  • Umpire In Training
0
John and Ang, to my mind an amendment to the SIs on the ONB should be titled as such, and should, ideally have its own section on the ONB that is separate from 'notices'. And, of course, and amendment to SIs, when published, should have an L flag (signal ashore) hoisted, with a numeral pennant below it, unless it is the first amendment to be posted. The lack of a numeral pennant has radically affected the results of a national team and its individual sailors at a European Championship I was working at. So, there's another hint for running a good event when amendments are issued.
Created: 23-Nov-22 15:16
P
Niko Kotsatos
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
1
Re: the Wind Tunnel Falacy, I find this is particularly applicable where the breeze is often steady (Buzzards Bay, Vineyard Sound, SF, etc.) and that lesser RC from shift places (Charles River, Boston Harbor) often have quite a bit more skill and urgency in setting courses in shifting conditions. The primary trick is not to shift the course the "the new wind" but to recognize that the wind will often oscillate (even in a persistent shift) and the course can be set for the average of these oscillations.
Created: 23-Nov-22 15:25
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Ant, I agree 100%.  There is often a gap between what is minimally required by the rules and best practice.  

I think you’ve described the best practice where I was looking at the rule min.  … which was spurred by the idea of a request for redress by a competitor claiming the amendment represented an improper action or omission by the RC (which I think keys off of the RRS min required actions of an RC). 
Created: 23-Nov-22 19:04
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
0
Ant,

What does L flag over numeral pendant mean?

I can guess, but I can't find it in 
  • The Race Management Manual
  • Appendix KE or KG
  • Appendix LE or LG.

And BTW where is a requirement to display flag L if a notice is posted stated?
Created: 23-Nov-22 21:40
Ant Davey
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • International Judge
  • Umpire In Training
0
John, Race Signals, other signals, ashore. Actually says a notice to competitors has been posted. That, at least, tells competitors to look at the ONB. I suppose it's up to them to determine whether it is simply a 'notice', or an amendment to the SIs.
Created: 23-Nov-23 07:04
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
0
Yes, Race Signals states the meaning of flag L if it is displayed.

I can't see any rule that requires the race committee, or anyone else to display it.
Created: 23-Nov-23 07:19
Ant Davey
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • International Judge
  • Umpire In Training
0
The booklet is about learning from mistakes. While the rules may not require an L flag, not having made a clear signal has been seen to have competitors leave a regatta feeling they have not been treated fairly. So, my advice is to do it. Also it's the SIs that state when and where any amendments to SIs will be posted. And as we know (most) sailors don't read the SIs, so the L flag is an additional reminder that can help a sailor, or help a PC when it comes to the no fault part of a claim for redress.
Created: 23-Nov-23 07:28
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
0
Created: 23-Nov-23 10:21
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Fleet Measurer
1
John P .. Don’t Accidental Create Button-hook roundings
This scenario can more easily happen when the race is a random distance race around set/govt marks and RC creates the course on the fly on the water based on conditions. I was not on the RC for this one (I was a competitor).   

The SI described a distance/random course around govt marks in the Chesapeake Bay (~20nm).  The SI’s stated that the course would be displayed by placards on the RC, green letters rounding to starboard, red letters rounded to port, all marks displayed by the RC are rounding marks.  There were 4 marks M1-M4 all rounded to port with a course Start - M1 - M2 - M3 - M4 - Finish. 

The start and finish were between the RC and an inflatable (allowing the RC to more easily position for an upwind start/first-leg). 

The RC positioned themselves perfectly for a nice upwind first leg. However, they didn’t pay as close attention to how that position setup the final leg, and inadvertently had it such that the rhumb-line/string from M3 to the RC didn’t touch M4 on the port side.  Sailing from M3 to Finish, M4 would naturally be a passing-mark to port .. and to round M4 would require boats to buttonhook M4.  

Luckily, the leading boats treated it as a passing mark and all other boats followed suit … no boats button hooked … no boats protested .. the race was scored as sailed.  I noticed this on my way to M4 … which had me sail a longer course and I lost a boat because of it.  Seeing this put me in an awkward position … buttonhook and protest thr leaders .. or take the loss of place. 

Interesting thought … if this race happened today and given the new requirement that the RC score boats NSC now.  Had the RC realized their error, would the RC be required to score all boats NSC, file an R4R for all boats, and hand it to the PC?
Created: 23-Nov-23 14:23
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Fleet Measurer
1
John P: Remember to modify A2.1 to remove the worst-score exclusion for both intended/unintended short series.

Again, I wasn’t on the RC, but was a competitor. This happened accidentally (RC forgot to mod A2.1, but intended to) in 2 regattas this past season from different YC’s.  In one regatta it was  a single day regatta with only 3 races. In the other a 2 day regatta with only 5 races.  

In both instances it swapped places in the top 3.  In one case, it swapped 1st/2nd place.

So remember, if you are running a regatta with multiple races scheduled, think long and hard how many races would be required to be completed for there to be a toss-out (if any).  Even if you have 3-4 days scheduled, remember weather/conditions might reduce the races to only a handful. 

PS: IMO … the default for A2.1 should be changed to be no toss and require a change in the SI’s to have one. 
Created: 23-Nov-23 15:07
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
1
Ang
Don’t Accidental Create Button-hook roundings

Was the all marks are rounding marks baked in  the the SI?
Created: 23-Nov-23 21:26
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
0
 Angelo Guarino
Said Created: Today 15:07
John P: Remember to modify A2.1 to remove the worst-score exclusion for both intended/unintended short series.

Again, I wasn’t on the RC, but was a competitor. This happened accidentally (RC forgot to mod A2.1, but intended to) in 2 regattas this past season from different YC’s.  In one regatta it was  a single day regatta with only 3 races. In the other a 2 day regatta with only 5 races.  

In both instances it swapped places in the top 3.  In one case, it swapped 1st/2nd place.

So remember, if you are running a regatta with multiple races scheduled, think long and hard how many races would be required to be completed for there to be a toss-out (if any).  Even if you have 3-4 days scheduled, remember weather/conditions might reduce the races to only a handful. 

In particular, if your SI allow only 1 race to make a series, you need to not have the only race you run excluded.


PS: IMO … the default for A2.1 should be changed to be no toss and require a change in the SI’s to have one. 

I think there's a Submission for that in the 2024 rule changes.
Created: 23-Nov-23 21:33
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
0
Ant,

I'm not for one moment arguing that matters specified in the SI should be changed by a slap-dash Notice to Competitors, or that the L flag should not be used.

I do think that some of your ideas are over-elaborate for a competitor rostered on as a club RO.
Created: 23-Nov-23 22:25
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
3
Loop roundings illegal in Canada

CAN Appeal CAN74

Race committees should never set courses so that the taut string in the definition crosses over itself at any rounding mark since this would put boats in the same or different races at unnecessary hazard with each other in their rounding manoeuvres. 
Created: 23-Nov-24 02:34
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Fleet Measurer
0
John A re: “Was the all marks are rounding marks baked in  the the SI?”

Yes.  In the Chesapeake Bay, select govt marks are identified by region of the Bay and assigned letter-designations. The SI stated the course would be described using these marks/letter-designations.  By default, these marks are not defined as rounding marks … SI’s can designate them passing/boundary marks or rounding marks.  The SI for this event stated that all marks of the course described by the placards were rounding marks.
Created: 23-Nov-24 12:33
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Fleet Measurer
0
John A re: Can Appeal 74

The CAN Appeal makes a good ancillary point … that marks are not “rounding marks” unless specifically stated in the NOR/SI.  

This brings to mind the point that  for these types of RC defined random-leg races, shortening cannot be done at a passing-mark (the mark needs to be a rounding-mark).   

So even if the course-string would naturally touch each mark on its proper side when tightened, designating specific marks as rounding marks can communicate to competitors that they may need to sail close enough to those marks such that they can see  if the race is shortened at that mark. 
Created: 23-Nov-24 13:01
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
0
RRS J2.1(4) does not require SI to 'specifically state' rounding marks, it requires that the SI 'identify' them.  Thus a typical W/L or triangle diagram will do the trick.
Created: 23-Nov-24 13:40
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Fleet Measurer
0
John A re: “Thus a typical W/L or triangle diagram will do the trick.”

Roger that.  My comments were focused more on random-legged courses designated around fixed/govt marks .. where RC’s are creating these courses on the water and communicating them to the fleet(s) via placards or course-board off the side of the RC. 
Created: 23-Nov-24 14:34
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
0
Angelo Guarino
Said Created: Today 14:34
John A re: “Thus a typical W/L or triangle diagram will do the trick.”

Roger that.  My comments were focused more on random-legged courses designated around fixed/govt marks .. where RC’s are creating these courses on the water and communicating them to the fleet(s) via placards or course-board off the side of the RC. 

Maybe you could get away with it if each vertex of the course specified in the SI was clearly convex on the chart, even if the chart wasn't included or referenced in the SI, but the moment there is doubt you're in trouble.

Jim Champ provided this example





All marks to starboard.

If 2 is at 2x, it's a simple rounding mark.

If its at 2y its a looping mark.

How are competitors to know which?

An either way provision as in Case 82 would be helpful.
Created: 23-Nov-24 22:29
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Yea … the 2Y orientation was what happened in my scenario … where 1= RC, 3 = M3 and 2Y = M4 … each about 1 mile apart and the wind coming from 3 o’clock.  I was about 3/4 to M4 (2Y) from 3, sailing the rhumb line to M4 (it was in my GPS) before I realized the situation.

The typical SI what will prescribe OTW course descriptions based on placards designating marks will use the terminology, “ … green to be rounded to starboard, red rounded to port ..” or something to that effect. This language precludes designating marks as passing/boundary marks. 

In the spirit of anecdotes/hints about errors … I thought this was good to keep in mind. 

Many times in this circumstance the RC will use one of the fixed/govt marks as the starting/finish pin.  In that case, the RC can more easily recognize the string-rule error, as often there would be a chart as part of the race docs highlighting  these marks. 

In my example, it was the placement of the RC randomly with a drop mark that caused the issue, focusing on their orientation to the first mark. Had the RC plotted their position on a chart or entered the chosen course on a chart plotter as a route, the problem would have been more evident. 
Created: 23-Nov-25 13:49
Philip Hubbell
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
  • Judge In Training
0
"shortening cannot be done at a passing-mark"?
Not so. A shortened course can be finished at any line the boats must pass through.
The line (not line segment) need not have buoys at each end - nor at any end.
To salvage a race that is otherwise doomed to time out, the RC can use any line that it can monitor, whether or not the competitors can identify the line - or the signal.


Created: 23-Nov-28 19:07
P
John Allan
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
0
Philip Hubbell
Said Created: Today 19:07
"shortening cannot be done at a passing-mark"?
Not so. A shortened course can be finished at any line the boats must pass through.
The line (not line segment) need not have buoys at each end - nor at any end.

We may be splitting hairs here, but:

'passing mark' is not a term used in the RRS. There are just 'rounding marks' and marks that are not 'rounding marks'

A line or a gate is not a Mark.

RRS 32.2 provides three distinct provisions for rounding marks, gates, and lines.

To salvage a race that is otherwise doomed to time out, the RC can use any line that it can monitor, whether or not the competitors can identify the line - or the signal.

This strikes me as a novel idea.  Do you have a Case, Appeal or Q&A to support this interpretation?

Created: 23-Nov-28 21:05
Philip Hubbell
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
  • Judge In Training
0
Only The American Heritage College Dictionary
and the chuckling acknowledgement of my Race Officer instructor
Created: 23-Nov-28 21:28
John Palizza
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Race Officer
  • Regional Judge
1
Well, that's not the way I was taught in the Advanced Judge Seminar. I asked the exact question, "What is meant by 32.2 (b) "a line the course requires boats to cross;" and was told that it referred to such things as between two sections of a bridge, or middle gates in a course where you can draw a discrete line between two points that a boat has to go past. I think you are opening up a whole new set of problems if you say "I have created an arbitrary line to shorten this course" particularly if boats have gone off to either side of the course and cannot easily see the signal for shorten course.
What I have done in a dying wind situation (and I will freely admit that this will probably drive some judges nuts, and it is not technically correct) is if it is a multi-lap course to have sailors finish at the start/finish line, which is usually mid-course. I tell the sailors well in advance so that they stay reasonably close to the finish line area and do not go off to either side of the course, either via radio or by having a safety boat inform all of the sailors. This is of course if I or a mark boat can't set up at a gate or mark before the boats get there.  I would not do this at a higher level event, but for local regattas, the sailors much prefer to finish the race rather than have it abandoned. Call it practical rather than technical race management.
Created: 23-Nov-29 17:00
[You must be signed in to add a comment]
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more