Proper course off the start line
Printed From: Yachts and Yachting Online
Category: General
Forum Name: Racing Rules
Forum Discription: Discuss the rules and your interpretations here
URL: http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12406
Printed Date: 09 Aug 25 at 8:12am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Proper course off the start line
Posted By: piglet
Subject: Proper course off the start line
Date Posted: 28 May 16 at 4:42pm
In a fleet start is there anything to stop a boat luffing the boat above just after the start.
Thanks in advance as always.
|
Replies:
Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 28 May 16 at 5:17pm
This all dependent on how far the leeward boat alters course and how the overlap came into being.
The leeward boat is always allowed go up to close hauled (assuming a beat to windward) She may only go above this if the overlap was initially established under circumstances set out in rule 17. The only exception being if she had rights to shoot the pin end.
The windward boat is always bound by rule 11, so must make all reasonable attempts to keep clear even if leeward is breaking 17.
-------------
Andy Mck
|
Posted By: piglet
Date Posted: 29 May 16 at 8:53am
If the overlap is established at the start line then does 17 apply?
The scenario is a product of healthy bar debate and thus hypothetical but essentially can L luff above close hauled if overlapped to windward by W when the overlap was established before the start gun?
|
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 29 May 16 at 9:14am
|
Yes.
Rule 17 can 'switch on' with a leeward overlap established before the start, and then 'lay dormant' while L has no proper course, that is L can luff without restriction (except for rules 15 and 16), until the starting signal, when she must not sail above her proper course.
|
Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 29 May 16 at 12:26pm
What we are trying to put into sensible English is: if the leeward boat established the overlap coming from astern within 2 boat lengths too leeward, i.e. In a situation that if it happened after the start gun she would not have "luffing rights" then she may not go above her proper course after the start gun. Before the gun she may as she has no defined proper course.
The problem is remembering how you all got there.
We often play this one in match and team racing. Encouraging the leeward boat with no right to go above close hauled to squeeze up once they are bow out.
Andy
-------------
Andy Mck
|
Posted By: piglet
Date Posted: 29 May 16 at 9:48pm
OK, so right to luff after the start is dependant on how the boats form up pre-start? Wouldn't work for me, I can't remember driving to work in the mornings.
However:
Lets assume that pre-start, L becomes overlapped with W from outside 2BL to leeward, does this then remove 17, and can L now luff above close hauled after the start?
|
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 30 May 16 at 6:03am
|
If L becomes overlapped with W from clear astern outside 2 boatlengths, then rule 17 does not apply at all.
|
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 30 May 16 at 10:21am
I know we old salts talk about luffing rights, but with the concept basically gone from the book, is it still sensible? Wouldn't it be better to think about restrictions on the ROW boat's right to change course, which is the way things are worded now?
You know, there are no special circumstances in which the leeward ROW boat gains the right to change course, but there are special circumstances in which that right is restricted.
|
Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 30 May 16 at 10:31am
You will note that I put them "luffing rights" in quotes. It is something that most sailors understand as the right of a boat to sail above its proper course. Most also understand the limitations as set out in 17 and refer to them as such. You will see we tried hard to put it into rules language. This is what we see at the bar, a confused look until we use terms people understand. It's the same when you go and see the doc.
-------------
Andy Mck
|
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 30 May 16 at 10:43am
Originally posted by andymck
You will note that I put them "luffing rights" in quotes etc etc |
All fair comment, but...
New sailors who come into the sport have never seen that language in the rules and won't ever see it, and arguably these days they learn more from coaching and on line sources than from sailing and bar talk with older sailors. So by using out of date language are we not at risk of creating even more confusion for those who most need clarity? Sometimes it seems to me the worst messes in rules discussions are from those who learned the rules 30 years ago and haven't kept up to date.
|
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 30 May 16 at 11:37am
Originally posted by JimC
I know we old salts talk about luffing rights, but with the concept basically gone from the book, is it still sensible? Wouldn't it be better to think about restrictions on the ROW boat's right to change course, which is the way things are worded now?
You know, there are no special circumstances in which the leeward ROW boat gains the right to change course, but there are special circumstances in which that right is restricted. |
Agree. I've said so before.
Under the post 1995 rules, a leeward boat is ALWAYS entitled to luff, ALWAYS subject to rule 16, and SOMETIMES subject to rule 17.
Originally posted by andymck
You will note that I put them "luffing rights" in quotes. It is something that most sailors understand as the right of a boat to sail above its proper course. |
Strongly disagree.
No sooner does someone start talking about 'luffing rights' than someone mentions 'luff as she pleases', which used to be all about the aggressive hard luff, NOT about proper course.
Originally posted by andymck
Most also understand the limitations as set out in 17 and refer to them as such. You will see we tried hard to put it into rules language. This is what we see at the bar, a confused look until we use terms people understand. It's the same when you go and see the doc. |
Agree that you pretty much expressed your comments in current 'rules speak'.
But IMHO if you continue discussing rules in language and concepts that were abandoned over 20 years ago, even round the bar, people will continue to be confused, as long as you do it that way.
Originally posted by JimC
Originally posted by andymck
You will note that I put them "luffing rights" in quotes etc etc |
All fair comment, but...
New sailors who come into the sport have never seen that language in the rules and won't ever see it, and arguably these days they learn more from coaching and on line sources than from sailing and bar talk with older sailors. So by using out of date language are we not at risk of creating even more confusion for those who most need clarity? Sometimes it seems to me the worst messes in rules discussions are from those who learned the rules 30 years ago and haven't kept up to date. |
Strongly agree.
|
Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 30 May 16 at 1:10pm
To luff, is just the correct nautical term to alter course to windward. We can of course just abandon the rich and vast English language and only use lawyer speak. But for people who still use obsolete words, it is useful to use them to clarify a concept with which they may be struggling and is entirely acceptable.
I do however, agree that when explains the rules we should aim to use the language in which they are written. But I find constantly that we end up with generations that can't communicate with each other, so using terms that they are familiar with is useful and inclusive.
-------------
Andy Mck
|
Posted By: piglet
Date Posted: 30 May 16 at 1:56pm
Originally posted by JimC
Sometimes it seems to me the worst messes in rules discussions are from those who learned the rules 30 years ago and haven't kept up to date. |
+1 on that one. Something I hear a lot at the club is:
"There is no such thing as proper course"
I apologise for bringing the term 'luff' into this thread.
But you must admit it is a handy term compared with 'sail above proper course'
|
Posted By: GML
Date Posted: 30 May 16 at 2:21pm
Originally posted by piglet
I apologise for bringing the term 'luff' into this thread.
But you must admit it is a handy term compared with 'sail above proper course' |
But they mean two different things! "Luff" means to change course towards the wind. "Sail above her proper course" means what it says. A boat that is sailing below her proper course can luff up to her proper course (subject to rule 16) even if she is subject to rule 17. Rule 17 doesn't say you can't luff, it says that in certain circumstances you can't sail above your proper course.
|
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 30 May 16 at 2:26pm
But luff doesn't just mean sail above proper course.
What I'm objecting to though, is the phrase "Luffing rights" which has long gone from the rules.
A ROW boat normally has the right to change course as she pleases, to luff or bear away. That's the default state as defined by Section A.
In a few situations that right is partially restricted by Section B and Section C rules.
|
|