Ranking as a Starter
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=3420
Printed Date: 07 Aug 25 at 11:21pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Ranking as a Starter
Posted By: Bender
Subject: Ranking as a Starter
Date Posted: 20 Sep 07 at 7:43pm
|
Many years ago, there used to be a rule (#50) entitled "Ranking as a Starter". It's not there any more, but does anyone know a) When did it disappear? b) Why did it disappear? |
Replies:
Posted By: Black no sugar
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 12:57am
|
Yep, it would be interesting as background info for the enormous storm in the little teacup that is LancingSC. And I'm in trouble again...  ------------- http://www.lancingsc.org.uk/index.html - Lancing SC 
|
Posted By: Stefan Lloyd
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 6:56am
|
Possibly you are looking for this? A9 RACE SCORES IN A SERIES LONGER THAN A REGATTA For a series that is held over a period of time longer than a regatta, a boat that came to the starting area but did not start, did not finish, retired after finishing or was disqualified shall be scored points for the finishing place one more than the number of boats that came to the starting area. A boat that did not come to the starting area shall be scored points for the finishing place one more than the number of boats entered in the series.
|
Posted By: Bender
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 8:24am
|
Thanks Stefan - aware of that one! It's specifically the "Ranking as a Starter" that I'm after, just for interest... A bit of background to support BnS's post... We (Lancing) have a Sailing Instruction that says...
On Sunday, 3 boats came to the starting area for the Topper race. One of the boats (a novice) managed to start with the previous start and was therefore OCS big time. The second boat had gear failure just before the start and retired. The third, our own BnS, started and sailed the course to win. Unfortunately, the view was taken later that as the OCS and RTD boats are not "starters" according to the RRS definition of "starting", although they were "racers" according to the RRS definition of "racing", the race should not count due to the SI. BnS has sought redress
|
, and the discussion rumbles on in our Sailing Committee forum.Posted By: Pierre
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 9:23am
|
Well I'm supporting BnS. Go girl
|
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 10:01am
|
Is there a time limit for starting in the SIs? If not did the Topper then start properly at the start of Lap 2? Otherwise I fear that BNS will have trouble gaining redress. Of course BNS could apply for redress on the grounds that the english of the SI is so poor as to make it essentially meaningless!
It certainly seems as if the intention of the SI as written is that OCS boats don't count towards competitors. This has interesting and perhaps inconsistent effects, depending on your scoring system. If I were on Lancing's Sailing Committee I'd suggest that the SIs refer to competitors as being more consistent. We do that at our club, and we have decided that the whole reservoir counts as the start area, so basically if you get off the bank you count as DNS not DNC. |
Posted By: Stefan Lloyd
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 12:12pm
|
Start A boat starts when, having been entirely on the pre-start side of the starting line at or after her starting signal, and having complied with rule 30.1 if it applies, any part of her hull, crew or equipment crosses the starting line in the direction of the first mark.Unless the Topper went around lap 1 very quickly, I don't see how it could satisfy the requirement to be entirely on the pre-start side at the starting signal. In the absence of any other definition, surely a starter is a boat that starts in conformance to the definition above. It would appear BNS was the only starter.
|
Posted By: Guest
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 12:41pm
|
I think the answer is A9 ... it says "a boat that came to the starting area" ... In this instance 3 boats came to the starting area so we have a race on ... I would award the result; why wouldn't you? At club level every effort should be made to encourage paticipation; if 3 boats launched and only one managed to finish for what ever reason that's a result. ------------- |
Posted By: Noah
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 1:26pm
|
OCS is a start - albeit an illegal start, so there's at least two starters in that race. Ask some questions: What score was the early starter awarded? OCS or DNC? What would have been the outcome if the early starter was only 5 seconds early instead of 5 minutes and a race (on the water) had ensued? What score was the retiree given. In my view it should have been DNS, not DNC, because he 'came to the starting area'. I agree with the view that racing should be encouraged - and the club's attitude doesn't appear to do this. The SI's need changing... Just my 2p worth... ------------- Nick D-Zero 316 |
Posted By: craiggo
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 2:23pm
| I'm with Rick on this one, and apply the same method as mentioned by JimC at my club (Thornbury). |
Posted By: Bender
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 2:46pm
Yes but....getting back to the original question...when and why did the "Ranking as a Starter" rule disappear? Anyone got any old rule books? I know it was there in '77  , but can't find any of my more recent references.
|
Posted By: Stefan Lloyd
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 3:12pm
|
No, in the terms defined by RRS, a boat that is OCS has not started. Read the definition, which is posted in this thread. |
Posted By: Stefan Lloyd
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 3:17pm
|
Because their SIs refer to the number of starters, not the number who raced. 3 raced but only one started. I don't think you should pretend the SIs say what you'd like them to say or meant them to say or think they ought to say.
|
Posted By: Guest
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 3:28pm
I think the definiton of a a starter is different to the definition of when a boat starts ... given the ambiguity (sp?) I'd let the result stand and fix the SI's. I'd say a starter is someone geting ready to start and after the start they become a racer ... so in this case there were 3 starters (or perhaps 2) ...
------------- |
Posted By: Stefan Lloyd
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 3:40pm
|
Wrong way around. You are racing before the start. "A boat is racing from her preparatory signal"Sorry Rick but you are perfectly ignoring clear definitions in the RRS to justify the outcome you consider fair.
|
Posted By: Black no sugar
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 4:03pm
|
Let's take that further. I understand that a boat who gets an OCS is not a "starter", OK. Now, in our club, the sailing instructions state, in the Scoring section: "Points for DNS, DSQ, OCS and BFD will be 6, or two more than the number of starters in the race, whichever is the greater." However, in practice, if there are 10 competitors in a race and 1 is OCS, whoever's disqualified, DNS or black-flagged get 12 points, effectively counting the OCS guy as a "starter". Finally, if being OCS means that the boat did not start at all, why bother about talking about "OCS" in the first place? We should record that boat as a "Did Not Start" and let the race officer add a comment to the results sheet. ------------- http://www.lancingsc.org.uk/index.html - Lancing SC
|
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 4:18pm
It sounds as if your club is using a scoring system which uses more conventional conventions for scoring codes than your SIs do and the two don't match! I disagree about marking OCS as DNS. Even if the score is the same they are different situations, and it does no harm to record them as that, and makes the series results more readable. |
Posted By: Guest
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 5:15pm
I know that ... this is an issue with their SI's not one of the RRS ... ------------- |
Posted By: Bender
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 5:15pm
|
...but what about my "Ranking as a Starter" rule? By the way, this has opened up a can of worms with regard to our SI's scoring definitions as well, cos they're at odds with RRS A9, but that's another matter! |
Posted By: Guest
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 5:22pm
|
... now look what you've done. I have gone and got my rule book out now ... I can see no definition in the RRS of the term "Starter" The SI's quote:
If there is no definition of a "Starter" in the RRS or the SI's then we have to take a view... My view is that any boats that leave the beach with the intention to race should be considered "starters" regardless of if they actually manage to start correctly ... ------------- |
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 6:18pm
Its in the definitions section at the end. Stefan quotes it on page 1. |
Posted By: Guest
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 7:53pm
|
That is the definition of a start http://sailing.org/tools/documents/Definitions-483.pdf?PHPSESSID=fc4ad1b5395d0f761b7da8322844caa1 - http://sailing.org/tools/documents/Definitions-[483].pdf?PHPSESSID=fc4ad1b5395d0f761b7da8322844caa1 The SI referes to starters ... ------------- |
Posted By: Chew my RS
Date Posted: 21 Sep 07 at 8:24pm
|
What ever the legal rights and wrongs, it seems stuffy, beauracratic non-sense to deny BNS a race. As ameteurs who do this for fun, having made the effort to go racing why then tell them they wasted their Sunday morning? Hardly encouraging, is it? At any rate, my take is that any boat that counts as a racer, must also qualify as a starter. I don't believe you must have started to be a starter - just have the intention of starting? Any boat that has signed on and and is afloat at the prep signal is racing and is therefore a starter. ------------- http://www.sailns14.org - http://www.sailns14.org - The ultimate family raceboat now available in the UK |
Posted By: Stuart O
Date Posted: 22 Sep 07 at 9:17am
|
I may be wrong but didn't the AC have this argument as to what a starter was in the 70s or 80s? I think they declared that a boat in order to be starter had to be afloat in the start area, defined, at the preparotory signal and that in order to score points ie a win either boat had to start the race by crossing the start line....... Just one of those arguments that occured between multi millionaire american lawyers!!!! looks to me if the SIs certainly need a revisit |
Posted By: gordon
Date Posted: 23 Sep 07 at 9:11am
|
SI's are often multi-layered documents that reflect the long history of racing in a club. Instructions are written to solve a temorary problem and then get locked in to subsequent versions. Having spent about 15 minutes re-writing our club sailing instructions, then a whole winter negotiating with class captains, stubborn members of the club and discovering had made a significant rule change concerning elegibility without posting it on the website... I have some notion of how complex this process can be. I firmly believe that SQIs should refer to the ISAF template as far as possible. If any variation is to be made then the instructions should be written using the language and the terms employed by the ISAF template. A useful excersise is to define exactly what the club wants, then write an instruction to provide that using ISAFese. In this case does the club wish it's race scores to reflect the number of boats that made the effort to come to the starting area (in which case the definition of DNS will serve as a model) or only to those that started according to the ISAF definition. Let me have a copy of your SIS and I would be able to suggest a possible text. Gordon ------------- Gordon |
Posted By: bigwavedave
Date Posted: 23 Sep 07 at 5:33pm
|
I think the issue that needs addressing is what was she doing out of the kitchen in the first place? ------------- 
|
Posted By: Stuart O
Date Posted: 23 Sep 07 at 6:18pm
|
Spent 15 minutes trying to fathum out what RRS ours related too!!!! My sympathies to you Gordon. As Gordon said many SIs realate to a clubs hitory, and probably haven't really been looked at for a long time. On our Sailing committee we nominate one person to look at them each year and amend if required and 2 of us look through every 4, just to make sure they are current without loosing the history they may reflect. |
Posted By: MRJP BUZZ 585
Date Posted: 23 Sep 07 at 6:50pm
Ouch ------------- Josh Preater http://www.bu22.co.uk">  BUZZING IS FUN
|
Posted By: Contender443
Date Posted: 23 Sep 07 at 6:54pm
|
Well it went like this today. The hearing was heard by a qualified race officer who consulted with an international juror before the meeting. He determined that 3 boats intended to race and that BNS fulfilled here requirements to complete the course under rule 28.1. Also that our SIs at the club are invalid as they do not change a specific rule and do not speicify this. See rule 86.1b If you follow this through then there is nowhere in the rules that specify the number of starters. It does however say in Appendix J 2.2.35 "the minimum number of boats appearing in the starting area for the race to be started" This should be written into the clubs SIs. Therefore as BNS sailed the correct course she was awarded a 1st and the race counts in the series. ------------- Bonnie Lass Contender 1764 |
Posted By: Black no sugar
Date Posted: 24 Sep 07 at 1:04am
|
------------- http://www.lancingsc.org.uk/index.html - Lancing SC
|
Posted By: Bender
Date Posted: 24 Sep 07 at 9:24am
|
...but when was the "Ranking as a Starter" removed from the rule book? |
Posted By: gordon
Date Posted: 24 Sep 07 at 9:39am
|
It was still in the rule book in the 1985-1988 version but had disappeared, as such, by 1997. The ancient rule 50 probably disappeared in the 1996 rewrite. However, in SIs based on the standard ISAF template, and using Appendix A, the difference between DNC and DNS is clear. The rules do not mention a starter, however RRSA9 makes a clear distinction between boats that come to the starting area and those that do not. I would suggest that any SIs that still contain a reference to "starters" replace that word by "boats that came to the starting area". I would love to have a look at the offending SIs at the origin of this thread. Gordon ------------- Gordon |
Posted By: Bender
Date Posted: 24 Sep 07 at 9:44am
|
As you asked... http://lancingsc.org.uk/downloads/2007 SIs.pdf - http://lancingsc.org.uk/downloads/2007 SIs.pdf |
Posted By: gordon
Date Posted: 24 Sep 07 at 10:37am
|
Thankyou for the SIs. After a very quick read there are a few pointsthat spring to mind. These remarks are intended to illustrate the thought process involved in preparing SIs: 1. The SIs need to be rearranged so that they are in the same order as the ISAF template. This will prove of value as they then become easier to read, members travelling to other events should (hopefully) find that the event SIs are in a familiar order. 2. RRS does not distinguish between helmsman and other mortals...surely it is the person in charge (RRS 46) who should be responsable for signing in. 3. Replace "starters" by boats coming to the starting area. 4. I am not too happy about the Race Committee having the power to disqualify under RRS 28.1 The competitor may have corrected her error, the course may have been badly written, the Race Committee may have misread the sail number. I believe that the competitor should have the right to a hearing. Competitors always have the right to retire if they believe that the protest is justified. 5. I don't really understand what the SIs want to achieve by SI4.1. If RRS 29.1 applies fully the X flag should be displayed until either all boats are completely on the pre-course side of the line or its extensions or until one minute before the next start. Do you do anything different? 6. SI4.3 introduces the black flag rule, but without the safeguards included in RRS 30.3. However a General Recall may be due to an error or ommission by the Race Committee. It seems unfair to impose the black flag rule at all times after a General Recall. It may be more appropriate to use any of the 4 possible preparatory signals rather than always use the P. The Z flag is an effective deterrent. 7 I feel that the term "outer limit mark" should be reserved for marks that may or may not be a start line defined by a transit, or between 2 boats, serving to limit the length of the line. The mark at the pin end of a start line is the start or starting mark, the mark at the end of the finish line is the finish or finishing mark (see Appendix L 9.3) 8 I don't understand how SI2.3 changes RRS32.2. The SI describes standard practise as set out in the race signals section of the rules. 9 Is there any good reason to wait 3 minutes after bringing down the AP (SI3.3)? I could go on (and on and on) but don't have the time at the moment. Gordon ------------- Gordon |
Posted By: Bender
Date Posted: 24 Sep 07 at 11:09am
|
Thanks for the input, Gordon. I think the reality is that we haven't done a complete revisit of the SIs in a while, and it's taken both our own local redress hearing, and your independent view of the SIs to highlight some of the shortcomings. Looks like a job for the winter! However, just to clarify a couple of things... Because our club racing is exclusively run from the shore, as opposed to our open meetings that use our committee boat (and have their own SIs!), our start and finish lines ARE bounded by an outer limit mark. Also, because of our location on the South coast, with prevailing southwesterlies, flag signals flown from the clubhouse are difficult to see from on the water, so we have a set of boards. Inevitably that means that we have to run with a restricted set of signals, and I accept that may lead to some SI inconsistencies. And finally, I'm sure that our club isn't unique in having to use inexperienced club members to run the races some of the time, and even some of our experienced racers struggle when asked to sit in the start box, so we have to try to keep things as simple as possible, which again tends to produce inconsistencies. |