Proper Course

Originally posted by Rupert Doesn't seem right or fair, but I can't see anything wrong with it.

What goes around comes around... it never pleases me I have to duck round a leeward boats transom to avoid getting stuffed into wind by something that can point 5 degrees higher than me either...

Originally posted by Doug.H Instead it leaves us with a sailor's personal opinion on what is quick or not.

Its worth noting that the case I quoted from the case book goes back to the 1960s and umpteen rule revisions, and also seems to be about boats of the same class... This is very well established.

Lets face it, windward boat keeps clear is a very fundamental rule, and we all know that if you don't want someone to take you up you go behind them, whether its a beat or a reach or a run. The "was it a proper course" question is usually very easy to decide in the room: the question is "did L continue to sail at that angle when the overlap ended". If the answer is no then L is probably toast unless they can produce witnesses who will agree they sailed the same hot angle at numerous other times in the race when conditions were similar and there were no other boats about.



Edited by JimC

Yep, proper course is odd, but I can't think of anything better. The rules really weren't dsigned for handicap racing, where boats want to sail radically different angles. You can have a situation where an Asym goes behind and to lee of you in a gust, sailing her proper course. The wind then drops, so her proper course to keep the kite filling is to luff up. She then luffs up, still on proper course, and makes the boat she has just caught up with luff up too. Doesn't seem right or fair, but I can't see anything wrong with it.

Originally posted by Doug.H Well surely the rule about a boat coming from behind not luffing above proper course may as well be deleted because they could simply come from behind at any time and luff wherever they like claiming it's the quickest route. I could approach from astern on a reach, luff up causing a big arc and claim that that's my proper course.....?? Utterly pointless having the rule there if it takes into account what someone feels is quick or not.

not true, imho, you would need to have some very sound
reasoning to sail more than about 10 degrees higher than
other boats of similar type on the same leg to convince a
pc. furthermore if you sailed an arc and then bore away
you would probably shoot yourself in the foot
demonstrating the higher course was for tactical reasons.
Also passing a boat to leeward without a wave to catch is
pretty difficult. Assuming this was handicap racing
you've just both lost places.

Originally posted by mike10626 Forgetting the rules for a second, isn't this strategically a bad position for the asymmetric boat to get herself in ?  If she had remained above the symmetric boat he would have got up to speed quicker and got away.  Going below she has to wait until she establishes an overlap, then shout and give the other boat time to get clear before she can power up. I can see it makes sense in a one design asymmetric fleet as this puts you in the controlling position but for handicap racing doesn't it just slow you down? I tend to agree the rules are on the side of the asymmetric boat - just not sure of the logic?

I agree with Mike, it was silly of the assym to go below the symmetric boat and then once the the kites were hoisted they needed to head up! just slowed both down. 

Alex

Edited by AlexM

Originally posted by Doug.H Where do the rules clarify what a proper course is?

In the definitions:

Proper Course - A course a boat would sail to finish as soon as possible in the absence of the other boats referred to in the rule using the term. A boat has no proper course before her starting signal.

So yes, its any course that you can convince the PC could be reasonable. Case 14 in the case book illustrates this - it appears to be about two boats in the same class:-

CASE 14 Rule 11, On the Same Tack, Overlapped Rule 14, Avoiding Contact Rule 16.1, Changing Course Rule 17, On the Same Tack; Proper Course Definitions, Proper Course When, owing to a difference of opinion about a leeward boat’s proper course, two boats on the same tack converge, the windward boat must keep clear. Two boats on the same leg sailing near one another may have different proper courses. Summary of the Facts After rounding the windward mark in light wind the fleet divided, some boats sailing towards shore to get out of the tide and others remaining offshore in hopes of a better wind. L had established an overlap to leeward of W from clear astern and they rounded the mark overlapped. W chose to remain offshore, while L began to luff slowly and informed W of her intention to go inshore. W replied ‘You have no right to luff.’ L replied that she was sailing her proper course and W was required to keep clear. The discussion took some time. L continued to gradually change course, and at no time did W state that she was unable to keep clear. The boats touched and both protested. The protest committee disqualified L under rule 17 for sailing above her proper course, and she appealed. Decision When, owing to a difference of opinion on the proper course to be sailed, two boats on the same tack converge, W is bound by rule 11 to keep clear and by rule 14 to avoid contact. This case illustrates the fact that two boats on the same leg sailing very near to one another can have different proper courses. Which of two different courses is the faster one to the next mark can not be determined in advance and is not necessarily proven by one boat or the other reaching the next mark ahead. The basis for W’s protest was that L sailed above her proper course while subject to rule 17. L’s defence and counter-protest were that she had decided that the inshore course out of the tide would result in her finishing sooner and that, therefore, the course she was sailing was her proper course. In addition, L argued that W had broken rules 11 and 14. The facts found do not show that L sailed above her proper course; therefore she did not break rule 17. When L luffed slowly between positions 1 and 2, W had room to keep clear, so L did not break rule 16.1. L could have avoided contact with W. By not doing so, she broke rule 14, but is not penalized because the contact caused no damage or injury. By failing to keep clear of L, W broke rule 11. W could have avoided the contact, and by not doing so she too broke rule 14, but is not exempt from penalization. L’s appeal is upheld. L is reinstated, and W is disqualified for breaking rules 11 and 14.

Edited by JimC