NoR v SIs

Did passing the mark on one side or the other make a significant difference to the result of the race?

If not, I would suggest that any redress issue be resolved by letting the race results stand.

The conclusion - the Race Committee made an improper action that did not significantly worsen any boat's score.

I agree up to a point.

1. It is possible (but unlikely) to decide that both courses were correct. In which case no boat broke rule 28.

2. Redress does not have to be as you propose. It could be to score boats in their finishing order (after calculating corrected time if it is a handicap race).

It didn't make any difference to your elapsed time whichever side of the mark you passed.

I presumed at the time that the SI's would have taken precedence, but that anyone disqualified as a result could and should have asked for redress.

As for the outcome of the request, I think the interchange between Brass and Gordon shows it would have been in the lap of the gods (if that's not elevating our commenters too highly). Frankly though, anyone awarded n+1 etc would imho have been entitled to feel extremely pee'd off after a 26 mile dinghy race.

One lesson we might all learn is to treat any course detailed in the NOR as not worth the paper it is written on, and accept the necessity of headless-chicken mode on the morning of the race.

How aggreived would you be if you protested a boat, she was found to have broken rule 28 and still placed ahead of you?

Originally posted by Brass I have difficulty scoring a boat that broke a rule with a better score than a boat that did not break a rule.

Isn't it vaguely analogous to case 45?

...because of a race committee error, but none of the boats racing gains or loses as a result, an appropriate and fair form of redress is to score all the boats in the order they crossed the finishing line.