Laser 28 - Excellent example of this great design Hamble le rice |
![]() |
Laser 140101 Tynemouth |
![]() |
Laser 161752 Tynemouth |
![]() |
List classes of boat for sale |
Simple Racing Rules |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page <1 1112131415 18> |
Author | |||
Chris 249 ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 10 May 04 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2041 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted: 14 Aug 15 at 11:55am |
||
What's the definition of "gaining"? If I hit someone in the stern and they get shoved forward 10' in a light wind mark rounding, have they "gained" and therefore suffer a DSQ?
|
|||
![]() |
|||
Solo4652 ![]() Groupie ![]() Joined: 08 Apr 15 Location: Stockport Online Status: Offline Posts: 71 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
@Chris249 and "Thread Twist". Ha! You spotted me moving the goalposts, dammit.
We started with 1 rule - "Avoid collisions" - and we moved on to the Golden 8 list because that helped clarify lots of situations. As a result of subsequent posts and suggestions, I'll tweak the Golden 8 in a moment. However, I do think there's some mileage in the Golden 8, providing we accept that outcomes might well be different compared to the existing rules. Then again, if you want something different, you have to do something different. One thing that strikes me in all this, is the problem of closed loops when defining situations and then applying rules to sort things out. Here's an example; From your earlier post, you describe a sailing incident thus: "re the "hunting" example - the issue is partly that it may be very hard to define "time and space to keep clear" without the framework of other rules. Who determines what "hunting" is when there is no proper course, and no requirement on the right of way boat to hold her course? How do you know who is hunting and who is just sailing and then getting hit?" I read this and I see the usual phrases relating to the current rules; time and space to keep clear, proper course, requirement to hold course and such like. To me, this is almost the tail wagging the dog and you end up stuck in a closed loop where problems can only be conceptualised and discussed in terms of the available solutions. This can easily result in closed, blinkered, "systems" thinking. As we've done before, let's stop perceiving the problem in terms of the available solutions. Let's lay the current rules, along with proper course, requirement to hold course etc to one side. This would mean we don't have to concern ourselves with defining all these things, and this might free our closed-loop thinking. The "hunting" scenario then becomes something like: "Two boats are racing and one keeps chasing the other one to gain an advantage." You see, I'm almost struggling to define the "problem" if I deny myself access to the traditional ways of framing it. Indeed, the "problem" almost disappears, and the solution is easily covered by repeated use of rules 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 from the Golden 8. This is the sort of mindshift I think we need if we want to simplify things. One last example. This actually happened. My partner has no knowledge of or interest in competitive sailing. She and I were standing on the balcony of Salcombe Yacht Club last year watching the Merlins start. The starts were pretty fraught affairs, what with biased start line, moored boats, tidal streams, lots of competitors, ferries. It all got pretty shouty out there. My partner turned to me and said; "Why don't they stop sailing into each other - wouldn't they go much faster?" The seasoned campaigner standing next to us said; "Indeed". Emperor's new clothes thinking from my partner. Thanks for the interesting discussion Chris, and others. Edited by Solo4652 - 14 Aug 15 at 12:10pm |
|||
![]() |
|||
Jack Sparrow ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 08 Feb 05 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 2965 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
the one that did the hitting didn't gain anything in your example. +1 to the post above!
|
|||
![]() |
|||
Solo4652 ![]() Groupie ![]() Joined: 08 Apr 15 Location: Stockport Online Status: Offline Posts: 71 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
OK, let's try to tweak the Golden 8 now we've thrown them around a bit and applied them to some cases. We'll need to ensure we don't end up with a verbal reasoning test comprised of double-negatives and nested subordinate clauses, mind. And remember that they have to fit onto 1 side of a plastic sheet. Actually, I think they're doing pretty well, if we accept that different outcomes to applying the existing rules may well result. Here we go. Wish me well, folks.
•1. Avoid collisions by giving boats enough time and room to avoid hitting things •2. Port keeps clear of starboard. •3. Windward keeps clear of leeward •4. Overtaking boat keeps clear •5. Hitting marks is OK and the inside boat(s) at a mark is entitled to room to round the mark. •6. If you have violated a rule, do a tack and a gybe as soon as you safely can. .7 Behave towards others in the same way you'd want them to behave towards you. There you go. I've, combined rules 1 and 5 because the more I thought about them, the more I convinced myself they were covering similar ground. Do feel free to keep them seperate, however. I've tweaked the mark-rounding rule to say it's OK to touch marks - as RS400's and windsurfers already do. The last rule is causing me some head-scratching. It's a catch-all mash-up of; fair sailing, don't cheat, don't swear, don't deliberately take out an opponent, don't throw a shackle into another competitor's boat at a start line to distract them, don't use unmeasured sails, don't threaten me, don't punch me, don't use a motor, etc etc. I completely accept that it is a clumsy mop-up rule. Interestingly, people contributing to this thread haven't referred to it at all, and have concentrated on when-boats-meet scenarios. So, over to you lot to throw the Golden 7 around, apply them to cases and see how they cope. Please remember that they will probably change the game and people's approach to it. But, as I said, if you want something different, you have to so something different. Edited by Solo4652 - 14 Aug 15 at 12:53pm |
|||
![]() |
|||
The Moo ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 01 Jun 06 Online Status: Offline Posts: 809 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
I struggle with Rule 4. You could have boats alongside each other with a similar performance where one second A is faster than B, the next second B is faster than C and the next second they are the same and so on. If there is a collision followed by disagreement it could be a nightmare to sort out. Surely port/starboad and windward/leeward is all you need?
|
|||
![]() |
|||
fab100 ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 15 Mar 11 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1005 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
I have to say I don't really see the point of yet another set of official rules.
In my experience those beginners who one might expect to be intimidated by the RRS tend to be given pretty much your list as a starter-for-ten. But even these are usually too much. Their boats are drawn to each other as if the had the same gravity field as a black hole. (why oh why is that?) They cannot anticipate what others might either do, or need to do in response to their actions. They cannot work out what port/starboard/windward/leeward are and don't see you coming in the first place. This is not a criticism (truly!), I understand why this is; they are too early in their sailing career to have developed sufficiently their 'auto-pilot' to enable them to have spare mental capacity for looking around let alone analysing situations. Learner drivers can be a bit the same, which is why these big, green P stickers are not a bad idea. So instead of another set of rules to create further confusion, let's just give people a green P to put on their sail. The boats at the front will have spotted them and give them time and space anyway (or will be long-gone). The mid and back-fleet salty-dogs who tend to be the most impatient, intolerant and vociferous are then on notice to wind their necks in, to stop bullying the newbies. Finally to hails. I rarely hail "Starboard" or whatever. I might sometimes call "Have you seen me, <name>?" But I'm most likely to say "keep going" or the like or point where I will, or I want them to, go when we cross at odd angles whilst on different legs, the objective to minimise disruption to each other. But if I am having a tight race at the front of the fleet (it sometimes happens i get there) I will use the rules to gain a strategic edge where I can and expect others to do the same thing on me. It's part of the game and I don't want it taken away thanks. You'll next be wanting me not to use my kite because someone else struggles with theirs.
|
|||
![]() |
|||
Solo4652 ![]() Groupie ![]() Joined: 08 Apr 15 Location: Stockport Online Status: Offline Posts: 71 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
Could be! Interesting. We might get down to the Golden 6, in that case - I'm all for fewer rules. See what others think. Edited by Solo4652 - 14 Aug 15 at 2:40pm |
|||
![]() |
|||
Rupert ![]() Really should get out more ![]() Joined: 11 Aug 04 Location: Whitefriars sc Online Status: Offline Posts: 8956 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
Rule 8 certainly needs rewording. It assumes I don't want people using the rules aggressively towards me, when in reality I expect it, and expect to do the same back, when the situation warrants it. If I then meet someone who simply used your rules a colregs, we have a problem of expectation.
I do agree that some of the psudo legal jargon used in appeals makes things very unclear, but luckily apart from on here I've never had to deal with such things in 40 years of sailing. The actual rules we have are probably shorter than many boardgames, so I'm afraid I have gone from a position at the beginning of this thread of at least thinking a simple rules set could possibly have merit to thinking that while I think the odd rule is not to my taste, as a set of they work very well. |
|||
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686
|
|||
![]() |
|||
Chris 249 ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 10 May 04 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2041 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
Nope, didn't say that the hitter gained anything - but the hittee did. If Rule 1 says "Avoid collisions (Gaining from a collision will incur the penalty of disqualification" then it's pretty clear. The boat ahead has not avoided a collision, and it has gained - therefore it gets DSQd merely because someone punted it in the transom. That means that anytime any boat can carry a DSQ and their opponent can't, they've just got to ram their stern and the hapless opponent is DSQd. Of course, the definition of "gain" could be tightened, but a savvy opponent could game that as well by giving the other boat a punt at the right time, such as when there are trying to get an overlap or have stalled in a bad tack. Defining what one "avoiding" a collision means seems to open up the proverbial 44 gallon drum of worms. There's any number of reasons why the boat ahead could have been hit. It could have been minding its own business and been rammed by a faster boat. It could also have blasted in on port and tacked just in front of a starboard tacker. And doesn't that leave the question who is actually at fault? The (former) port tacker could say "you broke Rule 1 and rule 4". The starboard tacker says "no, you broke Rule 5" and then the port tacker replies "no I didn't you numbat - we've been racing against each other all week, you knew I was going to tack to go around the mark so YOU broke rule 5 by not slowing down so you could avoid me once I was on starboard and ahead". And which would be right? Edited by Chris 249 - 15 Aug 15 at 8:45am |
|||
![]() |
|||
Solo4652 ![]() Groupie ![]() Joined: 08 Apr 15 Location: Stockport Online Status: Offline Posts: 71 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
@Chris249 above
Morning Chris. Overnight, the Golden 8, have become the Golden 7. Here they are, for reference; •1. Avoid collisions by giving boats enough time and room to avoid hitting things •2. Port keeps clear of starboard. •3. Windward keeps clear of leeward •4. Overtaking boat keeps clear •5. Hitting marks is OK and the inside boat(s) at a mark is entitled to room to round the mark. •6. If you have violated a rule, do a tack and a gybe as soon as you safely can. .7 Behave towards others in the same way you'd want them to behave towards you. Let's apply these to your scenarios above where a boat is rammed in the stern; "...boat ahead could have been hit. It could have been minding its own business and been rammed by a faster boat." Faster boat is DSQ'd under rule 4 if it hit the slower boat's stern, and also rule 3, if the faster boat hit the slower boat's windward side "[a boat] could also have blasted in on port and tacked just in front of a starboard tacker". Port-tack blaster is DSQ'd under rule 1 and rule 2 Maybe we don't have to be so concerned about who's "fault" it was. Just apply the rules. It may be the case that both boats are thrown out under different rules. So be it. |
|||
![]() |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page <1 1112131415 18> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |