Luffing rights - Proper Course - 2013 rule???
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=10918
Printed Date: 28 Jun 25 at 12:01pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Luffing rights - Proper Course - 2013 rule???
Posted By: ds797
Subject: Luffing rights - Proper Course - 2013 rule???
Date Posted: 16 Jun 13 at 12:34pm
|
Say 2 boats are on a reach (90 degrees to wind say), boat behind slightly faster wants to overtake boat in front. 1) Can the boat behind overtake to leeward and luff the windward boat above the "proper course"? 2) If the boat behind passes to windward, can the leeward (boat being overtaken) luff above their "proper course"? I think I know the answers, but won't write them here so as not to bias responses! I think there were some subtle changes in the 2013 rules. What does everyone here thing? Thanks! |
Replies:
Posted By: RS400atC
Date Posted: 16 Jun 13 at 3:21pm
|
I don't see the vertical bar in the margin which would indicate a change. The key is that the overlap must start while the leeward boat is withing two hull lengths of the other for any restriction on proper course to apply. And it is the leeward boat's proper course that matters, this may be much higher than the windward boat's, for instance if the leeward boat is asymmetric .... http://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/RRS20132016StudyVersion-%5B13380%5D.pdf |
Posted By: ds797
Date Posted: 16 Jun 13 at 4:00pm
| Hi RS...... sorry thats confused me more than I was before.... please can you expand? |
Posted By: Andymac
Date Posted: 16 Jun 13 at 5:15pm
|
In answer to your original question,
1) Depends; YES, [In the absence of any other constraining factors] if the leeward overtaking boat established the overlap with a lateral seperation of more than 2 boat lengths* (*larger of the 2 boats if mixed handicap).
NO, if the separation was less than 2 boat lengths.
2)Yes.
As RS says, one boats 'proper course' can be very different to another boat.
Take a Laser 1 and an RS200 (Assymetric) sailing a dead downwind leg; the Laser would expect to sail much deeper than the RS200. It is the leeward boats 'proper course' which is the crux of the matter.
As others have said before, the key to understanding the rules is to first learn the definitions.
|
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 16 Jun 13 at 5:38pm
|
Another quick question on the topic... If an overlap is established from behind, with no luffing rights (we shall assume the proper course of both boats is the same), and then the leeward boat gybes and then gybes back, does she then gain luffing rights, as she has become leeward boat through different means? Also, if 2 boats go round the mark overlapped, and then both gybe, does the new leeward boat have luffing rights? ------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: Lukepiewalker
Date Posted: 16 Jun 13 at 5:59pm
|
I would avoid using the phrase 'overtake'. It used to be in the rules, but isn't any longer (although it is in the appendix for 'Expression competition' in windsurfing). 17 says 'if a boat clear astern becomes overlapped withing two of her hull lengths to leeward of a boat on the same tack, she shall not sail above her proper course while they remain on the same tack and overlapped within that distance' which is the bit we are focusing on. So rather than overtaking, we are thinking of the rear boat being 'clear astern' in which case either boat can do what they like in terms course (subject to other boats and rule burden). Then we move to the state of being overlapped. If the boats are within two boat lengths (laterally) of each other then the proper course constraint applies as well as the 'room to keep clear' constraints. If you are further away (laterally) when the overlap is gained then you only have the 'room to keep clear' constraints. If you overlap to windward from clear astern then the leeward boat only has the 'room to keep clear' constraints. Or, to put it another way... what they said...  As Andymac says, the definitions are the key to the rules ------------- Ex-Finn GBR533 "Pie Hard" Ex-National 12 3253 "Seawitch" Ex-National 12 2961 "Curved Air" Ex-Mirror 59096 "Voodoo Chile" |
Posted By: Lukepiewalker
Date Posted: 16 Jun 13 at 6:02pm
|
It would appear I took so long writing that someone wrote something else in between The two gybes approach would indeed release you of the proper course obligations. As to the mark rounding situation I would say that you would be allowed to luff above proper course, subject to the 'room to keep clear' ------------- Ex-Finn GBR533 "Pie Hard" Ex-National 12 3253 "Seawitch" Ex-National 12 2961 "Curved Air" Ex-Mirror 59096 "Voodoo Chile" |
Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 16 Jun 13 at 6:05pm
|
As long as they are overlapped, and within 2 boat lengths laterally. Yes. Check the interpretation of gybing as well. A boat sailing by the lee may gybe and gybe back simultaneously due to top batten flicking accross and back again. I have seen a few breaks of 17 when going round a leeward mark they have got bow out and about a boat length and a half to leeward, having come from behind, they throw in a tack. Then call starboard. 17 says they have to go behind. Most seem to think it is rule 13 that is in force, even so, probably too close to tack. ------------- Andy Mck |
Posted By: Lukepiewalker
Date Posted: 16 Jun 13 at 6:07pm
|
I should add the caveats about mark-room and all that sort of thing as well, I'll change it to: As to the mark rounding situation I would say that you would be allowed to luff above proper course, subject to the 'room to keep clear' and any other rules in force relating to the mark rounding (Mark Room, that sort of thing) ------------- Ex-Finn GBR533 "Pie Hard" Ex-National 12 3253 "Seawitch" Ex-National 12 2961 "Curved Air" Ex-Mirror 59096 "Voodoo Chile" |
Posted By: sargesail
Date Posted: 16 Jun 13 at 9:20pm
| Think I'll let Brass or Gordon deal with some of the wrongness here....too tired after some good sailing. |
Posted By: RS400atC
Date Posted: 16 Jun 13 at 9:51pm
|
I don't know when 'overtake' was last in the right of way part of RRS, but I think it was a long time ago, like when Mk1 Cortinas were new? It is still in the colregs, and we all respect those when we come across non-racing craft, don't we? (Pond sailors may claim an exemption). It's rule 3 of colregs, overtaking vessel keeps clear, and it over-rides 'power gives way to sail and all that. |
Posted By: RS400atC
Date Posted: 16 Jun 13 at 10:01pm
Hi, which bit of my post is confusing? I expect the others have explained more clearly? If it's not clear, go straight to Bryan Willis' book is never bad advice IMHO. cheers, |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 3:30am
Well, that's going to make look like the shy retiring type that I am isn't it.
Ford Prefects mate. The black boxy ones. My copy of the RYA rules of 1947.
No, it's two hull lengths of the boat coming from clear astern.
Andymac meet Andymck
There is no meaning to 'gybing' in fleet racing. What matters for rule 17 is 'not remaining on the same tack'. A boat's leeward side, and hence the tack she is on, is determined, when sailing by the
lee or directly downwind, by the side on which her mainsail lies (Definition Leeward and Windward, Definition Tack Starboard or Port). Usually we we would say the side a boat's mainsail lies is where 'most' (more than half, two thirds) lies. With a non-gaff mainsail, it will be difficult for a boat that is by the lee to get most of her mainsail across the boat without the boom also coming across (and if you want to play around with that a little more see MR Call G5). Usually a double gybe is done dead downwind on a steady course, or with a little fishtail.
In a double gybe you expect to see the boom and most of the main come across the boat then come back.
At a leeward mark, an advanced outside boat with rule 17 on who throws a tack, in all probability is quite reasonably sailing her proper course: a boat can have more than one proper course, and on a windward leg, either tack is arguably her proper course.
But a leeward boat overlapped outside not more than two hull lengths separated, when tacking is going to have a lot of difficulty complying with rule 13 and rule 15.
So, its 13 and 15, not 17 that will cause her trouble
|
Posted By: Andymac
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 8:00am
Thanks Brass, Yes of course I should have used the term hull lengths (not boat lengths).
I believe myself and andymck have had an 'introduction' in the past.
Just to clarify, my use of the term 'overtaking' boat picked up on the description by the OP, and was repeated purely to illustrate the boat which gained an overlap from astern. I did not wish to infere that 'overtaking' boats had any rights or obligations under the RRS since the definition is not used.
|
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 8:24am
| The issue wasn't really 'hull' lengths or 'overtaking', but it's not lengths of the larger boat, but lengths of the astern boat. |
Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 11:00am
|
Brass The argument about gybing has come in a team racing situation. A boat holding its boom out in a by the lee situation. Which tack is she on if the sail has started to fill from the other side, ie the top of the sail has gybed, but is prevented from coming across the boat by the actions of the crew. The interpretation of which tack the boat was on then becomes tricky. Clearly the windward side has changed, despite the sail being held on the previous tack. The instruction from the senior umpire on the day was the boat has gybed, as there is a new windward side, from which the sail is filling, even though the sail had not crossed the boat, but had crossed the boom. This was the interpretation being used in the uk back in March, and may have changed again since. I did ask the question about the top of the sail flipping, as we see quite often in single handers, the answer was that was two simultaneous gybes under their current interpretation of the rule, as they were using the top batten area as the reference point. What could not be done was the forced passage of the boom across the boat, where the windward side, ie the direction of the filling of the sail did not change, even though you could get 2/3rds of sail across on the boats we use. This is obviously an area which is evolving, but they were putting more emphasis on windward side than position of the sail at that time. ------------- Andy Mck |
Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 11:18am
|
As for rule 17, we certainly enforce that rule off the start line, when a boat that has come from behind can not sail above close hauled (after the gun) until she has become clear ahead on the windward boat, unless she tacks behind. TR C4. TR call D7 would also suggest that you are constrained by rule 17 until you are passed the lay line to the next windward mark, so if you do tack, you go behind. These are both applicable to team racing and fleet racing. ------------- Andy Mck |
Posted By: Quagers
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 12:38pm
In a team racing situation this is governed by TR calls G1 and G3 which cover most situations. If the mainsail is being held in place against the force of the wind by the crew then that boat is not 'sailing by the lee' and its tack is determined by which side the wind hits. In the first situation you describe the conclusion is right (eg. yes the boat has gybed) but the reasons given are not those given in the rules and case book which confuse the issue. If the top of the sail flipped without the boom coming across without physical interference from the crew I would a) be very surprised and b) not class it as a gybe. |
Posted By: Quagers
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 12:41pm
I think you have mis understood call D7, it only applies in the case where leeward luffs and does not change tacks, as shown in the picture. If in the same situation leeward was able to complete its tack while giving windward room to keep clear under rule 15 that would be fine and windward would be obliged to avoid. In addition, on a beat either of the 2 tacks is considered to be a proper course. < id="adlesse_unifier_magic_element_id" style="display:none;"> |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 3:20pm
|
Thanks Quagers. That pesky tag is back. Good to get the TR stuff from somebody who knows about it. I need to get my head around it: I'm off to my TR Ump seminar in July. Agree TR Calls G1 and G3 cover the field. I see also that Appendix D does not bring back the gybe, so the language of 'gybing' tends to confuse the issue. Key point is that when the boom is held out artificially, the calls say the boat is no longer sailing by the lee, thus the 'actual' windward side governs.
|
Posted By: Andymac
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 3:30pm
Thanks for that point Brass, I had always assumed that it was the larger of the two boats (as per zone at a mark). I stand corrected.
|
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 4:02pm
Mate, that's not right either. For the zone it's hull lengths of the boat nearer to the mark. I can't think of any situation that depends on lengths of the larger boat.
|
Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 7:11pm
That call emphasises that rule 17 is in force until beyond the lay line when it becomes clear which of the two proper courses is the proper course. That then gives you back the opportunity to sail above close hauled. Before that, as we are constrained by rule 17 you are not allowed to luff above close hauled without going behind the windward boat. As described in question two of the same call. Thus. Going back to the original scenario. At the leeward mark. Having come from behind within two boat lengths to leeward, having not broken the overlap, even though you have two proper courses, you should not luff above close hauled unless you continue and go behind the windward boat. You either have to get to a clear ahead point or drop two boat lengths to leeward before you can chance your arm at a rule 13/15 tack, as to tack you will have already broken 17. I take the point that even if the leeward boat does luff, the windward boat still has to try to keep clear, but there seems to be an assumption witnessed at several events that if you are bow out and a bit to leeward you can chance your arm at a tack. Most of the situations would also have been covered by 13/15 which we called them on, but my point is that there was still a rule 17 obligation as well. ------------- Andy Mck |
Posted By: Andymac
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 8:36pm
Just read the definition of 'zone' - I should follow my own advice given earlier in this thread!!!
Where the hell did I ever dream that up from? Was there ever such a definition??
|
Posted By: Quagers
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 10:13am
I think I would like to wait for Brass to weigh in on that because I'm pretty sure you're wrong but I can't quote specifically why. The interpretation you describe is certainly not one I have ever seen applied at an event and I have never heard it articulated by a competitor or umpire I've met. So while you may indeed be right and I would be happy to be corrected I am very unsure. In reality, purely by geometry this isn't a situation which I can imagine occurring often, to have the space to complete the tack without violating R13/15 leeward is likely to be either clear ahead, more than 2 hull lengths to leeward or will pass behind after tacking anyway. |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 12:22pm
Yup, You're not crazy. Pre 1995 rules rule 38( b ) (equivalent of present rule 17) referred to 'two overall lengths of the longer yacht'. Changed to 'two of her hull lengths' in rule 17 in th epost 1995 rewrite.
|
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 2:03pm
In my original response to Andymck copied at the head of this post, I said 'a boat can have more than one proper course'. That was nonsense and I apologise for it. The better way of saying what I was driving at would be 'There may be more than one course that may reasonably be considered to be a boat's proper course ... and on a windward leg, either tack is arguably her proper course'. So guys, don't rely on me to get it right. I tend to think Andymck is on the right track (at least for TR) with TR Calls C4 and D7. Quagers, I think your take on TR Call D7 that it only applies when the leeward boat does NOT tack misses the principle that the Call points towards, which is that where it is clear that a boat's proper course is to tack she does not break rule 17 by luffing above close hauled, in an attempt to tack. This is no less valid if she manages to put the windward boat about then tack herself, rather than bearing away without tacking. What TR Call C4 is saying about boats coming away from a starting line seems to me to be absolutely analogous to to boats coming away from a leeward mark. Both TR Calls talk about it being clear (or not clear) which tack is the boat's proper course, and say that only if it is clear that a boat's proper course is to tack does she avoid breaking rule 17 if she luffs above close hauled. This is OK for for a TR/MR Call (btw, Call D7 is the same for TR and MR), where the umpires must rely on their observations and cannot enter into discussion about why a skipper thinks a course is his or her proper course. Case 14, however, discusses the determination of proper course, taking the opposite approach. It refers to 'The facts found do not show that L sailed above her proper course therefore she did not break rule 17.' In other words, in the absence of binding TR/MR Calls to the contrary, if it is not clear that a boat's course is NOT her proper course, she must be taken to be not breaking rule 17 (apologies for the string of negatives, but that's logic for you). That said, in a protest hearing, I'd be wanting to hear convincing evidence why a boat thought it was her proper course to tack, and would allow the other boat to bring evidence and argument against, before deciding. A boat can't just say 'I thought it was the better course' without giving good reasons. |
Posted By: ds797
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 12:47am
|
So there seems to have been major thread creep!! All good discussion.... but.... If I'm on a reach between two marks and want to overtake (yes I know the term is not used) a slightly slower boat, if I sail to windward of him does he have a right to luff me, or should he maintain his proper course to the next mark? If I pass him to leeward can I luff him to help me pass and clear his dirty wind? That was my original question, although I may have phrased it badly! Thanks. |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 1:04am
Rule 17 is a simple enough rule. Read it and apply it.
|
Posted By: Andymac
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 2:38am
Thank goodness for that, I kind of got something right, even if it was 18 years ago! Me thinks I need a little refresh myself on the rules... the devil is in the detail.
|
Posted By: jeffers
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 6:54am
Simple...already explained but here it is: If YOU pass to windward the leeward boat can luff you up to head to wind provided they give you time to respond and drop sails (if required). If YOU pass to Leeward you may not sail above YOUR proper course until you are clear ahead. Tactically the best way to overtake (depending on the length of the leg) is to try and get to be inside boat at the next mark unless you can go low enough or high enough to minimise the effects of the dirty air from the slower boat. ------------- Paul ---------------------- D-Zero GBR 74 |
Posted By: alstorer
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 8:38am
|
(assuming no tide) if the other boats (boat A) is a one or two sail boat that can easily sail a straight reach, and you (boat B) are a three sail boat that needs to go deep for hoists and drops but can hold the kite on quite a tight angle, then boat B's proper course may look to boat A as if B is luffing them (go deep to hoist, reach across at a hot angle, go deep to drop)- so there's are intricacies. ------------- -_ Al |
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 8:45am
|
One important tactic is knowing the point at which (if the next mark is a gybe) you'll no longer be able to overtake to windward and break the overlap of the boat you are overtaking, and to go below instead and try and hang on in dirty wind to get the overlap. It is also a good tactic if at all possible to go far enough to windward of another boat that to luff you would cause a serious change of course for the leeward boat, for limited gain, as you aren't directly affecting their wind. Some people will try and get you anyway, of course, but helms aware of the bigger picture may well leave you alone. Same applies to going to leeward - if you can, leave a large separation - go low. What it can mean is that you get a tighter reach into the gybe mark, so com in at speed, your transom angle meaning you have water on loads of boats who have gone high and are now slowly running down to the mark. Both these tactics mean avoiding all that tedious luffing/dirty wind stuff - in an ideal world! ------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: ds797
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 4:36pm
1.... obviously I didn't understand as I asked for clarification..... 2..... from RRS 2013-16: 17 ON THE SAME TACK; PROPER COURSE Rule 17 is deleted. |
Posted By: ds797
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 4:42pm
|
So next question then.... I'm now the boat being overtaken (yes I know there is no such term but bear with me!).... If a boat tries to pass to windward of me, I can luff them to head to wind (if I want to.... give them time... realise it will slow me down etc). Question: If the boat is passing me to leeward, can I adjust course downwards (i.e. bear away), assuming giving time to respond etc.... (for example, from close hauled bear away 10 degrees to get more speed) etc. Thanks :) |
Posted By: themeaningoflife
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 8:37pm
|
No you cannot, as they then gain leeward rights over you, you have to maintain the proper upwind course, which is closed hauled for best vmg. ------------- Cambridge University Lightweight Rowing Club RS800 1128 kindly sponsored by http://www.rwo-marine.com" rel="nofollow - RWO Marine |
Posted By: alstorer
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 9:12pm
um, more like they'll all be overlapped inside you (if you're going for a drop and harden up). If you're going for a gybe drop inside them, it is their transom that's important- and that's at (or near) 90° to the leg... We did have to pull out of a gybe drop approach a few weeks ago- though in this case we did have water, as the other boa was coming in at a similar angle. We'd established overlap sometime around the point that both boats had gybed onto final approach, well outside the zone. But that's a different matter entirely. ------------- -_ Al |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 11:26pm
I apologise for my terse answer.
What you have quoted is from either the Windsurfing Competition Rules or the Kiteboarding Competition Rules (Appendixes B or F to the RRS). Maybe you accidentally stumbled into the Appendices instead of the rules themselves.
If that's what you were trying to apply I can understand why you had difficulty <g>.
ARE you racing windsurfers or kiteboards?
If so, maybe one of the others here who is better at explaining tactics can talk about passing with no rule 17.
Otherwise, here's rule 17 (although I suspect you've already found it and read it by now).
I think the explanations above pretty much cover the ground.
Do you still have any specific questions?
.
|
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 11:33pm
You must keep clear of a leeward boat on the same tack (rule 11), so you can't come down on her if it means you will not keep clear.
You, however, have no proper course limitations. Rule 17 applies only to a boat that becomes overlapped to leeward within two of her hull lengths of a boat on the same tack.
|