Mark rounding/windward boat
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=11116
Printed Date: 28 Jun 25 at 11:59am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Mark rounding/windward boat
Posted By: NickM
Subject: Mark rounding/windward boat
Date Posted: 01 Oct 13 at 9:33pm
A minor incident on Sunday got me wondering. Situation was this.
Two boats in the same class race running down on port gybe to the leeward mark for a port hand rounding. Wind Force 3-4. Boat A is astern of Boat B but just establishes an overlap when entering the three hull length zone.
Boat B gives A mark room and as they harden up onto a port tack beat after the mark, (i.e. the mark is now just astern,) Boat B is level with but to leeward of Boat A. Boat A's boom end lightly brushes the shoulder of the helm of Boat B who is now hiking hard.
At what moment does 18.2 switch off and 11 apply? Boat B thought Boat A had made a less than competent mark rounding and was slow to sheet in and harden up. Boat A might have taken the view that Boat B did not give him sufficient room to complete the rounding in a seamanlike manner. At what point is Boat A is obliged to keep clear however slow it is to reach a proper close hauled course?
|
Replies:
Posted By: gordon
Date Posted: 01 Oct 13 at 10:12pm
Case 25 would be pertinent - when an inside windward boat that is entitled to mark-room takes more space than she is entitled to, she must keep clear of the outside leeward boat, and the outside boat may luff provided that she gives the inside boat room to keep clear.
Boat A is entitled to room to sail to the mark and room to round the mark as necessary to sail the course. She must do this whilst manoeuvvring promptly in a seamanlike way.
If the protest committee finds that A took more room than that to which she was entitled (and a less than competent mark rounding might lead to that) then A was required to keep clear.
-------------
Gordon
|
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 01 Oct 13 at 10:22pm
This is very like case 25 in the case book...
http://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/20132016ISAFCaseBook-[14819].pdf
To quote:
"IW sailed a hull length away from the mark on a course over 45 degrees below close-hauled and, as a result, took much more space than rule 18.2(b) entitled her to take."
And in the case that's treated as too slow to harden up and Inside Windward was DSQ.
|
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 02 Oct 13 at 12:05am
I agree that Case 25 will get you there in this scenario, but note the following:
- you have to read the whole of Case 25 to apply it: the headnote does not cover the content of the case very well;
- Case 25 relies on the distance IW was from the mark to conclude that she was not sailing within the mark-room to which she was entitled.
I suggest that there is a slightly different analysis available in this case.
First, Rule 18.2( b ) is NOT 'switched off'. It continues to apply while ever the boat entitled to mark-room remains in the zone and does not pass head to wind (rule 18.2( b ), last sentence). And, of course rule 11 applied throughout: its just that while a boat is sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled she will be exonerated if she breaks a right of way rule (rule 21).
In the scenario described, when the incident occurred, OP said the mark was just astern (presumably of at least A, the boat entitled to mark-room), thus the boat entitled to mark-room:
- had left the mark astern (Definitions: mark-room ( a ))
- had rounded the mark as necessary to sail the course (Definitions: mark-room ( b ))
- had left the mark on the required side (Definitions: mark-room, stem).
So, all the actions defined in mark-room have happened and been completed in the past.
The boat entitled to mark-room is no longer sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled: she is thus, no longer entitled to exoneration if she breaks a right of way rule; and the boat owing mark-room no longer needs to take any action to give mark-room.
The boat entitled to mark-room clearly breaks rule 11, is not exonerated by rule 21 and thus, on valid protest should be penalised.
The above analysis relies on an observable fact: mark left astern, rather than on a qualitative judgement about how far from the mark exceeds the space to which the boat entitled to mark-room is entitled. I think it is easier to apply.
Note, however, that Case 25 is very useful about the space or room: the third last paragraph says:
IW sailed a hull length away from the mark on a course over 45 degrees below close-hauled and, as a result, took much more space than rule 18.2(b) entitled her to take.
If it is not possible to apply the 'left the mark astern' criterion, this provides us with an authoritative guide to how much room is too much.
|
Posted By: gordon
Date Posted: 02 Oct 13 at 7:23am
Brass - I would take issue only on one point:
the entitlement to mark room ceases to apply:
- when the course of the boat entitled to mark-room is no longer determined by need to leave the mark on the required side, that is when she no longer needs room to sail to the mark or room to round the mark to sail her course (This may be when she leaves the mark astern, but especially in tidal waters this may be somewhat later). From this moment rule 18 may apply, but rule 18.2(b) ceases to have any relevance as the is nothing left to be entitled to...
OR if she leaves the zone or passes head to wind before the above condition is met.
However the entitlment to mark room does not automatically apply until the boat entitled to mark-room leaves the zone.
A further minor point:
The boat length from the mark, 45° indication in Case 25 gives us an EXAMPLE rather than an authorative guide. "Much more space" implies that if she had been closer to the mark, or had luffed further the boat could still have been taking "more" space than that to which she was entitled.
-------------
Gordon
|
Posted By: NickM
Date Posted: 02 Oct 13 at 11:07pm
|
Thanks guys for a very clear explanation as always. I was the helm of B and, as my initial reactions was doubt about who was in the right, I didn't shout. It was of course moderately windy and A was executing quite a tight turn and did not sheet in quickly. Actually I'm not sure he even noticed the minor contact.
|
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 03 Oct 13 at 12:29am
Originally posted by gordon
Brass - I would take issue only on one point:
the entitlement to mark room ceases to apply:
- when the course of the boat entitled to mark-room is no longer determined by need to leave the mark on the required side,
That language rings a bell. is it a quote from somewhere?
I have difficulty with the proposition that the entitlement to mark-room ceases.
I contend that the entitlement to mark-room continues to apply while ever the conditions for rule 18.2( b ) apply, but that, as you have said below, there are circustances when a boat entitled to mark-room 'no longer needs [it]' (which implies and is implied by the fact that she is no longer sailing within the mark-room to which she is (or was) entitled.
In other words the boat continues to have a theoretical entitlement to mark-room, but the mark-room that she is entitled to is, as you have said, 'nothing', or, [the entitlement to mark-room] 'ceases to have any relevance'.
If ever again, without having left the zone or passed head to wind, she is once again (say under tide or current, or tactical manoeuvre) in a position where her proper course is to sail to the mark, or she needs [room to] leave or pass the mark, her entitlement to room once again 'comes alive' or acquires content, and she can once again be sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled.
that is when she no longer needs room to sail to the mark or room to round the mark to sail her course (This may be when she leaves the mark astern, but especially in tidal waters this may be somewhat later). From this moment rule 18 may apply, but rule 18.2(b) ceases to have any relevance as the is nothing left to be entitled to...
|
Originally posted by gordon
However the entitlment to mark room does not automatically apply until the boat entitled to mark-room leaves the zone.
I don't quite get this.
Are there one too many, or one too few 'nots' in the sentence?
|
Originally posted by gordon
A further minor point:
The boat length from the mark, 45° indication in Case 25 gives us an EXAMPLE rather than an authorative guide. "Much more space" implies that if she had been closer to the mark, or had luffed further the boat could still have been taking "more" space than that to which she was entitled.
I absolutely agree that you have to be careful about language and context, and we should bear in mind the extended discussion of how much room is room in Case 21, but I still think the pithy quote from Case 25 is a pretty good argument settler.
|
|
Posted By: gordon
Date Posted: 03 Oct 13 at 8:10am
It is interesting to stress test your proposition that an 18.2b continues until the entitled boat leaves the zone. Turn to team racing... which (mis)uses the same rules...
What your interpretation leads to is that a boat that has passed the mark but not left the zone can gybe, return to the mark and once again claim mark room off other boats! Team racers would love to be able to do this - and they can but without any protection from rule 18!
The rule (18.2 and the definition of mark-room) defines a corridor to the mark and around the mark. The dimensions of this corridor are variable according to the conditions, and may turn out to be bigger than originally expected. There may be disagreement as to the size of this corridor (which will be settled by the PC). Whilst taking mark-room the entitledboat has an obligation to manoeuvre in a seamanlike way, which may not be to the entitled boat's tactical advantage.
Once the entitled boat has sailed through this corridor and out the far end then they have been given mark-room as defined. The obligation of the room-giving boat ends and the entitled boats exoneration under rule 21 ends.
18.2 obligations can ALSO end because the entitled boat passes head to wind or leaves the zone.
However the entitlement to mark room does not necessarily apply until the entitled boat leaves the zone. It can end before the entitled boat leaves the zone (There was not an extraneous negative in my previous post).
-------------
Gordon
|
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 03 Oct 13 at 9:43am
|
In ordinary club level fleet racing I think there could be advantages if the mark room protection extended until the inner boat leaves the zone provided she maintains a proper course to the *next* mark (and without tacking), but I hate to think what sort of abuses might be made of such at elite level, let alone the perversions of match and team racing...
|
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 03 Oct 13 at 11:44am
I got caught like this a few years ago after a less than perfect (though still within "seamanlike") rounding, when the leeward boat was able to force me to keep clear right after the mark. Luckily I did turns, as I lost the protest that I was still in the process of rounding. Up to that point, I'd not realized how quickly it all switches off. So long as we all understand how the rule works, then it isn't too bad, though in handicap racing there is both the problem of how high different boats point coming out of a mark, and how long it takes them to get to that point. If rounding outside a big, heavy boat, then they have the right to take their normal amount of time, I assume, to round and keep clear.
The rules really don't work as well for a mixed fleet.
-------------
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686
|
Posted By: gordon
Date Posted: 03 Oct 13 at 12:09pm
Rupert - you are correct in stating that the room to be given is the room needed by the entitled boat. A Flying Dutchman on the inside will need more room than an Optimist
In the same way the zone is defined as 3 hull lengths of the boat nearer to the mark.
On the other hand when rule 17 is in operation the proper course in question is the proper course of the leeward boat.
These precisions should be enough to ensure that the rules work for mixed fleets.
In your unsuccessgul protest did you argue that the leeward, right of way boat, had an obligation, under rule 16, to give you room to keep ckear when she changed course.
-------------
Gordon
|
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 03 Oct 13 at 12:20pm
She had given me room, there was no collision, so that side of things was fine. I guess the question was, at what point did the rights of the leeward boat kick back in again after mark room was given. The answer, logically, was as soon as the inside boat was clear of the mark. As there was no tide, I would have been able to get clear (I think I tacked off, but too late) as soon as my transom was clear. In adverse tide, I would think that if being forced to tack off then pushes you back down onto the mark, you would still need mark room?
-------------
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686
|
Posted By: Presuming Ed
Date Posted: 04 Oct 13 at 10:18am
|
Leeward never lost her rights, nor obligations under 14/16.1.
If leeward luffs in such a way that the only way you, as windward, can comply with 11 is by tacking and hitting the mark, then she has broken 16.1.
If her luff complies with 16.1 and you have the option of luffing, sailing high and slow, but decide not to do that and tack off instead, and as a result hit the mark then you are in breach of 31.
|
|