Boat A entered and participated in a race for a perpetual trophy and was scored by the race committee using the rating on her performance handicap rating certificate that was in effect at the time of the race. No protest against her was made, and no boat requested redress claiming that A had been improperly scored.

Several weeks after the race, the rating authority, acting on its own volition, changed A's rating. No changes had been made in A's hull or equipment between the end of the race and the time that her rating was changed. When the race committee learned of the change in A's rating, it re-scored the race using the new rating, which made A's score significantly worse.

A requested redress, claiming that it was improper for the race committee to re-score the race. The protest committee agreed and, under rule 62.1(a), granted A redress by reinstating her original score.

Was it an improper action of the race committee to re-score the race based on the change in A's rating? Was the redress given to A appropriate?

Re-scoring the race was an improper action of the race committee. A boat's rating under a rating system may, from time to time, be changed by the rating authority even though no changes have been made in the boat's hull or equipment. This is particularly common for ratings given under a performance-handicap rating system. These systems base a boat's rating, in part, on her performance in past races, which may change over time. 

The rating for a boat at the time a race is sailed is the rating that should be used by the race committee to calculate her corrected time under rule A3. The original score given by the race committee to A was calculated based on A's rating at the time of the race. Therefore, the redress given to A by the protest committee was appropriate.

USA 2011/104