Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • Angelo,

    I'd like to run the discussion below in this thread to avoid cluttering up your thread about the minimal documentation an OA might want.

    John Allan
    Said Created: Yesterday 14:18
    Gordon Davies
    Said Created: Today 11:11
    There have been several incidents in Ireland in which racing has been organised without fulfilling the minimal requirements to ensure that RRS apply. 

    What do you consider those 'minimal requirements' are?

    Gordon Davies
    Said Created: Yesterday 14:35
    The minimal requirements are set out in App J. However, these rule set out the contents, not the format of race documents
    The main items can be set out in a set of standard race documents applying to all club racing.

    Gordon Davies
    Said Created: Yesterday 15:44
    I struggle to envisage any circumstance in which I would be comfortable with boats entering an event without explicitly declaring in writing that they agree that the RRS govern the event. In our club the boat registration form is deemed to be the entry form for all club racing.

    What I was driving at with my question was what are the 'minimal requirements' for the RRS, in particular Part 2 When Boats Meet, to apply between boats.

    What Gordon is talking about are, I think, the requirements essential to the prudent management of racing by a club or other organising authority.

    I suggest that, following Juno v Endeavourthe minimal requirements for the RRS to apply between boats is nothing more than an agreement between them.  There is no fundamental requirement that this agreement should be in writing, unless and until there is some dispute about its existence or terms.

    I suggest this actually happens whenever two boats go out for a training session.

    If there is nothing more than an agreement between boats, there will, of course, be no Organising Authority, and some things in the RRS will not operate, for example:
    1. There will be no race committee to conduct and adjudicate starting and finishing.
    2. Boats will forego their rights to have protests heard by a protest committee (and may need to go to court to settle any dispute over damages),
    3. In the absence of written SI, there is likely to be confusion and misunderstanding about times and courses.

    I suggest that the actual function of the written undertaking to agree to be bound by The Racing Rules of Sailing referred to in RRS J1.2(11) is to form the basis of the principle that common agreements between entrants in a race and the Organising Authority constitute an agreement between the boats themselves, as discussed in Satanita's Case.
    Today 06:28
  • On mac OmniGraffle is a great tool for sketches like the course diagram:
    On windows Microsoft Visio is a similar tool.
    For a free tool you could try that was previously called
    Today 04:56
  • Jamie,

    Seemingly you have 2 different series with 2 different starting times, with a significant interval between the starts.

    The boat came to the starting area, started then retired in the first race,  the race in series A.  She should be scored RET in that race.

    She then left the racing area and did not come to the starting area for the second,  Series B race.  She should be scored DNC in that race.

    That is unless your SI somehow provide that a boat that came to the starting area for the first race shall not be scored DNC in the second race.

    If the boat was made fast to the pontoon at the preparatory signal for the second race, and  they didn't like the DNC score, they might consider RRS 45.
    Today 02:14
  • Tim Hohmann
    Said Created: Yesterday 14:47
    If it were me presented with that ambiguity I think I’d come down that the text description governed over the diagram. The diagram is drawn as it is for simplicity and shows that a boat may take 1a to port but the text says she doesn’t have to.

    Its a modern general rule of construction that related parts of a document should be taken together, not separated out.

    You can't generally have a 'conflict' between an ambiguous provision and an unambiguous one, like th textual course description in Angelo's example.  The diagram may be ambiguous, the text resolves any ambiguity

    I think that unless the course is simply around the outside of all the marks shown, a single diagram along will necessarily be ambiguous.  That is, any time the course passes between marks.

    Consider Angelo's diagram above.  From the diagram without a text course description it could be understood that on the downwind leg to the finish boats were required to leave Mark 2 to starboard.  The text description makes it clear that this is not the case.
    Today 00:41
  • I'm always a bit intrigued by our over insistence that the RC can't assist. 

    Is there another sport in the world that does this? If you are a runner or cyclist.. there are marshals that would direct you to the finish line.

    So I would have said 41(c) could easily be applied - with a member of the RC pointing sailors to the finish line (needs to be applied equally) AND 41(d) applies as the help was not requested.  Even without the RC shouting/pointing to the finish for every sailor, is there in fact an argument that as "the information was freely available" in the sailing instructions it was already available to all competitors.

    Is our aim as RC to be the pompous blazer wearing official or to help the competitors have a fair race

    Yesterday 18:36
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more