| Rules | ||
|---|---|---|
| Racing Rules of Sailing for 2013-2016; Version 6 | December 2015 | |
| Racing Rules of Sailing for 2017-2020 | August 2017 | |
| Racing Rules of Sailing for 2021-2024 | December 2020 | |
| Prescriptions | ||
| Australia | July 2017 | |
| Canada | November 2019 | |
| Great Britain - RYA has declined to grant a license for prescriptions and cases. | November 2019 | |
| New Zealand | July 2017 | |
| United States | February 2017 | |
| Cases | ||
| World Sailing Cases | February 2022 | |
| World Sailing Q&As | March 2022 | |
| Match Race Calls | January 2020 | |
| Match Race Rapid Response Calls | October 2018 | |
| Team Race Calls | December 2018 | |
| Team Race Rapid Response Calls | February 2016 | |
| CAN Cases | October 2017 | |
| RYA Cases | November 2019 | |
| US Appeals | November 2019 | |
| Manuals | ||
| World Sailing Judges Manual | December 2019 | |
However, many SI state that a boat that is not racing (see Definition) should stay out of the racing area. You would be breaking this rule.-> I got some things mixed up. Angelo Guarino comment clarifies this.What the RC absolutely needs to do is write the boats' number on the chronological list of finishers. And if a boat finishes twice, its number should be twice on this list. For scoring the RC might assume the last finishing position is the official one.
It is therefore advised not to cross the finish line a second time from course side. If a boat couldn't avoid it, that boat should make sure the RC knows it wasn't racing anymore and finished earlier.
Also note that the definition of Finish says nothing about crossing the line in the wrong direction. The RC should therefor not consider this as finishing again nor negating a previous finish of that boat. The RC might be annoyed at that boat. Best not do that.
This is incorrect. Yes, you have finished when any part of your hull crosses the line, but a boat is still racing until she clears the line and marks. See def: finish and racing, RRS 42.1 and Part 4 preamble.
I think your full reply was good, but the sentence above might be a little off.
IMO, while still racing, rules of Part 2 and full penalties still apply to the boat clearing the line/marks after finishing. I don’t see RRS 23 being an issue until the boat is no longer racing (see US 16). Looking at Case 126, IMO a boat clearing the line and marks is still on the final leg as that is the “….leg which is consistent with her course immediately before the incident and her reasons for sailing that course.”
Yes, once they have cleared both the line and marks. But importantly that is not what you wrote previously and the addition of “clears [the line and mark]” is the important and significant point added.
Bart, if a boat crosses the finish line and then discovers they sailed an improper course, the only way to correct it would be to unwind by going back through the finish line, further unwind until they are back at a position where they were sailing a proper course, and then finish the remainder of the course from there. So if the RC sees a boat that they previously marked as finished go back through the line, doesn't it follow that they might assume that boat is correcting an improper course and didn't finish? Or would they only record a new finish time if the boat subsequently crossed the finish line from the course side a second time?
Such an SI would be invalid as it would break RRS 86.1(b). Only a Class Rule can change RRS 42, under RRS 86.1(c).
I have often seen SI’s which try to keep boats that are not racing out of the “starting area” and these SI’s will then define the starting area as so many yards/meters this way and that. That said, I cannot recall an SI relating to the “racing area” that would effect/inform this situation.
Specifically, Part 2’s preamble assumes that boats that intend to, are and have been racing ARE in/near the “racing area”.
This said, a boat that has finished and no longer racing is certainly subject to RRS 23.1 and needs to do what is “reasonably possible” to not interfere with those boats still racing.
It’s a novel idea to put this into the SI as the “set play” for finishing, instead of using it as we normally see it as a way to avoid commercial traffic when a boat lacks way and other such “avoiding danger” situations.
Re Eric Meyn,
I assumed a boat correcting a mistake could just return straight to the mark it failed to pass according to the prescribed side. But I have to revisit this later
I'm not sure I'd agree that a boat finishing and then deciding to go back and unwind to correct an error on an earlier leg squares with the definition of finish. Clause (b) of the definition says the boat doesn't finish if she's correcting an error made at the line (for example, crossing a skewed line in the wrong direction). I don't think clause (c) is intended for correction of other errors, I believe it's for the circumstance when a boat may cross the finish line on a leg before the finishing leg (like a multi-lap course).
I think 28.2 says that if you cross the finish line to finish your opportunity to "continue to sail the course" and correct an error not made at the line has expired. If you want to correct such an error you have to recognize the error and start unwinding before you cross the finish line.
One boat on port crosses the center of the finishing line with the bow, but she was on the way on a sarboard boat also about to finish. Port boat put the engine to get away. Wrong. Se finshed, but still racing. Wrong tactic resolved by engine.
Same race, starboard boat crossing the finishing line next to the left mark. She put on the engine immediately, otherwise the current would have pushed the boat onto the mark. Wrong. She finished, but still racing. Wrong tactic resolved by engine.
So: sailboats against motorboat = Not fair.
I had 2 scenarios in mind when I wrote that.
Scenario 1:
Imagine 2 boats trying to finish in light air and against a strong current at different times. Boat A doesn’t have a motor handy and hits the mark just after crossing or decides it has to tack from starboard to port to stay away from the pin and then is forced to duck starboard approachers … setting them off the line. Boat B is able to put the engine in gear and gun it allowing them to turn into both wind and current and cross very close to the pin.
Scenario 2:
Imagine 2 boats overlapped on starboard working to windward against the current toward the pin end of the finish. Boat A inside and to leeward has a motor and Boat B the windward boat does not. Just as Boat A finishes next to the pin she guns her engine and turns up to avoid the pin, which forces Boat B to luff, stall and fall back. Now Boat B must tack onto port. Even if Boat B had a motor, she couldn’t use it in time as she hadn’t finished.
Maybe a way to fix Scenario 2 is that a boat using their motor can not alter course from the time they engage the engine until they clear the marks and line .. and if they hit a mark during this time, they must immediately disengage and correct the finish error. But then what if they have to avoid another boat not under power?
I just think this could get foggy and complicated.
PS: .. and what Aldo said :-)
I think those scenarios where a boat uses her motor to avoid hitting a finishing mark (assuming it can be established that she otherwise would have) or hinder another boat that hasn't yet finished (including, I would say, by her wake) would be covered by the "provided the boat does not gain a significant advantage in the race" clause of 42.3(i). So such a boat would be subject to protest for using her motor in a manner that isn't allowed by the SI.
I can see some problems with this solution. :)
Yes, provide SI’s to allow propulsion when imminent danger is present … no way in a shipping channel with a tanker heading your way or being swept into rocks , etc.
I just feel writing an SI like we are discussing is a fraught idea.
I don't want to pile on, and I think Ang was being a bit picky, but the time a boat 'unfinishes' is not the time she breaks the rule (or makes an error in sailing the course), but the time she takes [completes] a penalty under rule 44.2, or corrects an error in sailing the course. (Definition: Finish (a) and (b)).
If she doesn't take her penalty she is protestable but cannot be penalised without a hearing.
If she makes a rule 28 error at the finishing line, say by hooking around a finishing mark and crossing the line in the wrong direction, she has not finished and cannot be scored NSC until she actually crosses the finishing line from the course side. Once she does that, she is NSC unless and until she unwinds and finishes correctly.
I think you are overthinking this. Rule 42.3(i) takes care of significant advantage,
The light wind against tide is the very thing rule 43.3(i) is there for. It doesn't say anything about imminent peril or suchlike.
But why would you allow engines but not sculling, paddling or pumping?
How about
Boats that have finished may use prohibited propulsion in accordance with rule 43.3(i) to get clear of the finishing line and marks.
In addition to the no no significan advantage requirement, this doesn't switch off any of the other rules, so a boat availing herself of it must still keep clear, give room, and not interfere if possible.
Re Eric Meyn,
Eric and Bart,
The only rule 28 error a boat is permitted to correct after she has finished is an error in sailing the course made at the [finishing] line as provided in Definition: Finish (b).
A use of rule 42.3(i) that I have seen that seems to be reasonable is allowing a boat that is aground to use their engine to free themselves from a grounding on a falling tide.
Allowing a boat To motor away from the finish line before they have cleared the line is a bad idea.
If its OK for the Finns and other classes to switch off rule 42 any time it suits them, why is it a bad idea for a race committee to switch it off in limited circumstances to solve an identified problem?
Are you importing counsels of perfection appropriate to WS or Olympic events into club level race management?