Forum: The Racing Rules of Sailing
Direction to round marks.
Robert Ulph
Nationality: United Kingdom
0
Suppose in a race there are two windward marks, and one leeward mark. The race instructions are to round the first windward mark to starboard, but are silent as to which way to round the other marks. The second mark is to the right of the first mark as seen from the start line. So it would be very strange to round that second mark to port, since the direction of sail after rounding it is to go down towards the leeward mark. So it seems only reasonable to assume that that mark is also to be rounded to starboard.
Which way should sailors round the leeward mark?
Which way should sailors round the leeward mark?
Comments
[You must be signed in to add a comment]
There is a “button-loop” course case somewhere, but can’t put my finger on it.
PS: I was thinking of US Appeal 103. Below is the diagram.
It is rumoured that a race from Kinsale to Cork via the Fastnet Rock was described as -Start -Fastnet Rock Starboard -Finish. One boat departed Kinsale and turned East for Cork leaving the rock to starboard. All other boats rounded the rock. The first boat successfully claimed the trophy. Be careful about how you write your sailing instructions and course cards.
Nick re: “Please don't have a long debate about something as simple as this! ”
At the top of each thread is an “unsubscribe” button, which will suspend the email notifications you receive for that thread alone. So, if you (or any forum member) feels a topic is going too long and you no longer wish to receive emails … just click that button. .. it only stops the email for that particular thread.
Def: Sail the course (a) and (b) say what a boat must do relative to passing and rounding marks. “From the direction of the previous” only applies at the finish when determining which direction to cross the finish-line.
The other rounding and passing marks only make note of the “order” … not direction .. and in the case of rounding marks that the string touches them on the correct side.
Thanks Angelo. If this is meant to be a learning tool then there are right and wrong answers. If it’s social media then contributors should feel free to knock themselves out with all kinds of ‘opinions’. 😊
Since rounding is not defined the ordinary meaning must apply. To round the mark you must sail towards it from some direction (presumably the previous mark) and sail away in another direction ( again presumably to the next mark or finsh) it is not sufficient to merely pass the mark
I think the forum is meant to be many things … a learning tool … a social environment to discuss a topic of common interest … and a place to get the opinions of the rules from some really knowledgeable and experienced racers and race officials from around the world .. and to share ideas and solutions to common problems and issues.
I hope the result of our forum-moderation is all those things above.
What it is not … is a place to get definitive (i.e. “right/wrong”) interpretations of the RRS. That is reserved for the WS Case Book and Call Books (and Q&A Service)
As far as encouraging/discouraging dialog on a topic … even a “simple” one (PS: I really don’t like to characterize topics/questions as “simple” as it may discourage some from asking them)… as long as people are polite, respectful and patient with each other … and don’t take the topic too far afield .. I wouldn’t want to limit discussions that folk want to have.
If you apply the def: mark, def: sail-the-course, def: start, def: finish … they have all you need.
Boats can sail past marks and approach them from the opposite “direction from” the previous mark. This is why the string-rule and sail the course are constructed as they are … to remove all those variables and boil it down to the essential requirements.
Leaves me to ponder the ramifications of the requirements of J2.1(4) being included in the NOR but not in the SI.
In that case, it would seem "a race committee vessel surrounded by navigable water from which the starting or finishing line extends, and an object intentionally attached to the object or vessel" would be the only objects defined as a Mark.
Murray
We've had other threads that discussed situations where the OA/RC made an
unintentional[undiscovered] error in the race documents (NOR/SI) in defining the course .. but no boat protested and all boats sailed the same course. No complaint .. no problem is likely the outcome there. The issue mainly arises when some boats go one way and others another .. now the RC/PC has a problem to sort out.I was in a race that was very similar to US103, except importantly, all the marks were defined as rounding marks. The RC set themselves up in a position for the finish such that to round the last mark to port before finishing, it would require a button-loop rounding to port.
I wasn't in first place (maybe 3rd) .. so I had competitors ahead of me that I saw treat the mark as a passing-mark (both in my class and faster classes that started before the J105s).
This put me in a bit of a pickle ....
In the end, we passed the mark (no button) like the others .. all other boats did the same .. and I sent a private note to the RC what happened so that next time they could be more careful where they drop anchor.
The RC and I lucked out!
Thank you for your contribution and your opinions.
Charles, I think you're right - it's worth listening really closely to what is said. "Round the first mark to port" implies that the others might need to be passed to starboard, and a boat doing so could be said to be genuinely trying to make an attempt to sail the course. If it's simply "Pass to port" then that implies that all marks have to be passed to port. So then if some boats go round a mark to starboard that is grounds for protest.
I don't think that missing out a mark and arguing that it wasn't part of the course because no direction was specified is going to get me anywhere, unfortunately, whatever the merits of it.
Robert .. Nick's comment had me thinking ... and he brings up a good point (which is implied, but not stated).
NOR's/SI's state in the very beginning under "Rules" whether or not the Racing Rules of Sailing apply. All that we talk about here assumes that they do, but they don't unless it is stated. If you don't have something which says they do apply, you run the risk of being more than simply confused about the course.
What happens in this no-doc event if there is a collision and expensive damage or injury occurs? What ROW rules apply?
We've had other discussions on other threads about determination of fault in instances of damage/collision/injury and each MNA (jurisdiction .. US/UK/CAN/AUS, etc) might have their own prescriptions which talk about that.
Whoever is organizing this should put together a barebone document for the event and have people "enter" it by whatever means you describe ... which could be as simple as sending in an email with the boat-name to a specified address.
Just my 2 cents .. Ang
I see that appendices take precedence over definitions if there is a conflict. So a mark defined in the NOR might satisfy the definition of mark.
A mark is 'An object the sailing instructions require a boat to leave on a specified side ... ' (Definitions, Mark).
As long as:
The standard wording from Appendix KG '1.1 The event is governed by the rules as defined in The Racing Rules of Sailing', is not mandated by Appendix J. If it is not included in the SI, arguably, in accordance with RRS 4, the same effect is achieved.
That said, it's not a good idea not to completely describe courses and marks in the SI.