Forum members .. I know we had a thread that touched on some of these questions, but I couldn't find it (that thread looked at the question of being overlapped with a capsized boat in the zone).

If someone can find that thread and post a link to it in the comments, it might help inform this discussion for folks to read through that first.

Thanks - Ang

Ang, found one that might be what you're thinking of:

https://www.racingrulesofsailing.org/posts/158-rule-18-v-19-at-the-gybe-mark - Two overlapped boats approaching a capsized boat in the zone.

If I am understanding your case correctly,
Q1
"while capsized" means the masthead is still in the water. She has not tacked, regardless of her hull's orientation. Mark room still applies.

Q2
Whether she still has mark-room or not (and even better than mark-room) she is leeward of other boats overlapping her to windward from astern as they round the mark inside her. She can luff them to the moon. And protest them for not keeping clear, if they curtail her luff.

Q3
"shall avoid" by dictionary seems to mean the same thing as give way, so capsized and recovering boat seems to have ROW throughout and maintains it in this case. Smart sailors will indeed avoid a capsized boat.

Baptiste Verniest
said

Hello, that's an interesting questions!

Yes indeed.

Some quick thinking points (I didn't read the old thread Ang, so sorry if we're repeating rules and reasoning!)

Phil and Baptiste, I think you are seriously confusing the issues by introducing language like ‘on a tack’ that is not in the rules. Using the language in the rules tends to keep us on the straight and narrow.

Before going on, I think there’s a ‘Question 0’ that needs to be addressed.

Question 0. Does Y capsizing affect her entitlement to mark-room under rule 18.2b which she gained by reaching the zone clear ahead of B?

Answer 0. No. Section D Preamble switches off Section A Right of Way Rules for a capsized boat, but does not affect any other rules. Rule 18.2b continues to apply until rule 18.1 or rule 18.2d switches it off.

Discussion of Question 1

If boat A in her attempt to turn the boat around causes her bow to pass head to wind does 18.2(b) and (c) cease to apply? If the bow passes head to wind while capsized?

1. I'm not in the same thinking as Philip. Rule 18.2(d) uses the expression "passes head to wind", and to judge this, I'll be using the definition of tack, as when you pass head to wind you change tack. As the leeward side of the boat changes, she changes tack, and as she was bow close to the wind, she passed head to wind

This is unnecessarily complicated reasoning.

A boat, whether capsized or upright, clearly has a ‘head’ and a ‘stern’.

It is a simple fact whether a boat passes head to wind or not, regardless of whether she is capsized or not.

and rules 18.2(b) and (c) cease to apply to the capsized boat

Quite right (rule 18.2d)

(not that it can't apply again soon afterwards)

Rules 18.2b and c can NOT apply again soon afterwards: For them to apply in a second instance, a boat has to get outside the zone and then be clear ahead or overlapped on another boat when the first of them reaches the zone.

The rule that CAN apply soon afterwards is rule 18.2a: whichever boat gets overlapped inside gets mark-room.

That would apply to a boat capsized or which has not regained control after capsizing.

Yes.

Between @3 and @4, there is no problem with mark-room.

@4, B is overlapped inside Y and Y is required to give B mark-room,

As diagrammed, B avoids Y, Y gives B mark-room. No rule is broken.

Discussion of Question 2

While boat A is capsized and until she regained control, B shall avoid her if possible according to 23. Is boat A still required to give her mark - room? When her entitlement to mark - room finishes? The boat drifted away from the mark while capsized and when she regains control she can sail a straight line to the finish. Is she been given enough room to round the mark as necessary to sail the course?

2. Agreed that B shall avoid A if reasonably possible.

Yup.

I guess your question is whether B has to give mark-room, as in the drawing B was clear astern at the zone? If so, I'd say that unless you're under a requirement of rule 18.2(d) (mark-room given, passed head to wind or left the zone), B shall still give A mark-room under rule 18.2(b) until mark-room has been given, as usual.

Agree.

B established an overlapped on the inside as A is capsized at her own risks.

B’s obligation to give Y mark-room under rule 18.2b cease @3-delta, when Y passed head to wind.

B clearly becomes overlapped inside Y @4, and Y is required to give B mark-room (rule 18.2a)

It is B, not Y that is entitled to mark-room

If A's course is to luff close to the mark as she would round it and she can't do it because of A, I'd say that B broke rule 18.2(b) provided A was still entitled to mark-room.

A ceased to be entitled to mark-room when she passed head to wind.

Discussion of Question 3

When 23 apply between boats A and B, the rules of section A do not apply according to the preamble to Section D. The moment Boat A regain control then the rules of Section A start to re-apply.

What was the condition between the boats before (RoW - Keep clear)?

When boat A regains control of her boat and has the Row as leeward boat is she initially required to give room to A to keep clear as required by 15, or not because she was the RoW boat before the capsize and therefore she does not acquire the right of way?

3. Agreed for section A not applying when rule 23 applies. I don't agree with Philip as avoid being give-way. It is the same thing as right-of-way under section A and avoid or give room or mark-room under the rules of sections B and C.

Guys, please read the definitions of Keep Clear, Room, and Mark-room. Avoid is not the same as any of them, and they are not the same as each other.

The most obvious difference with the definition if Keep Clear is the wriggle-room provision in subparagraph ( b ).

You can very well be a right-of-way boat but still have to avoid There is also a difference between ‘avoid’ and ‘avoid contact with’ another boat or to give her mark-room (starboard outside overlapped at a mark). Rule 22 specifically uses keep clear, so it has to be a different meaning and interpretation.

I would say, but that may require much more thinking that we have a previous right-of-way under the rules of section A, even if they did not apply. A was the leeward boat and B had to keep clear of her.

The analysis is straightforward and not that lengthy.

@1, B, clear astern is required to keep clear of A (rule 12) and give her mark-room (rule 18.2b).

@2, no change.

@3-delta, Y capsizes (mast touches the water), not yet past head to wind, B is required to avoid Y if possible (rule 23), B still required to give Y mark-room.

@3 Y has passed head to wind, still not regained control, now on port tack. B is still required to avoid Y. Rule 18.2b has ceased to apply (rule 18.2d), and rule 18.2a will apply if one boat becomes overlapped inside.

@4-delta, Y has still not regained control, B gybes onto port tack, become overlapped inside Y. B is still required to avoid Y, and Y is required to give B mark-room, but if B, sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled does not avoid Y, and breaks rule 23, B is not exonerated because rule 21 does not provide exoneration for a breach of rule 23.

@4 no change

@5 Y has regained control, now overlapped to leeward outside B. B is required to keep clear of Y (rule 11), Y is initially required to give B room to keep clear (rule 15), and Y is still required to give B mark-room (rule 18.2a).

When she regained control after her capsize, she keeps her right-of-way and rule 15 does not apply.

No.

B’s obligation changes from obligation to avoid (rule 24) to obligation to keep clear (rule 11), and FWIW, in particular, the wriggle room obligation kicks in.

Rule 15 certainly does apply. No action of B gave Y right of way: Y acquired right of way by her action in regaining control of her own boat.

However, rule 16 still applies if A changes course.

Yes, and rule 18.2a still applies.

Considering the relationship between the boats before the capsize does not look useful to me yet.

The capsize and application of rule 23, and the Section D Preamble ‘switched off’ A’s original right of way under rule 12. When she regains control and rule 23 ceases to apply and Section A once again applies, she has acquired right of way afresh.

Should any case come to a hearing, the protest committee would certainly wonder what is avoiding a capsized boat. We're not talking about avoiding contact, but avoiding a boat, and that may be much wider depending on the existing conditions blah blah

Or it might be somewhat narrower.

Give that rule 24 deals with ‘interfering’ which is broader.

The analysis is straightforward and not that lengthy.

@1, B, clear astern is required to keep clear of A (rule 12) and give her mark-room (rule 18.2b).

@2, no change.

@3-delta, Y capsizes (mast touches the water), not yet past head to wind, B is required to avoid Y if possible (rule 23), B still required to give Y mark-room.

@3 Y has passed head to wind, still not regained control, now on port tack. B is still required to avoid Y. Rule 18.2b has ceased to apply (rule 18.2d), and rule 18.2a will apply if one boat becomes overlapped inside.

@4-delta, Y has still not regained control, B gybes onto port tack, become overlapped inside Y. B is still required to avoid Y, and Y is required to give B mark-room, but if B, sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled does not avoid Y, and breaks rule 23, B is not exonerated because rule 21 does not provide exoneration for a breach of rule 23.

@4 no change

@5 Y has regained control, now overlapped to leeward outside B. B is required to keep clear of Y (rule 11), Y is initially required to give B room to keep clear (rule 15), and Y is still required to give B mark-room (rule 18.2a).

Until Pos. 4 I agree with you but @5, B is sailing within the mark-room which is now entitled for according to RRS 18.2(a). This does not mean that she is not required to keep clear of Y under RRS 11 as windward boat, but if she is still sailing within the mark-room she is entitled for she is exonerated for breaking that rule (RRS 11). But when does RRS 18.2(a) ceases to apply, since 18.2(d) does not give any indication on that? Is B entitled to mark-room until she leaves the zone and get exonerated for a breach of Rule of section A?

Let's make the scenario even harder
Let's say that the capsized boat never passes head to wind. Still, RRS 18.2(b) ceases to apply when Y (the capsized boat is given the mark-room which she is entitled for). So according to the definition Mark-Room she needs:
- Room to sail close to the mark and she has been given that room
- Room to round the mark as necessary to sail the course..... Is that room been given to her at any of the positions?

Excellent points Stavros.

I agree that once Y has regained control and rule 11 applies, if B does not keep clear of Y while sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled she shall be exonerated in accordance with rule 21a.

I think I have an answer to your second issue about how long B's entitlement to mark-room lasts.

Because B's entitlement to mark-room arises under rule 18.2a it is NOT limited by rule 18.2d.

B's [theoretical] entitlement to mark-room continues as long as one of the boats is in the zone (rule 18.1) AND B remains overlapped inside Y.

The mark-room to which B is entitled, however, is limited in space to room for her to leave a mark on the required side and room to sail to the mark when her proper course is to sail close to it, and (b) room to round the mark as necessary to sail the course (Definition: Mark-room). Once she sails outside the mark-room to which she is entitled, although she may continue to be entitled to mark-room, she is NOT entitled to exoneration under rule 21 if she breaks a rule of Section A or rules 15 or 16 (which is the real benefit that being entitled to mark-room delivers).

In a nutshell, a boat, in some positions, can be entitled to mark-room, but not entitled to rule 21 exoneration.

The consensus seems to be arising that once a boat has left a mark astern she "has been given" and "is no longer sailing within" the mark-room to which she is entitled, so in the diagrammed example, once B sails a further half a boat length after @5 towards the finishing line, she will no longer be sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled and no longer entitled to rule 21 exoneration if she does not keep clear of Y.

Theoretically, when mark-room arises under rule 18.2a or 18.3, a boat can take her mark-room, then, say under the influence of adverse current, be swept back into a position where it is once again necessary to sail to the mark or round it, and she will still be entitled to mark-room to do this. Note that for mark-room under rules 18.2a or 18.3, it is necessary for boats to be overlapped. In the swept back by current scenario the overlap might be broken, and a new instance of overlap and mark-room might arise.

In your second scenario, Y never passes head to wind, and remains entitled to mark-room under rule 18.2b. She is also entitled to room to sail her proper course while she is overlapped with B under rule 18.2c.

I agree that while she was entitled to it she was given room to sail to the mark.

@3 and @4 she was entitled to room to round the mark as necessary to sail the course, and she was given that room.

@5 she no longer needs room to sail to the mark or to round the mark, the only remaining component of mark-room is room to leave the mark on the required side.

@5 Y hasn't quite 'left' the mark on the required side, so she is entitled to room to do that, but B is not in a position to interfere with Y doing that so B is giving the mark-room required.

@4 and @5 Y was entitled to room to sail her proper course: the course to the next mark is a beam reach and B was giving her room to sail that course.

Maybe, just maybe Y could make a case that her proper course was to sail closer to the wind than the direct line to the finish (current, gusts, etc), in which case, B would need to give her room to do that, but B is required to keep clear of Y in any case.

On the face of it, B has given Y the mark-room and room to which Y is entitled.

IF the next leg had been a beat to a windward mark then @5 Y would still be rounding the mark as necessary to sail the course and B might not be giving Y room to do this, and wold also probably not be keeping clear. .

In your second scenario, Y never passes head to wind, and remains entitled to mark-room under rule 18.2b. She is also entitled to room to sail her proper course while she is overlapped with B under rule 18.2c.

I agree that while she was entitled to it she was given room to sail to the mark.

@3 and @4 she was entitled to room to round the mark as necessary to sail the course, and she was given that room.

What i am trying to clarify in the scenario is until when Y (which never passes head to wind) is entitled to mark-room under 18.2(b). According to 18.2(d), she is entitled until she has been given that mark-room.
So she needs to fulfill 3 requirements to do that:
1. Sail to the mark --- and i think she was given room to do that
2. Round the mark as necessary to sail the course ---- and @4 she was given that room
3. Leave the mark on the required side ---- and @4 she left the mark on the required (port side). I think @4 there is nothing that can compel or force Y to leave the mark on the wrong side....
If these 3 requirements are fulfilled then she has been given the mark-room that she was entitled to and 18.2(b) ceases to apply.... and consequently she is not longer entitled to sail her proper course as described in 18.2(c)(2) because this apply only when a boat is required to give mark-room by 18.2(b), which no longer applies....

I see your point about "leaving the mark clear-astern" but i cannot find any rule to support this.

About B entitlement to mark-room i agree with your point....@5 she has been given mark-room (according to the definition) and afterwards she is not exonerated by RRS 21

Does this case help you?

Case 25
Definition, Mark-Room
Rule 11, On the Same Tack, Overlapped
Rule 14, Avoiding Contact
Rule 16.1, Changing Course
Rule 18.2(b), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room
Rule 18.2(d), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room
Rule 21(a), Exoneration
When an inside overlapped 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.

John, in questions 2 and 3 I was assuming A did not pass head to wind because I don't believe it is shown in the diagram - it was only a hypothethis
Then I'm agreeing with you on your discussion with Stavros in the case A did not lose her entitlement to mark-room under rule 18.2(b), especially the end of giving mark-room. I do believe the most commonly test used at the moment is like you said to have left the mark (and not the zone), ie the mark is clear astern the boat. There might be a RR on this, as I remember this expression surprised some judges and umpires.

1.
I cannot agree that a capsized boat, with her masthead and the leeward side of her sail in the water, can have passed head to wind no matter what her orientation becomes.
Her new windward "side" is the bottom of her hull and the leeward side is her deck. Or vice versa. Nothing she does approaches a "tack," so mark-room survives until she recovers.
2.
A boat "shall avoid" a capsized boat.
American Heritage Dictionary says "to avoid" means "to stay clear of, shun."
"Keep clear" conveys ROW in our RRS.

While the meaning of 'side' of a boat may be ambiguous, the meaning of 'head' of a boat is completely unambiguous.

The term 'pass head to wind' is used deliberately in the RRS to avoid using the term 'tack' Rules should be construed according to the words used in the rules, not by substitution of some other words.

Rule 18.2d refers (among other things) to a boat passing 'head to wind'.Nothing in rule 18.2d refers to, or depends on 'the side of a boat' or any of the defined terms (windward, leeward, port tack, starboard tack) relying on the notion of 'the side of a boat'.

All that is necessary for a boat to pass head to wind is for her bow to pass through the wind direction.

'Replacing' words and defined terms in the RRS with words of your own choosing will almost inevitably lead to wrong conclusions.

In your second scenario, Y never passes head to wind, and remains entitled to mark-room under rule 18.2b. She is also entitled to room to sail her proper course while she is overlapped with B under rule 18.2c.

I agree that while she was entitled to it she was given room to sail to the mark.

@3 and @4 she was entitled to room to round the mark as necessary to sail the course, and she was given that room.

What i am trying to clarify in the scenario is until when Y (which never passes head to wind) is entitled to mark-room under 18.2(b). According to 18.2(d), she is entitled until she has been given that mark-room.
So she needs to fulfill 3 requirements to do that:
1. Sail to the mark --- and i think she was given room to do that
2. Round the mark as necessary to sail the course ---- and @4 she was given that room
3. Leave the mark on the required side ---- and @4 she left the mark on the required (port side). I think @4 there is nothing that can compel or force Y to leave the mark on the wrong side....
If these 3 requirements are fulfilled then she has been given the mark-room that she was entitled to and 18.2(b) ceases to apply.... and consequently she is not longer entitled to sail her proper course as described in 18.2(c)(2) because this apply only when a boat is required to give mark-room by 18.2(b), which no longer applies....

I see your point about "leaving the mark clear-astern" but i cannot find any rule to support this.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stavros,

Since Rule 18.2(d) uses the phrase “until she has been given that mark-room”, we can reasonably assume that the entitlement to mark-room does not necessarily cease only when mark-room has been taken. The Rule does not imply that a boat entitled to mark-room will be entitled to that room until she completes the above mentioned manoeuvres, thus until she has also left the mark clear-astern.

So, in my opinion, in your scenario, Y’s entitlement to mark-room ceases under 18.2(b) at position 4, although the she has not yet pass the mark, as she is able to leave it on the required side and she can't reasonably do anything else.

I draw this conclusion from TR Call H2, in which the Umpires called that after position 4, B has been given room to round the mark as necessary to sail the course, although the has not yet left the mark astern.

In MR Call E2, the Umpires indeed called that since at position 3 B is on the next leg of the course and the mark is clear astern of her, Y has given B mark room. But, in my opinion, we can’t conclude from that call that only when a boat has left the mark astern, she has been given mark-room, since the incident occurred only after B left the mark astern. The same is in MR Call E3, since at position 6, where the incident took place, Y has neither pass the mark nor complete rounding the mark.

I know that the above mentioned Calls are authoritative interpretations only for umpired match or team racing, but they could help us clarify the above mentioned issue.

The possibility that the entitlement to mark-room may cease under Rule 18.2(b) before a boat passes the mark, is also expressed by Dave Perry in his book “Understanding the Racing Rules of Sailing through 2020” (p. 171), where he states that a boat might have received all the mark-room she is entitled to before she has left the mark astern, when there are no mitigating circumstances (such us adverse current etc).

I understand that two people might easily disagree about whether a boat that hasn't quite passed the mark but is - for instance - two boatlengths from it, on the correct side, has been given room to leave it on that side, so a change to Rule 18.2(d) may be helpful, to clarify this issue.