Forum: The Racing Rules of Sailing
Rule 42: Single roll at the start allowed by WS guide for umpires?
Douglas McKnight
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
- Club Race Officer
- Club Judge
0
World Sailing's RRS 42 guide for ILCA umpires and competitors, (linked below) says that, at the start, "one roll or body pump that does not clearly propel the boat" is allowed. (this is not the steering exception.) The guides for other classes have similar language.
My question is this: Why does WS use the language to "permit a roll"? It seems that a lot of ILCA sailors seem to reckon that a "free" roll/pump is allowed and the "clearly propel the boat" part is forgotten.
Why else would a sailor perform the antics required to perform a large roll at the start other than to propel the boat??? What is different about the start?
Does anyone know the reasoning behind this guidance?
Regards,
Doug
https://d7qh6ksdplczd.cloudfront.net/sailing/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/28161109/2022-03-RRS-42-Guide-ILCA-4-6-7.pdf
My question is this: Why does WS use the language to "permit a roll"? It seems that a lot of ILCA sailors seem to reckon that a "free" roll/pump is allowed and the "clearly propel the boat" part is forgotten.
Why else would a sailor perform the antics required to perform a large roll at the start other than to propel the boat??? What is different about the start?
Does anyone know the reasoning behind this guidance?
Regards,
Doug
https://d7qh6ksdplczd.cloudfront.net/sailing/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/28161109/2022-03-RRS-42-Guide-ILCA-4-6-7.pdf
Comments
[You must be signed in to add a comment]
Rock means reapeated rolling. Repeated means more than once in the same area on a leg (for IlCAs this means the same leg). Rock is a prohibited action, so the effictiveness of the roll is irrelevant. On the other hand, a roll will break the basic rule only if it clearly propel the boat. It is hard to judge this change of speed from behind.
THE PRE-START: ILCA (LASER) TECHNIQUE TIPS - How to get the best start with the British Sailing Team
The rule is clear, no gaining momentum but class behavior is not so clear.
Edit: I just realized that this video also teaches a variation of crabbing, perhaps different enough to skirt the rule against crabbing but I am not an authority on that issue.
Multiple edits to clean up the pasted text.
I agree the aim of the guide is worthy, but I think this language adds confusion and, arguably, gives support for the "arms race" of seeing just how much illegal kinetics you can get away with! The word "clearly" is not enough, I reckon, to prevent the move. That's like saying "you can cheat a bit, but not too much, and too much might be a moving target".
My basic question still stands: "Why else would you roll the boat, once, at the start, other than to get propulsion?" Why does the sentence call out a single roll as a "permitted" activity at all. If that didn't exist in the guide, then all the usual rules still apply. Why not simply remain silent on the "permitted activity" and give officials an easier time to call out an obvious kinetic move?
Personally, I find it ugly that we have this tacit understanding that an illegal move (IMHO) is almost required to be competitive, and the WS wording seems to support/encourage it.
I just re-read that, and it sounds like I'm ranting and pounding the table!
Doug
But I do think in this case it's always a moving target (though I'm rarely an ILCA sailor) and you're never going to legislate the exact allowed amount such that everyone can easily tell what's legal. So this is sort of an "if you can't beat 'em, join em" rule that at least let's a new fleet member know "this is a gray area you'll have to ask questions and learn about." Small comfort, I know.
Recall Rule 42.1. It is 100% clear that the crew "shall not otherwise move their bodies to propel the boat" (assuming the exceptions, such as steering, don't apply).
Why else is there a single roll or body pump at the start? It is obviously to propel the boat. We know this as ILCA sailors. Now does it "clearly" propel the boat seems irrelevant.
Doug
Thanks for the reply. I am familiar with the guidelines, and the wording that one roll is permitted if it does not "clearly propel the boat". However, that doesn't answer my more fundamental question of *why* that is the wording that WS uses.
As I said to Nicholas, why isn't a single Roll, which is obviously for the purpose of propelling the boat, a breach of 42.1? The guidelines aren't Rules, right? and they also aren't formal interpretations of the rules (if I recall correctly).
If the ILCA class, and World Sailing, reckon that everything is better with a permitted single roll at the start, then maybe it should be in the class rules? As it stands, I don't see how this behavior fits with 42.1. To me, it is 100% obvious what the roll is for, and how effective it is.
Doug
I've found many sailors that would argue that they roll the boat to leeward to help the boat turn up to close hauled shortly before the start signal and then roll the boat upright again once the turn is complete. If these rolls do facilitate steering (42.3(a): A boat may be rolled to facilitate steering) and do not propel the boat, they're legal.
In some cases I've seen, I think they genuinely are to assist in steering the boat. In others, there did not appear to be any appreciable steering occurring and it seemed intended for propulsion. Like others have mentioned, the line between rolling for steering and rolling for propulsion is often a very fuzzy grey area with a bit of overlap, so attempts to put a finer definition into place are difficult.
What I am troubled by is the WS Guidance that (paraphrasing) "one roll is ok as long at it doesn't clearly propel the boat". There's no mention of steering in that guidance and I simply don't see how it is consistent with 42.1.
Rule 42.1 doesn't even seem to require that the body movement is successful in clearly propelling the boat. It just prohibits a body movement "to propel the boat". So, imagine I'm sailing towards the start, close hauled, slowly heel to leeward and, at the start, roll/body-pump the boat upright without steering. If I do this "well", I might be protested for "clearly propelling the boat". If I do this with less efficiency, I maybe don't "clearly propel the boat" and get away with it.
However, to me, it's obvious that I'm breaking 42.1 if I do this, whether or not I draw attention to myself by making the speed change "clear". The wording in the WS guidance gives some cover for behavior that, to me, seems to infringe 42.1.
Again, the whole point of a (non-steering) roll is to propel the boat. Just breaking a rule and staying "below the radar" seems to violate both Basic Principles and Fundamental Rules (yes, I think I am pounding the table a little...).
Doug
To be consistent we cannot read the mind of the sailor nor should we try to do so.
We should look at what we can see in a manner we can penalize consistently through an event and between boats.
If a single roll does not propel the boat why should we penalize it?
If we are following a boat from behind, we cannot see if a boat is propelled so we cannot penalize. This is what leads to the belief in a free roll.
If we look sideways and see a boat is propelled we can penalize that as we have seen it and have the evidence of sight.
At the start, if we see a second roll, so a rock then this can be penalized, as it is easy to count and be sure of the penalty.
This is really about consistency, and not trying to get into the head of the competitor which is a dangerous route.
Everyone seems to agree that this creates a grey area as the roll can be explained via the competitor of the boat explaining that it was used to turn the boat up. Everyone also seems to agree that the process of rolling a boat such as an Laser/ILCA will most likely "propel" the boat forward at a speed greater than without the roll and pump. And everyone agrees this results in the boat breaking rule 42.2(b)(1).
The result here has been to create differing opinions on what is the method of judging when to penalize a boat and what those observations best are that lead to the penalty. Here we fall into an area based upon personal observations and perspective of the event. But this seems to be a result of the ambiguous WS rule, not from RO's and Judge's responding on how they would handle it. This ambiguity poorly serves both the judges and competitors as the first is left with a wide window of interpretation and the second is faced with engaging in an action that could result in their breaking of the rules but because the action is taught within the class and is so wide spread at events and it appears to have become an issue because it is partially backed up with a class rule. The end result is that competitors must consider pushing the limits of 42.2(b)(1) because of the starting permission of the "One Roll and One Body Pump" WS rule.
It seems the rule needs to explicitly permit "propelling" the boat at the start or strike the rule entirely as it conflicts too much with Rule 42.2(b)(1) and creates a difficult judging situation?
Michael, I agree with and understand the point about the dangers of assigning a motive to the actions of a sailor. However, RRS 42.1 seems to put us in that exact position when it prohibits body movement "to propel the boat". It seems unavoidable that the jury/umpire may have to adjudicate what the purpose of the body movement was. (a roll as a side-effect of a body movement to pick a piece of trash out the water, versus a deliberate roll right at the starting signal).
Hence, the source of my puzzlement about the World Sailing guidance. The WS Guidance seems to deviate from RRS 42.1 in an important way.
RRS 42.1 prohibits the body movement to propel the boat, not just the effective, skilled, roll that "clearly" propels the boat. World Sailing seem to say that the single body movement and roll is fine, and so the only way that is consistent with RRS 42.1 is if World Sailing somehow knows that this is not "to propel the boat" which seems just unrealistic and wrong. (Maybe a sailor could convince a jury that the reason he did a big roll and body pump at the start was for some other reason than to propel the boat? But, that would seem like an uphill struggle to me...)
Regarding the question of "If a single roll does not propel the boat why should we penalize it?". I think we should penalize it if it breaks Rule 42.1 and RRS42.1 does not require the body movement to clearly propel the boat.
Apologies for a bit of obsession on this. It's a live discussion at our club, and some collegiate sailors are convinced that some impressive kinetics are ok at the start, as long as it's only done once!
regards,
Doug
Gordon, why should we tolerate a roll that brings the boat up to sailing speed? That seems a clear violation and unfair to the sailors that are already at sailing speed.
I realize that none of this is easy to judge, hence my difficulties with the WS guidance. That document seems to confuse the situation, rather than clarify.
The whole idea of WS explicitly allowing a "free" (non-steering, not-too-effective) roll/pump is, at best, confusing, at worst in direct conflict with 42.1.
Thanks to all for the discussion. It's, obviously, a difficult subject, and I wish the concepts/Rules were more aligned with the WS guidance (as I understand things).
Doug
Collegiate sailors - I feel your pain. Collegiate and now high school sailors use a roll and flatten maneuver at the start to accelerate. Now if the the roll to leeward turns the boat up to close-hauled and the flatten does not accelerate the boat, no harm. The problem is I see the roll and flatten when boats are already on a close-hauled course. If the boat accelerates (creates a bow wave, slows down moments after the maneuver) the basic rule (BASIC 4) is broken. This roll and flatten is tolerated and even coached at the collegiate level. I have been told while serving as an umpire at a collegiate not to give a penalty for this maneuver even if it increases the speed of the boat. The real problem, in my opinion, is when these sailors compete at non-collegiate events with Appendix P invoked they may receive a penalty for breaking the basic rule. These sailors have "muscle memory" from hours of training and racing at the collegiate level making it difficult for them not to break Rule 42.
The Procedural Rules for Intercollegiate Sailing Competition includes the following:
7.4. MEANS OF PROPULSION, RRS 42.
7.4.1. During and immediately after tacking or gybing, a boat’s crew may move their bodies to roll the boat, provided that the boat’s mast does not move aggressively away from
the vertical more than once (Changes RRS 42.3(b)).
This allows crews to accelerate out of a tack or gybe, which again is against the basic rule. The Intercollegiate Sailing Association is not a class, therefore, they may not change Rule 42, but they have. And to be honest, in all racing, high school, collegiate and beyond, if you don't roll tack your dinghy, you won't be in the top half of the fleet. Riley Schutt proved that roll tacks in light air consistently result in the boat accelerating due to the roll and flatten (vortexes). Riley did a doctorial dissertation on the subject (https://ecommons.cornell.edu/items/92a25c06-4faa-4e1d-a0e4-4695ab05eb80). Here is a YouTube video in which he explains his research in human terms, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVfY0yRxmgY
Even at an ILCA event, if I clearly see an acceleration and subsequent slowing, or a roll that is not commensurate with the change of course, then the yellw flag is shown. However, because of the nature of the boat, and the position of the judge astern of the boats then only those sailors who exaggerate the manoeuvre get penalised.
That's a very interesting line of thinking.
I'm imagining a Laser creeping towards the line in light wind, and the daggerboard stalls and the boat starts to make leeway, right? Then the motion of a heel to leeward reduces the angle of attack of the daggerboard during the heeling motion with the goal of reattaching flow. Hopefully the flow stays attached when the heeling motion stops. So, now we have a boat heeled to leeward with the daggerboard no longer stalled. Maybe...
I think I can just about believe this argument up to here.
But, then what is the single "roll and body-pump" to upright for? If we're worried about the foil stalling, doesn't this immediately make matters worse? The dagger board's angle of attack increases due to the roll-to-upright and we need a good amount of propulsion forward to give the foil a chance to maintain/establish attached flow. Without forward propulsion we've just got a boat flopping upright with a newly stalled foil.
So, would the argument be that the roll to upright is not to cause propulsion, but just to get the boat upright with enough forward velocity to maintain attached flow? And, the fact that we only get this forward velocity if there's propulsion is entirely secondary. The entire goal of the roll-to-upright is to return to an upright position with attached flow? Right?
Hmm. It's a very interesting argument and I will think about it more. Right now, though, I'm pretty clear why this roll is done, and what the goal of it is.
Thanks
Doug
In this case, the heel to leeward is intended to trim the boat so that the flow of water over the foil generates a force that maintains the boat's speed. When the boat is righted another force is generated. The generation of any force, in any direction, is a form of propulsion (for instance, sticking a body part into the water to slow the boat)
This movement of heeling and righting constitutes a roll: a single-cycle athwartship movement of the boat during which the mast goes to leeward and back
to windward, or vice versa. (see WS Interpretations).
The WS interpretations state:
BASIC 1 An action that is not listed in rule 42.2 may be prohibited under rule 42.1.
BASIC 2 A kinetic technique not listed in rule 42.2 that propels the boat, and is not one of the permitted actions covered in rule 42.1, is prohibited.
BASIC 3 An action prohibited in rule 42.2 cannot be considered as permitted under rule 42.1.
BASIC 4 Except when permitted under rule 42.3, any single action of the body that clearly propels the boat (in any direction) is prohibited.
One roll is not prohibited under RRS 42.2. However, if the combined effect of a heel and right is to clearly increase or decrease her speed (in this case to decrease the boat's drift to leeward) then there is a case to be made to that this is a breach of RRS 42.1.
Once again, the key word is 'clearly' ... I tend to trust the judgement of my colleagues in this matter. If they think the movement merits penalty it probably does.