Please provide a drawing and show the different paths the boats took.

It will possibly make a difference in the answers you will receive. - Ang

PS: Nothing fancy. You can hand draw it, take a pic with your phone and add/upload it to your OP by clicking the “image” icon

I was trying to save time sorry here is the case in question:

So .. just to be clear .. you are saying by your drawing that the mark slipped 3-4 BL's to leeward of its original position? (for the sake of the responses) - Ang

Also, how fast was it moving? Would you say that it was in approximately the same offset-position for all in the same fleet? Or was it moving quickly, so that that some boats experienced a mark-position which was significantly different than others in the same fleet? (I'm not gearing-up an answer necessarily .. I just wanted to get the facts straight for everyone on the forum first).

Yellow does not satisfy the string rule (28.1) because she did not round the marks in the correct order (28.1(a)) nor will her "string" touch Mark 1 when drawn taut.

Abandoning the race would not be fair to Blue, who complied with rule 28.

I think Yellow would fail to get redress on the "through no fault of her own" test in 62.1, especially since errors in sailing the course may be corrected at any time before finishing.

It was probably more than 4 boat lengths (I had to tack after rounding to get to a position to fetch the offset) but for compactness I didn't draw it that far down I believe it caught ground and stopped drifting and was of course fixed by the following leg to windward. I think the first boats rounded while the mark was on the drift...

Craig, I'd ask you to imagine a couple scenarios here ...

Imagine the mark in its original position for a second. Now, imagine that there is a 40 degree backing wind-shift to the left, so the wind is now coming in at say 320 or so.

What's the difference?

Now, imagine the wind doesn't shift, but there is a 3 kt current in-line with only 7kt breeze from the North, such that a boat can not make the offset-mark on a beat from the windward mark .. they have to sail past the windward mark to make the offset (a scenario faced during a couple races in a recent championship).

What's the difference?

I think the difference is that this was an error in the course, rather then the conditions.
The other arguments would be:
I thought that one was the windward mark! (i.e. the offset had drifted downwind and out to the right)

What were the descriptions of the windward and offset marks in the SIs?

Let me give you a similar example:
Mark 1 and 2 are of the same type and color.
Mark 1 drifts as depicted in the diagram.

You have the first 4 boats round the marks correctly, before mark 1 passes mark 2.
From the 5th boat on you have a zoo of all roundings you can possibly imagine.

What should the RC / PC do?

Daigram:

Greg,

All marks were Green Tetrahedrons.
Course was Windward ->Offset->leeward gate..

Throw out the race after race is sailed. People sailed different courses. If you just have to keep the race grant redress to anyone that askes. Not sure I like that solution though.

Regarding Yellow saying she passed both marks to port, I am reminded of the famous sketch with Eric Morecambe and Andre Previn. You are playing all the wrong notes, said Mr Previn. Eric replied, I am playing all the right notes, not necessarily in the right order.

I guess if redress is to be considered, the effect of the mark moving on finishing positions needs to be assessed.

Ryan,
Throw out as in abbondon the Race after the fact?

Charles,
There were several scenarios posited I was surprised when someone suggested that they passed both marks to port so it's cool! To me is I can't envision a scenario where the sailor can absolve themselves from rounding the marks in the correct order without the RC taking action (actions available at the time: M flag on stake boat, replacement mark or abandon after it's clear the mark was that far out of position.)

Craig,

I think my first scenario is very important to consider. The marks' orientations would look EXACTLY the same to approaching boats with a 40 deg back of the wind during the windward leg. If someone wasn't paying attention to the horizon, or maybe fog obscured the shore and they didn't have a compass, the boats would come upon the marks the same way and they wouldn't know it was a wind-shift or how the marks were placed.

I've had this scenario many, many times racing (offset windward of the windward mark).

There are not any requirements of the orientation of an "offset mark". Actually, an offset mark is really just another mark of the course, as there isn't anything in the RRS's which differentiate offset-marks from marks. An offset-mark is just a mark of the course to be rounded.

If an inexperienced mark-boat placed the offset-mark that far to windward, would that be grounds to not round the marks in order? I think not.

I think this scenario comes down to 2 3 simple questions ...

1. Was the mark substantially in the same place for all boats and thus all competitors had the opportunity to sail the same course as described in the SI's? I think you answers lead me to a "yes" ..
2. Was the mark substantially in the place it was expected? I think the answer is "yes" .. 4BL's is just outside the zone of the mark, certainly approximately where it was expected.
3. Was the mark's final position such that the course still satisfied the string-rule? (such that a string drawn taught would touch each mark to be rounded on its proper side) .. based upon your drawing, the answer is "yes"

If the marks' positions offered each competitor the opportunity to sail the same course .. and the mark's movement did not violate the string-rule, then I think it's a fair race. The mark was only 4 BL's out of its normal position .. that seems hardly an excuse to ignore the SI's requirement to round it on its proper side and order.

On the other hand, as Thorsten describes, if it had wondered to the left such that it was to the left of the offset, then a string drawn taught would not touch each mark to be rounded on its proper side and the mark placements makes a boat satisfying the string rule impossible or dangerous .. as a boat would have to do a 'button-loop" around the windward mark to satisfy the string-rule. In that case someone should radio the RC and they should abandon immediately as it's a safety issue.

Ang

PS ..please consider the 2nd scenario too .. the one with the large current and slow boat speeds.

Is it grounds for redress/abandonment that the mark boat didn't take into consideration the current and that boats couldn't lay the offset from the windward mark? I think not as well. Sure, it'd be better in those conditions to set the offset well leeward of the windward in that case .. but there isn't anything in the RRS's that state the course must be laid such that a boat can lay the offset mark from the windward mark.

Actually in Thorten's case the argument makes sense essentially it is possible to round 1 and 2 simultaniously!! You have rounded when you take the mark on the required side on course to the next mark...

Craig, Abandon after the fact. Sure you can come up with a million scenarios which many of us tend to do but based on your description and the drawing I am abandoning that race.

If you abandon after the fact, you had best be prepared to spend the evening in a very long redress hearing. That is not a decision to be made lightly. "(T)he race committee shall not abandon the race without considering the consequences for all boats in the race or series." (Last sentence of RRS 32.1.)

How many boats sailed the "wrong" course? Did the majority sail the "right" course? You need to consider all factors. I've only had to abandon after the fact twice in the last 11 years, and once was a situation somewhat similar to this (a shorten course at the weather mark where the finish boat dragged anchor below the starboard lay line). The redress hearing took four hours - and the abandonment stood. It was extraordinarily painful - and why I won't use a Sierra flag anymore at a major event.

All marks were Green Tetrahedrons.
Course was Windward ->Offset->leeward gate..

My other observation is that I think it's better practice to have the windward mark and offset different shapes and/or colors for precisely this reason. A competitor should be able to easily ID which is which, no matter the wind-shift or direction of approach.

PS .. I just had the opposite occur during a practice race last Thursday. The wind shifted 30+ deg right. When we tacked for the windward mark on the port layline, we actually sailed windward of the offset mark on port on our way to the windward mark.

Craig Priniski
said Created: Today 12:43

I think we know the answer to this one, but interested in remedies after the fact...
During the final race of a regatta the weather mark began to drift downwind, while the offset (identical in type) held fast. Several boats rounded only the offset, claiming either that was the windward mark, or that they passed the windward mark to port after rounding the offset.

Several of these boats were of course protested, tossed and then filed for redress.

Should redress be given, should the race be abandoned after the fact?

First question is whether requests for redress by boats that have been penalised in a protest hearing, submitted after the protest hearing, are valid.

This depends on the substance of the redress:

• If the request for redress alleges an improper action by the protest committee in deciding the protest, it is invalid from the jump: rule 62.1a provides that a request for redress may NOT be based on a protest committee decision when the boat was a party to the hearing.
• If the request for redress alleges an improper action by the race committee to do with the mark, that is an incident in the racing area, rule 62.1 normally requires that a request for redress based on an incident in the racing area shall be delivered within the a time limit, which has probably expired by the time the protest is decided. rule 62.1, however also provides that the protest committee shall extend the time if there is a good reason to do so, and helpfully refers to requests for redress where there is some delay in 'learning of the reasons for making the request'. Boats penalised in the protest hearing did not learn that they had had their scores made worse until after the protest hearing and the protest committee should consider this a good reason to extend time and consider the redress valid.

The gateway to a protest committee giving redress is a conclusion that a boat is entitled to redress (rule 64.2), which, if the redress alleges an improper action by the race committee, requires that the protest committee conclude that some specific action or omission by the race committee was improper (and not merely in error). Here are some possible candidates:

• the race committee did not reposition or substitute the drifted mark when it was possible to do so (rule 34);
• the race committee used buoys for mark 1 and mark 1a that were indistinguishable and this caused confusion;
• the race committee did not abandon the race.

Q&A 2013-023 is worth a read.

It's really up to the boat requesting redress to identify the action or omission and present argument why it was improper.

Having identified one or more improper actions or omissions, it is then necessary to show that those improper actions or omissions, singly, or in combination made a boat's score or place in a race or series significantly worse (rule 62.1)

For boats that were disqualified for not rounding the mark: it was there for all to see, to the right of the offset mark, albeit somewhat downwind: the SI required boats to round first the right hand mark, then the left hand mark: they failed to do so: any failure by the race committee to reposition or substitute the mark, or use distinguishable marks did not 'make' those boats fail to round the mark: those actions or omissions do not found an entitlement to redress for those boats (although they might, for boats that did round the drifting mark and traveled extra distance, who aren't in this particular hearing).

This leaves the ground race committee did not abandon the race.

Note that if a protest committee decided that it was an improper omission of a race committee not to abandon a race, this would seem to indicate that the protest committee should abandon the race (but they first have to find a boat entitled to redress before they can do that).

As Matt has said, before a race committee abandons a race that has achieved a result, it must consider the consequences for all boats in the race or series (rule 32.1, last sentence).

Lets take the easy scenario first. Suppose (as we reasonably may) that the leading 4 or 5 boats rounded the drifted mark correctly and whether the race was abandoned or not did not affect the regatta prize-winers, it would be hard to say that the race committee should abandon the race.

Alternatively, let's suppose that there were some boats further back in the race whose podium chances could have been affected by rounding the out of position mark. They would not have been disqualified, so may not have requested redress, but the protest committee should probably now consider them for redress. The protest committee should probably follow the guidance in Q&A 2013-023

As a result of these considerations the protest committee might go back to the not reposition or confusing similarity grounds and find some boats that were not disqualified were entitled to redress, and either adjust their scores or abandon the race.