Philip, I can anticipate some of the Q's our forum members might have.  

Basically the answer is YES. 
The windward boat has to keep clear and if that involves a tack, then so be it.
The finishing line is irrelevant. Provided the leeward boat complies with rules 15 and 17 i.e. initially gives the windward boat room and does not sail ablve a proper course the windward boat has to comply with Rule 11. 
Wheather 2 metres is sufficient is a judgement call. Interrestingly, the leeward boat can probably give more room to the windward boat, if necessary, by bearing away as the windward boat tacks but the onus is on the windward boat to take action once th overlap is established. 
If they are near 3 lengths of the finish, then mark rome could apply, Depending upon which end of the line they are heading for room may have to be given or proper course might be different.

Nigel, I disagree that the FL is irrelevant.

If they are close to the FL and Boat A [Boat B] had over-stood, then footing off would be her PC (and as you say, MR might apply). 

B, close-hauled was clear astern of A, also close-hauled.
B became overlapped 2m to leeward of A

Question 1; In the existing conditions, is 2m the space initially  needed for A to manoeuvre promptly in a seamanlike way to keep clear?

If the rule 15 requirement has been met:
Question 2 Both boats are sailing close-hauled towards the finish line. Is there any reason to conclude that close-hauled is the proper course for both boats?

Rule 17 states that the leeward boat shall not sail above HER proper course. Th fact that the windward boat cannot point as high is irrelevant for RRS 17. See Case 7, 14, and 46.

There is no mention of B changing course when overlapped. If she does, she must give A room to keep clear under Rule 16.

It depends on what is meant by 2m, 2 meters or 2 boat lengths. If 2 meter leeward has no right to take windward up, if 2boat lengths then it can take windward up but give notice first 

' If they are close to the FL and Boat A had over-stood, then footing off would be her PC'
The proper course of A, to windward, is irrelevant. RRS 17 imposes an obligation on a leeward RoW boat. The only relevant question is what is B's proper course.

 'If 2 meter leeward has no right to take windward up' Under which rule? B is initially required to give A room to keep clear under RRS, 15, not sail above her (B's) proper course under RRS 17, and give A room if she (B) changes course. 
In a flat sea with no swell 2m might be more than enough, in a rough sea with a large swell 20m might not be enough.

Gordon ... yes of course. I meant to type Boat B. I changed it above.  Thanks for the correction. 

Over taking from stern must be two boat lengths to leeward to have rights to take other boat up unless done before starting of race.

Dennis,
RRS 17 states: If a boat clear astern becomes overlapped within two of her hull lengths to leeward of a boat on the same tack, she shall not sail above her proper course while they remain on the same tack and overlapped within that distance, unless in doing so she promptly sails astern of the other boat.

This does not mean that a boat coming from astern becoming overlapped within two hull lengths cannot  luff. She can luff the windward boat but only up to up to the leeward boat's proper course. In this case B's proper course - close-hauled - is considerably higher than A is able to sail. A will have to bail out.

But B still has to give A time to take avoiding action, so B dropping in close to leeward of A, making it impossible for A to keep clear would be an infringement under rule 15.

I disagree with Dennis, and also with the wording in Angelo's second response: "if Boat A had over-stood, then footing off would be her PC".

Because the leeward overlap was established from astern and within two boat-lengths, Boat B is limited by rule 17, and may only sail as high as her OWN proper course. Boat A's proper course is irrelevant.

Boat B is also limited by rules 15 and 16, and must allow Boat A time and opportunity to keep clear, assuming the latter responds promptly to the new overlap, as well as any course change. Also, it seems likely that Boat A was not over-stood, as she was already sailing close-hauled, but who knows -- and also as Ang and Nigel said, rule 18 might apply if nearing 3 boat-lengths to one of the marks (not the line in general though).

-- -- --
I find the following sentence to be the crux of the issue presented, and I feel from the wording that it tries to minimize three valid options for Boat A to follow the rules:
"Boat A cannot go higher except to basically go above close hauled which then increases leeway or to go HTW."

Well, yeah, boat A has to point above her close hauled to avoid a leeward boat who is sailing their own proper course, even if 17 applies. This might mean pinching (a very normal way that many people sail their boats), or going head-to-wind for a moment, or tacking if that is her best tactical option (doesn't sound like it was the only safe option though). Actually, she has to point above close hauled EVEN IF boat B breaks rule 17 -- still must follow rules 11 and 14 -- but she can then protest.

Last thing I'll say is that depending on the wave state, a 2 meter distance between a 43-footer and a presumably larger "super whiz bang" might be tighter than what is safely allowed, especially if the gap closed quickly after that point. On the other hand, if there were a too-tight distance, I'd expect to see the boat arguing that maneuvering with haste to widen that distance for fear of safety.

I often say: "it is never RRS 17!".    However, as Angelo said, if B has overstood (or if sailing high makes them overstand), then this would be one of the few times that above PC could be proven to to a protest committee.

If B is sailing high in order to make the the line, then A is not making it either, so A's option to tack away is both necessary and probably tactically a good idea anyway.

When B establishes the overlap and starts to come up, A must act, in away that a competent crew can act, to keep clear of B. 2 meters is enough room for A to start to maneuver to keep clear. If A does not react in a prompt manor, she breaks rule 11, regardless of whether B breaks rule 17.  A has several options
1. Maneuver to keep clear of B 
2 Maneuver to keep clear of B and protest under 15, 16, or 17
3. Hold course and break rule 11,  and protest under 17 and be exonerated in a hearing.  

Option 1 or 2 keeps A out of jeopardy. Option 3 risks dsq for a

If the word "overtaking" is in the RRS, I wish someone would point me to the entry.
Overlap from clear astern has the aforementioned obligations - and the boat ahead is not required to anticipate the astern boat's actions.
As soon as the too-close ( 2 meters on a 43-foot boat is plenty of room?!?!?!?) overlap occurred, skipper of Cruiser A might actually be in position to protest the Whiz-Bang skipper. Give-way has initial rights to tack away, but only if there is time and manoeuvring room.

The stern of A, in this case, is going to swing almost 5 meters just coming head to wind... (~14 m / 2) * Cos (45). Then it's all Rule 14 in all its updated forms.

Is it not the case that leeward Boat B must actually change course before Boat A has to act to keep clear. Simply hailing Boat A to head up is not a change of course. Then when changing course she must give A room to keep clear under Rule 15.

Joseph re:"If the word "overtaking" is in the RRS, I wish someone would point me to the entry."

Yes .. we try to get members to adopt the words used in the RRS .. it's always clearer when they do.  That said, the forum is a welcoming place for judges and racers of all experience, so when a forum member's intension is clear .. we like to just roll with it  Phil's OP was clear to most of us.

Richard, the rule is that once Boat B becomes overlapped to leeward, she changes from Keep clear to ROW boat. At that point, Boat A must allow B to sail her course, as well as to turn in either direction without immediately making contact. And at the same time, Boat B owes A room to keep clear according to both rule 15, as well as 16 if B changes course.

There are at least three ways A might need to head up without B changing course. I think it's possible all three apply in this situation:

In all three situations of course, leeward Boat B owes room to keep clear from rules 15 and 16.

In order to tease these rules apart, we need facts found and conclusions. The bolded stuff is either unknown or could be controversial (partly due to the unknowns):

Facts Found (FF#'s):

Conclusions (C#'s):

Points of uncertainty because we cannot ask questions of both parties (POU#'s):

Boat A does not need to change course to keep clear. She could just slow down!

Point I was making it state about how overlap was established and nothing to do with the rest. establishing from clear astern gives no rights as over taking unless you are leeward two boat lengths unless it was changed this year. I will have to pull rules up as I am on the road at this time to get rule number. Only time you gets rights that close is bee we fore starting signal.

The scenario did not say that “B came up” which is not a defined action.  The scenario said that B was sailing higher.  The difference is creating confusion in the discussion.  A has to keep clear immediately and B has to give room to do so.

Ok, thanks to All who contributed.
I started sailing racing in 1969 and sailed on and off till mid 90’s on dinghys and ocean racing
The rules were different then. Only came back to sailing and racing last year
Back then, the rules were different and there was certainly no way that an overtaking boat ( to leeward ) could force the windward boat up until certain conditions existed, ie become clear ahead, which in itself created a new situation.
I find the rules which now allow an overtaker to leeward to simply barge thru a ridiculous proposition
It may be ok for one designs or match racing but in a field of mixed yachts it appears lunacy to me. It flies in the face of the colregs where the overtaking boat must keep clear. 
So having had this confirmed for me, i must say probably no more racing for us as we are prone to this sort of what i term “abuse” by faster racing yachts who in most instances could easilly lay off a few degrees for the small amount of time that it takes to overtake us.  However that is not the mindset of ego driven skippers in friendly no extras mid week pursuit races

Thanks again to everyone
Phil

Hi Brent,

I think you've got a good handle on this.

Phil's 43 footer A can't sail as high as B - the boat the that becomes overlapped to leeward - and is slower:

The "gun" boat B becomes ROW as soon as her bow creates an overlap. And the windward boat A's period of grace given her by RRS 15, starts immediately - as does RRS11, requiring A to keep clear. If the 2 metre separation is between bow and stern quarter, B's advance at a higher angle (in the 'Room' Proper Course is oftern measured as the course she had been previously sailing) and at a higher speed,  A can't just assume "Well I'm keeping clear at this precise moment", because she will very soon not be keeping clear, at which point she is breaking RRS 11 and the period of grace, given her by RRS15, will have expired. And that's without allowing for B being much wider at beam max than she is at the bow.

So A has to act promptly and adequately because as RRS 15 states, A's Room to keep Clear only lasts "initially" which is not a very long time.. B must be allowed to sail her course.  If A has to tack away to keep clear during B's passing manoeuvre, she should do so ASAP in my opinion.

And Phil, I share your distaste for some of the rule changes since the 1960's - I still miss the right to "luff as I please" when overtaken close to windward.

Ok I see what you are talking about, the leeward boat has been sailing a higher course than windward boat before overlap so her proper course is set and now wants to sail under windward. Looking her at room and opportunity to keep clear at moment overlap is made. That is going to be a question of the windward vessls ability to be able to keep clear because of speed and ability to turn and keep clear. Windward doesn’t have move till over lap has been made and the different in speed of each vessel is going to play a close part in the opportunity to keep clear. Question would be why slow yourself down to sail into that position unless you are a much lager vessel and much faster and then one has to question weth that slower windward vessel has the ability to keep clear after overlap has been made. It is very possible that at point the windward vessel would claim that they were put into a position not able to keep clear at the point of actual overlap was made. The choice here comes down to are you willing to go to the room and prove that the windward boat could have kept clear at that point considering ach vessels ability to keep clear. Remember that while tacking to keep clear the windward vessels stern is going to move in your direction a greatly reduced to room to keep clear in the difference in speed and ability to keep clear. Remember the windward does not have to prepare to keep clear till overlap is made and then the part of time and opportunity comes into play. So there is not going to be and set rule on distance because of the possibility of each vessel to maneuver and turn remember the pivot point of the vessel having to move and turn. 

Now the reaction for A is to turn slightly higher than her course at point of over lap because she saw what was going to happen and had turned down slightly to play a dirty as B is going to play and when B makes over lap that close A turns up slightly and breaks over lap and takes away B over lap and now B has to make overlap again and now is to close for A to be able to keep clear. Now B is in trouble because it can’t sail behind and has not given A room to keep clear. Now B has to drop off to stay clear as it makes over lap again and has set a new proper course in overlap. This hurts both boat and if lucky B doesn’t hit A in process and gets r try amen out of race. Are you really ready to play that game or just go and Winn the race.

There was a now retired US appeal US108 that that touch on some of these ideas of a leeward ROW boat providing room to the windward boat to keep clear. 

Please be advised that this appeal has since been deleted from the US appeal book. 

Dennis Re: "the leeward boat has been sailing a higher course than windward boat before overlap so her proper course is set and now wants to sail under windward."

It's a bit simpler than that.  

First, a boat does not "set" their proper course by previous action and there is rarely a single proper course.  Even in a situation where a boat is on a beat to windward, a boat's VMG to windward can be basically the same through a 5-7 deg swing between low/fast and high/slow with optimum VMG in the middle.  

Def: proper course requires "the other boat" for its application and different rules use the term for different purposes.   In rule 17, proper course is a limit on the 'height' of a boat's course.  The rule 17 limited boat can't sail "above" her proper course. 

Though "the other boat" is required by def: PC, the next thing we do remove that boat from the picture. In this rule 17 application we ask, 

Based on the OP, the answer is "No, she is not and therefore Boat B is not breaking 17". 

That question is not asked until rule 17 applies and that is not until AFTER overlap occurs ...  and the question is continually asked until rule 17 no longer applies. 

I recall getting nailed like this off a start line in a vintage dinghy regatta in the UK. My very elderly boat wasn't particularly close winded and didn't have the best daggerboard in the world. Coming up under me was a boat of a certain class where their vintage racing was taken much more seriously and aggressively and consequently was much more close winded than mine. I attempted to respond, but was forced up until my board stalled out and I had fairly minimal control and contact ensued. Being off a start line tacking away wasn't an option. I have never worked out what I could have done, although possibly Gordon's suggestion of just slowing/stopping might have worked. 

Does anyone understand why this rule is as it is ?

Maybe Rob O or John A (our resident rules historians) can provide some context? (Nudge ... nudge). :-)

First, I want to reinforce what Angelo, Brent and others have been saying: We'll have a lot better conversation if we stick to the words in the rulebook, and to the facts as stated in the original question.  There's nothing in the RRS about "overtaking", and in fact, never have been since I started sailing in the 1950's.  Also, there are no rules about "time and opportunity", and again, those words haven't been in the rulebook for at least 30 years.  So let's not use them in our discussion.  

The earlier version of rule 17 was the "mast abeam" rule.  Here's that rule from the 1989-1992 RRS:

(Note that for boats that have started, the current rule 17 is embedded in that rule, because of the words "when the overlap began".  When a boat establishes an leeward overlap from astern, the helmsman of the windward boat will inevitably be forward of the leeward boat's mast.)

The problem with the 1992 rule (other than its complexity) was that it applied to overlaps that were established to windward from astern, and windward boats were prone to hail "Mast Abeam" long before the conditions of this rule were satisfied.  The result was that bigger or faster boats commonly passed to windward instead of to leeward, and when the leeward boat luffed to protect her air, the windward boat would simply hail "Mast Abeam" and the leeward bot would have to bear off and let her through.

In 1997, the "Mast Abeam" rule was dropped in favor of the current rule 17.  There was at the time, and has been ever since, a substantial group of sailors who think there should be no such rule, and I think they have a point (though I'm not in that group).  There is constant confusion about which boat's proper course is to be respected, and whether there's any limitation on what the windward boat must do to keep clear -- as demonstrated in this thread.  Also, the rule makes little sense in many situations, as for example, suppose the boats in the discussion above are 1-1/2 boatlengths apart on a run, and the leeward boat takes a slightly higher angle than her optimal downwind course.  Then she breaks rule 17 even though the other boat is unaffected by her behavior -- and maybe even unaware of it.  (Incidentally, I tried to get rule 17 changed for 2025, to require that the leeward boat's course has to affect the windward boat -- but my proposal was shot down.)

Finally, to answer Phillip's question: Why does rule 17 exist?  The answer is basically one of fairness.  Suppose one boat B is astern of another boat A, on a reach, and B is faster than A (maybe she's much bigger).  Boat A can effectively prevent B from sailing over her by luffing up to a higher line before, or just as, the overlap is established.  So, practically speaking, B must either go to leeward of A or sail high enough above her that she doesn't take A's wind.  So far, all good -- the rules encourage bigger boats to sail below smaller ones, rather than above them.  But if B does sail to leeward, look at what power she suddenly has!  Because of the geometry, a boat whose bow is overlapped close to leeward of the other boat's stern quarter has incredible leverage -- a very small luff on her part requires a huge change of course for the windward boat to maintain the separation and keep clear -- and that doesn't seem fair.  

Picture two ILCAs, Alan and Betty, long-time adversaries on the racecourse.  They are sailing downwind, leading a big fleet of boats.  Alan, who is trailing Betty, catches a wave and is able to barely get an overlap close to leeward of her.  He hails "Leeward!", Betty responds by reaching up to keep clear, and Alan reaches up, too, always giving her room to keep clear.  At all times, Betty's response has to be much greater than Alan's course change, so Betty ends up nearly head to wind while Alan still has his sail filled.  As the rest of the fleet comes upon them, Alan lets out his sheet and bears off sharply.  Betty bears off to follow him, but she can't even get down to a beam reach when Alan is already headed dead downwind again.  The fleet catches her but not Alan, the scoundrel.

This is not hypothetical, as the tactic is commonly seen in match racing, where there is no rule 17.  In that context, the tactic is exciting to see, and because match racing is a dog-eat-dog kind of activity, nobody worries about the fairness of it.  But the fleet-racing rules are designed to make it possible for boats to win by sailing fast and fair, so, in my opinion, a rule limiting the leeward boat is appropriate.  

Thanks Rob for an excellent explanation.
I must agree with you that the newly overlapping leeward boat needs to be constrianed but the rule falls short of constraining it in the instance in my OP.  So,……..just have to live with it or not race if I find the instances of us being pushed around too unpalatable
Rule 17 should be extended to prevent the leeward boat sailing above the proper couse of the windward boat.   That would indeed be fairer
Thanks again to all concerned. Afraid my newly discovered racing days are over.

Philip re: "Rule 17 should be extended to prevent the leeward boat sailing above the proper couse of the windward boat.   That would indeed be fairer"

I strongly disagree.  We apply Part 2 rules between 2 boats at a time and except in specific odd situations, the rules determine one boat is "keep clear" and the other is "ROW".

A fundamental concept of a boat keeping clear is that the ROW boat can sail her course without need of taking avoiding action.

When Boat B was clear astern, she was the keep-clear boat under RRS 12.   When Boat B becomes overlapped to leeward from close astern, Boat B becomes the ROW boat under RRS 11.  Boat B now has the ROW privilege under the rules "to sail her course".

To base RRS 17's course-limit on the windward, keep-clear boat, would be to flip that basic construct on its head ... as now it's the windward KC boat that can "sail her course" and the leeward ROW boat that now must keep clear of her. 

Not only does that fly in the face of the basics, but why is that "fair"?  Why should a boat's ROW privileges extend past when then they are no longer the  ROW boat?

Consider your OP as it's a pursuit race.  The low/slow boat wasn't ahead of the speedster because of better seamanship ... she was ahead because she got a head start.  From the start and up until this moment, she enjoyed the privileges of a ROW boat under RRS 12.  Boat A can't expect that to last forever, especially in a pursuit race ... where by design .. you have the fastest boats needing to pass the entire fleet from astern (believe me ... that can be quite a challenge!)

This is less of a problem in a normal start, where the faster boats are off the line and down the course early in the race and slower boats are wise to understand their height/speed relative to the competition and plan their start accordingly (for instance an RC-end start and a quick tack to port). 

I have to agree with Ang here. The goal is to put limits on the leeward boat's right-of-way, not to allow the windward boat to begin dictating the course everyone else takes. Even if we agree to disagree on fairness, a further constraint on leeward could easily result in collisions where a windward boat's proper course had to be passed down across several overlapping boats. It's much MUCH safer to allow the leeward boat to determine the course, and the windward boat to protest if that course isn't proper.

Beyond that, I feel the current rule is relatively fair, but also almost identical in spirit and application to the old mast-abeam rule we used to use (but without skippers needing 20-foot hiking sticks to game the system). Regarding the specific OP scenario, the opposite issue happens so much: fast boat rolls over the top... brutal as well. Plus, now that you know the rule, if you see this happening, you can bear off a little and offer them the high road if you so choose.

Lastly, we definitely want people like you to keep racing with us. We don't want you to feel like the rules support only the bigger, expensive boats... Please think through this rule, the potential strategies it opens up, and ask questions about any other rules strategy you might have.

The problem, I think, is that where boat characteristics are very different, the windward boat may be put in a very difficult situation through no fault of her own. See my example. Its all very well to say she should tack away, but that may not be an option at all if there are other boats in close proximity. And TBH, by the time it becomes obvious that leeward is aggressively changing course rather than simply powering through, windward may have very few options. I wouldn't want to see leeward restricted from sailing a proper course, provided she can do so without compromising windward's ability to keep clear, but I would want to see windward given ample room to keep clear for the duration of the overlap. How you would make that happen in the rules I don't know. 

Thanks again to everyone who contributed
I think my real issue is the way the hotshots conduct themselves in a social race
I have won many races in the past but consider myself “reasoable” and would not in the instance i posted about force a slower boat up for the sake of a couple of seconds gain, particularly when only going to finish mid field and not being anywhere in the aggregate standings. Much easier and possibly better in the long run if boat speed is significantly different
Perhaps i might avail myself of some equally dastardly tactics as mention in this thread - but then again…….
For the record I tnink the last post by Jim Champ summs up  the situation perfectly
Thanks All
Phil

Phil - it was an interesting scenario, but I'm saddened by your reflections that you'd rather not race under these conditions.  A couple of observations.....

Somewhat, but not completely, in jest: you could consider sailing on the whizz bang boat, and hence not have the problem.
More importantly, if the whizz bang boat is shouting the odds and being rude and unsportsmanlike, then consider a rule 2 protest.  Insisting on their rights in a forceful manner is fine, but doing so in a way that is unsporting, rude, or upsetting to competitors is not.  A chat in the bar afterwards is a friendlier option, but you do have some protections as we all want to see people racing hard but enjoying it.

And maybe most critically, if you have that sort of boat where it's a problem, it's something to be on the lookout for in advance whilst you're sailing - like you would naturally be for a port starboard situation.  If you know that your boat characteristics make it hard to extricate yourself from this position, then not getting into it in the first place is a good idea - if you see the leeward boat coming up, consider tacking early, or slowing slightly, or even bearing off so that they pass in front of you . Anticipation like that could save you a lot of grief and cost you very little time.....

Jim re: "I wouldn't want to see leeward restricted from sailing a proper course, provided she can do so without compromising windward's ability to keep clear, but I would want to see windward given ample room to keep clear for the duration of the overlap. How you would make that happen in the rules I don't know. "


It's is done initially by RRS 15 and then subsequently by RRS 16.1 each moment the RRS 17-restricted ROW leeward boat changes course.  

Unlike RRS 17, both RRS 15 and 16.1 convey "room to keep clear" to the windward boat.  That room is the space the windward boat needs to maneuver, which will take into consideration the characteristics of the boat and the wind and sea conditions. 

All that is needed is already in there. 

Russel re: "shouting the odds"

That's a new one for me.  Love collecting this little sayings :-). 

Ang

Philip,

if you think it is unreasonable for a fast boat to force a slower boat up for the sake of a couple of seconds gain,  the why is it OK for a slow boat to force a faster boat down for the sake of a couple of seconds gain?  Especially if the fast boat is ROW?  The slow boat only need sail a little higher and slower for a few seconds and the ROW boat will be gone.

Philip; if you think it is unreasonable for a fast boat to force a slower boat up...

There is a larger overall effect on a slow boat made to go slower than on a fast boat to be momentarily impeded.
As a general racing principle, regardless of platform, boats, cars, belt sanders, it is the inverse relationship between speed and time with respect to distance. Not how fast you go, but how slow you go.  ;-)