Note: This forum is not affiliated with World Sailing and comments on this forum do not represent an official interpretation of the rules, definitions, cases or regulations. The only official interpretations are those of World Sailing.
We had a spirited discussion last week at our club about a scenario such as this. I constructed the diagram above and have my own opinion, but I'm pulling the pin out of this grenade and lobbing it over the bulkhead to this wider community:
- Yellow and Green were sailing downwind toward a mark to be left to port. Green was aiming for a point a boat width or so from the mark while Yellow was aiming for a point a boat length from the mark. Green entered the zone clear ahead of Yellow (1). - While still 1.5 lengths from the mark, Green turned down to perform a proper course mark rounding (enter wide and exit close). As she turned, Yellow established an overlap from clear astern on Green (2). - Yellow continued sailing a straight course. Green could not make her desired rounding because of the proximity of Yellow, turned up (3), and made a seamanlike rounding of the mark (4) with Yellow close astern. - Green protested, claiming that Yellow did not allow her the mark-room for her proper course rounding (5). There was no contact.
From position 1 Green gets mark room, regardless of Yellow obtaining, not obtaining, or losing an overlap. Mark room entitles Green to sail to the mark, round it, and leave it astern. Mark room alone does not entitle a boat to a tactical rounding - only a seamanlike rounding. In this case Green was the windward boat without right-of-way and thus could not change course toward the right-of-way leeward Yellow boat.
"Why did Green think she had any entitlement to room to make a 'proper course rounding'?" Answer: Green thought that she could make a proper course rounding because she entered the zone clear ahead of Yellow.
Clark, Not trying to pick nits off you: just trying to probe why Green got it wrong.
Did Green not understand (or look at) the definition of mark-room?
Was Green living in the 2009 - 2012 past version of mark-room?
Did Green not realise that when she flared out at the mark she would become overlapped on Yellow and go from Clear Ahead Right of Way to Windward Give way?
Position 1) 12 and 18.2 (a)(2) G is ROW and mark-room entitled. 2) Y from astern gets an overlap to leeward of G -11, 15,17 Y is now ROW 3) Same 4) G, keep-clear, is entitled only to MR and to turn seamanlike. not a tactical turn. 5) G protest denied.
The comments use the terms proper course, seamanlike turn, and tactical turn. Proper Course has a definition in the rules. Manoeuvring promptly in a seamanlike way is mentioned in the definition for Room but "seamanlike turn" is not defined. Similarly, "tactical turn" is not defined.
Case 75 relates to a slightly different situation, since S gybes in the zone and there was contact. However, the discussion in Case 75 says "When S gybed just after position 2, she had not sailed farther from the mark than needed to sail her proper course. Indeed, in the absence of P (the boat "referred to" in the definition Proper Course), S's proper course might well have been to sail even farther from the mark and higher than she did, so as to make a smoother, faster rounding...". Doesn't this mean that S's proper course was what might be labelled a tactical turn?
Then USA Appeal US20 says "Mark-room is not defined to allow an inside boat without right of way to sail to a mark in a tactically desirable manner", which seems to contradict Case 75. Additionally, is this appeal relevant to everyone, or just those who sail in the USA?
In Case 75 the inside boat entitled to mark-room is also the right of way boat, and the outside boat is required to keep clear of her even if she sails outside the direct corridor to the mark that constitutes the mark-room to which she is entitled, thus enabling the inside right of way boat to make a 'tactical' rounding.
in US Appeal 20 the inside boat is the give way boat required to keep clear of the outside boat but exonerated by RRS 43.1(b) if she fails to do so as long as she is sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled, that is the direct corridor to the mark: this is described as a 'seamanlike' rounding.
World Sailing cases are authoritative interpretations and explanations of the rules (WS Regulation 28.3 quoted on WS Case Book page iii). Cases are binding on all protest committees.
US Sailing Appeals are decisions of the US Sailing Appeals Committee. Typically, protest committees conform their decisions to the appeals when the facts are similar, which makes them invaluable for competitors and officials to know and use. (US Sailing Appeals Book for 2021–2024 page iv first sentence). US Sailing Appeals are not binding either in the USA or elsewhere but judges will apply US Appeals where appropriate in comity with USA practice.
Hello Not related to the topic itself but it's related to the image(diagram) posted. Is there a software(app) that help produces this kind images(scenarios?) Many thanks
Geen still subject to rule 11 and kept clear of Yellow.
Mark room entitles Green to sail to the mark, round it, and leave it astern.
Mark room alone does not entitle a boat to a tactical rounding - only a seamanlike rounding.
In this case Green was the windward boat without right-of-way and thus could not change course toward the right-of-way leeward Yellow boat.
Answer: Green thought that she could make a proper course rounding because she entered the zone clear ahead of Yellow.
Did Green not understand (or look at) the definition of mark-room?
Was Green living in the 2009 - 2012 past version of mark-room?
Did Green not realise that when she flared out at the mark she would become overlapped on Yellow and go from Clear Ahead Right of Way to Windward Give way?
2) Y from astern gets an overlap to leeward of G -11, 15,17 Y is now ROW
3) Same
4) G, keep-clear, is entitled only to MR and to turn seamanlike. not a tactical turn.
5) G protest denied.
The comments use the terms proper course, seamanlike turn, and tactical turn. Proper Course has a definition in the rules. Manoeuvring promptly in a seamanlike way is mentioned in the definition for Room but "seamanlike turn" is not defined. Similarly, "tactical turn" is not defined.
Case 75 relates to a slightly different situation, since S gybes in the zone and there was contact. However, the discussion in Case 75 says "When S gybed just after position 2, she had not sailed farther from the mark than needed to sail her proper course. Indeed, in the absence of P (the boat "referred to" in the definition Proper Course), S's proper course might well have been to sail even farther from the mark and higher than she did, so as to make a smoother, faster rounding...". Doesn't this mean that S's proper course was what might be labelled a tactical turn?
Then USA Appeal US20 says "Mark-room is not defined to allow an inside boat without right of way to sail to a mark in a tactically desirable manner", which seems to contradict Case 75. Additionally, is this appeal relevant to everyone, or just those who sail in the USA?
I'd be grateful for any further clarification.
The difference between US Appeal 20 and Case 75 is that:
World Sailing cases are authoritative interpretations and explanations of the rules (WS Regulation 28.3 quoted on WS Case Book page iii). Cases are binding on all protest committees.
US Sailing Appeals are decisions of the US Sailing Appeals Committee. Typically, protest committees conform their decisions to the appeals when the facts are similar, which makes them invaluable for competitors and officials to know and use. (US Sailing Appeals Book for 2021–2024 page iv first sentence). US Sailing Appeals are not binding either in the USA or elsewhere but judges will apply US Appeals where appropriate in comity with USA practice.
Not related to the topic itself but it's related to the image(diagram) posted. Is there a software(app) that help produces this kind images(scenarios?)
Many thanks