Forum: Rule 18 and Room at the Mark

Mark room at the leeward finsih line.

Jerry Thompson
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Regional Race Officer
  • Regional Judge
Finish.jpeg 97.5 KB
 
A friend sent me the above hypothetical downwind finish (I understand the finish line is a bit off) scenario and asked me which rules apply.  I’m not absolutely sure.  A search of the cases and appeals didn’t help me.  I have reviewed this RRS post https://www.racingrulesofsailing.org/posts/388-mark-room-at-the-finish, but it is at a windward finish and want to present the leeward finish.  Position 2 is where I am not sure.
 
Green established the overlap from clear astern.
 
At position 1 Red is ROW, rule 11.
 
At position 2 Red is ROW rule 11, do any other rules apply?  
 
At position 2 which is the inside boat?
 
At position 2 may Red continue beyond her proper course?
 
At position 2 Green is not fetching the mark.  Must she be fetching to be entitled mark-room?
 
At position 2 Green must gybe, if she is entitled mark-room, does mark-room include room to gybe?  18.4 doesn’t seem to apply.
 
At position 3 Red and Green gybe, Green is ROW and entitled to mark-room.
 
At position 4 Red does not give Green mark-room, Green luffs and manages to avoid hitting the finish mark.  Red breaks rule 18.2(a).
Created: 20-Feb-06 20:04

Comments

John Christman
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • National Umpire
  • Regional Race Officer
1
Green established the overlap from clear astern.
- Therefore RRS 17 does not apply and Red is not limited in sailing above her proper course.
 
At position 1 Red is ROW, rule 11.
- Correct.
 
At position 2 Red is ROW rule 11, do any other rules apply?  
- RRS 18 is "turned on" as at least one boat is in the zone and none of the exceptions apply.

At position 2 which is the inside boat?
- Green is the inside boat.
 
At position 2 may Red continue beyond her proper course?
- As RRS 17 is not "turned on", Red may sail beyond her proper course before gybing.  However, what Red can do in the context of one rule may not be the whole story as other rules may impose restrictions on Red.  Restrictions are cumulative.  They aren't overridden just because another rule says you can do something.  When the first boat of the pair enters the zone, RRS 18 "turns on" and starting at that point in time Red is required to give Green mark room.
 
At position 2 Green is not fetching the mark.  Must she be fetching to be entitled mark-room?
- No.  In this case fetching the mark is not relevant as tacking is not a part of what the boats are doing to pass the mark, see RRS 18.3.
 
At position 2 Green must gybe, if she is entitled mark-room, does mark-room include room to gybe?  18.4 doesn’t seem to apply.
- RRS 18.4 does not apply.  The definition of mark room includes the "room to sail to the mark".  If a boat needs to gybe to be allowed to sail to the mark then the room includes that room.
 
At position 3 Red and Green gybe, Green is ROW and entitled to mark-room.
- True, however, Green has been entitled to mark room from the time the first boat entered the zone and not starting at Position 3.
 
At position 4 Red does not give Green mark-room, Green luffs and manages to avoid hitting the finish mark.  Red breaks rule 18.2(a).
- True, but Red actually broke RRS 18.2(a) shortly after entering the zone when she prevented Green from sailing "to the mark".
Created: 20-Feb-06 21:25
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
2
To piggy-back off of what John C wrote.  At position #1.5, where Green enters the zone, Red owed Green a corridor directly to the mark and wide enough for Green to pass it on the proper side.

If Green continued her course past #2 on her own accord, that just means that Red is sailing into room that is not hers .. and she does so at her own risk.

 As Case  63   states .. "At a mark, when space is made available to a boat that is not entitled to it, she may, at her own risk, take advantage of the space."

I've shown the corridor in purple.

image.png 191 KB
Created: 20-Feb-06 21:37
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • Club Judge
0
Hi Angelo
Can you explain why Green at 1.5  is entitled to Mark Room 
Paddy
Created: 20-Feb-07 00:18
P
John Eilers
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
0
Is there any requirement for red to sail a correct, most advantageous course and finish as quickly as possible; ie jibe for the finish line earlier?
Created: 20-Feb-07 02:23
John Ball
Nationality: Canada
0
As noted in the post above by Angelo, the boats reach the zone at about 1.5. At that time mark room is established and Green as inside overlapped boat is entitled to Mark Room under R 18.2(b).
From that point Green is entitled to sail close to the mark as her proper course at P1.5 would be to gybe over as soon as possible and sail to the correct side of the Committee boat. While Red is ROW under R 11, she is obligated to give mark room, and so any other course discussion for Red is irrelevant.

John
Created: 20-Feb-07 03:34
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Paddy, I agree with John B's description.

Are you asking, "Why is Green considered inside?" at position #1.5 and thus owed mark-room?  

First, I'm estimating that Green or Red's bow crosses the zone at #1.5 and thus one of them enters the zone at that time and they are overlapped. 

To further answer the question, you look at the mark in question and what side these boats need to leave the mark on.  The answer in this case is they both need to leave the mark to starboard.

OK .. so Red needs to leave the mark to starboard .. so what side of Red is Green on?  The answer is starboard again.

As you progress these boats forward, both having to leave the mark to starboard, Green being on the same side of Red as the mark must be left, Green's track will bring her between Red and the mark.  Therefore, Green is inside and thus owed mark-room from Red.

None of 18.1's criteria apply, therefore 18.2(b) applies.  [Actually, John C's last answer is slightly incorrect, Red break 18.2(b), not 18.2(a)]

Was that what you were asking?

Ang
Created: 20-Feb-07 04:47
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • Club Judge
0
Angelo
Thanks for your detailed answer
I fully understand now. Good to follow the track of the boats. 
Another tool to consider.  
Paddy

Created: 20-Feb-07 05:41
Bruce Hebbert
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • International Umpire
0
John Christman has this 100%.. the is a typical match race and 2 vs 2 team race finishing scenario. As soon as the first of the overlapped boats gets to the zone the Red boat must give the inside boat mark room. Red fails to do this. Red breaks 18..2 (b)
Created: 20-Feb-07 09:02
Catalan Benaros
Nationality: Argentina
0

Hi everybody, i am thinking it this way:
When both jibe we have a new overlap, so 18.2b is over and 18.2a turns on.




Finish.jpg 85.7 KB
Created: 20-Feb-08 11:50
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
2
Catalan, I would like to give you the challenge.  Where in the rules does it say that 18.2b turns off between position 2 and position 3, leaving only 18.2a? - Ang
Created: 20-Feb-08 12:42
Catalan Benaros
Nationality: Argentina
0

Point to Angelo:


18.2(c) When a boat is required to give mark-room by rule 18.2(b), 

(1) she shall continue to do so even if later an overlap is broken or a new overlap begins; 

Created: 20-Feb-08 14:12
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
3
OK Catalan, I've got a couple more questions for you .. 

  1. Looking at the definition of Clear Astern and Clear Ahead; Overlap, where do you contend that overlap was broken?  Try to reference the rule in your determination or show it on the drawing.
  2. Let us assume for a moment that overlap was broken and a new one began (which I do not think is true in this case), looking at 18.2(c) which you referenced, where in 18.2(c) does it say that 18.2(b) ceases to apply?

(BTW .. personally I learn best when challenged this way, so I'm hoping you are finding my questioning-approach beneficial to you).



Created: 20-Feb-08 14:33
Catalan Benaros
Nationality: Argentina
0

OF COURSE ANGELO !!!...I agree !!!....and thanks you !!!
...i do not want the answer for free !!!

Created: 20-Feb-08 18:47
Nigel Vick
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • International Judge
  • National Umpire
0
Who cares about rule 18, after the gybe in Catalan's scenario Red becomes the windward boat and is required to keep clear of green. And green now has luffing rights - this is what makes the downwind finish such fun in 2v2 team racing.
She is of course constrained by 16.1.  It is 18 that gets her into this position.
Created: 20-Feb-09 00:08
Bob Lewis
Nationality: Canada
0
Given Ang’s comments about Red not having broken any rules at 3 because she is sailing into Green’s room that is made available, can someone critique some other conclusions.

1.       At 3, Red is still entitled to mark room under 18.2 as none of the events in 18.4 that terminate mark room under 18.2 have occurred.
 
2.        Although Red still is entitled to mark room at position 3 she is also subject to 16.1 (as right of way leeward boat) and so can’t make a rapid turn into Green with the expectation of exoneration if the turn breaks rule 16.1, because she is not sailing within the room or mark room to which she is entitled.
 
3.       I wonder if it could be concluded that the first part of mark room “room to sail to the mark” expires at position 4 because room is defined to be the space a boat needs …while maneuvering promptly …  If Green had maneuvered promptly from when she entered the zone, she would have been finishing at position 4 and Red could say that the first part of mark room had been given and perhaps the second part since upon finishing further rounding of the mark is no longer needed to sail the course.  Surely a boat with mark room can’t just hang around near the edge of the zone and then dive for the mark when it suits them?
 
4.       At position 1.5 when green enters the zone she needs to bear away if she is to stay within the corridor.  I see three possible actions by Green.
 
a)       Green hails Red something like “Mark Room – Red, I want to bear away to the mark and you are blocking me, bear off”.  No one alters course.   Could Green then succeed in a protest for room not given or is some course alteration by Green needed.  I think a hail is not enough to say that Red did not give room as Green’s intention is not part of the rule.  Of course, this is where you have to agree with Ang’s diagram that room has been made available.
 
b)      Green bears off to start the turn down to the mark but heads up before contact.  Would that suffice for room not given.  As far as I can tell from US Appeal cases 119 and 120 in the Sup, effectively states that if a boat that needs to give room avoids contact then room has been given.  In both those cases room to keep clear was needed but in both cases the keep clear boats were unable to keep clear, yet it was determined that room to keep clear was given.
 
c)       Green bears off and hits Red. Now we’re talking. Red has clearly failed to give mark room and breaks 18.2(b) with no exoneration and probably 14 with exoneration as ROW boat. Green breaks rule 11 and rule 14 but is exonerated for breaking 11 by rule 21 and is exonerated for 14 by 14(b) as a boat with mark room, if no damage or injury occurs.

Created: 20-Feb-09 03:06
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Bob, just to be clear about Green making that room available, I said “if” ....

If Green continued her course past #2 on her own accord, that just means that Red is sailing into room that is not hers .. and she does so at her own risk. 

It’s not clear that is the case and Green could have felt forced into that corner by not being given room to sail directly to the mark at #1.5.  

There are not facts found either way from just the drawing. 
Created: 20-Feb-09 04:15
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Nigel, “Who cares about rule 18?”

Green does.  18 -> 21 -> 15/16 exoneration for Green.  
Created: 20-Feb-09 04:20
Catalan Benaros
Nationality: Argentina
0

I´d like to stop for a minute and think about "HOW WE BREAK AN OVELAP"

In the first case, Blue is faster than Red, and in position N°1,5 the overlap is broken.


66.jpg 20.8 KB

In the second case:

N°1 Yellow and Green are overlapped

N°2 Green gybes ....is this A NEW OVERLAP ???
67.jpg 18.5 KB


And in the last case,


At position N°1 both are overlaped

At position N°2 is this a NEW OVERLAP ??
68.jpg 17.3 KB

Created: 20-Feb-09 11:31
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
1
Catalan, that's a nice drawing to look at the question you are asking.

Looking at the definition of Clear Astern and Clear Ahead; Overlap and looking at your Blue and Red #1, you say they are overlapped ...
  1. What is your explanation of why Red and Blue are overlapped (using the definition's terms)?
  2. Does it matter that they are on the same tack?  Why or Why not?

General Questions ....
  1. Can boats be overlapped based upon more than 1 criteria at the same time?  
    1. Is there more than 1 overlap criteria between your Blue and Red? 
      1. If so what are they?
    2. Go back to the top to Jerry’s original drawing ...
      1. How many different criteria of overlap are met at position #3?
      2. How many at position #1?  Position #2?
      3. What are they?

Next looking at your Yellow/Green #1 and #2 ...
  1. Are Yellow/Green #1 overlapped for the same reason that Blue/Red #1 are overlapped?
  2. Does that reason change in your Yellow/Green #2 when Green flips her main to the opposite side?


Created: 20-Feb-09 17:57
Catalan Benaros
Nationality: Argentina
0
Looking at the definition of Clear Astern and Clear Ahead; Overlap and looking at your Blue and Red #1, you say they are overlapped ...
What is your explanation of why Red and Blue are overlapped (using the definition's terms)?

They overlap when neither is clear astern. 


Does it matter that they are on the same tack?  Why or Why not?

NO


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

General Questions ....
Can boats be overlapped based upon more than 1 criteria at the same time?  

NO

a) Same tack

b) Opposite  tacks



Is there more than 1 overlap criteria between your Blue and Red? 
If so what are they?

a) "They overlap when neither is clear astern. /same tack"




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

Go back to the top to Jerry’s original drawing ...

How many different criteria of overlap are met at position #3?

ONE,
 "They overlap when neither is clear astern. /same tack"


How many at position #1?  

 "They overlap when neither is clear astern. /same tack"


Position #2?

 "They overlap when neither is clear astern. /same tack"


What are they?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next looking at your Yellow/Green #1 and #2 ...

Are Yellow/Green #1 overlapped for the same reason that Blue/Red #1 are overlapped?

YES

"They overlap when neither is clear astern. /same tack"


Does that reason change in your Yellow/Green #2 when Green flips her main to the opposite side?

YES

"They overlap when neither is clear astern. /  OPPOSITE tacks"



 "......boats on opposite tacks only when rule 18 applies between them or when both boats are sailing more than ninety degrees from the true wind. "

Created: 20-Feb-10 13:13
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
1
Catalan, I hope having you work through this has been a good exercise for you.  I am going to share with you how I think about "overlap" and my personal process (this is just how my mind makes sense of it .. others might think differently!).

When I think about determining "overlap", I break it up into 2 parts.  The first part is the first half of the definition [emphasis added].. 

One boat is clear astern of another when her hull and equipment in normal position are behind a line abeam from the aftermost point of the other boat's hull and equipment in normal position. The other boat is clear ahead. They overlap when neither is clear astern. However, they also overlap when a boat between them overlaps both.

So, an overlap is established when neither is clear astern or they have a boat between them that overlaps both.

Next, the definition lists a series of conditions detailing when you can apply the term

[I know the above seems a bit awkward.  The definition clearly states that "...boats overlap when neither is clear astern.", then next they say that though they overlap, you can't apply the term "overlap" except in certain circumstances .. but that is how it is written.]

Next the definition lists the 'application-conditions' (below).  At least one of these conditions must be satisfied for the term "overlap" to "apply" between 2 boats.  


These terms always apply to boats on the same tack. They apply to boats on opposite tacks only when rule 18 applies between them or when both boats are sailing more than ninety degrees from the true wind.

It is easier for me to see these conditions as not mutually exclusive.  Since Overlap always applies between boats on the same tack, that means it also applies to boats on the same tack >90 deg TW and on boats on the same tack when 18 applies (this is just how my mind organizes it).

Therefore, once you determine that 2 boats overlap (neither is clear astern or there is an overlapping boat between them), you can only apply the term "overlap" in the rules if at least one of these possible conditions exists:
  1. both boats are on the same tack**
  2. both boats are sailing more than 90 deg's from the true wind (includes both same tack** and opposite tack)
  3. Rule 18 applies between them (includes both same tack** and opposite tack)

Looking back at Jerry's original drawing below .. 

  1. Position 1
    1. neither boat is clear astern AND can apply "overlap" because ..
      1. both on same tack, and
      2. both > 90 deg TW
  2. Position 2
    1. neither boat is clear astern AND can apply  "overlap" because ..
      1. both on same tack, and
      2. both > 90 deg TW, and
      3. 18 applied between them
  3. Between Position 2-3 (assuming both boats do not gybe perfectly simultaneously and therefore are momentarily on opposite tacks)
    1. neither boat is clear astern AND can apply  "overlap" because ..
      1. both > 90 deg TW, and
      2. 18 applied between them
  4. Position 3
    1. neither boat is clear astern AND can apply  "overlap" because ..
      1. both on same tack, and
      2. both > 90 deg TW, and
      3. 18 applied between them
  5. Position 4
    1. neither boat is clear astern AND can apply "overlap" because ..
      1. both on same tack, and
      2. 18 applied between them

So, as long as there is at least one application condition satisfied while they are overlapped (neither becomes clear astern of the other or loose the common overlap of a boat between them), the application of the term "overlap" between the boats is not broken.

When it comes to 18.2(b) vs 18.2(a), there is never a condition that turns off 18.2(b) in this scenario.  Once you have 18.2(b) applying, you should look at the conditions in 18.2(d) (which turns off 18.2(b) specifically) or the conditions in 18.1 (which turns off 18 entirely).  The conditions of 18.2(d) nor 18.1 are satisfied, therefore 18.2(b) still controls at positions #3 and #4.
 


image.png 147 KB
Created: 20-Feb-10 14:37
Catalan Benaros
Nationality: Argentina
0


This is the key for me:

".......So, as long as there is at least one application condition satisfied while they are overlapped (neither becomes clear astern of the other or loose the common overlap of a boat between them),

the application of the term "overlap" between the boats is not broken."


THANKS !!!!

Created: 20-Feb-10 18:08
Bob Lewis
Nationality: Canada
0

Angelo Guarino said

Bob, just to be clear about Green making that room available, I said “if” ....

If Green continued her course past #2 on her own accord, that just means that Red is sailing into room that is not hers .. and she does so at her own risk. 

It’s not clear that is the case and Green could have felt forced into that corner by not being given room to sail directly to the mark at #1.5.  

There are not facts found either way from just the drawing. 

Ang,

Thank you for the comment. I did think about the “if” and didn’t think there could be other facts, without at least a change of course, that would cause the condition in Case 63 to not be met, at least up until position 3 anyway – the case says “When a boat voluntarily or unintentionally makes space” so it seems to me that that has occurred.  Also, in Case 63, the boat making space did it totally involuntarily as it was being pinned out wide.  It seems to me that a leeward boat that must give room should be allowed to sail a parallel course and bear away when needed.  In US appeal 119 the leeward, give room boat, came within inches of the windward boat, causing a breach of rule 11, and still was held to have given room.  Is this really any different?  I did suggest some other "course change" facts that might change this.

Created: 20-Feb-11 02:21
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
1
Bob, be careful applying to our situation here.  

To answer your question, "Yes, this is really different".  Like my answer earlier about who cares about 18 in this situation.  18 is the answer as to why this is different and important.

In USA119, it is the windward [keep clear] boat that gets room [from the ROW boat to leeward]... room to keep-clear of leeward first by 15 and then by 16.

In our scenario, it is the leeward [ROW] boat (Green) that gets mark-room, which includes room.  Because Green gets mark-room and room, she is exonerated for breaking 15 and 16 in incidents with Red by Rule  21  (in complete contrast with US119) . [This exoneration is available when Red is "sailing within the room she is entitled to", which in this case is a corridor from where Green entered the zone directly to the mark on the proper side]

Many threads ago, John Allan pointed out (and it stuck with me) when you think "room" or "mark-room", think Rule 21 (he said it more eloquently .. but that's how I stored it).

Also read Case 118 as well.  Green is owed the corridor I drew early in the thread.  Green is exonerated for incidents with Red involving Section A, 15 and 16 when she sailing within that corridor.  Red enters that room at her own risk.

PS .. also Case 75 says it directly.  "The mark-room that P was required to give S was the space S needed in the existing conditions to sail promptly to the mark in a seamanlike way. .... That space was a direct corridor from S1 to a position close to and alongside the mark on the required side."

Created: 20-Feb-11 14:19
Bob Lewis
Nationality: Canada
0
Ang,

Yes, I agree with everything you just said, but I think you might be missing my point.  You are discussing the right to exoneration which is not in issue for red in this situation.  It is clear that green has mark room and if red fails to give it then there is no exoneration available for red.  The issue is, “did red give green mark room when they first touched the zone or is red instantly penalized when green makes no attempt to change course”.  Clearly if green bears away and collides with red, then red did not give green mark room and green will be exonerated by 21 for the rule 11 infraction.  But green does not bear away. Not even a little.  So why can red not say, “I was giving green the space to sail promptly, in a seamanlike way, to a position close to and on the required side of the mark.  I was ready to bear away promptly if green did and give the space needed otherwise I thought it was space freely given”.

Here’s a more extreme example.  Green gains mark-room as soon as red touches the zone. Is Red therefore immediately penalized because she is in the corridor?

 
image.png 34.6 KB



Regarding, US Appeal case 119 I was trying to focus on just whether the leeward overlapping boat gave room when it came within inches of the boat to be given, rule 15, room and the decision was no contact = no foul.  Mark room is just another type of room is it not?.

Created: 20-Feb-12 00:08
Bruce Hebbert
Nationality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Certifications:
  • International Umpire
1
At position 2 Red is required to give Green Mark Room as defined. From your diagram that would be room for Green to sail to the mark; as her proper course is to sail close to it. So do the actions of Red in any way prevent Green from doing this. In MHO the answer is no... so at position 2 Red is giving Mark Room.  Then there is the question of RRS 17. The diagram suggests that this does not apply as when the boats came together they were more than 2 boat lengths apart. In a team race a protest by Green would get a Green and White reply. If after Green bears away and gybes she is in any way impaired in sailing to the mark Red breaks 18.2(b).
Created: 20-Feb-12 11:48
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Bob, I'm with Bruce's reply regarding your last drawing.

As far as our discussion regarding OP (my zone-pic below), I'll copy your points and put my responses inline (all of course just being my opinion).

You are discussing the right to exoneration which is not in issue for red in this situation.  It is clear that green has mark room and if red fails to give it then there is no exoneration available for red.

Yes, my important point is exactly that.  Rule 21 applies to Green, NOT Red.  Rule 21 applies to Green while she is sailing within room or mark-room she is entitled to.  That room she is entitled to ... [from Case 75] " .. was a direct corridor from S1 [position #1.5] to a position close to and alongside the mark on the required side."  

Rule 21 potentially exonerates Green for breaking  ...
  1. rule 11 at #2, 
  2. rule 15 at #2.5, and 
  3. rule 16.1 at #3-#4.

  The issue is, “did red give green mark room when they first touched the zone or is red instantly penalized when green makes no attempt to change course”.  

No, not when Red first touches the zone ... we assess it each moment after that.  IMO we don't have enough information regarding the communication between the boats, their speed, the conditions, the performance characteristics regarding speed of turning, etc.  We are assuming that this is NOT an umpired event, where officials can be making these calls in real-time.   Though there is no required communication between the boats, communication between boats is a recognized method of attempting to avoid contact between boats, so we'd want to understand what was actually happening.

At position #1.5, there is ~1/3 BL between the tip of Green's boom to the Red's hull-outline (not accounting for rigging).  If Green had a reasonable apprehension that her boom might get caught in a shroud for instance and was calling for and waiting for Red to head down, that would be important info.

Clearly if green bears away and collides with red, then red did not give green mark room and green will be exonerated by 21 for the rule 11 infraction. 

Yes, but we can't forget Rule 14 in that statement.  This is where Green's apprehension to start heading down into currently non-existing space puts Green at risk.

It's important to note that out of all the "damage" and "injury" references in the rules, Rule 14 has the lowest standard as it is simply "damage or injury" (without qualifiers). 

 But green does not bear away. Not even a little.  So why can red not say, “I was giving green the space to sail promptly, in a seamanlike way, to a position close to and on the required side of the mark.  I was ready to bear away promptly if green did and give the space needed otherwise I thought it was space freely given”.

IMO we don't have enough information from the drawing alone to make that determination.  Red sails into that space at her own risk.

For the sake of discussion, let's assume that Green had a sheet over-wrapped on the winch and thus it was not her apprehension of collision with Red that delays her movement.  In that instance, Red can sail into position #2 and maybe further .. but when Green does make her move, Red is sailing in mark-room Green was entitled to.

IMO, at each moment that Red sails further into the zone, the corridor to the mark follows Green.  At #3, the corridor extends to either side of Green, the inside of which aligns with stern of the RC.  Just before #3, Red still has a chance to harden and leave Green room.  Adding to that (being Nigel's main point earlier), at #3, Green also becomes ROW, who will be exonerated for breaking 15 and 16.

By the time we get to #3.5, if I was Green I think I would bail on the line, protest Red and circle and recross.  Given the overlap of Red's stern over Green's bow, it might be clear at #3.5 that Red will not be able to provide Green room to avoid a collision with Red, the RC or both.

 Mark room is just another type of room is it not?.

Mark-room includes room to do the things listed in its definition.
Room is the space a boat needs [to do certain things] and includes space to maneuver and adds to that the space needed for a boat to comply with other obligations under Part 2 and Rule 31.

Created: 20-Feb-12 13:52
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Bob .. I just had a thought.  Let me try this out with you (this is a new way of describing how I think about it, so maybe it falls apart).

Words are important.  The words we use to describe things shapes how we think and categorize those things.

You've been consistent with using phrases with the effect of .. "Green gave her room freely" .. or variations on that.

I think using the terms "give" or "gave" puts an undo element of 'surrender' around our thinking.  If one gives something, someone else receives that thing and that thing now belongs to the receiver.

Instead of thinking of Green "giving her room freely", try thinking of it as Green 'not using her room at that moment'.

OK .. 

Say I've got $100 in $20's sitting on the table that I'm going to use to pay my bills that night.  We are roommates and you are home at 6pm and I'll be back at 8pm.  You need cash right now to pay for the pizza your ordered and the delivery man is knocking on the door.  You use $20 of my $100, buy your pizza and later go to the corner get $20 out of the ATM and put it back before I get home.

Did I give you that $20 freely?  No.  It was my money and you used some of it and put it back so that when I needed to pay my bills it was there.

If you went down to the ATM and it was broken, then you try another one and it's out of money and then I can't pay my bills, you are in trouble.  You use my $20, money that was not yours, at your own risk.

PS .. look closely at Case  12.  The OL boat tries to give the IW boat room when IW  turns to around the mar, but OL has put herself in that room and in a position that she can no longer provide it.  In Case 12's example, OL needed to provide IW the space to sail into.
Created: 20-Feb-12 14:42
Bob Lewis
Nationality: Canada
0
Ang,

Thankyou for your thoughtful comments.  I think we are having slight misunderstandings mostly over words and language as you suggest.  Probably this type of discussion needs to be over coffee.

About “gave room freely” – I’m happy to swap in “not using her room at the moment”.  Green certainly wasn’t really giving anything.  I was really trying to create a short phrase for “satisfied the conditions of Case 63, that you quoted”.

Can I ask one last question?

You said, “at each moment that Red sails further into the zone, the corridor to the mark follows Green.  At #3, the corridor extends to either side of Green”. I thought the corridor was fixed when mark room was first established.  In case 75 they discuss the Starboard right of way boat with mark room saying “because S had right of way, she was not required to remain within that corridor; she was permitted to sail any course provided that she complied with rules 16.1 and 18.4.”  Does that not imply the corridor does not follow the boat?  How can you sail out of the corridor if it moves with you?  

Created: 20-Feb-14 00:20
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Bob, I am really liking these questions as they are challenging me to rethink through my understanding and think of new ways of explaining it (to myself especially).

Again, my normal caveat, this is how I see it currently.  I'm open to correction and open to learning.

I'm glad you reference Case 75, because that is an important data point and it is different from our scenario in a few important ways.  

In Case 75, .. 
  1. the Inside boat is the ROW boat.  The Outside boat is the keep-clear boat providing mark-room.
  2. Rule 18.4 applies to Inside-ROW as she must gybe to sail her proper course
    1. in our scenario, 18.4 does not apply to Green as she is not ROW before she gybes.
  3. Outside-KeepClear provides Inside-ROW the corridor, and Outside does not sail into that corridor
  4. Inside-ROW is not restricted to the corridor, but is restricted by 18.4 and 16 when outside of the corridor until she gybes
    1. Inside-ROW can not sail beyond her proper course before her gybe (18.4)
    2. after she gybes, she becomes Inside-KeepClear under rule 11.
    3. Inside-ROW, once outside that corridor, needs to give Outside room to keep-clear as she changes course as is sailing outside of the mark-room she is entitled to, but is sailing within her rights as a ROW boat.

OK, back to our scenario and 'The Story of the Traveling Corridor' ...

As long as 18.2(b) applies between Red and Green .. " .the outside boat [Red]  at that moment shall thereafter give the inside boat [Green] mark-room. ".  In Case 75, Outside never sails into that corridor of mark-room.  In our scenario, at #2 Red has sailed into that space.  At #2, 18.2(b) still applies between the boats.  What is mark-room at #2 for Green?  IMO, it is the space from #2 to sail to the mark and pass it on its correct side.  At #2, that is a corridor from #2.

At position #3, now Green is Inside-ROW, but 18.2(b) has applied uninterrupted between the boats.  Red has sailed into the corridor from #2 (again, opposite from Case 75).  Red owes Green mark-room, which is the space to sail to the mark and pass it on its correct side.  At #3, that is a corridor from #3.

Had Red gybed at #1.5 and sailed to starboard of the RC leaving 3/4BL between her and the RC, that mark-room corridor would have been sufficient space for Green to sail to the mark and pass it on its correct side.   In that case, there would be no need to reset the corridor as Red would have never encroached upon it [as it is in Case 75].  

The original corridor would have been given and sufficient.

[added ... Also, after Green gybes she become ROW and 18.4 will not apply to her because it won’t be Green’s proper course to gybe again to finish.  Green will be exonerated for breaking 15 during her gybe and 16 after her gybe, but only as long as she remains within the mark-room she is entitled to.   Therefore if Red had provided the corridor at #1.5 and Green gybed and used her rule 11 ROW to take more room than that, Green would not be exonerated if she breaks 16.1 while doing so. ]

Created: 20-Feb-14 15:06
John Christman
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • National Umpire
  • Regional Race Officer
0
There has been a lot of discussion about the corridor which is simply a concept used to explain how the rules work.  The thing to remember is that having mark room, i.e. the 'corridor' to the mark, is really about the ability to "break" the rules listed in RRS 21 and be exonerated if you do.  It's the 'get out of jail free' card for the inside boat to sail directly to the mark from where ever they are at that instant in time even if they are not ROW.  There is no rule that restricts the inside boat to actually sailing in the corridor.  Even RRS 18.4 does not restrict you to sailing in the corridor, it just describes a line you can't cross i.e. the layline while sailing your proper course which may or may not be straight at the mark.  If the inside boat is ROW then they can still do all the things an ROW boat in that position can do as long as they don't break any ROW restrictions (RRS 15-17, 18.4).
Created: 20-Feb-14 17:57
Bob Lewis
Nationality: Canada
0
Ang, 

First let me confirm that I think “the corridor” is just a term used in case 75 as short hand for the much longer phrase they use “the space S needed in the existing conditions to sail promptly to the mark in a seamanlike way. That space was a direct corridor from S1 to a position close to and alongside the mark on the required side”.

I agree with John C. that this is only relevant to the availability of exoneration under rule 21 as the only result of having mark room is that it allows you, under certain conditions, to break rules of section A, 15 16 and 31, if compelled.

I agree there are significant difference in our scenario and Case 75.  But the question is which differences are relevant and do they distinguish our scenario from the case such that the case principal does not apply.

It could be that the corridor moves in some scenarios and not in others.

I believe first we need to decide whether in Case 75, the corridor moves with the boat that has the right to room which is S in the case.  Here is the diagram.

image.png 46.8 KB



We need to consider say position S1.8, where S has sailed out of the original corridor and is not yet “at the mark”.  The key question is, does the case stand for the principal, “Under these facts, the corridor does not move with S when it moves out of the original corridor from S1”?

It seems to me that it does imply that and that is why S must be careful not to break 16.1 when outside the original corridor.  If the corridor moved with S then 16.1 would not be a worry and S could rely on mark room. Also, if the corridor could move and follow S, in this case, then why did the case say S left the corridor?  

If we can agree on that, then it’s worth going on to see if our scenario has special facts, that distinguish it and make my suggested principal not applicable.

Created: 20-Feb-14 19:46
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
I agree with John C and his is consistent with my position #1.5, #2, #3 step by step discussion above.  The “corridor” is just shorthand for “space to sail to the mark to pass on the proper side.

In Case 75 at position 1.8, that space has been provided by Outside-Port. If the inside boat was also on port, Outside would have provided sufficient room, though not enough to sail a tactical rounding (see US 20 below). 

In Case 75, because Inside is also ROW, she is not limited by the minimum mark-room Outside gives her. In Case 75 she can sail outside the mark-room but when she does she is limited by 18.4 to not sail beyond her proper course and 16 to give Outside room to keep clear.

Also see Case 70 and US Appeal 20. US20 is a corollary to Case 75.  Taken together they paint the picture.

The main point and difference between our situation and Case 75 is that in our scenario the boat owing mark-room did not leave it open to the boat entitled to it,  therefore the space needed changes over time. In Case 70, 75 and US20 Outside left that space needed open for Inside and the inside boats sailed outside of it.


Created: 20-Feb-14 21:09
Bob Lewis
Nationality: Canada
0
OK, so if the give room boat is not sailing within the room it needs to give (unlike our scenario), then we apply Case 75 and US appeal 20 and conclude that the corridor does not follow the boat with mark room when it sails wide because if it did, then in Case 75 the inside ROW boat would not have needed to comply with 16.1 and in US Appeal 20 the corridor does not follow the boat with mark room when it sails wide because if it did, then she would have been exonerated by rule 21.

In our scenario, it is fundamentally different in that the give room boat sails into the mark room space of the boat with mark room and appears to deny that space to the boat with mark room.  In that case the corridor moves with the boat with mark room and she can break section 2 rules and 15 and 16 with impunity.

Now are we agreeing?
Created: 20-Feb-14 22:25
P
Angelo Guarino
Nationality: United States of America
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
  • Fleet Measurer
0
Yea, I think one can think of it that way. At the moment I can’t think of a scenario where that falls apart. 

It trips me up too, but it’s “Section A of Part 2” not “Section 2”.  Also, though I’m guilty of this often myself, try to use the words in the rules. So toss “impunity” and use “shall be exonerated”. Impunity may carry other unintended connotations.
Created: 20-Feb-14 22:42
Bob Lewis
Nationality: Canada
0
Thanks Ang, and apologies for the lazy and erroneous last sentence.
Created: 20-Feb-15 01:38
[You must be signed in to add a comment]
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more