Is a protest in this situation even winable on either side? How do you prove the windward boat didn't react enough to keep clear once overlap was established and how do you prove leeward didn't give room and opportunity if there is contact, and let's assume the contact was at the bows and there are no witnesses.
Mike is correct in pointing out that the outcome will depend heavily on how the testimony is given and the makeup of the protest committee.
Ultimately, the PC will determine the facts of the incident and those facts will drive the decision. When presenting the case, it behooves one to be calm, direct, and give hard physical data. How far apart were the boats? How fast were the boats going? How many seconds were they overlapped? How many degrees over what time did one change course? Give solid estimates and be prepared to back them up. Remember that the jury can calculate speeds and distances to validate their consistency.
Inexperienced protest committies tend to side with the boat that has right-of-way. International juries know the game so well that they cut to the decision almost instinctively. In between, different people will weight testimony in different ways. I know one very experienced judge who gives more credence to the person who has a better view of the incident. If one person tells a consistent story and another's has contradictions, I tend to believe the first. Sometimes, a witness just rubs the jury the wrong way and they don't believe him at all.
So, my advice is to be polite and unemotional. Give the protest committee good solid facts that hold up under scrutiny and lead the jury to see the incident as you do.
Oh, and it's better to avoid contact. That way, even if the PC rejects your facts, they won't have something to penalize you for.
I hope that helps,
Eric
