Is it working ?

Wouter

It would appear to me it is NOT working. A guy holes a boat and takes another sailor out of a World Championship. Did the culture or the justice in the sand have the wrongdoer offer up his boat as a replacement? "I screwed you up and I feel bad. Here, use my boat for the rest of the regatta." Doesn't sound like it.

Here in the Northwest while PU was sailing, the H-17 class had the same 'culture'. No protests. It was cool for the first year or so. But gradually the mentality moved to "Hey, he won't protest me, so I think I will push the limits on this situation."

Now, ten years later, protests are back in. That is because the racing got so out of hand regarding understanding and applying the rules on the water that the sailors were forced back into protesting. We still have 'issues' and 'people' we are trying to clean up.

It reminds me of my friend back in the 80's. He and his wife had an 'open relationship' -- each was free to see other people. It worked great for the first few years because neither of them were interested in seeing anyone else. Then one of them tried out their 'open relationship', and soon they were divorced! True story.

My attitude is: no harm, no foul. But if you cost me places, then prepare to do a circle or go to a protest. And if you hole my boat, you can be absolutely sure there will be a protest because my insurance oompany won't pay without one!

Protests, I believe, when used discriminately, have a place in our sport. To say otherwise does an injustice to the system and sport, based on my experiences.

What we NEED to work on instead of eliminating protests, is to re-program the perception that protests are a hateful personal thing. It just doesn't need to be that way all the time.

Our local area used to constantly advise sailors that the RC doesn't want to see any protests. It took several years, but that has changed to "if you are involved in an incident and in the wrong, please be a good sport and do your turn. If we need to have a protest hearing, let's keep it gentlemanly".

I am personally am not really a fan of protests and prefer the peer pressure system, which I agree does not alway work as well as it could. All too often people rounding a leeward mark plough into the mark with zero planning and no rights on a wing and a prayer hoping it will all be ok, when it isn't they need to be told there and then to do a penalty and have a witness or be protested out of the race. That has worked the few times that I have tried it. The same goes for the ones who cut the corner and touch the mark with the tiller extention and think its ok, they need to be told do the turn or you are out. Its up to all of us on the water to lean on the offenders and make it not worth their while to be cheeky or clueless.

Daniel

Perhaps it is a "Worlds" thing. The Laser Masters, the gentlemanly older guys, 'push the rules' significatnly in a North Americans or Worlds; The Flying Dutchman Worlds have had some head-shaking disregard for the rules.

These guys are entitled to race any way they want, and that includes whether or not they choose to protest one another. I don't personally agree with it, but I'm not racing with them.

On the other hand, I'm having trouble coming to grips with their willingness to limit the lack of protests against other sailors, but their complete acceptance to run to the room to request redress against the RC.

OK, maybe they weren't ALL in favor of that, but did they file protests after redress was granted???

Not to go off on a huge tangent, but at this event, there seem to have been plenty of examples of things one would not want to see hit the sailing media while we're trying to make our case to have multihulls reinstated at the Olympics. Some of these are already on Scuttlebutt (whether you like it or not, that gets a HUGE audience).

I'm sure there were TONS of other GREAT things that happened, but WOW there were some doosies...

Mike

Interesting post from another site: An example of how bad it can get...

The following took place at the Laser Pacific Coast Championship, held July 22-23, 2006 at Cabrillo Beach Yacht Club in San Pedro, CA:


July 25, 2006

Reese Lane NJ
Jury Chairman
Laser Pacific Coast Championship

Re: Protest #1, Sail # 164380 Protestor / Sail # 180081 Protestee


The following are the Facts Found by the jury:

1. 180081on port tack and 164380 on starboard tack were sailing downwind within two boat lengths of mark 3s overlapped.

2. Mark Identified as 3s was not a mark of the course.

3. 164380 was inside boat to 180081 to 3s

4. 180081 gybed to port , 164380 responded and was able to keep clear.

5. 180081 continued to head up only to abruptly stop and bare away sharply, resulting in contact with 164380 which broke 164380’s tiller extension.

6. 164380 immediately hailed protest.

7. 180081 gybed away towards mark 3p.

8. 164380 tacked around 3s and proceeded to round mark 3p.

9. 164380 again hailed protest at mark 4 when 180081 had not done penalty turns.

10. 180081 rounded mark 4 just ahead of 164380.

11. After mark 4, there was yelling between the skippers. The skipper of 180081 yelled, “ If you (164380) don’t shut up I’m going to beat your butt”.

12. The skipper of 164380 called the skipper of 180081 a “big idiot”.

13. The boats split tacks and came together at the finish line with both boats finishing on port tack, 164380 finished ahead of 180081.

14. Shortly after finishing 180081 tacked to starboard and rammed 164380.

15. The skipper of 180081 pulled the boats together side by side and said to 164380 “ didn’t I tell you I was going to beat your butt”.

16. 180081’s skipper got halfway out of his boat and boarded 164380 and started to grab and punch the skipper of 164380, not once but at least twice.

17. The skipper of 164380 asked “What the [censored] are you (180081) are doing”

18. The skipper of 180081 answered as he again attempted to punch the skipper of 164380 with an overhead punch “ Don’t you know who I am, you’ve [censored] up my regatta”

19. The skipper of 164380 only put his arms up to defend himself and made no aggressive moves in response to the attack.

20. The boats separated, 164380 reported to the Race Committee of his intent to protest.


Conclusions and Rules That Apply
Rules that apply: 2, 10, 13, 14(b), 15, 16.1, and Gross Misconduct that requires a RRS 69 hearing.

Decision
Boat 180081 is penalized as follows: DNE for race #4. It is also decided that the complete protest, facts found and accompanying documentation be referred to US Sailing for further action on the RRS 69 hearing.

Note 1: 180081’s skipper did not attend original protest meeting on Sunday, July 23, 2006, He was notified of the protest hearing in the club parking lot by Mark Specter, the Protestor, that he was being protested but left the premises before the scheduled hearing.

Note 2: 180081’s skipper (Brodie Cobb) was notified in writing on Sunday evening, July 23, 2006 of the alleged misconduct and of the time and place of the scheduled RRS 69 hearing to be held on Monday, July 24, 2006. The RRS 69 notification letter was hand delivered to Cobb’s local address where the protest committee had been told he was staying. This notification included a copy of the original protest and the RRS 69 hearing notification letter.

Note 3: 180081’s skipper (Brodie Cobb) had a second copy of the RRS 69 notification hearing letter hand delivered to him by the jury chairman just before he left the dock to go racing Monday morning, July 24, 2006. The jury chairman was told that Cobb left the venue sometime after launching his boat. Cobb left a letter at Cabrillo Beach Yacht Club addressed to the jury foreman declining to appear at the scheduled hearing due to “business commitments.”

Note 4: Because of 180081 skipper’s (Brodie Cobb) decision not to appear at either the original protest hearing or the RRS 69 hearing, the jury decided to hear the adjourned valid protest to determine the Facts involved in the incident when all the other parties and witnesses (other than Mr. Cobb) to the incident were available.

Note 5: The protest hearing was tape recorded by two recording devices. A Wave copy of the July 24, 2006 protest hearing testimony will be sent to U S Sailing.

Note 6: The Jury, after hearing the testimony from the protestor and three witnesses, decided to report the incident to US Sailing with a strong recommendation for further RRS 69 or Article 14 action. Copies of the cover letter with a copy of the original protest, the facts found, and the Conclusions and Rules That Apply are sent to:

a. Executive Director, U S Sailing
b. Executive Director, North American Laser Association (Co - OA).
c. Commodore, St. Francis Yacht Club.
d. Commodore, Cabrillo Beach Yacht Club. (Co – OA)
e. Mark Spector
f. Brodie Cobb

Everyone is different. Some people are 'corinthian', some are not. The rules and the protest process make sure EVERYONE plays on the same, level playing field no matter what their modus operandi may be.

I believe that if you say 'no protests', then: 1) it does not put any pressure on the sailors to study and learn the rules and get better that way, and; 2) opens the door to what other rules can be disregarded. I mean, if you are going to throw out the rules about protesting, why not throw out the rules for ooching, pumping, etc.? Where do you stop? Like I said, everyone is different. The rules are there for a reason.

And Jake is right, we need to make protests more amenable and less of a fight. The protest committee can go a long way there by addressing the issue from the outset of the hearing, and repeating that theme througout the proceeding.

I like what Stuart Walker wrote in his wonderful book 'The Tactics of Small Boat Racing', in which he states;

"Take away the risk of disqualification, (and) replace it with a 30% penalty, a slap on the wrist, or a polite ignoring of the incident, and you take away the race; you change it from an all demanding, head-on, toe-to-toe, no quarter given or asked battle to victory or defeat, into a dull, compromising parody of "after you, Pier.""

The fact that, as I read this now after ** years, it sounds a bit 'old fashioned', speaks volumes to the slackening of attitudes toward discipline in recent times IMHO. But then I'm probably just a bit too 'old school' in most people's eyes <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Bern - I'm right with you. Not sure how I came up "old fashioned," but it is currently being explained to me that I live in California now, and it is about getting boats on the line, not about silly rules like corrector weight for light crews... or using the correct-size sails. Guess I'm a fish out of water. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

For something like a Worlds, a referee at the marks would not be to hard to do?

Where exactly do you see referee in the ISAF sailing rules??

And if we as cat sailors took the initiative, we'd demand more respect for being ahead of the game in many areas of OTB sailing. Currently, we are seen as being somewhat basic in our attitudes.

Wouldn't hurt us to improve our image some IMHO.

Berny

P.S. I wonder if 'anybody' is listening <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Before you guys get too worked up, the person who holed Steve was scored a DNF - 99 on race 6 on Thursday.

Is that because he withdrew himself?

The only way to be scored DNF (per the RRS) is to actually not finish the race = he withdrew before finishing. No one can force him to do that. If stipulated in the SIs, he could be scored DNF if he received assistance. If he withdrew after finishing, that would be RAF. Of course, this is assuming nothing weird happened...

On-water judging is most common for Olympics, usually they're looking for kinetics, but they also monitor mark roundings, etc. It's important to note that in fleet racing (especially with lots of fast boats at a gate), it's much harder to position the jury boat to be able to see all points where contact could be made, to definitively confirm overlap, etc. There are other pros and cons to on-water jury.

Mike

I just returned last month from the Hobie 16 Worlds in Fiji. We had an on-the-water judge who would race up and down the course so he could be at both the weather mark and leeward gate. Having "the eye" watching made a large, but subtle difference, I think.

I fouled everyone and everything on every race at that friggin' gate (or so it seemed). I would have done my turns without the judge there, but after each infraction I thought about him being there. I think having someone on the water -- even if they don't see it -- will help to keep the dishonest ones more honest. Even though the judge may not see the infraction, the sailor doesn't necessarily know it!

Side note: We came into the gate in one race in 3rd and, yep, fouled a guy coming out. I went about 10 boat lengths before peeling off and doing my circle. Came back and was able to finish 3rd in the race (amazingly!).

Afterwards, the judge approached me and after a few tense moments (on my part), told me he wasn't going to press the issue, but that I did my penalty too late! I knew I had pushed the envelope. I didn't want to do a down speed circle, so I waited to get my speed up before peeling off. But I was really surprised he approached me about it. It wasn't like I waited 1/2 a leg before doing it!

In another "gate" incident I managed to screw up, I fouled a fellow American competitor. He asked for a 'circle' (as opposed to saying 'protest'.) Even though I didn't cost him any places, I knew I was wrong, and did the turn.

I believe doing the penalties makes me a better sailor. I will remember the pain of that penalty -- and what I need to do to avoid another one -- next time that situation occurs. It also builds character, which is way under-rated in this society in my opinion.

Folks, once again spin is ruling. If you weren't there, don't take sides at the expense of other people.

With all due respect to Steve Clark, from my perspective as a competitor it appears Steve could have been wrong and there are always two sides to an incident. The incident happened at a leeward gate and the mark was the left mark looking downwind. The boat that hit Steve was approaching the mark on starboard tack and was preparing to jibe and leave the mark to port. Steve "closed the door" on him leaving him no where to go and the collision was the result. If Steve had the right of way, he should have steered down if possible, let the other boat in, and then protested. But many competitors in the event feel that the other boat probably had the overlap with lots of time to spare. I don't know what was said on the water after the incident, but the other competitor withdrew from the race and was upset about it.

There was another incident in the same race where a competitor tacked in front of Steve (who was on starboard) and unfortunately Steve capsized avoiding a collision. Steve felt the other sailor tacked too close, the other sailor felt he was clear. Once again, Steve should have protested if he felt the other sailor was wrong.

Steve, you had a bad day with some bad luck. Stuff happens and we're bummed it got the best of you. But you did have the option to protest in each incident and take it to a protest committee and you chose not to. It's not fair to criticize the rest of the fleet if you chose to not pursue the justice you felt you were due. I hope you get your boat back together and are back on the race course soon.

I completely disagree with comments made about the lack of understanding of the RRS in this fleet. I was in the cheap seats plenty of times and rounded marks and gates with a lot of boats. I was quite impressed with the way the sailors handled themselves around the marks. Sure there were those who "pushed" but at the end of the day there were no damaged boats on the beach so we must have been doing something right.

Regarding the OCS redress incident earlier in the week, the fact was a competitor felt the RC did not react soon enough with an IR and requested redress for his OCS score. The RRS ALLOW YOU TO DO THAT. The facts found by the international jury were the RC made a mistake that affected this sailor and they awarded a redress score as they saw fit. Nothing less, nothing more. I'm sure the members of the RC may not agree with the actions of the jury but that is the system our sport has and to criticize the competitor or put labels on him for pursuing this action is simply wrong.

The regatta was a fantastic success. Congrats to all of the competitors, the race committee, the jury, and especially the organzing committe.

Bob Hodges
USA 230

I'm with Bob. Even just sitting at my computer it was clear this was an amazing regatta. Yes there were a couple unfortunate incidents, there usually are. This was clearly a first class event. Great venue, great organization, and what a battle for the championship. It just doesn’t get better than that. Congrats to all involved.

GRRRRRrrrrrrrr.