"Luffing rights" (a term I dislike) are controlled by rule 17. It says "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..."

Here is where the lee-bow part of the story becomes important. While the boats were beating to windward on opposite tacks, they were not overlapped (see the definition of overlap). When the port boat passed head-to-wind, she was either ahead of or overlapped with the starboard boat. The pivotal point is that boat I (inside) did not establish overlap with boat O (outside) from clear astern. Therefore, rule 17 does not apply and Boat I may sail abover her proper course.

In short, as long as she gives boat O room to keep clear (see rule 16.1), Boat I may luff up to head-to-wind at any time. She could have done so before or after reaching the zone. It's a legitimate tactic to persuade the windward boat to tack away.

I hoope that helps,
Eric

It does - thank you.

So.... does anybody have any secret on how to do this move in a cat...
the luff going head to wind must be slow enough to give the boat on your hip time to respond... but.. I usually stall out... meanwhile... the other boat is prepared to tack and just tacks smoothly and walks away..

In catamarans in light air, it's much better to overstand slightly than to short tack at the mark. So - don't get into this position. Port tack boat ducks stbd's stern, goes a boatlength or two, then tacks. Now they're on stbd's hip and in a controlling position.

If you end up in that position, the last thing you want to do is stall out. Slow down, let the weather boat roll you, then tack.

In catamarans, it's almost impossible to force someone on your hip to tack - as long as your boatspeed / pointing angle is comparable. Obviously, if you can point higher (and still keep up speed), then point until they get sucked into your bad air. But that takes a while.

This has gotten long and perhaps someone has suggested this idea....

Just cross his bow and burn him.

Go back to your original story - you are on port but can't clear the starboard boat without "fouling" him. Why not go ahead and cross his bow? You hold your course for the time it takes for him to make the protest and you sail on long enough to get back to windward of the layline. Now do your 360 penalty turn (very quick in a monohull) above the layline.

This seems faster than what you did, "We had to bear away, gybe, come back to close hauled, run for a short bit on port, and then tack back for A (naturally, after letting some traffic by that was coming in on starboard)."

Better yet, since you're right at the mark anyway, tack back onto starboard and wait until after you clear the mark to do your turn. If you wait until you round the mark (as lead boat) before doing your penalty turn you could sail above the mark and do you're turn in clear air, clear of traffic, and you'll foul the air of any traffic as they round and head down and try to launch spins. However, since you were first around the mark you might only lose the one place to the boat you fouled as you do your 360.

Sure, my way is a foul but my way took FAR less time than yours. Racing is to win, not to lose. Doing a penalty turn is playing by the rules, too. Saying you're sorry is better than saying congratulations.

OK, my flame suit on.

I suppose, it isn't what I would do.

David, I'm sure one of the judges will reply shortly, but I can think of at least 3 rules you break with that mindset. Rule 2 is one of them.

Since you're wearing the flame suit... I hope you travel with a lot of rum, although it is unlikely you'd have anyone wanting to hang out and drink it with you if this is your normal approach to racing.

Mike

Not long ago we had a boat destroyed because of that mentality.

The port tacker refused to give way, the starboard tacker hit him. Port was dsq'd starboard was written off as a total loss.

Interesting thought - but that direct approach crosses an ethical line that I prefer not to cross for good sportsmanship...i.e., knowingly foul the other boat. However, if I'm looking at that again and I'm 50/50 on whether or not we can make it, I might just weigh the consequences resulting from each option a little harder.

Also keep in mind, the penalty turn in monohulls is usually a 720 degree turn.

Take another look at rule 44.1, "Taking a Penalty", specifically rule 44.1(b), which says "if the boat... despite taking a penalty, gained a significant advantage in the race or series by her breach her penalty shall be to retire". If the advantage you get by breaking rule 10 "On Opposite Tacks" is insignificant, why do it? If it is significant, then the turns don't exonerate you - you must retire.

Also, reread rule 44.2 "One-Turn and Two-Turns Penalties". It starts "After getting well clear of other boats as soon after the incident as possible...". You cannot wait until it is convenient to take a one or two-turn penalty. You must do it right away.

And, Jake is right, the penalty for a breach of a rule of Part 2 "When Boats Meet" is usually two turns, not one. It may be customary for the SI's to change this penalty to one turn for catamarans, but if they don't, even cats must do two.

I hope that helps,
Eric

Thanks Eric. 44.1 and 44.2 were the ones I was also thinking of, for those exact reasons.

While rule 10 is obvious, I often go right to 44.1, 44.2 and 2 when people describe these workarounds for putting themselves into such "tactically challenged" positions.

The blood really boils when the excuse is: "I would have had to duck the whole fleet!" Yes, because you chose to put yourself there...

Keep in mind, I love coming in on suicide port. I just don't whine, or especially intentionally foul others, when it doesn't work out.

Mike

Jake was 50-50 whether he could make it. With only fleeting seconds to decide he considered whether he could make it at all. If he had a little more time (which he probably did not) he might have gone a step further and weighed the consequences of crossing Starboard's bow and failing. My contention was that it was worth the risk. The failed attempt left him in a better condition than tacking away, jibing, ducking the fleet, and sucking hind tit.

What if he crossed and crossed cleanly? He'd be in first, justifying the risk cuz that's how God planned it all along! Risk and reward. Sail fast, take chances, safety third. Nice guys finish last. Second place is "first loser". Racing has lots of such sayings that I did not originate. Watch NASCAR. Do you see any nice guys out there winning races? "Excuse me, ma'am, why don't you go on in front of me?" I don't think so. Winners make hard decisions to win, you all know that.

I thought it's 720 only if you make contact. I never suggested risking contact, only that if you're at 50-50 you should roll the dice to get the clean cross but plan for a negative outcome. Winners want the ball and go for it every chance they get. No matter how it comes out, aggressive intimidation wears down the opposition.

Clearly, you don't get it.

Read the rules again. This isn't NASCAR.

Colorful metaphors aside, if you're in the position of ducking the whole fleet coming across on starboard, it's because they followed the rules, planned and sailed better than you to get there.

A 50/50 chance to cross the lead starboard boat in a pack of 10 means you're in 11th place.

It's not about being nice, it's about following the rules.

Mike

Dave,
What wild hair got up your A$$? I know you better than this so I have to assume you are being sarcastic.
Jeff

If you're not sure whether or not you can cross, then clearly you ARE risking contact.




Might be an acceptable tactic for someone persuing an olympic career or a go at the Americas Cup. For the majority of us who like to actually socialize with or at the very least, remain on amicable terms with our competitors after a race, probably not a very good approach. Either way, I hope you carry decent insurance if you plan to race with this mindset.

sm

Actually No.... the insurance is NOT an adequate justification. Insurance covers his dumb a%% for mistakes and accidents. Willful disregard for the col regs gets the police involved.

As for the sport...
The damage this attitude does to the sport and all of the other competitors on the course is NOT covered by HIS insurance premium or his registration fee. I don't care whether he covers his financial butt with insurance. This is just a cop out... (you take insurance to cover YOUR butt... not the guy you foul)

The prescriptions that we all agree to when we register demand that you are RESPONSIBLE... The game is self policed.
There is no mention of insurance or liability.. JUST responsibility ...

If his actions on the water come close to matching his words.... he should be disciplined by the sport (US Sailing)

His insurance company would have reason to deny coverage and make him take them to court to get his liability and property covered.

The victim's insurance company has no reason to cut a deal... and he has given all personal injury lawyers a free shot at his assets and probably drag the host YC into the fiasco as well.

Not having a clue who this guy is... I hope that he was trying to make a point and his attempt at "sarcasm" as orphan notes just failed.

Wait wait wait...hold on a minute. There are a lot of variables and a lot of unknowns. You don't go into every crossing with 100% certainty that you will make it but you have to weigh consequences of making it or not - is it windy? Is there a chance I could not only foul the guy but cause damage? Am I 90% that I'll make it or am I 30% sure I'll make it? If it weren't for these kinds of decisions, racing wouldn't be exciting.

In the situation I site, we probably would have crossed the guy clean but there was some doubt if we would make it clean - it's not like I would aim at his mast and not deviate course.

Now, that said, it is wrong to approach this situation with certainty that you cannot clear the cross no matter what the variables are. It is, however, OK to approach the situations and weigh the risk/reward and decide to try for the cross even if you are only 70% sure you'll make it.

Do you really think 70% is acceptable? Sailing is not a contact sport(OK college sailing may be, but not for the rest of us). To me the only acceptable time to cross is if you know you can make it. The risk is not to your boat but the boat you are crossing. Personnaly I would like to see the rules changed to an auto DSQ(without the option to use it as a throwout) if there is contact and you are at fault. If damage to the other boat a possible regatta DSQ. Lets get back to sailing skills not sailing risks.

Per RRS 41.1(b), "if the boat caused injury or serious damage... her penalty shall be to retire". Therefore, if a boat breaks a rule and somone gets injured or a boat sustains serious damage, then either she retires, or gets disqualified by protest committee (assuming a protest).

If a boat wilfully breaks a rule, then she break rule 2 "Fair Sailing". Per RRS 2 "a disqualification under this rule shall not be excluded from the boat's series score.

If a competitor commits a gross breach of a rule, or sets out ahead of time to break a rule, then that (in my opinion) constitutes "gross misconduct" (see RRS 69.1(a)). The penalty may be (per RRS 69.2(c)(2)) "...excluding the competitor and, when appropriate, disqualifying a boat from a race or the remaining races or all races of the series..."

So, the rules already have a sliding scale of penalties for rule infractions without contact (or with contact but no injury nor significant damage), infractions with injury or serious damage, infractions with bad sportsmanship, and incidents of gross misconduct.

I hope that helps,
Eric

70% acceptable? It depends on a lot of variables but in this case, probably.

But! I'm not talking about 70% might make it vs. 30% chance that I'm going to get hit/creamed. I'm talking about a 30% chance that he may have to maneuver to avoid me....besides, we were moving at the speed of mucus in this scenario.