Simplifying the RRS -> Hello anarchy, or?

Gurra Krantz proposes to toss the RRS and go on with just one rule. If you hit another boat, you are both out.

They are going to test this in Stockholm, and evaluate wether this concept works and eventually what rules are absolutely needed.

They are also going to experiment with courses, to make boat handling more critical than top speed.

What do you think. Is it a good idea to toss todays rules out the windows and start with white pages? I actually think it might work, and would be pleased to see todays ruleset with their accompanying cases go out. You need to be an international jugde to be on top of all the rules and their interpretations. This creates more trouble than good on the course and within the sport in my opinion.

Ref: http://rrsstudy.blogspot.com/2008/10/no-rules.html

So, if I'm sailing in the back and still have my discard I can take out the champ as he crosses me on his downwind leg and get a case of beer from the guys formerly in second place?

they are getting too complicated but ditching the basics for one rule isn't going to work...see example above

apparently the new rules allow you to run into a capsized boat and IT gets penalised in teams racing...?
http://livesaildie.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1232

K.I.S.S.
- avoid collisions
- port/stbd
- windward/leeward
- ahead/astern
- inside overlaps at marks

The problem is that in an avoidence situation, now that both boats are burdened with the "avoid the other" you have no idea what the other boat may or may not do. At least with the RRS, you can anticipate "who" is going to change course based on who has right of way.

I go "huh, why did they do that" at least once at every regatta. Often a total surprise as they did not choose the logical option. The worst crashes I have seen have been when somebody trusted the other boat to do the right thing. Knowing you will be tossed if there is contact will make you more careful I believe.


If we accept that going to the room with the jury is an even gamble, then what would be different except that your odds is even worse under the proposed rules?
I think you could do the same Dennis proposes under the current rules with a reasonable chance of success.

If you think racing is crazy now then try those rules. What would that do to insurance claims. We were both wrong but he was down on port and i was up on starboard but the protest committee says 50/50 fault. Hello rate hikes
.

One thing you could try is feed all the required constraints into an "expert system" and have the software optimize the required rules. You might get some surprising results. Don't have an expert system handy at the moment, but I have a gut feeling (based on my experience with one such system $65K+) one could be coaxed into getting some very sensible results.