Steeplechase Video: Day 1 Start Collision

Well everyone has been waiting for it, I was hoping everything would calm down by the time I got it posted but the rhetoric just keeps escalating.

Keep in mind that there was no intent on causing damage and it was a racing incident that happened quickly in close quarters. Of course blame can be assigned but there was no intent on causing damage or trying to take out the other boat.

Saturday night we had a closed session viewing of the raw footage with both teams at Steve Lohmayer's party. The responsible person admitted mistake, apologized and they all shook hands.

I really hope we can keep the discussion civil and focus on the lessons to be learned. You can view the video on:
www.SailSeries.com

Karl needs that spin pole

I think you are missing the point...

You undermine the game of sailboat racing when you half butt the final result. Somebody should be DSQ'd or RAF'd... DNF is not correct.

I am sorry, I take responsibility and I am liable is outstanding... But, you still have to complete the process of the game.... it's what you agreed to when you entered the race.

Good lord...you're on a roll!

Great video Craig.

No doubt. The onboard from his pole cam showed some scary stuff , on the pole and on the water.

You are missing the point. I was shooting video, not race committee. I had to put a major project aside to get this done so you could try to slam me.

Sorry, Comments are not directed at you per se...

The general attitude that F up's get handled by some justice on the beach is just complete BS!

I just spoke with Riccardi and it sounds as if Skip doesn't see this as his fault.
Looks to me like it's about as straight forward as you can get. The ARC 22 (Skip) had no rights and bore away into the N-20 (Todd) which was to leeward of him. Is there any possible way this isn't the supercat's fault?

p.s. And by the way Rick, awesome work on the throttles. Evasive maneuvering at it's best. Maybe you've found the subject of your next seminar/book.

Actually it was directed at me...I was the only one that had a post unless you had it aimed at the spin pole joke (which was good by the way).

I was there, I know all that transpired. I was not race committee, I was just letting the sailors involved view the footage in a controlled manner so it would not escalate.

The race is over and there are lessons to be learned here. I am working on another video of the separation incident. Thankfully, that one is about how to do things right.

FYI: That was one quick delete Ding.

I thought I read that "responsibility" had been agreed on.

So... Now what???... No chance to get witness's, cross examine anyone, and have a jury decide on the facts and rule on the RRS.

Without a PC hearing... Skip can legally say that he is NOT avoiding "responsibility" (What he agreed to when he entered the event under the RRS) because the rules violations were not adjudicated.

Classic example of what happens when you make up your own rules...

What purpose is served by the insurance companies screwing both owners and saying pay your own deductibles... we can't sort it out.

AND the racing community knows that all of that word salad that they sign off on ... is just Bull$hit. This is just the wild wild west... "you pays your money... takes your chances."

ABSOLUTELY AWESOME!!

I thought Skip was better than that. After the discussion they had, I can't believe he would try to renig.

A boat that causes major damage MUST retire from racing, its in the RRS. Its plain and simple and to continue racing is violating the RRS, period.

One thing that may have been mentioned but I haven't seen it is insurance. If there is a claim for repairs many times insurance companies require a written report of the incident with fault assigned to one party or the other. Protests serve this purpose and the resultant decision of the protest committee to assign fault makes the decision for the insurance company. Without a protest hearing and protest form, the insurance company can't assign fault, and can't fulfill a claim.

He did renig on Sunday when I tried to talk to him, I too thought he understood how clear it was that he is in the wrong. Please voice your explanation of who is at fault and why

Skip is clearly at fault after carefully reviewing the video. He first cuts Karl off and heads up hard and bounces off of Karl. He then tries to duck hard and get behind Todd unsuccessfully. I thought at first he could argue that Karl pushed him down. That just isn't the case. You can see after he hits Karl he pulls hard on his rudders and accelerates right into Todd. Had he just bounced off Karl and stayed high he would have not hit Todd but would have probably run over the starting mark. Better to hit a starting mark than to hit a boat.

I've been there. I don't fault Skip for continuing. Doubt he knew the extent of the damage and he knew a committee boat was right there to help or tow if needed. Obviously he should have dsq'd himself after he saw the damage. I also understand making a mistake. I don't understand him not taking responsibility. Windward / Leeward. It's not much more basic than that. Todd had no chance to avoid the situation.

Oh yeah, And shame on Karl for trying to jump in there. Nice try but I'd have cut Karl off too. Karl thought better of it and got out of it nice and clean. Karl you barging SOB. :))

Skip goes toward the bow to un-skewer his pole from the N-20's hull. I think he knew the extent of the damage.

Facts Found:
1) Wind was approximately 10-12 kts, light chop.
2) ARC-22 and Nacra 20 were approaching the starting line on starboard tack.
3) ARC-22 established an overlap from astern and to weather of Nacra 20.
4) Approximately 2 seconds after the start, ARC-22 bore away, striking Nacra 20 with her fixed spinnaker pole just aft of Nacra 20's rear cross beam. The spinnaker pole pierced the hull and the boats were locked together for approximately 30 seconds.
5) ARC-20 sailed over the starting pin while the boats were locked together.
5) Nacra 20 sustained significant damage - a hull tear approximately 3 feet long - that forced her to immediately retire.
6) After the boats separated, ARC-22 continued in the race.

Conclusions:
ARC-22 broke rule 11 (windward boat shall keep clear of a leeward boat)
ARC-22 broke rule 14 (avoid a collision)
ARC-22 did not start properly and broke rule 28.1 (string rule) by sailing over the starting pin.

Decision:
ARC-22 is DSQ. Nacra 20 is entitled to redress under 62.1(b)

Karl said he did not make contact. He adjusted his course abruptly to avoid.

+1!

It sure looks and sounds like it in the video, but Karl would be the one that knows.

I had to watch it in slo-mo a couple of times to make sure there hadn't been contact with Karl. I still would not take bets on who would be ruled at fault between Karl and Skip if this went to the room. Blame can be passed up the line.

Jay you are Killing me!

I'm glad I wasn't drinking anything, or I'd need a new keyboard!

Reminds me of the Newkirk/Holmes 10 Commandments of Sailing:

1. Thou shalt not be a barge butt.
2. Thou shalt not overstand the gate with the kite up.
3. Thou shalt not lose sight of which section of the bridge the boat ahead just sailed through.

There are seven others... lemme cogitate.

This is a highly unusual situation, we don't normally have video. And, in more than one instance, I can see testimony that doesn't quite add up to the pictures.

Based solely on the video (no testimony), I agree with Matt's analysis; although saying that ARC (Wave) didn't start correctly assumes that he never corrected before starting (granted, a moot point).

While RRS 44.1(b) requires a boat that has broken a rule to retire if she caused serious damage; there is some leeway, in that Wave may not have thought she broke a rule (and who knows what they were thinking at that point?).

Wave definitely hit Stray Cats (you can see the shock in the pole-mounted camera at 1:25 in the video), AFTER coming up to do so. It was a rather light tap, so Karl may not have been aware of it.

After viewing the video, I don't think Wave has any hope of saying that Stray Cats forced Wave to hit Adrenaline. There was too much room between the Stray Cats and Adrenaline, and Wave did too much maneuvering to be considered innocent. Wave should have sheeted out and stopped after hitting Stray Cats (there was no point at which Wave had a shot of making it across the line without barging).

Mike

Cogitate away... We gotta have this.

Oh, no. None of these are on my list:

1. Have fun.
2. Pointy end up.
3. Don't hurt your crew.

Mike

Yeah, I want to hear these too. Have to say in all the years I've sailed against Kirk he has never barged. Of course, How would I know I'm always at the pin.

I love number three. "Hey Holmes, Which section did they go through?". Probably that one. "NOPE". Bong.

I wish those pics would get re-posted...hint,hint. I lost 'em. That carbon mast faired much better than the sc-22 from this year. Tad is still sailing with it.

I remember Mary pointing out that Newkirk signed his name on the bridge with a carbon fiber pencil (or was that Todd?).

I've never hit a bridge.Yet.

I was talking about the quote....

Always good for a reprise...

There was a great shot from up on the bridge also.


I guess I need to work on my Jakenese.

Hey!

Don't throw me under THAT bus!

Hey stop killing my resale value :-P

After reviewing the play!: The Nacra Infusion and ARC 22 are both barging. The ARC 22 comes up after realizing there is no room above the N20, making contact with the Infusion. (Time to react?) The ARC then bears away and approximately 2 seconds later makes contact with the N20.

I think there is a possibility the Infusion could be at fault being that the ARC tried to come up to avoid contact with N20. In doing so the ARC makes contact with the Infusion, then bears away to avoid further contact.

Also contributing is the fact that it is not a 1 design race, so boats have varying speeds per point of sail. And the start line seems to be set up on a starboard beam reach so the boats cannot slow down by pointing perpendicular to the start line. Therefore boat speeds are pretty high, not allowing much reaction time.

I am new to racing and I want to understand what happened, and what the rules say should have happened. Based on the video given and knowing nothing else but a basic (but far from complete) understanding of the rules, I have some questions/comments.

It looked to me like Stray Cats collided into Team Wave who then, as a direct result of that collision, hit Team Adrenaline.

1) Were there two incidents, or just one? In other words, according to the rules, are both collisions considered separately, or as a single incident?

2) It seems clear that Stray Cats hit Team Wave. Stray Cats was windward and had no rights. Is that correct or am I missing something important?

3) Team Wave did hit Team Adrenaline, but it seems a case could be made that the second collision was a direct result of Stray Cats' failure to keep clear and thus was also Stray Cats' fault.

Based on what little I know of the rules, I expect that Stray Cats was required to retire because of the incident.

Am I making sense, or do I need to review the rules?

Just to clear things up, there was no contact between skip and karl. There was cleary enough room for skip to sail straight and not hit anyone meaning in no way could karl be held responsible for the collision between skip and i. Or he could have rubbed hull against hull with karl doing little to no damage and karl would be at fault. Instead skip overreacted and drastically altered course bearing off trying to make the line rather than bailing like karl and in the process hitting me. Karl in no way forced skip to bear away as I mentioned before there was adequate room for skip to bail without bearing off.
My opinion is skip got flustered (as do the best of us) saw karl coming in hot which wouldn't be shocking in an f18 start, and reacted in fear turning into me.

The video shows skip tapping Karl pretty well.Saying there wasn't any contact is a bit like Ben Ainsley saying he didn't throttle the media boat driver while the camera's clearly show he did on the Finns at the world champs on the weekend.

Daniel, the upwind boat needs to be given a chance to move clear of a right of way boat. When the Arc22 swings upwind as quickly as it did a protest committee will side with the upwind boat that there wasn't an opportunity for them to respond and keep clear.

Both upwind boats shouldn't have been where they were. I've almost had a mast land on my head from an F18 that was rammed by a barging Tornado on a start line. It's not cool and it was lucky the start boat wasn't anchored. We play on relatively big, expensive to repair and powerful machines - respect in your ability is paramount on a race course.

I've never understood the logic of pinching up at the right end of the line, unless there is some obvious reason, ie. better current, better line to A mark, shallow spots over on the left, etc.

If the line is long enough, you will always be much better off running down to the pin with speed, finding a good hole to puch through, quickly jumping out into clean air, right?

Or were they all pinching up there trying to lay the highest span for going under the bridge?

Where were the two Marstroms and Mike/Dave C20 starting? Up high or running down the line?

Infusion responded appropriately. She headed up when challenged and gave up on the pin because the door was shut.

Looks to me that the ARC fended its position against the Infusion by heading up and then bore away to try to catch the pin but caught the N20 with its pole. Should have given way and taken the same path as the Infusion or release its sails before coming back for the pin and follow the N20.

Tim, the first leg to the bridge was a jib reach and there were monster boats in the fleet. It actually worked out pretty well for Ding (who started mid line or a little further left) but I was worried that if I started lower on the line, there was a good chance I would get rolled by the faster boats who's dirty air would keep handing me to the next boat in the freight train and I would end up at the back of the fleet. If it was an upwind beat to the bridge, then yeah, starting down there to get a clear lane of breeze would have been a pretty clear plan - the reach changes things a little.

Ahhh, I see. Thanks Jake.

Still, is the Super Cat considered one of the faster boats? I can see where Karl and other F18's might have wanted the right side going into a reach, but the Super Cat? I'm just wondering why he was up there, I think he's got a much taller rig than a F18?

The skipper of Stray Cats said they were not hit, it looks to me like they were. That being said the turn up into Karl was too fast to react to ( no time to respond)so not Karl's fault, and was more of a panic move as was the bearaway into the N-20. From all the bow thrashing it appears Skip (arc22) panicked when he had gotten himself into a tight spot. He should have pulled the plug and followed Karl out. It would be interesting to hear the crew of the ARC 22's story.

Here is a little insight into the situation:

I have sailed with Skip and against him, and consider him to be a good friend. In fact, I sailed on this very boat in the Steeplechase two years ago. I know well that it is a monster with certain design flaws, i.e. rudders, which make it very unmaneuverable in tight situations.

Couple that with the fact that Skip is relatively new to sailboat racing. His experience has been almost all in the Hobie Wave (hence the name Wave) fleet. To his credit, Skip has done very well with Waves and he has transitioned into A-Cats recently. Skip is very enthusiastic and has gone to extreme lengths to become a better sailor. I’m sure he is sick about what happened.

Having said that, in the Wave Fleet we have a chronic problem with a few sailors who consider barging to be a valid starting tactic. It is so bad that there is virtually no percentage in contesting the pin end. I am amazed that so many of our “good” sailors still try. Fortunately, the Hobie Wave is virtually indestructible and many such encounters are simply considered just racin’. I am not happy with that myself, but it seems to be part of the Wave culture. I don’t like to make waves.

Waves are obviously very maneuverable as well, and you probably could have pulled that trick successfully in one. However, Wave is not a Hobie Wave!

I would guess that in the heat of the moment, basic instincts took over and mistakes were made. We can all appreciate how quickly things turn to **** on these boats.

Based on the evidence, I would be totally surprised if Skip did not step forth and make things right.

Bob and I started dead on at the pin at the gun and it worked out very well for us. The M20s/F20 and SC22 were far enough above us that their dirty was never an issue. We got rolled by Jim before the bridge but it wasn't because of where we started it was because we didn't have the speed Jim had as the breeze softened on the approach to the bridge. If we could have kept pace it never would have been an issue for us and we would have been 4th through the brige behind the big boats. For us the pin was a good call and we'd do it again, the boat end is where the rif raf hangs out. :-)

Dave and I started the F20c mid line in the middle of a Marstrom sandwich. If you look at the video, you can see the yellow Marstrom, myself, and the gray Marstrom starting below the pack.

I had the same concerns of starting to leeward of the SC22's and getting rolled on the reach to the bridge, but decided that there was going to pile up at the committee boat end and it wasn't worth the risk.

As it turned out, we had enough boat speed to pull out from between the Marstoms, and the SC22's were never a threat.

We were very conservative going under the bridge and passed through on the 3rd span from the center. Being the first boat to the bridge, we didn't want to take any chances. The Marstoms passed a couple spans inside of us and made some gains to weather having a higher lane.

I was really shocked to hear Skip renig after admitting fault at the end of the meeting. I did not realize that he changed his mind the next day. I told Todd I can give him a statement about Skip admitting fault and their handshake.

Skip's crew got pissed off in the middle of the meeting believing they were not at fault and walked away. He did not state why he thought they were not at fault but it was probably best he walked away.

I believe Craig will verify what I am telling you about the line. After I set the port end I first started toward the starboard end perpendicular to the bridge (the course). But, knowing ALL the fleet would want to be there at the starboard end, I then headed 30 degrees farther south to set the starboard end, thus making the port favored. Craig even questioned why I was setting the starting line in such a way.
In the other thread Jake asked about this.
Reaching starts are very different than upwind starts and require different tactics. As Dave Ingram said, the pin end was already 20 boat lenghts closer to the bridge than the starboard end.
And indeed, most of the hot boats were down that way.
Rick

ISAF Rule 18.2, section e:

"If a boat obtained an inside overlap from clear astern and, from the time the overlap began, the outside boat has been unable to give mark-room, she is not required to give it."


Based on the video that is about as clear as the day is long. And yes, the astern boat did clearly bounce off Karl's boat, immediately changing course and hitting the N20 boat. Should have staying high and just running over the mark would have been proper.

To that point:

SECTION B
GENERAL LIMITATIONS
"A boat shall avoid contact with another boat if reasonably possible. However, a right-of-way boat or one entitled to room or mark-room
(a) need not act to avoid contact until it is clear that the other boat is not keeping clear or giving room or mark-room, and (not relevant...as the offending boat was not damaged)

Which brings us to the following:
PENALTIES AT THE TIME OF AN INCIDENT
44.1 Taking a Penalty

(b) if the boat caused injury or serious damage or gained a significant advantage in the race or series by her breach her penalty shall be to retire.

IMHO In the spirit of good sportsmanship, skip of the boat causing damage break out his check book, and everyone should shake hands. Furthermore, the damaged boat should have reported retiring after the incident. That would be the right thing to do. My two cents worth.

Rex,

Check the preamble of section C:

Section C rules do not apply at a starting mark surrounded by navigable
water or at its anchor line from the time boats are approaching
them to start until they have passed them. When rule 20 applies,
rules 18 and 19 do not.

This doesn't change the fact that the N20 was a leeward boat, and the ARC was the keep clear boat.

Rule 18 doesn't apply at starting marks. Read the preamble to Section C.

I can verify this. After Rick's explaination and looking at the course, I believe he did the right thing. The problem was that ALL the boats were to the East of the line and none were in the starting area 20 seconds from the start.

You guys are trying to treat this 120 MILE distance race as a normal buoy race.
You can't just have one race thrown out and do the next race. The next leg starts 70 miles away.
You can actually pass other boats by paddling and races have been won that way.
You can receive outside assistance and no be Disqualified instead receive a time penalty. This came about because a boat capsized in one of the channels a couple miles from the finish on the second day and would have destroyed the boat or endangered lives if outside assistance was refused.

Most of the races done down here operate the same way otherwise no one would put them on. The thing that bothers me was that Skip did not check to see if the other boat was OK. We were there but it is the right thing to do.

Hey Matt,
Can you post the guidelines that pertain to barging and apply them in this case? I think alot of folks don't grasp the concept, do it and think they got a good start.

I'm working on a response, will post in a bit

The word "barging" does not appear in the rule book at all.

Basically, you're not entitled to mark room at a starting mark surrounded by navigable water.

The windward boat must keep clear of a leeward boat. The leeward boat is entitled to luff as she pleases (to head to wind) subject only to the limitations of rule 16 (allowing the other boat to keep clear).

In practicality, this means that you can go nearly head to wind directly behind the committee boat, park, and as long as you can maintain that position, nobody is entitled to "barge in".

Thanks.

Thanks for the re-direct.

I was going to add thje ARC was 'windward boat' as well, (but it seems so obvious to anyone that races...)

For those who don't know me, I am a US Sailing Judge and Umpire in training (it's a lengthy process), and do a lot of judging at collegiate events in New England. I recently purchased an F18 and am now the Eastern Area Rep. I will try to answer the question about what rules apply at the start in a general fashion, not so much in response to Todd's situation.

Barging is actually never mentioned in the rules, so I try to avoid using that wording.

For the case of overlapped boats approaching the start, the rules that apply are:

Rule 11: WIndward Leeward
Rule 16.1: Right of way boat must give another boat room to keep clear
Rule 17: Proper course (only applies after the start)

Additionally, call C2 provides clarification on the situation

As was mentioned earlier, the preamble of part C states that rule 18 and 19 do not apply at a start mark surrounded by navigable water. There is no mark room for a start mark.

Rule 11 is the main one here. The windward boat is give way and must keep clear, even if that means sailing on the wrong side of the starting mark.

The leeward boat's actions are restricted by rule 16.1, which says a right of way boat must give the keep clear boat room to avoid. Usually this places restrictions on how quickly you can alter. At the boat, rule 16.1 can also restrict the ability of the right of way boat to force a windward boat into the start boat, as outlined in call C2.

Call C2 shows that if a windward boat has already established a position overlapped with the start boat, they can not be forced into the start boat because the leeward boat is not giving them room to keep clear. This doesn't apply very well to the steeplechase situation because of the nature of the start mark allowed the give way boat an out.

Rule 17 talks about proper course, but does not apply before a start. Therefore, a leeward ROW boat can point as high as they like before the start, effectively "closing the door". Rule 17 is important, however, because after the start the right of way boat must sail their proper course, which in most cases would be close hauled, and not above (although sailing above close hauled to make the pin is considered proper course).

I hope this explanation is helpful, and I can definitely try to answer any questions. I will try to post call C2 if I can figure out how to do it!

Best,
Jeff

Great description, Jeff.

On the positive side, this incident shows what barging actually looks like. More often than not, boats with no hope of "closing the door" will claim that others are barging.

Again, while there is no definition of the term, if there is enough space for you to sail between the RC and the closest leeward competitor, you have not barged.

Also, if the leeward boat shuts the door on you, and you avoided her and the RC boat, I would say that you didn't barge. You went for what you thought was an opening, and you were proven wrong. As long as you don't try to force your way in anyway, you haven't done anything illegal.

So, to me anyway, barging is only when you come in with no rights, and force other boats to avoid you so you can get by the RC boat and start where there was no room. Anything else may be an "attempted barge."

Mike

Thanks for the input but rules are easy to look up. This thread is to find how the rules pertain specifically to the situation in the video. There are two camera angles so there is plenty of content to go by.

Your input on this particular situation would be great!

IF there had been a boat instead of a mark bouy, Then there would have been an obstruction, correct? Then the N-20 would have had to given room ,but the ARC22 would have had to hold it's course as high as possible.
This still wouldn't have cleared the fact that the ARC 22 turned way down and drove into the n-20.

No, rule 19 is part of section C and does not apply to a start mark. This includes a RC boat is defined in the definitions:

Mark An object the sailing instructions require a boat to leave on a specified side, and a race committee boat surrounded by navigable water from
which the starting or finishing line extends. An anchor line or an object
attached temporarily or accidentally to a mark is not part of it.

So the ROW boat can take a "barger" up into the RC boat within his rights of the rules?

Of course not. You avoid and protest. But, as mentioned, Call C2 provides an out for windward boats that establish an overlap, so you need to proceed with caution.

Mike

No, that would break rule 16.1

16.1: When a right-of-way boat changes course, she shall give the other
boat room to keep clear.

If a windward boat is already between the right of way boat and the RC, she would not have room to keep clear. Therefore, the right of way boat would break rule 16.1. Team Race call C2 deals with this exact situation (the calls are interpretations of the rules by ISAF).

Call book: http://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/TRCallBookforTeamRacingfor20092012updatedNov2010-[9670].pdf

(copy and paste the address, the link is broken)

edited to fix wording in regards to call

Good explanition, Jeff. I'd just like to clarify that rule 17 comes into effect at the starting signal, which is before the boats actually start.

Regards,
Eric

So with all of this being said is there ANYWAY that video could be construed as NOT being Team Wave's fault?

Good point, I apologize if what I wrote was not clear.

The Call Books, Case Book, and Appeals Book are not rules and cannot be treated as such. They are, however, authoritative interpretations of the rules.

The Team Racing Call Book also only applies to team racing, which is not the case here. In this particular instance though, the rule application is the same.

Regards,
Eric

After re-reviewing the tape...

Stray Cats (windward of Wave) did not keep clear of Wave, as it appeared that Wave initially headed up to stop and/or avoid Adrenaline, and in so doing, immediately made contact with Stray Cats. Penalty on Stray Cats.

After that, Wave headed down way too far, and speared Adrenaline. Wave should have held her course higher, and released the sails to slow or stop. I would argue that Wave hitting Adrenaline was entirely the fault of Wave. Penalty on Wave.

Mike

You are absolutely correct on the wording, I apologize for writing that wrong, thanks again. From the introduction to the RRS:

Cases and Calls: The ISAF publishes interpretations of the racing
rules in The Case Book for 2009–2012 and recognizes them as
authoritative interpretations and explanations of the rules. It also
publishes The Call Book for Match Racing for 2009–2012 and The
Call Book for Team Racing for 2009–2012, and it recognizes them as
authoritative only for umpired match or team racing. These publications
are available on the ISAF website.

I agree that the call only applies to Team Racing, but the same rules apply, and I believe the call does a very nice job explaining the situation. In my original post I tried to outline the rules involved, then reference the call as an interpretation from ISAF.

I hope that this discussion is helpful, and will increase understanding for future situations.

ARGUE...

Yes... that is the problem.... WAVE will link the two events and say that first foul caused the second foul... It's an argument that takes into account his boats limitations on steering... If not for Stray cat... he has no problems.. Blame Sraycat for the whole thing.

OR
Wave could also argue that Adrenaline did not fall off to proper course after the start (which is not going to be observed in the video but WAVE saw Adrenaline come up)... Adrenaline will say.... no such action by me... I was not changing course....

Without a hearing... no judge is going to evaluate the collisions. They are explaining the rules applications.

For the sake of argument... the RRS could pitch two of the three boats or even all three boats.... NOW what do the three insurance companies do?

We are back in the responsibility versus liability conundrum.
In the end... if the RRS were not in place (per Mary)... but everyone thinks they are using some version of them... Now what?

PS... the rules are there so everyone has a fair shot at having fun...

I agree, it sure looks like there was a hit, but after reviewing the spin pole camera footage very close (and many times) you can see the camera jerks due to the skipper yanking on the stick, and you can see ... there was no touching (1:25 on the video)

Just watched the video again.Looked close but ok no contact with F-18 and ARC-22. If the ARC-22 has limited steering why would you try to force it in there?
The N-20 was single trapped flying a hull when they hit. He was on powered up and sailing a proper line. Looks like Team Wave was 100% at fault to me. Poor judgment and poor execution led to the hit.

On a kind of ironic point. Watching the video I kept noticing Emergency Repair Tape as a sponsor on the sail.

Apparently, it is okay to screw around and not enforce the sailing rules when sailing Waves. Just attend a Wave NA championship and you will know what I'm talking about! But, beware doing this (barging) sailing other higher performing cats; it may lead to an "Anslie" incident!

I'm just saying....

I feel there is always a little bit of "drift" whenever the rules aren't seriously enforced. As soon as people start getting away with stuff, it becomes "expected" that they can. AND, the beginners aren't going to be happy with the seasoned guys getting away with anything. Remember Juanas a few years ago when the rules were discarded after the fact?

+1

I know that there are limitations when viewing photos and video, but at 1:25, I can HEAR the boats hit... It's just like calling close calls at first base, your eyes can be secondary to your ears.

Mark, I'm with you (and have said it numerous times); the hearing is the only place that all of the testimony comes out.

In fact, the video isn't long enough to establish how Wave and Adrenaline became overlapped, which is critical to know whether Adrenaline was required to return to proper course after the starting signal (of course, this is assuming that Adrenaline wasn't on proper course, which is a whole different discussion).

Adrenaline would only be bound by RRS 17 if she established the overlap from clear astern, and within two of her hull lengths to leeward of Wave. Even so, 2 seconds would not have been enough time to avoid Wave's action.

Mike

Not trying to be right or argue (and i have no skin in this game).. but i disagree.. That is the sound of the camera slapping / moving around with heavy helming. I have the same camera, and have heard the same distinct sound (fom 1:25) on/in my spin pole movies without hitting anything.

It's very curious to read the various interpretation of these 2 videos. My take is that the top boat(black graphics) came roaring in from behind and way too high. He got luffed up by the 22 and avoided. i didn't see contact. The top boat did the right thing and went above the start buoy. The 22 was able to bear off in a very short distance and get on the correct side of the buoy showing excellent maneuverability. He would have been fine if it were not for his spi pole. A small error with disastrous results. He was also lined up too high, which is a pretty big mistake considering the other end of the line was favored. Also i thought the captain of the 22 should have dumped his traveler while the 2 boats were locked together.

MN3, I can definitely buy that. Especially since the video isn't conclusive (can't see the hulls touch, just a lot of shaking at the point it looks like they may have touched). In a hearing, if both parties said there was no contact, I doubt this video would overrule that.

Mike

Stray Cats needs to be given an opportunity to keep clear. Wave came in too fast and turned upwind to quickly for Stray Cats to respond "in a seamanlike manner" (I think that the wording).

Wave can't claim Stray Cats contributed to contact with the leeward boat because Wave steered down there all by himself when he should have rounded up with Stray Cats and got out of there.

Either way, neither of the upwind boats had any rights and were lucky the start boat wasn't anchored and 30 foot long - in fact methinks they wouldn't have tried it on if that was the case....http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/icons/default/smirk.gif

I think you’re looking for this:

RRS 16.1: When a right-of-way boat changes course, she shall give the other boat room to keep clear.

Room: The space a boat needs in the existing conditions while manoeuvring promptly in a seamanlike way.

Keep Clear: One boat keeps clear of another if the other can sail her course with no need to take avoiding action and, when the boats are overlapped on the same tack, if the leeward boat can change course in both directions without immediately making contact with the windward boat.

Obviously, since there apparently was no contact, Stray Cats (barely) kept clear of Wave (and vice-versa).

The more times I watch that video, the more things I see. Leading into the incident, Wave was changing course so much, it's hard to make a case that anyone could have predicted her next move...

Going back to the barging question, in the absence of Adrenaline, this would have been a good example of a boat (Stray Cats) legally taking a spot that was open (not barging). Wave was too far from the mark to defend. However, in the actual incident, if Stray Cats had pushed it, she would have barged on Adrenaline (and we all know that Todd was having none of that on Saturday!).


I’ve been having that thought for the past few days as well, although you’d be surprised what some people will try…

Mike

I would argue that that's not necessarily the case. There doesn't need to be contact in order to establish that one boat didn't keep clear. In fact, by making contact, either or both boats could be penalized under Rule 14.

In any case, after looking at the video several times, my opinion is that there are really two separate incidents that occur. The first being when Stray Cats enters the starting area from astern and above both Adrenaline and Wave with essentially no right of way under Rule 11. Wave's response to this is to luff. Whether the speed of Wave's luff violates Rule 16.1, or if Stray Cats Violated Rule 11 is open to interpretation. But this would be the topic for a separate protest.

After Stray Cats is luffed, she peels away and tacks off, leaving ample room for Wave to manuver to windward. However, Wave bears off, presumably in an attempt to get below the starting pin. In doing so, she accelerates and overlaps Adrenaline to windward from clear astern. Shortly after Wave initiates her bear away, Adrenaline turns upwind, closing the door on the start pin. Adrenaline is within her rights to do this as long as she doesn't violate Rule 161 since Wave's overlap was established from clear astern and Adrenaline may luff head-to-wind if she pleases. Wave is also not afforded any right of way under Rule 18, therefor, Wave's only response can be to luff up. She doesn't do this, and thus fouls Adrenaline by making contact and violating Rules 11 & 14.

Moral of the story, both Wave and Stray Cats tried to squeeze into a spot they shouldn't have. Stray Cats ultimately did the right thing by bailing out, Wave did the wrong thing by trying force her way in, and Adrenaline ended up paying the price.

At least, that's my take on it.

sm

I think you guys are tossing the baby out with the bathwater here by focusing on the rule and ignoring the race. Boats are allowed to defend their wind.. They CAN'T HIT the boat that is trying to pass to prove the point.

Wave is the ROW boat to Straycat.... Stray cat is trying to pass to windward. Wave is entitled to defend by coming up fast and hard to keep Straycat from trying the pass so close.. Sraycat has to INSTANTLY respond to Wave's luff and avoid her... Staycat could be made to go head to wind hard!. The limitation is that WAVE can't hit STRAYCAT in the hard luff to prove the point.

Stray cat has to pay attention to the ROW boat (Wave) and can't be asleep at the switch or purposely delay action. Wave can't tap Stray cat to prove the point... It's up to WAVE to decide if StrayCat failed to keep clear and throw the flag or not (Wave is over 20 feet). Forcing Stray cat to instantly go head to wind is not forcing them into an unseamanlike action. It would appear that Wave did not come up and hit Straycat.. or Straycat did an excellent job of keeping clear... But... only Wave knows if he wanted to come up a bit more. Straycats may know if Wave was demanding more up on Straycats part.

My point is ... the room and opportunity does not excuse the burdened boat from keeping a very sharp lookout when they put themselves in the position to be luffed and they can't be surprised at the hard luff and claim... no room and opportunity (using the rule as a weapon)

With respect to the actual collision.
Wave could say... They tried to luff head to wind to BOTH slow down and defend their position. ... Straycats prevented them from luffing head to wind and they broke off the luff to avoid hitting Straycats. Because they could not luff, they were unable to keep clear of Adrenaline. Their boat is not as maneuverable as others... They attempted to avoid the collision but the liability is Stray cats.

Without any testimony.... Who the hell knows. ... I suspect all of the sailors don't actually know exactly what happened and they were reacting based on their general understanding of the rules and their obligations. Now they are sorting through the rules after the fact and putting their reactions into their understanding and also actually reading the rule book to getting a better understanding.

One thing to realize is the line was not set to the wind and it was easy for the boats down the line to sail back up to the right mark. If someone thought a hole would open up at the right mark that was never going to happen.

To paraphrase Mark, I think everyone involved focused on the start and ingored the race.

Tactically and strategically, in any race, and especially in a long-distance race; there's no good reason to ever be at either extreme end of the line (especially the favored end), unless no one else is there. Only one boat ever "wins" the favored end. You're far better off being in the favored third, with clear air, boatspeed and room to maneuver if necessary.

Mike

I disagree. From what I see on the video, Wave had ample room to luff if necessary after Stray Cats bailed out. Wave CHOSE to continue to bear off in order to get below the pin after her luff. I don't see any reason that Wave can blame Stray Cats for causing her to contact Adrenaline. Wave should have either parked the boat and let Adrenaline sail through, or tack out and do the same thing Stray Cats did.

sm

Not if it's set on a reach...you start low, you potentially get washed out to the back of the train further up the leg. It's like when we used to race with B-marks. The fleet typically rounds A setting a high course to try and keep anyone from getting over top of them. Rarely does anyone point right for B unless they're free and clear or B is set on the perfect angle for a downwind sail.

The fleet was small...so it turned out to not be much of an issue - but I've started in a big steeplechase fleet where I started low on the line square to the bridge with a reaching breeze angle thinking I would stay free from the mayhem and I got killed with dirty air. Mix in boats that are faster and slower than and it gets ugly for the guy starting low that isn't the fastest in the fleet.

I hear what you're saying, and I know there are issues with boat size and getting washed out the back; but only one boat can have a good start at the high pin.

I maintain that it's a high-risk / low-probability-of-success move to fight for it at all costs.

And, I never said to start on the wrong end of the line. You want the favored third.

Mike

I am just making the argument.....

Here is another interesting point... without the video at the PC hearing... this is a bigger mess.

If he says.. it's a second event... then he argues that while he was the burdened boat... There was a hole and then Adrenaline came up after the horn and he did not have opportunity... ... given the long spin pole...

It has been clear that I have been silent here on this forum about the incident that occurred on the start of the first day of the Steeple Chase. Part of the reason for this is that I rarely if ever get on the forum, and had no idea that this string was being formed. When it was brought to my attention, by friends, what had transpired over the last few days on the forum, I logged on to see first-hand what had been said. I was amazed at the firestorm that had ensued concerning this incident, and also the mis-truths and misconceptions about the facts, as well as spot judgments of my character and other’s character from people that were not privy to the facts. Instead of giving a blow by blow from my perspective as the helmsman, which is quite different from the videos shot from opposite angles, I have decided to tell you what has transpired since the incident.
It has been said that I reneged on a hand shake that was to be considered an acceptance of blame for the damage to the leeward boat. First the setting of the discussion was in a home of a friend of mine that I admire and respect. The last thing I wanted to do is turn his home into a protest meeting and create an uncomfortable situation for him and the rest of his guests that were there to relax and have a drink with friends. From my perspective I thought that it was an impossible situation, as well as unfortunate, and since there was no protest committee to determine fault we were shaking hands and agreeing to disagree. When I was approached by Todd the next day I realized, then, that he still wanted me to accept fault. I told him there, in front of witnesses that I needed time to try to determine how we could get this event ruled on and if it was determined that I was at fault I would pay for the damages and accept fault. Since that conversation Todd and I have been in contact each day to discuss progress and suggest potential solutions. During this same time period I wrote up my description of what happened and sent it out to people that I know and trust that have been involved in protest hearings. It took time as I had to wait for one of the guys to get back from a cruise out of the country. Both of them saw the videos, my drawings and my write up. This morning they both concurred that I need to accept fault and responsibility for the damages to the leeward boat. I have contacted Todd and told him that I accept fault and will pay for damages.
As for the discussion on rule 41b, I had no prior knowledge of this rule and feel terribly that it could be possible that I could have participated in another infraction. Again, because I thought that I was not at fault at the time, I continued to sail on. I did see the damage above the water line of the boat and they were sailing it away under control and from my perspective I could not do anything to help them better than several boats with motors in attendance at the start. Since there is no committee to determine fault here what I am willing to do and intend to do is pose to Rick White that he swap my finish scores for the damaged boats finished scores as a way to exonerate myself from this possible infraction.
In conclusion I am very saddened by this turn of events and I thank everyone involved, especially Todd for being a stand up gentleman and allowing me the time I needed to come to an informed decision and make proper restitution. If there had been a formal means to resolve this Saturday it would have been done then and I would have accepted and respected the decision made.
Thanks to the people who know me and supported me and gave me the benefit of the doubt.
Respectfully Skip Kaub

Well done!!!

Thanks, Skip!

+1

LOL!!! I knew it but I can't help myself but engage. A boat does not have to anticipate another boat's actions. Your arguement is just short of making that statement.... the F18 only needs to react to ARC's actions which it did. If ARC allows F18 to get close before fending off, then it also has to allow F18 the opportunity to respond to its actions. Good advice is to make your defense known early if you do not wish to be rolled.

Great Stuff!!!

Skip,it's good to hear your details but would be interesting to hear your side of the events (blow by blow) that lead you to believe it was an "impossible" situation and there was no fault to you. It would help complete the story.
I think this has been a great rules exercise and has certainly given Mark S. plenty of opportunity to argue.

Kris..

The key word you use is "anticipate"

How about ... change the word anticipate to the phrase... " be prepared to instantly respond to the luff from leeward which could occur at any time. ... knowing full well that you might have to go head to wind to avoid leeward who has all of the rights."

People take the word anticipate and infer that windward boat must take some action (course change in anticipation of leewards action)...

The ROW boat does not have to give them time to scratch their balls... retrieve the rule from memory of the 2004 rule book... cogitate on the fact that leeward has rights... and then put the stick over... and when you protest... they come back with a defense saying... I did not have to anticipate the luff and you did not give me room and opportunity...

No way... that is not the game!

Oh... and the hail is irrelevant.... BS'ing your intention to take them to the moon if they stick their nose up there spices up the game but is also unnecessary and I am not sure it helps.

The F18, Straycats obviously knew the rules and was well aware that he could be luffed up and responded instantly. Did he anticipate the luff???? well this is just a matter of semantics... but yes... he did anticipate the luff and was prepared to sail his boat well when he had to.

It matters because I know lots of sailors who read... "No need to anticipate..." and "must have room and opportunity" to think that Hard luffs are out of the game these days and that it's OK to stick their nose up there and try to roll someone a few feet to weather...

Better advice would be.... make sure you are well into the passing lane... and leeward can't defend with a hard luff.

Way to man up. Silent Jay will be happy. If you need a cash advance Silent Jay can help with that too.

Very well done, indeed, Skip.

Mike

Indeed. Well done.

"You haven't won the race, if in winning the race you have lost
the respect of your competitors." - Paul Elvström

Properly conducted protest hearings need not be uncomfortable situations. More often, they are learning experiences for everyone. Judges will often take the time to thoroughly explain how they arrived at a decision and what could have been done to avoid the situation in the first place.

I encourage everyone to attend one of US Sailing's judges seminars over the winter. (Schedule is here.) The seminars spend far more time on how to conduct a proper hearing than they do teaching the rules. You don't have to take the test, if you don't plan on becoming certified. The seminars are highly beneficial, no matter which side of the table you're sitting on.

I probably should have spoken up sooner but I was present on the beach on Sunday where Skip said he wanted to get (and I paraphrase) a second opinion. He never denied responsibility. Shame on those who said he did. I wasn't present during the discussion at the house around the video.

I've been in this situation the first year I started sailing and it's a very easy trap to find yourself in. I had a boat on top of me that I felt prevented me from aborting my reach into the starting area - but I didn't know my rights too well and I really couldn't anticipate what was going to happen next. All I knew was that I didn't like the angle I was coming in at the start line but I felt like I couldn't escape. My focus was on the boat above me and the committee boat I was approaching. Next thing I know, I have a Hobie 16 bow on my trampoline and a skipper screaming bloody murder at me.

If you've been racing for a while reaching/barging/starting becomes second nature - but this incident does require some anticipation to prevent if there is a crowd of boats at different angles. If you can't see this potential before hand, once you get into it, the escape routes are narrow and few (if existent).

So ,shame on Todd Riccardi for assuming that since responsibilty for the incident wasn't accepted, it was denied. Seems like a pretty good assumption to me. I guess they just needed a better mediator. (Smiley face is for you Jake)
If it wasn't so obvious I could see the confusion, but not in this case. That said, because it was so obvious and fault wasn't immediately accepted, I'd bet Todd thought he was trying to get out of it. That's what I'd think. Seems some time with a nose in the rule book is in need. Ignorance of the rules could have really hurt someone in this situation.

Sorry Mark but that is the rule. You cannot wait until there is 3' of side-by-separaton separation and expect to do a hard luff that is impossible to respond to. ROW can still luff but in a manner that allows the other boat to respond to the luff.

So yes, if the ROW allows you to get within a few feet to weather then they have essentially given up their opportunity to do a "hard luff" at that moment and has allowed the other boat "to stick their nose there and try to roll someone a few feet to weather."

Kris, I am talking about the video and the timing... Are you saying that Wave luffed too late?


Originally Posted By: brucat
Obviously, since there apparently was no contact, Stray Cats (barely) kept clear of Wave (and vice-versa).

SRM wrote

I would argue that that's not necessarily the case. There doesn't need to be contact in order to establish that one boat didn't keep clear. In fact, by making contact, either or both boats could be penalized under Rule 14.

In any case, after looking at the video several times, my opinion is that there are really two separate incidents that occur. The first being when Stray Cats enters the starting area from astern and above both Adrenaline and Wave with essentially no right of way under Rule 11. Wave's response to this is to luff. Whether the speed of Wave's luff violates Rule 16.1, or if Stray Cats Violated Rule 11 is open to interpretation. But this would be the topic for a separate protest. ...

Are you taking the interpretation that Wave fouled Stray Cats because the luff was too fast and no room and opportunity were given?

I'm on the road, don't have a lot of time to respond.
But a couple facts:
1) 3 people witnessed Skip accept responsibilty on Saturday night, only 1 (him) thinks it was to "agree to disagree"
2) Jake missed the first minute of our conversation on Sunday where Skip told me he thought he was not responsible. He didn't come over until after my reaction of hearing this.
3) Skip informed me yesterday while accepting blame that at no time between the event and just recently when his 2 friends told him to accept the blame did he think he was at fault either from people telling he was and because he did not know the rules.
4)Skip did not want to get Rick White involved a couple days ago when I asked him to allow Rick acting as the regatta organizer and after the fact protest hearing to make the decision of who was at fault

However, either way Skip did graciously accept responsibility and offer to pay yesterday.
I'm just glad it's over with and I feel a huge weight lifted off my shoulders.
This should have been delt with at the event and not had to go past the weekend. I thought it had been until it was too late during my conversation with Skip on Sunday.
I am not alone in thinking that protests are not allowed at the Steeplechase which is why I didn't protest. I'm glad to know that they are and wish I had known on Saturday.

Just responding to your general statements regarding hard luffing.

Relative to the video -

Wave luffed appropriately. Stray Cats had opportunity to respond in a seamanship manner. I contend that Stray Cats was not standing on guard for an instaneous luff as your opening statement asserts is required by any boat that is passing to windward. The skipper was in fact straightening out the sheets with both hands when the luff came.

Also, if Wave luffed a little earlier, they could have luffed even harder.

Finally, did Wave really need to luff? It seemed as though there was no room at the pin with the N20.

[quoteSorry Mark but that is the rule. You cannot wait until there is 3' of side-by-separaton separation and expect to do a hard luff that is impossible to respond to. ROW can still luff but in a manner that allows the other boat to respond to the luff.

So yes, if the ROW allows you to get within a few feet to weather then they have essentially given up their opportunity to do a "hard luff" at that moment and has allowed the other boat "to stick their nose there and try to roll someone a few feet to weather."quote]

Are you referencing any of the rule analysis books?

Fortunately there were two angles of video to help. Without it who knows if you would have got this result.

GoPro, required equipment.

I see we're back to agreeing to disagree...

Without further testimony, I wouldn't say that the video angle is conclusive enough to say that Stray Cats didn't keep clear of Wave. You can't see if Stray Cats' stern was overlapped at the point that Wave came up and then went back down. So, absent any other testimony, and a consensus that there was no contact, I would rule that Stray Cats kept clear.

Anyone who wants a good lesson in the expectations of luffing and keeping clear should make their way onto an umpire boat at a match racing event on monohulls.

BTW, we all need to stop using the words anticipate and opportunity. Anticipate does not appear in RRS. Opportunity appears neither in Part 2 nor in the definitions. 'Nuff said.

Mike

This is an excellent point, and if anyone wants to get out on an umpire boat at a collegiate team race regatta this spring, let me know.

Just RRS. It is straight forward. If the leeward boat luffs so hard that the windward boat cannot keep clear in a seamanlike action, then RRS 16.1 is broken. Of course, the windward boat unavoidably breaks RRS 11 but is exonerated by RRS 64.1(c).

Email sent...

Mike

On a lighter note, If Todd was sailing with a parrot.......Captains used to do that you know. Peg legs, eye patches, and parrots. Anyway I was just wondering what the parrot might of said after the collision.

What Todd's parrot might have said.