Proposal for a Rules change to allow tiller extensions

I have prepared the following proposed rule changes in order to allow the use of tiller extensions. I submit them for your consideration and comment. If there seems to be a consensus for change I will submit the changes to the Rules Chairperson.

Rule 9.8

Current wording: No tiller extensions are allowed. Tiller yokes must be removed.

Proposed wording: Tiller extensions up to 36” long are allowed.

Rationale:

At the time the Final Draft of the Bylaws/Rules were approved in 2001, it was unforeseen that Hobie Co. would introduce a significant redesign of the rudder assembly. The tiller cross bar on the EZ LOC rudder assembly is approximately 12” aft of the tiller cross bar on the original rudder assemblies. Additionally, the molded rudder blades are not as consistently shaped as the standard Hobie fiberglass/EPO rudder blades.

As a result of the change in position of the tiller cross bar, it is not possible for sailors racing Waves equipped with the EZ LOC rudder assembly to move their weight as far forward on the boat as those sailing Waves equipped with the original rudder assemblies. This significantly affects upwind speed, and to a lesser extent downwind speed, particularly in light and medium winds.

Rule 1 states: ”The design and development of the Hobie Wave is directed towards a strict one-design class where the true test is between sailors and sailing skill, and not boats.” Through no fault of the organizers and members of the IWCA, the change in rudder assembly has rendered this fundamental principle of the IWCA invalid. Purchasers of new Hobie Waves are unable to compete on an equal footing footing with boats equipped with older rudder assemblies.

It seems unlikely that Hobie Co. will reintroduce the older rudder assembly as standard equipment. In order that as many future Wave sailors as possible (and present sailors of Waves equipped with EZ LOC rudder assembly) be encouraged to join the IWCA and participate in Wave racing, I propose that tiller extensions up to 36” long be allowed in the Class rules. This should go a long way mitigating the speed advantage of Waves equipped with original rudder assemblies.

Allowing tiller extensions will also increase the level of comfort while sailing – especially downwind. This will assist those who are less mobile, or who have back problems, etc., to enjoy sailing and racing.

I propose that tiller extensions be allowed on all Waves, regardless of rudder assembly design. Those sailing with the older assemblies would not enjoy equal downwind sailing and comfort benefits if tiller extensions were allowed only on EZ LOC equipped Waves.

I propose limiting tiller extension length to 36” so that tiller extensions would be less likely to become a factor in situations (start, finish, mark roundings) where boats are likely to be in close proximity to each other.

Rule 2

Proposed Change: Delete the sentence “Only changes which have no bearing on boat speed are allowed”

Rationale:

This change is necessary to allow tiller extensions.

Rule 2.1

Current wording: “To keep each boat as equal, simple and cost free as possible by rigidly maintaining, without deviation, the one-design features of the Hobie Wave for racing.”

Proposed wording:“To keep each boat as equal, simple and cost free as possible by maintaining, wherever possible, the one-design features of the Hobie Wave for racing.”

Rationale:

This change is necessary to allow tiller extensions. I think it is worth noting that other alternatives to introducing tiller extension as a means of equalizing boat speed – purchasing a used older rudder assembly (and top pintles) or buying the parts from Hobie Co. - would be anything but “cost free”. Also the supply of used older rudder assemblies decreases with each passing year.

Rule 6

Current wording: “...Approved changes are as follows: Stronger gudgeons, larger diameter wires, slight shimming of crossbars, and reinforced flanges not affecting water flow. Except as allowed in these rules, any changes or additions that in any way can be construed as speed devices are not class legal.”

Proposed wording: (emphasis added for clarity – not intended to be part of the final draft) “...Approved changes are as follows: Stronger gudgeons, larger diameter wires, tiller extensions up to 36” in length, slight shimming of crossbars, and reinforced flanges not affecting water flow. Except as allowed in these rules, any changes or additions that in any way can be construed as speed devices are not class legal.”

Rationale:

This change is necessary to allow tiller extensions.

This is a well reasoned and carefully worded proposal; Nice work! My only comment would be not to limit the length of the extension because in other boats the tiller extension is very rarely a problem when boats are close to each other and I can anticipate a debate that there would still be an advantage to the longer tillered boats with a restricted tiller extension length which would be a moot point with no limit (practical matters will decide a limit for each racer).

I also anticipate resistance to the change just to keep the boat simple but I think that if everyone is honest they will not add one if they think there is no advantage and and should allow it if they think there is an advantage. Very few racers make no attempt to move forward downwind so that is evidence that most think there is an advantage. The change should be easy and inexpensive and make racing fairer and more comfortable for everyone. Therefore I second the proposal.

If we need a thirder I'm there. I'd like to propose that we make the rule effective 1 August 2011 on a temporary basis. Then various people will try it and we'll know how it works and who it favours. Then the vote could be to make it an official rule at the Nationals in 2012.

Well written. The one thing I can tell you is the IHCA will never go for a tiller ext on the Wave, so that would prevent IWCA/HCA joint racing going forward if that rule change passes to the IWCA rules. I see that as a bad thing to be honest, but understand why you'd want the tiller ext.

What is wrong with just extending your tiller to the length of the old style?

I gave some thought to doing that and did a kind of mockup. Aside from being a violation of the rules, the tiller cross bar won't allow the the rudders to be raised with the mainsheet attached to the sail. It lifts too high. I suspect that kind of arrangement would even interfere with the ability of the rudders to kick-up when the main is sheeted tightly.

Don

Rick
That is what I am thinking too, and am trying to figure a way to make the lengths 'objective' meaning measuring back from the mast base. His objection about the EZloc raising too high is factual, but its maybe the only answer to even this particular varible out of the equation for being different lengths. I have asked for help with this from Matt Miller before I get too far in my thinking. I seriously think a tiller ext. is the wrong way to go on the Wave.

Compare doing that to just simply adding an extension. Which would you rather do? Then consider that you would be asking mostly newbies to do that - doesn't seem likely they would know how or have the confidence to make the change. (Matt Miller's comments make this a moot point anyway as essentially it is not an option). In contrast, adding a tiller extension benefits everyone by making it much more comfortable to sail downwind in any position you please and it is quick, easy, and inexpensive to do. To get (and keep)as many owners interested in racing as possible, it seems like a pretty easy decision. So to reverse your question, what is wrong with that? You could make money selling a "Rick White approved" tiller extension!

Hi Folks,

I think I'm about ready to submit the proposed Rules changes to the Rules Chairperson. There have been over a hundred views. While only a few have posted their agreement, the only person to come out opposed to the changes has reconsidered and lent his support.

I am still uncertain about whether I should include a maximum length for the tiller extension. Mike Fahle has raised a question about this. In general, I agree with him that it may not be necessary to limit the length. My reason for originally including a 36" maximum length was that I had visions of someone using an old H17 hiking stick.....which seems kind of silly now.

Comments on whether I should include a 36" limit in my submission?

Don (NorthernWave)

"If in doubt leave it out."

I haven't a clue about tiller extension length. And I'm pretty sure nobody else does either since nobody has used one in racing. Not legal. For this very reason I propose we make the rule effective immediately on a temporary basis. Then various people will try it and we'll know how it works. Then the vote could be to make it an official rule at the Nationals in 2012. A lot of people will have a lot more experience by then.

I am for it simply because I believe it will help equalize a parameter that is now unequal. We really don't know what the actual benefits will be, if any, until we try it.

I agree that a test phase would be wise. In fact, it would be nice to try it during Bay Week which is only a week from now.

Hi again,

I just submitted a proposal for rule changes to the Rules Chairman - Chip Short. Compared with draft posted earlier, I dropped the length restriction and included a suggestion that tiller extensions be allowed on a trial basis. I also cleaned up the grammar, etc. a bit. Here is what I submitted:



Rule 9.8

Current wording: No tiller extensions are allowed. Tiller yokes must be removed.

Proposed wording: Tiller extensions are allowed.

Rationale:

At the time the Final Draft of the Bylaws/Rules were approved in 2001, it was unforeseen that Hobie Co. would introduce a significant redesign of the rudder assembly. The tiller cross bar on the EZ LOC rudder assembly is approximately 12” aft of the tiller on the original rudder assemblies. Additionally, the moulded rudder blades are not as consistently shaped as the standard Hobie fiberglass/EPO rudder blades.

As a result of the change in position of the tiller cross bar, it is not possible for sailors racing Waves equipped with the EZ LOC rudder assembly to move their weight as far forward on the boat as those sailing Waves equipped with the original rudder assemblies. This significantly affects upwind speed, and to a lesser extent downwind speed, particularly in light and medium winds.

Rule 1 states: ”The design and development of the Hobie Wave is directed towards a strict one-design class where the true test is between sailors and sailing skill, and not boats”. Through no fault of the organizers and members of the IWCA, the change in rudder assembly has rendered this fundamental principle of the IWCA invalid. Purchasers of new Hobie Waves are unable to compete on an equal footing footing with boats equipped with older rudder assemblies.

It seems unlikely that Hobie Co. will reintroduce the older rudder assembly as standard equipment. In order that as many future Wave sailors as possible (and present sailors of Waves equipped with EZ LOC rudder assembly) be encouraged to join the IWCA and participate in Wave racing, I propose that tiller extensions be allowed in the Class rules. This should go a long way mitigating the speed advantage of Waves equipped with original rudder assemblies.

Allowing tiller extensions will also increase the level of comfort while sailing – especially downwind. This will assist those who are less mobile (or who have back problems, etc.) to enjoy sailing and racing.

I propose that tiller extensions be allowed on all Waves, regardless of rudder assembly design. This will enable those sailing with the older rudder assemblies to enjoy the same downwind sailing and comfort benefits as those sailing tiller extension equipped EZ LOC Waves.

I also propose that tiller extensions be allowed as soon as possible on a trial basis in order to evaluate the effects of these rule changes before a final vote is made on them.

Rule 2

Proposed Change: Delete the sentence “Only changes which have no bearing on boat speed are allowed”

Rationale:

This change is necessary to allow tiller extensions.

Rule 2.1

Current wording: “To keep each boat as equal, simple and cost free as possible by rigidly maintaining, without deviation, the one-design features of the Hobie Wave for racing.”

Proposed wording:“To keep each boat as equal, simple and cost free as possible by maintaining, wherever possible, the one-design features of the Hobie Wave for racing.”

Rationale:

This change is necessary to allow tiller extensions. I think it is worth noting that other alternatives to introducing tiller extension as a means of equalizing boat speed (e.g. purchasing a used older rudder assembly (and top pintles) or buying the parts from Hobie Co.) would be anything but “cost free”. Also, the supply of used older rudder assemblies decreases with each passing year.

Rule 6

Current wording: “...Approved changes are as follows: Stronger gudgeons, larger diameter wires, slight shimming of crossbars, and reinforced flanges not affecting water flow. Except as allowed in these rules, any changes or additions that in any way can be construed as speed devices are not class legal.”

Proposed wording: (emphasis added for clarity – not intended to be part of the final draft) “...Approved changes are as follows: Stronger gudgeons, larger diameter wires, tiller extensions, slight shimming of crossbars, and reinforced flanges not affecting water flow. Except as allowed in these rules, any changes or additions that in any way can be construed as speed devices are not class legal.”

Rationale:

This change is necessary to allow tiller extensions.

After reading Matt's post if you extended each arm to the length of the old style and leave the crossbar where it is, they the sailor could be as far forward as any others with the old system. Ergo, no need for an extension.

And if you basing your assertion on making it even, why not have an extension that same length as the difference between the old and new style?

That would solve the upwind sailing issue, and with a little creative tube bending (picture the handle on many golf carts) it would even be as comfortable under most conditions. Light winds would still present a problem if you want to move your weight towards the middle of the boat.

Downwind, it would be awkward. You want to be in the center of the boat, but the tillers would be centred over each hull.

I would have to do a mockup, but I believe such an arrangement would still interfere with the ability of the rudders to kickup (or raise) with the sail sheeted in tight and the rudders hard over. (The extended tillers would still be under the sail)

A "12" tiller extension (the difference in position between the tiller cross bars on the two rudder systems) does not equalize the boats. Think of a 12" arc centered on the tiller cross bar of the EZ LOC system. It does nothing for upwind sailing and next to nothing for downwind sailing. I have found that a 30" tiller extension just about equalizes the "hand position" for upwind sailing.

Finally, tiller extensions are a known quantity. They are readily available, inexpensive, and easy to install and uninstall. Custom made tillers would be relatively expensive, difficult to install, probably difficult to uninstall, and there is no existing design. Who would want to cut up their factory tillers just so they could enter a regatta? The purpose of my proposal is to open up IWCA racing to as many Wave sailors as possible.

I second the proposal again. It just seems to be a "no-brainer" solution to address the rudder issue caused by the change Hobie made several years ago. While I am not affected by that, I recognize that we should not risk losing any potential racers to this issue when such an easy fix is available. As others have pointed out, racers are a tiny minority in the Wave experience so we should strive to remove any potential barrier to entry and this does that. The added value for everyone is that they could race in comfort instead of contorting their bodies in an effort to move their weight forward in light to medium wind on the downwind legs. It would be the first substantive IWCA rules change that I can think of but one definitely worth making.

I agree completely and this is a reversible solution. In hindsight, to allow or even encourage folks to cobble up their tiller arms is certainly a step in the wrong direction and it would create an unacceptable enforcement situation.

An off-the-shelf extension is easy to source and you can even make your own with very little cost and effort.

As you are aware I am not in favor of fixing something that is not broken. The class has thrived and grown over the years and is still doing so. While the new rudder system has some drawbacks, it also has some advantages. I chartered one at Pensacola Beach and finished 3rd overall. One big advantage I found was on screaming reaches you can really much farther aft. I passed 7 boats on a reach and took the lead.

So, while you are addressing one problem, you are not addressing another. With an extension you will be able to forward, yet with the old system you will be at a disadvantage as you are unable to get farther aft.

I am having trouble understanding why you want to get so far forward upwind. Most of us sail right around the hump of the hull, not up near the cross beam. That could be one of the slowness problems – keep in mind the bow entry of the design is very blunt.., almost like a beer can, unlike the TheMightyHobie18 where we did depress the relatively sharp bows.

Jack, the North Coast Championship is a IWCA Sanctioned event and must use the class rules. And that means no extension, otherwise the sailor can be protested.
For non-sanctioned events, I see no reason why you all can’t experiment

As for the rules proposal, here is how a rule is changed:
b. Changes to the class rules:
i. Proposed permanent rule changes shall be submitted, by any member to the Rules Chairperson, for consideration at least 30 days prior to the annual meeting. Upon consideration of the change, the rules committee may either:
1. Recommend the change.
2. Reject the proposed change.
3. Modify the proposed change.
ii. Upon b.i.1 or b.i.3 above,
1. A Web site posting shall occur stating the proposed change, at least 15 days prior to the meeting.
2. A "YES" vote by a two-thirds votes of the membership present, providing there is a quorum, including absentee ballots and proxy votes at the annual meeting shall be sufficient to change the class rule.
3. To take effect on March 1st of the following year.


The Annual Meeting will take place during the Annual Wave Nationals in Key Largo, scheduled for the first weekend in December.

I'll vote for the tiller extension amendment also!

I have posted photos of the simple (dual) system I made for about $15 with parts from Lowe's electrical department. No holes to drill, and it stows itself for safety when not in use. I have sailed with it all the time for several years now, and love it. Without the extension, I could not sit on the hump between the seat pads and steer effectively.

I do agree with Rick that the shorter arms can be an advantage in heavier winds when you want your weight all the way back, such as in strong Florida winds. Unfortunately, in Indiana, that almost never happens. Most sailing is done in light air, with the bows in the air and the sterns cavitating, unless I use the extension to move forward and balance the boat.

So I'll suggest an amendment to the amendment: allow the old style tiller arms to be shortened to match the EZ-Locs (which would be easier than lengthening the new ones) then add the extensions. THEN everyone would be equal!

I was asked to post a comment that I had made about this issue in another thread.



I also agree that shortening the original length arms to EZ Loc length makes sense as an option.

I agree that there should be no change until the class follows the procedure for a proper vote.

I personally have no skin in this but I am very aware that there are perceived issues that newbees feel that keeps them out of the top 10. The rudders are one of these, so anything we can do to mitigate these perceived differences will help growth.

I don't think I will cut my dearly procured Hobie 20 arms down so I can sit father back on an occaisional screeming reach.

I've been reading all the tiller extension threads and have been reserving comment for a couple of reasons.

1.) I wanted to check it out on the water.
At our Fleet race Thursday night, my buddy (EZ locks) and I, (old style) were racing downwind in, light air, to finish, discussing the tiller's pro's and con's. We ended up agreeing. It's a huge comfort asset and a huge speed asset.

2.) I was surprised that a forum post proposal from an anonymous "stranger" to the forum could have constituted a major rule change. It took me forever to figure out it was Don Thomson. Rick cleared that up

As for the rules proposal, here is how a rule is changed:
b. Changes to the class rules:
i. Proposed permanent rule changes shall be submitted, by any member to the Rules Chairperson, for consideration at least 30 days prior to the annual meeting. Upon consideration of the change, the rules committee may either:
1. Recommend the change.
2. Reject the proposed change.
3. Modify the proposed change.
ii. Upon b.i.1 or b.i.3 above,
1. A Web site posting shall occur stating the proposed change, at least 15 days prior to the meeting.
2. A "YES" vote by a two-thirds votes of the membership present, providing there is a quorum, including absentee ballots and proxy votes at the annual meeting shall be sufficient to change the class rule.
3. To take effect on March 1st of the following year.


3. ) Weight Is a VERY big issue, tiller or not. Racing Hobies for 35 plus years has forced me to stay in relatively good shape, a bottom line “Keep it simple” rule. All the different equipment in the world will not take the place of a fit sailor that spends tons of time on the water.

Sincerely,
Mimi Appel
Fleet 204
Syracuse, NY

A bunch of things:

1. You tried discussing tiller extensions while racing without trying one? I think everybody knows that the old style tillers are better for racing. It appears that all serious racers have the $1500 downgrade. Now let's talk about tiller extensions. Or maybe try them.

2. The rules say that even an anonymous "stranger" can make a change proposal. Not so anonymous and not so much of a stranger when he submitted everything to this forum before doing anything with it. And incorporated suggestions.

Has the rule change been submitted to the Rules Chairperson? Will the Rules Chairperson notify the class members of the proposal? Has the rules committee discussed the proposal? Who are the members? Who has to post the proposed change? Has that been done by Don putting it up here?

How do we submit absentee ballots and proxies? How many members are there in the IWCA (I can do the 66% myself).

Since this forum exists maybe we could discuss, propose, modify, vote, and change a little more rapidly. Rather than just letting the folks who go to the Nationals vote.

3. I know that weight is a VERY big issue. But some folks grew up to be the right size to play college ball and some didn't. It might be nice to make an effort to be inclusive for recreational sailing.

Rules were put into place so we would have a good one-design class. Sorry you don't like them, but they were voted in unanimously.
Rick

Wow, that was certainly non-responsive to his legitimate comments and questions. Sounds an awfull lot like a response from Hobie in the old days, Rick. You used to hate that kind of thing.

First of all, I have no intention of embarrassing myself by arguing about what makes a catamaran go fast with the man who literally “wrote the book” on catamaran racing. Yes, I have a copy.

I appreciate the struggle that took place back in the days when I bought my first Wave to try and develop a Wave class association. Hobie Co. just wasn't interested. It wasn't what they envisioned for the Wave. Since then, the H17 has gone out of production and the class is in decline. The TheMightyHobie18 was superseded by the Tiger and other F18s, and as a class, it is facing extinction.

Similarly, the Wave that the IWCA established the one-design class rules for has been out of production for a number of years. The EZ LOC Waves now being produced are not equivalent boats to the older models. It seems to me that without a successful effort to attract EZ LOC Wave owners to IWCA regattas, the Class Association is doomed to wither.

As an EZ LOC Wave owner, I have to ask myself if it is worth the time and expense to attend an IWCA regatta in a boat that I believe is slower by design than others on the start line. Does the IWCA even want me there?

I don't believe the outcome of the vote on my Rules proposal is a foregone “No”. Despite Rick's well-deserved influence and the fact that a majority of the IWCA in attendance at the Wave Nationals will be sailing with older style rudders, I think enough IWCA members will agree that my proposed rule changes are in the best long-term interests of the Association.

Also, I don't see what harm would be done by inviting EZ LOC Waves with tiller extensions to a few regattas (on trial basis) to evaluate their boat-to-boat competitiveness? Those voting on the proposal would have more information to base their decision on.

The next IWCA event nearest me is the Wave North Americans in September in Indianapolis. It's a 14 hour drive each way, but I have a brother living at the half-way mark. To put put my money where my mouth is, if I am allowed to sail with my tiller extension, and in the absence of inclement weather, I will attend the regatta. I don't care if my results form part of the official standings. I am certain to get my butt kicked anyways

Finally, (to Mimi) I still don't think I have figured out how to get the word “stranger” off my profile. I'll post this and see.

Don Thompson
Fleet 298
Hull #189
Kanata, Ontario, Canada
Profession: retired (yippeee!!!!)

Does unanimously mean the rules were cast into stone? Manufacturers change stuff, conditions change, etc. Were the rules writers all seeing where their final submission for a vote addressed every contingency possible for the life of the boat?

Any set of laws or rules is a best guess to cover the conditions when they were written. The IWCA does, per its constitution, recognize that there can be changes. Specifically:

4. Meetings:
[...]
vii. New Business.
1. New motions.
2. Vote on rule or bylaw changes.

v. Rules Chairman
1. Be responsible for keeping the class rules current and organize any proposed rule changes.
[...]
4. Monitor class rules and recommend changes to the committee

So, let the petitioners for a tiller extension state their case, work through through the process, and put it to a vote.

Hilarious!

Certainly rules can be changed, but not on this or any other forum. There is a specific way to do so. We set it up that way so changes wanted by a few would have to be accepted the majority.

We (HCA) is in the 'testing' phase of this project right now. We have a boats of both variety with tillers added and using them in up/down wind situations to see if it a good/bad deal to propose a change to IHCA. Mimi is heading this up but hasn't given me the scoop on what she thinks just yet. I'll post or ask her to post her findings.

With out Rick and Mary's work in the Wave Class there may not be any Wave racing or at least not as much or as good. I think their voice should carry more weight than the adverage sailor at least in the discussion.
Reggie Poplin
North Carolina

Wow! Remember George Orwell's "Animal Farm"?

I remember a quote that went something like this: " "All animals are created equal but some animals are more equal than others."

Here's a question for Hobie:

Hasn't the new rudder system has been used on Waves longer than the old system? How mny Wave's were produced with the old system (a fixed number) versus the number with the new (an ever increasing number)?

Holding on to the old design makes the boat remind me of a VW Dune Buggy where older is is the standard. Or maybe the 6 volt VW bus.

I believe that in other one-design classes, when a change is made to the equipment for whatever reason, the folks with the older version are encouraged (sometimes required) to up-grade to the new version.

Short of requiring folks with the old style rudders & tillers to up-grade to the EZ-Locs, the tiller extension option would seem to be the best compromise.

This would actually give a slight tactical advantage to the newer boats, and encourage new sailors coming into the class; rather than fostering the implication that racing is the domain of the old-school sailors with the older boats, and newbies need pay big bucks to down-grade their brand-new boats if they want to join that private club. Folks with the old style rudders could then cut down their tillers and add the extensions (if they saw that as a competitive advantage), at a much lower cost.

I think the old style rudder system is by far the better system. If you do add the tiller extension the new boats will have to pass the stick behind the mainsheet.This is one of the great things about the early Waves. On the 2 Waves I have the rudders will fit off a 17 18 ect. and there are a lot of parts out there. Just change the tiller arm. I want be cutting mine down or buying the sorry new ones.

As for the rules being voted in unamimously, that would have been before the rudder/tiller change was made, so everyone had the same configuation. As the class association has grown, any new members are more likely to have the EZ-Locs. That original unanimous group may only comprise a small percentage of current membership. That's the price of success.

I do certainly respect Rick and the other founders of the IWCA, and the successful formula they have developed; but I think this discussion points out the fact that the situation has changed since those rules were written. It's time to take a look at the reality of boats being sold today, and how the IWCA can incorporate new members.

I'm not suggesting you should, but if anyone thinks there's an advantage to doing so, they should be allowed to make their boat conform to current production standards.


As has been stated repeatedly, that won't work. The EZ-Loc mechanism raises the crossbar above the clew of the sail, even with the short arms. That's why it was changed.

Maybe the old style is better for racing (although Rick admits the new style tiller arm is better in high winds), but that is not what stock Waves are equipped with any more.

Everyone has a title within the forum. You will notice the title below the Display Name in each post. Some titles are automatically assigned based on the number of posts a user has made, and some titles are assigned by the forum owner to denote official representatives of the company or other VIPs in the forums.


0 stranger25 newbie50 journeyman100 member200 enthusiast400 addict700 old hand1200 veteran1600 Pooh-Bah2500 Carpal Tunnel

Just so y'all know where I am coming from: I would like to end up with a CHEAP and EASY way to modify either configuration that will satisfy the racing body of the Wave world. ONCE that is done, I intend to put it to HCA's board then on to IHCA assuming we're savvy with the potential solution. The issue at hand is how to get a tiller yoke on the crossbar, as it's not reinforced like a Hobie 14/16. I would really think that tiller ext. length is irrelevent (unless someone can convince me otherwise) but there has to be a 'sweet spot' that makes it all fair. And I would say those that don't want anything to do with a tiller ext. should have that right as well. There are a few people working on the project, with pictures and everything. As soon as they come up with something, I'll get it on this board and then we should all follow proper procedures on requesting a rule change ONCE we decide it's necessary and HOW TO DO IT that everyone would be able to agree on.

I approve of this approach and applaud Chris for soldiering along with this. Once HCA solves this issue, I think it would be almost automatic for IWCA to go along. In spite of what you may hear, most IWCA folks I have talked to will vote yes to a sensible solution. Our growth is stagnant and I think HCA is now where the new Wave interst is. We need to be national, not regional, and we need to be under one rules package. Keep up the good work guys.

I believe you misunderstood what rules I was referring to. I was referring to the Constitutional Rules of the Class. Please go to www.WaveClass.com and read how you can change a rule about the boat. That is the rule I was referring to.
In other words, you cannot change a rudder or tiller rule on this or any other forum. We set up those early Constitutional Rules to keep order in the house.

Hear! Hear! I read this and had two thoughts:

1. Pretty much the Hobie way to do the engineering to come up with a solid solution. Unlike mine of a couple of pop rivets and stuff I had in my spare parts box. Its more fun when stuff doesn't keep breaking.

2. I got all excited about "one rules package". The Hobie 21 had sails from any maker, the Tiger has a spliced sort of tapered mainsheet, trampolines ... close, so close.

You guys are doing great. I think I'll go sailing.

I agree that the Rules need to be adhered to. There seems to be a little confusion as to whether proper procedure has been followed.I submitted my proposal for a Rules change to the Rules Chairman - Chip Short (chip@the-helm.com)on July 28th. I didn't receive confirmation that he received it (I didn't ask for confirmation), but I just sent another email this morning asking him to confirm receipt. If you go back to page 2 of this thread you can read the text of what I submitted. Is there anything else I need to do in order to get the membership to consider and vote on the proposal?

Don Thompson

Probably the best idea is attend the Nationals the first weekend in December at Chip and Barb's beach, in the Florida Keys and attend the National Meeting.
Rick

That would guarantee another year of status quo.

b. Changes to the class rules:
i. Proposed permanent rule changes shall be submitted, by any member to the Rules Chairperson, for consideration at least 30 days prior to the annual meeting. Upon consideration of the change, the rules committee may either:
1. Recommend the change.
2. Reject the proposed change.
3. Modify the proposed change.
ii. Upon b.i.1 or b.i.3 above,
1. A Web site posting shall occur stating the proposed change, at least 15 days prior to the meeting.
2. A "YES" vote by a two-thirds votes of the membership present, providing there is a quorum, including absentee ballots and proxy votes at the annual meeting shall be sufficient to change the class rule.
3. To take effect on March 1st of the following year.

The submission to the Rules Chairperson has, if we can believe Don, been done. More than thirty days to the Nationals. How long will it take to convene a rules committee and discuss the proposed change? If the general membership is to be consulted, then quite a while. How many people are expected to be at the Nationals? How many people are in the IWCA and therefore eligible to vote?

The proposed rules changes have to be posted on the web, presumably here, by mid November. All those people that care enough to vote have to make travel arrangements or get their proxy or absentee ballot to somebody who is going in order to vote.

The way we have always had a quorum is on how we structured the dues and the time of renewing. See below:
e. Membership is for one (1) fiscal year (Nov 15 -Nov 14) , and dues shall be set for the next year at the previous annual meeting by a simple vote. If there is no quorum to vote, dues shall remain the same as the prior year's level. Only Wave owners may hold office or be on the rules committee.
That way, most folks come to the Nationals and pay their dues, so everyone is there and paid up.
Otherwise you can send your dues to Skip Kaub, our Secretary
Secretary:
Skip Kaub, Indianapolis, IN
Skip@inquisitiveeye.com

One more try. Then I'm done.

"Only Wave owners may hold office or be on the rules committee." I presume you meant only IWCA members ..."

"That way, most folks come to the Nationals and pay their dues, so everyone is there and paid up." Not everyone Rick. But if the IWCA has 40 members total, a guess but I have asked and got no answer, then their memberships all expire on 15 November. So the twenty people who turn up for the Nationals are those who get to vote and the rest of us can ... well whatever.

So the general membership can debate and discuss on this forum and come to a consensus, of sorts, as to what should happen, about tiller extensions or pink anodized rear crossmembers or whatever, and then their memberships expire and a dozen people who go to the Nationals and attend the meeting vote and decide? Maybe you could ask those people who are voting whether their boats have EZ-Locs. Bet you there aren't three.

At any rate here are the questions, again, about the politics of getting tiller extensions approved:

How long will it take to convene a rules committee and discuss the proposed change? How many people are expected to be at the Nationals? How many people are in the IWCA and therefore eligible to vote?

The bylaws contain:

4. Meetings:
a. At least one annual meeting shall be held on the first night of the US Nationals. In the absence of a US Nationals, the meeting will be held at the discretion of the class president.
i. Special meetings may be held from time to time and can be done electronically with 15 days notice (web site posting).

and:

5. Committees
a. Rules committee - Shall consist of a Rules chairman, Chief measurer, and an Event coordinator.
i. The purpose of this committee:
1. Is to monitor the class rules.
2. Propose rule changes to the membership, as they feel necessary.
3. Solicit national and international event locations.
4. Make temporary rule changes as the situation arises.

So if we, meaning the IWCA membership, wanted to we could promulgate the rules changes, already done by Don; have an electronic vote; and then the Rules Committee could make a temporary rules change and people could try out the tiller extension without fear of being protested.

Charles Smith
IWCA Member
Sail Number 103 "Sploosh" (named by my granddaughter)

BigWhoop
You can bring any stock Wave to IWCA races and race. The hobie sails and now the rudder system on the Wave have been inconsistent over the years because of changes by Hobie. That is why IWCA allows all sail makers to build sails and get measured in. I will go with the folw on the tiller extension but it should be on what ever type of rudder system you have.

There has not really been a debate on this Forum. You and a few others have given opionions, but you have not heard any debate.
On the negative side for you, A tiller extension will help the big people also get farther forward. Think about it. Just one point. So, as in Lincoln/Douglas both side should be presented, and then voted upon.
At any rate, I don't think this is any emergency rule change that has to be made. Apparently you do.

The problem here is that only 4 or 5 IWCA paid members ever vist this forum.

Dues are only collected at the nationals and so it would be very difficult to comply with the bylaws unless you are at the nationals.

I'm not sure if it was intended to be this way, but the bottom line is that any rule change proposal is doomed by the way the rules are written.

Having said that, and earlier in this discussion, the future of the Wave class is in the hands of HCA-NA, not IWCA.

IWCA folks, for the most part, are quite happy with the status quo.

HCA has the responsibility to evaluate and institute rules that equalize inequities that arise from the Hobie Cat Company changing specifications. Once HCA has made such a rule adjustment, it would likely follow that IWCA would do the same.

My understanding is that the Hobie sails have settled down and haven't had significant changes in many, many years.

The current "need" to have an open sail rule is really about sailor weight, as I understand it.

Matt (Miller)?

Mike

I always find that one to be pretty funny. It is something used to argue the idea of open sail maker use on the Wave... The fact is, the Wave sail design has NEVER changed since day one. Slight variations in production may have occured, but we never made changes to shape or patterns.

Using some slight inconsistency in our production as an excuse to make much more dramatic changes in shape due to a personal desire always strikes me as absurd. It is what it is... some guys want to buy more power for an edge when racing and sail makers are happy to get their toe in the door.

We have measured as much as 8 inches differences in luffs. Not sure why.

Rick is correct, the 17 sails were almost never the same from year to year and the new one was always a little bigger. Strange!

It is very common for the luff rope to bunch up and "shrink" the luff length. You would have to measure under downhaul loads. Newer sails would then appear to be longer. Depending on the luff rope material used it may have been more prominent at some time over the years. You can not simply lay one on top of another and compare.

We are not talking about H17 sails here, but same applies. Actually more so. Mylar shrinks over time. That combined with the luff rope issue makes comparison difficult.

I now have a 1999 hobie 17 that weighs 329lbs and have had at least 4 others in the past weighing up to 365 lbs. All anyone wants is everything to be equal and let the sailing do the talking.

This is exactly why the tiller extension proposal was made, to bring things back to equality.

Speaking of which ...

6. Amendments:
....
b. Changes to the class rules:
i. Proposed permanent rule changes shall be submitted, by any member to the Rules Chairperson, for consideration at least 30 days prior to the annual meeting. Upon consideration of the change, the rules committee may either:
1. Recommend the change.
2. Reject the proposed change.
3. Modify the proposed change.
ii. Upon b.i.1 or b.i.3 above,
1. A Web site posting shall occur stating the proposed change, at least 15 days prior to the meeting.
2. A "YES" vote by a two-thirds votes of the membership present, providing there is a quorum, including absentee ballots and proxy votes at the annual meeting shall be sufficient to change the class rule.
3. To take effect on March 1st of the following year.

Were are we with this proposal? You know ... the proposal that is the topic of this thread? Rules Chairperson? Rules Committee?

I have not heard of any proposal being submitted yet.

Come on Rick, I submitted my proposal some time ago to the Rules Chairman listed on the IWCA website - Chip Short. chip@the-helm.com
But really, if you read back earlier in this thread, I already said that I submitted it and who I submitted it to. Is this a real class association or are we just playing some kind of a game? I have prepared and submitted a proposal for a rules change in accordance with the Rules of the organization because I believe it is in the best interest of furthering Wave racing. If you are interested in having the proposal considered by the membership, in accordance with the Rules, please tell me who I should submit it to, if not the person listed on the IWCA website.

Chip would be the right person. But, I have not heard from him about this issue. I will drop him an email.

Rick

Sorry for the delay, I didn't know I was still the rule chair.

In the short term, I'll discuss the issue with the other members of the rules committee.

Ultimately, it is going to need to be discussed and decided at the class meeting this December, so we might as well add it to the agenda now.

Thanks, Chip

FYI:
HCA-NA has submitted a proposal to the International Hobie Class Association requesting that a tiller ext be allowed and the option to shorten the tiller arms at the owners discretion.
This was approved by the HCA board and is in process with the IHCA rules committee. We hope for an answer fairly soon, so I'll keep you up on developments.
cw

COOL!!! Thanks Chris.

Mike

I remember there was a post on here several years ago (maybe the first time the subject came up) from someone with a European Wave. The tiller arms on their version were WAY shorter, like only one foot; but the boats came standard with a tiller extension. The poster said their Waves would be un-sailable without the extension. He posted a photo of his boat with snow on it, showing the short arms with the extension; and people joked about the white sand.

Perhaps the IHCA and IWCA could use their configuration as a reference (if they are truly "International").

Edit: I found the post, but I don't know how to imbed it. From "2006 Draft IWCA Class Rules" thread on 11/4/06 by "Bengtos" from Stockholm. Here's the photo.

Try this (copy the address of the old thread from the top of your browser, paste it into your new post):

http://www.catsailor.com/forums/ubb...;Words=Bengtos&Search=true#Post87493

I don't think I have the nerve to take a hacksaw to my perfectly good tiller arms.

Mike

Awwwww. Madcatter is going to be *so* much fun next year. Of course, it's not a done deal yet, but here's hoping! I'm thinking Rochester too...maybe Flying High.... I'm even going to go on a diet

I am confident this will go the way we want with our rules committee (but you never know) but I hope this stimulates that wave 'racers'.

The Euro version Wave has the tiller arms too low. You really want to be able to get back on the Wave. I get right under the tiller arm sometimes.

I didn't mean the Euro arms should become the "standard", but the rules should be written to allow European Waves to compete with North American or Australasian boats. Maybe a window of allowable lengths, with tiller extensions for arms less than the length of the original US Waves.

I wll add my opinions to this.

I have raced Portsmouth with a tiller on the old style Wave. I did not find them to be an advantage except during light gusty conditions when I was scrambling around.

Ronstan type connectors work and tillers well on Waves. I would suggest mounting them on the front or the bottom of the tiller cross bar because of how close the sail can be to the bar. I found that a Marstrom A Class extension, collapased is about the right length.

If you are worried about drilling a hole in the crossbar, you can surface mount a Ronstan style connector.

I think this a good proposal overall.

Holy cow! Why didn't I pick up on this sooner? The IHCA class rules absolutely should allow a tiller (without us needing to ask), since boats are being sold with this configuration already.

What else do we need to do to standardize these boats for worldwide racing? I know they're not going to change how they build them in CA, and I know they're not an ISAF class, and there are no events (currently) where boats would be shipped between Regions for events; but the IHCA rules should be equal everywhere (sans CompTip, obviously), so we can modify the boats to meet the class rules.

Just a thought...

Mike

As far as tiller length goes, the way we've asked for the rule to be written, its whatever the sailor wants. As far as not asking for permission, we're really the only games in town (HCA/IWCA) regarding organized Wave racing that I have been privy to, so we should do what we're doing.

Things seem to be moving along....

http://www.hobieclass.com/site/hobi...0%20HW%20rule%201.3%20for%20comments.pdf

I think we'll be golden on this, the only thing I may ask for is a change on the effective date as we'll have as many as 3 events prior to that date that Waves may want to participate in and might want to take advantage of the new rule.

Great write-up about this IHCA proposal in the new Hobie Hotline that I received today, on page 4. Thanks Chris and Matt!

It says to send comments to: rules@hobieclass.com before December 1, 2011.

If the IHCA approves it, will the IWCA be far behind? (or ahead?)

Time to get serious about this. If you're going to the Nationals then be prepared to vote. If you're not here's a proxy form cobbled up from a financial site someplace. You should fill it in and mail it to Chip Short ( chip@the-helm.com) and ... somebody else. Any volunteers to carry these in? I'll do it but my internet access is gonna be dodgy while I'm travelling.

Here's the proxy:

PROXY FORM
National Class Meeting of the International Wave Class Association
Be it known, that I, _______________, sail number _____, member in good standing of the International Wave Class Association (IWCA), hereby constitute and appoint by this email
Charles Smith (or change this to some other name)
as my agent for me and in my name to vote as my proxy at the National Class Meeting of the IWCA, to be held on 1 December 2011 or any adjournment thereof, for:
1) the matter of a change in the class rules to allow tiller extensions. To vote in my name for/against the change.
Dated: _______ day of _______, 2011.

There you go!

I gave two proxys in support of the change to Steve Abbey.

One for me (100)and one for Barbie (101)

Jack
I am in support of the change if you can vote or tell me how.
Reggie Poplin
Hobie Wave #28

The motion was made to follow the IHCA rule, if and when it becomes official. That motion passed.

Thanks to BigWhoop for seeing this through. I'm not sure if it will make a lot of difference in the race results but it will certainly make the boats more fun downwind. I have always hated the extreme positions required.

In the end it seems like it was the obvious thing to do and another step toward commonality with the within the Wave community.

Adding the extension on the old style tiller crossbar will be easy. Is there any decision on the "best" extension design for the new style system that goes way up at an angle with the blades raised?

No, you'll have to try a few different things and post your findings. There is no perfect way to do it, but I think the tiller stick will be short enough in both situations that it will be managable when the tillers are in the up position.

You will drill the tiller hinge bolt hole at an angle (tilted forward) through the tiller crossbar to allow the tiller to drop onto the trampoline when both rudders are down. Once a rudder is lifted, the tiller arms are so high... the tiller will have to be aft or over the stern. There is no way to easily sail one rudder up on the EZ Loc.

Tillers and hinges vary, so there is no set dimension.

It's official:

HCANA Hobie Wave Rules Change

That's great news. See what happens when you ask nice? C'mon Madcatter!

Thanks Don, for having the stamina to get that done.

It shouldn't change the status quo, but I think us older folks will be more comfortable. That was all I had in mind.

Finally. I am glad that is out of the way. I'll bet it makes alot more people happy than you think.
I have another rule change in mind too, I'll get to work on this spring and let you know what becomes of it.

Jack
Is the rule change for both groups?
Reggie

Yes Reggie...IWCA and HCANA

Actually, I just started the ball rolling. All the real work was done by Mimi and xanderwess. They deserve the credit.

It was also approved at the IWCA National Meeting in December.

Here is another one.