Ding Ding Ding! The winner

The only way out of the conundrum is to run the regatta under a different set of rules.

But US Sailing and ISAF will go after you for copy write infringement for your ISAF rules minus the Coast Guard requirement and bar your club and competitors from all US Sailing and ISAF events in the future.

We won't even get into your club's liability issues or your own liability limitations.

The conundrum is replaced by a catch 22!

I don't see any crack down on this annual regatta with its own set of rules.

http://www.jyc.org/FoolsRules/ThisYearsFoolsRules.htm

Ah... you bring up a great point... the need for good judgment!

What's needed is good judgment on all sides of the game we play.

If you want to run a regatta outside of the jurisdiction of ISAF and US SAILING, you need to write your own complete set of rules. I'm sure it's possible, but you may find it more difficult than expected to author rules that are complete (cover all actions of boats and race operations), consistent (no rules contradict any others), and coherent (don't lead to any unexpected consequences - such as one boat forcing another to break a rule without breaking one herself).

An organizing authority cannot use the Racing Rules of Sailing and then make changes prohibited by those rules. An honest jury will overturn those changes. If the OA forms a dishonest jury, then their decision will be overturned on appeal. If the OA refuses to follow the instructions of the appeals committee, they may be subject to sanctions levied by US SAILING or ISAF (including, as has been pointed out, being banned from running regattas). If a banned OA runs an event anyway, they may have difficulty getting competitors, as the sailors may face disciplinary action themselves for attending.

But let's back off from the threats. The preamble to the rules states:I would argue that the Organizing Authority is also expected to follow them. Sportsmanship is a basic principle. Why is it so difficult to abide by the rules of our sport?

There are provisions for developing and testing experimental new rules. See rule 86.3. If you want to try out experimental rules, you may need US SAILING's permission.

I don't see a "consensus and behavior of a majority of sailors not conforming to the rules". I think the opposite is true. I believe the majority of sailors think we should follow the rules. Civil disobedience (in my opinion), isn't really a viable or necessary action here.

Sincerely,
Eric

Last Tuesday evening I brought this issue up (prior to catching John's post) at a US Sailing Jr. Olympic Festival planning meeting for our yc which will also include the first USODA Gulf Coast Championship Regatta. Despite my mention of subsequent complaints (against the SI rule) from parents at Opti events within the GYA during the past year our planning committee demanded that USCG devices be worn exclusively, and my role as Safety Officer was slanted toward mediocrity.

For major catamaran and youth events I have recently used the phrase "USCG approved or international equivalent."

I have always felt that a regatta should be organized by sailors for the sake of the competitors' safety and performance challenge and not a blinded race comm. The Organizing Authority has the opportunity to keep up with the times or lose participation.

As Safety Officer and grandparent of a sailor I will put this back on the table with John's letter for their re-consideration.


Bert Rice
Laser Radial sailor - grandpa

I took a look at the rules for this event and have two observations:

1. Nowhere in the "press release" or the "rules" published does it say that this regatta is governed by the Racing Rules of Sailing. I conclude that the event is run outside the jurisdiction of ISAF and US SAILING.
2. I see that the rules include "All crew members MUST wear Coast Guard approved life preservers...

Regards,
Eric

People raced sailboats before US Sailing and people will race sailboats after US Sailing.

At the end of the day, Bob is right, it's a free country and you can do whatever you want.

BUT, don't expect much (any?) leeway at major events, and for those of us that are certified by USSA, we are expected to uphold the rules that are in place. I like to think that as catsailors, we are always thinking outside of the box anyway, and I know that most of us really try to make everyone happy (and we all know how much of a moving target that can be).

I am intentionally not discussing the merits of CE vs USCG, because that argument can go around forever.

If enough sailors feel strongly enough about this, why not petition USSA to make a change? They might go for it, or they might come back with other answers you won't like.

Remember, KISS is usually the best answer. There's nothing stopping anyone from buying a USCG PFD. If the buoyancy that will keep you face up in the water is a nuisance, maybe you should be reassessing your priorities.

Mike

Because of the rule that requires trapeze harnesses to float (43.1(b)), you'll float butt-up if you're unconscious, no matter what PFD you're wearing.

I discovered that when I went for a fully geared up swim in the pool at the 16 Worlds in Mexico. (You needed the chlorine to kill the seawater stink.)

I guess that is part of where I am coming from... does the rule make sense? Are you more safe? Parents I polled this weekend insist they got them for their kids because they wear them - comfort means no argument from little Susie about wearing the PFD, which means she's wearing it when the Sabot rolls over.

I never tried the dead-man's float like Lee suggests, so I don't know if my harness would put me face-down or not... interesting experiment, Matt. I did go into the water for the first time since I got this vest - I was kicked off the boat to assist a single-hander in righting his boat. I did find it much easier to swim in the CE vest.

In any country, you are free to break the law if you want.

We are all expected to uphold the rules, whether or not we are certified. Again, I refer everybody to the rule titled Sportsmanship and the Rules, which preceeds Part 1 of the rulebook.

For the sake of argument, let's assume that PFDs meeting either certification provide adequate flotation. We're not discussing design differences, but regulatory ones.

I'm sympathetic to this cause (really, I am), but I'll bet money that US SAILING won't rewrite this prescription to permit competitors to break the law. The only real solution I see is to lobby the USCG to change their regulations (or certification process). Of course, I don't see much hope there either.

All the RRS 40 prescription does is make the existing laws (regarding life-saving equipment) also rank as rules. It doesn't in any way add to existing legal requirements. The only difference is that in addition to breaking the law and risking a fine, you also break a rule and risk disqualification if you don't carry the mandated equipment.

Sincerely,
Eric

Well, that depends on your behavior with and without the US SAILING prescription. Let's examine the following possibilities:

1. You already obey the law. If so, then this rule doesn't affect you and the answer is no.
2. You don't already obey the law and you still don't obey it even with the prescription. In this case, the answer is also no.
3. You don't already obey the law but because of the prescription, you change your behavior and comply. In this case, maybe or maybe not. If you simply exchange an adequate USCG approved PFD for an adequate non-approved PFD, then no. If you use an approved PFD where you previously had not, then I think the answer is yes.

I believe that US SAILING has become increasingly safety-conscious over the past 20 years, and this prescription is another step in that direction. In principle, I agree with those who dislike rules saying "obey the law". They are redundant and place control of our sport in the wrong hands. I don't know the origin of this prescription, but I presume there must have been a real problem with competitors breaking the law for US SAILING to add it.

If little Susie is under 13 years old, then she must wear a USCG approved PFD anyway. If not, she only needs to carry an approved PFD on board - she can wear whatever she wants.

And I think that's the common sense solution here as well. If you have an adequate CE approved PFD that you prefer to wear, wear it and also keep a USCG compliant PFD on board. Stuff it in a hull compartment, bungee it to a crossarm, or sew additional pockets onto your trampoline - whatever it takes.

Regards,
Eric

That's all well and good but, I know plenty of guys who spend large sums of money to save ounces on their boats, like buying titanium bolts to swap out for stainless,etc. .You are going to have a hard time convincing these people to carry an "extra"life jacket that's more dangerous than the one they're wearing for the sake of a greedy, bureaucratic, red tape wrapped law.

If their need to "save ounces" outweighs their need to obey the law and follow the rules, then nothing I say will convince them. I trust that none of us here fall into that group. Does anybody here honestly believe that they have to break the law in order to win a race?

I can't believe that a moment's introspection would lead anyone to think that. We do have many cases, however, where wearing a USCG PFD is written into the SIs - this takes the Prescription to another level, and carrying doesn't meet this rule.

I'm no closer to resolving this issue in my head.

Yeah you are, you just don't like the answer.

That would assume that I'm not perfectly balanced between the two sides of the issue - I have nothing to gain or lose no matter which way I get tipped; therefore there can't be an answer I don't like.

My list of pro v con is a study in point and counterpoint.

What about the big butt, orange, around the neck & down the chest, "just rescued from The Lusitania", looking ones?

I think we've seen this one before:

Just the fact that you know what the Lusitania is (AND spelled it correctly) moved you up two more notches.