Obstruction - Start / Finish Line

"ProjectPro" <vendors2004.TakeThisOut@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:5a73b9cf.0404101825.2548f55d@posting.google.com
 > Our club prohibits crossing the start / finish line except to start or
 > finish. The entire area, including nearby extensions of the start /
 > finish line, are navigable. Our sailing instructions do not modify
 > RRS 28.1 (the "string" rule) in this regard, so "unwinding" is
 > permitted.
 >
 > A handful of sailors had a lively discussion over beer one night
 > regarding whether the prohibited start / finish line ranks as an
 > obstruction. It is clearly not a mark - boats can (and do) leave this
 > area to either side depending on individual polars or tactical
 > circumstances.
 >
 > The RRS definitions state that an obstruction is "an object that a
 > boat could not pass...", but the line is not an object. Further, the
 > definitions state that "...an area so designated by the sailing
 > instructions (is) also (an) obstruction...".
 >
 > Does the prohibition of crossing the line in the sailing instructions
 > make the "area so designated by the sailing instructions" an
 > obstruction, or would the SIs have to specifically state that the line
 > ranks as an obstruction?

If it is desired to treat the line as an obstruction, that is, creating
an entitlement to room under RRS 18, then the SI should explicitly
designate the thing as an obstruction.

But by designating start/finish lines as obstructions, you are
destroying the principles that allow one boat to force another over at
the start.

The effect of your local SI is a rather ham-fisted attempt to do what
the Flag I, Flag Z and Black Flag starting options in RRS 30 provide in
a carefully thought out way (with effective penalties, that won't
require a protest hearing). Why not use the carefully developed rules
provided?

The RRS don't provide a specific rule to keep the finish line clear, but
if this is really a problem, bearing in mind that the SI probhibition
will require a protest hearing to deal with an infringer, then it can
probably be dealt with better by:

* _requesting_ boats not to cross or re-cross the finish line except
when finishing (in the SI, or general notices), (this works fine with
several clubs where I race) and

* locating the finish line sufficiently away from nearby rounding marks
so that boats that are racing do not come near it, for example, 200 m to
windward of the windward mark of the course, or to leeward of the
leeward mark, if a downwind finish.

John<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line 

Thanks, Gene and John. Our ham-fisted attempt wasn't to recreate the
RRS 30 system, it was to keep boats out of the finishing area on laps
of the course between starting and finishing. We have boats of widely
differing speeds sailing different courses, and could end up with a
boat under spinnaker hauling butt to finish, only to have to deal with
a slower close hauled boat going back to the weather mark. The intent
is to keep the slower boat out of the finish line for safety purposes.

The reason that we allow someone to correct an error of going through
the line is that the Southern Chesapeake Bay gets some crazy currents
at times, and is possible for a boat to drift across the line without
the helmsman being able to prevent it. Under those drifting
conditions we are less concerned about the posibility of collision.

We are constrained by the shape and size of our Willoughby Bay and
cannot offset the starting line. I'm also not an favor of
"requesting" that competitors do something - there needs to be a
consequence.

It is not a problem that the RC would have to protest a competitor for
violating the line. It doesn't happen often enough for that to be an
issue.

The main question is whether the SIs have to use the word
"obstruction" in defining the area to be avoided, or is the fact that
it is a prohibited area enough to make it an obstruction for the
purposes of Rules 18 and 19?

Gene - Best of luck with the Lakefest Regatta next weekend. I wish I
could be there. It is a wonderful event!

Jim Williams
Willoughby Racers
Norfolk, VA

Allan" <allanj.TakeThisOut@s054.aone.net.au> wrote in message news:<407922a4$0$4574$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>...>
 > If it is desired to treat the line as an obstruction, that is, creating
 > an entitlement to room under RRS 18, then the SI should explicitly
 > designate the thing as an obstruction.
 >
 > But by designating start/finish lines as obstructions, you are
 > destroying the principles that allow one boat to force another over at
 > the start.
 >
 > The effect of your local SI is a rather ham-fisted attempt to do what
 > the Flag I, Flag Z and Black Flag starting options in RRS 30 provide in
 > a carefully thought out way (with effective penalties, that won't
 > require a protest hearing). Why not use the carefully developed rules
 > provided?
 >
 > The RRS don't provide a specific rule to keep the finish line clear, but
 > if this is really a problem, bearing in mind that the SI probhibition
 > will require a protest hearing to deal with an infringer, then it can
 > probably be dealt with better by:
 >
 > * _requesting_ boats not to cross or re-cross the finish line except
 > when finishing (in the SI, or general notices), (this works fine with
 > several clubs where I race) and
 >
 > * locating the finish line sufficiently away from nearby rounding marks
 > so that boats that are racing do not come near it, for example, 200 m to
 > windward of the windward mark of the course, or to leeward of the
 > leeward mark, if a downwind finish.
 >
 > John<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line 

Hi Jim,

I understand exactly what you are trying to do, because we tried the
same thing for many years in both TSC club racing and in open events
such as Lakefest.

As you know, we get some really high level officials on board for
Lakefest, with national and international race officers and judges. To a
person they told us the closed start/finish line was unworkable. The RRS
do not really accommodate this closure, and anyone appealing a DSQ would
probably win.

If your club is willing to go along with a valiant attempt to modify the
rules it may work, but perhaps not if you have genuine sea lawyers
involved. I agree that a "request" is not a good idea.

We gave it up for Lakefest to avoid the pitfalls. To maintain sanity of
the RC we have changed all the courses to remove the need for a closed
line. Any boat crossing the line other than starting or finishing is way
off course, so the number of incidents is very small.

As to your question of wording the SI's, the definition seems pretty
clear. An "area so designated by the sailing instructions [is] also an
obstruction". There is no mention of why the area might be selected,
such as being a prohibited area. There is no automatic designation other
than one that is safety related. It is not allowed to change the RRS
definitions. Therefore the SI's must explicitly designate the area as an
obstruction.

Regards,
Gene Fuller

ProjectPro wrote:
 > Thanks, Gene and John. Our ham-fisted attempt wasn't to recreate the
 > RRS 30 system, it was to keep boats out of the finishing area on laps
 > of the course between starting and finishing. We have boats of widely
 > differing speeds sailing different courses, and could end up with a
 > boat under spinnaker hauling butt to finish, only to have to deal with
 > a slower close hauled boat going back to the weather mark. The intent
 > is to keep the slower boat out of the finish line for safety purposes.
 >
 > The reason that we allow someone to correct an error of going through
 > the line is that the Southern Chesapeake Bay gets some crazy currents
 > at times, and is possible for a boat to drift across the line without
 > the helmsman being able to prevent it. Under those drifting
 > conditions we are less concerned about the posibility of collision.
 >
 > We are constrained by the shape and size of our Willoughby Bay and
 > cannot offset the starting line. I'm also not an favor of
 > "requesting" that competitors do something - there needs to be a
 > consequence.
 >
 > It is not a problem that the RC would have to protest a competitor for
 > violating the line. It doesn't happen often enough for that to be an
 > issue.
 >
 > The main question is whether the SIs have to use the word
 > "obstruction" in defining the area to be avoided, or is the fact that
 > it is a prohibited area enough to make it an obstruction for the
 > purposes of Rules 18 and 19?
 >
 > Gene - Best of luck with the Lakefest Regatta next weekend. I wish I
 > could be there. It is a wonderful event!
 >
 > Jim Williams
 > Willoughby Racers
 > Norfolk, VA<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line 

On 11 Apr 2004 07:41:59 -0700, in message
<5a73b9cf.0404110641.7f9e8522.DeleteThis@posting.google.com>
vendors2004.DeleteThis@verizon.net (ProjectPro) wrote:

 >The main question is whether the SIs have to use the word
 >"obstruction" in defining the area to be avoided, or is the fact that
 >it is a prohibited area enough to make it an obstruction for the
 >purposes of Rules 18 and 19?

If you are writing the sailing instructions and you want it to be
treated as an obstruction, then be sure to use the word "obstruction"
in your declaration as well as "prohibited". That way the SIs will
communicate clearly to the racers that it is to be treated as an
obstruction. It may or may not be a legal requirement, but it never
hurts to be explicit.

Ryk<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line 

A closed line only makes sense where the line lies between the
windward and leeward marks. To avoid the problem entirely, just ensure
that leeward mark is either upwind of the line, level with the line,
or uses the non-RC end as the leeward mark. However, it is easier to
separate boats by just dropping a finish mark a short distance to
starboard (usually) of the RC boat. If any line needs to be 'closed'
it can be that one, unless your conditions are such that you may still
be starting boats while prior starters may be transiting the area
(presuming you still have the leeward mark to leeward of the line).

If all this fails or cannot be done, there is one method which will
beat the sea-lawyers:

You must define each non-starting/finishing leg as requiring that BOTH
of the RC and the Start mark must be left, (at the helmsman's option)
either to port or to starboard.
'... from mark 3 to mark 4 leaving both of mark 1 and the Race
Committee vessel to starboard, or both of mark 1 and the Race
Committee vessel to port...'

This allows 'un-stringing' in case of error and protest ("did not
string") in case of failure.

In the Toronto area we gave up on this sort of idiocy about 20 years
ago....It is MUCH simpler to restructure things to completely obviate
any need for.

Geoff



On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 15:26:34 UTC, Gene Fuller <W4SZzzzzzz RemoveThis @att.net>
wrote:

 > Hi Jim,
 >
 > I understand exactly what you are trying to do, because we tried the
 > same thing for many years in both TSC club racing and in open events
 > such as Lakefest.
 >
 > As you know, we get some really high level officials on board for
 > Lakefest, with national and international race officers and judges. To a
 > person they told us the closed start/finish line was unworkable. The RRS
 > do not really accommodate this closure, and anyone appealing a DSQ would
 > probably win.
 >
 > If your club is willing to go along with a valiant attempt to modify the
 > rules it may work, but perhaps not if you have genuine sea lawyers
 > involved. I agree that a "request" is not a good idea.
 >
 > We gave it up for Lakefest to avoid the pitfalls. To maintain sanity of
 > the RC we have changed all the courses to remove the need for a closed
 > line. Any boat crossing the line other than starting or finishing is way
 > off course, so the number of incidents is very small.
 >
 > As to your question of wording the SI's, the definition seems pretty
 > clear. An "area so designated by the sailing instructions [is] also an
 > obstruction". There is no mention of why the area might be selected,
 > such as being a prohibited area. There is no automatic designation other
 > than one that is safety related. It is not allowed to change the RRS
 > definitions. Therefore the SI's must explicitly designate the area as an
 > obstruction.
 >
 > Regards,
 > Gene Fuller
 >
 > ProjectPro wrote:
  > > Thanks, Gene and John. Our ham-fisted attempt wasn't to recreate the
  > > RRS 30 system, it was to keep boats out of the finishing area on laps
  > > of the course between starting and finishing. We have boats of widely
  > > differing speeds sailing different courses, and could end up with a
  > > boat under spinnaker hauling butt to finish, only to have to deal with
  > > a slower close hauled boat going back to the weather mark. The intent
  > > is to keep the slower boat out of the finish line for safety purposes.
  > >
  > > The reason that we allow someone to correct an error of going through
  > > the line is that the Southern Chesapeake Bay gets some crazy currents
  > > at times, and is possible for a boat to drift across the line without
  > > the helmsman being able to prevent it. Under those drifting
  > > conditions we are less concerned about the posibility of collision.
  > >
  > > We are constrained by the shape and size of our Willoughby Bay and
  > > cannot offset the starting line. I'm also not an favor of
  > > "requesting" that competitors do something - there needs to be a
  > > consequence.
  > >
  > > It is not a problem that the RC would have to protest a competitor for
  > > violating the line. It doesn't happen often enough for that to be an
  > > issue.
  > >
  > > The main question is whether the SIs have to use the word
  > > "obstruction" in defining the area to be avoided, or is the fact that
  > > it is a prohibited area enough to make it an obstruction for the
  > > purposes of Rules 18 and 19?
  > >
  > > Gene - Best of luck with the Lakefest Regatta next weekend. I wish I
  > > could be there. It is a wonderful event!
  > >
  > > Jim Williams
  > > Willoughby Racers
  > > Norfolk, VA
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line 

"R. G. Newbury" <newburynospam.TakeThisOut@mandamus.org> wrote:
 > A closed line only makes sense where the line lies between the
 > windward and leeward marks. To avoid the problem entirely, just ensure
 > that leeward mark is either upwind of the line, level with the line,
 > or uses the non-RC end as the leeward mark.

This is good advice, but assumes it's possible. Some fleets race in
constricted waters where geography (hydrography?) force you to set
courses that you might otherwise prefer not to, especially when using
fixed marks.

I've become a big fan of the setup R.G. suggests, when it's possible.
We set a start/finish line square to the wind and a windward mark dead
upwind. Then, we drop the leeward mark about 100 yards to windward of
the RC boat, and have a downwind finish. This gives you a couple of
advantages:

1) If the wind shifts, you only have to move one mark (the windward
one). Unless the shift is really radical, the leeward mark can stay
where it is, and it's not critical that it gets set exactly. The chase
boat can just toss it over the side on the way up to set the windward
mark and forget about it. This really helps out when the RC is
shorthanded and you've only got a single chase boat.

2) The spinnaker drops all happen right in front of the RC boat. This
not only adds to the RC's entertainment factor, but makes for great
photography as well.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line 

Hi Geoff,

This is probably beating a dead horse, but here goes.

Your anti-sea-lawyer solution won't work. The definition of "mark" says,
"An object the sailing instructions require a boat to leave on a
specified side . . . ." There is no option to allow a "mark" to have
anything but ONE specified side. Changing definitions is not allowed.
Rule 28.1 could be changed to modify "sailing the course", but it would
need to avoid the use of "mark". Sounds like a real mess.

Mid-course start/finish lines can be useful in several situations.
However, it is necessary to either leave the line "open" or jump through
a bunch of hoops in the SI's to try to "close" the line.

Regards,
Gene Fuller



R. G. Newbury wrote:
 > A closed line only makes sense where the line lies between the
 > windward and leeward marks. To avoid the problem entirely, just ensure
 > that leeward mark is either upwind of the line, level with the line,
 > or uses the non-RC end as the leeward mark. However, it is easier to
 > separate boats by just dropping a finish mark a short distance to
 > starboard (usually) of the RC boat. If any line needs to be 'closed'
 > it can be that one, unless your conditions are such that you may still
 > be starting boats while prior starters may be transiting the area
 > (presuming you still have the leeward mark to leeward of the line).
 >
 > If all this fails or cannot be done, there is one method which will
 > beat the sea-lawyers:
 >
 > You must define each non-starting/finishing leg as requiring that BOTH
 > of the RC and the Start mark must be left, (at the helmsman's option)
 > either to port or to starboard.
 > '... from mark 3 to mark 4 leaving both of mark 1 and the Race
 > Committee vessel to starboard, or both of mark 1 and the Race
 > Committee vessel to port...'
 >
 > This allows 'un-stringing' in case of error and protest ("did not
 > string") in case of failure.
 >
 > In the Toronto area we gave up on this sort of idiocy about 20 years
 > ago....It is MUCH simpler to restructure things to completely obviate
 > any need for.
 >
 > Geoff<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line 

  > >The main question is whether the SIs have to use the word
  > >"obstruction" in defining the area to be avoided, or is the fact that
  > >it is a prohibited area enough to make it an obstruction for the
  > >purposes of Rules 18 and 19?
 >
 > If you are writing the sailing instructions and you want it to be
 > treated as an obstruction, then be sure to use the word "obstruction"
 > in your declaration as well as "prohibited". That way the SIs will
 > communicate clearly to the racers that it is to be treated as an
 > obstruction. It may or may not be a legal requirement, but it never
 > hurts to be explicit.
 >
 > Ryk
 >
There are a few other problems associated with a SI that indicates the
Finish Line is a 'prohibited area' unless finishing.

(1) Light air starts, class just gets across the line, air shuts down,
current pushes them back through the start-finish line. Now what?

(2) Most of the SI's identify the situation as 'prohibited' or wording to
that effect but do not spell out a consequence of going through the finish
line before a finish. So, off to the Protest Committee, and the Committee
says fine, but what is the penalty -- none spelled out in the SI's.

(3) Due to rough weather, the RC Boat gets moved around and in effect so
does one end of the Finish Line. Along come boats on a leg, trying to
figure out where one end of the Finish Line is so as to stay clear, but the
RC boat is all over the place, perhaps the line 'grew' substantially from
when the classes were started, and boats searching for the outer pin,
unknowingly cross through this new finish line. It happens. Happened to us
two seasons ago, we were in the lead, and we retired once we figured out
where the heck the other end of the line was (behind us and maybe a few
hundred yards further out and back in relationship to the RC boat). Yes, we
could have continued and appealed, but at the time we did not know the RC
boat was pulled off its position. And since the Start-Finish line is at
times in the middle of some legs, you either take it on the pin or on the RC
boat sides.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line 

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 20:54:00 UTC, Gene Fuller <W4SZzzzzzz RemoveThis @att.net>
wrote:

> Hi Geoff,
>
> This is probably beating a dead horse, but here goes.
>
> Your anti-sea-lawyer solution won't work. The definition of "mark" says,
> "An object the sailing instructions require a boat to leave on a
> specified side . . . ." There is no option to allow a "mark" to have
> anything but ONE specified side. Changing definitions is not allowed.
> Rule 28.1 could be changed to modify "sailing the course", but it would
> need to avoid the use of "mark". Sounds like a real mess.


Well, it will always have to be a 'mark' because the we are requiring
it to be left on a specified side.. And my formulation does not change
the definition, only the manner in which the specified side is
determined. And that is quite clear.
There is nothing in the rules which requires that a mark have only one
'side' *under all circumstances*. The instructions can require that a
mark may have a differing required side under differing circumstances.
In this case, the required side is that side chosen by the helmsman
which leaves both marks on the same side. In effect, the helmsman
specifies the side, for both marks.

Your interpretation would make it impossible to allow yachts to round
any group of marks in either direction, and would make it impossible
to stage a race from a start to and around an island, *in either
direction* as in one direction the island would be left to port, and
in the other, to starboard.


> Mid-course start/finish lines can be useful in several situations.
> However, it is necessary to either leave the line "open" or jump through
> a bunch of hoops in the SI's to try to "close" the line.

I have never been able to figure out any of those 'useful' situations.
Even with fixed mark courses, it is simpler to set the line at the
leeward end of things, or just start at one point and finish
elsewhere. Most excuses for using the mid course setup amount to a
lack of RC capabilities (boats, marks etc) which are reasonably
avoidable or surmountable. If they can set up in the middle they can
do so at the bottom. If there is no working space at the bottom, then
start at the middle, but do not attempt to finish there! Then there
is no start line after the start and therefor no problem.

But closed midcourse start/finishes are just a problem waiting to
happen and should not be used. Anyway, mid-course lines rarely easily
handle any sort of wind shift leading to lousy racing... And RC's do
not set out with the intention of providing lousy races... well at
least we certainly hope so! <VBG>

Geoff
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line 

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 13:46:02 UTC, "Garry McGonigal" <cecwin DeleteThis @mnsi.net>
wrote:

   > > >The main question is whether the SIs have to use the word
   > > >"obstruction" in defining the area to be avoided, or is the fact that
   > > >it is a prohibited area enough to make it an obstruction for the
   > > >purposes of Rules 18 and 19?

"Obstruction... an area so designated by the sailing instructions...."
RRS Definitions.


  > > If you are writing the sailing instructions and you want it to be
  > > treated as an obstruction, then be sure to use the word "obstruction"
  > > in your declaration as well as "prohibited". That way the SIs will
  > > communicate clearly to the racers that it is to be treated as an
  > > obstruction. It may or may not be a legal requirement, but it never
  > > hurts to be explicit.

The word 'prohibited' is not strictly actually necessary as it is
essence of being an obstruction that requires it to be sailed around
(rather than through)... But there is no doubt that adding this word
makes the meaning clearer.
Of course, making it clear only applies to that subset of the racers
who read the instructions, and among those, to the subset who actually
understand the instructions....So 24 point bold type might be in
order!

 > There are a few other problems associated with a SI that indicates the
 > Finish Line is a 'prohibited area' unless finishing.
 >
 > (1) Light air starts, class just gets across the line, air shuts down,
 > current pushes them back through the start-finish line. Now what?

If your SI's are screwed up then this is a problem. If the SI's say
'Except when starting or finishing, the line is ...(prohibited)' then
you deserve every problem which arises....
If your SI's say 'When proceeding from mark 1 to 3 or mark 3 to 4, ...
the line is (prohibited)' then you have no problem as your recent
starters are not yet on a leg when crossing the line is prohibited.

In part, this is why I would and did nominate the line ends as marks
of the leg when prohibiting passage between them. Under the old rules,
marks only had 'sides' when on a leg which that mark began, ended or
bounded. And more racers understand room at a mark than understand
room at an obstruction...

 > (2) Most of the SI's identify the situation as 'prohibited' or wording to
 > that effect but do not spell out a consequence of going through the finish
 > line before a finish. So, off to the Protest Committee, and the Committee
 > says fine, but what is the penalty -- none spelled out in the SI's.

Denominating them as marks provides a penalty through 'sailing the
course'..

 > (3) Due to rough weather, the RC Boat gets moved around and in effect so
 > does one end of the Finish Line. Along come boats on a leg, trying to
 > figure out where one end of the Finish Line is so as to stay clear, but the
 > RC boat is all over the place, perhaps the line 'grew' substantially from
 > when the classes were started, and boats searching for the outer pin,
 > unknowingly cross through this new finish line. It happens. Happened to us
 > two seasons ago, we were in the lead, and we retired once we figured out
 > where the heck the other end of the line was (behind us and maybe a few
 > hundred yards further out and back in relationship to the RC boat). Yes, we
 > could have continued and appealed, but at the time we did not know the RC
 > boat was pulled off its position. And since the Start-Finish line is at
 > times in the middle of some legs, you either take it on the pin or on the RC
 > boat sides.
 >

This is the major stupidity involved in having the RC in the middle of
the arena.

Bad setup, bad result.

Realistically, if you figure you absolutely must have the RC in the
middle, exactly WHY is it so important that the line be closed?
Except for the RC's convenience? If it is because the RC likes it that
way, they are not doing their proper job.


Geoff<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line 

> Denominating them as marks provides a penalty through 'sailing the
> course'..
>
>
> This is the major stupidity involved in having the RC in the middle of
> the arena.
>
> Bad setup, bad result.
>
> Realistically, if you figure you absolutely must have the RC in the
> middle, exactly WHY is it so important that the line be closed?
> Except for the RC's convenience? If it is because the RC likes it that
> way, they are not doing their proper job.
>
>
> Geoff
>
And if the Finish line has the RC boat and outer pin designated as marks,
and a boat passes through that 'invisible line, it probably then can correct
itself, by coming back and going around either end and sailing a proper
course.

One must understand that not all race courses are windward-leeward, and you
probably do. Modified Olympic courses have the RC boat in the middle, and
various marks of equal distance radiating out from it. In this case, there
are 8 rounding marks, all .75 miles from the RC boat, each mark 45 degrees
on angle. So a variety of possible legs, some .75 miles, some 1.5 miles.
Other courses of a similar makeup have 6 marks. And so on. But the RC boat
is central, and some of the legs, besides start and finish, bring boats on a
line by the start-finish area.

In terms of why a line msut be closed probably had more to do with various
classes out on the course, slow classes going first. Hence, closing the
line to just finishes not only helps the RC in recording finishes, but
avoids any confusion/mayhem that might occur when you have: boats finishing
but are mixed in with boats still sailing a non-finishing leg (certain rules
apply to a finishing boat that do not apply to another); and another class
coming from the opposite direction through the finish line while still on a
longer racing leg, opposed to boats trying to finish. It does happen.

Even some windward-leeward courses have the RC boat on the course, closer to
the leeward marks/gates.

But, regardless of how the start-finish restriction may be stated in the
SI's, unless there is linkage to a definition of penalties, or ways an
offending boat can correct itself without penalty, the rule is useless when
it comes to a Protest Committee hearing. Nothing is 'understood'.


Now with starting boxes, as an example, regattas spell that out very
clearly. If you are in your start, you stay in the box or this may happen.
If it is not your start and you offend, then this may happen.
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line 

Thanks for the input, everyone. Just for those who are interested, we
use a mid-course start / finish line for our Thursday night beer can
races. We use two drop marks (in addition to the start and finish
marks) that are always in the same position, and a government channel
marker. Sometimes we get windward legs, sometimes the entire race
consists of reaches. All boats sail three legs, and the spinnaker
boats additionally sail to the "weather" mark and back to the finish.
This results in boats finishing from both directions simultaneously.
We therefore have separate finish lines for the two fleets, with the
committee boat in the middle.

The most interesting thing about our racing is the Navy operations
that often occur in the area. We often get Seals jumping out of
helicopters into our race area, and then they get retrieved. We also
get an occasional antisubmarine sled towed through the course. Not
great for "real" racing because of the requirement for us to stay well
clear of these operations, but good enough for this level of
competition.

We normally have about 20 nonspinnaker boats and 10 spinnaker boats
registered. Most are learning to race or trying to improve racing
skills for the more important weekend races with other clubs.

Thanks again,

Jim Williams




On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 16:20:14 GMT, "R. G. Newbury"
<newburynospam.TakeThisOut@mandamus.org> wrote:

>On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 13:46:02 UTC, "Garry McGonigal" <cecwin.TakeThisOut@mnsi.net>
>wrote:
>
>> > >The main question is whether the SIs have to use the word
>> > >"obstruction" in defining the area to be avoided, or is the fact that
>> > >it is a prohibited area enough to make it an obstruction for the
>> > >purposes of Rules 18 and 19?
>
>"Obstruction... an area so designated by the sailing instructions...."
> RRS Definitions.
>
>
>> > If you are writing the sailing instructions and you want it to be
>> > treated as an obstruction, then be sure to use the word "obstruction"
>> > in your declaration as well as "prohibited". That way the SIs will
>> > communicate clearly to the racers that it is to be treated as an
>> > obstruction. It may or may not be a legal requirement, but it never
>> > hurts to be explicit.
>
>The word 'prohibited' is not strictly actually necessary as it is
>essence of being an obstruction that requires it to be sailed around
>(rather than through)... But there is no doubt that adding this word
>makes the meaning clearer.
>Of course, making it clear only applies to that subset of the racers
>who read the instructions, and among those, to the subset who actually
>understand the instructions....So 24 point bold type might be in
>order!
>
>> There are a few other problems associated with a SI that indicates the
>> Finish Line is a 'prohibited area' unless finishing.
>>
>> (1) Light air starts, class just gets across the line, air shuts down,
>> current pushes them back through the start-finish line. Now what?
>
>If your SI's are screwed up then this is a problem. If the SI's say
>'Except when starting or finishing, the line is ...(prohibited)' then
>you deserve every problem which arises....
>If your SI's say 'When proceeding from mark 1 to 3 or mark 3 to 4, ...
>the line is (prohibited)' then you have no problem as your recent
>starters are not yet on a leg when crossing the line is prohibited.
>
>In part, this is why I would and did nominate the line ends as marks
>of the leg when prohibiting passage between them. Under the old rules,
>marks only had 'sides' when on a leg which that mark began, ended or
>bounded. And more racers understand room at a mark than understand
>room at an obstruction...
>
>> (2) Most of the SI's identify the situation as 'prohibited' or wording to
>> that effect but do not spell out a consequence of going through the finish
>> line before a finish. So, off to the Protest Committee, and the Committee
>> says fine, but what is the penalty -- none spelled out in the SI's.
>
>Denominating them as marks provides a penalty through 'sailing the
>course'..
>
>> (3) Due to rough weather, the RC Boat gets moved around and in effect so
>> does one end of the Finish Line. Along come boats on a leg, trying to
>> figure out where one end of the Finish Line is so as to stay clear, but the
>> RC boat is all over the place, perhaps the line 'grew' substantially from
>> when the classes were started, and boats searching for the outer pin,
>> unknowingly cross through this new finish line. It happens. Happened to us
>> two seasons ago, we were in the lead, and we retired once we figured out
>> where the heck the other end of the line was (behind us and maybe a few
>> hundred yards further out and back in relationship to the RC boat). Yes, we
>> could have continued and appealed, but at the time we did not know the RC
>> boat was pulled off its position. And since the Start-Finish line is at
>> times in the middle of some legs, you either take it on the pin or on the RC
>> boat sides.
>>
>
>This is the major stupidity involved in having the RC in the middle of
>the arena.
>
>Bad setup, bad result.
>
>Realistically, if you figure you absolutely must have the RC in the
>middle, exactly WHY is it so important that the line be closed?
>Except for the RC's convenience? If it is because the RC likes it that
>way, they are not doing their proper job.
>
>
>Geoff
>
>
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line 

"Gene Fuller" <W4SZzzzzzz RemoveThis @att.net> wrote in message
news:Jsdec.14691$i74.281135@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net
 > Hi Jim,
 >
 > I understand exactly what you are trying to do, because we tried the
 > same thing for many years in both TSC club racing and in open events
 > such as Lakefest.
 >
 > As you know, we get some really high level officials on board for
 > Lakefest, with national and international race officers and judges.
 > To a person they told us the closed start/finish line was unworkable.
 > The RRS do not really accommodate this closure, and anyone appealing
 > a DSQ would probably win.

Could you elaborate in general terms why the international jurists have
said this is so?

What would be the problem with the following SI based on RRS 29.1

"If, other than when a boat is _finishing_, any part of a boat's hull,
crew or equipment is on the side of the finish line farthest from the
last mark, the boat shall sail completely to the side of the finish line
nearest the last mark before _finishing_. This modifies RRS 28.1"

This could be elaborated along the lines of RRs 30.2/3 to provide for a
percentage penalty or a DSQ (and also allow it to be "switched on/off"
by a flag signal depending on the conditions).

 >
 > If your club is willing to go along with a valiant attempt to modify
 > the rules it may work, but perhaps not if you have genuine sea lawyers
 > involved. I agree that a "request" is not a good idea.

OK, the "request" situation works to keep already-finished boats clear
of the finish line. If the prospect of a "little chat' with a flag
officer about sportsmanship and co-operating with the RC isn't enough to
induce people to co-operate, then I'm sorry for you. Obviously,
district regattas are a little different.

 > We gave it up for Lakefest to avoid the pitfalls. To maintain sanity
 > of the RC we have changed all the courses to remove the need for a
 > closed line. Any boat crossing the line other than starting or
 > finishing is way off course, so the number of incidents is very small.

If you can't get longitudinal offsets as illustrated in RRS Appendix K
Addendum A, then maybe you could try a lateral offset as shown in the
Match Racing SI 10.1 at

<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.sailing.org/matchrace/mrssi.doc" target="_blank">http://www.sailing.org/matchrace/mrssi.doc</a>

Maybe this is what RG is suggesting.

 > As to your question of wording the SI's, the definition seems pretty
 > clear. An "area so designated by the sailing instructions [is] also an
 > obstruction". There is no mention of why the area might be selected,
 > such as being a prohibited area. There is no automatic designation
 > other than one that is safety related. It is not allowed to change
 > the RRS definitions. Therefore the SI's must explicitly designate the
 > area as an obstruction.

But I think the discussion in this thread indicates that you don't want
to make the line an obstruction, and confer rights to room.

 > Regards,
 > Gene Fuller
 >
 > ProjectPro wrote:
  >> Thanks, Gene and John. Our ham-fisted attempt wasn't to recreate the
  >> RRS 30 system, it was to keep boats out of the finishing area on laps
  >> of the course between starting and finishing.

Sorry, on offence intended.

Thanks for clarifying that it's just the finish that needs to be
attended to.

  >> We have boats of
  >> widely differing speeds sailing different courses, and could end up
  >> with a boat under spinnaker hauling butt to finish, only to have to
  >> deal with a slower close hauled boat going back to the weather mark.
  >> The intent is to keep the slower boat out of the finish line for
  >> safety purposes.

Well, boats meet in this situation all the time on the race course away
from the finish line: why is it any different? You've got the whole of
RRS Pt 2 to take care of it. It might be different if your finish line
was in some narrow channel, not surrounded by navigable water.

  >> The reason that we allow someone to correct an error of going through
  >> the line is that the Southern Chesapeake Bay gets some crazy currents
  >> at times, and is possible for a boat to drift across the line without
  >> the helmsman being able to prevent it. Under those drifting
  >> conditions we are less concerned about the posibility of collision.

See my suggestion above.

  >> We are constrained by the shape and size of our Willoughby Bay and
  >> cannot offset the starting line. I'm also not an favor of
  >> "requesting" that competitors do something - there needs to be a
  >> consequence.

See my comment above.

  >> It is not a problem that the RC would have to protest a competitor
  >> for violating the line. It doesn't happen often enough for that to
  >> be an issue.

See my comment above: by making the SI an amendment to RRS 28, you can
provide for exhoneration, percentage or DSQ without a hearing.

  >> The main question is whether the SIs have to use the word
  >> "obstruction" in defining the area to be avoided, or is the fact that
  >> it is a prohibited area enough to make it an obstruction for the
  >> purposes of Rules 18 and 19?

I think we've all said that, if you want it to be an obstruction, the SI
have to say "it's an obstruction".

snip

John<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Obstruction - Start / Finish Line