Welcome, Guest.
Please log in using your email address as your Username.
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Room (Water) at a mark: ‘Piggy in the Middle'

Room (Water) at a mark: ‘Piggy in the Middle' 6 months 1 week ago #153

  • Bill Brockbank
  • Bill Brockbank's Avatar
  • Solo 4287
PIM Is at fault if she does nothing to get L to give both her and W sufficient room.
Her faults are of omission (not getting water from L) and commission.(not giving W room)

If PIM makes determined attempts to get mark room for herself and L, and fails, she can claim exoneration under 64.1

The principle of 'passing responsibility along the line' with every intervening boat taking an individual responsibility is well established. I doubt any other way would work. Otherwise W would need to identify, name and describe all the raft of boats outside him at a barging mark.

Rule 20 now incorporates the same 'pass it on' principle. If a leeward boat is entitled to room to tack at an obstruction and must call a windward PIM for room to tack, PIM must also call a boat to windward of both of them if she (PIM) also needs room to tack.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Room (Water) at a mark: ‘Piggy in the Middle' 6 months 2 weeks ago #150

  • Nick
  • Nick's Avatar
Lovely, so through no fault of their own, PIM could potentially be disqualified! Most of the rules make sense, but this one certainly doesn't.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Room (Water) at a mark: ‘Piggy in the Middle' 6 months 4 weeks ago #139

  • Bill Brockbank
  • Bill Brockbank's Avatar
  • Solo 4287
Situation. 3 starboard tack boats all overlap as they enter the zone at leeward mark 1 (to be left to starboard)
The inside boat is aiming too close to the mark to do a proper rounding, defined at the course she would take in the absence of the other boat(s). She is doing so to try and keep clear of the middle boat which she fails to do, her boom overlapping into the middle boat’s cockpit - although there is no collision.
The middle boat is keeping clear of the outside boat.
The inside boat protests the middle boat, who complains she is being squeezed by the outside boat yet does not protest.
Q. Who is right and why?
A. Being too close to another boat breaks a rule even if there’s no collision. The exact wording (Definitions: Keeping Clear) is a bit dry, but if the leeward boat can’t ‘wiggle’ without making contact somebody already broke a rule. Most times it’s the windward boat, but at a mark it’s the outside (in this case leeward) boat.
The middle boat complained that she was being squeezed by the leeward boat. If true the middle boat might be able to claim exoneration under Rule 64.1, where the outside boat’s illegal actions caused the middle boat to foul.
The wording of Rule 64.1 (… Exoneration) has been made much fiercer. To claim exoneration PIM (Piggy In the Middle) must show she was ‘compelled’ to foul the windward boat. Examples of action which might establish her being wrongly compelled to break a rule include was she trying to bear down on L, did she shout for room, did she protest L. If she did none of these things no protest committee is going to penalise L even if she was solely responsible and guilty. W hasn’t managed to ‘pass the blame’.
I’ve had this in a 420 championship where a gust brought a raft of boats - all touching each other - to a gybe mark. The first 20 odd boats, counting from the mark, could identify and legitimately blame the boat outside them. The 21st boat couldn’t and was disqualified, even though she was no more guilty or innocent than anyone else in the raft.
Returning to our case, W had been deprived of mark-room by a boat or boats outside her.
PIM had fouled W both by being too close and depriving W of proper Mark-room
PIM hadn’t done everything which would ‘prove’ the fault lay entirely with L and that that, and only that, had compelled PIM to foul W.
Had this gone to protest, PIM would be disqualified.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Time to create page: 0.190 seconds