Pierce Invitational

[Admin - Bob Adams]

Saturday, May 28th, noon.
Entries close Wednesday, May 25th.

See www.windjammers.org for more details.

[Admin - Bob Adams]

Scratch sheet for the Pierce is available here:

www.windjammers.org/race_info/PIERCE2005_Scratch.pdf

[Admin - Bob Adams]

AAAAAaaaarrggghhh!

[Admin - Bob Adams]

OK, yesterday's race was cancelled due to a time limit caused by light winds.

I have an observation about rule 17.1, which is the rule under which the race was cancelled. This is NOT a complaint or gripe, just an observation.

Rule 17.1 states "Any race in which no boat rounds the first windward mark within 90 minutes shall be abandoned." That's very clear.

The situation was this: the start was located about 2 miles south of Charles Island, and the course was X-F (for Class C boats anyway), which is to the "C1" Can at Middle Ground and back. The distance between the start and windward mark is about 7 nautical miles.

After the start the winds diminished almost to nothing, which put us a few miles short of the windward mark. At about the 80 minute mark the wind filled in and we resumed our way toward the mark, making about 5 knots. We guessed that we had another 45 minutes or so before we reached the mark.

Promptly at the 90-95 minute mark the RC called the race, first for the two spinnaker classes, and five minutes later for the cruising class.

My suggestion is that for a single windward mark race, rule 17.1 be relaxed, to give the 20-some boats who were out there yesterday the opportunity to finish the race. Once the wind filled in, we easily made the downwind run at 6 or more knots, and had rule 17.1 not been in effect it's likely that at least some of the boats would have finished the race within the 4-hour total time limit outlined in rule 17.2.

While the rule is clearly put and the race committee did absolutely nothing wrong, it would have been nice to the crews of the 20-plus boats out there if the RC had extended 17.1 to allow everyone a shot at getting the race completed. The 4-hour limit could still have been enforced.

Especially when considering the distances involved in a single windward mark race...7 miles to windward can easily mean 10-14 miles when tacking is considered. It's unlikely to expect many boats to be able to average roughly 9 knots for 90 minutes to reach the mark.

17.1 makes sense in the context of a multiple leg race, like two laps of a shorter course, or 3 or more marks in a race. But when 50% of the straight-line distance in a four hour total race is supposed to be completed in 90 minutes, and when the windward leg is realistically longer because of tacking, I'd like to suggest an amendment to rule 17.1.

Something along the lines that "should there be only one windward and one leeward leg of a course, the only limit on time will be the 4-hour limit to complete the race." Something like that would give the boats a better chance of getting a race completed, especially in a situation like yesterday where the wind freshened so much just before the time limit expired.

Again, I'm just making a suggestion; the RC did a good job considering the conditions before and after the start, and they did enforce the rules exactly. I know we had a fun time just being on the water, regardless of the outcome of the race.

[Admin - Bob Adams]

Oh, another suggestion I have (of course)!

Is it possible to standardize the Class (Division) designations between Classes A, B, and C, and Divisions 1, 2, and 3? Some boats (OK, fine, it was "Full Tilt"...) had a little confusion when their group was referred to simultaneously as "Class C" and "Division 3".

Can we see about resolving that semantic difference?

[Hugh]

Let's clear up a few things...

"Rule 17.1" does NOT refer to the ISAF RRS 17.1. It is only for the Pierce Invitational Sailing Instructions, which are local ammendments to the RRS. The SIs are meant to make changes to the RRS for people to have a better race suited to the local conditions. As such, having something like an OVERALL time limit makes sense, so we're not subjected to a drift-a-thon.

I will admit, the Pierce certainly seemed like it would suck from the way the winds went. Looking at the fleet, it was alarming to see a different angle for each boat racing. BUT... everyone was making some sort of VMG towards the mark. With a distance of nearly 7 miles DIRECTLY to the mark from the start, it was absurd to assume that the wind conditions would support the boat speed required for a sailing vessel to make the first mark within the time limit. I am loathe to criticize the decision of people in the field from the comfort of home, but it would seem that the wisdom of the RC in this matter was suspect. There was a mark boat available for use in setting a simple distance/bearing mark, but that was not used for some reason. Overall, it seems like the course and SIs were not well-conceived.

Also, what would have happened if the first mark was DOWNWIND? If the start was placed in the middle of the course, and the start was a downwind start, do you think that the first boat would have made the windward mark in time? Depending on the course, this isn't guaranteed. When the race commitee writes the SI, a lot needs to be taken into consideration. Don't hobble the race by thinking up some dumb-ass rule - think all the repercussions through before making it reality. Personally, I've been to more than one race where an RC has destroyed a race by not thinking things through.

I think RCs need to play conservatively when changing the RRS with the SI. Remeber, the rules have been set by a frickin' international commitee that takes many things into consideration. If we need an overall time limit, then fine; but I don't think a first mark time limt is necessary or even advisable. The course can always be shortened with the former case, but not always with the latter case.

Perhaps this means that we need better training for RCs? I don't know. All I know is that this race ****** (moderator edit: Please remember Forum Rule 17.1 "No naughty language"...Thanks!), and I'm not the only one that thinks that.

H.A. out.

[G3]

US Sailing is teaching race officers to use "Divisions" with a number system. The simple reason, when you have "A", "B", "C" divisions, the starting flags of Code Flag A - B - C have entirely differently meetings! So it is simple to use 1 - 2 - 3 flags.

The problem is with the programs that make the scratch sheets, they use "Class". Until changes can be made to standardize the switch from "Classes" to "Divisions", there will be these regretable problems.

For the Pierce, one person wrote the SI's, another person was in charge of making the scratch sheet.

[Admin - Bob Adams]

Greg, thanks for your explaination, and also the detailed emails regarding this subject. Sometime soon I'll compile a brief overview of your thoughts, and then post it here.

But right now, it's a nice day, and I'm gonna go sailing!

Bob

[G3]

I was the PRO for the Pierce, ready to take a beating from those that didn't get to finish the race.
To "Hugh": my GPS reading was 5.9 NM to X mark (C-1); we had instrument winds of 4 to 5 knots, at 205 degrees; there was a 2 knot flood current; all giving me indications that some boats could make the mark in the 90 minute time window. Plus, all the forecasts I reviewed were winds after Noon to reach 10 to 13 knots. There was no wind-ward mark boat (WWMB)available to me. There was a pin boat that stated he was available for pin boat duty and that he had a 3 PM appointment he had to be at. If there was a WWMB I would have had readings that the winds were light and dying at Middle Ground, I had no such data and no way getting that information.
Regarding doing a downwind start, from ECSA: “COURSES - A variety of courses provided the prevailing conditions are considered. Windward-leeward courses are generally preferred with lengths of 10 to 15 miles.” I’ve seen downwind starts, one boat can luff up the entire fleet making a mess at the start. Also, with 2 knots of current against you in 4 knots of wind, you would have been almost hovering. The 31’ RC boat had a slack anchor line between the current and the light winds opposing each other.
Your point of: “Don't hobble the race by thinking up some dumb-ass rule - think all the repercussions through before making it reality.” Look at RRS ’05-’08, page 112 # 15.1 That section is part of standard racing sailing instructions. The reason it is put in most SI’s is to prevent a “drifting- match” between competitors.
About shortening the course, please read RRS 32.2 – there was no WWMB to score a finish. I will reaffirm that in the light wind conditions RRS 32.1 (c) & (e) certainly are worthy of consideration.
There are other details about the race management that Bob will post later on.
Your comment, “…so we're not subjected to a drift-a-thon.” What do you think you were doing for a better part of those 90 minutes? Also, “Looking at the fleet, it was alarming to see a different angle for each boat racing…” usually when boats are sailing up-wind their bows are pointed in the same direction.
Two things would have prevented this race from being abandoned:
- A windward mark boat with the ability to put in a drop mark.
- More wind
Two things I had absolutely no control over as the race PRO. I sincerely wish that I didn’t have to pull the plug on the event. It just was not “..a competition of fairness” in those conditions.

[Admin - Bob Adams]

Yeah, it was nice sailing today. I even got a little sunburn action going. Yay, finally Summer!

As promised, I'm going to quote an email I sent to Greg earlier.

Playing the devil's advocate here, I would point out
that luck is almost ALWAYS a factor in races, and some
boats will benefit from unexpected wind shifts, lulls,
and position on the course; this isn't necessarily
"unfair". Again, going back to my original statement,
there were 20-odd boats still on the course and
racing, and I doubt there would have been many
complaints had we continued racing to the finish.

Then again Greg (even MORE devil's advocacy here), if
the race continued, there's the possibility that a
boat that came in last place may have protested the
race committee for NOT adhering to rule 17.1 and
cancelling the race, therefore having the race ruled
invalid by the protest committee. In that case,
probably EVERYONE would have been upset, having
worked all afternoon to finish, only to have the race get
thrown out by protest.

So, yeah, I can't help but agree with your action. As
the rule stood, you had no choice, and you did the
proper (if unpopular) thing. Sometimes that's the
toughest call to make, and I admire your decision.

Unless the RC was able to successfully poll each boat in the race via UHF and they agreed unaminously to override the rule, they had their hands tied by the rule as posted in the Sailing Instructions. Had they continued with the race, as I mentioned above, a single boat could have protested and had the race ruled invalid.

Two suggestions here; maybe we can modify or eliminate the rule as posted, and perhaps we can include a make-up date for the race, similar to what other yacht clubs do (I've got a half dozen NOR's that include "hurricaine dates"...maybe we can also have a "no wind" date also).

Anyway, suggestions are welcome on how we can make things run more smoothly. Of course, NOBODY can prepare for every contingency, but maybe if we all work together we can get more races in, and have more fun in the process.

Bob

[Hugh]

G3 - my bad about the mark boat. Sad to see that he wasn't available to help you out better. It's frustrating as a competitor to see what looks to be a ready source of help not do anything - probably doubly so for RC.

I'll have to agree on the point about the likelihood of a protest if 17.1 was ignored. The situation was bad all around. It seems like there's two things that would easily solve this sort of situation: having a mark boat available for the entire race, and not using a first mark time limit. If the mark boat is available, you only need to worry about overall time limit, as the course can be altered during the race to suit changing conditons. I know it's hard to get volunteers for RC, but it just seems like a necessity to have that mark boat, even if he's only there to fetch more beer from ashore.

The make-up date is a nice idea, but I doubt it could be pulled off very easily. I'd think most folks plan their weekends pretty tightly nowadays (I know I do), so re-scheduling would be hard. Not to mention those boats that have to deliver from other harbors...

I hope this isn't a portent of the season to come. I might have to go jet-skiing instead.

HA out.

[Admin - Bob Adams]

Here's an email Nick Amendola (WSC Fleet Captain) sent to Greg Geiger regarding race committee. Printed here with Nick's permission:

I've often thought that racing sailors really don't give the folks who work on race committees enough credit. About a decade ago, one-design sailors started asking for windward-leeward courses and the race organizers obliged.

Then, to make the racing better, race-management types started using offset marks to spread out the traffic around the windward mark. And roughly seven years ago, race organizers introduced the concept of the leeward gate to alleviate the congestion caused by big fleets compressing at leeward marks and to make these roundings more fun and more equitable.

All of these changes have made around-the-buoys racing a better, more enjoyable experience, so before this goes any further, let me just say thanks to race committees everywhere.

[Saltyguy]

Regarding the statement:

I sincerely wish that I didn’t have to pull the plug on the event. It (was) just was not “a competition of fairness” in those conditions.

The Pierce is part of the ECSA OFFSHORE CIRCUIT. The "competition of fairness" statement is typically a ONE DESIGN term used when running multiple windward\leeward races.

Would the Block Island Race, The Vineyard Race or the ECSA Rock to Rock Race be canceled due to light wind after the start? Not a chance. If it is an OFFSHORE CIRCUIT RACE then there should be an overall time limit, period. In my humble opinion, there is no such thing as "competition of fairness" gauge if the Pierce is truly part of an OFFSHORE CIRCUIT EVENT.

If you are setting a course to Middleground, you should be prepared to anchor if needed during a lull or foul tide and keep racing when the wind fills in as long as you finish within the overall time limit.

That is what OFFSHORE CIRCUIT EVENTS are all about.

[Hugh]

werd, saltyguy.

HA out.

[G3]

When you look in the current Racing Rules of Sailing, there are NOT seperate rules for "one-design" and "PHRF" events. When you attend the classes on race management the instructors, the materials and lectures don't have seperate between O-D and PHRF. The PRO, "if" he has all the race management equipment he needs, can set-up a good course. For this regatta, not all the requested equipment was provided. Had there been a wind-ward mark boat, this entire thread would not be here.

I've got 38 years of O-D, PHRF and hard-water racing experience. Being on the water when the wind dies is not racing, it is drifting. Sure you can put out the anchor, but that is called "anchoring", no one ever crossed the finish line while at anchor.

Again, read RRS Rule 32.1 (c) & (e).

The Star Class (yes, a one-design class) has a rule that the RC can't shorten the course. When the North Americian Champs were in Milford in 2001 the lead boat was 100 yards of the finish line when the time limit expired. The competitors drifted to the marks for 12.5 miles, at some point there should be a "voice of reason" that makes the decision to abandoned the race.

A smartly written NOR would have had a "hurricane date" (read "make-up" date). You will see at least 3 of these in other NOR's. Ask why not the Pierce NOR?

The real issue for this regatta, the requirement that all boats be ORC4 compliment. Did your boat carry a # 4 jib, or all the other items on the 13 page ORC 4 list?

All it would take is one competitor to file a protest based on this requirement, and this regatta would have been a night-mare!

-G3
PRO

[ktisdall]

I'd like to make some comments rearding the points brought up in this thread. These are my opinions and not necessarily those of WSC. However I think I share many of the views of the other officers, so here goes....

The outcome of the Pierce was extremely regrettable. I was on Secret and only about 5 minutes from the mark when time expired. A bad day for everyone.

Whether the time limit rules in the Sailing Instructions modify or reinforce existing RRS rules is pretty much irrelevant. What is important is that we don't use that language for future races. Those rules do not suit our racing environment, or the style of races we should be running per ECSA, where they want longer courses of fewer legs. The ECSA sanctioned races are Offshore Circuit Races. As such, they are not meant to be sailed in the style of OD dinghys on a lake.

WSC is attempting to respond to ECSA and USSAILING in their requests to do everything possible to improve the quality of the racing. This one obviously did not go that way. There was a great deal of consideration of the scenarios we might see, regarding the way the Sailing Instructions were written. The number of edits by the WSC officers frankly drove Greg and Nick nuts. Everyone tried to make it a good race. Change sometimes hurts. We certainly will look carefully at the time issue for future races. Previously we had a 4 hr window for first to finish and then another 'timer' for the remaining boats. That would seem to solve this issue.

WSC does not own or command a fleet of RC vessels and equipment. The races have always been, and will continue to be run by volunteers in their own boats, usually offering government mark courses. That the Pierce RC did not have a mark boat so we could run a short course is only because none was available to us. Christian's time that day was limited and he was not able to be a mark-setter. If we go back to the old race time limits we can still run short courses and avoid drift-a-thons if we have the boat resources to do it.

On the subject of make-up races, these are probably not practical for WSC. The reason is the tight schedule with ECSA's events and our own. Most racers pick the events they will do and arrange boat delivery and crew for those days. Also if we reschedule due to no wind, how about too much wind? Rain? Part of the luck of racing, or lack of it, is the weather on the day you sail the event. Sometimes we can use our skill and do well based on the weather. Sometimes we're just SOL.

Re: Anchoring. Anchoring is a valid race tactic in areas where current prevails over wind. That defines LI Sound much of the time. I personally have spent several hours anchored during races, holding or gaining position against others that did not. Most of those were distance races but one was at an Etchells spring frostbite series at Essex. Another was a WSC single-double where the wind died and I got swept onto Charles I (anchor didn't catch) by current.

Safety - I think I'll take the ORC 4 discussion to another thread!

One final though which directly relates to the Pierce. We needed a volunteer to provide a mark boat. We very often need help with RC one way or another and mostly have to make do with whoever we can talk into doing it, and whatever boat they have. So, when a race is being held, it would be great for all entrants to find out what resources are needed to make the event a success. Maybe you have a friend with a powerboat that would be willing to help. Maybe they have a sailboat and want to learn about racing but don't care to go swap gelcoat just yet. They could participate as RC and see how things go. Please get involved! We need people to help and we need boats!

--Kevin