The "1-2-3" Rule

Patrick Clancy on April 28, 2010, 10:42pm | More Posts

Perhaps the strongest and weakest part of sailing is the fact that it is a self-policing sport - weak because of a sailor’s bias. In almost any foul situation that is brought to “the room” you will have two people who have a clear understanding of the rules but they always seem to disagree on exactly what happened. This is because they’re biased; they both want to win. Although the protest room is something we all wish to avoid, it is necessary.

In team racing, the Racing Rules of Sailing states a boat’s points shall increase as follows:

Rule Broke	Penalty Points
Rule 28.1 when as a result she or her team has gained an advantage	10
Any other rule broken while racing for which a penalty has not been taken	6

It may be known to others as the “1-2-3 rule,” where if a team finishes with a 1-2-3 or 4, they are free of the consequences of a protest unless they gained a significant advantage. It's a rule that seems to solve some issues of handling a protest after the race, but also seems to provoke some individuals to strive for the 1-2-3 or 1-2-4 after a protest because they refuse to admit fault for an on the water incident.

Example 1 - Boats A,B,C v D,E,F. Boat A (port tack) attempts to cross boat D (starboard tack) on just after the start. Boat D protests boat A for a rule 10 violation because boat D claims they had to avoid boat A. Boat A disagrees

and continues to sail the race while hailing "code red", "play black", or "play 3" to his teammates for a possible protest situation. Meanwhile boat A's teammates have won their sides and consolidated the race where at the weather mark they are in a 1-3-4 combination. They proceed to make a passback and finish the race 1-2-4 so that they "automatically win".

***In this situation, it would be unlikely that a protest committee would disqualify boat A and grant them 10 points for the foul. They may disqualify them, but would most likely give them 6 points, therefore still granting their team the win in the race. Should this really happen? Even if after the race A admits fault in that situation?

Example 2 - Boats A,B,C v D,E,F. Team A,B,C is in a 2,3,4 combination with team D,E,F in a 1,5,6 combination. D enters the zone at the leeward mark clear ahead of all other boats and in the "1". Boat A enters the zone and attempts to break overlap with boat D and re-establish that overlap to force D to their proper course around the mark. Meanwhile boat B in the "3" position attempts to round the mark quickly without contact. Boat D is in the process of turning around the mark and hails to boat B "no room". Boat D avoids contact and protests boat B. Because D had to avoid boat B and round outside of them, boat A was able to get their "nose" around the mark and round inside of boat D. Boat C follows behind the action in the 4. Upwind, boat B calls for "code red", "play black", or "play 3". Team A,B,C is currently in a 1-3-4 combination. Boat B slows boat D to allow boat A to pass, and when they do, they convert to the 1-2-4 and finish the race. Because boat D feels boat B fouled them, he still protests. After the protest the jury based on both testimonies finds that their is "not substantial evidence" to grant boat B 10 points, and although they still disqualify boat B, he is only added 6 points and his team still wins the race.

Boat D was simply doing his job in the "1". Bumping the race, consolidating and condensing the race while his team was in a losing combination in the hopes that on the upwind one of his teammates could unbalance the pairs and convert to the play 4/5. In his attempts, a controversial foul with no contact occurs and the race goes into the books as a blowout 1-2-3 or 1-2-4. Is this really fair to boat D who feels that if boat B did their 360 degree turn his team might have been able to win the race?

It is a common conception that if a team wins a race 1-2-3 or 1-2-4 they "blew out", "were better" or were simply just "faster" than the other team. But for those who have team raced in many UN-umpired events, they have usually been subject to the possibility of the "code red", "play black", or "play 3" at one point or another.

Problems may also arise on the other side of the spectrum for the team enjoying a 1-2-3 or 4. An opponent on the losing team may take a shot at drawing the foul and unjustly taking the race when they clearly lost on the water. Without the “1-2-3” rule, problems may still arise.

Is there a possible solution to this problem? Is it a problem at all? There are certainly two-sides to this situation and the rule is obviously in place for a reason. But is there a better way to amend sailing instructions at UN-umpired team races?

1325 views

Updated on May 4, 2012, 8:57am

15 comments

Quiet Thinker 2 years ago

Although I don't agree with an automatic 10 points, I do think that "Agreement" brings up a very valid scenario. My point goes along a little bit with what one of the anonymous cowards said earlier in that with all other sports, there is not "yellow flag." Teams that rely on umpire calls or penalty points in any sport are not good teams. In fact they are usually amongst the teams that receive the least amount of respect from their peers.

I think that any time the results can be decided by competition and not the need to spin to prevent a loss that comes from the protest room, then the competition is better for it.

Perfect 2 years ago

I think the person below hit the nail on the head!

Agreement 2 years ago

In response to disagreement I think you misunderstood. Yes the yellow flag is needed for limited umpiring, but give them 10 points for a DSQ. That way you cannot win with a yellow flag. For instance, if you have a 1-2-4 and 2 fouls the 3. 2 does not spin even though his mast hit the top of the mast of the other boat during a tack. He disagrees because he didn't feel it or whatever his reasoning may be. So he continues to sail. He then continues to pin out the 3 and passes his 4 up to make his team in a 1-2-3 combo. Boat 3 still protests, but how would a jury find that boat 2 be granted 10 points for significantly gaining an advantage. Surely the protest committee would not grant 10 points for that race to boat 2 thus making them lose. However had boat 2 spun, boat 3 might have been able to make a passback on the 4 and who knows the race may have been significantly different. Thus, give them 10 points so that you cannot win with a yellow flag.

Disagreement 2 years ago

The yellow flag is needed for limited umpiring. Often there will be only 1 or 2 umpire boats following a race. They simply cannot see all the action.

Agreement 2 years ago

Yes the better teams will usually win, but you also have the not so better teams taking wins because of yellows or the 1-2-3 rule. Give em 10 points and they cant have that.

2 years ago

better team will usually win... but we all know that the final results show that each team is separated by only 1 or 2 wins

Agreement 2 years ago

I agree Yellow Flags are terrible. And honestly some teams hope for them, so that they can go to the 1-2-3 play. For some reason some people love the "oh yea I fouled the **** out of you, but we won 1-2-3/1-2-4 so suck it". And yellow flags do not solve this issue. But Green Flags for a disagreement are tough too, you know you would like to maybe get a chance to tell you side of the story. Bottom line I still think you up the anti on the DSQ. Give someone 10 points for a DSQ. Then yea sure it promotes spinning, but really going along with the Quiet Thinker...dont you still think the better teams will win? I do.

2 years ago

No yellow flags... just like in basketball, baseball, hockey, football, soccer, tennis, lacrosse, and basically every other sport

Quiet Thinker 2 years ago

I know some will disagree but I think that resorting to the yellow flag is not the best thing for racing. Some seem to think that a disagreement among the two umpires in the boat should go to a yellow flag but the rules clearly state that such a disagreement MUST be followed with a GREEN flag. I believe that sometimes umpires tend to talk out situations they arent sure about which unfortunately takes too much time to come to a decision. When this happens, like last year's Hinman, the incident has come and gone long before a decision is ever reached. I think in these situations if the umpires Green flag the incident then the competitors can keep on racing-which earlier I pointed out that the best teams are still the one's that RACE BETTER. -just my two cents. would love to hear what others have to say.

Jeff Dusek 2 years ago

what do people think about the umpires not throwing yellow flags this past weekend at the new england team race finals?

LImited umpiring was used at the Fowle Trophy which means yellow flags were an option. A yellow flag is only flown if the umpires feel they do not have sufficient facts to make a decision on the water. I was only there on Saturday, but the fact that no yellows were flown was mostly due to having three boats with two umpires on every race.

query 2 years ago

what do people think about the umpires not throwing yellow flags this past weekend at the new england team race finals?

Quiet Thinker 2 years ago

This is definitley a good discussion topic but often overlooks a very important point. In order to be a good at ANY sport, you have to be good enough "to beat the refs" too. What I mean by that is that EVERY sporting event there are opponents who get away with fouls that the refs mistakenly don't see or call the wrong way. At the end of the day the better opponent still wins.

Your scenario does bring up a slightly more complex issue-that of having no umpires on the water. Are there teams (not speaking collegiately) who tend to get into sticky situations or force fouls or worse-don't spins when the fould seems obvious? YES. Quick question though, when was the last time Silver Panda, Larchmont, or Tannery Loungers lost a race to those teams? The better teams still win those races because they RACE better.
As for the automatic 10 points I think that is a worse option and here is why: If a team has a slight lead the team behind has a far more advantageous reason to draw a foul-or at least a situation that could end up in a protest room where your chances are 50-50 at best and it becomes a he said-she-said. If a port tacker in the 4 of a 1-2-4 is crossing one of the opponents closely and at the last moment the opponent heads up to draw the foul and protets, the boat in the 4 would have to spin. Even though he was probably right it wouldnt be worth the 10 points of the 50-50 protest room.
Under the current rule the 4 could sail on and hail code red and finish the race without worry. Under what you propose the 4 would spin, probably lose an ace, and now the race has a totally different look where a slight unbalance could change everything.
We are all in agreement I think that cheesy behavior is undesirable at best. The rules writers did a pretty good job an adding in the 10 point penatly for this reason exactly. It wasn't always there. At this time I don't see any reason to change it.

10 points 2 years ago

Go to the Charles River Team race and you'll understand exactly what the person below is talking about. I like the idea of having coaches out on the water to help justify incidents. I also agree that if you can't sail a race cleanly... 10 points for a DSQ.

Non-Umpired Racing 2 years ago

Adding team races to college sailing is a great thing to do because it allows more teams to enjoy the team racing aspect of sailboat racing. Adding team races to the college schedule unfortunately presents the problem of acquiring umpires for the events every weekend. Not only is it difficult to find umpires, but it is especially difficult to find qualified umpires and in the numbers that you need to fulfill the requirements of running many races with umpires.

However we still want to have team races for a number of different reasons, but mainly because team races are "fun". Well it's not fun to race against teams who exploit this 1-2-3 rule...so what to do about that? I have a potential solution to this problem. Maybe in non-umpired team races we grant 10 points to a DSQ'd boat. This way it would be impossible to win a race with a DSQ. I understand this potentially produces many protests when losing from certain teams, for those of you who race in the college races you obviously know who the "happy protesting" teams are. It becomes very clear at this point in the year which teams cannot win without protests.
Back to the point at hand here, in regattas without umpiring there needs to be solutions to the 1-2-3 rule along with other things. However I think that regattas such as the Graham Hall were run much better than regattas like the SNETR because they allowed the coaches on the water for umpiring. Therefore the coaches could make a call if it were easy to do so and they agreed. For example if the two coaches from opposing teams were watching their teams race and decided that the foul was a clear red or green then they could flag accordingly, but if they disagreed or simply did not see the situation then they could yellow flag the protest. At least in this situation some of the protests would be solved on the water. Although there would be some yellow flags, it seems that this solution works best.
So in short, coaches on the water making "clear" calls is one way to solve the umpire shortage situation, and not being able to win a race with a 1-2-3 or 4 with a DSQ. Also it is important to always make protests at non-umpired team races a maximum 3 minute justice. I know that some teams treat the SNETR as the Superbowl, but lets be honest, it's got a reputation where out of district teams cant even stomach the thought of attending because of the head ache it would cause.
Basically non-umpired team races really are not that fun.

agreed 2 years ago

These are fairly typical problems in un-umpired teamracing unfortunately- another issue is if a boat fouls the other team and doesn't spin, then fouls again and causes the outcome of the race to be significantly altered. It really seems like the judges need to make their decision based on testimony of what happened AFTER the foul was committed- but is this possible or permissible in a protest room?