Shake and Bake

Well, in the version you posted O clearly doesn't break 17, but as the position of O2, O3, and O4 show us, O is stopped dead in the water. How does O suddenly get from O4 to O5? Even if that turn were possible, by that point B would have sailed around her! Sure, you can then trap the other blue boat, but if you are converting p2 to p4, who cares if the new 1 is slowed up a bit? he's just going to slow up and come back to you anyway...

watch the language please

C:\Program Files\TSS\Team Racing\T S\Shake & Bake\Shake and Bake Port Starboard 2.htm

Hopefully I linked this correctly but this is how it should be shown. You can see clearly that the inside boat (Orange) is not turning down into an overlap until Blue goes to gybe.

where do i get TSS?
also matt your response makes sense and even if you pulled I think it would be near impossible to win in a room...

Consider this image:

http://www.sailgroove.org/photos/view/296122/76383


At positions 2, 3, and 4 the boats are overlapped. Rule 17 applies at positions 2 and 3.

If O continued on her course at position 2, she would become clear astern of B. Instead, she heads down, and remains overlapped at position 3. How can that action possibly be consistent with the requirement that she "promptly sail[] astern" of B? Simply put, she is turning the wrong way, and she fails to sail astern.
Of course, you could argue that O is turning down to round the mark (i.e., heading down to sail her proper course) but I don't think that is the case you're making. Moreover, O appears to delay her turn down, undercutting her claim to be heading down to her proper course. (See Call F3)
Note also that in this situation if O continues to head down after position 4 and hits B, O almost certainly breaks rule 16.1, and is unlikely to be exonerated by 18.5.

Zach I think your right, that B can hold them but it has to be looked at as a continual trap in a sense, we had this move tried in practice and it's hard to execute with the clear astern definition.. Anyone know how this would be ruled in a protest situation between B and O and the clear astern?

Yea, it would be great so see either some video of a SailX racelet of this move; I have been playing around in TSS and I just can't recreate it in a way that doesn't violate 17 without allowing blue to just sail around orange.

Again, this is not something that lasts for a long time. How much time is promptly. This would typically happen in small slow dinghies that can turn well but don't accelerate well. Orange was clear astern after blue broke the overlap. Orange is not turning down to re-establish the overlap. If Orange were to never turn down again, this would not mean that she violated 17. It's still Blue's actions that are causing the overlap to be re-established and at that point, Orange is not preventing her from rounding the mark. Orange may turn down once Blue gybes, or she may turn down and gybe twice, but she is not turning down and maintaining an overlap.

Therefore I do not think that Orange violates 17 at all so long as she is not maintaining the overalp herself

I would like to add to both Charles, Ben, and Matt. Please be sure to make sure that your colors are correct from the video to when you are describing them in an argument on the post board. There are a couple instances where I had to read a few times and still could be confused with the whole blue orange situation. Not a big deal. And for the record I vote for Charles.

Let me clarify a bit.

So O is initially clear ahead. Then B becomes overlapped to windward. 17 doesn't apply. O luffs B. B breaks the overlap. B then re-overlaps O; as O came from clear astern, O is now subject to rule 17.


If O now heads up and again becomes clear astern of B (all of O's hull is behind a line perpendicular to B's course, through B's rudder), 17 ceases to apply. (O has complied with her obligation to sail astern of B).


However, if O then overlaps B again, O must do one of two things: either promptly head down to her proper course, or promptly sail astern of B. Simply *pointing* astern B doesn't do that, if they remain overlapped.


Of course, if they never re-overlap and O remains clear astern, then 17 doesn't apply and she need not sail her proper course. However, the geometry of the situation, as B heads down to DDW, suggests that in order to remain clear astern O would have to sail upwind a bit to remain clear astern. If this continues, B is just going to sail around O (which is OK, of course, as long as O hooks B's teammate and converts to a play 2).


Now I agree that O doesn't instantly violate 17 when they become re-overlapped, but as soon as they become re-overlapped O must act (in one of the two ways above) to comply with 17.

Matt,

I disagree in part. Once the overlap has been broken and Blue heads up, he is fully astern of Orange. After that point it is Orange's actions that are actually preventing Blue from staying clear astern. I don't think that it is fair to say that a boat (Blue in this case) is violating a rule when it is the other boat's (Orange's) actions that are causing it.
I presented this move to Dave Perry a couple months back and also to Jeff Borland and Rob Overton two weeks ago during the Szambecki (same group that was at the MAISA Team Race) and they all said the move does comply.
The second part of the move where Blue essentially gives up the 1 was unanimously considered the same as room freely given to the 1st Orange boat.
This is not a move that is intended to make a mark trap last indefinitely but rather a way to prolong its effects (condensing the race).

Charlie:

I'm afraid I think the move you describe is a violation of rule 17.

First, as you note, the callbook tells us what it means to 'sail astern' in a rule 17 context:

"A boat 'sails astern' (reference rule 17) of another boat if, while sailing on either tack, she becomes wholly behind a line abeam from the aftermost point of the other's hull and equipment." (2009-2012 Call D5)

The definition you cite makes clear that a boat does not promptly sail astern simply by "aiming" (your word) but rather must actually become clear astern of the windward boat.

In your scenario: initially the orange boat is not subject to rule 17. When blue heads up and break the overlap, the boats are no longer overlapped, and thus, rule 17 still does not apply. However, when blue heads back down so as to overlap orange from clear ahead, rule 17 now applies and blue must either promptly head down to her proper course, or promptly sail astern of blue.

If she "becomes wholly behind a line abeam of the aftermost point" on blue, she has sailed astern of blue; now, they are no longer overlapped and rule 17 no longer applies. However, if orange simple heads up to a course that, *points* in a direction that would take her clear astern of blue, but does not actually "sail astern" (i.e., actually cross that line) she breaks rule 17.

Remember, the course that orange is steering makes no difference as to whether she is clear astern of blue; the line that matters is the one drawn perpendicular to blue's course, passing through the aft-most point on blue. Until orange is fully behind this line, she has not sailed astern.

If you pause the video at t=0:54, the boats are still overlapped and therefore orange has not sailed astern of blue, and thus breaks rule 17. The same is true at t=1:40; even after the orange boat "sticks it up", he is still overlapped with blue. Orange breaks 17.

You are correct that if blue gybes onto port while orange is on starboard, blue is in trouble. Rule 10, not rule 11, now applies. Even if blue gybes back onto starboard, rule 17 no longer applies (orange doesn't need to gybe twice; see rule 17), and orange can luff. Thus, blue must be careful that she re-overlaps orange, forcing orange to round the mark, before blue gybes.

Hmmm. New thought! Same question.

If you are luffing in the zone with your bow pointing slightly astern of the boat in question are you promptly sailing aster of her?
I think not!
But does it matter? If a boat is pointing astern of another boat they are not overlapped! When 2 boats are not overlapped rule 17 doesn't apply.
Hmmm.
What do you think?