Nick also grew up in San Diego, sailing sabots at the San Diego Yacht Club. However it would be ridiculous to attribute Nick’s extreme athleticism to sailing the 8-foot sabot. Nick was an All-Star baseball… + See More +
Nick also grew up in San Diego, sailing sabots at the San Diego Yacht Club. However it would be ridiculous to attribute Nick’s extreme athleticism to sailing the 8-foot sabot. Nick was an All-Star baseball… + See More
- See Less - Nick also grew up in San Diego, sailing sabots at the San Diego Yacht Club. However it would be ridiculous to attribute Nick’s extreme athleticism to sailing the 8-foot sabot. Nick was an All-Star baseball player for the Point Loma Little League and when he was not on the field, Nick was in the water surfing. Nick transferred from the Bishops School to Point Loma High School for his junior year.
Nick graduated from Point Loma High and moved on to the College of Charleston. At Charleston he enjoyed the spoils of the spectacular sailing team, and got to work on his own driving skills. No doubt he improved greatly, earning ICSA All American second team in 2008.
#6
URIDICULOUS March 18, 2009 at 9:25pm
Well if boat A is traveling at a combined rate of 2,554.67 nautical miles/century then you will see that according to rule 14.59er that this does not compute.
The Hamster's question has been brought up before regarding gaining from the multiple tacks, particularly when the boat does not actually complete its "first" tack. If the breeze was particularly lighter than in the video and the boat never completed its "first" tack and rolled into the next and gained, then that may violate rule 42.
I emphasize "first" because the boat is still in the process of completing its tack until it reaches a close hauled course.
I am not sure that there is a clear definition on tactical considerations for it. Unless the boat is doing the manouver just for the sake of gaining through propulsion, I would think that this is completely legit.
This is typically a very downspeed manouver to go tack for tack with the opponent or to make a mark and not one where gaining from it is very likely.
Henry,
The ICSA Procedural Rules read:
7.4.1 During and immediately after tacking or gybing, a boat’s crew may move their bodies to roll the boat, provided that the boat’s mast does not move aggressively away from the vertical more than once (Changes RRS 42.3(b)).
How legal is that? - okay from these shots it is not easy to tell if "after the tack speed is not greater than it would have been in the absence of the tacks" (42.3b) but it is clear that the "boats crew are using their bodies to exaggerate rolling" NOT "to facilitate steering" (42.3a) as they are rolling the wrong way for that! But rather are "moving their bodies to propel the boat" (42.1)!
Similarly - is there any clarity or definition of the "tactical considerations" that would make such repeated tacks acceptable without falling foul of 42.2(c)?
Double Tack
I emphasize "first" because the boat is still in the process of completing its tack until it reaches a close hauled course.
I am not sure that there is a clear definition on tactical considerations for it. Unless the boat is doing the manouver just for the sake of gaining through propulsion, I would think that this is completely legit.
This is typically a very downspeed manouver to go tack for tack with the opponent or to make a mark and not one where gaining from it is very likely.
The ICSA Procedural Rules read:
7.4.1 During and immediately after tacking or gybing, a boat’s crew may move their bodies to roll the boat, provided that the boat’s mast does not move aggressively away from the vertical more than once (Changes RRS 42.3(b)).
Similarly - is there any clarity or definition of the "tactical considerations" that would make such repeated tacks acceptable without falling foul of 42.2(c)?