Rule 2, Fair Sailing
Rule A2, Series Scores
A boat may position herself in a tactically controlling position over
another boat and then slow that boat’s progress so that other boats pass
both of them, provided that, if she is protested under rule 2 for doing so,
the protest committee finds that that there was a reasonable chance of her tactic
benefiting her series result. However, she breaks rule 2 if she intentionally
breaks another rule to increase the likelihood of the tactic succeeding.
Assumed Facts for Questions 1 and 2
Boat A was well ahead of B. Both boats were on the last leg of the course in
the final race of a one-design class series. Suddenly, A changed course so that
she sailed back down the course towards B and positioned herself in a tactically
controlling position over B. A then slowed B’s progress, resulting in
three boats passing them. While A was controlling B and slowing her progress,
both boats remained on the last leg of the course, and A did not break any rule,
except possibly rule 2. A had calculated her own and B’s series scores,
and had determined that if B were to be passed by three boats A would defeat
B in the series.
Question 1
Did the tactic used by A, turning back and slowing another boat’s progress,
break rule 2? Is this tactic acceptable at any time during any race of a series?
Answer 1
A’s tactic was in compliance with recognized principles of sportsmanship
and fair play because the tactic was intended to benefit her own series result.
A boat may use such a tactic at any time during any race of a series without
breaking rule 2, provided that, if she is protested for using the tactic, the
protest committee finds that there was a reasonable chance that her tactic would
benefit her series result. A boat will usually be unable to meet this criterion
unless she is in the final race or races of a series in which the scoring system
permits one or more race scores to be excluded when series scores are calculated.
If she fails to meet the criterion, she breaks rule 2.
Notwithstanding the argument in the paragraph above, a boat also breaks rule
2 if she intentionally breaks another rule to increase the likelihood of the
tactic succeeding.
There are several formats for a ‘series’ of races. Most are simply
a single set of, for example, seven races, where the winner is the boat with
the lowest series score (see rule A2). Others, such as one-design class championships
with large fleets, involve a qualifying series followed by a final series. For
the purposes of this case, a ‘series’ is a set of races, including
the race in which the questionable tactic was used, governed by a particular
notice of race and sailing instructions.
Question 2
Would the answer to Question 1 be different if A had been unsuccessful in her
tactic – i.e., if three boats had not passed B?
Answer 2
No. A boat may use the tactic that A used even if she uses it unsuccessfully,
provided the protest committee finds that there was a reasonable chance that
the tactic would benefit her series result (see Answer 1).
Assumed Facts for Question 3
Boat A was ahead of B. Both boats were on the same leg. A positioned herself
in a tactically controlling position over B and then slowed B’s progress,
resulting in several boats passing them. One of the boats that passed both A
and B was C. While controlling B and slowing her progress, A did not break any
rule, except possibly rule 2. B protested A for breaking rule 2, alleging that
A’s tactic was undertaken to benefit C, whose crew were friends of A’s
crew.
Question 3
What criteria should the protest committee use to decide whether or not A broke
rule 2?
Answer 3
Except when sailing under Appendix D (Team Racing), it is unsportsmanlike for
a boat to use the tactic that A used unless there is good reason to believe
that the tactic benefited or could have benefited her own series result. A should
be asked how the tactic did or could have benefited her series result. If the
committee finds that the tactic did benefit A’s series result or had a
reasonable chance of doing so, then it should not penalize her for breaking
rule 2 or consider calling a hearing under rule 69.1(a).
Assumed Facts for Question 4
Repeatedly during either a race or series, boat A positioned herself in a tactically
controlling position over B and then slowed B’s progress, resulting in
several boats passing them. Each time A did this both A and B were on the same
leg. While controlling B and slowing her progress, A did not break any rule,
except possibly rule 2. It appeared to B that A’s slowing of B did not
benefit A’s series result and was done merely to harass B. B protested
A for breaking rule 2, alleging that A’s tactic was undertaken to harass
B and not to benefit A’s series result.
Question 4
What criteria should the protest committee use to decide whether or not A broke
rule 2?
Answer 4
It is unsportsmanlike for a boat to use the tactic that A used unless there
is good reason to believe that the tactic benefited or could have benefited
her series result. A should be asked how the tactic did or could have benefited
her series result and B should be asked for any evidence that would support
her allegation. If the committee finds that the tactic did benefit A’s
series result or had a reasonable chance of doing so, then it should not penalize
her for breaking rule 2 or consider calling a hearing under rule 69.1(a).
USSA 1991/282, revised by ISAF 2009