|
SCUTTLEBUTT No. 810 - May 8, 2001Scuttlebutt is a digest of yacht racing news of major significance; commentary, opinions, features and dock talk . . . with a North American emphasis. Corrections, contributions, press releases and contrasting viewpoints are always welcome.
WORRELL 1000 Many of the competitors complained about the lumpy, confused seas and had difficulty tuning the boat to the conditions. A herky-jerky pitching motion with constant stabbing into waves was a common complaint. First Time Worrell 1000 racer Nigel Pitt had trouble acclimating to the rough conditions and the new boat, but as he learned to fly the hull higher he felt his speed improved. As the fleet rounded the point and was able to crack off to a tight reach it was possible to tune the boat for a more stable ride. Lambert and Livingston showed their experience as they clearly mastered the sailing conditions and extended to a 10 minute win on the leg. After falling as low as 8th in the early going Steve Lohmayer and Kenny Pierce of Team Tybee got it going late in the race and moved into second. Lohmayer attributed their early speed problems to excessive mast rake and too much rudder sweep. The combination caused a lot of helm and made the boat hard to steer. As they came off the wind onto a reach the problem diminished and they were able to sail forward through the fleet. Reigh North and Scott Macdonald of British Columbia moved from a horrible starting position to a third place finish. The Hobie veterans will start in the 3rd slot tomorrow. Team Guidant, sailed by Rod Waterhouse and David Wallace substituting for Sandra Tartaglino hit the beach in fourth and Team Baywind rounded out the top 5. After the frightening finish of leg 1 the fleet was spared at today's finish. The wind dropped to 10 knots while the majority of the fleet finished. The surf moderate to 4 feet and the landing was dead downwind. The breaking waves and foaming whitewater pushed the boats onto the beach causing minor rudder problems but no one spun out of control. When landing on a beach in surf the turbulent whitewater of a breaking wave can grab the rudders and turn the boat abruptly, upsetting the balance of the sail-plan and causing the boat to round up or gybe uncontrollably. The mellower surf off Jensen Beach allowed the sailors to run onto the beach sitting on the tramp, not necessitating a trapeze to keep the boat driving forward. Team PI did capsize only 1/4 mile from the finish, but they righted the boat smartly and only gave up 5 minutes in the process. P-Yacht ladies and Team Australia are still on the racecourse at 7:15 PM. The helicopter is heading up to establish visual contact with them before dark. Zack Leonard, www.worrell1000.com/
WORRELL 1000 SIDEBAR According to race organizers, Weaver, sailing with Rick Deppe, and Tartaglino, crewing for Worrell veteran Rod Waterhouse, sustained injuries while attempting to land their Inter 20 beachcats in the heavy surf and 20-knot onshore winds. Tartaglino's injury came after her boat planted its bows into the sand and pitch-polled. During the incident, Tartaglino suffered multiple leg fractures. Weaver sustained his injury, a broken ankle, while he and Deppe were attempting to push their boat across the finish line. Excerpt from Grand Prix Sailor Full story: www.sailingworld.com/gps/
TRANSPAC Traditionally, competitors sail south of the rhumb (direct) line to avoid the Pacific High, an ever-moving zone of high pressure that creates a floating desert of light wind between Los Angeles and Honolulu. Because all boats monitor the race radio frequency, navigators sometimes will call for a course change soon after roll call to slip away from rivals. Now that 24-hour headstart is cut in half. According to the Sailing Instructions, now available in hard copy and on the event Web site, www.transpacificyc.org, the communications vessel Alaska Eagle will start morning roll call at 0830 hours PDT and evening roll call at 1815 hours PDT. Boats will be required to give their positions as of 0800 and 1800. There is a history of boats reporting false positions to gain a strategic advantage, but in recent years the rules have prohibited that ploy. Any boat failing to answer roll call or report its position correctly will be penalized by the addition of 10 minutes to its elapsed time for each infraction. With the accuracy of the modern Global Positioning System (GPS), there is no longer a reasonable excuse for reporting a false position. However, as a safety precaution, each boat's navigator is still required to plot a position using a sextant for celestial sightings four times during the race. Transpac official Dale Nordin said, "Your backup is celestial, and you need to know how to use it." Rich Roberts, www.transpacificyc.org
IN THE GOOD OLD SUMMERTIME
VOLVO OCEAN RACE Swedish Match was probably the fattest in the fleet last time and we have opted for a narrower boat, although we still have to see how narrow we are compared with the others. But we are on the narrow side compared to last time and we have to see if you need a fat boat for the Code Zero sails; or do you want a stiffer boat for downwind - it depends on what you believe in terms of the weather patterns. Most boats are sailing at a heeled angle and we have to see how she performs when she is heeled, the power she picks up when heeled. I think this 'V' shaped hull is the way to go for us. I pray to God that we are right. Normally you get from the designer, in this case the Bruce Farr office, a menu, and out of that menu you pick what you believe in, in relation to the weather pattern and the way you want to sail your boat, what you believe in terms of VPPs, the strong and weak sides, and he designs what you are after. Of course he has his own input which is very invaluable. It is very hard to talk against what he believes is fast because he has all the proofs. We wanted a narrower boat than last time, we wanted a 'V' shaped boat, we knew we wanted the boat to be slippery when heeled. And that's how he designed the boat and not so much focused on good handling in critical conditions - I think it may be tough for us in the Southern Ocean. It will be easier speed-wise on the shorter legs, which carry a lot of points in relation to their length. madforsailing website. Full interview: www.madforsailing.com
LETTERS TO THE CURMUDGEON * From Seth A. Radow (edited to our 250-word limit): SoCal PHRF has addressed an issue that was discussed in a series of recent emails with the following amendment: "Some boats that are issued Rating Certificates may have systems or use procedures which, if used while racing, would violate the Racing Rules of Sailing (Racing Rules). The issuance of a Rating Certificate to such boat does not amend or abrogate any provision of the Racing Rules." This amendment covers water ballast, electronic winches, moveable keels and detachable headstay issues. There are 3 rules that are "potentially" violated by these items. "Potentially" is the appropriate word because ANY yacht club can eliminate rules 51, 52 and or 54 by simple stating that fact in the sailing instructions, as some clubs have on major races. Ensenada drops Rule 51, Transpac will most likely drop 51,and 52. Puerto Vallarta dropped 51 and 52. The removable headstay issue may or may not violate rule 54. Some opinions would say yesâ but the judge advocate of PHRF believes not. PHRF has an obligation to handicap each and every boat that comes before the board so long as it meets PHRF requirements. In some races based on certain SI's these boats are perfectly legal. On other SI's, they are protestable by the other racers. PHRF is a rating organization, not a police force. If a racer thinks a rule has been violated, he knows what to do. And that has nothing to do with PHRF. CURMUDGEON'S COMMENTS: While I think it was important to clarify this issue, that does not mean we are re-opening the PHRF thread beyond this issue. Also, below you will find just three more letters on drug testing and three on PWCs. These will be the final three letters for each of these threads. Both are now officially dead! * From Geoff Brieden: In response on how to best handle drug testing for potential Olympic sailors, why doesn't US Sailing use a format generally used by other sports and sports organizations for its high level athletes? That is, if you want to even try to qualify for the Olympics, or want consideration in any way, then you must complete an application and register with US Sailing, signing a disclosure that you have read and understand the restrictions on certain substances and that you are aware that you may be tested for banned substances, and the consequences of such a positive test may be disqualification from Olympic consideration. These would then be the only people subject to any potential drug testing. If you haven't registered, then you won't be tested, but you also cannot be considered for participation at Olympic and high level ISAF sanctioned competitions. To be a professional athlete (or at least an elite athlete) in most other American sports, you must declare yourself as such and are governed by the substance abuse policies of that level of the sport. Why would we not want to handle sailing any differently? It seems like the easiest and most logical way to handle this, while not stepping on the toes of the weekend sailor who likes to compete at high levels. * From Geoff Newbury (Reply to Joseph Bainton): If sailing is to remain an Olympic sport, then make the 'Olympic rules' apply only to Olympic sailors. Writing the rules so as to allow the penalization of 'weekend warriors' who happen to sail against the Olympic level racers, is just plain stupid. And it is a potential source of friction, which should not exist. Paul's 'invitation' was not, to my mind particularly gracious, it was a 'this is the way it is, so accept it'. But the entire premise is unacceptable: The regime allows that at any time, anywhere, the MNA can test ANYONE. This premise was stuffed down our throats by way of ISAF by the IOC. And our 'acceptance' of testing is mandatory. It is one thing for the police (who can only do so on reasonable grounds) to ask you to blow in the tube, because drunk driving does cost lives, but it is quite another to at random demand of any sailor whether you have drunk too much coffee, or taken a cold remedy. A better big step forward would be to ban drug testing on any sailor who has NOT indicated that he wants to compete at the top level. It will be easier for maybe 10,000 sailors worldwide to file a 'notice of intention and consent to testing' than to have every other sailor in the world filing for a waiver. Drug abuse is not an overall problem in sailing. Drug abuse at the Olympic level might be a problem. The remedy should focus on the problem. * From Will Harris (edited to our 250-word limit): I'm in the lunatic fringe. I arrived here by as Mr. Magtanong suggested, 'reading the text'.
- Rule 5- Drugs - applies in all races...period. Now that it is established that they can test YOU...read 19.2.8, you may just start noticing the black helicopters. The rulebook makes clear that drug testing applies to ALL sailors at all times. I have the utmost respect for Mark Reynolds, and applaud the level of sacrifice and commitment he and other Olympic competitors share. I, along with 99% of sailors who choose not to participate in the Olympic Games are currently governed by the same onerous provisions as he is. Sorry Mr Henderson and Mr Magtanong, but there is no provision to "opt out", regardless of your level of sailing. ISAF seems to want to pursue a policy of selective enforcement. Enforcing a rule via unpublished, unofficial criteria is simply wrong. Furthermore, it is in direct opposition to the basic principle of sportsmanship which leads off our rules. This section of the rulebook needs to be scrapped immediately, and re-written ASAP. The (un-printed) rule book trumps even opinions expressed in "Scuttlebutt". * From Garry Hoyt: Three cheers for Peter Harken and Russell Long for taking on the heavily muscled PWC lobby. The incontrovertible fact is that these noisy and frequently dangerous devices are an intrusion on the tranquility and natural beauty that attracts thousands of kayaks, canoes, shells and sailboats to selected waters. By all means invite and allow PWC's to the open ocean and wide bays where they can blast around to their hearts'content without interfering with any one else's pleasure. But keep them out of the beaches, quiet lakes, harbors and national parks where people are seeking relief and refuge from the annoyance of noise, pollution and commotion that PWC's so quintessentially combine. Think of the guy who worked all his life to buy a small cabin on some quiet water and now finds his long sought privacy shattered by the audial and visual blight of raucous PWC's violating the peace he paid for. * From Peter Brechter: For many of us the PWC issue is simply one of noise. The bottom line is that in a crowded world it is important to pursue your leisure activity in a way that doesn't ruin the enjoyment of others. It is all well and good for Ms. Fontain to tell us that the manufacturer's are building quieter machines - but she need only spend a "quiet" Saturday in my front yard to understand just how many of the noisy ones are still out there and just what it is like to have this incessant noise pervade your very existence from dawn until dusk during your limited leisure hours. For those of us who count on access to wilderness areas to find some occasional peace and quiet in our lives, the existence of noise pollution created by dirt bikes, snowmobiles, ATVs and PWCs eliminates our one hope for solitude. I think Ms. Fontain should seek tolerance of a different sort - tolerance from profit minded manufactures who refuse to admit that their products fundamentally detract from the quality of life. I for one don't consider PWCs my fellow boaters much in the same way that I don't consider the guy rapped in body armor flying past me through the woods on his dirt bike a fellow naturalist. * From Hal Smith: As long as PWC's are marketed through motorcycle dealerships to people who have no marine experience, there will be on-the-water courtesy problems with these "vessels" and everything else afloat. To be fair, certainly not all PWC operators misbehave, but the conspicuous majority of PWC operators fall into the obnoxious and dangerous category. This is a problem, because the boating community has managed thus far to keep the government largely at bay through self-discipline. We suffer enough at the whim of extreme groups who are concerned that my sailboat may permanently alter the balance of nature. PWC's bring unwanted government attention to our activity. I seem to remember that PWC's were first offered through traditional marine dealerships, but sales were lackluster. When PWC's were sold through motorcycle shops, sales soared. This says something about a lot (not all) of operators. I personally found a PWC boring after about 15 minutes, so I can imagine why someone else might pursue inappropriate behavior to keep the thrills alive. When you had rather be attacked by no-see-ums (teeth with wings) than by one PWC, it is past time their industry redesigned its market appeal in its own long-term best interest.
EDS ATLANTIC CHALLENGE The start will be in St Malo on 3rd July 2001. The fleet will then sprint to Hamburg, Germany where the yachts will remain for two days before making their way to Portsmouth, where another sprint should guarantee a spectacular finish. After a short stay in Portsmouth the fleet will depart for Baltimore on the East Coast of the USA where the expected arrival date is the 14th July. Sailsail website Confirmed Race Entries: Team Group 4 UK; Kingfisher UK; Fila Italy; - Sill France; Gartmore UK; Ocean Planet USA. Full story: www.sailsail.com
VERY INTERESTING For info on other regattas: www.goflow.com/raceprev.htm
JUBILEE
EASY TRANSITION
INDUSTRY NEWS * Sperry Top-Sider has renewed its support of the US Sailing Team as it's exclusive footwear supplier. Notably, the renewed support will now include the US Disabled Sailing Team and the US Youth World Team, along with the US Sailing Team which Sperry has supported for eight years.
QUOTE / UNQUOTE
THE CURMUDGEON'S OBSERVATION |
