Post by Admin on Feb 22, 2016 13:13:04 GMT 1
Email from David Hollom:
You are probably aware that a major revision of a number of class rules is being undertaken by IRSA. Many of them are good commonsense changes and others you could possibly argue about but nobody would be too put out if they were adopted. There are, however, two fundamental changes proposed, one of which will mean major changes to the rigs of many boats if they are to comply with the new rules and the other that will, if adopted, change the whole nature of our sport.
The first of these two rules proposes a minimum mainsail luff length for the smallest suit of sails and the other will allow a boat to have any number of certificates its owner desires and then choose which one he or she will be using, to suit the weather conditions of the day.
There are two problems with the minimum mainsail luff length. Firstly, it discriminates against lighter boats which will probably benefit more from a smaller suit of sails than a heavier boat and so it is type forming, something that is, definitely, not desirable. Secondly, because it is difficult to change rig and sails to be bigger it means that a large number of owners are going to have to invest in, at the very least, a new smallest suit of sails and in most cases a new smallest rig. And it doesn't stop there. In some cases this increase in size of the smallest suit of sails will put them very near to the next suit up so that the next suit up may require changing and possibly, to get the most out of the change, every other small suit. This seems to be an unnecessary and potentially expensive change when the smallest suit of sails is already limited by the ability to place the required sail numbers on the sail. Furthermore, this will not achieve the IRSA objective of easing the race officers decision to abandon racing, because high winds are more likely to pose a competitor and race committee safety issue than affect the ability of any boat to sail in those conditions
The problem with allowing multiple certificates is that it will require multiple rigs, multiple sails, multiple bulbs and possibly multiple fins, to be competitive. The cost will therefore be enormous and to what purpose. If you optimise your boat for say light conditions, so can every other competitor so you still end up with no advantage but a whole lot of expensive gear that you could well do without. The counter argument is, that if you own a number of boats, you can choose, on the day, the one that most suits the conditions and that allowing multiple certificates levels the playing field by allowing owners of single boats the chance to create a boat more suited to the conditions of the day. However, it is a sledge hammer to crack a nut and, besides the considerable extra expense, it opens up a whole series of potential problems not least of which is how do you police it with so many certificates flying around. And what measurer is going to be willing to give up enough time to measure the same boat say 5 times in different configurations. There will be a major exodus of measurers and without measurers you don't have a sport. The problem of an owner choosing a boat on the day can be easily overcome by requiring the certificate of the boat you are going to sail to be presented to the race organisers some time in advance of the event, so that choosing a weather specific boat will be harder and will not be without risk. This seems a much more workable solution to the problem if indeed there is a problem.
The almost unanimous feeling within the UK is that multiple certificates should not be allowed and that the present rule stating that the last certificate cancels all previous certificates, should be retained. There is also a large majority who are against the proposed minimum mainsail luff length rule which many regard as unnecessary.
IRSA sent you these rule proposals early in December and gave you a ridiculously short time for response and discussion within your country. It appears now that IRSA are going to railroad these rule changes through against what I think is a majority who are against them. However, that is only the feeling within the UK and it could be that we are out of touch with World opinion and so it would be useful if you could convey to us the general feeling within your country, regarding these proposed rule changes. Time is too short so a vote is not possible but if you could sound out opinion within your own organisation and membership and let me know as soon as possible, the result of that straw poll, I would be most appreciative.
Although the IRSA EC voting may have already taken place, your DNM will have the opportunity to vote at the forthcoming General Assembly to ratify, amend or reject these new rules for further discussion and implementation in 2017.
Looking forward to your early reply.
You are probably aware that a major revision of a number of class rules is being undertaken by IRSA. Many of them are good commonsense changes and others you could possibly argue about but nobody would be too put out if they were adopted. There are, however, two fundamental changes proposed, one of which will mean major changes to the rigs of many boats if they are to comply with the new rules and the other that will, if adopted, change the whole nature of our sport.
The first of these two rules proposes a minimum mainsail luff length for the smallest suit of sails and the other will allow a boat to have any number of certificates its owner desires and then choose which one he or she will be using, to suit the weather conditions of the day.
There are two problems with the minimum mainsail luff length. Firstly, it discriminates against lighter boats which will probably benefit more from a smaller suit of sails than a heavier boat and so it is type forming, something that is, definitely, not desirable. Secondly, because it is difficult to change rig and sails to be bigger it means that a large number of owners are going to have to invest in, at the very least, a new smallest suit of sails and in most cases a new smallest rig. And it doesn't stop there. In some cases this increase in size of the smallest suit of sails will put them very near to the next suit up so that the next suit up may require changing and possibly, to get the most out of the change, every other small suit. This seems to be an unnecessary and potentially expensive change when the smallest suit of sails is already limited by the ability to place the required sail numbers on the sail. Furthermore, this will not achieve the IRSA objective of easing the race officers decision to abandon racing, because high winds are more likely to pose a competitor and race committee safety issue than affect the ability of any boat to sail in those conditions
The problem with allowing multiple certificates is that it will require multiple rigs, multiple sails, multiple bulbs and possibly multiple fins, to be competitive. The cost will therefore be enormous and to what purpose. If you optimise your boat for say light conditions, so can every other competitor so you still end up with no advantage but a whole lot of expensive gear that you could well do without. The counter argument is, that if you own a number of boats, you can choose, on the day, the one that most suits the conditions and that allowing multiple certificates levels the playing field by allowing owners of single boats the chance to create a boat more suited to the conditions of the day. However, it is a sledge hammer to crack a nut and, besides the considerable extra expense, it opens up a whole series of potential problems not least of which is how do you police it with so many certificates flying around. And what measurer is going to be willing to give up enough time to measure the same boat say 5 times in different configurations. There will be a major exodus of measurers and without measurers you don't have a sport. The problem of an owner choosing a boat on the day can be easily overcome by requiring the certificate of the boat you are going to sail to be presented to the race organisers some time in advance of the event, so that choosing a weather specific boat will be harder and will not be without risk. This seems a much more workable solution to the problem if indeed there is a problem.
The almost unanimous feeling within the UK is that multiple certificates should not be allowed and that the present rule stating that the last certificate cancels all previous certificates, should be retained. There is also a large majority who are against the proposed minimum mainsail luff length rule which many regard as unnecessary.
IRSA sent you these rule proposals early in December and gave you a ridiculously short time for response and discussion within your country. It appears now that IRSA are going to railroad these rule changes through against what I think is a majority who are against them. However, that is only the feeling within the UK and it could be that we are out of touch with World opinion and so it would be useful if you could convey to us the general feeling within your country, regarding these proposed rule changes. Time is too short so a vote is not possible but if you could sound out opinion within your own organisation and membership and let me know as soon as possible, the result of that straw poll, I would be most appreciative.
Although the IRSA EC voting may have already taken place, your DNM will have the opportunity to vote at the forthcoming General Assembly to ratify, amend or reject these new rules for further discussion and implementation in 2017.
Looking forward to your early reply.
