Proposed Rules and Race Course Changes

[eric_anderson]

In a perfect world, you have the sun high in the sky, big clear ice and constant moderate breeze. The world we actually race in is never perfect.    We sometimes race in conditions of somewhat limited visibility, glare, freezing rain, light snow, blowing snow, we sail boats with all white sails, and sometimes masts.   There is a fair bit working against us.

I believe that the primary objectives of race management are safety, and fair racing.  Anything that enhances one, without greatly affecting the other, is worthwhile.

\We don’t live in a bubble, and I fully accept that the sports I love are dangerous.   Every sport I have been passionate about in my life has killed at least one friend of mine.  I accept that, and realize it may be my time some day.   On the other hand, I don’t cycle or Iceboat without a helmet and do my best to insure safe personal conduct and race conditions.

On a race course, the collisions most likely to kill someone are head on, or near head on, upwind- downwind.  With iceboats tuned the way we can today, you have closing speeds approaching 90 mph.     Frankly my closest calls have all been of this variety.   Forget rules for a second and think about the situations that we have observed causing bad crashes.  I define a bad crash as one that results in death, extensive surgery, a permanent injury, or you lose at least 2 months of work.

1.       A boat rounding the leeward mark and tacking immediately, sailing on starboard  straight at the  boats coming down wind  that are distracted about the upcoming rounding
2.       A boat rounding the windward mark and gybing  immediately, sailing on port  straight at the  starboard tack boats coming upwind  that are distracted about the upcoming rounding  ( the worst racing cash I ever saw occurred on this scenario.)
3.       Groups of boats rounding the windward mark in breeze , sailing  through the parade of  boats that overstood  the port layline  and  reaching in on port   at a very tight angle at the  boats coming upwind  that are distracted about the upcoming rounding. 
4.       A boat that overstands the windward mark on port and just before he gets to the mark realizes there is no hole to tack into and bears off instead and accelerates into the oncoming fleet.
 
So those are the situations likely to cause bad accidents, what causes the most number of iceboat accidents? Based on my personal observations

1.       Starboard gybe boat making a bad  gybe and rounding at the leeward mark in breeze and spinning out and getting hit. 
2.       Port tack  boat over standing the windward  mark and trying to make a hole in a crowded  starboard parade of boats
3.       A boat rounding the leeward mark and not realizing that a faster boat is just above and behind him tacks immediately at the mark causing a collision.
4.       Boats are finishing on port and starboard, other boats are lapped and rounding the mark.  The boats finishing are exiting the finish line straight down wind, or are gibing  to round either end of the line, or are just hardening up to go around the start line.  When you see another boat you don’t know if he is rounding, going to go straight, going to gybe, or just head up.   way too much chaos when you have 15 boats finishing at once.   Below the pits you have 3 separate streams of boats all rounding up and trying to find their gear. 
 
What if you could do something that would decrease the likelihood of all these collisions, and it has been proven for the last 10+ years in Europe?   Using a second mark offsets the upwind and downwind laylines of boats and reduces the number of events that lead to a head on collision.
Requiring all boats to pass between the start line and the leeward mark after finishing, gets everyone going the same direction after the finish, and is what everyone does in scratch racing and local racing anyway.
As an added bonus, sailors who sail on both continents don’t have to adapt to 2 different course configurations at championship (ranking) events.
I think if you talk to the sailors that have raced DN’s in Europe and in the North America you would find that the vast majority feel the euro course is safer, and prefer it.  The only sailor I know that does not like it is Robert Cumins.   I respect his opinion,  but I also realize  that no rule will please 100% of the sailors.  Is this a perfect proposal? Nope.  Does it limit the box we compete in? Yes it does.  Does it increase the work on the RC?  Yes for the darling marks, keeping the start line closed, decreases RC work.

So how would we as a class go about making  a change?  First off, the racing rules are written and administered by the National Ice Boat Authority.   Our best approach is to Formally ASK the NIA to consider a change.
 
Eric Anderson US 5193

[eric_anderson]

So that is what we did. We asked.    The IDNIYRA governing committee submitted the following letter to the NIA:

Memorandum to:  National Iceboat Authority  Board of Directors
From: IDNIYRA Governing Committee, and IDNIYRA- European Governing Committee
On behalf of the DN class, we would like to thank you for all the effort the NIA Board of Directors has put into the management of the Iceboat racing rules and regatta management.
The IDNIYRA governing committee in conjunction with IDNIYRA-European Governing Committee is hereby requesting that the NIA Board of Directors add an alternative Course diagram to the current appendix 1 and  modify certain rules to allow the use of this alternative course diagram.  As a class we feel that some changes are needed to increase safety and insure better race management at events with large fleets.  At the same time, we want to minimize the effect on the current rules.  These changes can be instituted by simply providing an alternative Race Diagram to Appendix 1, instituting 2 new Definitions and modifying 2 other definitions.
The reasons the IDNIYRA Governing Committee would like these changes are as follows:
The first is that currently in the DN class, ½ of the regattas that result in national rankings are conducted using one course diagram  (NIA appendix 1), and the other ½ of the regattas are conducted using a different course (see attached Diagram).  This alone is a huge problem in the DN class, and leads to confusion on the parts of those sailors that sail on both continents.
The second reason, is one of safety, If you talk to DN sailors who have raced using the race course that prevails in Europe, and course we use here, there is a near universal preference for the Euro course configuration.  We recognize that it does change the game slightly, however in general it does make racing safer.   We realize that there are differing opinions on what the marks should be called, and how they should be treated under the rules.  It is our position that the extra marks, and the imaginary line connecting them, are simply treated as one mark, allowing the current rules to stay largely the same.
The other item that we would like to advance is using a closed start line, and requiring all skippers to exit the finish area to the left, between the Leeward Mark and the odd side of start line.  In a large fleet it is often the situation that some sailors are finishing, while others are rounding the leeward mark.  While the use of the Bart rule eliminates some of this confusion, you end up with a situation where sailors finishing are going straight down wind, some are turning to round the mark on port tack and some are going around the scorers on starboard tack.   Below the pits, you have sailors rounding up from 3 different directions, holding up their heads and trying to get back to their gear.  It is far more logical and safer for all boats to pass between the mark and the start line and approach the pits from the same direction.
The last item we would like to include is to prevent boats from tacking right after the start.  On several occasions, Race committee Personnel have complained about boats passing too close to them  right after the start.   This is done by requiring boats to not cross an imaginary line between the center of the start line and the leeward mark, on the first windward leg.
 It is assumed that the NIA BOD would generally follow the modifications outlined in position paper dated 8-19-2009, by Jane Pagel.  It is our considered opinion that this is in the best interests of the DN class, and potentially other iceboating classes.  We would additionally request that this discussion should be held in conjunction with the European Iceboat Authority, which has been empowered to hear protests resulting from IDNIYRA- Europe events.  Our hope is that  the NIA board would give these changes serious consideration and would act on them  in a timely manner so they can be used for the 2016 racing season.
 There is a clear track record for thess proposals as the windward darling mark has been in use at European events since 2004, and the leeward mark since 2006, the closed start line is used in Europe and in other classes.
 
Attached are the proposed rule changes (Addendum 1) for your considerations as well as
Appendix 1b- Alternative Race course Diagram (Addendum 2) As the Europeans use it.
 
Respectfully submitted,
Kent Baker  IDNIYRA Commodore
Jeorg  D. Bohn IDNIYRA Europe Commodore
Eric Anderson IDNIYRA  Vice Commodore
Geoff Sobering  IDNIYRA Secretary
Wes Wilcox IDNIYRA  Treasurer
 

[eric_anderson]

Why are Course changes needed? 
The DN has evolved quite a bit since its origin in the 1930’s.   While the boats look similar, changes in runner, mast, and sail technology have dramatically increased the velocity the DN goes while racing.  These changes additionally have allowed sailors to remain competitive much later in life, where eyesight and reaction time may not be as fast.    On possible solution is to slow the boat down, and to take steps to increase visibility.   I think slowing the boat down would not be popular so that is unlikely to pass.  Increasing visibility is good strategy, but it is hard to do without a redesign of the boat, so it is unlikely.
  If you can’t or don’t want to change the boat, the race course must change.   
One possibility is smaller fleets, this sounds great in theory, but how can it work in Europe with 220 boat entry restrictions?  Are you going to have 7 fleets?  This just is not practical.


So Now what Happens?

2 things happen.  First the NIA will discuss these proposed changes and decide if they collectively want to consider updating the NIA rules.  Since the rules require a 4/5 th’s (80%) majority and there are 7 member of the NIA, 6 out of 7 members would have to agree with any proposed rules changes.  In truth the likelihood of any changes coming from the current board seem slim.  If the board decides not to make any changes, then the IDNIYRA is going to face some hard choices.

1.    Maintain the status quo, this is a problem because ½ the class races under one set of rules and course descriptions, and ½ the class races under another set of rules.  This alone leads to a lot of confusion.  Secondly since the underlying reason for the course/rules change is to make the racing safer, this seems like a poor choice. 
2.   Do what the EIDNIYRA does, which is basically ignore the NIA race management rules, and make common sense changes, in an attempt to make racing safer.  Doing this has consequences as the NIA would no longer be available to hear protest appeals.  The IDNIYRA bylaws/ racing rules currently prohibits this so this would take a membership vote.
3.   In conjunction with European IDNIYRA, establish a committee, similar to the Technical committee to determine common rules and race management for the DN Class.  Since these members would be voted on by the general membership, and be ½ from the US and ½ from Europe  this  would likely be more responsive to change

I think this is a topic for serious discussion, both here on the forum and at the annual meeting.  I don’t think any change will come quickly, or without a bit of pain.  I do think that as a class, if we expend the effort, an effective  solution can be found in the next few years.

Cheers
Eric Anderson US 5193

[Ken Smith]

Bravo. Nice post. Better plan.

In Landsailing, there is a redzone that includes a line of cones and a "darling" mark equivalent. It nearly eliminates mark rounding issues.

I am in favor.

Ken

[DN 805]

FYI
I think there is merit in being optimistic.

There are seven people on the board of directors of the National Iceboat Authority.
Paul Goodwin, Ron Sherry, and Jane Pegel represent the DN class.
The other members are from the Skeeter and Renegade classes.  The members also serve as representatives of organizations such as the Northwestern IYA, Eastern IYA, etc. etc.   The NIA is a 501c3  not-for-profit organization that has made a set of rules available for use by organizers of iceboat races.    The NIA is not the governing body for iceboat racing.   It is the choice of a class organization, a club, or an association such as the Northwestern IYA, whether or not to  manage their races according to NIA rules.    However, the BOD of the NIA cannot be expected to consider appeals from any protest decisions when NIA rules are not used.   Prior to the NIA, rules used at events often differed.   In the beginning, (early 1960s) representatives from iceboat racing organizations sat down and wrote the rules.  Subsequently the NIA constitution was written and the various iceboat racing organizations made the choice to use the NIA rules.  The NIA has served to stabilize  iceboat racing rules

The proposal  from the IDNIYRA to establish an alternate course was received on November 7, 2014.  According to the author, the topic for the proposal was discussed at the IDNIYRA meeting in 2009.   It has taken more than five years for a proposal to be written and submitted to the NIA.  Ever since receiving the proposal the NIA BOD has been actively discussing how best to adapt the NIA rules to accommodate an alternate course configuration with  changes in the sailing rules that would apply on the alternate course. There also has been input (pro and con)  from sailors of DNs, Skeeters, and stern steerers.    More is involved than merely having a new course diagram.   When various regatta organizers used course formats that differed from the NIA, often it was expected that there  was "an understanding" amongst the sailors as to which maneuvers were allowed and which maneuvers were restricted.   In fact, many sailors did not "understand".   The NIA BOD is working to make sure there are written rules that tell the sailors what is allowed, what is not allowed, and any penalties that might apply.    The course configuration and maneuvers should not be restricted to the extent that the race is a "boat speed contest".  It is important to allow maneuvers that enable a skilled sailor to be successful. 

It is important to remember that any race organizer, not merely DN race organizers, might choose to use an alternate course and rules.  It might be the Wednesday afternoon gathering for a dozen Nites, a fleet of stern steerers varying in size from 26 ft to 55 ft., or 40 boats on the line at the DN Western Challenge.     Consequently, it takes a good deal of thought to provide an alternate course diagram and the necessary changes in the rules.  An effort is being made to include the best features being proposed as well as the best features currently in the NIA rules. 

Also important to remember, is that the current NIA course diagram and rules will remain intact  as a viable choice for race organizers.

I anticipate the NIA BOD will make thoughtful decisions, and it won't take five years to get the job done.    This is a group of experienced racers, each one, with the exception of Paul Goodwin, has won one or more major championship.    The race management experience is equally as impressive. 

It's time to get out on the ice.   

Regards
Jane Pegel