Print Page | Close Window

Luffing rights

Printed From: Yachts and Yachting Online
Category: General
Forum Name: Racing Rules
Forum Discription: Discuss the rules and your interpretations here
URL: http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12164
Printed Date: 19 Apr 21 at 4:07am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Luffing rights
Posted By: about a boat
Subject: Luffing rights
Date Posted: 22 Sep 15 at 12:48pm
This might be a bit of a basic question. I understand how luffing rights are established by a leeward boat on a beat and do not have a problem with that. My two questions are:

Why is a boat (with luffing rights) allowed to push another up to head to wind? and;

Why is the method of establishing the overlap so important as to give rise to this right?

Thanks



Replies:
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 22 Sep 15 at 12:57pm
Tradition is probably as good an answer as any...

But I suppose it was about blocking people who came from behind and attempted to take your wind.


Posted By: Presuming Ed
Date Posted: 22 Sep 15 at 6:10pm
Originally posted by about a boat

Why is a boat (with luffing rights) allowed to push another up to head to wind? and;

IMHO, because after the abandonment of "mast abeam" hails in 97, you have to stop somewhere. HtW seems as good a place as any. Relatively easy to determine. 

Originally posted by about a boat

Why is the method of establishing the overlap so important as to give rise to this right? 

Again, without "mast abeam", a way of limiting the power of boats overtaking close to leeward was needed. 


Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 22 Sep 15 at 6:42pm
My unreliable memory tells me that even before mast abeam was removed you couldn't luff when overtaking from astern. I assume it has been kept all through from the IRPCS and overtaking boat keep clear. It also seems "fair", though as some rules don't, you can't always judge things by that.

-------------
Firefly 2324, Lightning 130, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446


Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 22 Sep 15 at 6:50pm
Yeah, its been the case since at least 1989 rules (earliest I have handy) that you couldn't luff when overtaking from leeward, but you could luff if you came up from below. And gosh, isn't the phrasing of the rules from back then clumsy. Don't let anyone tell you that pre rewrite rules were clearer and easier to follow...


Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 22 Sep 15 at 9:21pm
I don't wish to be rude, but technically, 'luff' and 'luffing' are highly ambiguous terms which have not been used or defined in the RRS since 1995.

Their use almost always causes confusion in rules discussions.

If you are talking and thinking in terms of 'luffing rights', then you are applying the wrong conceptual approach to the modern rules.

The issues here are simply:

* Has a windward boat kept clear;

* Has a leeward boat changing course towards the wind given a windward overlapped boat room to keep clear as required by rule 16; and

* Has a boat that has become overlapped to leeward from clear astern within two of her hull lengths sailed above her proper course contrary to rule 17.

As others have said, the old concept of luffing rights was probably meant to implement a basic human right of a boat ahead to 'protect her wind' or something.

That is still available through the ability of a right of way leeward boat to change course, subject to the limitations of rules 16 and 17.


Posted By: Presuming Ed
Date Posted: 23 Sep 15 at 4:12pm
Originally posted by Rupert

My unreliable memory tells me that even before mast abeam was removed you couldn't luff when overtaking from astern.

Yes, exactly. Because the w/ward boat had been ahead of mast abeam when the overlap was established. 

To luff as a leeward, overtaking boat, you had get to clear ahead, and then when WW established a new overlap, you could luff her. 


Posted By: PeterG
Date Posted: 23 Sep 15 at 6:43pm
To luff as a leeward, overtaking boat, you had get to clear ahead, and then when WW established a new overlap, you could luff her. 

My memory is not what it was, and I don't keep old sets of rules handy, so I may be wrong, but my memory is not that you had to get clear ahead and then create an overlap from infront. Surely all that was needed was to get your mast in front of abeam - then you could luff until it was no more?


-------------
Peter
Ex Cont 707
Ex Laser 189635
DY 59


Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 23 Sep 15 at 7:02pm
No, you did have to get clear ahead. I can't be bothered to type in the full horror of the then rules, see if you can read this:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/56735928@N05/albums/72157658588431679" rel="nofollow - http://www.flickr.com/photos/56735928@N05/albums/72157658588431679


Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 23 Sep 15 at 8:04pm
Clear ahead and then you could luff until your mast was level with their helm, roughly,and they would say "mast abeam". You'll still hear it sometimes, even now...

Personally, I think I preferred having limits on the luffing.

And yes, the idea now is whether you are not constrained from sailing above your proper course, but it is still luffing, were all know that!

-------------
Firefly 2324, Lightning 130, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446


Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 23 Sep 15 at 8:49pm
Originally posted by Rupert

but it is still luffing, were all know that!


the trouble is tho' Rupert, you and I and our contemporaries know that, but the youngsters shouldn't have that concept so much, and a fair bit of rule debate confusion is caused by use of out of date concepts (overtaking boat keeps clear for example!)


Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 23 Sep 15 at 10:25pm
Originally posted by Rupert

And yes, the idea now is whether you are not constrained from sailing above your proper course, but it is still luffing, were all know that!


Luffing used to be defined simply as changing course towards the wind.

You have no notion what weird meanings people put on it.

Even in the old days many people used it to mean a tactical engagement between a windward and a leeward boat, usually resulting in contact.

I've seen other turkeys insist that it only happened when rule 17 applied, or you were only Luffing if you sailed above close hauled ....the list is endless


Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 24 Sep 15 at 7:54am
I like your tactical engagement description. The term is obviously far wider than this, as it can be used in all sorts of ways to describe turning towards the wind, but we are only really looking at one aspect of it.

However, thinking further, our understanding of it is certainly shaped by early encounters. Firefly sailing on the Thames in the 70s surrounded by ex team racers means luffing was an aggressive tactic to say the least.

-------------
Firefly 2324, Lightning 130, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446


Posted By: about a boat
Date Posted: 25 Sep 15 at 11:50am
OK. I am not sure if my logic is correct but I thought the reasoning behind the rule to give entitlement to luffing rights was probably as result of other rules.

Thus a boat establishing an overlap from clear astern and within two boat lengths does not gain luffing rights to protect their wind since their favoured course would be to go to windward rather than leeward. Am I correct in proper course does not apply?

A boat that does establish luffing rights can protect their wind right up to forcing the other boat to head to wind at which point if windward boat pass head to wind would be required to keep clear until on a close hauled course.


Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 25 Sep 15 at 11:57am
The sentence "I'll luff you off the course if you go to windward of me" is one I don't hear much any more... maybe I simply sail in more gentlemanly classes these days? Or were sailors farmore rude and aggressive in the olden days?

-------------
Firefly 2324, Lightning 130, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446


Posted By: Presuming Ed
Date Posted: 25 Sep 15 at 12:57pm
I would think it was more common as a tactic on the old triangle-sausage-beat Oly course - luffing to defend your wind on the long reaches. 


Posted By: Oatsandbeans
Date Posted: 25 Sep 15 at 3:09pm
I also think that as boats have become faster luffing is not a worthwhile tactic. A fast assymetric has a very limited course in any breeze, too high and they fall over too low and they also fall over. Although some slower boats do give it a go trying to luff a faster assymetric, it is not normally a good idea. Sometimes I wonder what would happen if we just ditched this rule!


Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 25 Sep 15 at 3:59pm
Originally posted by about a boat

OK. I am not sure if my logic is correct but I thought the reasoning behind the rule to give entitlement to luffing rights was probably as result of other rules.

Thus a boat establishing an overlap from clear astern and within two boat lengths does not gain luffing rights to protect their wind since their favoured course would be to go to windward rather than leeward. Am I correct in proper course does not apply?

A boat that does establish luffing rights can protect their wind right up to forcing the other boat to head to wind at which point if windward boat pass head to wind would be required to keep clear until on a close hauled course.


I tried to explain it politely, but I apparently didn't persuade you to join us in the 21st Century.

There is no longer a rule that gives an entitlement to 'luffing rights'. Rule thirtywhateveritwas, which said 'a boat may luff as she pleases' was removed in the 1995 rewrite.

Luffing to protect your position and your clear air is not prohibited, but is subject to the limitations in rules 16, 17, and 14.

Luffing rights, such as they were, were only enunciated in the rules as a starting point so that limitations could be imposed upon those rights.

I don't think the concept of tactical defensive or offensive luffing, or rules affecting it have ever been as a result of, or facilitative of any other rule or rules.

In the language of recent rules, a boat does not 'establish an overlap', boats 'become overlapped'.

Any boat that becomes overlapped (to leeward) from clear astern gains right of way, subject to limitations on changing course under rule 16, and initially, under rule 15.

If that boat became overlapped within two boat lengths, she is additionally limited to not sailing above her proper course, by rule 17. You are not correct to say that proper course does not apply.

Your last paragraph is not clear to me.

A leeward boat may change course towards the wind.(luff), and a windward boat is required to keep clear as long as the leeward boat stays on the same tack, that is, up until the leeward boat passes head to wind, when rule 13 While Tacking applies.

Originally posted by about a boat

Why is a boat (with luffing rights) allowed to push another up to head to wind? and;

Why is the method of establishing the overlap so important as to give rise to this right?


I can only answer your first question with another:Why should she be prohibited from doing so?

In answer to your second, The right of any boat to change course is limited only by other applicable rules.

The RRS in general, are an 'open'rule set: Anything which is not forbidden is permitted, in contrast to a 'closed' rule set, like some class rules, where Anything not permitted is forbidden.


Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 25 Sep 15 at 5:13pm
Originally posted by Oatsandbeans

Sometimes I wonder what would happen if we just ditched this rule!

The rule in question is windward boat gives way to leeward boat. If you ditch that what would you replace it with?


Posted By: Oatsandbeans
Date Posted: 25 Sep 15 at 7:42pm
Don't quite know. Just my attempt to deal with 2 issues at the same time -rule simplication and the problems of agressive sailors that think its really smart to get into agressive luffing matches- not really what I go sailing for.


Posted By: sargesail
Date Posted: 25 Sep 15 at 8:19pm
Originally posted by Oatsandbeans

Don't quite know. Just my attempt to deal with 2 issues at the same time -rule simplication and the problems of agressive sailors that think its really smart to get into agressive luffing matches- not really what I go sailing for.

Then pass to leeward!


Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 26 Sep 15 at 12:55pm
Or go very high.
If you are far enough above them they will end up going astern of you or you will be able to call clear ahead earlier due to relative positions.

-------------
Andy Mck


Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 26 Sep 15 at 1:15pm
Yep, being luffed is normally only a problem for people who attempt to pass aggressively close to windward.

One alternative to the rules as they currently work would be to have something like no boat is allowed to sail above or below its proper course whilst boats are overlapped, which would add a lot of complication and fundamentally change things.
It would also encourage faster boats to beat up slower boats by passing aggressively close to windward, which would make pursuit races pretty ugly experiences for the mid fleet.
If you wanted to avoid that then you might have to add something like boats passing to windward have to maintain 2 boat lengths separation, which makes the rules even more complicated still.
And then, as well as making the rules much more complicated, we've put competitors into a considerable straightjacket as to where they can sail.
Then imagine the situation with 4 or 5 boats overlapped, all of which probably have different proper courses.
"Sail your proper course"
"I can't, two boats below his proper course is higher and I have to go up"


Posted By: Do Different
Date Posted: 26 Sep 15 at 2:51pm
"Yep, being luffed is normally only a problem for people who attempt to pass aggressively close to windward. "

Thumbs Up


Posted By: iGRF
Date Posted: 26 Sep 15 at 6:40pm
Originally posted by Rupert

The sentence "I'll luff you off the course if you go to windward of me" is one I don't hear much any more... maybe I simply sail in more gentlemanly classes these days? Or were sailors farmore rude and aggressive in the olden days?


You should come down to hythe and try taking me to weather, you'll hear it soon enough, we still sail triangle sausage.

-------------
https://www.corekite.co.uk/snow-accessories-11-c.asp" rel="nofollow - Snow Equipment Deals      https://www.corekite.co.uk" rel="nofollow - New Core Kite website


Posted By: yottiemad
Date Posted: 27 Sep 15 at 5:26pm
now that's the sort of comment we silent watchers would expect of GRF, none of that ' how I enjoyed sail in merlin with a decent crew'. Clap

-------------
YOTTIEMAD


Posted By: iGRF
Date Posted: 27 Sep 15 at 5:44pm
And today I enjoyed a sail in an L3k with a decent crew, in fact it was twin commodore powered as we had a visit from the Redoubt banditerati, no luffing today mind, it was blowing top end of a five and only 7 boats finished out of twenty starters, amazing how a drop of wind stops all that shouting, that and getting a mouth full of brine everytime i went to open the source of all wisdom...

Not that that wisdom stopped us getting caned by a couple of kids in a Feva, I've got a picture of them somewhere I shall off and find it..

Here they are last week at the KSSA, it was probably windier today, they finished 3rd on corrected. Hannah and Alex

-------------
https://www.corekite.co.uk/snow-accessories-11-c.asp" rel="nofollow - Snow Equipment Deals      https://www.corekite.co.uk" rel="nofollow - New Core Kite website



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com