R
Ross B
Guest
niiiiice
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The comments about swimming pools, countdown sequences and independence are relevent as analogies to describe concepts.
Sailchris says M.B.s are not independent. I'm not convinced, especially if they have a coach on board. Identifying the level of independence is necessary to determine the agreed behaviour of the mommie boats or to lodge a protest.
Relevant(and tradgic) report http://www.imco.org/page0153v01news63.htm
Yet people here don't want to regulate these boats. Are you sure they are not dangerous and what if it happened to you.
Ian
Relevant(and tradgic) report http://www.imco.org/page0153v01news63.htm
Yet people here don't want to regulate these boats. Are you sure they are not dangerous and what if it happened to you.
Ian
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"It's time to move forward and plan new adventures," she said. "But I will be heartbroken if what happened that day is swept under a rug and no improved safety guidelines eventually evolve from it. Doesn't the cause of a serious accident merit investigation so the risk of it happening again can be reduced?"[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Indeed, a similar incident occurred in June involving a chase boat and a German crew sailing a Tornado catamaran.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"It is hard to comprehend how any sailor could be broadsided by a power boat in clear daylight," Birkenfeld wrote to Scuttlebutt, the sailing e-mail newsletter.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"I'm very concerned about power boats out on the race course on sailing days," she said. "We can never reduce all the risks, but we should take steps to [do so] on race days. If there is a mistake by a power boat there's no chance for us. It's like a car hitting a pedestrian."
But she hasn't proved anything yet and if moommy boats are to be regulated, there will need to be proof.
There is no concrete proof that using an M.B. will up your performance so much you will win everything.
If I go out tomorrow with an M.B. will I suddenly outsail Ben Ainslie?
If I had a coach on board are you telling me he would be necessarily corrupt because he was on an M.B.?
Would I do everything he suggested and how could you prove that you knew he suggest cheating to me?
There are just way too many variables and no proof. I would be against banning something based on heresay and innuendo.
But sailing is a total sport. You can't win accolades by just being the best sailor. You must be the best person, the best sailor, the best connected, the best funded...
Gimme proof. Gimme facts.
I'm not getting this. How is this related to the thread? Please explain.
None needed. There are no relevant facts that are disputed.
1. Mommy boats exist.
2. Mommy boats provide various assistance to sailors.
3. The assistance is provided on the water.
4. Outside assistance is not allowed.
since trapeze hooks have been found to kill a couple of people, should trapezing be banned?
yea I really hove found this to be so pointless since it will never be agreed upon that I'm just trying to sidetrack it lol
None needed. There are no relevant facts that are disputed.
1. Mommy boats exist.
2. Mommy boats provide various assistance to sailors.
3. The assistance is provided on the water.
4. Outside assistance is not allowed.
3. The assistance is provided on the water.
How is this any different to another sailor reading the wind? The unsupported sailor may get it right. Coaches aren't right every time. M.B.s don't make you infalable. All the information is available to everyone on the course. Prove the advantage.
I approach this issue from a standpoint of upholding the existing rules. If they allow assistance now, is it legal? Should I follow the same rules?Wait, am I correct in understanding you to mean that you think that it's OK for a sailor to get wind reading assistance from a coach during a race?
I approach this issue from a standpoint of upholding the existing rules. If they allow assistance now, is it legal? Should I follow the same rules?
Since you won't address my questions, or i can't word them in a way you understand them, let's look at your undisputed facts:
1. M.B.s exist: agreed. Not too hard to prove.
2. M.B.s provide various assistance to sailors.
My point on this one is if you want to regulate M.B.s, you have to prove what that assistance is and what level of advantage is supplied. Without those facts, you will either fail at regulating, or regulate the wrong thing, or not be able to regulate at all. There is no factual evidence of assistance. There is anecdotal evidence mainly constructed from what people think coaches do or M.B.s supply, but that is just heresay.
3. The assistance is provided on the water.
How is this any different to another sailor reading the wind? The unsupported sailor may get it right. Coaches aren't right every time. M.B.s don't make you infalable. All the information is available to everyone on the course. Prove the advantage.
4. Outside assistence is not allowed.
Define the assistence. Prove the level of assistence is so great that is should be regulated. M.B.s exist now under the rules that allow no outside existence. How can that be? If it is true it must be proven. So prove it.
Show me the proof. You want me to accept your word simply because you offer it. I would if it pertained to your life in a casual setting - maybe a drink at the pub.... but you're asking people to accept suggestion as proof and then change their rules to suit unproven suggestion. I haven't added to my list of necessary proof. I not ducking the issues. Just prove that what you say happens, actually happens. Otherwise you won't be able to regulate anything.
I responded to each and every one of your questions and dispensed with them. I either answered your question, or explained why it was not relevant to the discussion.
LOL well if you say so...
The rest of your points are unproven heresay.
Give me the transcripts of protest committee meetings. What goes on now is legal, because it is allowed to happen under the current rules.
If you can't protest it you can't say it is illegal. If you knew how to protest it your suggestions would have factual base.
Instead of taking the opportunity to investigate how you could protest it, you've decided to move on to regulation, citing that investigation of the actual nuts and bolts of your claim is "irrelevent". You've made a giant leap of process.
There have been all manner of implications in this thread ranging from opinion (completely allowable) to direct accusation and naming of names (slightly dodgy). But there is no proof of anything. It is not enough to say you think it isn't right. If you want to change the rules you need to prove it isn't right.
Not unless they can prove their claims to a panel/committee/jury/membership.I hate to be rude, but can someone actually do more than talk, and get something done around here?
He was driving the boat. It was a power boat, there were no constraints that gave him any right of way (i.e. no narrow channel, no control issues, etc.). He could not have been looking where he was going.Just as a coincidence, this story appeared in one of our national papers on 11 days ago:
http://tinyurl.com/2ovnwy
It's a brief glimpse into the Bruce Kendall side of the story. (ignore the emotional journalistic bias...it gets far worse in other stories)
LOL well if you say so...
sailchris said:I responded to each and every one of your questions and dispensed with them. I either answered your question, or explained why it was not relevant to the discussion
The rest of your points are unproven heresay.
Not unless they can prove their claims to a panel/committee/jury/membership.
But they won't do it without proof of non-compliance or cheating or without reason. You can't change ILCA rules without same.ANY regatta organizer can ban (or strictly regulate) Mommy boats under the current rules. They do not need to prove anything to anyone to do this.
But they won't do it without proof of non-compliance or cheating or without reason.
LOL True, it's an opinion just like yours. Can you supply proof that every RC in the world is irrational and will ban or change rules simply because a guy rolled of the beach and asked them? No? So your opinion is your opinion, mine is mine. RC could also form a crime syndicate and etc etc etc...Your statement represents an opinion. Please provide proof that they WON'T do it without proof of non-compliance, because they certainly CAN do it without any justification whatsoever.
Can you supply proof that every RC in the world is irrational and will ban or change rules simply because a guy rolled of the beach and asked them? No? So your opinion is your opinion, mine is mine.
But they won't do it without proof of non-compliance or cheating or without reason. You can't change ILCA rules without same.
NO!If I go out tomorrow with an M.B. will I suddenly outsail Ben Ainslie? [/left]