Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

"Stefan" wrote in message

In article ,
says...


the no discards series has thrown up some very interesting results
in the past - rewarding turning up and consistantcy
- one missed race can take you out of the silverware if there are
30 + boats i nthe series

No-discard series are another question. Limiting discards should
encourage participation, but no discards may put people off since
almost nobody these days can make every race in a long series. A well-
known club I know has recently changed its summer series scoring from
no- discard to a small number of discards and seen participation
significantly increase, as more people can realistically hope to win
the series and therefore make the effort to turn up.

Anyone seen the case being made out for making the Olympics (and
possibly thereafter RRS Appendix 1) no discards? I thought the 1
discard was meant to cater for gear failure and bad hair days in a way
that would not affect the final result?

John

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

In article ,
says...


Anyone seen the case being made out for making the Olympics (and
possibly thereafter RRS Appendix 1) no discards? I thought the 1
discard was meant to cater for gear failure and bad hair days in a way
that would not affect the final result?


Or more probably, being OCS.

The class I used to help run had some championships which were no-
discard. It certainly reduced the number of general recalls, which was
the intention. Some helms said it made it a lottery, because you have to
push it at the start to stand a chance of doing well, and if you were
OCS that was your championship gone. Personally I got my best result in
a no-discard championship and think it rewards consistency, but it does
risk being unfair to someone who has a bad result through no fault of
their own e.g. being fouled by another boat.

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

On Tue, 25 May 2004 15:45:41 +0100, Stefan wrote:

In article ,
says...


Anyone seen the case being made out for making the Olympics (and
possibly thereafter RRS Appendix 1) no discards? I thought the 1
discard was meant to cater for gear failure and bad hair days in a way
that would not affect the final result?



The case is that they want to be sure everybody - including the winner
- sails in the last race in the Olympics. It looks bad if the TV
cameras show up for the last race and the winning boat is on the
beach. Not a reason that would make any sense in most regattas.

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

Richard S wrote:

The case is that they want to be sure everybody - including the winner
- sails in the last race in the Olympics. It looks bad if the TV
cameras show up for the last race and the winning boat is on the
beach. Not a reason that would make any sense in most regattas.

So why not make the last race a no-discard race?

Andy

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

"Andy Champ" wrote in message

Richard S wrote:

The case is that they want to be sure everybody - including the
winner - sails in the last race in the Olympics. It looks bad if
the TV cameras show up for the last race and the winning boat is on
the beach. Not a reason that would make any sense in most regattas.

So why not make the last race a no-discard race?

Clever.

Have you got any ideas on the original question: What's the [public]
case being made out for making the Olympics (and possibly thereafter RRS
Appendix 1) no discards?

John

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

J. Allan wrote:


Clever.

Thanks!


Have you got any ideas on the original question: What's the [public]
case being made out for making the Olympics (and possibly thereafter RRS
Appendix 1) no discards?


Wellllll... one good idea is enough for this year. No! Have you
checked on ISAF's web site?


Andy

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

"Andy Champ" wrote in message

J. Allan wrote:


Clever.

Thanks!


Have you got any ideas on the original question: What's the [public]
case being made out for making the Olympics (and possibly thereafter
RRS Appendix 1) no discards?


Wellllll... one good idea is enough for this year. No! Have you
checked on ISAF's web site?

Another good idea g.

I checked the ISAF Olympic links, and the no discards proposition was
only a rumour. The NOR states

15. SCORING
15.1 The Low Point scoring system of Appendix A will apply.
15.2 Four races are required to be completed to constitute a series.
15.3 (a) When fewer than 5 races have been completed, a boat's series
score will be the total of her
race scores.
(b) When 5 to 11 races have been completed, a boat's series score will
be the total of her race
scores excluding her worst score.
(c) When 12 or more races have been completed, a boat's series score
will be the total of her
race scores excluding her two worst scores.

John

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

Andy Champ wrote:

So why not make the last race a no-discard race?

Another option, which has been used at least occasionally, is to put in
the race instructions that an OCS or a DSQ cannot be discarded.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

"DSK" wrote in message

Andy Champ wrote:

So why not make the last race a no-discard race?

Another option, which has been used at least occasionally, is to put
in the race instructions that an OCS or a DSQ cannot be discarded.

Given that the hypothetical goal being discussed was to keep all boats
racing in the last race of the series for the TV cameras, this would be
overkill and reverses the thrust of the RRS to 'decriminalise' these
infringements.

John

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

J. Allan wrote:
Given that the hypothetical goal being discussed was to keep all boats
racing in the last race of the series for the TV cameras, this would be
overkill and reverses the thrust of the RRS to 'decriminalise' these
infringements.

Sorry, was just giving that info to show there is precedent for
excluding individual races from being dropped from the final score.

Personally, I don't think it's wise to "decriminalize" DSQs. I'd be more
in favor of going the other way... maybe kneecapping...

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

DSK wrote:



Personally, I don't think it's wise to "decriminalize" DSQs. I'd be more
in favor of going the other way... maybe kneecapping...

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Not sure I agree. DSQs can be the result of honest misunderstanding of
the rules. Not the same as the fair play rules.

Andy

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

Andy Champ wrote:
Not sure I agree. DSQs can be the result of honest misunderstanding of
the rules. Not the same as the fair play rules.

That's what 720s are for. A DSQ is well earned by somebody who gets into
an incident and *thinks* he is totally in the right. Not allowing it to
be discarded would provide incentive to actually learn the rules, and
would increase the level of sportsmanship IMHO.

DSK

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

DSK wrote:
Andy Champ wrote:

Not sure I agree. DSQs can be the result of honest misunderstanding
of the rules. Not the same as the fair play rules.


That's what 720s are for. A DSQ is well earned by somebody who gets into
an incident and *thinks* he is totally in the right. Not allowing it to
be discarded would provide incentive to actually learn the rules, and
would increase the level of sportsmanship IMHO.

DSK

Again, not sure I agree. There's a sliding scale here between
misjudging something, no impact, but the stand-on boat has to take
evasive action; (2 turns) the case where you honestly think you are
right, but aren't (usually protest & DSQ) and the case I've had where
the port side boat in an ordinary P&S just doesn't give way, despite
hails and all.

A DSQ does concentrate the mind for most people.

Andy

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

Andy Champ wrote:
Again, not sure I agree. There's a sliding scale here between
misjudging something, no impact, but the stand-on boat has to take
evasive action;

But if the give-way boat doesn't do a 720, and the stand-on boat has had
to take evasive action, then the give-way boat has gained an advantage.
If it is an honest mistake then the skipper should be willing to do a
720. Otherwise it is cheating, basically.

The reason the 720 was brought in is so that small errors in judgement
don't result in a DSQ... the sportsmanlike action used to be to withdraw
from a race if one knew one had fouled a competitor. How many people do
you think would do that nowadays?


... (2 turns) the case where you honestly think you are
right, but aren't (usually protest & DSQ) and the case I've had where
the port side boat in an ordinary P&S just doesn't give way, despite
hails and all.

A DSQ does concentrate the mind for most people.

Agreed.

Shucks, if I'm going to protest somebody I almost always do a 720 just
for CYA. Protest committees do some wierd things, I've seen them ignore
clear cut infractions, hand DSQs to stand-on boats, but so far I haven't
had one hand me a DSQ after a 720.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

DSK wrote:

Shucks, if I'm going to protest somebody I almost always do a 720 just
for CYA. Protest committees do some wierd things, I've seen them ignore
clear cut infractions, hand DSQs to stand-on boats, but so far I haven't
had one hand me a DSQ after a 720.


My memory could be playing tricks, but aren't there cases where by
taking a 720 you are admitting blame, and it prevents you from winning a
protest against the other party?

Andy

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

In article ,
says...
DSK wrote:

Shucks, if I'm going to protest somebody I almost always do a 720 just
for CYA. Protest committees do some wierd things, I've seen them ignore
clear cut infractions, hand DSQs to stand-on boats, but so far I haven't
had one hand me a DSQ after a 720.


My memory could be playing tricks, but aren't there cases where by
taking a 720 you are admitting blame, and it prevents you from winning a
protest against the other party?

Don't see how sailing around in a couple of pointless circles "admits"
anything (some light days I see several boats doing this several times in
one race g). OTOH, if you're in Scoring Penalty land, flying a yellow
flag indicates that you "take" the penalty (RRs 44.3).

John

Discards (was Dinghy pursuit racing: advice needed)
 

Andy Champ wrote:
My memory could be playing tricks, but aren't there cases where by
taking a 720 you are admitting blame, and it prevents you from winning a
protest against the other party?

Not as far as i know. There used to be least two IIRC cites in the case
book where a decision along those lines was overturned on appeal. Doing
a 720 is *not* an admission of guilt, although at the moment I can't
point to a specific case for proof.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King