As written, I agree with the committee. Why #1: while sl tacked within the zone, they did not force the protester boat above close hauled. No violation of 18.3. #2.sl had completed its tack before the protester altered course…therefore no violation of rule 13 as indicated in finding #5. #3 the only thing left is a plain old rule 11 (windward leeward when overlapped..think parallel lines that the 11 makes) which sl actually had rights and the protester obliged..although begrudgingly. If I were the protester, I would have made the argument that SL’s tack wasn’t completed and thus forced “us” to change course which would be a violation of rule 13 as the boat scenario seems to show.It seems like they instead went into the hearing with a focus on rule 18.3, which the admitted they did not go above closed hauled. IMHO
@@ghislaindevouton5301 The NMEA data from the instruments is being logged and then merged with GOPRO sensors data. It's all here: github.com/sergei/ottopi/tree/master/clipper
The hearing decision by a protest committee for port/starboard situation at 5:30 can be found here drive.google.com/file/d/1PBbL5bQbCaFSQm3qoBihkSxPklt9mGMM
Thanks so much for sharing the protest and the decision. Very educational. Was the video shown during the hearing? If not, do you think it could have played in your favor? Do you think you could have handled the maneuver differently to increase your chances? I'm trying to gather some wisdom, several of my own protests having been rejected.
