Sydney To Hobart 2015-2016

[JPA Cate]

Hey, RC,

Thanks for posting that link.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Polux

and while we wait the few hours for the race start my favorite images from the 2013 edition, curiously with smaller boats on big waves. If Rustic does not know them he is going to like them:

After watching this I am having slight second thoughts about entering in the race....


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[hoppy]

the start should be viewable live world wide here,

https://au.tv.yahoo.com/plus7/live/

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Polux

The race committee has a role to play in what regards to make sure the conditions are not plain dangerous to racers and that varies with the type of boats that enter a race.

It is usual to delay the start of a mini transat for some days to make sure they will not meet for sure conditions that can put the boats at risk.

Regarding a Transat for bigger racing boats, like Open 60's and big trimarans it is not usual because they can take a lot more than the mini racers without danger but I had seen some races delayed some days, just to make sure that they will not get for sure 50 or 60K winds and huge seas that can cause an unnecessary risk.

Those, special the last, are raced by professionals and all the boats are oceanic racing boats with much more safety features than cruiser racers or cruising boats.

On a race like the S2H it is more complicated since you will have many different types of boats, with different thresholds of safety in what regards what they can take safely and with many different types of sailors, from amateurs to very good amateurs to professionals.

The organization has to take that into account in what regards what is considered conditions that would endanger unnecessarily crews and in what regards to postpone a race that would meet with certitude those conditions.

Sure, the last responsibility is always from the skipper but if the organization persists in maintaining a race on a time schedule that they now that would be dangerous to the type of boats involved, they are being irresponsible and they will share a responsibility in what regards deadly accidents on that race.

I have stayed out of this thread for a couple of days as posters like Factor, Jim C. RaymondR, Mirage G and Cruising Cat have voiced my exact thoughts way more eloquently and concisely than I can and thus I felt I had nothing further to add to the conversation; however I want to add to the comments above

The SH is very different (IMO) to many other ocean races although I admit I am not full bottle on what happens elsewhere. The geneses of the SH is more about the first skipper to arrive in Hobart after departing Sydney at 1 pm on Boxing day rather than what is the fastest boat per se . In the early days that took 5 or 6 days rather than a day or two now.

So what is the difference between the first skipper to arrive rather the fastest boat. To my mind, there is subtle but important difference and I will attempt to explain.

The fastest boat is just about boat design and whether it's design suits the conditions on the day where as the first skipper to arrive is way more complex in it's execution.
This skipper has to chose a boat design that will handle all weather conditions, pick a crew who has the "right stuff" to handle whatever is thrown at them, read the weather and know when to slow down or seek temporary shelter, when to push on, what route will allow him to get there first regardless of conditions, keep the crew motivated for days on end of terrible conditions (both below and in general), know what the boat can and (just as important) can't handle and so on. It doesn't matter if the skipper is a professional racer or a keen amateur, the test is who gets to Hobart first.

This is a big ask and a real test of seamanship (IMO). To postpone the race because the weather forecast is bad simply isn't appropriate. It is up to the skipper to decide how is the best way to handle the conditions. For some it may be as simple as withdrawal even before the start, for others, it may be waiting out the weather further down the coast or reassessing before crossing the Bass Strait or heading further east or whatever. The skipper is the one to judge what is the best way to reach Hobart first. It is not the race organisers decision , they are only responsible to getting the race under way in an orderly fashion (again IMO). In fact some skippers prepare two boats prior to the race and chose which boat depending on forecast conditions a day or so beforehand.

Note, I believe this approach isn't necessary the right approach for other ocean races but it is the right for the SH.

[Rustic Charm]

And there off, with Wild Oats leading the race

[Wotname]

Great start by WOXI and kudos for being willing to cross the fleet on a port tack and being successful.

[Rustic Charm]

perpetual did a fantastic move when it took the lead.

Comanche has just taken off now they are around the heads. I can see Comanche getting a good lead.

[Wotname]

Yep, Comanche "won the first leg"

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Wotname

I have stayed out of this thread for a couple of days as posters like Factor, Jim C. RaymondR, Mirage G and Cruising Cat have voiced my exact thoughts way more eloquently and concisely than I can and thus I felt I had nothing further to add to the conversation; however I want to add to the comments above

The SH is very different (IMO) to many other ocean races although I admit I am not full bottle on what happens elsewhere. The geneses of the SH is more about the first skipper to arrive in Hobart after departing Sydney at 1 pm on Boxing day rather than what is the fastest boat per se . In the early days that took 5 or 6 days rather than a day or two now.

So what is the difference between the first skipper to arrive rather the fastest boat. To my mind, there is subtle but important difference and I will attempt to explain.

The fastest boat is just about boat design and whether it's design suits the conditions on the day where as the first skipper to arrive is way more complex in it's execution.
This skipper has to chose a boat design that will handle all weather conditions, pick a crew who has the "right stuff" to handle whatever is thrown at them, read the weather and know when to slow down or seek temporary shelter, when to push on, what route will allow him to get there first regardless of conditions, keep the crew motivated for days on end of terrible conditions (both below and in general), know what the boat can and (just as important) can't handle and so on. It doesn't matter if the skipper is a professional racer or a keen amateur, the test is who gets to Hobart first.

This is a big ask and a real test of seamanship (IMO). To postpone the race because the weather forecast is bad simply isn't appropriate. It is up to the skipper to decide how is the best way to handle the conditions. For some it may be as simple as withdrawal even before the start, for others, it may be waiting out the weather further down the coast or reassessing before crossing the Bass Strait or heading further east or whatever. The skipper is the one to judge what is the best way to reach Hobart first. It is not the race organisers decision , they are only responsible to getting the race under way in an orderly fashion (again IMO). In fact some skippers prepare two boats prior to the race and chose which boat depending on forecast conditions a day or so beforehand.

Note, I believe this approach isn't necessary the right approach for other ocean races but it is the right for the SH.

Wotname, just a response to your last paragraph, which I acknowledge you are giving your own opinion on what you believe is the role of the race organizers. But, whilst you are expressing your opinion, the race organizers as a result of the 1998 now do recognize that in law the race organizers are responsible for the safety of all participants. And whilst it is up to each skipper how they race, and whether to continue, or to pull out, the race organizers are ultimately responsible for all and can pull a boat out of the race. They also have the decision to postpone the race if weather conditions are way too dangerous to race. It hasn't happened yet since the 1998 race, but everyone knows the ultimate authority lay with the race organizers and the race organizers now recognize that they do indeed bare the burden of the decision making around safety. They now recognize, the opposite to what you believe, that they are not only responsible for getting the race underway in an orderly fashion. But are responsible for the participants all the way to the finish.

[Wotname]

Re the heavy weather aspects of the SH, plenty is written about 1998 but let's not forget that other years were just as bad (apart from the fatalities). 1993 was just as bad weather wise, 104 starters with 66 withdrawals.

There was no over the top responses in rule changes then and there were 371 starters in '94 (with 62 withdrawals).

This year only 108 starters - maybe too much "red tape and over regulation" - perhaps ???

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Re the heavy weather aspects of the SH, plenty is written about 1998 but let's not forget that other years were just as bad (apart from the fatalities). 1993 was just as bad weather wise, 104 starters with 66 withdrawals.

There was no over the top responses in rule changes then and there were 371 starters in '94 (with 62 withdrawals).

This year only 108 starters - maybe too much "red tape and over regulation" - perhaps ???

No, 1998 was the worst weather they had in the history of the event! I'm not sure how this can be disputed.

371 starters in 94? Wow!

I do personally think some of the requirements are overboard. The qualification requirements, crew numbers, some of the vessel requirements, to name a few.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Wotname

...
This skipper has to chose a boat design that will handle all weather conditions, pick a crew who has the "right stuff" to handle whatever is thrown at them, read the weather and know when to slow down or seek temporary shelter, when to push on, what route will allow him to get there first regardless of conditions, keep the crew motivated for days on end of terrible conditions (both below and in general), know what the boat can and (just as important) can't handle and so on. It doesn't matter if the skipper is a professional racer or a keen amateur, the test is who gets to Hobart first.

This is a big ask and a real test of seamanship (IMO). To postpone the race because the weather forecast is bad simply isn't appropriate.....

Your view implies that small boats like most of the ones that make the S2H can handle safely all weather conditions. They can't and if the conditions of the race are known to be dangerous for the boats that are allowed to race, then the right attitude is to postpone the race. Doing otherwise is irresponsible.

This is valid for any sail race. A sail race is a sportive event, not an extreme adventure with possible casualties.

Regarding the race, conditions on the beginning of the race are dificult to say who favors at the middle they are probably favorable to Comanche and in the last 1/3 favorable to Wild Oats. It is going to be interesting

For now Comanche is leading and "little" Rambler is second. Rambler is probably the most interesting boat on that race regarding design/performance. It is even possible that it stands a winning chance, if he does not lose too much for Comanche on the 2nd part of the race. I believe that on the last 1/3 (upwind) will be faster than Comanche (but slower than Wild Oats).

[Rustic Charm]

This is what really pisses me off. One of the greatest blue water races in the world and it gets just 60 minutes local coverage

It's already finished on our local tv..

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Wotname, just a response to your last paragraph, which I acknowledge you are giving your own opinion on what you believe is the role of the race organizers. But, whilst you are expressing your opinion, the race organizers as a result of the 1998 now do recognize that in law the race organizers are responsible for the safety of all participants. And whilst it is up to each skipper how they race, and whether to continue, or to pull out, the race organizers are ultimately responsible for all and can pull a boat out of the race. They also have the decision to postpone the race if weather conditions are way too dangerous to race. It hasn't happened yet since the 1998 race, but everyone knows the ultimate authority lay with the race organizers and the race organizers now recognize that they do indeed bare the burden of the decision making around safety. They now recognize, the opposite to what you believe, that they are not only responsible for getting the race underway in an orderly fashion. But are responsible for the participants all the way to the finish.

You are of course correct that this is only my opinion but I suggest the way it is now is not an improvement or advancement of boating - both racing and cruising. I fear that such "control" by "the state" only results in limiting our freedom to sail in a manner of our own chosing. This type of "control" will one day see increased regulation of our activities for "our own protection". What happens in racing trickles down to what happens in cruising - perhaps??

Sorry Mr RC, you can't leave port today, your "mainsail safety certificate" expired at midnight last night and you will be at risk if you continue. You must maintain your rudder in accordance with the manufactures recommendation and it now requires mandatory replacement. Your hull colour has been proved unsafe in 0.025% of boating incidents in Westfalia and it requires repainting before your boat can be launched again and oh, you will need a certification from the paint manufacturer that the colours comply with the current requirements. Please note, this colour certification is valid for 12 months only as the high UV predictated this summer may fade it beyond acceptable levels.

Yes, over the top response perhaps but such is possible! And IMO, we should all rail against creeping regulation - especiaaly when it is pitched as "for our own protection"; left unchallenged and unchecked, we will be left totally safe and totally sorry.

To be honest, some death is preferrable to total safety. At least, when someone oversteps their ability and dies, the rest of us take notice. I don't suggest there should be no regualtion and I see regulation very important in the commerical world where personal safety decisions aren't available to the employee as they are subject to what management provides. In these cases, commerical operations require regulation to force management to manage risk but why is it so in a recreational activity. And regardless of professional racers or not, the SH isn't truly a commerical operation - or maybe it is ??? Are the entrants employees??? Maybe they are - in law???

There would be more boats completing (note- not necessarily racing) if this " nanny state of affairs" were less intense.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Polux

Your view implies that small boats like most of the ones that make the S2H can handle safely all weather conditions. They can't and if the conditions of the race are known to be dangerous for the boats that are allowed to race, then the right attitude is to postpone the race. Doing otherwise is irresponsible…..

I guess I disagree

Over the 70 old year history of the race, most if not all boats can handle the conditions between Sydney and Hobart. Some will handle bad conditions by withdrawing (this is a "right and proper" response to bad weather), other by seeking shelter before leaving the NSW coast etc. Certainly there have been mistakes made by the skippers in pushing on when they over estimate their ability of themselves (or the boat) but such is the nature of the event.

We may have to agree to disagree on what the SH means. It might be just a ocean race under the control of the race committee or it may be a test of seamanship on how best to get your boat to Hobart after leaving Sydney on boxing day.