swift-solo
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: CB ARGUMENT.PDF

To: "Rob DesMarais, D.C." <drrld@xxxxxxxxxxx>, swiftsolo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: CB ARGUMENT.PDF
From: "Robert Harper" <rharper@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:59:28 -0600
In-reply-to: <000001c5737e$af6013b0$05000100@OFFICE>
References: <000001c5737e$af6013b0$05000100@OFFICE>
I don't think I will be winning races due to the length of my blade. Since I am 45 years old and weigh in at 230#, I think my best bet at winning will be if I am the only one left standing. I do agree that there should be a maximum length. I would like it to be a little longer than 55" is all. I did not have too much trouble at De Soto launching with my long blade and I do think that to some extent the owner/operator should be responsible. I would prefer not to be "grandfathered in". I would prefer that if we have a maximum that that is the maximum, period, end of story. I hate it when people say you won or I lost because of bla, bla, bla. We should be able to admit that the "teabag" at the toss was costly.

Let's agree on a length and let it be that. If I have to, I'll cut mine down.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:53:48 -0600, Rob DesMarais, D.C. <drrld@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Class,


I'm uncomfortable with a grandfathering in clause ad infinitum in regards to
boards. Would it mean that if the person builds future blades that they
would be at the grandfathered in length? I don't feel it will be a real
issue for the next few years, but there should be a clause that at some
point in the future, in class regatta's, that if those racing feel that they
are now at a disadvantage, (e.g. Robert is winning each race :-),) that
compliance with the rules be enforced.



My two bits worth,



Rob





Robert and class,



I suggest that we grandfather any longer boards and make them exempt. By
simply submitting a picture in the next few days of boards already completed
with a tape measure placed on the board, we can deal with this problem
(boards that exceed 55").



As you can see in the Pdf, if we increase the length much beyond 55" the
entire purpose of the amendment will be lost. The problem of destroying vang
arms and mainsail cheeks in heavy air will not be reduced at all unless the
board is short enough that, with it pulled up the maximum safe amount, you
can sail to water shallow enough to jump in and control the boat. By
"maximum safe amount" I mean the highest point at which an inadvertent tack
of gybe could be completed without destroying the vang arm or sail cheeks.



Best regards,



Bram





--


Don't be good. Have LOTS of fun.
Live large, love life, and sail fast.


This is the Swift Solo mailing list. For unsubscribe instructions, visit here: http://catzooks.com/swift-solo/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

This is the Swift Solo mailing list archive. Visit here to see instructions on how to subscribe and unsubscribe from the list, and to browse the mailing list archives.