In a World of Absolute Power

Postscript - Before I begin my story, let me first say that I emailed the following piece to Dan Nowlan, Dave Rosecrans, Bruce Eissner (Offshore Chair) and Dick Hampikian on August 12th. I gave them ample room (time) and opportunity to comment or correct any inaccuracies they found. However, not one of them has followed up with me in the last five days. - ANB

Transpac 2003 was a really great race. I take my hat off to the TPYC board, Bill Lee and Brad Avery and the huge number of volunteers on both ends. Specifically, accolades should be given for the tremendous increase in the number of entries. I must also say that everyone from the sailors to the spouses were amazed at the organization of the event.

Beyond Transpac itself, however, this race brought to my attention a few issues that sailing needs to focus on, especially here in the US. This was the second major regatta on the West Coast for Dan Nowlan and his baby, Americap. The first was last years Big Boat Series. I have now, as a skipper, done both of these regattas. Honestly, I've walked away from them believing they were two of the most frustrating, aggravating experiences of my life. Explaining to my parents, when I was in ninth grade, that I had gotten suspended from school for fighting wasn't this painful.

For those of you who don't know me, we have an ILC 40 designed by Joubert/Nivelt and built by Scorpio Yachts, in Canada. We bought her three years ago (as Sprint 4) after selling our Santa Cruz 40, "Osprey". Since then we have diligently worked with the designer, our sail maker and our crew to get the boat up to speed. Anyone from Detroit will recognize the challenge we've had on our hands. We've trophied in a few races, and won the SoCal PHRF Champs ('01); but the boat has never really done much. Transpac was our first really solid result. Therefore, I can honestly say she is no rule beater.

We decided to do Transpac in late 2002. At that time we sat down with a Naval Architect (NA), in Southern California, who both sails with us and has worked for Bernard Nivelt. In getting ready, we felt that the most effective gains, under IMS, would be in removing the rating bustle off the back of the boat and going with oversized kites (we ended up with 140% poles).

In April of 2003 I entered the Transpac. At the same time we contacted Dan Nowlan, as did our NA, and discussed the best way of re-rating the boat. He asked that Bernard send an electronic file of the boat's measurements without the bump and he would see about amending the file without having to re-measure the boat. After a careful review it was agreed that he could and we would only need to get a freeboard measurement.

In May of 2003, after San Diego Yachting Cup, Frank Whitten, the SoCal measurer 'did' the freeboards and righting moment measurements. Later that month Dan Nowlan issued a new certificate. We knew from our NA that things were going to change. We knew that the measured displacement was going to increase. We guessed that the less rounded bottom would sink more into the water. We had removed 295 pounds (I weighed everything removed from the bottom) of glass, foam and filler from the boat and Americap said that the displacement went from 11,326 to 12,100 pounds. Imagine the PHRF meeting in which the local board all looked at me and said "let's see if we understand this….you made your boat lighter in practice and it got heavier in theory?"

Two weeks later we received another new certificate in which the boat was .2 of a second slower. So far everything was going well, save the fact that the local PHRF board thinks I was playing games with the rule. And of course three members of the local PH board are on a boat in my class for Transpac.

It was not until the Pre-Race Dinner that I walked up to Dan. He turns to me and said "Antony, certain people are complaining about the rating and displacement of your boat. I should have noticed it, but didn't until now… I'm just too busy with Chicago-Mackinac." He then went onto say, and bear in mind this is Saturday, June 29th (six days before our start of a 2,225 mile offshore race), that 'I would like to re-measure the boat."

"Fine" I say, "we're putting a new keel bulb on her after Transpac, we can do it then".

"No" he says "I would like to do it before Transpac."

Seriously folks. He'd issued two "valid" certificates. He'd had three months to play with the data and six days before one of the longest offshore races in the US is about to begin he wants to re-measure the boat…all because a couple of people don't like their own rating? Wow, what a way to ruin a pre-race dinner! "Hey guys, guess what? US Sailing is accusing us of cheating based on our 'friend's' comments to them".

I then heard nothing until 2:30 on Monday afternoon (almost 48 hours later) when I got an email from Dan Nowlan saying:

"Antony and Nick,

I have reviewed the measurements on Tera's XL with respect to the
displacement drop based on the new hull file. First, before my comments, let my offer my apologies for bring this up this late date. I should have noticed this issue in May when the boat was floated and inclined.

My review shows no obvious error source. This displacement difference could
be attributed to any one of three causes.

1. Freeboard measurement error.
2. Designer lines file different from actual hull file.
3. Tera's XL has found a rating loophole shape.

With your concurrence, this is what I would like to do.

a) There is a way to do a spot check of the designer lines with the boat in the water. It was developed for MORC. In the most simple of terms, it puts a straightedge under the boat and determines the distance from the centerline to deck at (probably) two locations. From this we can make a direct confirmation of the designer file.
b) Should that not reveal a discrepancy, do another freeboard measurement.
Since you are most certainly provisioning the boat, this would not be
convenient for you, but I don't have an alternate idea.

I have discussed this with Dick Hampikian and he is prepared to do part a and, if necessary or feasible, part b.

Thank you.

Dan Nowlan
Offshore Director
US SAILING"

It's now less than 96 hours from our start. At the same time I learned that Frank Whitten was out of communication as he was on a sailing vacation on the St. Lawrence. The next morning I called Dan at 0630 to touch base and see what his current thinking was. This is now the Tuesday before a Friday start. He explained that he was going to try and get another measurer to come and do the measurement. He also said that no matter what happens he would abide by the results of the measurement "if it comes out 100 pounds lighter we will update the certificate with the new data and if it comes out 100 pounds heavier we will do the same."

Later that morning, I got an email at the office explaining that Dick Hampikian, who is not an official IMS Measurer, would be at the boat at 1pm to do the measurement. I called my Dad, explained the plan and set about changing my schedule for the day, as did he.

At 1pm I arrived at the dock. So did Dick and his assistant. This is where it really started to slide downhill. What they wanted to do was take two 1" channel beams of hollow aluminum to do the measurements. Also bear in mind that we had a practice scheduled for the next day (Wednesday), with the crew, and a delivery to the start on Thursday. Thus, by this time the boat was mostly provisioned for the race. We also had everything stacked to port because we were working on things on the starboard side. I put the Ockam chip for heel in and it read 6 degrees to port.

We began by measuring the deflection of the beams. Dick measured ¼". My 61-year-old father, with me standing in the middle of the 12-foot beam, then stuck his index finger in the aluminum tube and pulled (the same process that Dick had used). He got as much as 2" of deflection, without pulling too hard and only using one finger. I called Dan and explained this to him and was told, "that's within acceptable limits". That's a lot of deviation as we were only looking for .3 of an inch.

Then Dick realized that he needed to determine the shear line of the boat. To make hiking more comfortable the deck/hull joint has about a 3" radius. Therefore, it is a fairly challenging job for a pro with the right tools. Dick, on the other hand, had none of the right tools with him. He began by looking for Frank Whitten's pencil marks from two months before and many washings and days of sailing. Amidst probably a dozen similar small scratches and scuffs he finds what he pronounces as "Frank's mark on one side". Bear in mind he wasn't at the last measurement by Frank. By this time, my father, who had been at that measurement with Frank, is just shaking his head in disbelief. Dick then looks at the mark and without the proper equipment (and while looking at a boat that is heeled 6 degrees) pronounces a random mark to be in the wrong place. Dick could not find any marks on the other side, or any on the bow. So looking at a boat that is heeling 6 degrees he takes his thumb and forefinger and puts them into a "right angle", steps back away from the boat, squats down, puts the "right angle" to his eye, and then sticks his other forefinger into the right angle at 45 degrees and proceeds to explain to his assistant where to place the shear line mark.

Finally, we get the beams situated. One is on the deck. At each end is a string that is tied to the other beam under the water. We now need to figure out what the height of the hull is using a tape measure and the string. They take their measurements and look at each other. The first measurement is off. In fact, it is more than the designer's file said it should be, thus the boat is actually heavier not lighter as they expected. Sure enough the second measurement is also off, in the same direction.

Next I called Dan Nowlan. Using my phone, on my dime Dan asks to speak with Dick. For over 50 minutes they discuss what this means. Finally, Dick gives me the phone. Dan explains the following: " a quick analysis has shown that the boat is actually another 80 kilos heavier based on today's measurement. However, they don't believe Frank Whitten's (the official Southern California Measurer) freeboard measurement." Bear in mind that they have not spoken with him, they do not have his notebook and they are looking at only one or four 3-month-old supposed pencil marks. All of which is so circumstantial I don't even know where to begin. Worse yet, for Dan, the boat will now get a new certificate saying it is slower than the last one. During this time, Dick was measuring the difference between his shear line mark and Frank's supposed shear line mark. Dan explains that he is going to review the data that night and will have a response the following morning.

The next morning I call Dan. He explains the following: "the station measurement made the boat 120 kilos (264 pounds) heavier and the difference between Dick's shear line and Frank's one makes it 40 kilos lighter (88 pounds); thus the net is only 80 kilos (176 pounds) heavier. Therefore, because it is only .2 of a second per mile he is not going to issue a revised certificate."

Ok. So we've wasted an afternoon whilst they were doing the measurement. We've proven that it was not our fault that their numbers don't jive. And they still don't know what the problem is. Now, they are reneging on the original agreement that regardless of the outcome a new certificate would be issued. While .2 of a second may not seem like much it is 7 and a half minutes on the Transpac!

So let's review what this taught us about Americap: (1) we now have a rule that can be appealed by other sailors when, just prior to the start of a race, anyone can convince Dan Nowlan to re-measure a boat. (2) We have a Director of Offshore Sailing who does not believe the measurements of one of his official measurers (Dan actually told me he "did not trust Frank's measurement)…and is willing to toss his own people under the bus. (3)We have a volunteer measurer who, without any instruments, can eyeball things and affect the results of a quantitative certificate that relies on measurements accurate to hundredths of an inch, all the while over-ruling the official measurer's measurement with the right tools. (4) We also have a system in which they can qualitatively elect whether or not they are going to accept officially gather measurement data.

I ask you: "Is this the future of measured rule racing in the US?"

In closing, I like so many others was struck by Barry Carroll's recent comments in "Seahorse". With respect to the demise of his business he explained that the lack of an international rule had a "huge" impact on it. But what struck me more was his theory that "there's been a 'balkanization' of the rating rules, where each region now has it own rule to fit its own style of sailing and conditions." I completely agree, but would also say that the 'balkanization' of the US, from the rest of the sailing world, has occurred largely because of politics and petty territorialism.

The fact of the matter is that owners and sailors have little or no influence on the governing bodies' decisions about sailing. It is my hope that the executives at US Sailing will discontinue their current strategy of "going it alone", and commit to an international rule and the sailors that participate within it. For the last four years we have struggled in a vacuum filled only by PHRF and Dan Nowlan; and I for one am ready for a change.

Antony Barran