How Soon B4 we Can Announce Sanctioning?

Well, the insurance APPLICATION is ready to go. Needs your signature and submission to Gowie, Barden & Brett (the address is on the application I sent you) with the check.

When we get the policy, I'll check to see what additional requirements (if any) there are and if they need to be included in the sanctioning verbage.

Yes, my suggestions are on the sanctioning post. Since I've rarely performed PRO duties, I think we should perhaps draft a generic contingency plan for regatta emergencies (on and off-water injuries, weather emergencies, etc.) that we can submit to the chapters. By generic, we could just bullet-point items they should straighten out before hand, like:

- Location of nearest OPERATING medical center for non-critical emergencies (to save EMS charges). Regattas on weekends may have to use EMS anyway...

- Phone / radio contact list distributed to all organizers and RC.

- Name of responsible persons for:Weather information, Parking and access, facility use and cleanup, first aid, registration (including proof of registrant insurance), scoring, NOR distribution, Food, enforcement of on-water safety, etc.

- whatever other considerations you all think of..

Jay

Jay,

I know this is a little late in coming, but our US Sailing membership number is 310464N.

Rick,

I sent the Certification package to Eric last night along with your comments. We'll work it.

Bob

Thanks, Jay,
Got it and it will be mailed within the hour.
I wrote the check out of personal funds, so Bob, Could you reimburse me as soon as you get enough money?
Rick

Insurance was the big issue regarding the Sanctioning Package. Now that it is line, how about letting us see the rest of the package for approval?
The world awaiteth.
Rick

Rick,

How much do I need to reimburse you for?

Bob

$300 for the insurance.
Rick

Do we have to describe the insurance coverage in the Sanctioning package? If so, it still needs to be added to the certification page. Jay, can you scan the declaration page of the policy and e-mail it to me por favor?

Eric

Rick,

We only have $116.73 as of today. I could send $50 now and more as we get more...what do you think?

Bob

If I don't I can have Rick do it. We won't get the dec page until we get the policy. Rick indicated he sent the application in last week, so we should be seeing something relatively soon.

We could probably include a bullet list of the following:
limits of coverage (dollar amount)
Who is covered (NAMSA chapters and members)
What is covered (Regatta activities only - bodily injury & property damage)
What is not covered

Also - we should include what the race committee and registration committee needs to do to MINIMIZE the chance of claim against the regatta, namely the items I've posted previously:

Racers required to show proof of boat coverage (marine policy or homeowner's)
Release of indemnity/hold harmless agreement that racers are required to sign.
Written plan to deal with emergencies (on and off-water)
Responsible persons (weatehr, PRO, registration, etc.)

And (depending on how NAMSA wants to approach this) guidelines for postponement/cancellation of racing activities (weather, on-water hazard, etc.)

Jay

No hurry, Bob,
Just wait until the funds grow some more. I have had many other expenses that some day I hope to get back (for example paying for the Domain Name, setting up the website and maintaining its monthly costs, etc.), but again, all of that can wait until we get NAMSA totally afloat on its own.

We are already beginning to get NAMSA membership dues through subscriptions. And Catsailor is going to be sending out subscription renewal cards to get pastdue subscribers up to date at the new rate that includes the dues.

Big thing now is to get this Sanctioning Package ready to go in a few days -- has to be in the next issue of Catamaran Sailor, which will go to press next week.
Rick

Rick,

What are we looking to produce for the Magazine? Were you thinking of including the entire thing, or just a brief summary of the pacage contents and who to contact for the sanctioning information?

I would think that a quick blurb about NAMSA offering to sanction races, provide regatta insurance for sanctioned races, and who to contact for further information. This would give us a bit more time to refine:

Rules and any modifications
Hold harmless agreements
Registration forms
Scoring software and protocols
Results submissions and data maintenance

Jay

RIght,
We need to get the info out.., whatever we have. As I have mentioned, the insurance was the big horse, the rest of the stuff is ponies.., and can be modified at any time.

If by press time I don't have the full package, I can wing it, if you will edit my wording for correctness on the insurance issue.
As the old saying goes, "... to hell with the torpedoes, full speed ahead."
Rick

Rick,

I plan on having my final comments to Eric by COB today on the sanctioning package.

Bob

I'm kind of late getting into this. I'd also like to see a "standard release" be included in the package so that they get the skipper and crew to sign the release at registration. Also some wording to the effect that unless the release is signed you may not participate in the regatta. Just a little more protection.

Mike Hill

I think Jay was going to say something about that, but it certainly needs to be covered properly.
Thanks, Mike,
Rick

Jay feel free to add insurance suggestions into the document.

NAMSA Regatta Certification

NAMSA Regattas will be subject to varying types of criteria depending on the nature of the regatta. There is specific criteria for Chapter events (type 1 event) and specific Criteria for Regional and National events (type 2 event).

NAMSA TYPE 1 events will have very flexible sanctioning criteria in order to fit all Chapters’ needs.

NAMSA TYPE 2 events will have more structured sanctioning requirements in light of the organizational challenges encountered when planning larger regattas.

(Rick: Is this really a certification? Are we trying to be dictatorial.., or just be a body under which there is a lot of free form. Maybe for National or Regional Championships we could be more stringent, but I wonder about ongoing events.)

(Bob: I'm thinking of regatta certification as a "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval." As such, I think you have to dictate minimum standards. That way, a person entering a regatta in Seattle can be assured he's getting the same quality product as a guy entering a regatta in Key West. At this time, I think NAMSA is fighting to be recognized. It would be a grave disservice if we sanctioned a poorly run "free form" regatta.)

(ERIC: I like the minimum standard concept, the standards have to be user friendly so that organizers will comply. There can be Special Criteria for Nationals , Regionals, etc. where tighter control is needed for everyone’s protection and reputation and where there will be a higher level of NAMSA representation (officers and committee members in attendance). How can NAMSA hold organizers of local events accountable for the minimum standards set?)

Objective:

* Communicate to the multihull sailing community that a specific regatta welcomes all multihull sailboats and that a standardized racing format will be used.

(Rick: Is this only for racing. Perhaps we should end the sentence after sailboats.)

(Bob: Again, I think we need to communicate the fact that a NAMSA Certified Regatta signifies a quality product.)

* Regattas which meet the criteria established below shall be permitted to use the "NAMSA Certified" logo when advertising the event.

(Rick: I am still having trouble with the "certified" thinking.)

(Bob: Again, think of it as quality control.)

Criteria:

* The event organizer must be a member of NAMSA.
(Eric: Does the term “event organizer” refer to an individual member or fleet member, or does it really matter? Should this be more specifically worded?)

* All regattas shall be conducted in accordance with the current ISAF rules.

(Rick: That is probably OK, but should we eliminate ISAF?)

(Bob: I think Rick misunderstood. We're saying that the regatta will be conducted in accordance with ISAF Rules)

*Insurance:
(Eric: ‘’’description of coverage placed here’’’ Additional insurance as required by Individual racers, fleets, parks, beaches, clubs depending on local laws, etc…. Is a statement of this nature required to cover other types of possible liabilities?)

* Buoy Racing:

* An event organizer may specify the minimum number of same-type boats that will constitute a one-design fleet for a specific regatta. Each fleet will get a separate start and will be scored separately. Scoring will be based on finishing position. (Rationale: CRAC uses a minimum of 5 boats to designate a one-design fleet; CRAM uses 4. Hobie one-design fleets can be 1 boat. By allowing the event organizer to establish the minimum, everyone is included)

(Rick: Good, much better than the demanding thing before)

* Boats not racing in a one-design fleet will race in a handicap fleet. This fleet will get a separate start and will be scored separately. Scoring will be based on corrected elapsed time using each boat's unique handicap number. At the discretion of the event organizer, there may be more than one handicap fleet. These fleets may have separate starts and/or separate scoring based on some distinguishing factor or combination of factors (e.g. D-PN, whether the boats are spinnaker/non-spinnaker equipped, single-handed, youth). (Rationale: 2001 Spring Fever Regatta had 3 Portsmouth fleets. One for high D-PN boats, one for low D-PN boats, and one for youth)

(Rick: Replace Portsmouth with handicap. We will also be covering big boats who use such things as PHRF, MASF, NEMSA, etc,)

(Bob: Concur with Rick's comments. I replaced Portsmouth with handicap)

* It is suggested that the 2001-2004 Racing Rules of Sailing, Appendix K, Sailing Instructions be used.

(Rick: How about, it is suggested that the Sailing Instruction be used as a template to be sure all problems possible will be covered)

(Bob: Concur with Rick's Comment. Change made above.)
(Eric: Concur)

* Distance Racing:

* Organizers of distance events may score one-design fleets, handicap fleets, and/or any other fleet based on some distinguishing factor (e.g. single-handed, youth, club membership). Regardless of how fleets are scored, the overarching criteria is that all multihull sailboats are welcome to race in the event unless safety precautions dictate otherwise. (Rationale: The Statue of Liberty Race scored line honors (based on elapsed time only), largest one-design fleet, 3 Portsmouth fleets (overall, single-handed, Fleet 250), and a "Turned Back at Bridge" fleet)

(Rick: I think this is a problem. For Distance Races it should be strictly up to the race organizers on what boats are welcome and what boats are not. For example, for the Key Largo Steeplechase, we do not allow single-handers and while not yet disallowing, we do not want boats with higher handicaps, i.e., Wave, H14, H16, P16.., and now the Hobie and P18 are not really welcome. Reason is that they are usually sailed by novice sailors [which we do not want for safety reasons] and the boats are already slow. They may not even make it, or if they do it is after midnight. I know the Steeplechase is a dangerous race and we are all very aware of it. Many distance races are very safe and can be inclusive, but I don't see how we can mandate race organizers to put themselves in jeapordy.)

(Bob: Concur with Rick's comment. Change made above.
(Eric: Concur)

Awards:

* It is suggested that awards be given three deep in any scored fleet that has at least seven boats.

(Rick: Well, not really. Often there are no awards at all. Again, I don't think this is something we should mandate. Perhaps we can suggest that the norm is 3 deep if there are 7 boats, or whatever, but I really don't think we can tell organizers what they have to do for awards.)

(Bob: Concur with Rick's comment. Change made above.
(Eric: Concur)

(Eric: What other intangibles can we “offer” race organizers if they organize under NAMSA? Coverage of the action, photos of the event in Catsailor, promotion of their fleet prior to and following events? NOR publication, yearly calendar of events? Discounts at Catsailor On line Marine Store?

I will put my comments in bold
NAMSA Regatta Certification
First of all, I think this whole thing should be called a Sanctioning Package.., and eliminate the word Certification.., We are certifying nothing, but we are sanctioning an event to happen.

NAMSA Regattas will be subject to varying types of criteria depending on the nature of the regatta. There is specific criteria for Chapter events (type 1 event) and specific Criteria for Regional and National events (type 2 event).

NAMSA TYPE 1 events will have very flexible sanctioning criteria in order to fit all Chapters’ needs.

NAMSA TYPE 2 events will have more structured sanctioning requirements in light of the organizational challenges encountered when planning larger regattas.

Eric, what we talked about was along that line, but believe the higher the number the more important the event. For example, let us call the North Americans, Nationals or Regional Championship should be called a Level One Event (I think "Level" may be a better word than "Type" and for level One Events we would need more requirements.

Then Level Two Events would be regattas run by Chapters that are not major races. For example, like monthly races put on by CABB where we have no race committee and make up the course when we see what the wind is like for the day.

We might then have a Level Three Event, which would be more or less a fun event, or we could just combine that with the Level two

(Rick: Is this really a certification? Are we trying to be dictatorial.., or just be a body under which there is a lot of free form. Maybe for National or Regional Championships we could be more stringent, but I wonder about ongoing events.)

(Bob: I'm thinking of regatta certification as a "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval." As such, I think you have to dictate minimum standards. That way, a person entering a regatta in Seattle can be assured he's getting the same quality product as a guy entering a regatta in Key West. At this time, I think NAMSA is fighting to be recognized. It would be a grave disservice if we sanctioned a poorly run "free form" regatta.)

(ERIC: I like the minimum standard concept, the standards have to be user friendly so that organizers will comply. There can be Special Criteria for Nationals , Regionals, etc. where tighter control is needed for everyone’s protection and reputation and where there will be a higher level of NAMSA representation (officers and committee members in attendance). How can NAMSA hold organizers of local events accountable for the minimum standards set?)

Objective:

* Communicate to the multihull sailing community that a specific regatta welcomes all multihull sailboats and that a standardized racing format will be used.

(Rick: Is this only for racing. Perhaps we should end the sentence after sailboats.)

(Bob: Again, I think we need to communicate the fact that a NAMSA Certified Regatta signifies a quality product.)

* Regattas which meet the criteria established below shall be permitted to use the "NAMSA Certified" logo when advertising the event.

(Rick: I am still having trouble with the "certified" thinking.)

(Bob: Again, think of it as quality control.)
Again I am against this certification idea. There is no way we can certify anything, nor should we. Look at US Sailing.., they don't certify a regatta or anything else. Even if we used the Hobie Sanctioning idea, they also did not certify anything. This thinking will get us in trouble.., we cannot force feed event organizers from around the country to do things exactly as we dictate.
And should we go to Level Events, you cannot make minimum requirements for Level Two, but should for Level One.
Criteria:

* The event organizer must be a member of NAMSA.
(Eric: Does the term “event organizer” refer to an individual member or fleet member, or does it really matter? Should this be more specifically worded?)
We should require that Event organizers, either as Individuals or Chapters, be a NAMSA member (either Individual or Chapter Member

* All regattas shall be conducted in accordance with the current ISAF rules.

(Rick: That is probably OK, but should we eliminate ISAF?)

(Bob: I think Rick misunderstood. We're saying that the regatta will be conducted in accordance with ISAF Rules)
No, I didn't misunderstand. Why should we be so specific in our Sanctioning Package that we specify what rules an event must operated under. Why not just say "conducted under current rules."

*Insurance:
(Eric: ‘’’description of coverage placed here’’’ Additional insurance as required by Individual racers, fleets, parks, beaches, clubs depending on local laws, etc…. Is a statement of this nature required to cover other types of possible liabilities?)

* Buoy Racing:

* An event organizer may specify the minimum number of same-type boats that will constitute a one-design fleet for a specific regatta. Each fleet will get a separate start and will be scored separately. Scoring will be based on finishing position. (Rationale: CRAC uses a minimum of 5 boats to designate a one-design fleet; CRAM uses 4. Hobie one-design fleets can be 1 boat. By allowing the event organizer to establish the minimum, everyone is included)

(Rick: Good, much better than the demanding thing before)

* Boats not racing in a one-design fleet will race in a handicap fleet. This fleet will get a separate start and will be scored separately. Scoring will be based on corrected elapsed time using each boat's unique handicap number. At the discretion of the event organizer, there may be more than one handicap fleet. These fleets may have separate starts and/or separate scoring based on some distinguishing factor or combination of factors (e.g. D-PN, whether the boats are spinnaker/non-spinnaker equipped, single-handed, youth). (Rationale: 2001 Spring Fever Regatta had 3 Portsmouth fleets. One for high D-PN boats, one for low D-PN boats, and one for youth)

(Rick: Replace Portsmouth with handicap. We will also be covering big boats who use such things as PHRF, MASF, NEMSA, etc,)

(Bob: Concur with Rick's comments. I replaced Portsmouth with handicap)
OK, We also have a big problem with demanding that Handicap boats get a separate start of their own. How can we be demanding these sort of things from an event organizer? Good example, at the Tradewinds, which is NAMSA NAs, we start the lower DPN FLeet, with the I20, N6.0s, etc. And they love it. They don't want a separate start, so how do we get off demanding that they have one?
* It is suggested that the 2001-2004 Racing Rules of Sailing, Appendix K, Sailing Instructions be used.

(Rick: How about, it is suggested that the Sailing Instruction be used as a template to be sure all problems possible will be covered)

(Bob: Concur with Rick's Comment. Change made above.)
(Eric: Concur)

* Distance Racing:

* Organizers of distance events may score one-design fleets, handicap fleets, and/or any other fleet based on some distinguishing factor (e.g. single-handed, youth, club membership). Regardless of how fleets are scored, the overarching criteria is that all multihull sailboats are welcome to race in the event unless safety precautions dictate otherwise. (Rationale: The Statue of Liberty Race scored line honors (based on elapsed time only), largest one-design fleet, 3 Portsmouth fleets (overall, single-handed, Fleet 250), and a "Turned Back at Bridge" fleet)

(Rick: I think this is a problem. For Distance Races it should be strictly up to the race organizers on what boats are welcome and what boats are not. For example, for the Key Largo Steeplechase, we do not allow single-handers and while not yet disallowing, we do not want boats with higher handicaps, i.e., Wave, H14, H16, P16.., and now the Hobie and P18 are not really welcome. Reason is that they are usually sailed by novice sailors [which we do not want for safety reasons] and the boats are already slow. They may not even make it, or if they do it is after midnight. I know the Steeplechase is a dangerous race and we are all very aware of it. Many distance races are very safe and can be inclusive, but I don't see how we can mandate race organizers to put themselves in jeapordy.)

(Bob: Concur with Rick's comment. Change made above.
(Eric: Concur)

Awards:

* It is suggested that awards be given three deep in any scored fleet that has at least seven boats.

(Rick: Well, not really. Often there are no awards at all. Again, I don't think this is something we should mandate. Perhaps we can suggest that the norm is 3 deep if there are 7 boats, or whatever, but I really don't think we can tell organizers what they have to do for awards.)

(Bob: Concur with Rick's comment. Change made above.
(Eric: Concur)

(Eric: What other intangibles can we “offer” race organizers if they organize under NAMSA? Coverage of the action, photos of the event in Catsailor, promotion of their fleet prior to and following events? NOR publication, yearly calendar of events? Discounts at Catsailor On line Marine Store?
Starting with discounts, I have vowed to my Suppliers that since we have the most traffic of all dealers, it would be unfair to discount, and so I cannot discount. Sorry. If I did, I would have a monopoly and run my suppliers out of business and then I would be out of biz.
Somewhere we need to suggest that PR is the biggest thing that make regattas tick.
We have made the Tradewinds work because we hype it for almost a year, and then have pix and results the night it is over, or the next day for sure.
So, we need to suggest that Chapters and Event Organizers bust butt to be sure all events have a Press Release, and that a PR of results and pix, story if possible, are released within a very short time.
Again, we cannot dictate these things, but strongly urge.
If there is one theme I want you all to understand is that we are not a DOG wagging a TAIL. We are nothing at the moment, except some ideas. We are NOT ISAF, NOR US Sailng, we are a flimsy org. with great ideas and $114 in the bank.
We want this Sanctioning Package to be pallitable and easy on them to swallow, not a big huge pill that we are stuffing down their throats.
This sanctioning can be modified yearly, and as we see how things are going, then perhaps we can be more demanding, but I really don't think we are in the position to Certify or Demand anything.
Heck, they all have been putting on races for decades without us, so why all of a sudden we demand they do it our way?
Thanks for listening,
Rick

I agree with Rick and the other posters that we should make this as easy to tolerate as possible. I believe one of the reasons people are even looking to NAMSA for regatta help is the insurance coverage (so they don't have to do it themselves).

The insurance section will dictate what organizers must do to ensure they are protected from liability (signed release and proof of insurance from racers, not SELLING liquor, etc.) whether it's level 1 or 2.

The only other thing I would suggest is that we develop certain criteria for scoring, especially with Level 1 events. Does everyone use the same program these days (Sailwave) or would this be to sticky of an issue to address?

I also agree on the PR aspect of it. There should be general criteria for posting and distribution of results, color comentary, and pictures.

Thanks, Jay, for the backup.
And about the scoring, again no demands, but how can we not highly recommend Sailwave?
Colin has begged for help in the past and as we grow that is possibly a field that we can get into and offer more tech support than it presently available.., or just make it easier to use. Nothing like a step by step walk through.

The point is that this also must be spoon fed, not force fed.
Rick

My additional 2 cents:

1. Sanctioning/certifying is meaningless without standards.

2. Nobody is being dictated to or forced to do anything.

3. I like the different "Levels" of certification.

4. If I was a regatta organizer and was considering NAMSA certification, my cost/benefit analysis would look something like this:

a. Benefits:

(1) I get to choose the Level of certification. Nobody is forcing me to do anything.

(2) Cheaper insurance.

(3) National advertising on the Catsailor Web Site and in Catsailor Magazine.

(4) Participants get points entered into a National database.

(5) Participants may qualify for a Regional or National event as a result of participating in my event.

(6) Post-race coverage in Catsailor Magazine.

b. Cost:

(1) $20 Individual Membership/$50 Chapter Membership.

(2) Send an email to get the certification package.

5. As an event organizer, looks like a no-brainer to me.

Bob

All right I hope I didn't overstep my bounds but I worked on some of the wording in this. Let me know what you think. I liked all of Rick's suggestions and incorporated them all I think.

There are two levels of NAMSA Sanctioned Regattas. Each level has a different set of simple requirements. Chapter events (Level 2 sanctioned) will be very flexible to meet all types of buoy, distance, and fun events. Level 1 sanctioned events will have more requirements to ensure consistent Regional and National events.

Objective:

Level 2:
* Communicate to the multihull sailing community that a specific regatta welcomes all multihull sailboats and that a standardized racing format will be used.
Level 1:
* Communicate to the multihull sailing community that a specific regatta welcomes all multihull sailboats that meet a certain criteria (ie. F18, Shark Nationals) and that a standardized racing format will be used.

* Regattas which meet the criteria established below shall be permitted to use the "NAMSA" logo when advertising the event.

* The event must be organized by a NAMSA chapter or the event coordinator must be a member of NAMSA.

* All regattas shall be conducted in accordance with the current ISAF Racing Rules of Sailing.

(I like this as it give participants an idea that the event will be run in an organized manner. I've never been to a race that wasn't under these rules. )

* It is suggested that the Notice of Race (NOR) follow the standard format as given in the US Sailing Appendix J. at http://www.sailing.org/rrs2001/rrsapp1pgs78to103.pdf

* It is suggested that a template for the Sailing Instructions be taken from the current ISAF Racing Rules of Sailing, Appendix K. Available at http://www.sailing.org/rrs2001/rrsapp1pgs78to103.pdf

(I believe we can take both of these appendicies and greatly simplify them for event coordinators.)

*Insurance:

Level 1: All particapants are required to show proof of Insurance with a minimum of $100,000 in liability coverage.
Level 2: All particapants are required to have insurance with a minimum of $100,000 in liability coverage.

(I'm greatly concerned about requiring proof of insurance at every event. It simply doesn't happen today anywhere except Hobie Nationals. This would be a big obstacle for local regattas as people would invariably forget there proof of insurance. Until people get use to carrying proof of insurance with them we can't make this a requirement. I recall at Hobie Nationals people having to call home and get it faxed to the event so they could sail. I think we could simply state that all boats that race must be covered by an insurance policy.)

*Signed Release: All regatta participants (skipper and crew) shall have signed the standard NAMSA statement release of liablity in order to participate.

*Buoy Racing, Distance Racing, and Fun events can be fleeted, raced, and scored using the method that is listed in the events Notice of Race.

Level 2: The preferance for fleeting is in the following order.
1. Formula
2. One-design
3. Portsmouth

( I don't believe that requiring anything in scoring or fleeting can gain us anything. Each group has a preference that is really none of our business. In fact this line can be deleted entirely.)

*Scoring:

Level 2:

In beachcat bouy events, when one-design or formula is not used, it is recomended to use Wind Corrected Portsmouth numbers using Sailwave scoring software available at www.sailwave.com. It is also recomended that "Wind Corrected Portsmouth" results be emailed to Darline Hobock at HobockD@aol.com within two weeks following the event.

In distance racing it is acceptable to use standard dpn numbers to score.

Level 1:

In beachcat bouy events, when one-design or formula is not used, organizers are required to use Wind Corrected Portsmouth numbers. Sailwave scoring software is available at www.sailwave.com to assist in scoring. Organizers are required to email "Wind Corrected Portsmouth" results to Darline Hobock at HobockD@aol.com within two weeks following the event.
In distance racing it is acceptable to use standard dpn numbers to score.

*Prizes:

Level 2:

There is no requirements for prizes in a level 2 event.

Level 1:

(unknown)

Mike Hill
Regions committee.

Nice work Bob and Mike,
This is a great start and collection of ideas. As Rick said, we can tweak it as we go.

Are there logos that I can access in order to set up the draft?

Eric,

When I get home, I'll email you the logos.

Bob

First off I want to address one word I find that really grates on me for what we are trying to do -- Certification.
I still have to ask the question.., how can we certify anything? How can we guarantee a give standard. Are we going to have to attend every "sanctioned" event in order guarantee that it meets stringent standards?
I really can't imagine that.
Perhaps even sanction is too strong of a word. How about the word "endorsement."

Bob, I agree that we would not be forcing anything on anybody.., in fact, if we don't offer them a sugar-coated pill, we would forcing nothing to no one. They will simply say.., "No thanks, I don't need any Sanctioning. Been doing fine without you.., can do fine without you in the future."

Please keep in mind, we are trying to attract these groups to us and therefore must offer them something "attractive." We cannot be saying, "...you must do this, you must do that, you must do the other thing."

I have been the PRO and organizer of the Tradewinds for a number of years now and can tell you straight away that I would not comply with the things you have been wanting to tell these people to do.
For example, "Proof of Insurance." That is crazy. I have been sailing for 40 years and have never had to show any proof of insurance.

On Level Two I don't see how you can have any standardized racing required. Again, just take my case. At CABB events one guy runs it all. We meet at Hobie Beach around 9AM and set up our boats, sign our name on a sheet of paper and put our DPN number on it if we know it.
The we look out at the water and see which way the wind is blowing and figure out a course that would be the best for competition, utilizing all the permanent marks we need to do so.
The starting sequence of 3 minutes begins when John blow his whistle. Everyone keeps their own time and there is an honor start.
OK, write a standard for that.
You see what I mean?

Rules, Sure ISAF Rules are predominantly used but other local rules also apply in Level Two. Antoher example is in Biscayne Bay they use BBYRA Rules. How do account for that if we demand they use only ISAF Rules? Don't see any reason to say ISAF, rather just that "applicable rules will apply."

I believe it was Mike that said, (I don't believe that requiring anything in scoring or fleeting can gain us anything. Each group has a preference that is really none of our business. In fact this line can be deleted entirely.)
I totally concur with that.

Scoring: Requiring Wind Adjustments. OK, I can personally tell you that we have never used them at the Tradewinds and don't ever plan to do so. Too damn many boats, too damn many classes, too much confusion already in scoring. So, I would not comply with such a requirement. What are we going to do, kick the Tradewinds out of NAMSA? And if we can't get the President of NAMSA to comply, how the heck are you going to coherse CRAW, CRAM, CRAC, and all the others jump through the hoops.
Not going to happen.

Again, we face the very possible rejection of NAMSA when we require and demand too much. Once the infrastructure is in place and NAMSA is a big strong machine, maybe we can start making a few requirements that will help the multihull world.

In General, we just have to take the attitude that we are here to help the folks out there.., not make their life more difficult.
Think about CABB and that fact that we are lucky we still have a beach to sail from, that we have no RC and never will in the future, etc. These are the people we need to appeal to. And "appeal" is the key word here.

Now, once we get this worded we should throw it up on the Open NAMSA Forum for some comments by those that we are trying to appeal to. So, at that time, be prepared for some pretty harsh comments.

YOur thoughts?

Rick

Rick,
I agree. There are many loosely knit groups of cat sailors out there that we can appeal to. Please comment on the last draft I sent... We are very, very close.

My thoughts:

I was thinking more and more about other "sanctioning organizations" like NASCAR and NPC and actually visited their web sites. I think you're right Rick...they had to build their product and reputation from scratch over time. NASCAR didn't always have state of the art standardized vehicles, strict rules, beautiful tracks, national advertising, etc. They built a product over time, then slowly demanded stringent standards (usually based on horrific accidents). Eventually, they were recognized for running quality, professional events which attracted the cream of the crop.

Another example could be the "Drug Lord" Model. Give the people free drugs until they're hooked, then demand high prices.

OK...I think I've finally come around. Why don't we just let everyone run their regattas the way they want. For now, let's forget about Level 1, 2, and all the "standards" we've been discussing. We'll offer them our name and logo, cheap insurance, a points system, regional/national racing, and national exposure for the price of membership. Sure, we run the risk that someone will run a crappy regatta and soil our name, but I guess it comes with the territory. Maybe someday, people will be "hooked" on NAMSA and be willing to pay a high price and adhere to strict standards to be associated with our name.

Bob

O.K. Bob, please review this with the free form mind set and make suggestions. We are almost there!
We will work on level 1 racing next.

Eric Arbogast

Draft level 2 Sanction (chapter)
NAMSA Regatta

Objective:

* Communicate to the multihull sailing community that a specific regatta welcomes all multihull sailboats under one national umbrella.

Benefits:
· Regattas which meet the sanctioning criteria established below shall be permitted to use the "NAMSA" logo when advertising the event.
· NOR will be posted in Catsailor Magazine.
· Pre race adverting in Catsailor Magazine.
· Post race coverage Catsailor Magazine.
· Low cost Regatta insurance
· Participants get points entered into a National NAMSA database.
· Increased participation in your events due to point system leading to Level 1 events.
· Tips and suggestions on how to run a quality regatta.
·

Criteria:

* The event organizer must be a member of NAMSA.

* All regattas shall be conducted in accordance with the current ISAF rules.

*Insurance:
Each racer must sign a release of liability in order to participate in any NAMSA event before the event starts.

WHO IS COVERED WHAT IS COVERED WHAT IS NOT COVERED ADDITIONAL REQUIRED COVERAGES NOT PROVIDED BY NAMSA

* Buoy Racing:

· An event organizer may specify the minimum number of same-type boats that will constitute a one-design fleet for a specific regatta. Each fleet will get a separate start and will be scored separately. Scoring will be based on finishing position.

· Boats not racing in a one-design fleet will race in a handicap fleet. This fleet will get a separate start and will be scored separately. Scoring will be based on corrected elapsed time using each boat's unique handicap number. At the discretion of the event organizer, there may be more than one handicap fleet. These fleets may share one start or have separate starts and/or separate scoring based on some distinguishing factor or combination of factors.

* It is suggested that the 2001-2004 Racing Rules of Sailing, Appendix K, Sailing Instructions be used.

* Distance Racing:

* All multihull sailboats are welcome to race in the event unless safety precautions dictate otherwise.
* Scoring: Event organizer may use any scoring system. It is suggested that Sailwave be the scoring software of NAMSA sanctioned events.

· Fun Events:

· Insurance and release of liability required.

· Postponement:

· Dangerous weather conditions (threshold) other factors?

Awards:

· Level 2 events carry no award requirement.
· It is suggested that awards are be given three deep in any scored fleet that has at least seven boats if and when awards will be given.

Rick, et.al.

I agree with keeping it simple, but there are a few MINIMUM things we must deal with.

I doubt sincerely this insurance company will say "Here's your policy - go out and do whatever". Yes, it is rare when a participant or spectator sues the PRO or RC for injury or damage, but what's to say they wouldn't?

Most racers would sort out the problem amongst themselves for any minor injury or damage. But there could be issues. To take Tradewinds for example:

Two years ago conditions could have been considered outside of the typical design characteristics of the boats involved. People may distance race in 25+, but it's not typical for a bouy race. Racers can choose to compete, but most will go out in order to attempt to keep the points up. Could the F-18HT sued RC for damage when their sail was sawed up before the start? Possible - even though unlikely because of the waiver (which as we all know doesn't hold much water in courts) and most sailors understand the risks.

Or Tradewinds this year. A N6.0 sailor hit a submerged hazard while on the course, damaging his boat and injuring his crew. Was RC negligent in setting up the course over hazards and not instructing the racers? Or the I-20 that hit the anchored boat(s) in the middle of the course? Could the owner of the anchored boat sue the RC? An enterprising attorney could have some sort of case had damages or injury been significant. In the N6.0 case, I believe the boat owner had insurance, but no one had ever asked/required it. If injuries had been significant and the owner uninsured/underinsured, who would the injured party look to for relief?

Again, most sailors/racers understand that they take the risks unto themselves, but as more and more people get into the sport (especially beginners who may not fully understand the risks), this could cause issues.

As a third example, consider the setup area at Tradewinds. There were minimally supervised children, people backing trailers, boats moving around, and alcohol. Again, the prudent person would conduct themselves accordingly, but what if there had been an injury associated?

I've seen a number of really stupid lawsuits, and I'm not even a legal person. The latest "roll your eyes" case involves a school district being sued because some students decided to jump from the emergency exit while the bus was moving and suffered head injuries. The school district lost. Go figure.

The insurance thing is relatively straightforward. A good number of homeowner's policies even cover it. If not, $200 per year covers a pretty big policy. Perhaps NAMSA could poll its members to see if they would be interested in us attempting to get a volume discount on individual boat owners insurance. KEEP IN MIND THIS COULD BE A VERY TIME AND LABOR INTENSIVE EFFORT due to the various boats, locations, and owners out there. Perhaps a quick poll NAMSA or Catsailor could conduct is to ask how many people are sailing around uninsured (I would doubt many of the more pricey boats are)

Perhaps we should offer the requirements for insurance coverage only to the more stringent level (is that level 1?) because that will be the more organized of the two, anyway. In the CABB racing example, I don't know about sanctioning that, since it's really a "beercan" race. Does CABB even have insurance on that? Why add all the trouble of scoring, NOR, etc. on that type of racing?

HAVING SAID ALL THAT, it's really up to the insurer. If they require all participants to have coverage, then if any chapter wants coverage, they have to provide diligent effort to comply. In the past, policies did not require this, but things change overnight in some cases.

Jay

Bob, a good analogy with NASCAR. I do believe they started out as a bunch of hills rum runners -- the movie "Thunder Road" comes to mind.

Should it occur that someone is running "crappy" or unsafe regattas under the NAMSA name, we can warn them.., and then not sanction (endorse) them until they get their act together.

On the Proof of Insurance, again I have never been asked if I had it or not. Certainly not prove it.
I do think everyone should have insurance to cover their own liablity situation. I would hate to have someone Cut me in three (if a mono hits you, they cut you in two only) and just say, "Sorry!"
How about we suggest that on the registration forms we have skipper and crew sign the waiver and also include in the waiver that they will be responsible for any damage caused by their negligence?

Jay, We never ran any races with the wind at 25+ at the Tradewinds. We were recording 18-20, with an occasional gust nearing 25. And there were very few capsizes as I recall. Believe me, had it been 25+ and with those God-awful temperatures, I would not have been out there running the races. I was miserable enough as it was.

Guess we will never be able to comprehend frivilous "Hot Coffee" lawsuits.

Any chance we could get some rough wording of the sanctioning package and let the public comment over the weekend?

Thanks,
Rick