Jester Challenge - 'Would You Allow this...?' Thread Follow-Up

[conachair]

A while ago there was a thread about the Jester Challenge (sort of) race from uk to Azores. http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...w-12488-2.html
In this thread there few negative posts, mostly along the line "all very well, but someone has to go and rescue them when it all goes wrong".
I think this post on the jester forum
Yachting and Boating World forums: The final tally - well done all!
shows that it is still possible for a group of people to undertake adventurous offshore passages on vessels which many people would deem to be too small, safely without the need of governing bodies and regulations. If every sailor showed the same high levels of seamanship and self sufficiency then perhaps the rescue services would have an easier life.

Any thoughts?

[Pblais]

Any thoughts?

Sometimes fools do anything they please. At that point they are welcome to it. The other side is well meaning people don't let fools kill themselves when it can be prevented or saved. It somehow goes with being a full human being.

It comes down to letting people kill themselves or having to put up with the concept that because you think you can do something you really can do it. In all respects we have proven what can be done in sailing. All the great sailing challenges were over 100 years ago. There is nothing significant left to prove. Pretending to do something new is no longer required. To go ahead and do it any way is one thing but to expect sanction or permission to do so beforehand is beyond acceptability and well into arrogance.

[conachair]

Originally Posted by Pblais

In all respects we have proven what can be done in sailing. All the great sailing challenges were over 100 years ago. There is nothing significant left to prove. Pretending to do something new is no longer required.

Possibly so, though I think you're missng the point. What I find refreshing in this example is that no-one thinks they are doing anything new. Winning doesn't matter. The whole ethos is more about doing the best you can on a vessel prepared as best you can. Prepared for safety and selfsufficciency, not for speed.

[dcstrng]

Originally Posted by conachair

it is still possible for a group of people to undertake adventurous offshore passages on vessels which many people would deem to be too small, safely without the need of governing bodies and regulations...

Having left the tonnage boats for the more modest, reality-sized craft in recent years, the notion of smaller boat blue-water passages doesn’t seem particularly novel to me, and following this rather low-key “race” I’ve supposed it to be a rather gentlemanly endeavor as contrasted with the almost garish, and unearthly expensive events that seem to characterize modern ocean racing… more power to them…

I’m not in favor of the assumption of the “right” to be rescued – which I take to be a different issue – if I was ever in that circumstance, I might change my tune… However, I’m struck by how many boats have their crews rescued, only to find that the vessel sails (semi-serenely) on without them, weathering the storm – but human endurance is finite and presumably even the best of sailors can get too exhausted to make rational decisions… Still, I think setting to sea with the assumption that some blue-water rescue service will bail me out if I’m too much of an idiot is decidedly presumptuous… I’m not at all convinced, however, that is the case here…

If the Jester event raises the yachties’ eyebrows, then the Around-in-Ten folks will leave them convulsively apoplectic…

[Pblais]

[FONT='Calibri','sans-serif']Still, I think setting to sea with the assumption that some blue-water rescue service will bail me out if I’m too much of an idiot is decidedly presumptuous[FONT='Calibri','sans-serif'].[/FONT][/FONT]

To be fair I don't think anyone takes that approach. I just don't believe anyone thinks that they don't have to worry because they can be rescued. They may be naive and/or under prepared then suddenly become aware that they screwed up. Stuff and circumstances happen to even the best and most prepared. There is always real risk.

Events like the 1500 and ARC rally are both similar in nature just with a longer history. They both are well organized and have a decent track record. They make strict minimum requirements and not all applications are accepted. I don't really buy into the lessor standard. On a one off anything is possible. The above event ended with no tragic consequences but it does not really prove the bigger issue in the slightest.

The standard that because no one was killed isn't much of a standard. The details of the organization and the boats really are not that open to scrutiny. I just don't think the risk involved is any less than going alone.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by Pblais

Events like the 1500 and ARC rally are both similar in nature just with a longer history. They both are well organized and have a decent track record. They make strict minimum requirements and not all applications are accepted. I don't really buy into the lessor standard. On a one off anything is possible. The above event ended with no tragic consequences but it does not really prove the bigger issue in the slightest.

The standard that because no one was killed isn't much of a standard. The details of the organization and the boats really are not that open to scrutiny. I just don't think the risk involved is any less than going alone.

I suspect that we are not fundamentally apart in our views about not venturing to sea in a poorly equipped boat / with too little experiance - but as an (armchair!) follower of the Jester Challenge - I would point out the whole idea of the Jester is that the "standard" is set by each participant, rather than by a scrutineering commitee.

The concept being that whether you have met the "standard" set by a Commitee or not is irrelevent when at sea and trouble arrives, as the Commitee won't be around to bail you out (pun intended ) - and Neptune won't be impressed by a note from them......bottom line is that all choices / decisions are down to the Skipper, as he has to live with them. or not. For most folk their is a lot of learning to do, from each other and others locally and on internet. From what I can tell their is a good DNS (and DNF) number which IMO reflects well on folk involved and their sense of prudence (self preservation? ).

The idea for it being about boats under 30 foot is that many (obviously not all!) are capable of doing long voyages, but that their are not many races or events that welcome them - or for which their is any real point in entering an older small boat and of course the original Jester at 25 foot was barred from entry into the Ostar in the 1970's, despite having completed previously. Ostensibly for size / safety reasons but in reality for not being commercial enough.

So kinda begs the question of the purpose of the Jester sailing as a fleet..........As far as I can tell it is not about safety in numbers, but more about sharing a Challenge (mainly the Skippers challenging themselves - it may be old hat to many over the last 100 years, but not to everyone). Of course folk could do and do do (???!!) this individually - but the Jester provides both a date and a destination to aim for (always easy to say to yerself "next year"), as well as support and ideas from like minded folk of varying abilities and experiances who have the same aim.

The Jester "Organisation" doesn't actually "organise" anything - a date, a start and finish point gets set..........and people then subscribe to the idea and then attend (or not).

In the UK it is perfectly legal to set sail for Antartica in a bath tub. Litterally. I appreciate that different countries and folk have different views / laws about stuff like this - me? I would hate it to be any different. Just cos' someone else says something is "safe" does not make it always so, and IMO always better for the Skipper to know him / herself that something is prudent than to rely on another's opinion.

In practice, living in a colder climate seems to apply common sense. or at least remove the temptation to venture too far offshore really badly equipped. For most anyway. And either Lady Luck or Darwin takes care of the rest

But as always, opinions do differ

[Pblais]

but as an (armchair!) follower of the Jester Challenge - I would point out the whole idea of the Jester is that the "standard" is set by each participant, rather than by a scrutineering commitee.

Watching the risk as an armchair follower is a lot different than actually doing it. I suppose the appeal comes for the lack of standard. The contest is to watch to see which participants were prepared and which were not becomes the show. To set up the maze and see how many rats can make it to the finish line. I suppose as armchair sports go it's got a little bit of appeal. No hideous deaths but always the possibility is clearly enough for the armchair crowd. It's too bad it plays so poorly on television. Dreadfully long too.

I'm not much for watching sporting events.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by Pblais

Watching the risk as an armchair follower is a lot different than actually doing it. I suppose the appeal comes for the lack of standard. The contest is to watch to see which participants were prepared and which were not becomes the show. To set up the maze and see how many rats can make it to the finish line. I suppose as armchair sports go it's got a little bit of appeal. No hideous deaths but always the possibility is clearly enough for the armchair crowd. It's too bad it plays so poorly on television. Dreadfully long too.

I'm not much for watching sporting events.

Ouch and IMO a tad unfair to extract that from what I wrote . Have you just bought a catamaran?

But in any event, making one's own decisions does not equate to a lack of standards. IME usually the opposite - both within armchair and without

But, as I said before........opinions do differ.

[Pblais]

Ok a bit unfair I can apologize for that one, but so was the catamaran crack. We are not going there on this thread or any other. That is not a personal decision option here.

making one's own decisions does not equate to a lack of standards

Given the date, start, and finish lines are preset by someone else with no rules it still seems more like rats in maze. I suppose the choice is to do as you are told and follow the course. Making all ones own decisions is essentially a total lack of standards. I don't say if it is bad or good.

In a rats and maze contest I'm more in favor of a steal the cheese and run approach given there are no rules and the rats are left to do as they please and are happy to do so.

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by Pblais

<snip>

In a rats and maze contest I'm more in favor of a steal the cheese and run approach given there are no rules and the rats are left to do as they please and are happy to do so.

I'm with you on this concept, Paul, in fact, I think you've just outlined the makings of a great sailing contest! Crews (the rats) could resort to whatever tactics they wish, aboard whatever sailing vessel they wish, to obtain the cheese (gold coins) and escape.

Where does the cheese come from? Well, unlike The Skins Game where the golfers have none of their own "skin" in the game, the rats in Paul's contest put up their own swag - winner take all! Sort of an Ultimate Fighting Championship, but on the water - let's call it "Ultimate Fighting Pirates of the Caribbean!"

If you could get it on TV, you could knock American Idol out of the box. And, if people actually die while competing, it'll be a greater spectacle than a public execution!

Paul, have your people call my people . . .

TaoJones

[conachair]

I suppose the appeal comes for the lack of standard. The contest is to watch to see which participants were prepared and which were not becomes the show.

As is probably obvious I am a fan of this event. I think digging deeper maybe for me the appeal is that there is no contest, there is no show. Though maybe you were refering to us lot watching. Surfing various forums and the net I think most if not all the skippers llike to do this sort of thing anyway, jester is just a focus. (ming ming's site here Introduction to the junk-rigged Corribee Mingming ). The contest is to sail as best you can, the show is the ocean. Digging deep again maybe I see jester as being a metophor of the things which led me towards sailing in the first place, reading the likes of Slocum and Moitessier. Being at sea just for the joy of it and listening to your boat and doing what needs to be done.

[Pblais]

Being at sea just for the joy of it and listening to your boat and doing what needs to be done.

I can go for that any day.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by conachair

Introduction to the junk-rigged Corribee Mingming ).
.

Great read, thanks.

I particularly like:

I myself would never go to sea in a yacht that did not pass the Mingming Test. I can't understand why it's not mandatory for every new-build to be unsinkable. Easy enough to do with today's lightweight, high-volume designs.
Thing is, I've researched all this very carefully. What I've found is that that there are only two positions a yacht can occupy relative to the ocean. You can be either on top of it, interfacing helpfully with the air we so like to breathe, or at the bottom of it, hobnobbing with wrecks and very weird sea creatures. I'd take the former every time.
On top is the place to be and, for my money, in my own boat. I'm puzzled why offshore sailors in particular don't make more effort in this regard. Why they seem so prepared to let their pride and joy spiral down through the depths. To lose their ship and exchange it for a flimsy bit of rubber tube that may or may not inflate.

[Therapy]

Mr. Taylor says this too.

Although the leaping off point for the Jester Challenge was the disenfranchisement of yachts under thirty feet from the OSTAR, it is about much more than boat length. The Jester Challenge is a rallying point for those who despair of the creeping regulation and the over-commercialisation that now pervades our sport. It is a focal point for those who want to see responsibility back in the hands of individual skippers, rather than committees. It is a symbol of defiance against nannies and rule-freaks.

He has valid points on the KISS argument.

[Zephyr's Aura]

It seems to me that there is risk in anything you do. From getting out of bed to crossing the street to sailing a boat across an ocean. The only difference is the amount of time you spend doing them and the amount of preparation you use. The guys surfing big waves in Hawaii (this is a televised sport by the way) are most likely at higher risk than a guy crossing an ocean in a 20 to 30 foot boat. However with proper preparation both can be done safely. It's up to the individual to decide if they are ready for such a challenge. I personally wouldn't try to surf big waves, however I wouldn't presume to tell some else that they shouldn't.

I've done many many things in my life that other people consider dangerous. I have flown hang gliders, I've flown thousands of hours of aerobatics, I've climbed mountains, and I've sailed my boat in the ocean. All of these things can be deadly. I've never been seriously injured. I've also never considered any of these things to be particularly dangerous. Primarily because I have allot of experience in each of these areas. In every case I have had people tell me that I shouldn't do them, and in every case the only way to gain the experience is to do them. I think that anyone can do anything if they take their time, and gain experience by gradually pushing their own envelope. That being said there will always be people who go out and do stupid things, and you can't regulate stupidity.


Tim