The inside out gate used at the M/10R Worlds with additional spreader marks turned downwind legs at that race into pure lottery. The beauty of what we do is that clever tactical racing is and should be rewarded. Do we want to further dumb down the sport by having a close race between 2 competitors choose gate and spreader options (under a weather bank) to round near 25+ metres apart and see who is lucky enough to get the unseen gust through trees? Without the other having any chance to attack or equally defend, this is not racing. All of this because we either don’t know how to overlay a windward mark in waves and wind for a clean rounding or don’t respect our opposition enough to take a transom? We can all get it wrong, but persistent offenders are not that hard to weed out at bigger events if willing. Weeding the club or local offender (bully) maybe not so easy…. Yes we want a clean race, but it should still be a race that rewards race craft, not further increase of luck. Regarding Umpire use of R2 and having to have a level of certainty, why did they not use a video option if in doubt as they were happy to ‘selectively’ use for an early incident? As for distances, of course nobody wants an eyesight test. The reports from the last IOM Worlds in Australia paint a mirrored picture of any umpiring issues being blamed largely on distance. What was conveniently overlooked was the start/finish line being within clear view of a raised platform of skippers where the largest number of unpunished rule breaches occured worthy of R2 hearings. Are our issues course distance related, venue related, skipper behaviour related or umpire standard related? It might be worth a bigger look at how all areas can be improved not just throwing people under buses….