• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

21,348 posts in this topic

Hard to say what their burn rate is but desperate times call for desperate measures if the team wants to remain intact.

 

Kim dot com could save the day with a $5M drop. Maybe he's not interested.

 

Is ta koodie out stumping for funding (we know nav isn't) ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Oracle 17.1 was intended to foil from the get go, why did they design so much flex into the platform. Controlling the AOA of the lifting portion of the main foils is critical to stable controlled full foiling. But, Dogzilla in its skimming state was very flexible and very fast.

And if the AC34 design rule was not intended to prohibit full foiling while allowing for semi-lifting foils why were the rudder elevators restricted to only being adjustable in pitch between races.

While claims may have been stated to the contrary after the fact, the evidence doesn't prove these claims to be rational or believable.

 

There were many things from the early days that are hard to pin down ..

 

Wasn't it Clean that said he had it direct from GD that they found out they were able to foil by accident ?

 

Perhaps that was part of the " video that shall remain unseen " ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sclarke,

You say AC34 would have been a failure without GD? I could say it was a success in spite of GD. RC and Larry as his benifactor were very ambitious in dragging the AC community into the fastest in shore race boat designs to date. But, due to the huge transition and a very tight world economy they compromised and decided to make AC34 a transitional Cup. The defender and the COR hired Morrelli and Melvin to write a class rule to prevent full foiling for this iteration. It may have been possible that there would have been a tighter challenger series had TNZ not gone renegade and hired the rules designers that just happened to have found a loop hole. But, that is the essence of the AC spirit. Find a way within the rules to create the fastest boat/team combination and execute well on the race course. Both Artemis and Luna Rosa got left wanting. Team Oracle did a fantastic job responding when their backs were against the wall and TNZ just didn't think Oracle had enough runway to pull it off.

A lot of people are saying that the only way to gauge a successful AC is by the number of teams entered. I say the best way to measure the success of the AC is by the amount of interest it draws. Two teams battling at the highest level in the fastest boats and having the result decided in the very last race is the highest level of drama in sports to date (from a sailors perspective). If Oracle hadn't stepped up their game to beat TNZ's full foiling ploy, that would have been one of the worst AC's in recent memory.

 

Fair enough summary.

 

Here's your own standard: I say the best way to measure the success of the AC is by the amount of interest it draws.

 

Then this: Two teams battling at the highest level in the fastest boats and having the result decided in the very last race is the highest level of drama in sports to date (from a sailors perspective).

 

How do you think 'interest' should be measured?

Now using that criteria, do you have any idea how AC34 stacked up against recent AC's - back to Fremantle or so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just admit it people, for 3 years, what GD said was NOT negative (although the defender would have you think it was) But everything he predicted, suggested or talked about came true in the last cycle. From the get-go GD suggested the entry fee was too high (so they slashed it) Russell, Jimmy and Larry suggested 8-10 challengers, GD said no, its too expensive and unrealistic, so they got 3 (the lowest number since the Louis Vuitton Cup started. GD said the boats were too big and too dangerous, and a sailor died. The challengers were promised a "Pit lane" with accommodation for teams and a shared crane (which was later taken away) and then there was the rudder debacle where Russell in essence tried to change the AC72 class rule right before the racing started! Not to mention, the defender caught red-handed twice infringing their own protocol. Now they come out with a verbal assault on the team that carried the last AC because they couldn't organise it properly. A bit rich from a team who haven't delivered on anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just admit it people, for 3 years, what GD said was NOT negative.

 

You can't be honest.

 

Is that why the NZ public is so supportive ?

 

How about the "hysterical" NZ media ? They sure helped the situation eh ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just admit it people, for 3 years, what GD said was NOT negative.

 

You can't be honest.

 

Is that why the NZ public is so supportive ?

 

How about the "hysterical" NZ media ? They sure helped the situation eh ?

The public ARE supportive of the team, thats why they got the welcome home that they did. but they are NOT supportive of the AC, there's a difference. We feel Oracle have stacked the rules so much its unwinnable. Granted thats probably because of a few reporters (Dana Johannsen) from the Herald. There's always gonna be haters, like there are haters in America because there was hardly any Americans on the American boat. I bet if you polled America on OTUSA the majority wouldn't even know who they are let alone support them. But one of the biggest reasons is that the AC is "A rich mans game" And the richest man in New Zealand is something like 152nd on the Forbes list. We are a sailing nation, a sporting nation, but the AC isn't about sailing anymore its about who has the biggest wallet. Thats why the New Zealand support for the Americas Cup is fading, but the Support for the team, for the most part is still strong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Just admit it people, for 3 years, what GD said was NOT negative.

 

You can't be honest.

 

Is that why the NZ public is so supportive ?

 

How about the "hysterical" NZ media ? They sure helped the situation eh ?

The public ARE supportive of the team, thats why they got the welcome home that they did. but they are NOT supportive of the AC, there's a difference. We feel Oracle have stacked the rules so much its unwinnable.

 

Really ? Grumpy apparently doesn't think so from his last press release. Apparently you missed it - go check it out, it's not exactly hard to find.

 

And neither does LR, TA, BAR and Artemis - they all seem to be marching ahead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't studied to numbers. But, from the reaction I got from many non-sailing friends, AC34 was nothing short of spectacular. And, there were quite a few interviews on talk shows and mentions in the evening news. While sailing gets quite a bit more press coverage in your neck of the woods. That's quite an accomplishment in the U.S. media market for sailing.

 

You have your perspective that Oracle ruined everything that was great about the AC and I have mine; that Oracle was finally able to get awe inspiring boats with great video coverage and graphic representations to make racing more understandable the general public. With two incredibly talented crews executing their teams plans to win the AC.

 

I think Grant Dalton and Team New Zealand were a major attribute in making a spectacular event. But, unlike you I also appreciate the herculean task that Larry and Russell undertook and were largely IMHO successful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ You're arguing with one of the idiots who perpetuated the Grumpy Grant moniker.

 

In the US apparently it's customary to bend over and say "Thank you Sir, too kind", while being screwed over....

 

The dumb and the 1%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the US apparently it's customary to bend over and say "Thank you Sir, too kind", while being screwed over....

 

The dumb and the 1%?

The 'we are being screwed over' refrain got old and tired a long time ago. And now it's biting the team in their own ass.

 

There is an undercurrent of under-siege, highly-negative mentality being stirred aggressively by some portion of ETNZ backers that just is really unhealthy. I fail to see how it helps anyone - including themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ You're arguing with one of the idiots who perpetuated the Grumpy Grant moniker.

 

In the US apparently it's customary to bend over and say "Thank you Sir, too kind", while being screwed over....

 

The dumb and the 1%?

 

Seems like your blinkered viewpoint is referring to the NZ public at the moment, otherwise grumpy wouldn't be in a panic.No ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Just admit it people, for 3 years, what GD said was NOT negative.

 

You can't be honest.

 

Is that why the NZ public is so supportive ?

 

How about the "hysterical" NZ media ? They sure helped the situation eh ?

The public ARE supportive of the team, thats why they got the welcome home that they did. but they are NOT supportive of the AC, there's a difference. We feel Oracle have stacked the rules so much its unwinnable.

 

Really ? Grumpy apparently doesn't think so from his last press release. Apparently you missed it - go check it out, it's not exactly hard to find.

 

And neither does LR, TA, BAR and Artemis - they all seem to be marching ahead.

I watched it when it came out! Thats because of the media coverage, GD doesn't think its AS stacked as it was last time (Hence the 3 years of straight talk about the last cycle) The media sentiment towards the Americas Cup has been negative yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean it reflects exactly GD's thoughts on it. We all know bad news sells more newspapers than good new does. BAR did you see the BAR Team video?? There's more of Oracle in it than him!, Luna Rossa (Oh sow now you like them, when in the last cycle Max Sirena was GD's bitch, pissing and moaning and everyone wanted them kicked out) now they're "Marching ahead", Artemis well they have no leg to stand on to say anything because they were Oracle's poodle last time, but then GD allowed them to sail out of compliance so they can't afford to take sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In the US apparently it's customary to bend over and say "Thank you Sir, too kind", while being screwed over....

 

The dumb and the 1%?

The 'we are being screwed over' refrain got old and tired a long time ago. And now it's biting the team in their own ass.

 

There is an undercurrent of under-siege, highly-negative mentality being stirred aggressively by some portion of ETNZ backers that just is really unhealthy. I fail to see how it helps anyone - including themselves.

 

The quick turn of events is kind of ironic for grumpy - never saw it coming as he fueled the fire for 3 years turning the loose cannon NZ media and fans against the defender when he would have been better served by supporting the event - especially having almost won it. Not too smart for a team reliant on commercial sponsorship. Never could figure this out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Just admit it people, for 3 years, what GD said was NOT negative.

 

You can't be honest.

 

Is that why the NZ public is so supportive ?

 

How about the "hysterical" NZ media ? They sure helped the situation eh ?

The public ARE supportive of the team, thats why they got the welcome home that they did. but they are NOT supportive of the AC, there's a difference. We feel Oracle have stacked the rules so much its unwinnable.

 

Really ? Grumpy apparently doesn't think so from his last press release. Apparently you missed it - go check it out, it's not exactly hard to find.

 

And neither does LR, TA, BAR and Artemis - they all seem to be marching ahead.

I watched it when it came out! Thats because of the media coverage, GD doesn't think its AS stacked as it was last time (Hence the 3 years of straight talk about the last cycle) The media sentiment towards the Americas Cup has been negative yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean it reflects exactly GD's thoughts on it. We all know bad news sells more newspapers than good new does. BAR did you see the BAR Team video?? There's more of Oracle in it than him!, Luna Rossa (Oh sow now you like them, when in the last cycle Max Sirena was GD's bitch, pissing and moaning and everyone wanted them kicked out) now they're "Marching ahead", Artemis well they have no leg to stand on to say anything because they were Oracle's poodle last time, but then GD allowed them to sail out of compliance so they can't afford to take sides.

You're a lost cause.

 

Have fun with AC35, or there is always the Wednesday night beer can series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're a lost cause.

 

 

Have fun with AC35, or there is always the Wednesday night beer can series.

Amazing!! Just like Lil Jimmy, someone presents the "Other side" of the story, with points you can't refute, so you resort to the personal attacks. I think its you that is the lost cause. And its Thursday night races, not Wednesday nights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Not too smart for a team reliant on commercial sponsorship. Never could figure this out."

 

Well it's not so much the commercial sponsorship that appears damaged at all (GD candidly admits he's in the best position that way, ever!) but the public polls that he's now got big problems with. They all pulled from the poisoned well but all that KoolAid made with bad water left a really sour aftertaste. Who with any sense has an appetite for another steady diet of defeatism negativity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice talking point repetition there swallower, you've earned you fan cap again this month - do you get a photo of you wearing it put up at GGYC - 'employee of the month' style?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You're a lost cause.

 

 

Have fun with AC35, or there is always the Wednesday night beer can series.

Amazing!! Just like Lil Jimmy, someone presents the "Other side" of the story, with points you can't refute, so you resort to the personal attacks. I think its you that is the lost cause. And its Thursday night races, not Wednesday nights.

 

Like I said - you think grumpy was not at all negative during AC34 you're a lost cause - he even earned a gag order, or have you forgotten that ?

 

OK, whatever, thursday nights - please enjoy them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice talking point repetition there swallower, you've earned you fan cap again this month - do you get a photo of you wearing it put up at GGYC - 'employee of the month' style?

It's a point I've been making for a very long time. And now even JS is making it. Hell, even GD and Shoebie won't argue against it now.

 

What point have you ever stuck to, that had lasting truth? The Corruption Of That Whore Iain Murray? Do you worship at the altar of Herbie Lester?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice talking point repetition there swallower, you've earned you fan cap again this month - do you get a photo of you wearing it put up at GGYC - 'employee of the month' style?

 

Get it straight nav - it's a jacket and a shirt package, but no photo, only a free dinner :)

 

You guys are really a sorry bunch of losers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lasting truth?

 

If TUSA would just try running a sports event first and foremost, abide by the deed, stick to their own protocol, not try to change the definition of sailing fundamentals like 'wind speed', not put their paid employees in untenable conflict of interest situations, cut the abuse of their opposition, not renege on hosting agreements and try not to cheat quite so often perhaps there'd be fewer issues raised?

 

Just maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There you go again, questioning one of the central tenets of AC34: Independent race management.

 

The intense cynicism surrounding that, including by Peter Lester calling for IM's resignation on national TV, is why all the competitors will now fund ACRM. But it never was intended to be a "screw ETNZ proposition" and it never ran that way except for in the minds of the noisy, conspiratorial fringers. Again: Some of them spewing it out even on national television.

 

It's no wonder ETNZ has lost public support, the negativity has been intense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lasting truth?

 

If TUSA would just try running a sports event first and foremost, abide by the deed, stick to their own protocol, not try to change the definition of sailing fundamentals like 'wind speed', not put their paid employees in untenable conflict of interest situations, cut the abuse of their opposition, not renege on hosting agreements and try not to cheat quite so often perhaps there'd be fewer issues raised?

 

Just maybe?

 

The only thing for certain is that you'll take this to your grave, along with Herbie :)

 

Just in case you're wondering, take solace in the fact that the world is against you, at least the AC world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From http://www.sail-world.com/USA/Who-would-have-guessed-the-Kiwis-like-the-AC-2017-Protocol?/123357

 

good headline..

--

After lots of drama, critical comments and lots of Kiwi mainstream headlines, now Emirates Team New Zealand (ETNZ) surprisingly revealed that after an analysis of the Protocol and the changes that had already been made, or signalled, that the document was reasonable and the Cup considered to be quite winnable by the team.

 

Sail-World's America's Cup Editor Richard Gladwell reports in detail, but it seems that after blowing off like Mount Vesuvius initially that with a few more brain cells on the job, the Kiwis now realise that the Challenger of Record, the Hamilton Island Yacht Club has negotiated a reasonable Protocol for the 2017 event.

 

ctd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"the public is waning on the idea after the new set of rules was made public"

 

that, after all those Herbie fools like PJM (bloviating about 2 boats for OR), Tasker (they're trying to destroy ETNZ), Lester (the conspiracies are all true, they always have been) and Lewis (best to just start our own regatta instead, screw competing in the AC ever again) and Dana J (whatever thought momentarily enters her Protocol-expert little birdbrain at any given moment) :

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/nbnat/307963014-key-urges-team-new-zealand-sponsors-to-step-up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Lasting truth?

 

If TUSA would just try running a sports event first and foremost, abide by the deed, stick to their own protocol, not try to change the definition of sailing fundamentals like 'wind speed', not put their paid employees in untenable conflict of interest situations, cut the abuse of their opposition, not renege on hosting agreements and try not to cheat quite so often perhaps there'd be fewer issues raised?

 

Just maybe?

 

The only thing for certain is that you'll take this to your grave, along with Herbie :)

 

Just in case you're wondering, take solace in the fact that the world is against you, at least the AC world.

Well...this is all going well. Just like old times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

You're a lost cause.

 

 

Have fun with AC35, or there is always the Wednesday night beer can series.

Amazing!! Just like Lil Jimmy, someone presents the "Other side" of the story, with points you can't refute, so you resort to the personal attacks. I think its you that is the lost cause. And its Thursday night races, not Wednesday nights.

 

Like I said - you think grumpy was not at all negative during AC34 you're a lost cause - he even earned a gag order, or have you forgotten that ?

 

OK, whatever, thursday nights - please enjoy them.

Are you able (And I'm not being sarcastic here) I'd just like someone to tell me 3 things that were "Negative" and unwarranted or untrue about what GD said. And not just, "I think he was so he was". 3 things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"the public is waning on the idea after the new set of rules was made public"

 

that, after all those Herbie fools like PJM (bloviating about 2 boats for OR), Tasker (they're trying to destroy ETNZ), Lester (the conspiracies are all true, they always have been) and Lewis (best to just start our own regatta instead, screw competing in the AC ever again) and Dana J (whatever thought momentarily enters her Protocol-expert little birdbrain at any given moment) :

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/nbnat/307963014-key-urges-team-new-zealand-sponsors-to-step-up

You really have no idea and don't even seem to be close to getting it. But carry on anyway, your tin foil hat theories are rather hilerious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one of the main problems with the NZ public is they think TNZ is like the All Blacks. NZRFU govern rugby in NZ and that body (through its appointed selectors) pick the squad of players from all over the country. From this sqad, the team that runs on to the paddock is selected.

 

TNZ is not representitive of Yachting New Zealand, it is a private team, with (mostly) private funding governed by an internally chosen Board. TNZ can select who it wants, for whatever event it wants with no reference to the country's sailing governing body. Its not like any other sporting team in NZ, a private team who can do whatever event they chose to compete in. However TNZ tug on the emotions of the Kiwis by infering that is the 'National Team' representing the whole nation, hence it should get Goverment funding (like the Olympicor the ABs). Wake up and realise that this team was set up not by YNZ but a group of individuals to compete in international regattas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming back from sailing. What's new ?............the repetitive sailor's diarrhea.

 

SWS, try Imodium, could work on your brains. Not sure it's strong enough though. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The spin on this forum, mainly from the 2 OR fanboys, is pretty unbelievable and totally irrational. On one hand, GD was a negative influence on the Cup who made no valid points. on the other hand, GD's view of the current protocol proves it is fair. Unbelievable!

 

Consider what GD has said

 

'We found some checks and balances that are not necessarily apparent at first reading. 'Our conclusion is that we can mount a competitive challenge, with a realistic chance of winning the 35th America’s Cup.

Think about it. GD has to raise money. How do you raise money when you are saying that the defender has stacked the deck? He realised he needed to backtrack really fast or else he wouldn't get a cent from anybody. His whole pitch has to rely on the idea that they got so close last time and can win it this time. To say that OR has an even bigger advantage written into the protocol this time around would kill all chance of TNZ raising the money needed.

 

Most people on this forum realised years ago that GD only says things based on gaining an advantage. He plays the game. Anybody who thinks that his comments are based on anything other than what best helps TNZ is dreaming.

 

This protocol is one of the worst ever written. It contains so many things that RC and LE said were totally wrong about what SNG/EB tried to do. It gives OR a big advantage. However, it cannot win them the Cup on its own. For them to win, they need to design and build a boat that's good enough and put together a team that can win races. No matter what advantages they give themselves, they still have race. If one of the other teams comes up with a better boat that OR cannot replicate/better in the time available, then they are stuffed. But make no mistake - the protocol has been written in favour of OR and gives them the very best chance of defending.

 

For the challengers, the choice is to play to those rules or not play at all. And while OR has a big advantage, the challengers know that it doesn't guarantee OR will win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The spin on this forum, mainly from the 2 OR fanboys, is pretty unbelievable and totally irrational. On one hand, GD was a negative influence on the Cup who made no valid points. on the other hand, GD's view of the current protocol proves it is fair. Unbelievable!

 

Consider what GD has said

 

 

'We found some checks and balances that are not necessarily apparent at first reading. 'Our conclusion is that we can mount a competitive challenge, with a realistic chance of winning the 35th Americas Cup.

Think about it. GD has to raise money. How do you raise money when you are saying that the defender has stacked the deck? He realised he needed to backtrack really fast or else he wouldn't get a cent from anybody. His whole pitch has to rely on the idea that they got so close last time and can win it this time. To say that OR has an even bigger advantage written into the protocol this time around would kill all chance of TNZ raising the money needed.

 

Most people on this forum realised years ago that GD only says things based on gaining an advantage. He plays the game. Anybody who thinks that his comments are based on anything other than what best helps TNZ is dreaming.

 

This protocol is one of the worst ever written. It contains so many things that RC and LE said were totally wrong about what SNG/EB tried to do. [it gives OR a big advantage. However, it cannot win them the Cup on its own. For them to win, they need to design and build a boat that's good enough and put together a team that can win races. No matter what advantages they give themselves, they still have race. If one of the other teams comes up with a better boat that OR cannot replicate/better in the time available, then they are stuffed. But make no mistake - the protocol has been written in favour of OR and gives them the very best chance of defending.

 

For the challengers, the choice is to play to those rules or not play at all. And while OR has a big advantage, the challengers know that it doesn't guarantee OR will win.]

And how different this is from any other AC since the begining?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Oracle was intended, was designed to, foil from day one; complete and utter BS, that first boat was totally Michael Mouse ... or perhaps you forget, as the US fan boys are apt to do: like we won all those wars we started, ha! Oracle 1 flexed like a flacid phallus, foils that snapped, immediately, utterly stupid steering helm setup, arsed over because of catch up fear and egos that got ahead of reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Protocol v1 was biased, the defender and the CoR concentrated all the power, the new amended one is much better.

However we still don't know the venue, the AC62 rule can be modified after being known, but no competitor will attack the event they try to sell to their sponsors and they will obviously tell publicly they have a chance to win.

 

When they get their sponsors the tune will change and be more agressive to defend their rights.

 

The OR fan boys rethoric, hatred campaign against the kiwis, GD character assassination, is despicable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Oracle was intended, was designed to, foil from day one; complete and utter BS, that first boat was totally Michael Mouse ... or perhaps you forget, as the US fan boys are apt to do: like we won all those wars we started, ha! Oracle 1 flexed like a flacid phallus, foils that snapped, immediately, utterly stupid steering helm setup, arsed over because of catch up fear and egos that got ahead of reality.

Who ended up winning AC 34?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Len Brown strangely silent on America’s Cup

 

Monday, 16 June 2014, 1:14 pm

Press Release: Cameron Brewer

Len Brown strangely silent on America’s Cup, more interested in NRL Nines

Auckland Councillor Cameron Brewer says it’s great news that the economic impact of the NRL Nines exceeded expectations, but while the Mayor is today talking up the ‘value of major events to this city,’ he remains strangely silent on Team New Zealand’s plight.

 

“Nine months ago the Auckland Mayor was down with the crowds at Shed 10 cheering on Team New Zealand and enthusiastically talking up the benefits to Auckland of the San Francisco regatta and coverage not to mention the huge economic boost to Auckland if the Cup ever returned.

 

“Back in September, he was all thumbs up about the America’s Cup, waxing lyrical about its positive impact on Auckland, and getting all prematurely excited about its return to the Viaduct.

“I’m not necessarily advocating for more Government money, I just want to know if the Mayor still thinks an America’s Cup challenge is important to Auckland, and what his view has been to the Government in recent days.

 

“He is now conspicuously silent when Team New Zealand need him most. He’s busy singing from the rooftops about the $9.3m economic return of the NRL Nines, but plenty will be thinking what about the $529m the 2003 America’s Cup brought New Zealand?

 

“Last year ATEED was boasting Auckland as the “spiritual home” of the America’s Cup in New Zealand. It spent over $1 million of ratepayers’ cash showcasing Auckland in San Francisco including funding 18 people to attend last year’s America’s Cup. Now they too are strangely AWOL despite all their hype and investment little more than nine months ago.

“ATEED and the Mayor were talking up the global audience the America’s Cup provides and the huge opportunities for key Auckland sectors. They were keen to drive home its positive impact on the region’s exports and international tourism. It was a massive deal for Auckland nine months ago, but supposedly it’s not worth any advocacy now. Talk about being a fair-weather friend.

 

 

 

“Grant Dalton would’ve been hoping the Mayor was on his side when it comes to buying a bit more time. Where’s all his talk about the America’s Cup economic benefits now? Why did the Mayor believe it was essential for ATEED to spend $1m and send 18 people to San Francisco last year, but is seemingly not prepared to beat the drum for Auckland now?

 

“I call on the Mayor to make his position clear, whatever that may now be. He owes it to Team New Zealand, and to Auckland’s ratepayers who have invested millions around the America’s Cup over nearly 20 years. As Auckland’s number one cheerleader, he now needs to come out of hiding on this issue. There’s a lot at stake either way,” says Cameron Brewer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Protocol v1 was biased, the defender and the CoR concentrated all the power, the new amended one is much better.

 

The OR fan boys rethoric, hatred campaign against the kiwis, GD character assassination, is despicable.

:)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This protocol is one of the worst ever written.

You maintained, screamed bloody murder, the same circuitous bullshit when the AC34 Protocol was released.And yet ETNZ damn nearly won it in the end.

 

As GD has tried to explain with facts to you thick heads, this time it is even more winnable.

 

Btw, your hero EB has f'-all to do with any of that, your personal pain-point notwithstanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Grumpy has unfortunately overplayed the kiwi underdog versus the dastardly American billionaire villain one two many times.

 

It does not matter what the public thinks of ETNZ, GD has shit in the well and because of that the press has turned against him.

The press ultimately decides how the voters feel and the politicians know that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+ 100

 

ETNZ needs to man up, express confidence, be a positive step-up-to-a-fair-fight we-can-beat-these-guys force.

 

Nega-navitism digs deeper into a personal, conspiratorial hell hole. The 'culture' has a major flaw, an ugly element that is still being grossly emphasized instead of de-emphasized.

 

IF that new board has any wisdom they will identify and weed out the noxious parts, sooner rather than later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Grumpy has unfortunately overplayed the kiwi underdog versus the dastardly American billionaire villain one two many times.

 

It does not matter what the public thinks of ETNZ, GD has shit in the well and because of that the press has turned against him.

The press ultimately decides how the voters feel and the politicians know that.

 

He's way too far down the road to instantaneously backtrack 180 degrees and have any credibility just because he's got a cash flow crisis. .

 

Not sure how he could miss this coming at him at full speed. Must have been counting paper clips.

 

If it ends in peril in two weeks time the one thing we can be sure of - it will all be OTUSA's fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The press ultimately decides how the voters feel and the politicians know that.

I remember the US press on an aircraft carrier reporting GW Bush winner of the Irak war. He was gone at the next elections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The press ultimately decides how the voters feel and the politicians know that.

I remember the US press on an aircraft carrier reporting GW Bush winner of the Irak war. He was gone at the next elections.

That's a bit disingenuous, TC. :)

 

He served two terms of 4 years and could only have been elected twice - which he was.

 

Some would say, "Thank God for small mercies", no doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't confuse the TC with facts.

 

What he meant to say was that if frogie canadians could have voted in US, Bush would not have been reelected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As GD has tried to explain with facts to you thick heads, this time it is even more winnable.

"Even more winnable" is not what he said. Just "winnable".

 

Would you like to compare and contrast the AC34 and 35 protocols and explain the factors that make it "even more winnable" for challengers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Oracle was intended, was designed to, foil from day one; complete and utter BS

Nobody has said that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

So Oracle was intended, was designed to, foil from day one; complete and utter BS

Nobody has said that.

 

 

Only SWS and aldo, plus others too I'm sure - to lazy to look. Also there have been other claims that M&M designed the rule so as NOT to foil; M&M have honestly denied that claim. Oracle were pitiful in those early days. Not saying they didn't get their act together later after frantically studying ETNZ ... but they were a fucking embarrassment earlier. A bit like me with some of my foil designs. If it's embarrassment, I know what I'm talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Just admit it people, for 3 years, what GD said was NOT negative.

 

You can't be honest.

 

Is that why the NZ public is so supportive ?

 

How about the "hysterical" NZ media ? They sure helped the situation eh ?

The public ARE supportive of the team, thats why they got the welcome home that they did. but they are NOT supportive of the AC, there's a difference. We feel Oracle have stacked the rules so much its unwinnable. Granted thats probably because of a few reporters (Dana Johannsen) from the Herald. There's always gonna be haters, like there are haters in America because there was hardly any Americans on the American boat. I bet if you polled America on OTUSA the majority wouldn't even know who they are let alone support them. But one of the biggest reasons is that the AC is "A rich mans game" And the richest man in New Zealand is something like 152nd on the Forbes list. We are a sailing nation, a sporting nation, but the AC isn't about sailing anymore its about who has the biggest wallet. Thats why the New Zealand support for the Americas Cup is fading, but the Support for the team, for the most part is still strong

The polls run in NZ show the public are NOT supportive. 80% of kiwis say no to govt funding.

 

SC Clarke. You are as bad a spin doctor as Dalton and Barker.

 

TV One and the herald ran polls. The newspapers are full of many people against ETNZ. Even Crew.org.nz has a poll in its forums with most sailors saying NO!. Yip even the sailors are not supportive

 

You and your mates are just plain old bullshitters talking up rubbish to make yourself seem important.

 

When you make bullshit stateemts like that. Back it up with facts.

 

80% of kiwis area against this. The poll's have a degree of accuracy of 3%.

 

As for the turn out when they arrived back. 5000 people is 0.02% of the population. And many where there for something to do as opposed to outright supporters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think 80% of the population are against ETNZ, I think they are against sailing in the AC, and I can see why when you read some of the drivel here. Regrettably the AC is seen as an event that isn't run fairly and as a result there is no desire to be seen to compete in it.

 

I do not think that this public perception of unfairness is helped when you look back at the history of the cup, the number of times things have ended up being settled in court and the latest lot of cheating.

 

If you were a large corporation looking to sponsor an event would you sponsor it, if that is what the public perception is? Hardly good for your brand.

 

and just in case any of the fan boys get too excited and think I am picking on their team, I am not I think all the teams over time have been involved in unsporting behaviour and rule manipulation.

 

So is it time to clean the image of the cup before no one decides its worth entering?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This protocol is one of the worst ever written.

You maintained, screamed bloody murder, the same circuitous bullshit when the AC34 Protocol was released.And yet ETNZ damn nearly won it in the end.

 

As GD has tried to explain with facts to you thick heads, this time it is even more winnable.

 

Btw, your hero EB has f'-all to do with any of that, your personal pain-point notwithstanding.

It's funny how whenever you are on the back foot, you come up with something to do with EB. Most of the others understood that i never supported EB in any way whatsoever. All i ever stated was that what he was doing wasn't as evil as RC and LE were making out. Plus, of course, there was your claim that if RC and LE tried any of the things they accused EB of doing, you would turn on them. Yet now there are a whole host of articles pointing out that they are doing exactly what they were against EB doing, you simply make excuses. Yet all this has done is proven the points I made all along, namely that LE is no better than EB. They always did have a shared vision and the last Cup and the next one are just an extension of that vision. All the war between them was really about is who was going to implement that vision.

 

You keep shouting about the fact that as ETNZ pushed OR so close, it proved that everything was fair. Maybe there is another way of looking at it - OR had such an advantage that even with smashing a boat and having a fraction of the testing time of ETNZ, they still managed to win. How? First, they used their knowledge gained from the big wing and designed a better wing than ETNZ. They already knew you didn't need LET. Second, they clearly better understood the aerodynamic issues than ETNZ and that would have been gained from DOGzilla. I still believe that a winged cat gave OR a big head start, which was one of the main reasons why they chose the boats (although i say thank heavens they did, even nif they were stacking the deck). Imagine how far ahead of ETNZ they would have been if they had sailed a full program.

 

Oh, I nearly forgot. We have also learned something else, in case people didn't know already. You are not prepared to condemn OR for doing the things you attacked Alinghi for. You simply make excuses. All your bluster was simply that. You have no interest in anything other than ensuring your team is on top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 well said Simon and I think it applies to a number of others here who were very quick on the attack back in the day but now seem to believe OR, LE et al are immune from any criticism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course AC34 can be criticized on some aspects, and obviously AC35 will not (can't possibly) match all opinions and preferences by all people for how they themselves might arrange things.

 

But on the subject of fairness one can make a strong argument that independent race management was implemented well in AC34 and looks to be further cemented for AC35.

 

Si: On the subject of OR racing in the Qualifier series, well if you continue to ignore all the facts pointing out the truly significant differences between what EB had proposed for AC33 versus what is in the AC35 Protocol, well since your head is so stuck in the sand then it's not worth debating the point with you, you won't ever see it. Much more importantly, listen to what GD has to say about it. He is ~in favor~ of it.

 

Dogwatch: Yes, GD started with the Protocol and AC35 being "at least as winnable as last time." But when prompted further he came back with "Yes, you're right. It's more winnable than last time." It was at almost exactly 30:00 of the 40:00 recording at SailWorld - guaranteed. That broader subject was the basic point that GD set out to straighten the reporters (and so hopefully the public) out on but perhaps that all went completely over your head. He went through a long list of reasons to support that basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dogwatch: Yes, GD started with the Protocol and AC35 being "at least as winnable as last time." But when prompted further he came back with "Yes, you're right. It's more winnable than last time." It was at almost exactly 30:00 of the 40:00 recording at SailWorld - guaranteed. That broader subject was the basic point that GD set out to straighten the reporters (and so hopefully the public) out on but perhaps that all went completely over your head. He went through a long list of reasons to support that basis.

 

Nice smokescreen. The piece under discussion related to the protocol. GD remarked that at the start of AC34, OR had a major design lead.

 

So I'd ask again. What elements in the AC35 protocol are more favourable to challengers versus AC34?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course AC34 can be criticized on some aspects, and obviously AC35 will not (can't possibly) match all opinions and preferences by all people for how they themselves might arrange things.

 

But on the subject of fairness one can make a strong argument that independent race management was implemented well in AC34 and looks to be further cemented for AC35.

 

Si: On the subject of OR racing in the Qualifier series, well if you continue to ignore all the facts pointing out the truly significant differences between what EB had proposed for AC33 versus what is in the AC35 Protocol, well since your head is so stuck in the sand then it's not worth debating the point with you, you won't ever see it. Much more importantly, listen to what GD has to say about it. He is ~in favor~ of it.

 

Dogwatch: Yes, GD started with the Protocol and AC35 being "at least as winnable as last time." But when prompted further he came back with "Yes, you're right. It's more winnable than last time." It was at almost exactly 30:00 of the 40:00 recording at SailWorld - guaranteed. That broader subject was the basic point that GD set out to straighten the reporters (and so hopefully the public) out on but perhaps that all went completely over your head. He went through a long list of reasons to support that basis.

 

With mutual consent there is nothing to stop the CoR and defenders from agreeing to have the defenders participating in whatever the two sides are willing to agree to, and there is nothing forcing challengers to participate in such "unfairness". In this case, the challengers likely see advantages to them, at least in the context of compromise, to having the defenders compete with them in the lead up events, PARTICULARLY since the defenders will have limited/no ability to materially impact the Challenger selection (the best challenger will have a 99.99% chance of advancing without influence by the defender). It will, having the defenders participating, provide the challengers with more exposure for sponsors, and they ALL want the America's Cup to be more of a regular, commercial sporting event. All this pissing about the "unfairness" of that is absurd, the challengers see the whole protocol being a reasonable assemblage of compromises, or else they can step up with a DoG challenge.

 

The biggest reason for a grip I can see with this protocol is related to only having the Top-4 challengers advance to the final venue. To me, I could see that undermining funding abilities for some teams. There is also some support for x-lots' concerns over the defender having some advantage WRT practice on Boat 2 due to transportation/scheduling. The other issues are either unavoidable (nailing down the venues) or have decent rationale (1-boat/2-boats, fees, participation in other regattas, etc.) and do not represent any "unfairness" on the par to of the defender.

 

Some of you may not LIKE that the Defender will be participating in the lead up events with their AC62 class boat, and that is fine, but it does not represent unfairness, and it does have rationale that is supported by the challengers, at least on the basis of compromise, from all we have heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this pissing about the "unfairness" of that is absurd, the challengers see the whole protocol being a reasonable assemblage of compromises, or else they can step up with a DoG challenge.

 

Challengers plural? The only challenger with the option of a DoG challenge is the CoR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Dogwatch: Yes, GD started with the Protocol and AC35 being "at least as winnable as last time." But when prompted further he came back with "Yes, you're right. It's more winnable than last time." It was at almost exactly 30:00 of the 40:00 recording at SailWorld - guaranteed. That broader subject was the basic point that GD set out to straighten the reporters (and so hopefully the public) out on but perhaps that all went completely over your head. He went through a long list of reasons to support that basis.

 

Nice smokescreen. The piece under discussion related to the protocol. GD remarked that at the start of AC34, OR had a major design lead.

 

So I'd ask again. What elements in the AC35 protocol are more favourable to defenders versus AC34?

 

They (the Challengers) will have stronger position for attracting funding with the guarantee to be allocated a venue for ACWS/Round-Robin competition in their home waters. They have a class rule that significantly lowers the importance of the massive resources of Oracle that could overwhelm the other teams with design/research . . . limiting the main areas of fundamental impact on performance. The rule also makes the logistical costs dramatically lower. These factors make it more possible for a team with less design/research $$$ but exceptional sailing to be able to compete . . . . These changes certainly do not help the Defenders on a competitive standpoint.

 

Another thing to remember, the original AC34 protocol was also going to involve the AC-Class boats going up against the challenger AC-Class boats prior to the final, with the plans for them to be introduced in the final season of the ACWS leading up to the LV & AC, so it is not as though this protocol has introduced something "unfair" that was not in AC34, as well. True, the ACWS did not introduce the one-point lead potential last time, but I'm not sure how much that is a positive or negative to the defenders (I tend to think that it may be more likely that a challenger goes into the AC with the one-point lead than either the defender doing so, or neither team doing so if a 3rd team were to win that point but not make it to the final).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Dogwatch: Yes, GD started with the Protocol and AC35 being "at least as winnable as last time." But when prompted further he came back with "Yes, you're right. It's more winnable than last time." It was at almost exactly 30:00 of the 40:00 recording at SailWorld - guaranteed. That broader subject was the basic point that GD set out to straighten the reporters (and so hopefully the public) out on but perhaps that all went completely over your head. He went through a long list of reasons to support that basis.

 

Nice smokescreen. The piece under discussion related to the protocol. GD remarked that at the start of AC34, OR had a major design lead.

 

So I'd ask again. What elements in the AC35 protocol are more favourable to challengers versus AC34?

 

I agree that much of what GD listed was more about his own team's better experience and (potential) financial strength, than about differences in the Protocol. But otoh he did say that the AC62 Class Rule changes ETNZ wanted have been incorporated, and that the recent change to how the Arbitration Panel members are selected was a good step forward.

 

Again: It's not like ETNZ didn't damn nearly beat Oracle last time, even without the relatively better strengths they will have going into this next one. Am just not buying a 'stacked deck' argument, except for on a couple minor points that are arguable: possible extra time on an AC62 for the Defender; the possible disaster insurance benefit of having a B boat to turn to; and (hopefully this will change if there's a call for it) only 4 Challs making it to the Match venue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw, looking at Article 35.3 (b ) it apparently is true, what both GD and JS said about the B boat. Once OR starts the Match, they too can't change boats no matter what happens.

 

Sorry if that was already made clear to others, it was still a niggling question to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw, looking at Article 35.3 (b ) it apparently is true, what both GD and JS said about the B boat. Once OR starts the Match, they too can't change boats no matter what happens.

 

Sorry if that was already made clear to others, it was still a niggling question to me.

Thanks for that SR - I hadn't delved into the clauses on that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ETNZ will be back in AC35.

 

You don't lose the Melbourne Cup by a nose and not return in the next run.

 

Besides, no Kiwi will stand down when there's a bunch of Aussies in the mix for a win. For fear of never hearing the end of it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ Thanks for the thanks. Will paste that clause tomorrow if nobody can (please) beat me to it.

 

^ Agreed. Faye or someone will just have to reach a little deeper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"But Dalton is unable to finalise any deals until the host venues for both the Cup match and qualifying series are known."

 

Why? He was able to last time. "any deals"?

 

I'm not saying it's easy to nail down full funding, and I even admit this is Dalton's most valid concern, but this story seems to just eat what is given them without asking "why?".

 

I'm guessing we are going to know things MUCH sooner than the far out timeline that has been presented. My strong guess is that one lesson learned from AC34 is that it is better to under-sell and over-deliver, which was NOT the case, by anyone's estimates, for AC34. I would hope they have the main venue nailed down by the end of summer, as well as the the first-season schedule for the ACWS.

 

Even if we don't have Cammas/French to commit by then, we will still have at least three venues for the first ACWS season in Europe (Italy, Sweden & England), Australia & New Zealand, the US, and possibly China. There would be more possible venues than can be accommodated in the first season, so hopefully they can go ahead and run up the first season schedule so all the teams can benefit, with those teams venues that can't be fit in scheduled for 2016.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

"But Dalton is unable to finalise any deals until the host venues for both the Cup match and qualifying series are known."

 

Why? He was able to last time. "any deals"?

 

I'm not saying it's easy to nail down full funding, and I even admit this is Dalton's most valid concern, but this story seems to just eat what is given them without asking "why?".

 

I'm guessing we are going to know things MUCH sooner than the far out timeline that has been presented. My strong guess is that one lesson learned from AC34 is that it is better to under-sell and over-deliver, which was NOT the case, by anyone's estimates, for AC34. I would hope they have the main venue nailed down by the end of summer, as well as the the first-season schedule for the ACWS.

 

Even if we don't have Cammas/French to commit by then, we will still have at least three venues for the first ACWS season in Europe (Italy, Sweden & England), Australia & New Zealand, the US, and possibly China. There would be more possible venues than can be accommodated in the first season, so hopefully they can go ahead and run up the first season schedule so all the teams can benefit, with those teams venues that can't be fit in scheduled for 2016.

For sure the first lesson learnt from AC 34 is not to oversell the event.

The second lesson would be to better chose the venues in order to help potential challengers.

The third, that they forgot to learn, was to make the AC45 foil as soon as now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

"But Dalton is unable to finalise any deals until the host venues for both the Cup match and qualifying series are known."

 

Why? He was able to last time. "any deals"?

 

I'm not saying it's easy to nail down full funding, and I even admit this is Dalton's most valid concern, but this story seems to just eat what is given them without asking "why?".

 

I'm guessing we are going to know things MUCH sooner than the far out timeline that has been presented. My strong guess is that one lesson learned from AC34 is that it is better to under-sell and over-deliver, which was NOT the case, by anyone's estimates, for AC34. I would hope they have the main venue nailed down by the end of summer, as well as the the first-season schedule for the ACWS.

 

Even if we don't have Cammas/French to commit by then, we will still have at least three venues for the first ACWS season in Europe (Italy, Sweden & England), Australia & New Zealand, the US, and possibly China. There would be more possible venues than can be accommodated in the first season, so hopefully they can go ahead and run up the first season schedule so all the teams can benefit, with those teams venues that can't be fit in scheduled for 2016.

For sure the first lesson learnt from AC 34 is not to oversell the event.

The second lesson would be to better chose the venues in order to help potential challengers.

The third, that they forgot to learn, was to make the AC45 foil as soon as now.

 

I have never agreed with you more . . . on all accounts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

So I'd ask again. What elements in the AC35 protocol are more favourable to defenders versus AC34?

 

They (the Challengers) will have stronger position for attracting funding with the guarantee to be allocated a venue for ACWS/Round-Robin competition in their home waters. They have a class rule that significantly lowers the importance of the massive resources of Oracle that could overwhelm the other teams with design/research . . . limiting the main areas of fundamental impact on performance. The rule also makes the logistical costs dramatically lower. These factors make it more possible for a team with less design/research $$$ but exceptional sailing to be able to compete . . . . These changes certainly do not help the Defenders on a competitive standpoint.

 

Another thing to remember, the original AC34 protocol was also going to involve the AC-Class boats going up against the challenger AC-Class boats prior to the final, with the plans for them to be introduced in the final season of the ACWS leading up to the LV & AC, so it is not as though this protocol has introduced something "unfair" that was not in AC34, as well. True, the ACWS did not introduce the one-point lead potential last time, but I'm not sure how much that is a positive or negative to the defenders (I tend to think that it may be more likely that a challenger goes into the AC with the one-point lead than either the defender doing so, or neither team doing so if a 3rd team were to win that point but not make it to the final).

 

Let's unpick that.

 

Challengers do not have "a guarantee to be allocated a venue for ACWS/Round-Robin competition in their home waters." Read 25.3. They may apply, no later than the end of entry period, for an ACWS event. They have to provide (another) performance bond of unspecified amount. There is no suggestion at all that competitors can apply to hold qualifiers. Read 27.3.

 

Lower cost class rule, please read the question, we are talking about the protocol.

 

ACTS in the original AC34 protocol, please read the question, which was about the claim that the AC35 protocol improves the chances of challengers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if we don't have Cammas/French to commit by then,

 

Entry closes Aug 8th (15.1). 15.2 allows late entries at defender's discretion. You can make the assumption late entries would be permitted. I wouldn't be so sure, given RC's direction that light-weights shall no longer darken his door.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Even if we don't have Cammas/French to commit by then,

 

Entry closes Aug 8th (15.1). 15.2 allows late entries at defender's discretion. You can make the assumption late entries would be permitted. I wouldn't be so sure, given RC's direction that light-weights shall no longer darken his door.

Hmmm. Not sure I'd include Cammas/French as light-weights, even if they struggle to find $3 million in a hurry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, strike out light-weight, substitute financially challenged. Has anything been heard from the French challenge since the announcement back in December?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's is good news that they are still interested in maintaining their connection but the old pen is far from the check as they are really keeping their options open .

 

" We are working closely with them with the objective of renewing our sponsorship as soon as the team is in a position to finalise arrangements regarding the next campaign," said Boutros Boutros, Emirates' divisional senior vice president, corporate communications, marketing and brand. "

 

Was Boutros in politics previously by any chance ? Does anyone have a clue as to when arrangements will be " finalized " as he puts it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, strike out light-weight, substitute financially challenged. Has anything been heard from the French challenge since the announcement back in December?

Only once, quite recently, singing the praises of the Fair Prot (they are quick learners, at least)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's is good news that they are still interested in maintaining their connection but the old pen is far from the check as they are really keeping their options open .

 

" We are working closely with them with the objective of renewing our sponsorship as soon as the team is in a position to finalise arrangements regarding the next campaign," said Boutros Boutros, Emirates' divisional senior vice president, corporate communications, marketing and brand. "

 

Was Boutros in politics previously by any chance ? Does anyone have a clue as to when arrangements will be " finalized " as he puts it ?

Well, that would be up to RC, would it not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A big push of PR. If Barker does not earn as much as Spithall then he is not charging enough or ETNZ is not paying enough for a winning skipper. Nice to see Shoeby o TV trying to mop up the mess as usual. Is there a PR person in ETNZ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But unfortunately total bullshit. Why do they keep coughing up this line about having the greatest design team in the world. Christ, they haven't won anything in 14 years! And they designed a complete dog of a boat last time, something that was totally outclassed by a much better boat.

 

Deano should actually get some credit for doing so well early in the AC match in what was really a crap boat. I don't care if ETNZ learned to foil first or taught Oracle how to foil or gybe or roll tack, at the end of the day their boat was a design fuckup, plain and simple. LET that wasn't necessary, no tab when it was needed, fucking silly pie warmers. And all those wires under the hull creating aero drag. What a joke.

 

Dalts, you don't have the best design team in the world, you don't even have the second best or third best or fourth best. And I'll wait and see what Artemis and Cammas announce before I decide whether you get awarded 5th or 6th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

So I'd ask again. What elements in the AC35 protocol are more favourable to defenders versus AC34?

 

They (the Challengers) will have stronger position for attracting funding with the guarantee to be allocated a venue for ACWS/Round-Robin competition in their home waters. They have a class rule that significantly lowers the importance of the massive resources of Oracle that could overwhelm the other teams with design/research . . . limiting the main areas of fundamental impact on performance. The rule also makes the logistical costs dramatically lower. These factors make it more possible for a team with less design/research $$$ but exceptional sailing to be able to compete . . . . These changes certainly do not help the Defenders on a competitive standpoint.

 

Another thing to remember, the original AC34 protocol was also going to involve the AC-Class boats going up against the challenger AC-Class boats prior to the final, with the plans for them to be introduced in the final season of the ACWS leading up to the LV & AC, so it is not as though this protocol has introduced something "unfair" that was not in AC34, as well. True, the ACWS did not introduce the one-point lead potential last time, but I'm not sure how much that is a positive or negative to the defenders (I tend to think that it may be more likely that a challenger goes into the AC with the one-point lead than either the defender doing so, or neither team doing so if a 3rd team were to win that point but not make it to the final).

 

Let's unpick that.

 

Challengers do not have "a guarantee to be allocated a venue for ACWS/Round-Robin competition in their home waters." Read 25.3. They may apply, no later than the end of entry period, for an ACWS event. They have to provide (another) performance bond of unspecified amount. There is no suggestion at all that competitors can apply to hold qualifiers. Read 27.3.

 

Lower cost class rule, please read the question, we are talking about the protocol.

 

ACTS in the original AC34 protocol, please read the question, which was about the claim that the AC35 protocol improves the chances of challengers.

 

Maybe I'm wrong, but my impression is that the challengers are considered to have the right to host an event, but I admit maybe I'm reading more into it. Still, my bet is that the organizers WANT the challengers to hold events, as they know it will help to secure more challengers and more public interest - more money.

 

Actually, there are elements of the class that are integral to the protocol. The number of boats, the number of foils, the number of wings, the number of crew. The protocol and class rule absolutely were developed together, not in vacuums.

 

I may be wrong, but I thought you had complained that having the defender compete with the challengers in AC Class boats would represent a negative to the challengers on a competitive stand point. If I'm wrong about that, sorry. But if that has been your contention, all I'm saying is that the AC34 protocol also had that as an element, with the AC72s originally planned to be integrated into the last season of the ACWS, rather than the AC45s. It's just that it never happened, as they decided after the issuance of the initial protocol, to just stick with the AC45s in the ACWS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dalts, you don't have the best design team in the world, you don't even have the second best or third best or fourth best. And I'll wait and see what Artemis and Cammas announce before I decide whether you get awarded 5th or 6th.

 

How well did your second-, third- and fourth-best design teams perform in the last three America's Cups?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the movie star rock star! :)

 

That really was a nice segment on 3 News TV, well done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys. Head down, working away. Trying to keep life's S/N tolerable. And enjoying being on the water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Dalts, you don't have the best design team in the world, you don't even have the second best or third best or fourth best. And I'll wait and see what Artemis and Cammas announce before I decide whether you get awarded 5th or 6th.

 

How well did your second-, third- and fourth-best design teams perform in the last three America's Cups?

 

None of those design teams were there, they are all new. The old Artemis design team is long gone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I'm the 3rd best golfer in the world, might even enter a PGA tournament someday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people on this forum realised years ago that GD only says things based on gaining an advantage. He plays the game. Anybody who thinks that his comments are based on anything other than what best helps TNZ is dreaming.

 

Only saying things that gain an advantage and avoiding saying what results in disadvantage are two different things and I'm not certain "GD only says things based on gaining an advantage" bears scrutiny.

 

When he criticised EB's AC33 protocol, in a process that was likely to (and did) result in ETNZ sitting out AC33, how did that gain ETNZ advantage? How did alienating a major AC player, previously helpful to ETNZ, gain ETNZ advantage?

 

How did criticism of AC72 costs gain ETNZ advantage?

 

And so on. I believe much of the time, shocking as the concept might be, he is actually saying what he thinks. I'm not so naive as to believe he'd continue to do so if he perceived that to disadvantage his team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Btw, looking at Article 35.3 (b ) it apparently is true, what both GD and JS said about the B boat. Once OR starts the Match, they too can't change boats no matter what happens.

 

Sorry if that was already made clear to others, it was still a niggling question to me.

Thanks for that SR - I hadn't delved into the clauses on that point.

35.3. Limits on Hulls and Cross Beams:
(a) The Defender shall not Launch more than two (2) pairs of Hulls
and two (2) pairs of Cross Beams, provided that:
(i) any second pair of Hulls is built from the same Hull mould(s)
as its first pair of Hulls;
(ii) any modification to the first pair of Hulls shall not exceed
twenty per cent. (20%) of the Original Hull Surface;
(iii) any modification to the second pair of Hulls shall not exceed
twenty per cent. (20%) of the Original Hull Surface of its first
pair of Hulls; and
(iv) any modification to a Cross Beam shall not exceed fifty per
cent. (50%) of the original mass of the Cross Beam when it
was Launched.
( b ) In the event that the Defender Launches two (2) pairs of Hulls
and two (2) pairs of Cross Beams in accordance with Article
35.3(a), the Defender shall race the first pairs of Hulls and Cross
Beams that it Launched in the America’s Cup Qualifiers and in the
Match, except that:
(i) if either or both of the first pair of Hulls and/or either or both of
the first pair of Cross Beams are damaged:
(A) prior to four (4) days before the first scheduled race day
of the America’s Cup Qualifiers and the
Measurement Committee determines that the damage
cannot be repaired in time for the first pair of Hulls and
first pair of Cross Beams to be sailed four (4) days prior
to the first scheduled race day of the America’s Cup
Qualifiers;
( B ) within four (4) days of the first scheduled race day of the
America’s Cup Qualifiers, or thereafter, and the
Measurement Committee determines that the damage
cannot be repaired in time for the first pair of Hulls and
first pair of Cross Beams to be sailed the next day;
© prior to four (4) days before the first scheduled race day
of the Match and the Measurement Committee
determines that the damage cannot be repaired in time
for the first pair of Hulls and first pair of Cross Beams to
be sailed four (4) days prior to the first scheduled race
day of the Match; or
(D) within four (4) days prior to the first scheduled race day
of the Match and the Measurement Committee
determines that the damage cannot be repaired in time
for the first pair of Hulls and first pair of Cross Beams to
be sailed the next day; and
(ii) the damage was not intentionally caused by the Defender,
the Defender may race the second pairs of Hulls and/or Cross
Beams (or any combination thereof) that it Launched.
© A Challenger shall not Launch more than one (1) pair of Hulls and one
(1) pair of Cross Beams, provided that:
(i) any modification to the pair of Hulls shall not exceed twenty
per cent. (20%) of the Original Hull Surface; and
(ii) any modification to a Cross Beam shall not exceed fifty per
cent. (50%) of the original mass of the Cross Beam when it
was Launched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. The rules address either within 4 days prior, or else before. Nothing allows a change once the Match has started.

 

Thnx for finding and posting it, the two-boat issue has been far overplayed by some, even in screaming headlines in NZ, who just aren't hip to the actual details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a difference a week makes. No shooting from the hip, and gone from the NZ press, thank fuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a difference a week makes. No shooting from the hip, and gone from the NZ press, thank fuck.

Surprisingly, 'the Press' has not even reported RC's offer of a 2nd boat to the challengers. I guess they have politicians to hang out to dry.

 

http://www.sail-world.com/NZ/Americas-Cup:-Coutts-repeats-offer-of-second-AC62-for-Challengers/123480

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What a difference a week makes. No shooting from the hip, and gone from the NZ press, thank fuck.

Surprisingly, 'the Press' has not even reported RC's offer of a 2nd boat to the challengers. I guess they have politicians to hang out to dry.

 

http://www.sail-world.com/NZ/Americas-Cup:-Coutts-repeats-offer-of-second-AC62-for-Challengers/123480

Maybe that's because it is widely disputed. I spoke to two top people at two teams and neither had received such an offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe that's because it is widely disputed. I spoke to two top people at two teams and neither had received such an offer.

It's on Russell's Facebook page. Silly top people, don't they check there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Maybe that's because it is widely disputed. I spoke to two top people at two teams and neither had received such an offer.

It's on Russell's Facebook page. Silly top people, don't they check there?

Interesting.

 

Seems to me that RC is now worried unfettered training arrangement between challengers might be less desirable for OTUSA than allowing them a second boat. After all, he wouldn't be making such an offer based on 'fairness' now would he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Maybe that's because it is widely disputed. I spoke to two top people at two teams and neither had received such an offer.

It's on Russell's Facebook page. Silly top people, don't they check there?

Ya that kind of detective work is apparently too hard for some .

 

So do you think any of the NZ press will ever admit to jumping to some seriously incorrect conclusions and causing their boy to have a much tougher chore than necessary ?

 

I remember watching those fans living and dieing watching the races and missinform that crowd and others like them really is a shame .

 

And here we were thinking herbiegate was bad .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

What a difference a week makes. No shooting from the hip, and gone from the NZ press, thank fuck.

 

Surprisingly, 'the Press' has not even reported RC's offer of a 2nd boat to the challengers. I guess they have politicians to hang out to dry.

 

http://www.sail-world.com/NZ/Americas-Cup:-Coutts-repeats-offer-of-second-AC62-for-Challengers/123480

Maybe that's because it is widely disputed. I spoke to two top people at two teams and neither had received such an offer.

Apparently those top people are so busy they haven't heard of the internet or Facebook :)

 

They should have called Leweck , hell even he knew about it .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now