Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

~Stingray~~

RC Talks Cup Cats

Recommended Posts

New to me
--

Americas Cup: Adjusting the balance

What are the factors behind this proposal to downscale the boat?

A lot was learned this past February, when Oracle and Artemis were sailing their modified AC45 turbo sport boats on San Francisco Bay. These were launched as design test platforms, but when you look at the video images, we found the boats to be presenting well on camera, which is where most of your sponsorship value lies. We also saw them going basically the same speeds as the AC72s, and this was just after launching them. Plus they have improved maneuverability than the bigger boat.

http://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2015/03/27/americads-cup-adjusting-the-balance/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They look good on TV for the sponsors. Well, I guess that is good enough for me... :angry: Not.

 

The more they monkey with the AC for TV and money, the worse it will get. They're already not holding it on their home waters so why not go all the way? Scrap the DoG and do as you please for money's sake.

 

And I believed in these guys back during the court fight...MM was right and I posthumously owe her an apology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New to me

--

 

Americas Cup: Adjusting the balance

 

What are the factors behind this proposal to downscale the boat?

 

A lot was learned this past February, when Oracle and Artemis were sailing their modified AC45 turbo sport boats on San Francisco Bay. These were launched as design test platforms, but when you look at the video images, we found the boats to be presenting well on camera, which is where most of your sponsorship value lies. We also saw them going basically the same speeds as the AC72s, and this was just after launching them. Plus they have improved maneuverability than the bigger boat.

 

http://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2015/03/27/americas-dcup-adjusting-the-balance/

See, I told you guys it was John Navas's fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They look good on TV for the sponsors. Well, I guess that is good enough for me... :angry: Not.

 

The more they monkey with the AC for TV and money, the worse it will get. They're already not holding it on their home waters so why not go all the way? Scrap the DoG and do as you please for money's sake.

 

And I believed in these guys back during the court fight...MM was right and I posthumously owe her an apology.

It will get worse if they hire Max Mosley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If reducing the cost means a competitive French challenge - which seems to be one of the drivers of the proposed changes - then it is totally worth it. The French team will be awesome, and I have no doubt that BA racing will also benefit relative to the teams with endlessly deep pockets.

The Italians hate it because two (possibly 3) potentially formidable teams that may have been hammpered by funding shortages will no longer be so. But I bet they come around - great racing is way better than one-sided routs as we clearly saw last time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want some of that North Shore stuff you are smoking - the day a low budget team becomes competitive...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From that link

 

"There's probably no question that the bigger boats are grander, and in some ways more spectacular, but one of the great lessons from the last Americas Cup Final was that if we can have close racing amongst good teams, then that becomes more of the focus."

 

Am no huge fan of RC but he does have an uncanny ability to recognize things from a higher perspective than some people closer to the water-action do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New to me

--

 

Americas Cup: Adjusting the balance

 

What are the factors behind this proposal to downscale the boat?

 

A lot was learned this past February, when Oracle and Artemis were sailing their modified AC45 turbo sport boats on San Francisco Bay. These were launched as design test platforms, but when you look at the video images, we found the boats to be presenting well on camera, which is where most of your sponsorship value lies. We also saw them going basically the same speeds as the AC72s, and this was just after launching them. Plus they have improved maneuverability than the bigger boat.

 

http://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2015/03/27/americas-cup-adjusting-the-balance/

Ooh! A properly rererenced scoop to SailingScuttlebutt's exclusive interview with Russell Coutts himself! Stingray, I salute you for your journalistic integrity.

 

Aren't SailingScuttlebutt and Sailing Anarchy engaged in a death match for the domination of Web sailor's hearts and minds? Could be looked at in several dimensions:

  1. total clicks delivered to advertisers (ka-ching!)
  2. evolving into the Web goto for accurate unbiased journalism (meh). No Forums, a newsletter slick landscape, post yer thoughts on Facebook.
  3. or developing the zany anything goes marginally pronographic biggest sailing Website on the planet (see #1 above). Oh, and by the way amassing the largest Forum of somewhat useful information for sailors of any ilk, if they're willing to wade through pages of invective, misdirection, plain stupid people.

Me? #3. It's titillating entertainment not journalism folks, gets more clicks every time. Scot is wise. BTW, I spelled pronographic correctly, look it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From that link

 

"There's probably no question that the bigger boats are grander, and in some ways more spectacular, but one of the great lessons from the last Americas Cup Final was that if we can have close racing amongst good teams, then that becomes more of the focus."

 

Am no huge fan of RC but he does have an uncanny ability to recognize things from a higher perspective than some people closer to the water-action do.

I cannot work out whether you are simply sucked in every time and believe this bullshit, or whether you post it even though you know it is bullshit because you will do anything to justify your team.

 

The thing that made the last Cup was not close racing, because it really wasn't that close. To start with, ETNZ were all over OR. What made it interesting was the comeback. After a while, we all knew that OR should win the races because they were simply faster, but what made it exciting was knowing that one small mistake could lose it for them. And what made that likely was the boats. If they had found their form when ETNZ was leading by a couple of races, it would not have been anywhere near as good. The comeback, as historic as it might have been, would have been as dull as shit if they were sailing 4KSB's. In fact, my non sailing friends who thought it was all so cool thought so because of the boats, with the comeback secondary. If all you need is close racing, lets get boat like they use on the match race tour. That would guarantee close racing.

 

Reduce the spectacle and you reduce the appeal. When i watch the AC45T's sailing around, I don't have that same sense of wonder and they simply don't seem to be anywhere near as on the edge as the 72's. The 72's were beasts that everybody knew were capable of biting their crew really hard. You simply don't get that from the 45's. I consider myself a pretty accomplished (if aging) helm and I wouldn't hesitate to steer one of the foiling 45's if given the chance, However, i would turn down the chance to drive a 72 because the stakes would be too high and I am not sure I would be good enough, making it dangerous for everybody on board. It;s just like with cars. The reason why the very top end works (F1 etc) even though there are probably better series out there is because we all know we would kill ourselves driving an F1 car when most believe they could get lesser cars around a track.

 

All I can hope is that if they do go for smaller boats, they keep them big enough to keep the spectacle. It might just be OK in a 52/3/4 but a 45.......no way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RC's flying circus? Sounds good. I get that. Happy for LE and sponsors to fund it too.

 

But why fuck with the America's Cup?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...The reason why the very top end works (F1 etc) even though there are probably better series out there is because we all know we would kill ourselves driving an F1 car when most believe they could get lesser cars around a track...

 

This.

 

The 72s were all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

From that link

 

"There's probably no question that the bigger boats are grander, and in some ways more spectacular, but one of the great lessons from the last Americas Cup Final was that if we can have close racing amongst good teams, then that becomes more of the focus."

 

Am no huge fan of RC but he does have an uncanny ability to recognize things from a higher perspective than some people closer to the water-action do.

I cannot work out whether you are simply sucked in every time and believe this bullshit, or whether you post it even though you know it is bullshit because you will do anything to justify your team.

 

The thing that made the last Cup was not close racing, because it really wasn't that close. To start with, ETNZ were all over OR. What made it interesting was the comeback. After a while, we all knew that OR should win the races because they were simply faster, but what made it exciting was knowing that one small mistake could lose it for them. And what made that likely was the boats. If they had found their form when ETNZ was leading by a couple of races, it would not have been anywhere near as good. The comeback, as historic as it might have been, would have been as dull as shit if they were sailing 4KSB's. In fact, my non sailing friends who thought it was all so cool thought so because of the boats, with the comeback secondary. If all you need is close racing, lets get boat like they use on the match race tour. That would guarantee close racing.

 

Reduce the spectacle and you reduce the appeal. When i watch the AC45T's sailing around, I don't have that same sense of wonder and they simply don't seem to be anywhere near as on the edge as the 72's. The 72's were beasts that everybody knew were capable of biting their crew really hard. You simply don't get that from the 45's. I consider myself a pretty accomplished (if aging) helm and I wouldn't hesitate to steer one of the foiling 45's if given the chance, However, i would turn down the chance to drive a 72 because the stakes would be too high and I am not sure I would be good enough, making it dangerous for everybody on board. It;s just like with cars. The reason why the very top end works (F1 etc) even though there are probably better series out there is because we all know we would kill ourselves driving an F1 car when most believe they could get lesser cars around a track.

 

All I can hope is that if they do go for smaller boats, they keep them big enough to keep the spectacle. It might just be OK in a 52/3/4 but a 45.......no way

 

I'm 100% confident that a smaller boat can be made just as psychotically dangerous as the ac72s...they've certainly managed to do that in Formula one time and time again.

 

I totally agree that non sailors were drawn in more by the technology and the scale than the comeback once they became aware of the event, but that awareness was largely a direct result of the mainstream media coverage that DID hinge on the comeback. Either way, smaller boats will certainly be less spectacular in person, but IMO it will make little difference on tv, where 99% of the viewers are actually going to watch the thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

New to me

--

 

Americas Cup: Adjusting the balance

 

What are the factors behind this proposal to downscale the boat?

 

A lot was learned this past February, when Oracle and Artemis were sailing their modified AC45 turbo sport boats on San Francisco Bay. These were launched as design test platforms, but when you look at the video images, we found the boats to be presenting well on camera, which is where most of your sponsorship value lies. We also saw them going basically the same speeds as the AC72s, and this was just after launching them. Plus they have improved maneuverability than the bigger boat.

 

http://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2015/03/27/americas-cup-adjusting-the-balance/

Ooh! A properly rererenced scoop to SailingScuttlebutt's exclusive interview with Russell Coutts himself! Stingray, I salute you for your journalistic integrity.

 

Aren't SailingScuttlebutt and Sailing Anarchy engaged in a death match for the domination of Web sailor's hearts and minds? Could be looked at in several dimensions:

 

Yes, SButt gets to get way ahead of the game, compared to SA - as usual.. Probably because of Clean's having no "journalistic integrity" at all. Good catch :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I cannot work out whether you are simply sucked in every time and believe this bullshit, or whether you post it even though you know it is bullshit because you will do anything to justify your team.

 

 

False either/or premise there, but another nice try there you argumentative asshole ;)

 

Keep trying to work it out, you've a very long way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John may have altered the course of AC history with his video - no kidding. People have watched it, and honestly believe they understand the state of play.

 

Purportedly, even Coutts!

 

John - he owes you!

 

For my part, it's not the video that won me over. It was the boat. If you liked the AC72 - I promise you won't be disappointed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

From that link

 

"There's probably no question that the bigger boats are grander, and in some ways more spectacular, but one of the great lessons from the last Americas Cup Final was that if we can have close racing amongst good teams, then that becomes more of the focus."

 

Am no huge fan of RC but he does have an uncanny ability to recognize things from a higher perspective than some people closer to the water-action do.

I cannot work out whether you are simply sucked in every time and believe this bullshit, or whether you post it even though you know it is bullshit because you will do anything to justify your team.

 

The thing that made the last Cup was not close racing, because it really wasn't that close. To start with, ETNZ were all over OR. What made it interesting was the comeback. After a while, we all knew that OR should win the races because they were simply faster, but what made it exciting was knowing that one small mistake could lose it for them. And what made that likely was the boats. If they had found their form when ETNZ was leading by a couple of races, it would not have been anywhere near as good. The comeback, as historic as it might have been, would have been as dull as shit if they were sailing 4KSB's. In fact, my non sailing friends who thought it was all so cool thought so because of the boats, with the comeback secondary. If all you need is close racing, lets get boat like they use on the match race tour. That would guarantee close racing.

 

Reduce the spectacle and you reduce the appeal. When i watch the AC45T's sailing around, I don't have that same sense of wonder and they simply don't seem to be anywhere near as on the edge as the 72's. The 72's were beasts that everybody knew were capable of biting their crew really hard. You simply don't get that from the 45's. I consider myself a pretty accomplished (if aging) helm and I wouldn't hesitate to steer one of the foiling 45's if given the chance, However, i would turn down the chance to drive a 72 because the stakes would be too high and I am not sure I would be good enough, making it dangerous for everybody on board. It;s just like with cars. The reason why the very top end works (F1 etc) even though there are probably better series out there is because we all know we would kill ourselves driving an F1 car when most believe they could get lesser cars around a track.

 

All I can hope is that if they do go for smaller boats, they keep them big enough to keep the spectacle. It might just be OK in a 52/3/4 but a 45.......no way

I'm 100% confident that a smaller boat can be made just as psychotically dangerous as the ac72s...they've certainly managed to do that in Formula one time and time again.

 

I totally agree that non sailors were drawn in more by the technology and the scale than the comeback once they became aware of the event, but that awareness was largely a direct result of the mainstream media coverage that DID hinge on the comeback. Either way, smaller boats will certainly be less spectacular in person, but IMO it will make little difference on tv, where 99% of the viewers are actually going to watch the thing.

Trust me - they are pretty spectacular in person.

 

They owe nothing to the AC72. You won't even miss the big dinosaurs, I promise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

From that link

 

"There's probably no question that the bigger boats are grander, and in some ways more spectacular, but one of the great lessons from the last Americas Cup Final was that if we can have close racing amongst good teams, then that becomes more of the focus."

 

Am no huge fan of RC but he does have an uncanny ability to recognize things from a higher perspective than some people closer to the water-action do.

I cannot work out whether you are simply sucked in every time and believe this bullshit, or whether you post it even though you know it is bullshit because you will do anything to justify your team.

 

The thing that made the last Cup was not close racing, because it really wasn't that close.

 

You must have watched different racing than I watched. By every count the last Cup was the closest racing in AC history at least since it was televised. And I've watched every race that was televised since the 12 meters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The thing that made the last Cup was not close racing, because it really wasn't that close.

You obviously were not there to say that.

 

I could watch TNZ and OR arriving neck to neck, screaming at 40 knots at the first mark, I had never seen that in sailing.

 

I could listen thousants of spectators screaming when TNZ and OR were passing each other in the upwind leg, in front of Alcatraz.

 

Yes it is true that it was not the case in all races, but the intensity was huge. You also conveniently forget that any boat could have broken at any time.

 

I cannot be suspected of being a Oracle fan but I have to recognize it was a fantastic show (thanks to both teams). Do you seriously want to come back to "slomonos" ? it doesn't make any sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one here who notices a similarity to what happened with The Little America's Cup when it was hijacked and put up for One Design competition?

 

Yes, it was cost saving, yes, it would have reversed the trend of dropping participation - but it completely went against the "spirit" of the contest.

 

Smart Lawyers could argue that Black is White and vice versa. That is not what we need here.

 

What we have here, is a proposal based upon cost cutting and increased participation.

The America's Cup does not have a good record with respect to multi challenger competitions - Yes, Valencia was good, but dull, Auckland Good and Fremantle was the best - high participation, good venue/conditions and great excitement - but don't forget all those dull years at Newport and San Diego to put it in context.

 

The Cup is steeped in prestige, glamour, tradition, flamboyance, subterfuge, excellence, technology and exclusiveness.

There are a hundred other descriptors - but it is all about high end, elite competition.

 

The point I am trying to make is - where do you draw the line in moving the Cup into being cheaper & better attended? - without finding that you are no longer holding an event that bears any connection to the history of the America's Cups of yesteryear.

 

Corporations have a poor track record in every industry of dismantling history and tradition in the search for a quick fix. The management of the Cup in this current cycle seems to be without a plan, vision or conviction.

 

Holding a cup, with little respect to nationality (yes, I know this is not new...) in a venue chosen because they couldn't stay in their home town, in a process that was little more than revenue raising 101, and now a year after requiring entry by teams, to change the specs of the boats so significantly is moronic.

 

It is very sad that San Fran is no longer the venue - it had great geography, conditions, and an audience on its threshold - a better venue I struggle to think of - but RCFC fucked it with grandiose claims of revenue and wealth that never came to be. Why today do we not have focus on building an event or product that is judged on its merits, rather than its failings (to deliver revenue)? The sailing side of the last Cup was spectacular. It had everything, great boats, good conditions, a breeze direction that enabled easy explanation by good TV coverage and a comeback, the likes of which we are never to see again.

 

LE, I surmise, has lost his appetite for the gravy train that he has created.

Past team members going legal in all manner of ways, a City that won't play, and a society that is (ironically) so connected and informed by modern IT, that it becomes difficult to build a cohesive story or change direction of your business without everyone getting to know the (real) backstory......

 

If you were to take these steps to the logical conclusion, why not hold a contest in Moths, Flying Phantoms or Nacra FCS 20's?

You already have these boats in the teams, and the sailors are champions of the Moths already.

 

The answer of course, is that what you are left with, is a competition, that is not the America's Cup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said, but it's worth noting that even the 45T is a better boat than the 72.

Its a better boat than the OLD 72 you mean. The technology has matured and the rules modified to make this generation more controllable. A NEW 52/62/72 or whatever would be at least the 45Ts equal, but more visually dramatic...and probably a shit ton scarier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thought I would quote this bit again from above - Thanks Boink!

 

Holding a cup, with little respect to nationality (yes, I know this is not new...) in a venue chosen because they couldn't stay in their home town, in a process that was little more than revenue raising 101, and now a year after requiring entry by teams, to change the specs of the boats so significantly is moronic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one here who notices a similarity to what happened with The Little America's Cup when it was hijacked and put up for One Design competition?

 

Yes, it was cost saving, yes, it would have reversed the trend of dropping participation - but it completely went against the "spirit" of the contest.

 

Smart Lawyers could argue that Black is White and vice versa. That is not what we need here.

 

What we have here, is a proposal based upon cost cutting and increased participation.

The America's Cup does not have a good record with respect to multi challenger competitions - Yes, Valencia was good, but dull, Auckland Good and Fremantle was the best - high participation, good venue/conditions and great excitement - but don't forget all those dull years at Newport and San Diego to put it in context.

 

The Cup is steeped in prestige, glamour, tradition, flamboyance, subterfuge, excellence, technology and exclusiveness.

There are a hundred other descriptors - but it is all about high end, elite competition.

 

The point I am trying to make is - where do you draw the line in moving the Cup into being cheaper & better attended? - without finding that you are no longer holding an event that bears any connection to the history of the America's Cups of yesteryear.

 

Corporations have a poor track record in every industry of dismantling history and tradition in the search for a quick fix. The management of the Cup in this current cycle seems to be without a plan, vision or conviction.

 

Holding a cup, with little respect to nationality (yes, I know this is not new...) in a venue chosen because they couldn't stay in their home town, in a process that was little more than revenue raising 101, and now a year after requiring entry by teams, to change the specs of the boats so significantly is moronic.

 

It is very sad that San Fran is no longer the venue - it had great geography, conditions, and an audience on its threshold - a better venue I struggle to think of - but RCFC fucked it with grandiose claims of revenue and wealth that never came to be. Why today do we not have focus on building an event or product that is judged on its merits, rather than its failings (to deliver revenue)? The sailing side of the last Cup was spectacular. It had everything, great boats, good conditions, a breeze direction that enabled easy explanation by good TV coverage and a comeback, the likes of which we are never to see again.

 

LE, I surmise, has lost his appetite for the gravy train that he has created.

Past team members going legal in all manner of ways, a City that won't play, and a society that is (ironically) so connected and informed by modern IT, that it becomes difficult to build a cohesive story or change direction of your business without everyone getting to know the (real) backstory......

 

If you were to take these steps to the logical conclusion, why not hold a contest in Moths, Flying Phantoms or Nacra FCS 20's?

You already have these boats in the teams, and the sailors are champions of the Moths already.

 

The answer of course, is that what you are left with, is a competition, that is not the America's Cup.

Good post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The AC from the Deed of Gift is not about participation and revenue generation. It is about a 1 on 1 competition for who can build the faster boat and win with it. A number of times a faster boat did not win. (Shamrock IV, Endeavor, Gretel II, for example)

 

When TV ratings, sponsor revenue, venue location with hosting fees, and salaries take over, as it has here, then it is not the AC as the DoG called for, it is not a 'friendly competition between nations'; its a business model.

 

Maybe we need another gap in challenges like after WWII to get things back where they should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well said, but it's worth noting that even the 45T is a better boat than the 72.

Its a better boat than the OLD 72 you mean. The technology has matured and the rules modified to make this generation more controllable. A NEW 52/62/72 or whatever would be at least the 45Ts equal, but more visually dramatic...and probably a shit ton scarier.
We also need to fit the boat into the Great Sound. I guess the 45T is already as quick as the 72 - but a lot more agile.

 

Agility was not a strong point for the 72.

 

I would like to see a fleet race of these foilers - so the more agile the better.

 

I get the "majesty" argument too. The rig on the 72 made it possible to follow the races from all over the bay. And if it was just about speed, we would do kite boards (fu Burling!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The thing that made the last Cup was not close racing, because it really wasn't that close.

You obviously were not there to say that.

 

I could watch TNZ and OR arriving neck to neck, screaming at 40 knots at the first mark, I had never seen that in sailing.

 

I could listen thousants of spectators screaming when TNZ and OR were passing each other in the upwind leg, in front of Alcatraz.

 

Yes it is true that it was not the case in all races, but the intensity was huge. You also conveniently forget that any boat could have broken at any time.

 

I cannot be suspected of being a Oracle fan but I have to recognize it was a fantastic show (thanks to both teams). Do you seriously want to come back to "slomonos" ? it doesn't make any sense.

 

Wow, that was smart. Did you hit your head?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In case anyone missed following this link from the OP article, this one is notable because of Peter R being with ACEA.

 

'How to change the America's Cup boat'

 

Peter Rusch, Communications Director of the America’s Cup Event Authority, provides this explanation:

....

(says almost exactly what Porthos had already divined)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're on a roll - how long before Clean pulls the plug?

 

When I first posted quotes from the RC interview in the TF thread I thought it tactful not to post the link but to acknowledge the source .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're on a roll - how long before Clean pulls the plug?

 

When I first posted quotes from the RC interview in the TF thread I thought it tactful not to post the link but to acknowledge the source .

Yes, I remember you doing that. Later I went looking for it and, since it's straight from RC (he doesn't do interviews very often) figured it was worth a thread. The Peter R one is notable too although Clean did actually post something AC-useful for a change on that, with help from Porthos.

 

We constantly post link to sites, I see no reason at all to not include sailing sites. Got a PM from the Ed once a long while back, he was for some reason PO'd at the PD site; but iirc I ignored the PM and just went on my way with always posting as I choose. We should all be comfortable doing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You are on the wrong tact.

Maybe I need a retaction?
I agree with you - all credit to the source.

 

The knave's "not link", not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That Peter R piece (and well done again to Porthos for divining it, I think even before that one at SButt) is the answer (well, ACEA's position anyway) on how a Protocol change can be made to use a different Design Rule.

 

Am not sure the sequence but it's possible that when Max S called PB, who was apparently in Japan, that Max was not yet aware of this explanation; and at the time assumed that unanimity was required to change the DR. We debated it here for a time, it was a little confusing until heads got to scratching over the question.

 

And so PB's (probably short and loud) response to Max wherein the statement uses 'unanimity' may have been based on an incomplete assumption. While they may maintain that the 'principle' is important, and GD expressed the same, the actual legality of it does look to be just as Rusch writes. An AP article by B Wilson had that incorrect too, he wrote that a DR change had to be unanimous; it's even possible that his article reinforced Max's initial take on it, later relayed to PB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scuttlebutt gets the ACEA press release writer to repeat on Thursday night exactly what we reported six hours earlier. WHAT A SCOOP! Meanwhile, Ruschy read the SA piece (with Porthos analysis) minutes after we published it.

 

 

 

the actual legality of it does look to be just as Rusch writes. An AP article by B Wilson had that incorrect too, he wrote that a DR change had to be unanimous; it's even possible that his article reinforced Max's initial take on it, later relayed to PB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wondered too if Rusch borrowed from that, they are remarkably similar.

 

The ACEA doesn't seem to have a big team of people in place yet, legal beagles either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wondered too if Rusch borrowed from that, they are remarkably similar.

 

The ACEA doesn't seem to have a big team of people in place yet, legal beagles either.

 

But...but...Cory Friedman! (Since Larry's lawyers are all busy right now). Bernie and I had the same mistake hours earlier, but Porthos is a smart cookie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From that link

 

"There's probably no question that the bigger boats are grander, and in some ways more spectacular, but one of the great lessons from the last Americas Cup Final was that if we can have close racing amongst good teams, then that becomes more of the focus."

 

Am no huge fan of RC but he does have an uncanny ability to recognize things from a higher perspective than some people closer to the water-action do.

Good OP link, thanks.

 

Hard to know for sure. But I enjoyed watching the AC45 World Series last time, lots of competitive teams. And the AC final was (fortunately) incredible to watch as well. However, the LVC was a total snooze fest, I don't know anyone who would disagree. The other challengers weren't in the same league as ETNZ, it was a joke unfortunately.

 

It seems another large boat like the AC62 could easily lead to another totally lopsided challenger series, with fewer teams undoubtedly, that can't be good for sailing. Taking steps to avoid another LVC like the last one would seem a legit priority IMO.

 

The foiling AC45's are a step up, and there should be good competition among more boats. We'll have to see if they're not different enough from existing classes to put on a unique spectacle, that is a risk. I'm not smart enough to be an armchair QB on this...probably not the only one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, hopefully the competition will be much stronger next time; smaller boats may, may improve that possibility although it was already looking better even at an AC62 given LR and AR's likely strong campaigns, probably BAR too.

 

From a site beginning with P and including a D..

 

--

... The rule changes are being drafted and teams will be asked to vote on these changes before the end of March.

 

 

UPDATE

 

Just off the phone with Pete Melvin.

 

He's involved with the redesign program and whats being proposed here. Basically, the teams already running the AC 45 Turbos have come to the realization that the boats are plenty fast and a 62' might be overkill. What they are proposing is using AC 45 parts in the new boat, which possibly would have hull extensions implemented for longitudinal stability, (less down the mine shaft business) and major cost savings. This might help some teams stay in the game and encourage others who could afford $10~$15 million for a campaign. They pretty much have 1 week to sort out the numbers ans assess and vote.

 

While some teams have already begun the tooling for the 62' hulls might object, Pete notes that the original calcs for the 62' vs the 72' were only 5% slower on average around the course, the new thinking is 50 knots would be possible, but at what costs? With the revamped AC 45 turbo's, that might be possible anyways. The bonus for the teams, they would have spare hulls

around without major expense, which could be a major asset!

 

Pete noted that this is the last feasible opportunity for teams to make a decision one way or another...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 million? That would be a 95% reduction for OTUSA - LE should be pleased.

 

Note how it's also predicated on increasing participation but Pete Melvin ^ talks about spare hulls and really only seems to consider existing Teams.

 

Surprise surprise...

 

"Calling Hamilton Island! - Hullo? Have we got a deal for you, maaaate - you won't believe it"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GD should be pleased with a budget reduction that dramatic too, it's a little confusing to me why he's so hung-go about preserving the 62 just so that he can make Auckland happen. But he's a bean counter and I'm not, so what do I know?

 

I wouldn't rule out some team switching their support and voting to keep the AC62s after thinking more about it. Especially if they can do that but still eliminate the Auckland event. BAR is one possibility, I bet they have money guaranteed to go the distance, it's a case where the backers are 'hoping' for some level of recompense from commercial contracts. They wouldn't have gotten into it so big otherwise. And TT likes the idea but underwrote a solid campaign even before the proposal. LE? More money than God but does seem to be thinking long-term-good for the event even if he loses and drops out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you heard GD express a preference either way? Firstly the question isn't even before them yet (Pete M still has work to do), so how can they know the budgetary factors.

And if Schiller really reacts like such a sook, who knows if he will be overridden and then what the final chances of some event (ACWS?) occurring in Auckland will be and how that will impact decisions in Wellington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well.. We do have GD on video stating unequivocally what he wants. But it wasn't an LR style ultimatum, so who knows which way he'll vote depending the option mixes presented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time for EB to re-join the fold?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GD should be pleased with a budget reduction that dramatic too, it's a little confusing to me why he's so hung-go about preserving the 62 just so that he can make Auckland happen. But he's a bean counter and I'm not, so what do I know?

 

I wouldn't rule out some team switching their support and voting to keep the AC62s after thinking more about it. Especially if they can do that but still eliminate the Auckland event. BAR is one possibility, I bet they have money guaranteed to go the distance, it's a case where the backers are 'hoping' for some level of recompense from commercial contracts. They wouldn't have gotten into it so big otherwise. And TT likes the idea but underwrote a solid campaign even before the proposal. LE? More money than God but does seem to be thinking long-term-good for the event even if he loses and drops out.

And RCFC would be a long term good for the AC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well.. We do have GD on video stating unequivocally what he wants. But it wasn't an LR style ultimatum, so who knows which way he'll vote depending the option mixes presented.

GD needs the NZL tax payer. His preferred option is an Auckland regatta. Maybe he'll swing to AC45T's if Auckland can be put back in the frame.

 

After all, no one will win the AC on a minimum budget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ That's what several players said in the AC press release, yes. For the long term good.

 

It's almost like LE invested a frikkin' shipload of millions last time around as an investment towards making a more sustainable event. And now he's telling RC, Okay now make it work for everyone, here's a much lower budget, I'm putting my money where your mouth was so that you are in the same boat as the wannabe team France's and China's of the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ That's what several players said in the AC press release, yes. For the long term good.

It's almost like LE invested a frikkin' shipload of millions last time around as an investment towards making a more sustainable event. And now he's telling RC, Okay now make it work for everyone, here's a much lower budget, I'm putting my money where your mouth was so that you are in the same boat as the wannabe team France's and China's of the world.

Classic spinbot....

 

No matter what boat is used in 35, tousa will spend a fuckin shipload more money than anyone else, and no way would he put his team into a race where they could be beaten by the rifle droppers of the sailing world...he's already done that and got beat when they didn't have the lazza advantage...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BA after a team meeting, possibly others have said it too, said that OR's budget is significantly reduced this time around. The recent AP articles, possibly TE sourced, have suggested the same. If anyone can provide links suggesting the opposite then: go for it, or else go off and bite your fat uninformed tongue.

 

That said, if the thing does still stay at AC62's and Quals in Auckland, etc, well it makes sense that LE is going to be willing to give his team a good chance in that scenario too. But it's clearly not his preferred one. TT has said much the same thing, from the current RC44 event in Malta: it's about the long term.

 

Some articles/OP-eds suggest that it's too late in this cycle to make the change, the Italian ones especially arguing that millions have already been spent AC62-specific-wise, and perhaps that's a valid argument. But if anyone is going to offer a much lower-budget event for the long term, well it strikes me as fairly magnanimous that the 4th richest guy on the planet is the one doing it. There are plenty of other, more serious, causes he's involved in - maybe everyone who cares about this sideline should be pleased with this approach.

 

We all (me included) think of grandeur as being a key factor in our own definitions of 'what the AC is' and are naturally inclined to believe that size matters. But it's possible that LE, absent any money concerns at all, sees completely different priorities about what the event should be about. RC emphasizes 'competition' and it could actually be the real catnip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

From that link

 

"There's probably no question that the bigger boats are grander, and in some ways more spectacular, but one of the great lessons from the last Americas Cup Final was that if we can have close racing amongst good teams, then that becomes more of the focus."

 

Am no huge fan of RC but he does have an uncanny ability to recognize things from a higher perspective than some people closer to the water-action do.

I cannot work out whether you are simply sucked in every time and believe this bullshit, or whether you post it even though you know it is bullshit because you will do anything to justify your team.

 

The thing that made the last Cup was not close racing, because it really wasn't that close. To start with, ETNZ were all over OR. What made it interesting was the comeback. After a while, we all knew that OR should win the races because they were simply faster, but what made it exciting was knowing that one small mistake could lose it for them. And what made that likely was the boats. If they had found their form when ETNZ was leading by a couple of races, it would not have been anywhere near as good. The comeback, as historic as it might have been, would have been as dull as shit if they were sailing 4KSB's. In fact, my non sailing friends who thought it was all so cool thought so because of the boats, with the comeback secondary. If all you need is close racing, lets get boat like they use on the match race tour. That would guarantee close racing.

 

Reduce the spectacle and you reduce the appeal. When i watch the AC45T's sailing around, I don't have that same sense of wonder and they simply don't seem to be anywhere near as on the edge as the 72's. The 72's were beasts that everybody knew were capable of biting their crew really hard. You simply don't get that from the 45's. I consider myself a pretty accomplished (if aging) helm and I wouldn't hesitate to steer one of the foiling 45's if given the chance, However, i would turn down the chance to drive a 72 because the stakes would be too high and I am not sure I would be good enough, making it dangerous for everybody on board. It;s just like with cars. The reason why the very top end works (F1 etc) even though there are probably better series out there is because we all know we would kill ourselves driving an F1 car when most believe they could get lesser cars around a track.

 

All I can hope is that if they do go for smaller boats, they keep them big enough to keep the spectacle. It might just be OK in a 52/3/4 but a 45.......no way

I'm 100% confident that a smaller boat can be made just as psychotically dangerous as the ac72s...they've certainly managed to do that in Formula one time and time again.

 

I totally agree that non sailors were drawn in more by the technology and the scale than the comeback once they became aware of the event, but that awareness was largely a direct result of the mainstream media coverage that DID hinge on the comeback. Either way, smaller boats will certainly be less spectacular in person, but IMO it will make little difference on tv, where 99% of the viewers are actually going to watch the thing.

Trust me - they are pretty spectacular in person.

 

They owe nothing to the AC72. You won't even miss the big dinosaurs, I promise.

 

 

^ This is saying a lot, because if I'm not mistaken, you were one that was lobbying hard for them to not go with smaller boats before, because you did so love the spectacle of the big wings. But if you are OK with the smaller boats having watched them in person, I'm pretty open to the change. Can't help but think maybe they should split the difference, and go with a 53, or whatever, both to have it a bit more grand, as well as to separate the boats from the ACWS to make the periodic big show truly more of a big show..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BA after a team meeting, possibly others have said it too, said that OR's budget is significantly reduced this time around. The recent AP articles, possibly TE sourced, have suggested the same. If anyone can provide links suggesting the opposite then: go for it, or else go off and bite your fat uninformed tongue.

That said, if the thing does still stay at AC62's and Quals in Auckland, etc, well it makes sense that LE is going to be willing to give his team a good chance in that scenario too. But it's clearly not his preferred one. TT has said much the same thing, from the current RC44 event in Malta: it's about the long term.

Some articles/OP-eds suggest that it's too late in this cycle to make the change, the Italian ones especially arguing that millions have already been spent AC62-specific-wise, and perhaps that's a valid argument. But if anyone is going to offer a much lower-budget event for the long term, well it strikes me as fairly magnanimous that the 4th richest guy on the planet is the one doing it. There are plenty of other, more serious, causes he's involved in - maybe everyone who cares about this sideline should be pleased with this approach.

We all (me included) think of grandeur as being a key factor in our own definitions of 'what the AC is' and are naturally inclined to believe that size matters. But it's possible that LE, absent any money concerns at all, sees completely different priorities about what the event should be about. RC emphasizes 'competition' and it could actually be the real catnip.

Well if it's te sourced we can take it to the bank, because no way would he be fucking lying....the same te who was quoted as saying 'we can always jimmy the rules'...

As I said before it will be interesting to watch you spin this mess up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BA after a team meeting, possibly others have said it too, said that OR's budget is significantly reduced this time around. The recent AP articles, possibly TE sourced, have suggested the same. If anyone can provide links suggesting the opposite then: go for it, or else go off and bite your fat uninformed tongue.

 

That said, if the thing does still stay at AC62's and Quals in Auckland, etc, well it makes sense that LE is going to be willing to give his team a good chance in that scenario too. But it's clearly not his preferred one. TT has said much the same thing, from the current RC44 event in Malta: it's about the long term.

 

Some articles/OP-eds suggest that it's too late in this cycle to make the change, the Italian ones especially arguing that millions have already been spent AC62-specific-wise, and perhaps that's a valid argument. But if anyone is going to offer a much lower-budget event for the long term, well it strikes me as fairly magnanimous that the 4th richest guy on the planet is the one doing it. There are plenty of other, more serious, causes he's involved in - maybe everyone who cares about this sideline should be pleased with this approach.

 

We all (me included) think of grandeur as being a key factor in our own definitions of 'what the AC is' and are naturally inclined to believe that size matters. But it's possible that LE, absent any money concerns at all, sees completely different priorities about what the event should be about. RC emphasizes 'competition' and it could actually be the real catnip.

 

 

LE could afford to just compensate teams such as LR for expenses incurred to date for AC62 design work. Would probably cost him less to do that than it will eventually cost to build two AC62s compared to two AC45/55s, or whatever. Have everyone start off on the same foot, again, from here on. Allow LR to save face for their announcement they would not proceed if the rule was changed, and probably very happily proceed with smaller boats. Can't see that happening, but it is a solution that could probably work for everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The thing that made the last Cup was not close racing, because it really wasn't that close.

You obviously were not there to say that.

 

I could watch TNZ and OR arriving neck to neck, screaming at 40 knots at the first mark, I had never seen that in sailing.

 

I could listen thousants of spectators screaming when TNZ and OR were passing each other in the upwind leg, in front of Alcatraz.

 

Yes it is true that it was not the case in all races, but the intensity was huge. You also conveniently forget that any boat could have broken at any time.

 

I cannot be suspected of being a Oracle fan but I have to recognize it was a fantastic show (thanks to both teams). Do you seriously want to come back to "slomonos" ? it doesn't make any sense.

 

Wow, that was smart.

 

^^ I don't know what is the relation between smart and and facts.

Anyway, that is one of the favorite photo I took there, OR apparently jumping on TNZ ass . Not even sure you have been able to enjoy the show, live. :)

1244404_10201353562315184_1998102482_o.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time for EB to re-join the fold?

 

 

Absolutely, even russel-god would like that.

 

Btw I'm over the scale down to small boats already. This russel-god shoots from the hip, so non vast knowledge of scripture can prepare for his whims. russel-god's gift to sailing, will be what it will be.

 

Otoh I'm sick of the spin even Melvin is onto, as if speed is all that mattered. If you want small boats just stop the bull-shite and do it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well.. We do have GD on video stating unequivocally what he wants. But it wasn't an LR style ultimatum, so who knows which way he'll vote depending the option mixes presented.

Plenty of what he wants here - but nothing unequivocal - regarding boat size http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/government-clear-regarding-team-new-zealand-funding-2015032808

 

Dalton said Team NZ supported Luna Rossa's position "simply because we believe it's too late to make a fundamental change to the rules unless all the teams agree".

He said the proposal to race the smaller boats would rule out Auckland as a venue for the qualifying series.

"We absolutely support cost-cutting, it makes total sense and we're all for that," Dalton said.

"But the proposal was to go down to AC45s, a much smaller boat, and lose Auckland as a qualifier. That was the chip that was played to convince other teams."

Dalton said the decision to oppose the proposal was easy.

"We agree with Luna Ross and their stance in terms of the correct way it should be handled with the teams, and we absolutely need Auckland as a qualifier."

 

- Enough of an event in Auckland to keep Gvmt on side

- Costs = budget

- Help keep Patrizio involved

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, hopefully the competition will be much stronger next time; smaller boats may, may improve that possibility although it was already looking better even at an AC62 given LR and AR's likely strong campaigns, probably BAR too.

 

From a site beginning with P and including a D..

 

--

... The rule changes are being drafted and teams will be asked to vote on these changes before the end of March.

 

 

UPDATE

 

Just off the phone with Pete Melvin.

 

He's involved with the redesign program and whats being proposed here. Basically, the teams already running the AC 45 Turbos have come to the realization that the boats are plenty fast and a 62' might be overkill. What they are proposing is using AC 45 parts in the new boat, which possibly would have hull extensions implemented for longitudinal stability, (less down the mine shaft business) and major cost savings. This might help some teams stay in the game and encourage others who could afford $10~$15 million for a campaign. They pretty much have 1 week to sort out the numbers ans assess and vote.

 

While some teams have already begun the tooling for the 62' hulls might object, Pete notes that the original calcs for the 62' vs the 72' were only 5% slower on average around the course, the new thinking is 50 knots would be possible, but at what costs? With the revamped AC 45 turbo's, that might be possible anyways. The bonus for the teams, they would have spare hulls

around without major expense, which could be a major asset!

 

Pete noted that this is the last feasible opportunity for teams to make a decision one way or another...

 

That does not seem to be a practical idea .. the only "parts" that could be used are the 40 foot hulls but they would not comply with the rules which require the hulls the be built in the challenging country .. the wings would be too small and the beams need to be longer ,, so in a nutshell there is nothing on the AC45's that could be used on an AC55 ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes, hopefully the competition will be much stronger next time; smaller boats may, may improve that possibility although it was already looking better even at an AC62 given LR and AR's likely strong campaigns, probably BAR too.

 

From a site beginning with P and including a D..

 

--

... The rule changes are being drafted and teams will be asked to vote on these changes before the end of March.

 

 

UPDATE

 

Just off the phone with Pete Melvin.

 

He's involved with the redesign program and whats being proposed here. Basically, the teams already running the AC 45 Turbos have come to the realization that the boats are plenty fast and a 62' might be overkill. What they are proposing is using AC 45 parts in the new boat, which possibly would have hull extensions implemented for longitudinal stability, (less down the mine shaft business) and major cost savings. This might help some teams stay in the game and encourage others who could afford $10~$15 million for a campaign. They pretty much have 1 week to sort out the numbers ans assess and vote.

 

While some teams have already begun the tooling for the 62' hulls might object, Pete notes that the original calcs for the 62' vs the 72' were only 5% slower on average around the course, the new thinking is 50 knots would be possible, but at what costs? With the revamped AC 45 turbo's, that might be possible anyways. The bonus for the teams, they would have spare hulls

around without major expense, which could be a major asset!

 

Pete noted that this is the last feasible opportunity for teams to make a decision one way or another...

 

That does not seem to be a practical idea .. the only "parts" that could be used are the 40 foot hulls but they would not comply with the rules which require the hulls the be built in the challenging country .. the wings would be too small and the beams need to be longer ,, so in a nutshell there is nothing on the AC45's that could be used on an AC55 ..

 

Agreed, but worse than that, the second you send the AC down the one design/common component route is the moment it loses its relevance.

 

I have always advocated for the Cup to be affordable and, maybe more importantly, have a large number of entries, by which I mean around 10 teams. This is, of course, what RC and LE wanted from the start and what the likes of Stingray supported before their team screwed things up so badly that we saw the biggest drop in entries ever. However, the way of achieving wider entry is not through making the boats far too small or bringing in any one design element. The size of the boats needs to be big enough to stand out from everything else, be it the GS32 or even the Extreme 40's and the AC has always been and must remain a design challenge.

 

If they are serious about cost reduction, you need to put in place a number of things. I would include

 

  • maximum team size - restrict the number of employees (and limit what you can sub contract out). In particular, limit the number of sailors, just like almost any professional sport does with their teams. How about crew size plus 3? It would mean that sailors need to be more rounded in their skills as they might need to swap roles on the boat, but why would that be a bad thing?
  • Team salary cap - again, many professional sports run such a rule. In particular, this needs to be in place for the sailing team
  • Make the ACWS optional - the point of it is to give team sponsors exposure, but as we saw from last time, ETNZ lost interest once the real sailing began and it was clear they would rather have not done it, yet they were the one team that had big sponsors to keep happy. Or if you want an ACWS, make it events at the main venue so as to reduce team costs.
  • Finally, the toughest of the lot - well policed budget caps. As has been pointed out, the rich teams will always spend far more than the poor ones and while it doesn't usually follow that means they will win, there is certainly a minimum budget needed that is way above the average teams spend.

All of those measures do not change the spectacle at all, but what they would mean is that teams have to be smarter. It would no longer mean that only the teams with deep pockets could be competitive. Imagine the management discussions trying to balance the budget on the sailing team - how do you allocate salaries between wing trimmer, helm and tactician?

 

Whatever happens, it must not be the boats that are dumbed down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sailing has many many events. Many of them are world championships. There is the Olympics. There are one designs, development classes and restricted classes. There is only one Americas cup, the longest lived sporting trophy in the world. What has made this event special? Tradition is part of it, along with the unique essence of a challenge trophy where nobody knows even a hint of the outcome until the two teams cross the first start of the final match. Cutting edge technology and vessels of grandeur are also in the recipe. Such is the attraction of the Americas cup beyond all reason that it has broken hearts and destroyed fortunes. The Auld Mug has always been catnip to those with large fortunes and engorged ego's. That is all part of the fascination.

 

Simply making the vessels in which the cup is contested cheaper will not necessarily make a competitive challenge cheaper. Those with the money and ego to contest the cup will always find a way to spend money if they perceive a competitive advantage in doing so.

 

Discarding all that has made the cup great does not to me seem a prudent strategy. We are to be shown a competition in small cheap catamarans in which there is no differentiation between defender and challengers. This sounds to me similar to some other sailing competitions. What it does not sound like is the America's Cup.

 

Can we not have just one outrageous, magnificent pinnacle showpiece at which jaws will drop and skins will tingle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes, hopefully the competition will be much stronger next time; smaller boats may, may improve that possibility although it was already looking better even at an AC62 given LR and AR's likely strong campaigns, probably BAR too.

 

From a site beginning with P and including a D..

 

--

... The rule changes are being drafted and teams will be asked to vote on these changes before the end of March.

 

 

UPDATE

 

Just off the phone with Pete Melvin.

 

He's involved with the redesign program and whats being proposed here. Basically, the teams already running the AC 45 Turbos have come to the realization that the boats are plenty fast and a 62' might be overkill. What they are proposing is using AC 45 parts in the new boat, which possibly would have hull extensions implemented for longitudinal stability, (less down the mine shaft business) and major cost savings. This might help some teams stay in the game and encourage others who could afford $10~$15 million for a campaign. They pretty much have 1 week to sort out the numbers ans assess and vote.

 

While some teams have already begun the tooling for the 62' hulls might object, Pete notes that the original calcs for the 62' vs the 72' were only 5% slower on average around the course, the new thinking is 50 knots would be possible, but at what costs? With the revamped AC 45 turbo's, that might be possible anyways. The bonus for the teams, they would have spare hulls

around without major expense, which could be a major asset!

 

Pete noted that this is the last feasible opportunity for teams to make a decision one way or another...

 

That does not seem to be a practical idea .. the only "parts" that could be used are the 40 foot hulls but they would not comply with the rules which require the hulls the be built in the challenging country .. the wings would be too small and the beams need to be longer ,, so in a nutshell there is nothing on the AC45's that could be used on an AC55 ..

 

No, that is the current protocoe :" CIC ..shall satisfy the

constructed in country requirements of the Deed of Gift if the exterior surface

of each Hull is laminated in the country of the yacht club represented by the

Competitor. The constructed in country requirements of the Deed of Gift shall

not apply to any other parts, structure or components"

 

And they can modify the prot if they want, which they will do anyway this week.

 

So, yes, they can use AC45 parts but it will be mostly useless as boats will fly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they are serious about cost reduction, you need to put in place a number of things. I would include

 

  • maximum team size - restrict the number of employees (and limit what you can sub contract out). In particular, limit the number of sailors, just like almost any professional sport does with their teams. How about crew size plus 3? It would mean that sailors need to be more rounded in their skills as they might need to swap roles on the boat, but why would that be a bad thing?
  • Team salary cap - again, many professional sports run such a rule. In particular, this needs to be in place for the sailing team
  • Make the ACWS optional - the point of it is to give team sponsors exposure, but as we saw from last time, ETNZ lost interest once the real sailing began and it was clear they would rather have not done it, yet they were the one team that had big sponsors to keep happy. Or if you want an ACWS, make it events at the main venue so as to reduce team costs.
  • Finally, the toughest of the lot - well policed budget caps. As has been pointed out, the rich teams will always spend far more than the poor ones and while it doesn't usually follow that means they will win, there is certainly a minimum budget needed that is way above the average teams spend.

 

^^ Do you want to destroy what is left from the AC ? No, one size of boat and the fastest wins.

There are plenty of OD for the rest. Seriously, do you think ONE competitor would vote for that ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am of the persuasion too that bigger is better. But this leading-edge foiling technology is disruptive on several levels and so I'm trying as a fan to be open-minded and brave about the possibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the big is good for the AC spirit, that 10 teams are good for the sustainability of the event and that 50ft cats screaming at 50 kts are good for both.

With a canting wing they can try to copy the much smaller Vestas and they have a long way to go.

Big is only good for speed with waves on the ocean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think many are disputing its good to cut costs. i've been wondering since 2011 why the 45's weren't used for the Cup match. i think the real issue is that the change is so late in the game. on the LR side, they have already invested on ton into the 62. On the AUS side, they already dropped out because of the high cost. So now, why risk alienating the few who have stuck by the concept only to attract another few? If ETNZ and LR drop wout with their $100 million budgets, you think OTUSA is going to cap their spending? nope. It will be OTUSA's $100mm vs. France's $20.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BAR is one possibility, I bet they have money guaranteed to go the distance, it's a case where the backers are 'hoping' for some level of recompense from commercial contracts.

 

Believe what your like. It's been stated multiple times by the team that they don't yet the budget covered and need a headline commercial sponsor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you think OTUSA is going to cap their spending

 

Yes actually, all the indications are that there's a budget squeeze in progress. This doesn't mean I don't think they'll outspend others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If they are serious about cost reduction, you need to put in place a number of things. I would include

 

  • maximum team size - restrict the number of employees (and limit what you can sub contract out). In particular, limit the number of sailors, just like almost any professional sport does with their teams. How about crew size plus 3? It would mean that sailors need to be more rounded in their skills as they might need to swap roles on the boat, but why would that be a bad thing?
  • Team salary cap - again, many professional sports run such a rule. In particular, this needs to be in place for the sailing team
  • Make the ACWS optional - the point of it is to give team sponsors exposure, but as we saw from last time, ETNZ lost interest once the real sailing began and it was clear they would rather have not done it, yet they were the one team that had big sponsors to keep happy. Or if you want an ACWS, make it events at the main venue so as to reduce team costs.
  • Finally, the toughest of the lot - well policed budget caps. As has been pointed out, the rich teams will always spend far more than the poor ones and while it doesn't usually follow that means they will win, there is certainly a minimum budget needed that is way above the average teams spend.

 

^^ Do you want to destroy what is left from the AC ? No, one size of boat and the fastest wins.

There are plenty of OD for the rest. Seriously, do you think ONE competitor would vote for that ?

 

WTF are you on about. I know that English is not your 1st language, but your comprehension seems worse than ever. What has "one design" got to do with what I wrote?

 

With a canting wing they can try to copy the much smaller Vestas and they have a long way to go.

 

Yet again you show a remarkable lack of understanding about how sailboats work. You want them to copy a boat that only sails on one tack and can only properly sail on one point of sailing. Smart thinking.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Can we not have just one outrageous, magnificent pinnacle showpiece at which jaws will drop and skins will tingle?

 

Two out of the three $Bs left standing in this game want your "small cheap catamarans". So the answer to your question appears to be no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think many are disputing its good to cut costs. i've been wondering since 2011 why the 45's weren't used for the Cup match. i think the real issue is that the change is so late in the game. on the LR side, they have already invested on ton into the 62. On the AUS side, they already dropped out because of the high cost. So now, why risk alienating the few who have stuck by the concept only to attract another few? If ETNZ and LR drop wout with their $100 million budgets, you think OTUSA is going to cap their spending? nope. It will be OTUSA's $100mm vs. France's $20.

 

+1, exactly. It was the same for AC34, the try to change the boat class halfway through the prep time for the match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Can we not have just one outrageous, magnificent pinnacle showpiece at which jaws will drop and skins will tingle?

 

Two out of the three $Bs left standing in this game want your "small cheap catamarans". So the answer to your question appears to be no.

 

Yes you are right. The point is it wont be cheaper, it wont be spectacular, it probably wont endure over 150 years and it wont be the America's Cup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Can we not have just one outrageous, magnificent pinnacle showpiece at which jaws will drop and skins will tingle?

 

Two out of the three $Bs left standing in this game want your "small cheap catamarans". So the answer to your question appears to be no.

 

 

That's not true at all. For AC35, Artemis don't want it at all - not even a tiny bit - but they know what happens when you screw Russell, and they would like to have a chance to win, thank you very much. Everything AC has been saying about 'seeing the AC45s fly having changed everyone's minds' is bullshit. Coutts has been trying to pull this since last year because LR is way ahead and because he hates those 'spoiled rich kids'.

 

If you remember that Coutts only gets his huge bonus when he wins an AC, everything else falls into place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And let's remember the unsolved mystery of AR's 45T being a clone (at least platform-wise) of the OR boat. Who designed it and fabricated crossbeams etc?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Can we not have just one outrageous, magnificent pinnacle showpiece at which jaws will drop and skins will tingle?

 

Two out of the three $Bs left standing in this game want your "small cheap catamarans". So the answer to your question appears to be no.

 

 

That's not true at all. For AC35, Artemis don't want it at all - not even a tiny bit ....

 

Dogwatch is right. Here's Matt Sheahan again:

 

As Artemis Racing boss Torbjorn Tornqvist told me during the current RC44 event in Malta, “The cost of competing in the Cup needs to come down, the current budgets are just not justifiable. They need to be half what they currently are. That would mean a budget of around $50million which is still the most expensive sailing campaign by far.”

 

http://www.yachtingworld.com/blogs/matthew-sheahan/why-reducing-costs-is-a-risk-to-the-next-americas-cup-63036

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

edit: But it's very easy to see how most people on the existing teams would much prefer to have big-budget campaigns instead, with lots of people employed both directly and indirectly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Can we not have just one outrageous, magnificent pinnacle showpiece at which jaws will drop and skins will tingle?

 

Two out of the three $Bs left standing in this game want your "small cheap catamarans". So the answer to your question appears to be no.

 

 

That's not true at all. For AC35, Artemis don't want it at all - not even a tiny bit - but they know what happens when you screw Russell, and they would like to have a chance to win, thank you very much. Everything AC has been saying about 'seeing the AC45s fly having changed everyone's minds' is bullshit. Coutts has been trying to pull this since last year because LR is way ahead and because he hates those 'spoiled rich kids'.

 

If you remember that Coutts only gets his huge bonus when he wins an AC, everything else falls into place.

 

 

Artemis says they want it. I don't know and I very much doubt you know what Gunvor's hedge position has been on the rouble and Brent crude price but it isn't implausible TT may have good reason to want to draw his horns in. I'll take an explicit statement over a paranoid narrative that says they mean the exact opposite to what they say and how they'll presumably vote.

 

Your narrative also assumes a belief by Artemis than being nice to Coutts now means he'll be nice back in the future. Do you believe they are that naive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Can we not have just one outrageous, magnificent pinnacle showpiece at which jaws will drop and skins will tingle?

 

Two out of the three $Bs left standing in this game want your "small cheap catamarans". So the answer to your question appears to be no.

 

 

That's not true at all. For AC35, Artemis don't want it at all - not even a tiny bit ....

 

Dogwatch is right. Here's Matt Sheahan again:

 

As Artemis Racing boss Torbjorn Tornqvist told me during the current RC44 event in Malta, “The cost of competing in the Cup needs to come down, the current budgets are just not justifiable. They need to be half what they currently are. That would mean a budget of around $50million which is still the most expensive sailing campaign by far.”

 

http://www.yachtingworld.com/blogs/matthew-sheahan/why-reducing-costs-is-a-risk-to-the-next-americas-cup-63036

 

 

Ima guess that Matt Sheahan's take on Torborn's comments at the gala dinner of the Russell Coutts 44 Worlds isn't the best source for info, especially when you see how little Sheahan really knows about the Cup's machinations lately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Can we not have just one outrageous, magnificent pinnacle showpiece at which jaws will drop and skins will tingle?

 

Two out of the three $Bs left standing in this game want your "small cheap catamarans". So the answer to your question appears to be no.

 

 

That's not true at all. For AC35, Artemis don't want it at all - not even a tiny bit - but they know what happens when you screw Russell, and they would like to have a chance to win, thank you very much. Everything AC has been saying about 'seeing the AC45s fly having changed everyone's minds' is bullshit. Coutts has been trying to pull this since last year because LR is way ahead and because he hates those 'spoiled rich kids'.

 

If you remember that Coutts only gets his huge bonus when he wins an AC, everything else falls into place.

 

 

Your narrative also assumes a belief by Artemis than being nice to Coutts now means he'll be nice back in the future. Do you believe they are that naive?

 

 

Every time some billionaire or some local government gets taken to the cleaners by Coutts, I'm amazed they were so naive, but it's now been happening since about 2003. I'm not sure how he fools otherwise intelligent people again and again, but it's hard to argue with the evidence.

 

Or you could believe Sheahan, who is at a Russell Coutts 44 event on a press junket. 'Cause that makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it most reliable to assume people mean what they say rather than the direct opposite, unless there's cause to believe otherwise. You haven't so far constructed a plausible reason for the latter.

 

Don't confuse this with Polyanna-ish credulity, as that isn't me and more to the point, I'm pretty sure it isn't TT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it most reliable to assume people mean what they say rather than the direct opposite, unless there's cause to believe otherwise. You haven't so far constructed a plausible reason for the latter.

 

 

 

The fact that it is AC public relations should give everyone a cause to believe otherwise. And then there is that TT wants to hire Russell to win him AC36.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, this is from a SF insider the other day.

 

I can't get my head around the excuse that the costs are the reason. They all knew the costs when they signed up. It's not like shipping prices doubled or carbon and epoxy prices tripled, in fact fuel is now half the cost it was before and shipping significantly lower. Why does he get away with such a crap story?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, this is from a SF insider the other day.

 

I can't get my head around the excuse that the costs are the reason. They all knew the costs when they signed up. It's not like shipping prices doubled or carbon and epoxy prices tripled, in fact fuel is now half the cost it was before and shipping significantly lower. Why does he get away with such a crap story?

Maybe because his grinders expect to make $546K per year, and when they don't get it they turn around and sue.

 

Is this "insider" funding a campaign ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, this is from a SF insider the other day.

 

I can't get my head around the excuse that the costs are the reason. They all knew the costs when they signed up. It's not like shipping prices doubled or carbon and epoxy prices tripled, in fact fuel is now half the cost it was before and shipping significantly lower. Why does he get away with such a crap story?

Maybe because some of the teams thought they could get financed but are finding they're falling way short on funding, as you know. Not like he could say that directly. But we'll never really know...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Here, this is from a SF insider the other day.

 

I can't get my head around the excuse that the costs are the reason. They all knew the costs when they signed up. It's not like shipping prices doubled or carbon and epoxy prices tripled, in fact fuel is now half the cost it was before and shipping significantly lower. Why does he get away with such a crap story?

Maybe because his grinders expect to make $546K per year, and when they don't get it they turn around and sue.

 

Is this "insider" funding a campaign ?

 

That's part of the story everyone is trying to make money (not that they are no entitle to) but forget the cup was always about spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

If they are serious about cost reduction, you need to put in place a number of things. I would include

 

  • maximum team size - restrict the number of employees (and limit what you can sub contract out). In particular, limit the number of sailors, just like almost any professional sport does with their teams. How about crew size plus 3? It would mean that sailors need to be more rounded in their skills as they might need to swap roles on the boat, but why would that be a bad thing?
  • Team salary cap - again, many professional sports run such a rule. In particular, this needs to be in place for the sailing team
  • Make the ACWS optional - the point of it is to give team sponsors exposure, but as we saw from last time, ETNZ lost interest once the real sailing began and it was clear they would rather have not done it, yet they were the one team that had big sponsors to keep happy. Or if you want an ACWS, make it events at the main venue so as to reduce team costs.
  • Finally, the toughest of the lot - well policed budget caps. As has been pointed out, the rich teams will always spend far more than the poor ones and while it doesn't usually follow that means they will win, there is certainly a minimum budget needed that is way above the average teams spend.

 

^^ Do you want to destroy what is left from the AC ? No, one size of boat and the fastest wins.

There are plenty of OD for the rest. Seriously, do you think ONE competitor would vote for that ?

 

WTF are you on about. I know that English is not your 1st language, but your comprehension seems worse than ever. What has "one design" got to do with what I wrote?

 

With a canting wing they can try to copy the much smaller Vestas and they have a long way to go.

 

Yet again you show a remarkable lack of understanding about how sailboats work. You want them to copy a boat that only sails on one tack and can only properly sail on one point of sailing. Smart thinking.....

 

^^

1) Its even worse if you are not able to understand your first language. I say that instead of the stupid measures your propose to limit the costs you should consider OD and other races than the AC.

 

2) It is clear that you never used a canting mast and you are not aware of what is going on trimarans. And telling that Vestas lessons can't be learned because they sail on one tack is absolutely stupid.

 

As far as your understanding of how sailboat work we still remember your declarations of why the Artemis 1, a non foiler, would be faster than all the other ones. You picked the only lame duck of the pack.

 

Either you want to make a fool of yourself or you are a troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think of this, re: all of the above on changing the boats and costs for B's:

 

If you want to create a sustaining series, with multiple players, that will attract TV and sponsors, you need to cut the cost so that it can eventually make a profit when it gets going. This is not about how much it is going to 'cost' LE, TT, Bertelli, etc. out of their pockets, it is about the cost to the sponsor driven teams that they need to build the numbers for the 'league'. Once they get that then they can sell it to the TV guys with a stronger hand, generating profits. It is not about the AC any more, this is an investment in the future AC sports league.

 

So if you pay a grinder $500 some thousand now, what is that cost going to be when there is a 'Grinders Union', ala the NFL, MLB, etc., etc.? You have to keep the costs low now, so they are not out of sight when it finally takes root. A grinder might one day end-up with a $100 million, 10 year contract like a few elite athletes now.

 

These guys are looking long range, not the 35th match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you people STILL not understand that it cannot 'finally take root' as long as it is the America's Cup governed by a challenge deed? This is all smoke and mirrors, and everybody on the inside knows it - otherwise, the brilliant Doc Harvey would have already issued his announcement on how ACEA is going to fix the Deed problem...

 

 


so they are not out of sight when it finally takes root. A grinder might one day end-up with a $100 million, 10 year contract like a few elite athletes now.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites