Recommended Posts

I like your stuff, clean, but a sports reporter/announcer who can't bring himself to say anything about a game is just a fan, not a pro. The VOR in-house coverage has been OK but it'd be nice if we had some stuff from someone independent who would actually talk about the sailing decisions that have made the difference. I guess you're not that person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

no, nothing happened.  I have just found it immensely hard to be interested in this race so far, and I'm not writing stuff that doesn't interest me.  I'm not sure why I am so bored with the racing.  Might just be the fact that there are basically no unknowns for this edition and there's nothing to me that's super exciting outside the raw feeds and an occasionally good live show.

 We know the boats, we know the teams, it's like the first quarter in a football game that you know will go down to the wire.  For me that is the quarter when I make the food, pour the drinks, have a smoke break, etc.  

The videos and media output do however interest me, so Matt and I will be doing a Boatfeed show next week for Leg 2.  If you haven't seen ep. 1, it's a little too much intro but it's here:

 

It looks like a new episode of "PLAID MEN"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries. VOR wants to be the place for fans to go. Tweet apparently from  Jordi Neves (Protected Tweet) Chief Digital Officer @volvooceanrace

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

I have just found it immensely hard to be interested in this race so far, and I'm not writing stuff that doesn't interest me.  I'm not sure why I am so bored with the racing. 

Yes I can see why you have that opinion, but there is a mismatch, something just not quite right with those statements being posted with rabbiting on about how cool it is for 36 mins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, nroose said:

I like your stuff, clean, but a sports reporter/announcer who can't bring himself to say anything about a game is just a fan, not a pro. The VOR in-house coverage has been OK but it'd be nice if we had some stuff from someone independent who would actually talk about the sailing decisions that have made the difference. I guess you're not that person.

That's not what the show is about, and it's Matt's concept.  There's other places for other shows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HOW TO GO FASTER THAN THE REST

For the teams sitting in Cape Town at the moment, going quicker is all they think about in advance of the Leg 3 start line. 

So the big question is how do they do that?

Some quick background to my thoughts in that regard. Though I suggest you grab a beer before reading further.

The difference between failure and succeeding can either be the "lowest risk failure factor" or the "highest risk failure factor". What does that risk shit mean for something like sailing in a crewed RTW race like the VOR and more so it is now a "Stopovers to the Extreme" race?

By way of explanation:

When the Space Shuttle, and one of  mankinds most technologically advanced pieces of equipment took off in 1986, it turned into a giant BBQ. It was all caused by a failure in the "O-rings" sealing a joint in the solid rocket booster, which on account of being colder than predicted that day of launch, allowed gases to by-pass the "O-ring" and ultimately flames to make contact with the adjacent external fuel tank, causing the whole thing to shit itself like a sparkler at a kids birthday party. 

In other words all because of a $5 rubber part you could buy at Costco, NASA and America in the mid 80's suddenly looked like a nation doing a giant pre-school science experiment. That is called the "lowest risk failure factor".

So what is an example of the "highest risk failure"? It probably is in your own neighborhood right now. Your bus, train or even aeroplane (if you have money to commute in a kerosene canary) will not run on time because the old shitty bustop, train stop or airport amoungst a network of better ones let's the other ones down. The cream of that transport network are not the ones at fault, big spend infrastructure at all nodes is a necessity. 

Having said that there had just been a case of a Japanese train company which just recently made a national apology for one of its trains leaving 20 seconds early. Thats right 20 seconds early, can you believe that. While passengers had only to wait 4 minutes for the next one the company did a through audit to find what must have been the "highest risk failure" in their mind to have occured in their highly technological network. The culprit it ended up was simply a human, a conductor who had not checked the timetable between having some Sushi and dreaming about meeting his girlfriend at a Love Hotel or cupboard that evening.

Anyway if you have lasted reading this Sparrow shit so far, then you're probably saying to yourself 'what in the fuck has this got to do with sailing and the VOR'? 

Well the answer is simple.

In a RTW race in OD boats every percentage gain over ever minute is gold. However where do you invest that couple of percentage points in improvement? Is it getting more towards diminishing the "high risk" or "low risk" failure factor. 

In OD that "high risk" gain can't be boat so that has to be crew like Skipper, Navigator, Watch Captain etc. Alternatively is it investing efforts towards gains in those that aren't in those positions who sit within the "low risk failure" factor ranks? That is the million dollar question so let's look to other sports for some guidance.

There has been a ton of imperial analysis done by say individual American football teams (who have budgets that Sailing even at AC level dream about) when doing player lists and budgets. Do they put say an extra 10% to their budget at the "low risk" grunt end or at the "high risk" star end? Immediate thinking is the touchdowns the stars generate dictates that is where the bucks go. Clearer thinking is about the grunts, often unheralded, that via many passages of play help create those touchdowns the stars execute. The answer is and reality behind successful teams is the money and resources is being invested towards being a couple of percentage points better than the rest going towards the "low risk" grunt end, not the stars, providing they are there of course, good or bad. 

Now I know an immediate response is the huge salaries sought and obtained by the "high risk" stars, however that thought needs to be tempered by additional employer  revenue whether it be bodies through the gate, apparel, endorsement splits etc to underwrite star payments compared to their fellow team members. If one or more of those stars is shagging a Kardashian sister all the better. All is not what it appears on the dollar front in professional sport.

So where does the current VOR stand in terms of teams finding that few extra percentage points gain in boat speed. Should the additional top up investment be made at the "high risk" end like Skippers, Watch Captains etc or the "low risk" end such as those not in those roles?

Comparitive team sports thinking indicates to do anything other than invest everything available towards improvement at the "low risk" or the Space Shuttle "O-ring" end is doomed to come up short.

It is not my intention to dissect all the VOR teams based upon the above shit I have just written and make some projections. That is impossible on account of many other factors. However one thing jumps out for me and which I would be disengenious if not mentioning it.

The V65 is a prick of a boat and needs to be wrestled around the race track. That puts a spotlight on female crew members simply because of their physical disadvantage. That is a fact of life.

No matter the individual skills male or female on board that factor alone makes female crew selection an area of "low risk" improvement that can reap a dividend where percentage improvements are at play. That said male or female there is simply no room for passengers on these boats. 

Of all the skippers who I think have put more effort towards improving the "low risk" and getting rid of the "O-ring" factor is Xabi. In my mind it is no coincidence Mapfree is therefore where it is. Now I know some will howl knowing I have a crush on Sophie, but the reality is I would die a happy man if I sat in the chair beside Vila for just a 600 miler.

That said, things could quickly change if other teams cotton on to that area of potential to improve. In my mind boats that will improve over the forthcoming legs will be those who make subtle changes at the less obvious end of their crew lists, not the star end.

I don't believe I have taken time off from hammering Randumb to write this.

The Sparrow.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Of all the skippers who I think have put more effort towards improving the "low risk" and getting rid of the "O-ring" factor is Xabi. In my mind it is no coincidence Mapfree is therefore where it is. Now I know some will howl knowing I have a crush on Sophie, but the reality is I would die a happy man if I sat in the chair beside Vila for just a 600 miler.

Good food for thought. In another words, who is carrying the least amount of dead weight.  

What about Támara Echegoyen?  Mapfre is quite heavily invested in the "high risk" as well.  Collectively perhaps one of the most experienced teams in the race.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Southern your begging me to comment on individuals which I'm reluctant to do but IMHO Xabi had the luxury of first having Sophie, mature, a trillion offshore race miles under her belt, physically and more so athletically superior to many of the guys in this race. Therefore he didn't need another Sophie mini-me so someone like Támara got the gig with her technical nous, albeit with no bigboat offshore experience. Great balance.

I may be wrong but I believe Sophie was one of the first crew Xabi settled on if my theory of concentrating on the "low risk" produces a higher dividend in terms of team performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jack_sparrow said:

HOW TO GO FASTER THAN THE REST

[good stuff snipped, easily seen above]

That said, things could quickly change if other teams cotton on to that area of potential to improve. In my mind boats that will improve over the forthcoming legs will be those who make subtle changes at the less obvious end of their crew lists, not the star end.

I don't believe I have taken time off from hammering Randumb to write this.

The Sparrow.

Thanks for taking that time--much better reading than your basher posts. 

Not much to quibble about here, though. For 'low risk' ones to watch, a couple come to mind:  TTOP's Liz commended Lucas Chapman (surfer dude) as one who might gain them that extra few feet on each wave. On AKZO,  Martine Grael's ability to helm and trim an Olympic dinghy better than almost anyone else in the 49 FX world might  give AKZO that edge. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Southern your begging me to comment on individuals which I'm reluctant to do but IMHO Xabi had the luxury of first having Sophie, mature, a trillion offshore race miles under her belt, physically and more so athletically superior to many of the guys in this race. Therefore he didn't need another Sophie mini-me so someone like Támara got the gig with her technical nous, albeit with no bigboat offshore experience. Great balance.

I may be wrong but I believe Sophie was one of the first crew Xabi settled on if my theory of concentrating on the "low risk" produces a higher dividend in terms of team performance.

I posted over in Crew Changes instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Of all the skippers who I think have put more effort towards improving the "low risk" and getting rid of the "O-ring" factor is Xabi. In my mind it is no coincidence Mapfree is therefore where it is. Now I know some will howl knowing I have a crush on Sophie, but the reality is I would die a happy man if I sat in the chair beside Vila for just a 600 miler.

 

That's a very fancy way of saying how a team is not stronger than its weakest link :)  You'd be a killer consultant!  But I liked it. Well written.

And I won't howl but brag about the fact that I've met her, talked, shared a beer. I was a little drunk but she was drunker. Seemed like a nice person :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

I was a little drunk but she was drunker.

Oh just indulge us a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, southerncross said:

Oh just indulge us a little.

My lips are as closed as this little Christmas cookie I just decorated ;)24D9C551-9EBA-4F67-BE63-0F1A57D15120.thumb.jpeg.371a683075e817ed0b9d89603a7920aa.jpeg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack opens up a very interesting line of thought. I do disagree with some of what he wrote, but the core intent is very pertinent. (The Challenger disaster was essentially a management failure. The o-ring was just the specific failure that took it out .)

The core analysis here usually comes under the heading of "game theory" in the proper mathematical meaning of the phrase. And it isn't a trivial thing to look at.

Comparing Gridiron Football to the VOR is fraught with a few difficulties, but it does give us a place to start. Gridiron is a highly evolved game with set plays and a very high risk-reward strategies. But it is a game that intrinsically has discontinuities in the play.  4th down and short? The game turns over. That is a very hard edged discontinuity in the game flow. One that encourages the use of game theory to try and work out the best possible strategies moment to moment. And the game evolves. The mix of players on a team is as much selected to address the mix of players on the other teams as to address a nebulous "best possible" player mix. The game may evolve over time simply by teams moving to different mixes of players in a rock/paper/scissors cycle. 

The VOR is different, as intrinsically the game is different. There is only one thing that matters - reach the next port ahead of your opposition more times than they reach it ahead of you. You might never see one another on the sea. In principle it should be no different to a drag race. No tactics, just get there as fast as you possible can.  But of course it isn't, because the conditions are not known perfectly ahead of time.  This is where you end up with game theoretic analysis again. And one of the strategies that must be included is that of covering your chief opponent (even in the knowledge that you may need to allow another opponent free reign, and that your most important rival will probably change as the regatta progresses.) So, what does this mean for crew choices?  It means that like gridiron, there are crewmembers  that can make or break a leg when high risk strategies are used, and there are crewmembers that can underpin the dogged effort needed to make a low risk lower gain strategy pay off.

The most obvious is the navigator. Hero to zero in a couple of scheds is easy. Pascal "we are fucked, totally fucked" Bidégorry showed us exactly how. But don't forget he will have been the architect of their comeback just as much as that of their downfall. Every navigator carries the weight of a single decision having the potential to drop them out of the back door on a leg, and every decision is based upon incomplete information and guesses. Each will prefer different balances of risk/reward and every one will understand the nature of game theory as applied to their task. From the point of view of a VOR team, it is a no brainer - without the best navigator you can find you cannot win. There will be too many occasions where the calls made by a lesser navigator will drop you off the pack - just like 4th down and short, there is a hard edge in the results of a poor decision that makes simplistic analysis impossible.

But when you get to the rest of the team I suspect it is a much more complicated problem.  The skipper is usually a done deal. They are key in the boat ever getting to the start line. And they have the responsibility of building and maintaining the team, as well as being the one to make final calls on hard decisions.

After that all of the boats seems to have gone for similar in principle, but different in implementation mixes of crew. All have a mix of old hands, previous winning experience and young potential. Obviously the rules on female and under 30 crew have shaped this, but not wildly. But having a harmonious crew with a fit of capabilities and time together is almost certainly going to be a very significant element of choices. Clearly Witty placed this very high. As the race progresses and everyone learns more he may well be proven more right than we give him credit for currently. The different teams will be learning at different rates - the least experienced will be learning much faster as they have much more to learn. Scallywag may well have the depth of team experience to build on the lessons faster than the others. Last race every boat eventually won a leg, and did so on their merits. I have every expectation that this race will be no different.

I don't think the raw power of female crew is as big a deal as Jack does - I found the bit where Martine Grael had been favoured on the wheel and left there instead of rotating her through trimming as telling. It reminds me of a statement from (I think) Ken Read upon the release of the VO65 that the most important person in his estimation on board were the drivers. And in the previous race that proved to be a very astute view.  We saw little more than a drag race procession around the marble, one where consistence, risk averseness, and dogged pursuit of the edge in average day in day out speed won the day.

This race has already proven different. I would say that all the teams looked at last time and realised that they had to play slightly higher risk strategies otherwise the almost guaranteed outcome would be that the most polished and consistent team would win. This is probably going to the be case again. But if a team wants to have a shot at glory they need to be prepared to roll the dice more often. And that is where the game theory comes in.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, southerncross said:

What about Támara Echegoyen?  Mapfre is quite heavily invested in the "high risk" as well.

What about her?

Her off-shore navigatonal and meteorological skills are probably below average on the fleet, but probably better than Tuke's or Burling's or Grael's anyway... Anyhow, she's a hell of a driver and trimmer, disciplined, professional, with a killer instinct and harder than a rock.

Her final race for gold in 2012 olympics was epic, and she would have won 2016 if she hadn't made a major fuck up at the start of the medal race,

I'd take her on my boat any time.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Francis Vaughan said:

Pascal "we are fucked, totally fucked" Bidégorry showed us exactly how

It was "we are fucked, completely fucked" as I recall.

Compared to Witty's "how am I gong to tell them ...". it was very good.  10 Random points Pascal.

Learn from that Witty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chuso007 said:

What about her?

Her off-shore navigatonal and meteorological skills are probably below average on the fleet, but probably better than Tuke's or Burling's or Grael's anyway... Anyhow, she's a hell of a driver and trimmer, disciplined, professional, with a killer instinct and harder than a rock.

Her final race for gold in 2012 olympics was epic, and she would have won 2016 if she hadn't made a major fuck up at the start of the medal race,

I'd take her on my boat any time.

 

No kidding.  Did you read this out of context to what Jack was saying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Francis Vaughan said:

This race has already proven different. I would say that all the teams looked at last time and realised that they had to play slightly higher risk strategies otherwise the almost guaranteed outcome would be that the most polished and consistent team would win. This is probably going to the be case again. But if a team wants to have a shot at glory they need to be prepared to roll the dice more often. And that is where the game theory comes in.

Francis I hope you are right as it makes for a more interesting race.  However, wondering if "follow the leader" is not inevitable once the slower boats figure out the boat speed issue.  The risky tactics have come into play when boats fell off the pace and had no way of catching up.  More than one skipper mentioned it felt futile to continue to bleed miles and do nothing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, southerncross said:

No kidding.  Did you read this out of context to what Jack was saying?

Probably....B)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chuso007 said:

Her off-shore navigatonal and meteorological skills are probably below average on the fleet, but probably better than Tuke's or Burling's or Grael's anyway... Anyhow, she's a hell of a driver and trimmer, disciplined, professional, with a killer instinct and harder than a rock.

Her final race for gold in 2012 olympics was epic, and she would have won 2016 if she hadn't made a major fuck up at the start of the medal race,

I'd take her on my boat any time.

Great link--the start, the surfing and crew work, a thrilling race to watch. Thanks for taking the time with the link. Shows Tamara definitely fits JS' "low risk" crew to watch.

Quibbles: should have been in the crew change thread, but nonetheless much more worthwhile than dealing with trolls.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, stief said:

Her final race for gold in 2012 olympics was epic, and she would have won 2016 if she hadn't made a major fuck up at the start of the medal race,

I remember that race well but didn't make the connection.  Thanks for posting.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, southerncross said:

I remember that race well but didn't make the connection.  Thanks for posting.

Yeah, the commentator kept calling her "Dominguez" instead of Echegoyen...:lol::lol:

We keep both of our parent's last names in Spain, you know...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Francis Vaughan said:

Comparing Gridiron Football to the VOR is fraught with a few difficulties, but it does give us a place to start.

Francis you are the only one trying to compare Gridiron to VOR. The reference I made to football was only in terms of the the imperical analysis done in professional sports (with budgets far greater than sailing), on where they concentrate their efforts towards securing miniscule levels of improvement. They are seeking that extra improvement above that of their competitors and not from the high risk, but the low risk failure areas.

 

22 hours ago, Francis Vaughan said:

I don't think the raw power of female crew is as big a deal as Jack does - I found the bit where Martine Grael had been favoured on the wheel and left there instead of rotating her through trimming as telling. It reminds me of a statement from (I think) Ken Read upon the release of the VO65 that the most important person in his estimation on board were the drivers.

 

On 01/12/2017 at 5:26 AM, NORBowGirl said:

That's a very fancy way of saying how a team is not stronger than its weakest link :) 

The process of finding areas where miniscule levels of improvement can be made in the context of identifying areas of risk to find it, is not simply just a case of looking for the "weakest link" and making it stronger. 

For example I would regard driver selection as an area where if you are weak, has a high failure risk and so naturally is one of the first things to address in crew selection before looking for the hard percentage gains. Strategy is also has a high risk failure factor and at this level one assumes all teams are on a level footing and any gains probably don't exist or at least mistakes are cancelled out.

Note: Adopting or having to adopt high or low risk sailing strategies is a completely different discussion point. Those strategies high or low risk, are always going to fall into the category of having a high level of probability towards contributing to success or failure.

It is also not a process necessarily role or specialist related on account crew numbers are small and there is a fair degree of multi-tasking involved.

For instance assume there is a speed difference detected between two Watches "A" and "B" where "Watch B" is consistently quicker. Now the obvious areas of analysis is going to be the high failure risk roles of say drivers, trimmers and interpretation of nav instructions etc. However after careful analysis the performance outcomes attached to those roles can't be split. Therefore where can the difference in boat speed between watches be coming from? 

What if it is a case of "A Watch" member(s) having to come on watch for sail changes in the equivalent conditions more often than "Watch B", and therefore becoming more fratigued and therefore slower. The area for improvement is is not in the slower "Watch A", but the quicker "Watch B", on account one member, while an absolute cracker in their specialist role, is disadvantaged physically during sail changes and help has to come from those not on watch.

So using Francis's example of a relatively small Martine Grael being favoured on the wheel. I would suggest she wasn't chosen for her driving skills in this "high failure risk" role but it addressed optimising a "low failure risk" area, being the overall level of physicality of her watch. 

Instead of her participating in sail changes she drives and which happens to be her speciality, therefore not necessitating the need to secure more grunt from the off watch, who then in turn get the maximum rest so they can perform at the optimum.

For all of the teams it is now find small gains or fail.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎30‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 5:19 AM, MR.CLEAN said:

That's not what the show is about, and it's Matt's concept.  There's other places for other shows.

Agreed Sir! If they don't like it they don't have to watch it, now do they!

Cheers

SS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2017 at 3:15 PM, random said:

Yes I can see why you have that opinion, but there is a mismatch, something just not quite right with those statements being posted with rabbiting on about how cool it is for 36 mins.

Videos can be very very cool even if a race is not interesting to me.  sailing still is.

what's rabbiting?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Videos can be very very cool even if a race is not interesting to me.  sailing still is.

what's rabbiting?

Ok, yes I agree. 

Lately, images of submarining 65s just makes me think that they are of poor design and dangerous.  Stories of crew being repeatedly washed to the end of their tethers ... at what point is this just silly rather than brave. 

Talking continuously/non-stop. This comes from Cockney rhyming slang - 'Rabbit and Pork' = talk. Therefore in the tradition of Cockney rhyming slang to 'rabbit' or 'rabbiting on' is to talk a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, random said:

Lately, images of submarining 65s just makes me think that they are of poor design and dangerous.  Stories of crew being repeatedly washed to the end of their tethers ... at what point is this just silly rather than brave.

I agree. And it even almost seems like they are trying to do that stuff to get the footage. All fun and games until someone dies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely they can be better protected.  Images of water pouring off the cabin roof just near the companionway are bullshit.  But they make for great images for masses and that is what it is al about. 

Compare that to Gabart, comfy and dry.

2017-11-30_14-11-50-620x350.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random said:

Surely they can be better protected.  Images of water pouring off the cabin roof just near the companionway are bullshit.  But they make for great images for masses and that is what it is al about. 

Compare that to Gabart, comfy and dry.

Surely they can. Wonder why the designers, in consultation with the sailors, didn't think of that? Oh wait . . .  I should look up that discussion and links for you. Apologies. I'll get right on it after the other three threads I'm following up.

aside: only replying since you actually have bothered to provide a decent  link supporting and explaining rabbiting, Most of the time I figure you're just trolling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone please provide me a link to the schedule? When is the in-port race (if one)? When does leg 3 start? Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Varan said:

Can someone please provide me a link to the schedule? When is the in-port race (if one)? When does leg 3 start? Thank you!

http://www.volvooceanrace.com/en/ports/cape-town.html

Race Village opening: 24 November 2017
In-Port Race: 8 December 2017, 12:00 UTC (14:00 Cape Town)
Leg Start: 10 December 2017, 12:00 UTC (14:00 Cape Town)

More information can be found on the Cape Town host city website: www.volvooceanracecapetown.com

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New life-saving application for drones? (Running lines out to other craft) :) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stief said:

Yep, good videos.  Couldn't see any that included design to stop crew in the cockpit from being blasted off their feet by green water over the bow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, plenty about layout.  My point is still the same.  Green water at 20 knots is very heavy and will overpower a person in an instant.  As In a report of a lifejacket auto deploying.  That's unacceptable at those speeds when the crew is on station and the boat is sailing as it should.  Those cockpits hark back to 4ksb's.

As compared to ...

Gabart-seul-face-au-mythe_reference.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Randumb comparing the design attributes of a 100' single hander trimaran to a crewed 65' 13 tonne mono??.. ....you keep aiming for and attaining new heights in stupidity?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

C'mon Jack--don't waste your time. The issue of the VOR design is past. The design process was a remarkable model of consultation in ocean racing, but far from perfect. Anyone who just wants to argue the result should be changed without understanding the past is just trolling.  It is what it is now, and not worth the effort to fix.  So,  pointing out that it doesn't compare  will be as futile as arguing 24hr records. I much preferred your strategy of drowning the trolls with long elaborate analogies: much more rewarding to read. 

Speaking of which, I really liked FV's elaboration and addition of game theory. The weather really is the competition, and despite the billions spent trying to develop the tools that narrow the odds by forecasting, those tools are still not enough to be able to predict a winner. I was hoping someone would bring up chaos theory--the butterfly in Costa Rica example. If butterflies are the indeed key, then how would chaos theory (or even game theory?), deal with the Vestas wind farms. Might be more fun exploring that idea than feeding trolls.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, stief said:

I was hoping someone would bring up chaos theory--the butterfly in Costa Rica example.

Ha Ha.  I almost brought chaotic systems in the thread about the Kevin Hall Essay.  Trying to measure two seemingly separate chaotic systems (they are entirely interactive) in fluid dynamics is impossible according to the theory and quantum theory blah blah blah.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stiffler the Vestas wind farm bit reminds me of something. I recall it being said that SciFi has dialed into their worldwide wind data bank to help give them the edge when closing the shore. That may well have given them the confidence in Leg 1 to bounce off the coast when exiting the Med?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jack_sparrow said:

Stiffler the Vestas wind farm bit reminds me of something. I recall it being said that SciFi has dialed into their worldwide wind data bank to help give them the edge when closing the shore. That may well have given them the confidence in Leg 1 to bounce off the coast when exiting the Med?

Yes, We discussed it briefly when Vila's "local knowledge" lost out to VS11's Honey-prepping the leg with Vestas wind modelling computers. No problem if you'd like me to find the link: I owe you for the above.

(Although this is a leg 3 topic, I'm going to be fascinated by the prep the navs demonstrate in the CT exit: currents will play a more than a minor role there, so maybe Vila will trump SiFi)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, stief said:

I much preferred your strategy of drowning the trolls with long elaborate analogies: much more rewarding to read.

Unfortunately Stifler, randumb is like a Glow Stick...I can't help wanting to snap and shake the shit out of him until the light comes on.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, southerncross said:

Ha Ha.  I almost brought chaotic systems in the thread about the Kevin Hall Essay.  Trying to measure two seemingly separate chaotic systems (they are entirely interactive) in fluid dynamics is impossible according to the theory and quantum theory blah blah blah.

Spend some great hours reading up on Kevin Hall and his balancing act between math and art. Saved this one for you SC: good example of ignoring anything but the gut:

Quote

One of the best moments of the event came in the fourth race. It was the second race of the day, so we were all tired. One of my main competitors for the Olympic spot rounded the last turn with a comfortable lead into the short final leg. He aimed for the low end of the finish line and went for a smooth style with what’s called “two to one” purchase on his mainsheet. Less load, but also half the stroke when you pump, like rowing with a short oar. 

I came around the last turn fully in the zone. It’s in the back of your mind somewhere, quiet and calm, the idea that you will be leading by the finish. Sort of a warmth of confidence, a presence. It’s not a thought. At least for me, when I’m sailing really well, I’m not thinking Grrrr, I’m gonna catch that guy and pass him. You just know. “Balls to bones,” as the Oracle says to Neo in The Matrix about knowing whether or not he’s in love, or knowing whether or not he’s The One. (OK, silicone prostheses to bones in my case, but whatever.)

I stayed on the big chain ring, one to one, direct link to the sail. Long oar. I aimed higher than the guy in front of me. More potential speed, much higher workrate, less margin for error with steering.

The legs push into the lower back. The shoulder pulls hard on a straight arm, mainsheet wrapped around the wrist to prevent any slippage, like a strap for a 330?pound deadlift. Then at the end of the stroke, to make sure to launch down the wave—which gives more speed at the bottom turn to line up the next wave— the arm gives a quick snap to finish the pump. Everything slowed down around me. It was like there was a golden path laid out on the water and all I had to do was steer to keep the bow aimed down it. The sound of the spray shooting away from the boat had distinct elements, not just a general quality. I didn’t look over to see how my gain rate was; I didn’t look up to see how far the finish line was. I just knew.

It would have been a horrible feeling for Mo, when the gun went off before he got to the finish, meaning someone else had gotten there first. When I looked up, his whole body slumped with the disappointment. Right then I knew that there was one less guy to worry about for the rest of the week. In fact, right then I knew there was only one guy to worry about for the rest of the week, and that was me. If I used all my skill, stayed present, and made wise choices at the big moments, it was completely in my hands. For the first time since sophomore year of college, I believed that I’d get to keep what I did for the rest of the week. I trusted myself and I trusted the world.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Unfortunately Stifler, randumb is like a Glow Stick...I can't help wanting to snap and shake the shit out of him until the light comes on.

Well, your call of course. Just saying that when you snap and shake at an idea about the racing, it's much more illuminating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, back in the real world, people are getting thrown about the cockpits for the entertainment of the masses.  Doesn't matter what and who was involved in the design process, or how much discussion in some other thread there was, the boats are more dangerous than they need to be.  But how can it be good video if the crew stays dry FFS!

I bet they are all salivating waiting for more submarining in the southern Ocean.  I really hope no one gets hurt getting smashed about the cockpit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rennmaus said:

http://www.volvooceanrace.com/en/ports/cape-town.html

Race Village opening: 24 November 2017
In-Port Race: 8 December 2017, 12:00 UTC (14:00 Cape Town)
Leg Start: 10 December 2017, 12:00 UTC (14:00 Cape Town)

More information can be found on the Cape Town host city website: www.volvooceanracecapetown.com

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stief said:

 I was hoping someone would bring up chaos theory--the butterfly in Costa Rica example.

Chaos theory is actually something I was going to mention - but more in the context of the various routing options we see, and especially in wildly different routes predicted as "best" for boats that are only short distances away from one another on the water.

There is a core overlap between my musings on game theory and chaos theory. The role of a discontinuity in the system. In classical chaos theory it is the presence of these discontinuities that result in the apparently near-random behaviour. This is why I went into Gridiron in more detail - the presence of rules explicitly geared to introduce such discontinuities in the play make the game flow more chaotic than many other field games, and drive the need for (and applicability of) game theory. A Gridiron game is a set of a large number of plays - smaller games where "game" starts to have the mathematical game theory meaning.  For the VOR these plays are the province of the navigator. But they have much the same problem - opportunities for hero to zero or opportunities for the crew to grind down the opposition by pure effort and skill, and mixes of the two.

Where the navigator and skipper have rather different options to a Gridiron coach is that the team on board is what they started with. No substituting specialists for each play. So, as Jack argues, there is an element of risk reward in the construction of the crew.  However what there is is the ability to optimise roles over time. I would argue that at any given moment the most critical person on a boat is the driver. If the driver isn't getting the best out of the boat it matters little that the navigator comes up with the best route or that the trimmers are keeping the thing motoring. Keeping the best driver on the wheel at all times is IMHO Jack's minimum risk play. If that means keeping the best drivers out of the trimming rotation, it is a pretty easy very low risk call.  But the importance of the driver is only at any given moment, it doesn't take into account the other levels of experience and ability needed to make the edge. The ability to keep going mode shift after mode shift, changing sails time and time again, stacking and restacking. Knowing what and when, and having the stamina to do so. Balancing the strain on the crew, exhaustion etc to get that edge against the losses if you don't push so hard but avoid total exhaustion isn't trivial. And it has to be balanced against the driver's ability to keep up the speed, and so on.  Mostly this is going to be a skipper making a call based upon experience, but if you could work out the numbers, it would become a classical game theory question. Balancing the least worst outcome against best possible outcome, all with imperfect information about what is to come.

The change in this race is that the number of women on board changes the dynamics of crew rotation. We don't have a crew where everyone can do anyone else's job reasonably well. It naturally leads to a slight increase in specialisation. And if you are going to have women crew, choosing rock star drivers is a pretty easy low risk call.  (Sophie is of course something of an exception, but she really is exceptional.)

One wonders if the crew mix Dee has is not as well optimised by this standard. But she was quite clear that this was not the prime rationale for her crew, and that a balanced set of opportunities for young sailors was more important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, stief said:

Spend some great hours reading up on Kevin Hall and his balancing act between math and art. Saved this one for you SC: good example of ignoring anything but the gut:

Oh no! Apologies SC. I wasn't telling you what to do, only saying what I found from Kevin Hall that supported your points about intuition.

 Should have caught the autocorrect  mistake earlier. 

Fixed: "I spent some hours . . . "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of interesting leads and applications: thanks. So many to unpack, and I still have to check whether "gridiron" is being used more precisely than just 'American/ Canadian football'. Link to that term appreciated if used in a more special sense.

8 hours ago, Francis Vaughan said:

Chaos theory is actually something I was going to mention - but more in the context of the various routing options we see, and especially in wildly different routes predicted as "best" for boats that are only short distances away from one another on the water.

OK. Lots of examples of "wildly different" from Leg 2 to back that up, from the "Eastern" routes down the African coat shown by Mark Chisnell, LibbyG, and the Expedition/Squid projections to the projections around the St Helena High later in the race. So the failure of the  models is better explained by Chaos theory there, rather than the the more casual term "naviguessing"? If so, duly noted as another way to watch Leg 3 tracks.

9 hours ago, Francis Vaughan said:

the apparently near-random behaviour

Tongue in cheek? Intentional or not, had to laugh at the application of game and chaos theory to the forum posts. :) (Scapegoat theory works too)

9 hours ago, Francis Vaughan said:

Where the navigator and skipper have rather different options to a Gridiron coach is that the team on board is what they started with. No substituting specialists for each play

 Agree somewhat. Gridiron coaches don't get to be in the middle of the scrimmage during the play. The specific example I'm thinking of here is Xabi seemingly playing a minor role, say,  on the winch in the middle of the cockpit, while 'lesser' talents are trimming or driving. Bouwe, Simeon, Dee too have seemed almost like 'passengers' in some of the Raw clips. Will be cool to use the 'coach' example as a way to focus watching what positions the 'coaches' play and assign next leg.

Be back in a bit. Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, stief said:

Oh no! Apologies SC. I wasn't telling you what to do, only saying what I found from Kevin Hall that supported your points about intuition.

 Should have caught the autocorrect  mistake earlier. 

Fixed: "I spent some hours . . . "

I didn't take it that way.  Thanks for the good read.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2017 at 10:32 PM, random said:

Meanwhile, back in the real world, people are getting thrown about the cockpits

You must not remember the 70s at all

 

65 cockpits are like a volvo wagon compared to them

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MR.CLEAN said:

You must not remember the 70s at all

 

65 cockpits are like a volvo wagon compared to them

 

Some of us recall how the 70's versions were doing half the speed of the 65s as well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, random said:

 

Some of us recall how the 70's versions were doing half the speed of the 65s as well.

 

V70 are only slower than VOD65 when they are crewed by mumpties with sails dating from the '09 race

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

V70 are only slower than VOD65 when they are crewed by mumpties with sails dating from the '09 race

Ah, sorry, I thought you were talking about the 1970s.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone watched this morning "Quick Fix" on Facebook? Who was the new presenter in suit and tie?!?!?! I didn't like Nial that much, but not sure this was an improvement (difficult to say as the Quick Fix is way too short and the guy did not say anything besides "tough sailing" and join us at 13 Hours UTC....)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-12-11 at 3:55 AM, JeronimoII said:

anyone watched this morning "Quick Fix" on Facebook? Who was the new presenter in suit and tie?!?!?! I didn't like Nial that much, but not sure this was an improvement (difficult to say as the Quick Fix is way too short and the guy did not say anything besides "tough sailing" and join us at 13 Hours UTC....)

Yes, and was worried Colman was being replaced by the suit. Thanks to Chasm for clearing that up here . Great link to Digby Fox's CV.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2016-01-22 at 4:00 AM, stief said:
On 2016-01-22 at 2:09 AM, Herman said:

Tom Touber steps down as VOR Race Director. He stays involved in the VOR for The Netherlands trying to push Simeon Tienpont as skipper for a new VO65. He wants to bundle the 3 Dutch initiatives into one effort. And he wants to sell the Brunel boat to another team. Tienpont is already under contract for the next AC, which coincides in 2017 with the next VOR. So pushing this seems a bit strange to me.

 

The Hague has put in a bid as 24 hours-stopover like in the last edition.

 

Source (in Dutch).

Interesting and confusing. Looks like a new org chart and profiles needed for the VOR site, which still lists Tom Touber as Chief Operating Officer http://www.volvooceanrace.com/en/join-us.htmland http://www.volvooceanrace.com/en/people/325_Tom-Touber.html

Herman, google translates "zegde" as "terminated". Your "steps down" seems more accurate. True? Not sure, too, when Touber voted against Brunel's sponsorship of the VOR.

Help anyone? Can't find Herman's post, nor the old VOR org chart linked above.

No big deal. Just scratching an old mote botherin' me mind's eye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wayback Machine?

Tom Tauber
Join Us

There is also the old people page which had all (most?) employees last round. (Shore) team members too.
That made sense, so off to the chopping block with it for this edition....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chasm said:

Wayback Machine?

Tom Tauber
Join Us

There is also the old people page which had all (most?) employees last round. (Shore) team members too.
That made sense, so off to the chopping block with it for this edition....

Thanks as ever for your internet magic. Ironically, the current VOR site does have a bit of a public org chart--just not easily accessible.

e.g., http://www.volvooceanrace.com/en/people/348_Karin-Backlund.html 

Guess they forgot to chop, hide or link it. Can't tell what is policy or inadvertent any more. Oh well. The racing is great. Looking forward to the in-port race, even if Phil Laurence signed off on the official notice that the race happened January 5 .  Inadvertent mistake, I'd guess.

More importantly, where's Herman's post? Probably  just an inadvertent glitch in the forum software. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

watching mainsail on CNN ...  with all the experienced ocean racers out there why would Brunel risk having inshore racers who have never done an offshore boat race for them ... seems a bold move to me 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have wondered the same.  Some check the box of the under 30 crowd, others check the box for the female sailors on board, but it surprises me that so many people get to do a leg in this race with little to no overnight sailing, much less one for hundreds/thousands of miles.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to sail-world

New Zealand company, Vesper Marine is supplying its Guardian AIS technology to enable the racecourse perimeters to be set, the system will also caution spectator and race official boats. The B&G equipment will allow the race boat officials and mark layers to see the positions of the buoys in order to place them in the exact required location and also manage the boundaries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^^ A NZ company that treats the locals as suckers. For example the wonderfull Vesper XB-8000 AIS.

US price - $730 USD (Defender).

NZ price - $1,012 USD (On-line).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I only one who thinks that VOR "beach cleaning" PR events are pretty pathetic?

Guys picking up stuff on beach without shoes and gloves. It looks like 2min video event, not cleaning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a tiny bit. Ok, a lot.
It just does not compare favorably to one of the "clean up the neighborhood" drives. Those tend to end with a photo of a trailer full of trash at the end of the day. Even when the elementary school does it. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have an active link to raw tracking info that can be imported to Expedition?

It looks like it used to be on YB, but no longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else find it so pathetic that boats that fail to finish a leg(s) can still beat boats that actually complete the whole "around the world race". I think the scoring system sucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Rskiff said:

Does anyone else find it so pathetic that boats that fail to finish a leg(s) can still beat boats that actually complete the whole "around the world race". I think the scoring system sucks.

I find it pathetic that anyone thinks that the scoring system matters.  It's a PR event not a boat race.   The boats are hired, the teams are contracted, everything is branded.  What about that do you not understand?

Sailing is now a commodity that can be purchased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2018 at 6:24 AM, bruce said:

watching mainsail on CNN ...  with all the experienced ocean racers out there why would Brunel risk having inshore racers who have never done an offshore boat race for them ... seems a bold move to me 

There may be other reasons but one good one is that some of these people know more about trimming than most.

I have met a lot of experienced ocean racers who have no fucking idea about the finer points.

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