• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
strider470

Luna Rossa Challenge. AC 36

Recommended Posts

Hey jack, can't you read? This is not a COR thread. This is about Luna Rossa in the 36 AC.

Share this post


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

Great another COR thread...let's see if we can set a world record for stupidity.

Yeah, the guy that got on me for my spelling can't read himself.

Close this shit.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, strider470 said:

Hey jack, can't you read? This is not a COR thread. This is about Luna Rossa in the 36 AC.

 

1 minute ago, WetHog said:

Yeah, the guy that got on me for my spelling can't read himself.

Close this shit.

WetHog  

I am the one that cannot read.  Still can't spell either.

Anyway, heres hoping Patrizio Bertelli got his balls back from his rich wife.  Otherwise, LR in AC36 will be just like LR in AC34.  A poodle bitch.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, redract said:

we got the who

now, what, where, when?

In time, but you better believe Sad Max Sirena will be prancing around in LR silver and red in the near future.  :lol:

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, WetHog said:

 

I am the one that cannot read.  Still can't spell either.

Anyway, heres hoping Patrizio Bertelli got his balls back from his rich wife.  Otherwise, LR in AC36 will be just like LR in AC34.  A poodle bitch.

WetHog  :ph34r:

I'm sure Luna Rossa will be a proper COR and a strong challenger. Time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ale!

Finally nice to have luna rossa back in the game. Expect checco bruni back in the team and Vittorio Bissaro on the boat as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, strider470 said:

I'm sure Luna Rossa will be a proper COR and a strong challenger. Time will tell.

I hope so as well.  After 2007 I'd expect nothing les.  But then 2013 happened so their is doubt.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎27‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 7:59 AM, strider470 said:

I'm sure Luna Rossa will be a proper COR and a strong challenger. Time will tell.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/28/2017 at 7:02 AM, strider470 said:

The Challenge for AC 36

Il-Presidente-del-CVS-Agostino-Randazzo-consegna-la-sfida.jpg

Curious to know whos boat they are on....

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WetHog said:

Curious to know whos boat they are on....

WetHog  :ph34r:

Probably De Nora's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jaysper said:

Probably De Nora's.

Of course.  Just read ETNZ has been using that for years....

Having a billionaire backer has its perks.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


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

Of course.  Just read ETNZ has been using that for years....

Having a billionaire backer has its perks.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Eh, hes a pretty serious multi-millionaire but not billionaire. But yes, a tame millionaire does have its perks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on the type of boat that will be chosen for the next Cup, it is even possible a second Italian Challenge! On the Italian sport newspaper "Gazzetta dello Sport" there were rumors about Mascalzone Latino coming back too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you don't see in this image, is a guy on the deck with orders to shoot anyone not from Italy or NZ

italians.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/28/2017 at 11:02 PM, strider470 said:

The Challenge for AC 36

Il-Presidente-del-CVS-Agostino-Randazzo-consegna-la-sfida.jpg

I hope Aotearoa has crossed the finishing line when that Challenge was accepted B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, strider470 said:

Depending on the type of boat that will be chosen for the next Cup, it is even possible a second Italian Challenge! On the Italian sport newspaper "Gazzetta dello Sport" there were rumors about Mascalzone Latino coming back too.

I guess you have me at a disadvantage I cant read italian

please keep us infomed of any news

p.s. I love you country, many happy rugby tours there and private visits ....use to go 3 or 4 times a year

 

Also you said "type of boat that will be chosen" please explain more....you mean monohull vs cat ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, mako23 said:

I guess you have me at a disadvantage I cant read italian

please keep us infomed of any news

p.s. I love you country, many happy rugby tours there and private visits ....use to go 3 or 4 times a year

 

Also you said "type of boat that will be chosen" please explain more....you mean monohull vs cat ?

I'll put here any news I'll read on Italian media!

First on the paper edition of "La Gazzetta", and then online ( http://www.gazzetta.it/vela/17-07-2017/vela-onorato-promessa-coppa-america-210363790740.shtml ) there was a quite long interview to Vincenzo Onorato (Mascalzone Latino) and when asked about a possible involvement in the next America's Cup he said:

«Il discorso è complesso, dipende davvero da che cosa decideranno i neozelandesi. Se la disegnano sui monoscafi non enormi che privilegiano l’arte marinaresca farò di tutto per esserci».
Arte marinaresca?
«Nell’ultima Coppa America ho visto ciclisti, ma non una scotta, né manovre con lo spinnaker. Io, e forse non sono il solo, vorrei vedere anche altro. Marinai con le scotte in mano che manovrano le vele, questa è la vela nella quale sono cresciuto».
 
"It's complex, it really depends on what the Newzealanders will decide. If they will choose monohulls (but not huge) and a return to seamanship I will do everything possible in order to compete."
- seamanship?
"In the last America's Cup I've seen cyclists, but not sheets or spinnaker maneuvers,. I, and I think I'm not alone, would like to see more. Sailors with sheets in their hands trimming sails, this is the yachting where I grew up."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, strider470 said:

I'll put here any news I'll read on Italian media!

First on the paper edition of "La Gazzetta", and then online ( http://www.gazzetta.it/vela/17-07-2017/vela-onorato-promessa-coppa-america-210363790740.shtml ) there was a quite long interview to Vincenzo Onorato (Mascalzone Latino) and when asked about a possible involvement in the next America's Cup he said:

«Il discorso è complesso, dipende davvero da che cosa decideranno i neozelandesi. Se la disegnano sui monoscafi non enormi che privilegiano l’arte marinaresca farò di tutto per esserci».
Arte marinaresca?
«Nell’ultima Coppa America ho visto ciclisti, ma non una scotta, né manovre con lo spinnaker. Io, e forse non sono il solo, vorrei vedere anche altro. Marinai con le scotte in mano che manovrano le vele, questa è la vela nella quale sono cresciuto».
 
"It's complex, it really depends on what the Newzealanders will decide. If they will choose monohulls (but not huge) and a return to seamanship I will do everything possible in order to compete."
- seamanship?
"In the last America's Cup I've seen cyclists, but not sheets or spinnaker maneuvers,. I, and I think I'm not alone, would like to see more. Sailors with sheets in their hands trimming sails, this is the yachting where I grew up."

Thank you for your response very interesting. I myself would like to see giant monohulls at maximum dimensions allowed. The ac50 looked like fast toys...amazing to watch but some of the magic is gone..not majestic

Share this post


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

Did P$B express any opinions about multihulls, when asked about them in this video from back in Bermuda?

http://video.gazzetta.it/video-embed/709063ca-5aa1-11e7-abf0-64ee5e755912

Already commented: he likes multis a lot, they are not conflictual with monos. Now are they the best choice for the AC: he says he doesn't know, but considers that boat type has to be chosen by the Defender (ahem ...)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Xlot said:

Ouch ... "as a human being, worth less than zero" ...

Wow :blink:

 

9 minutes ago, Xlot said:

but considers that boat type has to be chosen by the Defender (ahem ...)

Hmm, that's not an encouraging statement. Bertelli needs someone to link him to the DoG text <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Xlot said:

Already commented: he likes multis a lot, they are not conflictual with monos. Now are they the best choice for the AC: he says he doesn't know, but considers that boat type has to be chosen by the Defender (ahem ...)

 

clear as mud - but I like 'conflictual'......that's straight Italian I guess ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, nav said:

clear as mud - but I like 'conflictual'......that's straight Italian I guess ;)

Not just Italian ...

 

Share this post


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

Wow :blink:

 

Hmm, that's not an encouraging statement. Bertelli needs someone to link him to the DoG text <_<

Help me please, where in the DoG do I find who can choose the boat type, especially for both/all participants and in an MC AC?

For a DoG match, only the challenging vessel has to be specified; the defender's boat can be anything within the other DoG requirements like LWL, center-board etc, 

Share this post


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

Already commented: he likes multis a lot, they are not conflictual with monos. Now are they the best choice for the AC: he says he doesn't know, but considers that boat type has to be chosen by the Defender (ahem ...)

 

Thanks, X. 

Agreed that the part you put in italics is the more interesting part of his response, suggesting he was not of the mind to be forcing either monoscafi or multiscafi for consent.

Max seems to lean to monohulls, which may influence P$B and become a factor; there have been suggestions of interest from a lot of potential challengers, which could also send the event down that path.

Odd shot taken by Max at BA, but then he like GD has taken shots at almost everyone over the years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ You are in good company then.

 

What's 'odd' is that it didn't occur to you that LR has a bit to be upset about, just maybe this is an indication of where they put some of the blame?

 

But slag away Spin-boy, you have nothing else.....no facts.....no team :(

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Rennmaus said:

Help me please, where in the DoG do I find who can choose the boat type, especially for both/all participants and in an MC AC?

For a DoG match, only the challenging vessel has to be specified; the defender's boat can be anything within the other DoG requirements like LWL, center-board etc, 

 

My italics had you in mind, Rennie :D  You are of course right in theory - but it is a fact of life that, with hip-pocket Challengers, it is the Defender who pre-decides/confirms the type of boat: this is what happened in ACs 34 & 35, and would have happened in AC33 too (with EB keeping the last word on the new AC33 Rule) had LE not gone DoG

Bertelli being a practical man, this is what he was referring to. He also sounded sincere/modest, either he's a good actor or rumors of his stranglehold over GD are greatly exaggerated

Share this post


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

 

My italics had you in mind, Rennie :D  You are of course right in theory - but it is a fact of life that, with hip-pocket Challengers, it is the Defender who pre-decides/confirms the type of boat: this is what happened in ACs 34 & 35, and would have happened in AC33 too (with EB keeping the last word on the new AC33 Rule) had LE not gone DoG

Bertelli being a practical man, this is what he was referring to. He also sounded sincere/modest, either he's a good actor or rumors of his stranglehold over GD are greatly exaggerated

I agree, it is usually the defender with the buy-in of the MC-challenger.
My question was directed at the peeps here who think the challenger dictates the boat.

Hope, all is well for you, my friend. Cool that we have an Italian challenger involved again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, ~Stingray~ said:

Odd shot taken by Max at BA, but then he like GD has taken shots at almost everyone over the years.

 

Not to my knowledge. Having had several conversations with the guy, the outburst (assuming he indeed said that) seems out of character: as nav postulates, this may give us a tantalizing glimpse of what happened at the time of the AC62 demise - the obvious implication being BA was a turncoat

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Xlot said:

 

My italics had you in mind, Rennie :D  You are of course right in theory - but it is a fact of life that, with hip-pocket Challengers, it is the Defender who pre-decides/confirms the type of boat: this is what happened in ACs 34 & 35, and would have happened in AC33 too (with EB keeping the last word on the new AC33 Rule) had LE not gone DoG

Bertelli being a practical man, this is what he was referring to. He also sounded sincere/modest, either he's a good actor or rumors of his stranglehold over GD are greatly exaggerated

Only in certain quarters. Stinger has been pushing that particular barrow uphill for sometime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Xlot said:

 

Not to my knowledge. Having had several conversations with the guy, the outburst (assuming he indeed said that) seems out of character: as nav postulates, this may give us a tantalizing glimpse of what happened at the time of the AC62 demise - the obvious implication being BA was a turncoat

He probably sees the BAR-ART-initiated London Framework Agreement cartel as responsible for the change from AC62 to AC50.

 

1 hour ago, Rennmaus said:

Help me please, where in the DoG do I find who can choose the boat type, especially for both/all participants and in an MC AC?

For a DoG match, only the challenging vessel has to be specified; the defender's boat can be anything within the other DoG requirements like LWL, center-board etc, 

The first Challenge received is effectively a DoG Challenge which must be accepted, after which the Defender & Challenger may by MC agree and/or change the vessels, match conditions, additional challengers, boat design, etc. Failure to reach Mutual Consent effectively reverts the Challenge into a 1-on-1 DoG match per the Deed, which is what happened in 1988. Same thing in AC33 with the court-disqualified CoR promoting OR-Xerox as CoR - and the rest, regrettably, is history.

Share this post


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

Thanks for the try, but it's not the answer for the Q " where in the DoG do I find who can choose the boat type?".
 

The answer grasshopper lies in the 1988 mis-match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Xlot said:

 

Not to my knowledge. Having had several conversations with the guy, the outburst (assuming he indeed said that) seems out of character: as nav postulates, this may give us a tantalizing glimpse of what happened at the time of the AC62 demise - the obvious implication being BA was a turncoat

 

 

Could be, maybe MS blames any and all who voted for the boat change, but the Gtran looked a bit wild, which is why I asked if there was a gentler clarification to be taken:

They succeed in a few such as Max Sirena with his load of strong humanity. Humanity that not all the champions have, though multiplied as Ben Ainslie: "as a person is worth less than zero".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, ~Stingray~ said:

Few succeed as Max Sirena with his charge of strong humanity. Humanity that not all champions have, even if they've won multiple medals like Ben Ainslie: "as a person he is worth less than zero".

FIFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Rennmaus said:

Oh Indio, really... tsk.

1988 was a salient lesson for any Challenger. I doubt LR would have specified a boat other than a generic 90'x90' box to have options if there is no MC.

Share this post


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

FIFY

Thanks again.

GD took shots back in the day at BAR for the Olympic 'heavy' gold medals they had 'hanging around their necks' in a mocking way, there is apparently no love lost between the parties against BAR and others; and no hesitation to attack them either. Wierd, since other team bosses typically don't behave that aggressively against their perceived enemies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/06/2017 at 7:59 AM, strider470 said:

I'm sure Luna Rossa will be a proper COR and a strong challenger. Time will tell.

Yup. I'm with you on this one.

They did what they had to in 34. Now that Wussel vision is gone burgers they will be back just as in 2000, 2003 and 2007.

Maybe the top challenger,  maybe not. But definitely not a poodle. 

Share this post


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

Yup. I'm with you on this one.

They did what they had to in 34. Now that Wussel vision is gone burgers they will be back just as in 2000, 2003 and 2007.

Maybe the top challenger,  maybe not. But definitely not a poodle. 

definitely not a poodle?

they may not be one for the teams that you dislike...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I agree, it is usually the defender with the buy-in of the MC-challenger.
My question was directed at the peeps here who think the challenger dictates the boat.

Point is he should at least make the pretense 'We're fighting hard for the Challengers, negotiating to get as good a boat as we can'.

Just a meek 'up to the Defender' is not what a good CoR should be saying.

 

Quote

the BAR-ART-initiated London Framework Agreement cartel

That came from those two?!

Well they just lost all the respect they earned from me during the racing :angry:

Share this post


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

That came from those two?!

Well they just lost all the respect they earned from me during the racing :angry:

Yep, The Frenchies spilled the beans - without too much "persuasion" :)

Share this post


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

Point is he should at least make the pretense 'We're fighting hard for the Challengers, negotiating to get as good a boat as we can'.

Just a meek 'up to the Defender' is not what a good CoR should be saying.

Oh, but then there's the other rumor, with Bertelli effectively having Dalton by the short hairs ... choose the one you prefer :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

 Wierd, since other team bosses typically don't behave that aggressively against their perceived enemies.

Was he channelling Russel, the Dr. General  and JS then do you suppose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Xlot said:

Oh, but then there's the other rumor, with Bertelli effectively having Dalton by the short hairs ... choose the one you prefer :D

 

Correct, Bertelli and some Swiss manufacturers behind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

Thanks again.

GD took shots back in the day at BAR for the Olympic 'heavy' gold medals they had 'hanging around their necks' in a mocking way, there is apparently no love lost between the parties against BAR and others; and no hesitation to attack them either. Wierd, since other team bosses typically don't behave that aggressively against their perceived enemies.

Excluding RC of course, right? Yeah, nah.

Share this post


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

Excluding RC of course, right? Yeah, nah.

You're kidding, right?

The reason for what got called the 'Dalton Gag Rule' was generally attacked here for the reason that it was supposedly to curtail his attacks against the event and his competitor syndicates. People here were hungry for the conflict they believed he'd let loose with. As soon as he had the Cup he lit directly into it.

The prospect of GD, MdR, and Max's being free to let loose against potential competitors in AC36 could be 'entertaining' on some level but doesn't it unnecessarily poison the waters? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ~Stingray~ said:

You're kidding, right?

The reason for what got called the 'Dalton Gag Rule' was generally attacked here for the reason that it was supposedly to curtail his attacks against the event and his competitor syndicates. People here were hungry for the conflict they believed he'd let loose with. As soon as he had the Cup he lit directly into it.

The prospect of GD, MdR, and Max's being free to let loose against potential competitors in AC36 could be 'entertaining' on some level but doesn't it unnecessarily poison the waters? 

The golden age of America's Cup was Dennis Connor in full flight...  Every event needs it's colourful characters even more so if you have distilled it down to hired guns sailing identical boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

You're kidding, right?

The reason for what got called the 'Dalton Gag Rule' was generally attacked here for the reason that it was supposedly to curtail his attacks against the event and his competitor syndicates. People here were hungry for the conflict they believed he'd let loose with. As soon as he had the Cup he lit directly into it.

The prospect of GD, MdR, and Max's being free to let loose against potential competitors in AC36 could be 'entertaining' on some level but doesn't it unnecessarily poison the waters? 

The AC is not a popularity contest. My advice to them would be to HTFU, or just fuck off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

doesn't it unnecessarily poison the waters? 

That sounds like an 'appropriateness' argument.

 

 this is major sport, not a fucking dinner party!

Share this post


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

The AC is not a popularity contest. My advice to them would be to HTFU, or just fuck off.

Ironic from the OR-Xerox sycophant who tried to spin all the former defender's self-serving machinations over the last 4 years! I seriously doubt Larry will challenge in AC36 - he's failed every other time he's had to go through a Challenger Selection Series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-7-30 at 6:29 PM, MR PLOW 270 said:

definitely not a poodle?

they may not be one for the teams that you dislike...

Sorry dude, not a poodle for any team including etnz. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Boybland said:

The golden age of America's Cup was Dennis Connor in full flight...  Every event needs it's colourful characters even more so if you have distilled it down to hired guns sailing identical boats.

Personally I'd rather see the cocksuckery left out of it.

Conner was equal parts legend and cocksucking cunt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Spinray trying to dodge the point that it was his team that did the attacking during AC36. After they skewed that playing field in their favour too, with an ever more draconian disrepute clause - as they did across the board.

As to GD's character, it was almost exclusively SR and his West Coast Mafia buddies doing the beat up on him in AC35 - for obvious partisan reasons. They will never admit that ETNZ is seen as a strong/the strongest Challenger and that actions to limit their chances do actually take place.

In how many sports are the basic rules written (and even re-written during the game!) by one or several of the competing teams.

But please, public comment is 'unseemly'.....yeah right!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it sad that there are folks trying to defend the disparagement clause 

 

AC isn't a major sports league where the teams collectively own the league and there's a vested interest to keep disputes in house. Even in major league sports, the disparage limitations are generally limited to referees because there's a need to limit the amount of undue pressure referees may get from a super star or old powerful coach. 

 

Even if the idea was to preserve the branding, here's a rule. Make all protests/discussions/disagreements confidentially submitted so the authority and teams have an opportunity to address it privately without a circus. But after three weeks, all discussion and materials are released publicly. You want discourse and dialogue, if differences exist you can market the shit out of it provided it isn't a clusterfuck press fire. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jaysper said:

Personally I'd rather see the cocksuckery left out of it.

Conner was equal parts legend and cocksucking cunt.

But we are still talking about him now 30 years later, that's how interesting he made the event!  Jimmy and GD are kind of the same, but slightly watered down, 20 years from now they will be the characters talked about when Kiwi's talk about how we won the cup in 2017.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't put JS in the same category as GD and Conner. JS is a boy who was given the wheel of 2 fast boats. He has never had to work hard to raise money, run a campaign. If you had removed JS from any of the last three campaign the results would have been the same. If you took GD or Connor out they would not have won.

JS is a boy with a fast mouth and nothing else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that is a little hard on JS.  I agree with 99 percent of what you said but from a sports psychology point of view the come back in the 34th Americas cup is something the majority of people couldn't have done even if on a faster boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Barnyb said:

Don't put JS in the same category as GD and Conner. JS is a boy who was given the wheel of 2 fast boats. He has never had to work hard to raise money, run a campaign. If you had removed JS from any of the last three campaign the results would have been the same. If you took GD or Connor out they would not have won.

JS is a boy with a fast mouth and nothing else. 

JS is one of the biggest reasons why Oracle won AC34. Everybody involved with Oracle says that. He would not give up and he wouldn't let the team give up. He made the tough decisions to change key crew and he pushed everybody in the team to keep giving as much as they possibly could. He was the one when sitting around in a big group who was doing all the pushing for ideas. The reason Oracle came back like they did was pure bloody mindedness from JS. He even accepted he needed to give up control of the sailing team to Ainslie. Make no mistake, without JS, they would not have won.

As for GD, I believe that he cost TNZ the cup twice, in 2007 and 2013. In 2007 he wouldn't make the hard decisions over who steered and did a piss poor job of motivating his team (remember the "no man love") by taking all the passion out of it. Boat handling was a huge issue and that was down to Dalton and his inability to motivate the team.. In 2013 he should have seen what was happening and taken the pressure off the team by getting the shore based guys working on making the boat faster, but his big ego, including wanting to be on the boat, got in the way. He also screwed up the lay day issue.

For all of the hero worship that Dalton attracts, the truth is that his track record is far from stellar. He won the Whitbread by sailing a maxi when all the talent was racing the 60's. The only boat with a realistic chance of challenging him dropped a mast on the first night and had to retire. When sailing the same class as everybody else, he was pretty average with the worst being in 2001/2 where he managed to be last on the water and worst prepared of all, despite being the only 2 boat team which should have given him a big advantage.

ETNZ did a great job this time, but that was because of the likes of the Sailing Team Director (Glenn Ashby) and the helm, Pete Burling and the design team. Why did they do so well? Because Dalton wasn't allowed near the important stuff this time around.

Let's give credit to those who deserve it and that certainly wasn't Dalton. :angry:

Share this post


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

Don't put JS in the same category as GD and Conner. JS is a boy who was given the wheel of 2 fast boats. He has never had to work hard to raise money, run a campaign. If you had removed JS from any of the last three campaign the results would have been the same. If you took GD or Connor out they would not have won.

JS is a boy with a fast mouth and nothing else. 

I am not comparing their sailing or organisational ability, just their entertainment value and possible future position as a hero / villain of the story in peoples memory and pointing out that having characters that fall into that catergory enhances rather than detracts from the event.

Share this post


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

Why did they do so well? Because Dalton wasn't allowed near the important stuff this time around.

Let's give credit to those who deserve it and that certainly wasn't Dalton. :angry:

Dalton has made mistakes but if he wasn't there ETNZ would not exist so for that alone he deserves full credit.

Share this post


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

ETNZ did a great job this time, ... Why did they do so well? Because Dalton wasn't allowed near the important stuff this time around.

In the America's Cup nothing is more important than having the money to be able to compete.

Share this post


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

Don't put JS in the same category as GD and Conner. JS is a boy who was given the wheel of 2 fast boats. He has never had to work hard to raise money, run a campaign. If you had removed JS from any of the last three campaign the results would have been the same. If you took GD or Connor out they would not have won.

JS is a boy with a fast mouth and nothing else. 

Agreed. Talented absolutely,  but in a small subset of skills in which Dalton and Conner are/were. 

Share this post


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

JS is one of the biggest reasons why Oracle won AC34. Everybody involved with Oracle says that. He would not give up and he wouldn't let the team give up. He made the tough decisions to change key crew and he pushed everybody in the team to keep giving as much as they possibly could. He was the one when sitting around in a big group who was doing all the pushing for ideas. The reason Oracle came back like they did was pure bloody mindedness from JS. He even accepted he needed to give up control of the sailing team to Ainslie. Make no mistake, without JS, they would not have won.

As for GD, I believe that he cost TNZ the cup twice, in 2007 and 2013. In 2007 he wouldn't make the hard decisions over who steered and did a piss poor job of motivating his team (remember the "no man love") by taking all the passion out of it. Boat handling was a huge issue and that was down to Dalton and his inability to motivate the team.. In 2013 he should have seen what was happening and taken the pressure off the team by getting the shore based guys working on making the boat faster, but his big ego, including wanting to be on the boat, got in the way. He also screwed up the lay day issue.

For all of the hero worship that Dalton attracts, the truth is that his track record is far from stellar. He won the Whitbread by sailing a maxi when all the talent was racing the 60's. The only boat with a realistic chance of challenging him dropped a mast on the first night and had to retire. When sailing the same class as everybody else, he was pretty average with the worst being in 2001/2 where he managed to be last on the water and worst prepared of all, despite being the only 2 boat team which should have given him a big advantage.

ETNZ did a great job this time, but that was because of the likes of the Sailing Team Director (Glenn Ashby) and the helm, Pete Burling and the design team. Why did they do so well? Because Dalton wasn't allowed near the important stuff this time around.

Let's give credit to those who deserve it and that certainly wasn't Dalton. :angry:

A lot of people talk about Jimmy being the major reason that Oracle won AC34. I agree, Jimmy was a big part of it, but I believe mot of it was due to their design team and namely Grant Simmer. Jimmy was able to keep his crew focused, but the main thing was he was able to get into Dean Barkers head. BUT Jimmy also has a pattern of sacrificing others, but not sacrificing himself. It started with the "Cheating" Oracle was skippered by Spithill which means the buck stops at him. But he was able to separate himself from others and throw guys like Matt Mitchell under the bus. Then when their backs were against the wall, and they were desperate, instead of falling on his sword and letting Ainslie (a perfectly capable helmsman at the time) take the wheel, no, he threw Kostecki under the bus so Ainslie could take the tacticians role, even though Ainslie was a backup helmsman. And again, in the last AC, (allegedly) he was again, unwilling to give up the helm to Tom Slingsby (An Olympic gold medalist) so he went to Larry directly and asked for his job back causing an (alleged) rift between the two. He was also unwilling to give up weight to his crewmates even though his position did not require the muscular physique he obviously had. Yes Spithill is a master in terms of sporting psychology, but he also has a pattern of sacrificing others to save himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SCARECROW said:

I think that is a little hard on JS.  I agree with 99 percent of what you said but from a sports psychology point of view the come back in the 34th Americas cup is something the majority of people couldn't have done even if on a faster boat.

True dat.

Share this post


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

A lot of people talk about Jimmy being the major reason that Oracle won AC34. I agree, Jimmy was a big part of it, but I believe mot of it was due to their design team and namely Grant Simmer. Jimmy was able to keep his crew focused, but the main thing was he was able to get into Dean Barkers head. BUT Jimmy also has a pattern of sacrificing others, but not sacrificing himself. It started with the "Cheating" Oracle was skippered by Spithill which means the buck stops at him. But he was able to separate himself from others and throw guys like Matt Mitchell under the bus. Then when their backs were against the wall, and they were desperate, instead of falling on his sword and letting Ainslie (a perfectly capable helmsman at the time) take the wheel, no, he threw Kostecki under the bus so Ainslie could take the tacticians role, even though Ainslie was a backup helmsman. And again, in the last AC, (allegedly) he was again, unwilling to give up the helm to Tom Slingsby (An Olympic gold medalist) so he went to Larry directly and asked for his job back causing an (alleged) rift between the two. He was also unwilling to give up weight to his crewmates even though his position did not require the muscular physique he obviously had. Yes Spithill is a master in terms of sporting psychology, but he also has a pattern of sacrificing others to save himself.

John Kostecki had stopped believing at 4:0 down. Jimmy had him replaced by BA.

They would never have won, had Kostecki stayed on board as tactician, IMO, regardless of the improved boat speed upwind.

Share this post


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

Then when their backs were against the wall, and they were desperate, instead of falling on his sword and letting Ainslie (a perfectly capable helmsman at the time) take the wheel, no, he threw Kostecki under the bus so Ainslie could take the tacticians role, even though Ainslie was a backup helmsman.

Now you are just being silly. Kostecki was clearly out of his depth and making mistakes. If you had left Kostecki on the boat and changed JS for Ainslie, there would have been no improvement. The "brains trust" at the back of the boat was not working and JS was not the problem, as became very clear as the match went on. Switching Kostecki and Ainslie was the correct move. Giving Ainslie the "authority" to run the boat was also a big move. There is no way that Ainslie could have done what he did if he was steering. Youi can't call the shots, boss the crew and work with the strategist (Slingsby) if you are helming. 

The dumb move was not having Ainslie on the boat to start with, but that was more to do with loyalty to Kostecki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Team_GBR said:

Now you are just being silly. Kostecki was clearly out of his depth and making mistakes. If you had left Kostecki on the boat and changed JS for Ainslie, there would have been no improvement. The "brains trust" at the back of the boat was not working and JS was not the problem, as became very clear as the match went on. Switching Kostecki and Ainslie was the correct move. Giving Ainslie the "authority" to run the boat was also a big move. There is no way that Ainslie could have done what he did if he was steering. Youi can't call the shots, boss the crew and work with the strategist (Slingsby) if you are helming. 

The dumb move was not having Ainslie on the boat to start with, but that was more to do with loyalty to Kostecki

I'm not disputing Kostecki was out of his depth, You wanna talk mistakes...if you count how many mistakes Kostecki made then, to how many Jimmy made this time, Jimmy probably made more now, than Kostecki made then. So that puts Jimmy out of his depth too right?? Isn't it funny how the "Brains trust" at the back of the boat wasn't working then, and the "Brains trust" at the back of the boat didn't work this time either, as was evident with the alleged rift between Spithill and Slingsby.The common factor being Jimmy Spithill calling the shots at the helm. The difference was this time, the design rule was tighter than it was last time, so they couldn't make wholesale changes like they did last time.

Share this post


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

I'm not disputing Kostecki was out of his depth, You wanna talk mistakes...if you count how many mistakes Kostecki made then, to how many Jimmy made this time, Jimmy probably made more now, than Kostecki made then. So that puts Jimmy out of his depth too right?? Isn't it funny how the "Brains trust" at the back of the boat wasn't working then, and the "Brains trust" at the back of the boat didn't work this time either, as was evident with the alleged rift between Spithill and Slingsby.The common factor being Jimmy Spithill calling the shots at the helm. The difference was this time, the design rule was tighter than it was last time, so they couldn't make wholesale changes like they did last time.

The difference in AC34 was boat speed, pure and simple. As indeed it was in AC35.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Legion of Modernrate Jack said:

Looking at a post from live sail die

And the area for each base, it appears that the poodle defender has agreed to use monoslugs for the AC36!

That's being incredibly disingenuous.

it was a presentation to council from two local special interest groups. Nothing from RNYS or ETNZ. 

Edit: the article L.S.D referenced http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11897235

Edited by TimmyHate
Add link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Legion of Modernrate Jack said:

 

arf.gif

That's right. Don't let the facts get in the way of your narrative 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Legion of Modernrate Jack said:

I fatti hanno le voci sono le specialità di sì, il Kiwi?

Chiaramente non si può leggere così smettere di parlare fuori il culo.

Y puedo publicar en otro idioma demasiado coño

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Legion of Modernrate Jack said:

I fatti hanno le voci sono le specialità di sì, il Kiwi?

What is this? A random sequence of Italian words without any meaning? If you try to explain in English I can help you with the translation :)))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Legion of Modernrate Jack said:

What it started off in Auslish then became Italianish was amusing when converted back to Auslish, i had to post it verbatim #googlishtrans :)

:-D :-D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Team_GBR said:

JS is one of the biggest reasons why Oracle won AC34. Everybody involved with Oracle says that. He would not give up and he wouldn't let the team give up. He made the tough decisions to change key crew and he pushed everybody in the team to keep giving as much as they possibly could. He was the one when sitting around in a big group who was doing all the pushing for ideas. The reason Oracle came back like they did was pure bloody mindedness from JS. He even accepted he needed to give up control of the sailing team to Ainslie. Make no mistake, without JS, they would not have won.

As for GD, I believe that he cost TNZ the cup twice, in 2007 and 2013. In 2007 he wouldn't make the hard decisions over who steered and did a piss poor job of motivating his team (remember the "no man love") by taking all the passion out of it. Boat handling was a huge issue and that was down to Dalton and his inability to motivate the team.. In 2013 he should have seen what was happening and taken the pressure off the team by getting the shore based guys working on making the boat faster, but his big ego, including wanting to be on the boat, got in the way. He also screwed up the lay day issue.

For all of the hero worship that Dalton attracts, the truth is that his track record is far from stellar. He won the Whitbread by sailing a maxi when all the talent was racing the 60's. The only boat with a realistic chance of challenging him dropped a mast on the first night and had to retire. When sailing the same class as everybody else, he was pretty average with the worst being in 2001/2 where he managed to be last on the water and worst prepared of all, despite being the only 2 boat team which should have given him a big advantage.

ETNZ did a great job this time, but that was because of the likes of the Sailing Team Director (Glenn Ashby) and the helm, Pete Burling and the design team. Why did they do so well? Because Dalton wasn't allowed near the important stuff this time around.

Let's give credit to those who deserve it and that certainly wasn't Dalton. :angry:

I thought Baker was one of the biggest reasons why Oracle won. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Endless permutations, depending on your bias :D

You could equally argue that it was JS taking a more major role (overall charge?) that lost it for OTUSA this time around, while GD's tenacity held things together at ETNZ!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Team_GBR said:

JS is one of the biggest reasons why Oracle won AC34. Everybody involved with Oracle says that. He would not give up and he wouldn't let the team give up. He made the tough decisions to change key crew and he pushed everybody in the team to keep giving as much as they possibly could. He was the one when sitting around in a big group who was doing all the pushing for ideas. The reason Oracle came back like they did was pure bloody mindedness from JS. He even accepted he needed to give up control of the sailing team to Ainslie. Make no mistake, without JS, they would not have won.

As for GD, I believe that he cost TNZ the cup twice, in 2007 and 2013. In 2007 he wouldn't make the hard decisions over who steered and did a piss poor job of motivating his team (remember the "no man love") by taking all the passion out of it. Boat handling was a huge issue and that was down to Dalton and his inability to motivate the team.. In 2013 he should have seen what was happening and taken the pressure off the team by getting the shore based guys working on making the boat faster, but his big ego, including wanting to be on the boat, got in the way. He also screwed up the lay day issue.

For all of the hero worship that Dalton attracts, the truth is that his track record is far from stellar. He won the Whitbread by sailing a maxi when all the talent was racing the 60's. The only boat with a realistic chance of challenging him dropped a mast on the first night and had to retire. When sailing the same class as everybody else, he was pretty average with the worst being in 2001/2 where he managed to be last on the water and worst prepared of all, despite being the only 2 b