• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.
MidPack

Poll: Next AC Boat

Next AC Boat?   633 members have voted

  1. 1. Next AC Boat?

    • Foiling cat very similar to AC35 boats
      189
    • Another foiling multihull
      127
    • Displacement monohull
      139
    • Foiling monohull
      160
    • Other
      18

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

933 posts in this topic

3 hours ago, surfsailor said:

Defender trials gave the US a huge advantage back in the day, just like challenger trials give the challengers an advantage today. The ACEA acknowledged as much by including the defender in the first round robin in AC 35. And before anyone cries 'unfair', I would note that the outcome of the cup tells a very different story. So that is something ETNZ will need to wrestle with in AC36, unless their predetermined framework agreement with LR is specifically designed to minimize the number of viable challengers by going to a boat design that is financially out of reach for most of them.

And while there were a few exceptions - Gretel II might have been faster than the Chance redesigned Intrepid in 1970, for example - for the most part, the AC was won with superior speed going back to the original challenge, and much of that is technology - sails, hulls, rigs, etc. Think Ranger. So to say that technology isn't a huge part of the AC is disingenuous at best.

The AC has moved with the time to keep pace with advances in racing yachts, but in fits and starts rather than linearly - the 12 meters were probably kept past their due, but a lot of that had to do with the fact that the offshore racing boats of the time (both CCA and then later IOR) were dog slow, our nostalgia for those eras notwithstanding, so by comparison the 12s weren't boring. But that is no longer the case - big offshore multis are smashing every record imaginable, the IMOCA 60s are hitting damn near 30 kts in the southern ocean, and the reality is that it's the 21st century, not the 19th. In that context, the AC 72s were the modern day J-boats, and the AC 50s are like the 12s when they were young and fresh.

For sure the rule needs to be tweaked - reduce human power requirements, severely limit the computer driven flight control to make it more about the sailors - but overall, I don't see how you could ask for a more successful format - lots of viable teams, epic starts, incredible racing, and an outcome that showed just how level the playing field actually was.

 

 

 

 

Has anyone ever said that technology isn't a huge part of the AC?  It's just that some of us are pointing out that sailing ability HAS been a major part of the AC. Gretel II, Endeavour, and Valkyrie may all have been faster boats beaten by better sailors. Valkyrie was in the lead and just had to finish the leg she was on when she tore two spinnakers and lost n 1893. Sherman Hoyt leaves us in no doubt that Endeavour was the faster boat.

When the 12s were around there were already "big offshore multis smashing every record imaginable". Eric Tabarly's 69' tri Pen Duick IV had wing masts in 1968 - when only one AC boat had a spade rudder. Alain Colas bought her and chased the Whitbread fleet around the world solo, setting a record. I think she also set a Transat record in the year that Ragtime first won.  In 1978, Tabarly launched Paul Ricard, a foiling tri with a wing mast, which took Atlantic's transat record. The early ORMA 60s were also launched at the tail end of the 12 Metre period. There were, of course, many others.

Earlier AC boats were much more part of mainstream sailing than the AC72 and AC50s are. The J Boats were designed to the same rating system as S Boats at club level, and they were in many ways less advanced than their smaller versions. The same thing applied to the Length and Sail Area boats. In England, both the Js and the L x SA boats raced regularly at local regatta level, in a fleet of comparable boats that had nothing to do with the AC. That's very different from the AC72s or AC50s, which have never turned up to Cowes Week or Kiel Week, and are sailed under a tight box rule that does not have smaller counterparts racing at club level.

Yep, it's the 21st century - so what aspect of 21st century sailing should we highlight? In the 21st century the fastest-growing hull material is probably polyethylene (as used in Bic O'pens, RS Fevas, etc), many multi fleets are down, the top selling racing yacht is probably the J/70 (which is slower than comparable boats), sailors are ageing and kids are getting fatter, and there's more J Classers racing than AC boats and more Dragons than sportsboats. If we want to faithfully follow 21st century trends with the AC we'd probably have it raced in a polyethylene mono using a 1930s design, with a minimum crew age of 50 or a minimum weight of 175 pounds.   :-)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, A Class Sailor said:

 

Why? There were more lead changes in the AC than we have ever seen before and overall, racing was closer than in monohull days. The racing format and the course meant that even a team like ETNZ could actually be beaten and they had to work hard for their wins. If we had been in big leadmines on traditional AC courses, a boat with the advantages of ETNZ would have won every race by miles and would never have been headed.Look at what happened in the DOG match of AC33.

 

Get it right. We would not have seen any foiling cats to the current designs. If you remember, it needed a complete redesign of the 12's to suit the conditions. If you had sailed the boats from 83 or earlier, they would have sunk in those conditions, if they had not broken their rigs first. You design to the rule for the intended conditions.

 

Cats were always considered a fringe and somewhat unsporting type of sailing. Cats were banned by most of the top clubs as "ungentlemanly". Attitudes have changed somewhat, although there is still a hard core group who seem to think multis are the work of the devil (still banned from the S2H)

The AC has always been a design competition, first and foremost but does not focus on the fastest possible type of boats. Even now, with the cats, the original rule for the 72's was never written believing that it would produce the fastest boats and the same applies to the 50's. The "fastest boats" was always marketing hype and I wanted to remind them of Paul Larson and L’Hydroptère every time I saw or heard it. They were the fastest boats under a limiting rule. 

The AC has never been about sailing in boats that are relateable to the masses. If you think that racing a J was something that the public could relate to, you are dreaming. What I do know is that people who have never sailed and never previously watched an AC racing (except for the last race of 83) but maybe watch the start of the S2H for the spectacle have talked to me about the current AC boats and how wild they look. In some ways, i would say that people have related better to the extreme nature of what is going on than they do to normal sailing in the same way as you get big crowds to certain Red Bull extreme sports events. You are not going to be able to argue that the Red Bull air race attracts big crowds because everybody can relate to flying planes like that.

My biggest gripe is that there is clear prejudice at work. The DoG makes zero mention of the type of boat and therefore any boat goes, so long as they are agreed by the 2 parties. Mutis are now mainstream and so are foiling multis, even if they are less common. We are seeing them in every form of sailing, from beach cats right up to ocean racers. Any sailor can now 'have a go". Look at the numbers at the upcoming Moth and A Class worlds (218 and 136). Not exactly a fringe activity. 

If you want to say that you don't like cats and foiling, that's your right, but stop wrapping it up in BS arguments about spirit of the AC and about average people not being able to relate to it. If you prefer watching slow boats over long races with very little real excitement, which i admit I used to watch because there was nothing better, that is your right, but don't try justify it by using others as "evidence". It is your personal choice, nothing else.

The Js WERE something the sailing public could relate to. They were designed to the same rule as the one that governed much of US sailing down to club level racing in S Classers, and one that was very similar to the one that governed UK sailing down to club level racing in 6s and Scandinavian sailing down to 5s. In England the Js raced at about 20% of club regattas in their annual procession around the coast. They shared the start line with local one designs, 6 Metres, 8 Metres etc. The public in their tens of thousands went to watch, using special trains run for the purpose.

The Red Bull Air Race is raced in planes that are slower than 1920s biplanes, and slower than many private planes. If you want to use it as an object lesson then the AC should be sailed in 12s.

There's not "clear prejudice at work". It's a conception of the AC that arguably relates it closer to the history of the event, and the donor's wishes. He clearly said that he felt the boats had to be ocean going types and the AC72s and AC50s were not. 

I've sailed multis at a bunch of different clubs and never found any prejudice, or any claims that they were "ungentlemanly". Modern technology has allowed us to research multi history in a way that we have never been able to before. It's become apparent that most of the claims about discrimination are based on lies. 

The main prejudice is from those who are perfectly happy for every other type of boat (inshore multis,m offshore multis, windsurfers, kites, dinghies, etc) to be allowed to have its own events but then whine like dingoes when the monos want to do the same thing. If you are going to complain when the AC or Hobart bans multis then you are also going to have to either complain when there are multi-only regattas or kite-only regattas, or accept that you are applying double standards. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, A Class Sailor said:

 

Why? There were more lead changes in the AC than we have ever seen before and overall, racing was closer than in monohull days. The racing format and the course meant that even a team like ETNZ could actually be beaten and they had to work hard for their wins. If we had been in big leadmines on traditional AC courses, a boat with the advantages of ETNZ would have won every race by miles and would never have been headed.Look at what happened in the DOG match of AC33.

 

Get it right. We would not have seen any foiling cats to the current designs. If you remember, it needed a complete redesign of the 12's to suit the conditions. If you had sailed the boats from 83 or earlier, they would have sunk in those conditions, if they had not broken their rigs first. You design to the rule for the intended conditions.

 

Cats were always considered a fringe and somewhat unsporting type of sailing. Cats were banned by most of the top clubs as "ungentlemanly". Attitudes have changed somewhat, although there is still a hard core group who seem to think multis are the work of the devil (still banned from the S2H)

The AC has always been a design competition, first and foremost but does not focus on the fastest possible type of boats. Even now, with the cats, the original rule for the 72's was never written believing that it would produce the fastest boats and the same applies to the 50's. The "fastest boats" was always marketing hype and I wanted to remind them of Paul Larson and L’Hydroptère every time I saw or heard it. They were the fastest boats under a limiting rule. 

The AC has never been about sailing in boats that are relateable to the masses. If you think that racing a J was something that the public could relate to, you are dreaming. What I do know is that people who have never sailed and never previously watched an AC racing (except for the last race of 83) but maybe watch the start of the S2H for the spectacle have talked to me about the current AC boats and how wild they look. In some ways, i would say that people have related better to the extreme nature of what is going on than they do to normal sailing in the same way as you get big crowds to certain Red Bull extreme sports events. You are not going to be able to argue that the Red Bull air race attracts big crowds because everybody can relate to flying planes like that.

My biggest gripe is that there is clear prejudice at work. The DoG makes zero mention of the type of boat and therefore any boat goes, so long as they are agreed by the 2 parties. Mutis are now mainstream and so are foiling multis, even if they are less common. We are seeing them in every form of sailing, from beach cats right up to ocean racers. Any sailor can now 'have a go". Look at the numbers at the upcoming Moth and A Class worlds (218 and 136). Not exactly a fringe activity. 

If you want to say that you don't like cats and foiling, that's your right, but stop wrapping it up in BS arguments about spirit of the AC and about average people not being able to relate to it. If you prefer watching slow boats over long races with very little real excitement, which i admit I used to watch because there was nothing better, that is your right, but don't try justify it by using others as "evidence". It is your personal choice, nothing else.

First off, all of this is "personal choice", but at the moment The Jay has made better arguments, backing it up with facts, regarding that simple thought that Extreme Sailing is not main stream.

"The AC has never been about sailing in boats that are relateable to the masses. If you think that racing a J was something that the public could relate to, you are dreaming. "

I'm not dreaming and many a dream was started watching Js, 12s and the other monohulls race.  To deny that is to negate generations of sailors.  They inspired me.  You know my first boat?  It was a Prindle 18.  Yes, a Cat.  I sailed that for 8 years and eventually got out of it for two reasons, the class was never interested in the base, but only in what was new.  They looked down on almost anything that was not a Cat.  I had a '78 boat and in '81 when I went to my first race, they pretty much ignored me.  Eventually I just played till I realized soloing an 18' Cat was too much effort.

I eventually bought a '89 Buccaneer 18 and the first regatta I went to, folks not only helped me rig, they gave me tips, they cheered when I finished, they welcomed.  Foiling Cats will never be mainstream for Cats are not mainstream, unless you like to fly hulls and cruise.  As has been discussed before, foiling itself will not be mainstream, because the entry effort is to high for most people.  Extreme is never inclusive other then to its own small group.

Dennis Connor had to "bend the rules" to try and beat NZ and in doing so, opened the door to the situation we have today.  Numbers do not lie and the attention span of a public already overwhelmed by so many other pretty baubles will not stay on boats they do not understand and boats they will never even consider to sail.  You say the public (by which you mean the sailing public or the what the fuck is sailing public?) cannot relate to a J boat, but let me ask you a question and unless your an actual crew from AC35, if I put you at the helm of a J class sailboat then at the helm of the AC50, which one do you honestly believe you could sail better and understand how it works.  I'll give you mine first for I've sailed for 35+ years....I would have no issue helming that J and even giving crew input, albeit not AC level, but I would have zero idea how to sail a foiling cat, an AC50 and get it on the foil, much less keep it there.  That defines relating to a boat.

No one will "win" this debate and NZ will do what they do.  I am clear that were they to announce foiling cats, I'd once again stop paying attention to the Cup.  I have no love for that type of vessel in the America's Cup.  I figure you'd do the same if they announce a monohull of any kind.  However, if you would not, please look up the definition of hypocrite.  

Share this post


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

The Js WERE something the sailing public could relate to. They were designed to the same rule as the one that governed much of US sailing down to club level racing in S Classers, and one that was very similar to the one that governed UK sailing down to club level racing in 6s and Scandinavian sailing down to 5s. In England the Js raced at about 20% of club regattas in their annual procession around the coast. They shared the start line with local one designs, 6 Metres, 8 Metres etc. The public in their tens of thousands went to watch, using special trains run for the purpose.

The "sailing public" back in the days of J's was a very limited group of people. It was an exclusive and small pastime. The masses you talk about who came in on special trains weren't sailors and didn't understand sailing. They were there for the spectacle

Quote

The Red Bull Air Race is raced in planes that are slower than 1920s biplanes, and slower than many private planes. If you want to use it as an object lesson then the AC should be sailed in 12s.

Clearly you don't fly. You could not fly an average private plane or 1920's biplane around an Air race course. For the job at hand, they are very technical planes way ahead of the average plane.They are designed to be the fastest planes around the course they fly. 12's are not designed to be the fastest boats around the courses they sail.


 

Quote

 

There's not "clear prejudice at work". It's a conception of the AC that arguably relates it closer to the history of the event, and the donor's wishes. He clearly said that he felt the boats had to be ocean going types and the AC72s and AC50s were not. 


 

Don't try to suggest that the IACC boats were ocean going but why does ocean going mean you can't sail multis? I have no objection to you changing so that the boats need to be ocean going, but you can get foiling multis to be ocean going.

 

Quote

I've sailed multis at a bunch of different clubs and never found any prejudice, or any claims that they were "ungentlemanly". Modern technology has allowed us to research multi history in a way that we have never been able to before. It's become apparent that most of the claims about discrimination are based on lies. 

I never said that today people consider multis "ungentlemanly" but if you experienced prejudice and discrimination against multis, you have either been lucky or you haven't looked very hard. throughout the world there are clubs that ban cats because they think you cannot race cats and monos together, which is BS. there are major races that don't allow multis, sometimes even citing safety, even though multis race around the world.There are places where i am not allowed to race my cat (too fast, too big, angles make it unsafe and they take up too much space in the boat park) but i could sail an 18' skiff or Moth which between them would either take up more space, sail faster or sail extreme angles as well. In Sydney, they even formed their own cat club to overcome the prejudice.

 

Quote

The main prejudice is from those who are perfectly happy for every other type of boat (inshore multis,m offshore multis, windsurfers, kites, dinghies, etc) to be allowed to have its own events but then whine like dingoes when the monos want to do the same thing. If you are going to complain when the AC or Hobart bans multis then you are also going to have to either complain when there are multi-only regattas or kite-only regattas, or accept that you are applying double standards. 

Same tired old excuses. If you have an open event, it should be open. if you have a closed event, it should be closed. Multis would never expected to be invited to the IRC championships. Races like the Transpac have shown us that there are no issues with mixed fleets and they have been truly progressive. There is no excuse in this day and age for excluding multis from major open events. Here in Australia it is because the fat cats at places like the CYCA want their headlines saved for the monohulls. they can't handle that line honours, the most pointless category in a handicap event, would go to a multi. Its all about prejudice and ego.

Share this post


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

Has anyone ever said that technology isn't a huge part of the AC?  It's just that some of us are pointing out that sailing ability HAS been a major part of the AC. Gretel II, Endeavour, and Valkyrie may all have been faster boats beaten by better sailors. Valkyrie was in the lead and just had to finish the leg she was on when she tore two spinnakers and lost n 1893. Sherman Hoyt leaves us in no doubt that Endeavour was the faster boat.

 

Thanks for that, saves me from posting a similar reply. To be honest your choice of words would of been better

Share this post


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

Has anyone ever said that technology isn't a huge part of the AC?  It's just that some of us are pointing out that sailing ability HAS been a major part of the AC. Gretel II, Endeavour, and Valkyrie may all have been faster boats beaten by better sailors. Valkyrie was in the lead and just had to finish the leg she was on when she tore two spinnakers and lost n 1893. Sherman Hoyt leaves us in no doubt that Endeavour was the faster boat.

Nobody has ever suggested that you don't need a great crew. If you can't sail the boat, you cannot win. The key point is that came about to provide an answer to technical questions regarding types of boat. Primarily, it has been a design competition where, very occasionally a better crew has managed to win with a slower boat. Giving examples of where a better crew has won, or, maybe, more accurately a poorer crew has failed to win despite having the better boat, doesn't "prove" that the AC is primarily a bout sailing ability. I believe there is a strong argument to say that it was not about the ability of the crew, because for all the limitations on club and words about competition between nations, there was never a restriction on nationality of crew. If the crew was an important part of the match, there would have been such limitations. By leaving it free, I suggests that they wanted the best crews on the boats to show off the ultimate performance of the boat.

Share this post


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

Defender trials gave the US a huge advantage back in the day, just like challenger trials give the challengers an advantage today. The ACEA acknowledged as much by including the defender in the first round robin in AC 35. And before anyone cries 'unfair', I would note that the outcome of the cup tells a very different story. So that is something ETNZ will need to wrestle with in AC36, unless their predetermined framework agreement with LR is specifically designed to minimize the number of viable challengers by going to a boat design that is financially out of reach for most of them.

And while there were a few exceptions - Gretel II might have been faster than the Chance redesigned Intrepid in 1970, for example - for the most part, the AC was won with superior speed going back to the original challenge, and much of that is technology - sails, hulls, rigs, etc. Think Ranger. So to say that technology isn't a huge part of the AC is disingenuous at best.

The AC has moved with the time to keep pace with advances in racing yachts, but in fits and starts rather than linearly - the 12 meters were probably kept past their due, but a lot of that had to do with the fact that the offshore racing boats of the time (both CCA and then later IOR) were dog slow, our nostalgia for those eras notwithstanding, so by comparison the 12s weren't boring. But that is no longer the case - big offshore multis are smashing every record imaginable, the IMOCA 60s are hitting damn near 30 kts in the southern ocean, and the reality is that it's the 21st century, not the 19th. In that context, the AC 72s were the modern day J-boats, and the AC 50s are like the 12s when they were young and fresh.

For sure the rule needs to be tweaked - reduce human power requirements, severely limit the computer driven flight control to make it more about the sailors - but overall, I don't see how you could ask for a more successful format - lots of viable teams, epic starts, incredible racing, and an outcome that showed just how level the playing field actually was.

Good post!

The other big aspect of Cory's argument is of course how the friendly challenge between nations was focused completely a match between those nations' yachts and those nations' yacht design technology - and was, nothing, nothing whatsoever about the crew who sailed those 'constructed in country' national yachts.

Those arguing for nationality rules, especially if they are about the crew, absolutely have the wrong motivations, Deed intent-wise.

Share this post


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

Good post!

The other big aspect of Cory's argument is of course how the friendly challenge between nations was focused completely a match between those nations' yachts and those nations' yacht design technology - and was, nothing, nothing whatsoever about the crew who sailed those 'constructed in country' national yachts.

Those arguing for nationality rules, especially if they are about the crew, absolutely have the wrong motivations, Deed intent-wise.

Are multihulls 'yachts'? (your words)

From Wikipedia, for a quick source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yacht

A yacht /ˈjɒt/ is a recreational boat or ship. The term originates from the Dutch word jacht "hunt", and was originally defined as a light fast sailing vessel used by the Dutch navy to pursue pirates and other transgressors around and into the shallow waters of the Low Countries...

Racing yachts[edit]

Main article: Yacht racing
220px-Cabo_San_Lucas_Race_Start_2013_pho
 
Cabo San Lucas Race Start 2013
220px-J-24_yacht_racing%2C_Sydney_Harbou
 
Inshore yacht racing in Sydney Harbour, Australia

Racing yachts try to reduce the wetted surface area, which creates drag, by keeping the hull light whilst having a deep and heavy bulb keel, allowing them to support a tall mast with a great sail area...

From the DoG, it leaves things open with 'yacht or other vessels:

"Any organized yacht Club of a foreign country, incorporated, patented, or licensed by the legislature, admiralty or other executive department, having for its annual regatta an ocean water course on the sea, or on an arm of the sea, or one which combines both, shall always be entitled to the right of sailing a match for this Cup with a yacht or vessel propelled by sails only and constructed in the country to which the challenging Club belongs, against any one yacht or vessel constructed in the country of the Club holding the Cup. The competing yachts or vessels, if of one mast, shall be not less than sixty-five forty-four feet nor more than ninety feet on the load water line; if of more than one mast, they shall be not less than eighty feet nor more than one hundred and fifteen feet on the load water line."

So, does the term 'vessel' include multihulls, or other types of mono hulls?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the courts already decided it. The Deed makes no exclusion of multihulls, anywhere in it.

Share this post


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

Yep, it's the 21st century - so what aspect of 21st century sailing should we highlight? In the 21st century the fastest-growing hull material is probably polyethylene (as used in Bic O'pens, RS Fevas, etc), many multi fleets are down, the top selling racing yacht is probably the J/70 (which is slower than comparable boats), sailors are ageing and kids are getting fatter, and there's more J Classers racing than AC boats and more Dragons than sportsboats. If we want to faithfully follow 21st century trends with the AC we'd probably have it raced in a polyethylene mono using a 1930s design, with a minimum crew age of 50 or a minimum weight of 175 pounds.   :-)

 

 

Yet the foiling Nacra is in the 2020 Olympics - which surely as good a barometer as anything for the direction of competitive sailing - and the RSX convertible (plus foils) is targeted for 2024. Go figure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, A Class Sailor said:

My biggest gripe is that there is clear prejudice at work. The DoG makes zero mention of the type of boat and therefore any boat goes, so long as they are agreed by the 2 parties. Mutis are now mainstream and so are foiling multis, even if they are less common. We are seeing them in every form of sailing, from beach cats right up to ocean racers. Any sailor can now 'have a go". Look at the numbers at the upcoming Moth and A Class worlds (218 and 136). Not exactly a fringe activity.

Sorry but in much of the world A-class is very much a fringe activity. I've never even seen one. As far as the UK goes, In the several decades I've been sailing, the proportion of sailors sailing multihulls has markedly decreased, Not "clear prejudice", simple facts.

Share this post


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

Sorry but in much of the world A-class is very much a fringe activity. I've never even seen one. As far as the UK goes, In the several decades I've been sailing, the proportion of sailors sailing multihulls has markedly decreased, Not "clear prejudice", simple facts.

Classes are alway parochial, and strong in one place but not another.  

Flying elevens are one of the strongest youth classes in australia but you don't see them elsewhere.  sunfish are big in some places (ugly as hell) with some 300,000 despite being ancient and ugly. 

manly jr and sabot were also big in aussie.  

It is a combination of history and suitability for environment.  there are plenty of A class out there and for a long time, same with moths.  

 

 

Share this post


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

It is a combination of history and suitability for environment. 

Absolutely. UK has a sailing culture where small boats are generally kept at sailing clubs, sailing clubs have limited space and multihulls take up much more space. Hence a lot of clubs don't want multi-hulls. It isn't "clear prejudice", it's a rational reaction to objective constraints. Same goes for bigger racing multihulls, they take up more marina space and hence are even more ruinously expensive to berth than monohulls.

Share this post


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

Absolutely. UK has a sailing culture where small boats are generally kept at sailing clubs, sailing clubs have limited space and multihulls take up much more space. Hence a lot of clubs don't want multi-hulls. It isn't "clear prejudice", it's a rational reaction to objective constraints. Same goes for bigger racing multihulls, they take up more marina space and hence are even more ruinously expensive to berth than monohulls.

at the end of the day there is no substitute for sailing what others are sailing in your club.  if lasers are strong sail lasers, if sunfish are strong go somewhere else. ;-) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

Sorry but in much of the world A-class is very much a fringe activity. I've never even seen one. As far as the UK goes, In the several decades I've been sailing, the proportion of sailors sailing multihulls has markedly decreased, Not "clear prejudice", simple facts.

 

23 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

Absolutely. UK has a sailing culture where small boats are generally kept at sailing clubs, sailing clubs have limited space and multihulls take up much more space. Hence a lot of clubs don't want multi-hulls. It isn't "clear prejudice", it's a rational reaction to objective constraints. Same goes for bigger racing multihulls, they take up more marina space and hence are even more ruinously expensive to berth than monohulls.

So there is no misunderstanding where I come from, I am a dinghy sailor who has just ordered my first cat, an A, so I think I have a dog n this fight and I believe you are either are believing all you are told or deliberately adding to the false information. I have been out measuring and the width argument does not stack up. An A barely takes up any more width in a boat park than some popular British designs and in some cases, because of the trolley design, they are no different at all and an 18' boat takes up 18' even if it is a monohull. A Merlln is only 130mm narrower than an A and the Laser 5000 I used to keep at HISC (no cats allowed) was wider by 200mm. There is no logic to the ban on cats based on space taken, because there are smaller cats and all that would be needed would be a size limit. The problem with a size limit is that it would mean some monohulls might be lose out.

I can understand that back in the day, the speed and angles that a cat sailed made it less compatible to sail with monohull dinghies but today, with a reasonable number of high performance apparent wind monohulls, that argument has gone.

I guess that as they are private members clubs they can choose what they want at their club, but at least be honest about why. Don't come up with a rubbish reason that doesn't stand scrutiny. 

Numbers of multihull sailors in the UK decreased for a number of reasons, but that doesn't mean that prejudice against cats doesn't exist. Maybe it has caused the decline. That said, it is now picking up fast again following cats being back in the olympics. Youth cat sailing has never been stronger and I expect that to be seen through other classes as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Performance rafts are often found upside down, cruising rafts are often no faster than monos. One thing is for sure, they cost a lot more to berth which is why a surprising number of our local racing fleet live on moorings. Biggest drawback is simply the waterline length you need to have any kind of accomodations or rum drinking facilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh for heavens sake Team GBR. You are constructing an argument around a couple of outlier monohull classes of extreme width. Most clubs would go bust if their dinghy parks were packed out with Merlins or Laser 5000s. Not I think that there ever were enough Laser 5000s to fill a dinghy park.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the %age of active boats in an average dinghy parks that's pushing it a little. Where there was water that was open enough there have been multihulls in the dinghy park for a long long time. Same with 5tonners back in the day. Most of them lived on their combi's but you'd often enough seen 1 belonging to the local hot heads at some random canal feeder in the Pennines or else where.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At my club if you are not actively sailing your boat, you won't get a space next year. We are in effect limited in our membership income by the number of people to whom we can provide dinghy park spaces and that's far from unusual for a British sailing club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nor is it particularly universal.

Have come across many different takes on this including clubs where the GC park didn't give a monkeys. So long as boat park dues where paid and the boats where of the right sort (generally clinker built of the local vintage) all was good .... in fact all was better than good because a parked up boat made less demands on them than one out racing regularly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Defender trials gave the US a huge advantage back in the day, just like challenger trials give the challengers an advantage today. The ACEA acknowledged as much by including the defender in the first round robin in AC 35. And before anyone cries 'unfair', I would note that the outcome of the cup tells a very different story.

Lay off the coolade bro :rolleyes:

Defender trials gave the US a huge advantage back in the day, just like challenger trials give the challengers an advantage today. -This is true

The ACEA acknowledged as much by including the defender in the first round robin in AC 35. And before anyone cries 'unfair', I would note that the outcome of the cup tells a very different story. -This is complete horseshit and you fucking well know it :wacko:

 

Orifice stacked the deck to give them the advantage of getting an early look at the Challenger then have 2 weeks to adjust and a further week after the first couple of days and all without the disadvantage of potentially being distracted or even knocked out fighting other Defenders.

Its not for nothing that many of the ETNZ team have said their victory against the odds was so much the sweeter for it.

 

Share this post


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

Giving examples of where a better crew has won, or, maybe, more accurately a poorer crew has failed to win despite having the better boat, doesn't "prove" that the AC is primarily a bout sailing ability.

Just to make it clear, I never said that the AC was primarily about sailing ability. It's just that the AC is not all about technology as some have claimed - it's a mixture.

Share this post


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

Yet the foiling Nacra is in the 2020 Olympics - which surely as good a barometer as anything for the direction of competitive sailing - and the RSX convertible (plus foils) is targeted for 2024. Go figure.

 

Sorry, but the Olympics isn't a good barometer of the direction of competitive sailing. There has been a 100% reduction in keelboats in the Games over the past two decades, yet no indication I can find of a reduction in the proportion of keelboats in the general community, Windsurfing got in the Games in 1984 and started declining thereafter - its admission was therefore clearly not an indication of the direction of competitive sailing. Offshore racers were considered for the Games around 1968 but were not allowed in, and shortly after that offshore racing became an even bigger part of the sport. The second two-person trapeze dinghy got into the Games in 1976, which seems to be pretty much the time that two-person trapeze dinghies started to decline in popularity in the UK at least. Putting in the Tornado and dumping the FD for the Laser are arguably the only times the Olympics have provided a true indication of the direction of the sport.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

Oh for heavens sake Team GBR. You are constructing an argument around a couple of outlier monohull classes of extreme width. Most clubs would go bust if their dinghy parks were packed out with Merlins or Laser 5000s. Not I think that there ever were enough Laser 5000s to fill a dinghy park.

Now who is getting ridiculous. In the same way as no club would ever get packed out by merlins to the exclusion of all others, no club would be packed out by a multihull fleet. One one hand you say that cats or on the decline, next you imply that if a club opened up to cats, it would be swamped. Make your mind up. As for clubs going bust, all the clubs I have been a member of charge storage based on the size of boat. As an aside, the irony of HISC not allowing cats is that they have hosted major cat events. 

Anyway, we won't agree, so I have made my case and led this thread far enough OT. Enough from me :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, A Class Sailor said:

The "sailing public" back in the days of J's was a very limited group of people. It was an exclusive and small pastime. The masses you talk about who came in on special trains weren't sailors and didn't understand sailing. They were there for the spectacle

I clearly referred to the sailing public, not the non-sailing public. Cowes Week in the J era had plenty of small yachts that were in the same general style as the Js and earlier AC boats; Redwings, X Boats, etc. Reading pieces like Burgess' comments on Enterprise or LFH's letters about Whirlwind really brings home how the Js were modelled very closely off smaller Universal Rule boats; they were not stand-alone craft.

But I think you may be underestimating how the average person could relate to sailing. This was the era when going to a seaside resort or hiring a boat on the weekend was a typical way to spend a holiday in many places; when there were hundreds of Thames Skiffs with small rigs hired out each weekend, for example, and many British beaches and harbours had small sailboats that took out day trippers. New Jersey had huge fleets of catboats that took out daytrippers. Sydney had big hire fleets of Open Boats.

When you either had to row or sail to get anywhere on the water, when you couldn't afford a car, lots of people sailed.

Clearly you don't fly. You could not fly an average private plane or 1920's biplane around an Air race course. For the job at hand, they are very technical planes way ahead of the average plane.They are designed to be the fastest planes around the course they fly. 12's are not designed to be the fastest boats around the courses they sail.

Okay. But seeing how tiny air racing is as a sport, obviously it's not a good model to follow.
 

Don't try to suggest that the IACC boats were ocean going but why does ocean going mean you can't sail multis? I have no objection to you changing so that the boats need to be ocean going, but you can get foiling multis to be ocean going.

I never said multis couldn't be ocean going or that IACC boats were.

I never said that today people consider multis "ungentlemanly" but if you experienced prejudice and discrimination against multis, you have either been lucky or you haven't looked very hard. throughout the world there are clubs that ban cats because they think you cannot race cats and monos together, which is BS. there are major races that don't allow multis, sometimes even citing safety, even though multis race around the world.There are places where i am not allowed to race my cat (too fast, too big, angles make it unsafe and they take up too much space in the boat park) but i could sail an 18' skiff or Moth which between them would either take up more space, sail faster or sail extreme angles as well. In Sydney, they even formed their own cat club to overcome the prejudice.

I've seen very little prejudice against multis although it does exist. I have seen outright prejudice and abuse of monos from multi sailors, like walking down a dock (in an event that allowed monos and multis to race) calling all monos shitters that should be burned. 

In Sydney they have skiff clubs for skiffs, sailing clubs that just sail dinghies, windsurfer fleets that just sail windsurfers, clubs that have just raced offshore boats and no inshore boats, there was a sailing canoe club just for sailing canoes, there was a shorthanded club just for shorthanders, and cat clubs just for cats. None of them attracted criticism apart from the mono clubs that are just there for monos. That is clearly inconsistent. 

Same tired old excuses. If you have an open event, it should be open. if you have a closed event, it should be closed. Multis would never expected to be invited to the IRC championships. Races like the Transpac have shown us that there are no issues with mixed fleets and they have been truly progressive. There is no excuse in this day and age for excluding multis from major open events. Here in Australia it is because the fat cats at places like the CYCA want their headlines saved for the monohulls. they can't handle that line honours, the most pointless category in a handicap event, would go to a multi. Its all about prejudice and ego.

So did you complain about the Texel cat race?  Do you think that the Trial Bay cat regatta is a creation of prejudice?  What about the old Cat Week - bet you hated that for banning monos!  How often have you spoken out about windsurfer regattas that don't allow Etchells to race?  Do you complain about a trailable yacht regatta that doesn't allow small fixed keelers in?  

All that mono sailors do is what just about every other sporting group or interest group do - have specialist events. There are kite events, windsurfer events, cat events. There are events just for old Fords that don't allow new Fords or old Ferraris. There are clubs for certain breeds of dogs, not all dogs. There are events just for motorbikes, not for cars. There are clubs for Hayabusa riders and not for Ducatis. No one whinges about those specialist events so why not let mono sailors have the same respect?

PS - re whether foilers are mainstream; there are 50 Moths actively doing regattas in Germany, 105 class members, and As report 129 boats, probably not all foiling. Apparently 500,000 people sail regularly in Germany, so about one in 2000 of them are foiler sailers - and Germany seems to have the second or third biggest population of foilers. Whether foiling is mainstream is rather debatable. In 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ac foiling multi

Exss foiling multi

VOR going foiling and half multi

Vom foiling

Figaro foiling 

Mini transatlantic foiling 

To top level of the sport isn't going foiling. It's gone foiling already.

As for prejudice. "Multihull is not our sport" is an expression of prejudice. They are supported by water and driven by the wind. There's nothing in the dog about the number of hulls.

And for the record if there was mutual concent to race the AC in foiling kite boards what could any of us object too?

Share this post


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

Ac foiling multi

Exss foiling multi

VOR going foiling and half multi

Vom foiling

Figaro foiling 

Mini transatlantic foiling 

To top level of the sport isn't going foiling. It's gone foiling already.

As for prejudice. "Multihull is not our sport" is an expression of prejudice. They are supported by water and driven by the wind. There's nothing in the dog about the number of hulls.

And for the record if there was mutual concent to race the AC in foiling kite boards what could any of us object too?

Ok! I get the point you like foiling

Is it ok with you that I'm not a fan of foiling ?

Why................. public interest has dropped since that AC went to cats

IACC Boats (no decline in interest over 15 years)

1992  11 syndicates

1995  10 syndicates

2000   12 syndicates

2003    10 syndicates

2007    12 syndicates

Introduction of Cats (Interest in AC falls of cliff)

2013  4 syndicates

2017  6 syndicates ( Even after massive attempt to cut costs) (The french and Japanese budget too small  to run an IACC campagin)

I accept that you like Foiling CATS the rest of the world don't seem so keen 

Share this post


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

Ok! I get the point you like foiling

Is it ok with you that I'm not a fan of foiling ?

Why................. public interest has dropped since that AC went to cats

I accept that you like Foiling CATS the rest of the world don't seem so keen 

I don't think it is a matter for individual preferences .. the important thing is which boat will be best suited to the light airs that you can expect if the event is sailed in Auckland during the summer.

The foiling cats proved at Bermuda that they sailed and handled well and gave us spectacular racing .. why would you want to change that?

If you are an ETNZ fan you should take into account that ETNZ are the world leaders in foiling cats .. why would you walk away from that?.

Share this post


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

Ac foiling multi

Exss foiling multi

VOR going foiling and half multi

Vom foiling

Figaro foiling 

Mini transatlantic foiling 

To top level of the sport isn't going foiling. It's gone foiling already.

As for prejudice. "Multihull is not our sport" is an expression of prejudice. They are supported by water and driven by the wind. There's nothing in the dog about the number of hulls.

And for the record if there was mutual concent to race the AC in foiling kite boards what could any of us object too?

Well, I can't find a decent definition of "mainstream" so perhaps one could just say it attracts only a very small percentage of racing sailors.

I don't know why the Figaro, Mini or EXSS are "the top level of the sport" but the ORCi worlds (120+ boats), the Dragons, the TP52s, Maxi 72s, and most of the OIympic events aren't. The Figaro is largely a local event, the Mini seems to be overwhelmingly amateur. Nor, arguably, are such events a guide to the future of the sport. The VOR and Mini went to water-ballasted boats and then canters, which remain tiny segments of the sailing community. The Figaro also went to water ballasted boats, and before that it was in half tonners - none of those segments has really survived. It's arguable that having so many marquee events in minority types is bad for a sport - can you show us many popular participant sport that do it?

Is saying "multihull is not our sport" (setting aside any possible translation issues) really prejudice?  I've met many cat sailors who would have said that sailing leadmines was not their sport - are they prejudiced? There's no real definition of what a "sport" is and what a "discipline" is, and the history of the AC is almost all in monos.

If foiling kiteboards came in I'd say they were in violation of the ideals of the men who wrote the Deed and made the event what it is. Remember when the Little America's Cup was switched from C Class cats to F18HT cats? Remember the outrage that caused here and other places because people thought that the type that made the event a legend should not be chucked out of the event? If you can't chuck one class out of one trophy then why is it OK to chuck monos out of another trophy? And no, the Deed is not the difference.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Terry Hollis said:

I don't think it is a matter for individual preferences .. the important thing is which boat will be best suited to the light airs that you can expect if the event is sailed in Auckland during the summer.

The foiling cats proved at Bermuda that they sailed and handled well and gave us spectacular racing .. why would you want to change that?

If you are an ETNZ fan you should take into account that ETNZ are the world leaders in foiling cats .. why would you walk away from that?.

I'm a proud Kiwi and a ETNZ fan......however in my last post I was putting my feeling aside. I'm just a bit concerned that Foiling cats have been a turn off for the public. I cant give you a logical reason ( I like cats) but the drop in AC interest is real.  I suspect that the AC50 boat is not majestic enough. When I watch J boat racing there's something magical about them. They are so big and powerful, the crew look like ants running around there decks. 

Share this post


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

Ok! I get the point you like foiling

Is it ok with you that I'm not a fan of foiling ?

Why................. public interest has dropped since that AC went to cats

IACC Boats (no decline in interest over 15 years)

1992  11 syndicates

1995  10 syndicates

2000   12 syndicates

2003    10 syndicates

2007    12 syndicates

Introduction of Cats (Interest in AC falls of cliff)

2013  4 syndicates

2017  6 syndicates ( Even after massive attempt to cut costs) (The french and Japanese budget too small  to run an IACC campagin)

I accept that you like Foiling CATS the rest of the world don't seem so keen 

Go back and look at the stats for when the AC changes class. Those drop offs are entirely predictable and in line with expectation.

The only difference between AC35 and the first IACC regatta is the bad blood with LR. There's no difference in numbers between AC34 and the first regatta with multiple challenges using the 12m's. The first regatta with number is really the first with a challenger series sponsored by LV. You could point to that and say it changed the face of what the AC was and turned it into something it never was before, that lasted right through to the end of the IACC era.

The bigger numbers come with a southern hemisphere defence, prominently because there are multiple US and/or AUS challengers and when the boat hasn't changed 15+ years. Except for that it's the same countries time and time again and they where all represented in AC35 bar the Italians and Spanish. You can put the latter squarely down to the global economic down turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, A Class Sailor said:

 

13 hours ago, surfsailor said:

For sure the rule needs to be tweaked - reduce human power requirements, severely limit the computer driven flight control to make it more about the sailors - but overall, I don't see how you could ask for a more successful format - lots of viable teams, epic starts, incredible racing, and an outcome that showed just how level the playing field actually was.

 

11 hours ago, Gutterblack said:

You must be on drugs

Why? There were more lead changes in the AC than we have ever seen before and overall, racing was closer than in monohull days. The racing format and the course meant that even a team like ETNZ could actually be beaten and they had to work hard for their wins. If we had been in big leadmines on traditional AC courses, a boat with the advantages of ETNZ would have won every race by miles and would never have been headed.Look at what happened in the DOG match of AC33.

 

14 hours ago, bucc5062 said:

first, you'd not see one foiling cat in some of those conditions, yet they raced.

Get it right. We would not have seen any foiling cats to the current designs. If you remember, it needed a complete redesign of the 12's to suit the conditions. If you had sailed the boats from 83 or earlier, they would have sunk in those conditions, if they had not broken their rigs first. You design to the rule for the intended conditions.

 

Get your facts correct.  12s were constructed to Llyods standards, Courageous competed in AUS.  

Share this post


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

Those arguing for nationality rules, especially if they are about the crew, absolutely have the wrong motivations, Deed intent-wise.

 

Anyone who supported the London-Coup - has no leg to stand on 'Deed intent-wise' !

 

Share this post


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

Well, I can't find a decent definition of "mainstream" so perhaps one could just say it attracts only a very small percentage of racing sailors.

I don't know why the Figaro, Mini or EXSS are "the top level of the sport" but the ORCi worlds (120+ boats), the Dragons, the TP52s, Maxi 72s, and most of the OIympic events aren't. The Figaro is largely a local event, the Mini seems to be overwhelmingly amateur. Nor, arguably, are such events a guide to the future of the sport. The VOR and Mini went to water-ballasted boats and then canters, which remain tiny segments of the sailing community. The Figaro also went to water ballasted boats, and before that it was in half tonners - none of those segments has really survived. It's arguable that having so many marquee events in minority types is bad for a sport - can you show us many popular participant sport that do it?

Is saying "multihull is not our sport" (setting aside any possible translation issues) really prejudice?  I've met many cat sailors who would have said that sailing leadmines was not their sport - are they prejudiced? There's no real definition of what a "sport" is and what a "discipline" is, and the history of the AC is almost all in monos.

If foiling kiteboards came in I'd say they were in violation of the ideals of the men who wrote the Deed and made the event what it is. Remember when the Little America's Cup was switched from C Class cats to F18HT cats? Remember the outrage that caused here and other places because people thought that the type that made the event a legend should not be chucked out of the event? If you can't chuck one class out of one trophy then why is it OK to chuck monos out of another trophy? And no, the Deed is not the difference.

 

 

 

ORCi Worlds is a handicap event. Dragon Worlds is owner driver. The SSL would be a better shout. Maxi 72s is owner driver and lives in a gheto. TP52s disappeared into owner driver land when the Med Cup collapsed, and haven't exactly had their reputation enhanced since by being getting pwned and Quantum and ETNZ. None of them rely on public or sponsor interest. The ones I quoted do. The Olympics it's just been pointed out that it's not representative of competitive sailing.

WRMT ... multi hull and the match racing is better than when stayed old monohull racing nearly consigned it to the dustbin.

TdF ... has gone multihull

I don't remember when the LAC changed from the C-Class because some asshole had stripped it of the title it had for god knows how long. Loved seeing the tech in the C Class though. Stupendous. The problem for the C-Class Cup is that the AC has stolen its clothes.

Yes it really is prejudice and yes they are. A failure to keep an open mind on what the best boat for the AC is based on a preconceived notion that it should have one hull if pretty much the definition of prejudice. Monist vs Multist? It's as bad as the argument between "car drivers" and "cyclists". 

The AC is the DoG. The DoG is the AC.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, sailman said:

Get your facts correct.  12s were constructed to Llyods standards, Courageous competed in AUS.  

Yep. And American Eagle set the Fastnet course record in 1971, won the SORC, and got the line honours/IOR double in the '72 Hobart, while Gretel finished 2nd in the 1980 Hobart ahead of Nefertiti. True offshore boats - just as Schuyler said the AC was meant to be raced in.

Share this post


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

I'm a proud Kiwi and a ETNZ fan......however in my last post I was putting my feeling aside. I'm just a bit concerned that Foiling cats have been a turn off for the public. I cant give you a logical reason ( I like cats) but the drop in AC interest is real.  I suspect that the AC50 boat is not majestic enough. When I watch J boat racing there's something magical about them. They are so big and powerful, the crew look like ants running around there decks. 

I don't think you will be threatening Dalton's job .. The objective the ETNZ is to successfully defend the America's cup .. The number of challengers or spectators is irrelevant to that objective.

Share this post


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

Yep. And American Eagle set the Fastnet course record in 1971, won the SORC, and got the line honours/IOR double in the '72 Hobart, while Gretel finished 2nd in the 1980 Hobart ahead of Nefertiti. True offshore boats - just as Schuyler said the AC was meant to be raced in.

That went out the window with the IACC.

Share this post


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

ORCi Worlds is a handicap event. Dragon Worlds is owner driver. The SSL would be a better shout. Maxi 72s is owner driver and lives in a gheto. TP52s disappeared into owner driver land when the Med Cup collapsed, and haven't exactly had their reputation enhanced since by being getting pwned and Quantum and ETNZ. None of them rely on public or sponsor interest. The ones I quoted do. The Olympics it's just been pointed out that it's not representative of competitive sailing.

WRMT ... multi hull and the match racing is better than when stayed old monohull racing nearly consigned it to the dustbin.

TdF ... has gone multihull

I don't remember when the LAC changed from the C-Class because some asshole had stripped it of the title it had for god knows how long. Loved seeing the tech in the C Class though. Stupendous. The problem for the C-Class Cup is that the AC has stolen its clothes.

Yes it really is prejudice and yes they are. A failure to keep an open mind on what the best boat for the AC is based on a preconceived notion that it should have one hull if pretty much the definition of prejudice. Monist vs Multist? It's as bad as the argument between "car drivers" and "cyclists". 

The AC is the DoG. The DoG is the AC.

 

So how many non-owners are steering Minis?  Aren't they mainly owner-driven?  A while ago plenty of top sailors were happy to say that the Farr 40s were top level when they were owner-driven. Personally I can't see why whether an event relies on sponsor or public interest is relevant to whether it is "the top level of the sport" unless one believes that top level = PR, or why a handicap event cannot be "top level" as the Admiral's Cup was eons ago. Arguably the Finn and Laser Olympic events are certainly representative of competitive sailing, given the enormous number of hiking singlehanders that are active. And if the WMRT is now such a success then why has it shrunk so much?

If you think that the person who took the LAC from the C Class was an "asshole" because the class had been in the LAC for so long, why are you happy to see monos taken away from an event they had been in for much longer? After all, the DoG for the Little America's Cup allowed that change, so if all is OK if the Deed allows it then why should the LAC be treated differently to the AC?

I can't agree that it's prejudice to think that an event that was made great by one type of sporting gear should remain as the event for that type of sporting gear. I wouldn't want to see the Moto GP taken over by F1 cars just because they go faster and get better ratings. As a multihull sailor I think it would be an outrage if the LAC was handed over to foiling kiteboards just because they were faster and newer, which is arguably similar to what has happened to the AC. 

Lots of cat sailors were outraged when the Tornado's Olympic spot was taken away. They didn't just go "oh well, it's driven by the wind so all is good, we'll just go sail Stars". The Tornado association and other associations and top sailors said that cat sailing was a separate discipline to mono sailing. The difference between a sport and a discipline is not well defined. A person can reasonably say "I am a mono sailor and this cat sailing is not my sport" just as people basically said "I am a cat sailor and mono sailing is not my sport" when the T was dumped. The cat sailors were not being prejudiced - they were expressing a very reasonable point of view.

 

 

 

Share this post


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

I don't think you will be threatening Dalton's job .. The objective the ETNZ is to successfully defend the America's cup .. The number of challengers or spectators is irrelevant to that objective.

Ah come on Terry. Dalts and ETNZ have in the past laid it on heavy that ETNZ is more than a sailing team. That they represent the country and it's maritime tradition and industry. They have been explicit that the purpose of ETNZ was to bring the Cup to Aukland for the financial benefit of all.

The first thing out of GDs mouth after winning AC35 was that they intended to put on a sporting and fair contest in keeping witht eh traditions of the AC, whether that meant they where doomed to fail as defenders or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, rgeek said:

That went out the window with the IACC.

Yes, and they were widely mocked for falling apart. The point remains the same - the 12s were seaworthy boats - the sort that Schuyler specifically said the Cup should be sailed in, and the sort that people like Herreshoff and Vanderbilt encouraged. To ignore what Schuyler said just because it was in that covering letter rather than the Deed itself can be seen as a very legalistic reading of the situation.

Furthermore, if the Deed is the Cup then how can you be happy with the alternations to remove the "own bottom" rule or the LWL limits?  It's not very meaningful to say "the Deed is the AC" if one actually means "the Deed, however anyone wants to modify it, is the AC".

And can you please tell us what major participant sport has so many events in which the gear used is so different from the gear used by most weekend competitors?  

Share this post


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

Go back and look at the stats for when the AC changes class. Those drop offs are entirely predictable and in line with expectation.

The only difference between AC35 and the first IACC regatta is the bad blood with LR. There's no difference in numbers between AC34 and the first regatta with multiple challenges using the 12m's. The first regatta with number is really the first with a challenger series sponsored by LV. You could point to that and say it changed the face of what the AC was and turned it into something it never was before, that lasted right through to the end of the IACC era.

The bigger numbers come with a southern hemisphere defence, prominently because there are multiple US and/or AUS challengers and when the boat hasn't changed 15+ years. Except for that it's the same countries time and time again and they where all represented in AC35 bar the Italians and Spanish. You can put the latter squarely down to the global economic down turn.

Nice try but under USA stewardship the cup has taken a nose dive. You can try explain it away but the figures don't lie. But ill  examine some of your points

 

Go back and look at the stats for when the AC changes class. Those drop offs are entirely predictable and in line with expectation.

When we went to IACC boats there wasn't a drop off in money spent or boats built, in fact a massive increase was seen

The only difference between AC35 and the first IACC regatta is the bad blood with LR

Your kidding me .....the only difference was bad blood with LR, some of the extra differences massive number of boats built, more syndicates, more media, more racing etc etc

The first regatta with number is really the first with a challenger series sponsored by LV

Considering the LV cup was started in 1983 with 7 syndicates and 1987 was 13 syndicates, the first regatta with numbers is 1987 not 1983 which was second not the first. The fact that was 13 syndicates in Perth has nothing to do with the LV cup.  It has everything to do with Australia winning it. 

The bigger numbers come with a southern hemisphere defence, prominently because there are multiple US and/or AUS challengers

What multiple Australian Challengers are you talking about. Except from one austrlia there was no others. The Australian participation was next to nil

Except for that it's the same countries time and time again and they where all represented in AC35 bar the Italians and Spanish. You can put the latter squarely down to the global economic down turn.

The economic meltdown was 2008 and maybe in the states and UK there hasn't been a recovery, but for the rest of the world we have recovered. Also you are well aware why no Italians turned up and its got nothing to do with the economy.  Spanish interest in the AC has always been luke warm and there constant lack of success would be a factor. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Terry Hollis said:

I don't think you will be threatening Dalton's job .. The objective the ETNZ is to successfully defend the America's cup .. The number of challengers or spectators is irrelevant to that objective.

 I agree on all your points 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Admirals Cup is a different era. Perhaps the most important lesson it teaches is that when the sailors try to take charge the money walks away in a fit of peek not dissimilar to some of the attitudes on AC35.

There are a whole raft of classes that bill them selves as Grand Prix in their paid for coverage on CNN, because it's what the owners what to buy into. Lets be honest tho. They're not really though are they? A sailor driven AC is a massive threat to that attitude tho. If the sailors aren't picked on merit then where does that leave you? And an AC in boats that are obviously dissimilar to them even more so.

WMRT, you can't shrink further than zero.

Share this post


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

And can you please tell us what major participant sport has so many events in which the gear used is so different from the gear used by most weekend competitors?  

Not sure what this has to do with it. Being a major participation sport means not having a high barrier in terms of equipment.

How ever sailing it's self is a prime example.

And when I look at an AC50 I see a sail boat that for all the world look like a very fancy Optimist.

Share this post


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

Nice try but under USA stewardship the cup has taken a nose dive. You can try explain it away but the figures don't lie. But ill  examine some of your points

 

Go back and look at the stats for when the AC changes class. Those drop offs are entirely predictable and in line with expectation.

When we went to IACC boats there wasn't a drop off in money spent or boats built, in fact a massive increase was seen

The only difference between AC35 and the first IACC regatta is the bad blood with LR

Your kidding me .....the only difference was bad blood with LR, some of the extra differences massive number of boats built, more syndicates, more media, more racing etc etc

The first regatta with number is really the first with a challenger series sponsored by LV

Considering the LV cup was started in 1983 with 7 syndicates and 1987 was 13 syndicates, the first regatta with numbers is 1987 not 1983 which was second not the first. The fact that was 13 syndicates in Perth has nothing to do with the LV cup.  It has everything to do with Australia winning it. 

The bigger numbers come with a southern hemisphere defence, prominently because there are multiple US and/or AUS challengers

What multiple Australian Challengers are you talking about. Except from one austrlia there was no others. The Australian participation was next to nil

Except for that it's the same countries time and time again and they where all represented in AC35 bar the Italians and Spanish. You can put the latter squarely down to the global economic down turn.

The economic meltdown was 2008 and maybe in the states and UK there hasn't been a recovery, but for the rest of the world we have recovered. Also you are well aware why no Italians turned up and its got nothing to do with the economy.  Spanish interest in the AC has always been luke warm and there constant lack of success would be a factor. 

 

 

We're using AC35 as a baseline for failure and talking teams entered. By your argument all AC regatta before '83 are a failure, I would argue thanks largely to the fuckwittery of the NYYC. '83 was the first to get more than AC35. '87 is even longer into the 12m era so doesn't support your argument that the level of entry is driven by the boats.

The first IACC AC had 8 teams in the LVC. OK,OK I forgot about the nation that hasn't entered the AC since '95, who had 2 teams there. Given they haven't stumped up for that long hardly a cause for criticism that there was no AUS team at AC35 thanks to the boats. The other absentees are the Italians and Spanish. You might benefit from looking into what's going on with the Spanish economy but, if you say they are only a side issue anyway, well OK.

Australian teams in the LVC:

83 - 3 teams

92 - 2 teams

95 - 2 teams

...

1987 - 6 US teams

2000 - 5 US teams

2003 - 3 US teams

The most diverse turn out in AC history was 2007 and it was a complete one off.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, The Jay said:

Furthermore, if the Deed is the Cup then how can you be happy with the alternations to remove the "own bottom" rule or the LWL limits?  It's not very meaningful to say "the Deed is the AC" if one actually means "the Deed, however anyone wants to modify it, is the AC".

Was it in the original version or added afterwards?

Sure anyone can change it. Only no one has changed it to say "having only one hull".

Share this post


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

Ac foiling multi

Exss foiling multi

VOR going foiling and half multi

Vom foiling

Figaro foiling 

Mini transatlantic foiling 

To top level of the sport isn't going foiling. It's gone foiling already.

As for prejudice. "Multihull is not our sport" is an expression of prejudice. They are supported by water and driven by the wind. There's nothing in the dog about the number of hulls.

And for the record if there was mutual concent to race the AC in foiling kite boards what could any of us object too?

I think you need to distinguish between foiling and foiling assist.  4 of the 6 you mention are monohulls (and with the VOR, the question remains if they will do foiling cats in-port) with foils for added righting moment.  That is a far cry from a true foiling boat that lifts out of the water.  So if you are okay with monohull foil assist boats, then you'd be fine with an AC contested in such a vessel.  Good to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me? I'd be OK with the AC competed for in anything that was the fastest boat round the track of our era and would prefer it to be less reliant on stored power as I believe that is leading to boats that are directly driven by stored power/human energy rather than the air and the water.

And by track I mean where ever RNZYS holds it's annual regatta.

I didn't like the AC50 concept because I though it was "just fast enough to be fastest".

The argument being made was that foiling it's self was putting people off. Well, if you look at that list pretty much every sailing event that relies on public interest has now gone foiling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, rgeek said:

Not sure what this has to do with it. Being a major participation sport means not having a high barrier in terms of equipment.

How ever sailing it's self is a prime example.

And when I look at an AC50 I see a sail boat that for all the world look like a very fancy Optimist.

Dude,

Seriously?  You've either jumped hte shark or really need to take a step back.

picoptimist108a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 sail, rudder, hull. Limited number of sailors and a limited roll for them. Yup. Looks like about as similar to an AC50 as a Compton foldup does to a TdF triathlon time trailer to me.

Share this post


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

Me? I'd be OK with the AC competed for in anything that was the fastest boat round the track of our era and would prefer it to be less reliant on stored power as I believe that is leading to boats that are directly driven by stored power/human energy rather than the air and the water.

And by track I mean where ever RNZYS holds it's annual regatta.

I didn't like the AC50 concept because I though it was "just fast enough to be fastest".

The argument being made was that foiling it's self was putting people off. Well, if you look at that list pretty much every sailing event that relies on public interest has now gone foiling.

But you missed the point of difference.  Foiling vessels that lift the entire body out of the water is different than foiling assist where the extension is used for righting moment more than lifting the boat out of the water.

Yes, VG seems to have led this movement in monohulls and I don't think most sailors mind the evolution.  In terms of HP racing, FAs (foil assists) are here to stay and might one day move to the mainstream market.  Full Foiling (FF) is a different beast all together and may or may not make it past the edges of the sport.  Like other boutique disciplines FF have a place and may grow, but as I said before, the total cost of entry will always be a barrier.

Interesting side note to support that notion.  The year the Rubik's cube came out the world went nuts.  By the second year sales were in the 100 Millions and they held a world championship.  That was 1982.  That was the last one held for decades for within the next 2 years sales dramatically dropped as people discovered, it was hard to solve the Cube.  Not until the internet came along and folks posted algorithms to help solve the puzzle did it have any resurgence and today they are back to having a world championship.  Total cost of entry cannot be ignored when promoting something new and different.

Glenn and Pete could go around giving all sorts of encouragement for FF cats, but despite their star power, only a few will truly make the effort.  The whole thing about arguing that the AC is about the "best" is that best is relative to the discipline.  The best could be the best monohull designs today if that was decided.  The best could be the best FF cats.  The choice is up to the current owners of the AC.  Someone said that the AC is not about spectators...wow....in the end, who do you think pays for those boats.  If people don't watch then it reverts back to a contest amongst very rich individuals who don't give a fuck about our opinion.  I'd rather spectators matter, that the owners of the cup consider that very hard and determine which discipline may bring in more of them and then try to make the "best" design win.

Share this post


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

1 sail, rudder, hull. Limited number of sailors and a limited roll for them. Yup. Looks like about as similar to an AC50 as a Compton foldup does to a TdF triathlon time trailer to me.

Just to be sure.....this boat is akin to an AC50.  Man I hope you say yes.  One hull, one rudder, limited crew.  I sailed one of these for years, never knew I was sailing the precursor to an AC50.  Cool.  (byw, crew are two good friends of mine and rare was I able to see  them in that direction.)

buc18_112610.jpg?format=1500w

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a good think about that one morning over a particularly satisfying shit. I came to the personal conclusion that boat of foils are still 'born by the water' and that anything with a keel generates energy and lift from the water, the only difference being the direction of that lift.

Share this post


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

I had a good think about that one morning over a particularly satisfying shit. I came to the personal conclusion that boat of foils are still 'born by the water' and that anything with a keel generates energy and lift from the water, the only difference being the direction of that lift.

Too much information 

Share this post


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

I had a good think about that one morning over a particularly satisfying shit. I came to the personal conclusion that boat of foils are still 'born by the water' and that anything with a keel generates energy and lift from the water, the only difference being the direction of that lift.

Well said thought "keel" may be your undoing.  Now I'm fired up enough I may get a sailor I know to put a foil on a Buccaneer 18 and see  what happens.  Viva la Foil!  But still no FF cats in the AC :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're being told this..

Image result for time trial bike

looks more like this...

Image result for childs toy bike

Than this...

Image result for Ac50 Sailboats

looks like this...

Image result for optimist

 

Share this post


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

at the end of the day there is no substitute for sailing what others are sailing in your club.  if lasers are strong sail lasers, if sunfish are strong go somewhere else. ;-) 

 

Hey, lay off the Sunfish. If you can make a Sunfish go upwind then anything else is easy. It is also well rounded for a wide age group, from young kids up to 80 yo. Some of the top names in sailing have Sunfish on their resume, JK for one, Mark Mendelblatt for another. (raced against his brother a couple of weeks ago) It is a hard boat to sail fast and well upwind, and offers some unique opportunities downwind, like sailing it deep by-the-lee if needed and still maintaining good speed.

Maybe that is it, 44' w/l Sunfish, lateen rig and all.

Share this post


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

We're being told this..

Image result for time trial bike

looks more like this...

Image result for childs toy bike

Than this...

Image result for Ac50 Sailboats

looks like this...

Image result for optimist

 

Yes, I see the resemblance.  One is a high tech boat that brings joy to 10s if not 100s of kids (adults really) that can handle it and one is a massively expensive one off that requires grunts to make it work and can be sailed pretty much by only a few people in the world.

At the end of the day, I think the foiling kites got it the most right.  It is dumb to put a foil on a opti for at some point, it just goes back to being a hull in the water.  Foils on cats, hull still in the water and I've love to see one attempt to lift a hull on a hot summer day on Lake Hartwell where a top breeze may be 5 kts.  Foiling kites at least understand that who gives a fuck about the hull.  Get that slab of plastic out of the water asap so the real "fun" can begin.

However, in the spirit of good will, let's all get behind the AC hosting foiling moths (or Optimist) for at least we'd see actual crew work and not cyclists or computer assisted tabs.    I'll accept that the guy in that opti is more a true sailor than Captain Kirk pushing buttons and pedals.

Share this post


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

TP52s disappeared into owner driver land when the Med Cup collapsed, and haven't exactly had their reputation enhanced since by being getting pwned and Quantum and ETNZ. None of them rely on public or sponsor interest.

 

 

The TP's have owner-driver and pro driving mixed and is some of the best racing out there. The owners like the boats and decided to run it themselves to keep it alive when Audi pulled-out and have done a good job with it. Many, including the FP with Azzura's new boat at the time called 'the last TP52 ever to be built' had it buried and in the grave back then. Not so, they have had maybe 12-15 new builds since then and look to have more again before next season (they won't be in the US next year because of that) and the old boats are sailing inshore and offshore events around the world.

So disappeared? No, not really, just not broadcast like they used to be but the owners are starting to pay for that also with the Thurs-Saturday live streaming.

I think some money like that would come into the AC, as a TP campaign is not much less than an AC campaign, they spend quite a bit on those boats. And you have a wide variety of spending there, from modest to full-on budgets.

edit: and there are old boats updated to the new rules that still win races and place on occasion on the tour.

Share this post


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

We're using AC35 as a baseline for failure and talking teams entered. By your argument all AC regatta before '83 are a failure, I would argue thanks largely to the fuckwittery of the NYYC. '83 was the first to get more than AC35. '87 is even longer into the 12m era so doesn't support your argument that the level of entry is driven by the boats.

The first IACC AC had 8 teams in the LVC. OK,OK I forgot about the nation that hasn't entered the AC since '95, who had 2 teams there. Given they haven't stumped up for that long hardly a cause for criticism that there was no AUS team at AC35 thanks to the boats. The other absentees are the Italians and Spanish. You might benefit from looking into what's going on with the Spanish economy but, if you say they are only a side issue anyway, well OK.

Australian teams in the LVC:

83 - 3 teams

92 - 2 teams

95 - 2 teams

...

1987 - 6 US teams

2000 - 5 US teams

2003 - 3 US teams

The most diverse turn out in AC history was 2007 and it was a complete one off.

 

The early multi-challengers were France and Australia, due more to it being a new thing and taking time to gain some momentum. '77 was an add of the Brits and Swedes, then 83, with LV jumping-in to sponsor you had 6-7 teams challenging and then it took-off from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Terry Hollis said:

I don't think you will be threatening Dalton's job .. The objective the ETNZ is to successfully defend the America's cup .. The number of challengers or spectators is irrelevant to that objective.

That single objective is clearly inconsistent with holding your hand out for government money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RGeek, may one ask who has ever said that a kid's trike is more similar to a Lotus TT bike than an Opti is to an AC50? Where is that post?

What I am saying is that in the western world's most popular equipment-intensive sport, the bikes used at the top level look very similar to the bike an aspiring weekend warrior can buy at their local shop. Why not follow that model?

Oh - and that Lotus you posted? It's banned from most road racing on two counts - one the frame is illegal and second the TT bars are illegal in mass start events at all levels. So It's actually a symbol of how much trouble an enormously successful sport goes to ensure that gear is comparatively easy to use and to own.

In conclusion, can I ask when the benefit of promoting hyper-performance boats is actually going to hit the sport? It's been over 20 years now since SA, Seahorse, Frank Bethwaite and others said that high performance was the future of the sport and the sport is continuing to dwindle. How much longer do we have to wait for the approach to pay off and the sport to start growing again? Thirty years? Forty? Fifty?

1307633927485-l8r87u2rzt24-630-354.jpg

 

20150716-20150716-DSC_5113.jpg

Share this post


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

Was it in the original version or added afterwards?

Sure anyone can change it. Only no one has changed it to say "having only one hull".

If the Deed can be so easily changed - if it's just a weathervane - then it's largely meaningless to say that that it's such an important document. 

Personally I have a strong suspicion that the Deed doesn't mention any restriction to monos because at the time the Second Deed was written, cats were a fully accepted class - but it was also accepted that they would not race with monos. The same issue came up later with the Seawanhaka Cup and people like Clinton Crane then said explicitly that it was accepted that monos and multis should not be put in the same event.

These days we would probably write it down, but in those days sailing was less organised and more was left up to the judgement of race committees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Capture.JPG.d0b4be03fc0cffcc7cfd7c1f3535325a.JPG

 

Just tried to watch some of the 1992 America's cup videos. Painful to watch. At one time, I thought it was exciting, now it put me to sleep.

Maybe I am getting old.....

Share this post


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

Capture.JPG.d0b4be03fc0cffcc7cfd7c1f3535325a.JPG

 

Just tried to watch some of the 1992 America's cup videos. Painful to watch. At one time, I thought it was exciting, now it put me to sleep.

Maybe I am getting old.....

I had the same surprise. As much as I enjoyed every AC in my lifetime, when I recently watched some of the 2000 AC races during the IACC era - it was plain boring. I know many of my generation wish/hope the old displacement monohulls would come back for the AC, I'd be surprised if they attract even 1% of an audience under 60. Sail racing at 6-15 knots boatspeed can be great fun, watching same is boring.

Share this post


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

Can I ask when the benefit of promoting hyper-performance boats is actually going to hit the sport? It's been over 20 years now since SA, Seahorse, Frank Bethwaite and others said that high performance was the future of the sport and the sport is continuing to dwindle. How much longer do we have to wait for the approach to pay off and the sport to start growing again? Thirty years? Forty? Fifty?

 

 

 

Just going by participation at the top level.

Seems to be paying for the Moths...

http://www.mothworlds.org/malcesine/2017/02/record-fleet-for-2017-moth-worlds/

Likewise the A Class (Although this is the 2015, it was the largest fleet at the time).

http://www.sail-world.com/USA/2015-A-Class-Catamaran-World-Championships-–-Overall-so-far/138141

These are both classes that have embraced high performance and foiling and it's making them more appealing not less.

Share this post


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

That single objective is clearly inconsistent with holding your hand out for government money.

The objective to win is one thing and the methodology to achieve that objective is another.

The methodology to win the America's Cup starts with management and leadership followed by finance and the assembly of a team that is able to achieve the objective.

Spectators may be involved if the method of raising finance involves sponsorship but is not the objective .. winning the America's Cup is the objective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Boybland said:

Just going by participation at the top level.

Seems to be paying for the Moths...

http://www.mothworlds.org/malcesine/2017/02/record-fleet-for-2017-moth-worlds/

Likewise the A Class (Although this is the 2015, it was the largest fleet at the time).

http://www.sail-world.com/USA/2015-A-Class-Catamaran-World-Championships-–-Overall-so-far/138141

These are both classes that have embraced high performance and foiling and it's making them more appealing not less.

Fantastic boats, but the great world title fleets are not reflective of actual worldwide numbers. The 2016 AGM minutes and national reports state that Moths have 50 active boats in Germany (or one in about every 10,000 regular sailors) and 105 class members. Before foils arrived they had 70 members so they gave gained just 35 members since 2002. In France, the Moths have no regular racing at all and just 15 class members in 2015. Japan has about 25 active boats - before foiling they had 30 class members. Denmark has just two Moths. Switzerland has just 34 class members (compared to 50 before foils) and only three regattas per year. The US Moth nationals had just 14 boats. Italy has no available numbers, and report no growth. England has about 70-90 class members (with no recent growth) and there are 110 class members in Australia. Just 150 boats are being sold each year.

So across such major sailing countries as the USA, Germany and France there's about 90 active boats. The class is fantastic, the boats are awesome, the performance is amazing - but the numbers are actually pretty tiny and growth is actually fairly small. The Moths actually had much, much higher numbers many years ago when they were about as fast as a Laser.

There's only 70 A Class being built each year. Several countries have about 100 active As, which is great because again the boats are stupendous and they are giving people lots of joy. But since 2002 the class has reportedly lost 10 members in Australia; lost 28 (about a quarter) in Italy; gained 20 in France, 12 in the USA, 29 in Germany, and a bunch in the UK. The number of boats being built each year has dropped from about 100 to about 70. In comparison, about 200 Finns are sold each year.

Total sales of 220 International class foilers a year out of a total International class production of about 10,000 boats per year is not going to revitalise the sport, nor is an area of sailing that, however fantastic, is not gaining huge numbers of active racers. None of this is taking anything away from the work being done by the classes or the excellence of the boats - it's just that ultra high performance doesn't attract many sailors. And if ultra high performance doesn't attract people who are already committed to the sport, it's hard to see why it will attract people who are just watching and face enormous hurdles if they are ever to get into hyper-performance types.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jay,

The point of your seemingly endless argumentative posts is based on one basic premise, right? That the AC should in your own opinion be all about representing what others sail, because in your opinion it would therefore have the effect of growing participation in sailing.

Here's a suggestion: If you love Optimists, 470's, TP 52's, whatever classes you love, why not focus your attention there instead? They already have good participation.

There is absolutely ZERO obligation on AC cycles and their boat design intentions to cater to your various wishes about growing sailing in other design forms, whether you wish it were true or not. 

The basic premise of all of your posts is seriously flawed. The AC has a completely different agenda, except for as philanthropic sidelines like what we saw with the O'pen Bic youth Endeavor serolies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh for fuck's sake, no one with 23,610 posts can criticise others for "endless posts".

I haven't actually said that the AC has an obligation to cater for growing sailing in other forms. However, other people have said that the current model of the AC will grow sailing. If they make such a claim why can't it be debated?  And why can't it be said that it would be a good thing if the AC did actually help grow the sport?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shrug. I haven't focussed my posts over many, many years over your particular problem/issue. 

Yours is an argument that imo happens to be boringly pointless and has little to no relevance to the technology forefront that America's Cup yachts design is most purely intended to be about.

Share this post


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

Yours is an argument that imo happens to be boringly pointless and has little to no relevance to the technology forefront that America's Cup yachts design is most purely intended to be about.

I've been watching cup races since 1980 and I cant ever recall these yachts ever being at the forefront of technology except for the foiling boats. Even in 1980 12 Meters were considered to be old lead mines. At the time I was helping my neighbour crew his eighteen footer, and that was very fast.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, mako23 said:

Ok! I get the point you like foiling

Is it ok with you that I'm not a fan of foiling ?

Why................. public interest has dropped since that AC went to cats

IACC Boats (no decline in interest over 15 years)

1992  11 syndicates

1995  10 syndicates

2000   12 syndicates

2003    10 syndicates

2007    12 syndicates

Introduction of Cats (Interest in AC falls of cliff)

2013  4 syndicates

2017  6 syndicates ( Even after massive attempt to cut costs) (The french and Japanese budget too small  to run an IACC campagin)

I accept that you like Foiling CATS the rest of the world don't seem so keen 

Benjamin Disraeli (19th century British Prime Minister) is reputed to have said that "there are lies, damned lies and then there are statistics". 

Look at most forms of sponsored sailing and numbers are well down. The Volvo used to get 20+ boats and saw a low of 6 boats in 2012. It's now up to 8 but only by the organisers giving away boats. That had nothing to do with foiling boats.

It is a simple truth that we live in different times. We have been through the GFC and many ultra wealthy people now consider it vulgar to splash the cash like they used to. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have led the way with that. Very few commercial sponsors are now around who will commit to that much money and the limited nature of the AC doesn't help. Getting $100m AC campaigns together is significantly harder than it ever was. A change to monohulls will be meaningless without a significant move to change the whole budget equation, and if you change it for cats as well you will probably get the same results. Even the "small" amount ETNZ spent this time around is way more than most sponsors and B's would consider an acceptable spend, and without some limits, there will always be the elephant in the room - somebody could "buy" the cup by out spending everybody else, something i would suggest happens most of the time. I suspect that if budgets were made public from this last edition, if you took ETNZ out, the relative performance of teams would equate to the amount they spent.

The biggest challenge of a new class is how to do it without increasing costs, or preferably, while reducing costs. People want more sailors doing things, which will mean more sailors overall and that adds to the bill. A new rule burns far more development money than an existing rule. 

ETNZ have a difficult problem in this regard, made worse by a challenger who will throw a lot of money at the game this time because he knows this is probably his last shot at achieving his long held dream (and you can't take the money with you!) while they want to ensure that they don't lose simply by being out spent. A change to mono's would increase LR's chances but reduce ETNZ's unless they can raise a lot more money or limit development and sailors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Volvo only got 20 boats in 1 or 2 editions. 8-10 would be a reasonable benchmark for comparison. The big issue for the Volvo looks to be that 2 of the 3 big sponsors for sailing historically (tobacco and alcohol) are now banned from sponsoring sport. Sailing has struggled to attract the new money in the tech industry. Not hard to see why.

Share this post


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

Benjamin Disraeli (19th century British Prime Minister) is reputed to have said that "there are lies, damned lies and then there are statistics". 

Look at most forms of sponsored sailing and numbers are well down. The Volvo used to get 20+ boats and saw a low of 6 boats in 2012. It's now up to 8 but only by the organisers giving away boats. That had nothing to do with foiling boats.

It is a simple truth that we live in different times. We have been through the GFC and many ultra wealthy people now consider it vulgar to splash the cash like they used to. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have led the way with that. Very few commercial sponsors are now around who will commit to that much money and the limited nature of the AC doesn't help. Getting $100m AC campaigns together is significantly harder than it ever was. A change to monohulls will be meaningless without a significant move to change the whole budget equation, and if you change it for cats as well you will probably get the same results. Even the "small" amount ETNZ spent this time around is way more than most sponsors and B's would consider an acceptable spend, and without some limits, there will always be the elephant in the room - somebody could "buy" the cup by out spending everybody else, something i would suggest happens most of the time. I suspect that if budgets were made public from this last edition, if you took ETNZ out, the relative performance of teams would equate to the amount they spent.

The biggest challenge of a new class is how to do it without increasing costs, or preferably, while reducing costs. People want more sailors doing things, which will mean more sailors overall and that adds to the bill. A new rule burns far more development money than an existing rule. 

ETNZ have a difficult problem in this regard, made worse by a challenger who will throw a lot of money at the game this time because he knows this is probably his last shot at achieving his long held dream (and you can't take the money with you!) while they want to ensure that they don't lose simply by being out spent. A change to mono's would increase LR's chances but reduce ETNZ's unless they can raise a lot more money or limit development and sailors.

I agree with your general hypothesis to some extent, but the decline in AC figures are so steep that I'm not willing to equate the complete drop to your thesis. I'm wondering that LE was seen so rich and powerful that it disheartened potential corporate sponsors. ie "Oracle are invincible on the water so why invest in a challenge." 

Share this post


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

I agree with your general hypothesis to some extent, but the decline in AC figures are so steep that I'm not willing to equate the complete drop to your thesis. I'm wondering that LE was seen so rich and powerful that it disheartened potential corporate sponsors. ie "Oracle are invincible on the water so why invest in a challenge." 

I do think that had something to do with it. LE throwing so much money at the DOG challenge sent a message. I suspect that many felt he was willing to do an open budget defence. The Brits gave up on AC34 because they said the budgets were going to be way too high and in AC35, the same happened with the Australian CoR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, A Class Sailor said:

I do think that had something to do with it. LE throwing so much money at the DOG challenge sent a message. I suspect that many felt he was willing to do an open budget defence. The Brits gave up on AC34 because they said the budgets were going to be way too high and in AC35, the same happened with the Australian CoR.

So were in agreement...wow a rare occurrence in this place :)

if only we could agree in other forum sections 

Share this post


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

Jay,

The point of your seemingly endless argumentative posts is based on one basic premise, right? That the AC should in your own opinion be all about representing what others sail, because in your opinion it would therefore have the effect of growing participation in sailing.

Here's a suggestion: If you love Optimists, 470's, TP 52's, whatever classes you love, why not focus your attention there instead? They already have good participation.

There is absolutely ZERO obligation on AC cycles and their boat design intentions to cater to your various wishes about growing sailing in other design forms, whether you wish it were true or not. 

The basic premise of all of your posts is seriously flawed. The AC has a completely different agenda, except for as philanthropic sidelines like what we saw with the O'pen Bic youth Endeavor serolies. 

The same could be said for yours, but at least Jay backs his points up with reasonable facts.

If the AC was protocol'd to go with FA monohulls, then those competing would work to find the best technology to fit into that model.  That then fits your view that the AC is about winning and about technology.  There is nothing, nothing that requires a cup owner or challenger to stay with what was or if they do make a change, part of the decision will be "will it give advantage over others?" and "will it drawn attention?"

Going back to '88.  What would have happened if DC, instead of cheating, had actually tried to build a 90 ft sailboat to compete against NZ.  He may have won, he may have lost, but he at least would have kept to a spirit and yes I'll say, a Corinthian approach to the game.  Instead of IIAC(?) we may have seen 70-80 foot yachts.  By cheating, and that is all how I see it, he opened the door to a level of rule twisting and thinking that has actually dragged down the AC as a whole.  Yes, we get it,you love fast cats, but if trends continued, those cats could be the swan song of the AC.

As to those who talk about the "boredom" of watching IIAC or even 12 meters races, gimmie a break.  You know the out come.  Of course it is boring.  It would be like popping in a 92 Daytona race when Jeff Gordon was a rookie and almost beat Earnhardt.  I watched the 500 mile, 3+ hours race live and at the time it was intense.  If I tried to watch it now, yep, boring.  Y'all love the AC35, but that was because it was unknown.  Will they come back, won't they.  Will they spill....Wait a year or two.  Watch it again, all of it and tell me how intense it is.  People love to watch games like Baseball or Cricket.  Talk about old and slow.  Some games can last 4 hours and when you add up the time they actually did something for 35 minutes.  yet people still watch and watch in large numbers, because while they know most of it is boring, the unknown of the game is what they are waiting for.  American Football, 3 hours of play and again maybe actual effort 20 minutes.

I watched live when S&S blew a genoa in a hug blow with a good lead.  I watched them clear the deck, set a new sail the whole time NZ was climbing up their backs.  All that at maybe 7-8 kts but I was on the edge of my seat.  The rest of the race I held my breath as S&S held off the Kiwi's.  If I watched it today, the whole race, I'd fast forward to the good spots.  Boring is not defined by speed, but by the knowing.

This AC35 had nothing but the same, but faster.  One day someone will fast forward to the exciting moment, because most of the race is just the same, two boats sailing in straight lines till they have to tack. 

Share this post


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

Shrug. I haven't focussed my posts over many, many years over your particular problem/issue. 

Yours is an argument that imo happens to be boringly pointless and has little to no relevance to the technology forefront that America's Cup yachts design is most purely intended to be about.

 

10 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

Shrug. I haven't focussed my posts over many, many years over your particular problem/issue. 

Yours is an argument that imo happens to be boringly pointless and has little to no relevance to the technology forefront that America's Cup yachts design is most purely intended to be about.

48,611 posts on saac

5% drunken bollocks

45% cut and paste

50% utter bollocks...see above...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bucc5062 said:

Going back to '88.  What would have happened if DC, instead of cheating, had actually tried to build a 90 ft sailboat to compete against NZ.  He may have won, he may have lost, but he at least would have kept to a spirit and yes I'll say, a Corinthian approach to the game.  Instead of IIAC(?) we may have seen 70-80 foot yachts.  By cheating, and that is all how I see it, he opened the door to a level of rule twisting and thinking that has actually dragged down the AC as a whole.  Yes, we get it,you love fast cats, but if trends continued, those cats could be the swan song of the AC.

Eh?

AC has nothing to do with middle class Corinthians sailing about the harbour in their 4 man day boats and 2 man dinghies... well other than, for a short period once they dumbed it down to 12m size, they got to sail on AC yachts if they where good enough... when said same Corinthians declared they didn't want to be Corinthian anymore. You'd imagine the number of industry professionals they where racing with might have got them thinking.

Rule twisting is practically an institution in the AC going right back to the beginning.

Plus '88 was followed by the IACC which are 82ft long.

What trend is that? AC35 being an Italian and Spanish team away from having the same basic make up and entry as all the other post '88 US defences and a bunch of US teams away from being the same size as the rest bar 2007.

We all know the cause. Fall out and squabbling. It's got nothing to do with multihull/monohull.

LR was building a multihull, no problem, and they have said they have no problem with a monohull or multihull this tie round. Alinghi has a problem with multi hulls? Yeh right. It's completely inappropriate for the King of Spain to enter a high profile yacht race at the moment. Where are the Australians? They haven't entered  since '95 which is a whole load of monohull regatta missed.

Share this post


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

RGeek, may one ask who has ever said that a kid's trike is more similar to a Lotus TT bike than an Opti is to an AC50? Where is that post?

What I am saying is that in the western world's most popular equipment-intensive sport, the bikes used at the top level look very similar to the bike an aspiring weekend warrior can buy at their local shop. Why not follow that model?

Oh - and that Lotus you posted? It's banned from most road racing on two counts - one the frame is illegal and second the TT bars are illegal in mass start events at all levels. So It's actually a symbol of how much trouble an enormously successful sport goes to ensure that gear is comparatively easy to use and to own.

In conclusion, can I ask when the benefit of promoting hyper-performance boats is actually going to hit the sport? It's been over 20 years now since SA, Seahorse, Frank Bethwaite and others said that high performance was the future of the sport and the sport is continuing to dwindle. How much longer do we have to wait for the approach to pay off and the sport to start growing again? Thirty years? Forty? Fifty?

 

The lotus was a track bike. They tried banning technology from the hour record, which is probably closest to the AC in many ways. It killed it completely and utterly stone dead.

I made a comparison between the AC50 and Opti. I think they look basically the same. Your comparison is not between the highest tech. the sport has to offer and the introductory equipment. But oh boy the kids trike has 3 wheels!!!!!!!!! Jesus we'd better not buy that strange contraption cos it doesn't look like the bike Lance Armstrong rode.

I'm not suggesting that AC foiling technology should be made legal in a J/70 regatta or any other class aimed at participation.

Talking of the J/70. Performance boat or no? .. and the SB20? or the Viper 640? or Melges 24? or the J80? or the Hunter 707? or any of the other relatively light weight, relatively over canvased classes that have been the new fleets keeping the lights on for the last 20-25 years.

NAh. We should of kept everything the same and there would now still be massive fleets of 24s everywhere. Is that right?

Are you saying Beneslow, Elan, bla bla bla just packed up promoting all other styles of boat? Or that the myriad of local classes that actually make up grass root sailing suddenly stopped promoting them selves?

So you don't have to wait long. It's all ready happened.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely someone can set up another match racing circuit for monohulls ?  After all there is a pretty healthy circuit for racing vintage cars and it is quite entertaining in its own right.

The monohull match racing circuit could include rules specifying owner drivers and all national amateur crews, leaving the America's Cup to be held in ultra fast foiling multi's driven by pro drivers

Incidentally....its worth watching this video...very exciting last few laps. Vintage cars like vintage boats are very special. 

Share this post


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

Eh?

AC has nothing to do with middle class Corinthians sailing about the harbour in their 4 man day boats and 2 man dinghies... well other than, for a short period once they dumbed it down to 12m size, they got to sail on AC yachts if they where good enough... when said same Corinthians declared they didn't want to be Corinthian anymore. You'd imagine the number of industry professionals they where racing with might have got them thinking.

Rule twisting is practically an institution in the AC going right back to the beginning.

Plus '88 was followed by the IACC which are 82ft long.

What trend is that? AC35 being an Italian and Spanish team away from having the same basic make up and entry as all the other post '88 US defences and a bunch of US teams away from being the same size as the rest bar 2007.

We all know the cause. Fall out and squabbling. It's got nothing to do with multihull/monohull.

LR was building a multihull, no problem, and they have said they have no problem with a monohull or multihull this tie round. Alinghi has a problem with multi hulls? Yeh right. It's completely inappropriate for the King of Spain to enter a high profile yacht race at the moment. Where are the Australians? They haven't entered  since '95 which is a whole load of monohull regatta missed.

There is bending, then there is twisting, then there is Connor making a mockery of them.

I used the word Corinthian in regards to the spirit of, not some form of physical racing.

Quote
Co·rin·thi·an
kəˈrinTHēən/
adjective
 
  1. 1.
    belonging or relating to Corinth, especially the ancient city.
    •  
  2. 2.
    involving or displaying the highest standards of sportsmanship.
    "a club embodying the Corinthian spirit"

Sure, NYC/US held the cup so long, because they gamed the system to some degree, but they also built good boats.  They didn't try to win a horse race by bringing in a car and arguing that it still touches four spots on the ground. 

The US got beat in 83 because the Aussies built a better boat, but it took a full 7 races to win it.  83 and 87 where the height of that corinthian spirit, 88 was the lowest and after that, RC/LE just decided to keep it in the gutter.

I'm no fan of foiling Cats in the AC (or any at this time), because other than speed, they are boring to watch unless they fail dramatically then they seem done for the day.  They are boring, because you see nothing of crew work, other than scrambling side to side then back to two guys sitting in their cockpits and 3 guys pedaling hard.  However I also don't like FF Cats in the AC, because to me, they do not represent the best spirit of the Event.  They started as a cheat, they got put back in one of the worst ACs every held.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_America's_Cup

That was a cluster fuck from the start, but interesting to note that at one point, GCYC was willing to go monohulls to move things forward.  Everytime I see a Multi in an AC all I am reminded about is the joke they made of this race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pretty sure that's the next AC ride... just put a bike on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Game the system"?

Requiring the opposition to sail across the Atlantic while you raced about it stripped down day boats? Banning the challenger from racing anyone? Banning locals for sailing with the challenger when it looked like they might get close to winning.

Corinthian?

While it carries a Victorian emphasis on fair play it really was more about a rejection of pretty much everything the AC has stood for. It means amateur sailing of a boat to own your self; in opposition to sitting in the club getting drunk and making wagers on which of your fellow club members boats will come home first.

And if we're talking sportsmanship in a Corinthian context we're really talking the unwritten standards of British fair play that would see BAR send in a support rib and lend their direct opponent equipment to repair there broken yacht, rather than the "by the rules" standards of American sportsmanship or the "by the interpretation of the rules by todays officials" sportsmanship introduced to modern sport by in no small part the Kiwis.

'64ish was the birth of Corinthian involvement in the AC. '83 was the beginning of its downfall. '87 was its complete destruction. The poison pill is LV sponsorship ... the very thing required to kick of large number of challengers.

The argument that the AC needs to get back to a Corinthian attitude and standard of fair play doesn't stack up. For there to be numbers in the AC what's needed is external funding and commercialisation (and static class rules).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, rgeek said:

"Game the system"?

Requiring the opposition to sail across the Atlantic while you raced about it stripped down day boats? Banning the challenger from racing anyone? Banning locals for sailing with the challenger when it looked like they might get close to winning.

Corinthian?

While it carries a Victorian emphasis on fair play it really was more about a rejection of pretty much everything the AC has stood for. It means amateur sailing of a boat to own your self; in opposition to sitting in the club getting drunk and making wagers on which of your fellow club members boats will come home first.

And if we're talking sportsmanship in a Corinthian context we're really talking the unwritten standards of British fair play that would see BAR send in a support rib and lend their direct opponent equipment to repair there broken yacht, rather than the "by the rules" standards of American sportsmanship or the "by the interpretation of the rules by todays officials" sportsmanship introduced to modern sport by in no small part the Kiwis.

'64ish was the birth of Corinthian involvement in the AC. '83 was the beginning of its downfall. '87 was its complete destruction.

Wow....We really see the world differently if you think '87 compares to 2010.  

involving or displaying the highest standards of sportsmanship.

Whether you want it to only apply to amateurs, the ideal should resonate with all athletes and 2010 shit on the thought, the word, and the deed.  2013 just kept up the diarrhea and finally in 2017 somebody bunged up Russell's ass so at least no more shit would spew from him. 

The problem with trying to cheat to win is that it never really turns out well for all parties.  I'll go back to the original topic and hope for this:

That NZ chooses a 60-70 ft monohull Foil Assisted.  No canting keel to reduce and need for stored power.  No water ballast that is picked up or drained via power.  Open design on keel, foils, rudders, soft sails, box design on hull, and standard standing rigging and hardware.

That they sail in the Spring in the Hauraki Gulf to garner as much wind variation as indicated at that time and the do not limit racing conditions short of extreme unsafe or almost zero wind conditions.

That they OTA broadcast the event as well as streaming live over the internet with video/sound on the boats, in the air and on other chase boats.

That they push a nationality rule that puts at least 50% of the crew as native or long term citizens, but relaxing sail and boat construction.  Design comes from nationality/

That they run courses that would give a 60-90 minute race with multiple laps with a minimum of 3 races a day.

And most of all, attempt to cost it such countries/rich people/corporations will want to challenge and build and not play the event out in courts.

Oh and ban Russell Coutts, Larry Ellison and anything they touch from entering.  Even if it meant no US representation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corinthian sailing is a very specific thing that hasn't changed very much since the founding of the Royal Alfred Yacht Club (the oldest explicitly Corinthian yacht club in the world). The AC got closest to Corinthian ideal for me in the immediate post war era. '83 the Cup is won by an essentially corporate effort. In '87 it's won by in essence a professional team backed by corporate money. Then there is '88.

If we mean sporting and fair play, lets talk sporting and fair play.

But for 2000-2007 the AC has shit on the highest standards of fair play through out it's entire history. It's a lesson in what money will do to win and pre WWII a clash of cultures in terms of British fair play and American sportsmanship by the rules.

Then we're back in the toilet of a DoG challenge, which in it's own way is a fair fight.

Objectively there are some bad things have been done since but in a number of ways, AC35 was as fair a regatta as we've seen.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never ends here does it. And I've seen few if any contributors change their mind of the various forums I visit. Fortunately RNZYS will lead most some a few of us to stop making the same points over and over and over one of these days.

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can never work out why Americans who have corporatised every corner of global business, still have this corinthian fetish?

Americas Cup and fair? What the Brits tried to do to America, an uncouth quasi commercial vessel, daring to race against gentlemens yachets..

then after winning the cup and later the deed being written, leading to in reality rightly so, the NYYC interpretations to hold onto the thing.

All this bluster about match racing and "public interest" based on teams entered, gets so blurred, it is no wonder folks klingon and beat the old horse sensless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope once they anouncement something we can then get in with criticising it based on our preexisting bias and opinions 

Share this post


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

Corinthian sailing is a very specific thing that hasn't changed very much since the founding of the Royal Alfred Yacht Club (the oldest explicitly Corinthian yacht club in the world). The AC got closest to Corinthian ideal for me in the immediate post war era. '83 the Cup is won by an essentially corporate effort. In '87 it's won by in essence a professional team backed by corporate money. Then there is '88.

If we mean sporting and fair play, lets talk sporting and fair play.

But for 2000-2007 the AC has shit on the highest standards of fair play through out it's entire history. It's a lesson in what money will do to win and pre WWII a clash of cultures in terms of British fair play and American sportsmanship by the rules.

Then we're back in the toilet of a DoG challenge, which in it's own way is a fair fight.

Objectively there are some bad things have been done since but in a number of ways, AC35 was as fair a regatta as we've seen.

 

As a kiwi I felt the rules were fair. The fact that Oracle came ino the match with a one point gain is also fair. It could of been ETNZ with the extra point  if it beat oracle in the previous round robins. 

Share this post


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

The lotus was a track bike. They tried banning technology from the hour record, which is probably closest to the AC in many ways. It killed it completely and utterly stone dead.

I made a comparison between the AC50 and Opti. I think they look basically the same. Your comparison is not between the highest tech. the sport has to offer and the introductory equipment. But oh boy the kids trike has 3 wheels!!!!!!!!! Jesus we'd better not buy that strange contraption cos it doesn't look like the bike Lance Armstrong rode.

I'm not suggesting that AC foiling technology should be made legal in a J/70 regatta or any other class aimed at participation.

Talking of the J/70. Performance boat or no? .. and the SB20? or the Viper 640? or Melges 24? or the J80? or the Hunter 707? or any of the other relatively light weight, relatively over canvased classes that have been the new fleets keeping the lights on for the last 20-25 years.

NAh. We should of kept everything the same and there would now still be massive fleets of 24s everywhere. Is that right?

Are you saying Beneslow, Elan, bla bla bla just packed up promoting all other styles of boat? Or that the myriad of local classes that actually make up grass root sailing suddenly stopped promoting them selves?

So you don't have to wait long. It's all ready happened.

 

R, you make some good points but you're getting your facts wrong on others, and seem to be determined to ignore the point.

No, that Lotus 110 you posted is not a track bike as anyone with a passing knowledge of track bikes would know - it has brakes and gears which are banned in track racing (gee, rules that slow famous high-tech equipment down.....). You were apparently thinking of the Lotus 108 track bike (now illegal, like the 110) that Boardman rode to the hour record as "the highest tech the sport had to offer" - but by some definitions it wasn't.  The Lotus 108 was designed to a restrictive set of UCI rules, and Boardman's record was 35% slower than the contemporary record set by an amateur in a streamlined recumbent. (below)

So the bit of sporting equipment you are holding up as high tech was actually highly restricted in performance - just like (for example) a potential new AC mono may be. And yet, it's famous. Doesn't that show quite well that you don't need the ultimate in unrestricted high performance to create a high tech buzz?  People didn't give a fuck about the fact that the high-tech Lotus was much slower than the backyard-built recumbent, and in the same way people may not give a fuck if the AC is sailed in boats that are much slower than a foiling multi.

My comparison is between the equipment a weekend warrior uses and the highest level of competitive equipment. There is very little visual difference in the most popular equipment-intensive sport, as in the pics I posted of an entry-level Trek and a Trek from this year's Tour. No, that doesn't mean that the AC should be sailed in Beneteaus but it does prove that millions of people are willing to cheer on professional athletes using gear that does not look very different from the stuff you can buy in a neighbourhood shop. You don't need exotic gear to interest the public.

And nope, we are still waiting for the "benefits" of the "top level" of the sport being sailed in foilers to flow on - the sport is NOT growing as some claimed it would.

I have no idea why you think I've claimed we shouldn't have J/70s etc. The success of such boats, compared to the limited number of foiling cats, indicates that maybe the sport would be better off with a big version of the Melges 24 etc in the AC. And claiming that I've said we should have no new designs is simply bullshit since I have never said that. The point is that studies into the public perception of sailing and analogy with other sports indicate that there is no need to have the main event sailed in bleeding edge ultra-radical equipment.

Since you are apparently determined to put words in my mouth, I will try to stop responding to yours posts but please stop trying to claim I said things I never said.  I'm not even saying that I am definitely right - all I'm saying is that the point is worth considering.

 

Trout 2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Jay

I m not going to quote your very long post about Moth and A Class numbers, but it is another case of using statistics in isolation to try to make a case. All classes see numbers rise and fall and the Moths and A's are no different. One thing that has been seen in recent years is the drop off in sales of high performance boats, yet both the Moths and the A's are actually pretty strong on new boat sales due to foiling.Since foiling came along, Moth new boat builds have been at levels not seen since the 1960's. I think 150 boats per year is a huge number for such an expensive and difficult to sail boat. Maybe it isn't reflected in fleets, but people are not buying those boat just to sit in the garage. More than ever before, foiling Moths are being used as a leisure boat as well as a racing boat.

You quote the number of Moths at the US championships as evidence but you add no analysis. Was that caused by a downturn in interest, or just a location that people didn't want to go to or bad timing compared with other events? Numbers without analysis are meaningless. I look at 216 boats entered the worlds and can only think about how extraordinary that number is. You say as a negative that there are only 70-90 class members in the UK, but i look at the 62 Brits entered for the worlds. I have never seen such a high level of interest as a percentage of the members. that says the class is very strong. How about 40 Australians? I doubt there has ever been 40 Australian boats at any class worlds outside of Australia. At the other end of the scale, you say Denmark has 2 moths, yet they have 3 entered for the worlds. The number of registered class members says little about the strength of a class.

With the A's, the general feeling is that the class is doing very well compared with others. There is a noticeable change in the fleet demographic and location, but the upcoming worlds will be the largest ever in a location that generally doesn't do as well for entries when other international classes have been there. It will have the highest percentage of first time sailors we have seen which clearly shows the class is healthy. Some mourn the loss of the old sailors while others celibate that A's are clearly staying relevant. What I do know is that if a class cannot keep bringing in new people, it dies. Lots of new people is a good thing.

Never expect high performance sailing to be a mass participation segment of our sport. It never has been and never will be. Instead, look at how people lap up the coverage of both Moths and A's despite most of those following knowing they will never sail the boats. Live stream the Moths and, say, the lasers at the same time and which do you think will get the viewing figures?

It's easy to take raw numbers, but the reality is that foiling boats have had a profound impact on the sailing scene in ways that go well beyond raw numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, A Class Sailor said:

The Jay

I m not going to quote your very long post about Moth and A Class numbers, but it is another case of using statistics in isolation to try to make a case.

He likes to hear himself talk, and will choose facts that support his POV while ignoring the big picture. I'm still waiting for his prescription for what ails sailing, but he just tears down others ideas.

On 7/15/2017 at 6:26 PM, The Jay said:

Has anyone ever said that technology isn't a huge part of the AC?  It's just that some of us are pointing out that sailing ability HAS been a major part of the AC.

 

On 7/16/2017 at 1:48 AM, The Jay said:

Just to make it clear, I never said that the AC was primarily about sailing ability. It's just that the AC is not all about technology as some have claimed - it's a mixture.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, A Class Sailor said:

The Jay

I m not going to quote your very long post about Moth and A Class numbers, but it is another case of using statistics in isolation to try to make a case. All classes see numbers rise and fall and the Moths and A's are no different. One thing that has been seen in recent years is the drop off in sales of high performance boats, yet both the Moths and the A's are actually pretty strong on new boat sales due to foiling.Since foiling came along, Moth new boat builds have been at levels not seen since the 1960's. I think 150 boats per year is a huge number for such an expensive and difficult to sail boat. Maybe it isn't reflected in fleets, but people are not buying those boat just to sit in the garage. More than ever before, foiling Moths are being used as a leisure boat as well as a racing boat.

You quote the number of Moths at the US championships as evidence but you add no analysis. Was that caused by a downturn in interest, or just a location that people didn't want to go to or bad timing compared with other events? Numbers without analysis are meaningless. I look at 216 boats entered the worlds and can only think about how extraordinary that number is. You say as a negative that there are only 70-90 class members in the UK, but i look at the 62 Brits entered for the worlds. I have never seen such a high level of interest as a percentage of the members. that says the class is very strong. How about 40 Australians? I doubt there has ever been 40 Australian boats at any class worlds outside of Australia. At the other end of the scale, you say Denmark has 2 moths, yet they have 3 entered for the worlds. The number of registered class members says little about the strength of a class.

With the A's, the general feeling is that the class is doing very well compared with others. There is a noticeable change in the fleet demographic and location, but the upcoming worlds will be the largest ever in a location that generally doesn't do as well for entries when other international classes have been there. It will have the highest percentage of first time sailors we have seen which clearly shows the class is healthy. Some mourn the loss of the old sailors while others celibate that A's are clearly staying relevant. What I do know is that if a class cannot keep bringing in new people, it dies. Lots of new people is a good thing.

Never expect high performance sailing to be a mass participation segment of our sport. It never has been and never will be. Instead, look at how people lap up the coverage of both Moths and A's despite most of those following knowing they will never sail the boats. Live stream the Moths and, say, the lasers at the same time and which do you think will get the viewing figures?

It's easy to take raw numbers, but the reality is that foiling boats have had a profound impact on the sailing scene in ways that go well beyond raw numbers.

A Cat, I agree with a lot of what you say. I was trying to address the claims sometimes made that high-performance sailing WILL become a mass participation  area, and that there has been a big shift towards high-performance boats.  As you say, we can "never expect high performance sailing to be a mass participation segment of our sport. It never has been and never will be" and that "one thing that has been seen in recent years is the drop off in sales of high performance boats".

I'm definitely NOT looking at figures in isolation or without analysis. The person i was replying to was the one who was using figures for one regatta to make a broad point. My point is that you can't just use entry numbers for one event (particularly one sailed in a major sailing location with craft that are very easily shipped) to show the strength of a class. And the US nationals figure I used, by the way, is higher than other recent US titles;

You and I are saying the same thing - high performance craft are fantastic but they are not a mass participation area. To me, that seems to have relevance for the choice of an AC boat.

 

PS - The info about Denmark having 2 Moths came from the class' own AGM. Yes, there are probably many foilers being sailed just for fun but the same applies to many other classes, so to compare on a like-for-like basis it seems best to use the numbers for active boats, as given by the class itself.  And looking at Youtube viewer figures doesn't really show the ultra-high performance dinghy and cat classes as attracting bigger audiences.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right Jay. I'm not sure what point your making. Cyclings commercial success on the continent is largely down to it being consistently promoted as a working class sport. In the US thanks to the business fashion fitness boom in the 2000s. In the UK its down to success at the Olympics. In particular before Olympic success the sport was on its uppers in the UK. The equipment is part of that but there is a big distinction that needs to be drawn between people who ride a bike and people with participate in the sport of cycling. Can they empathise with the Tour De France for having ridden a bike? Yes, but that's a structural issue for sailing in all forms. Unless you're sailed you are, arguably, not going to empathise with the AC in any form.

Totally agree that 'the skiffs the thing' didn't work as an exclusive way forward for the sport. Where we disagree is that it was promoted in isolation. If you have issue with it being promoted at all you're really saying that the development of the sport should of stopped with the J24/GP14/Lightning/Laser. I raised the j/70 et al because they are the offspring of the movement you're claiming has been bad for the sport. I disagree with that premise because: People didn't stop promoting other forms of sailing and existing classes, if there where still attractive they would still be popular. In an otherwise declining sport those OD sportish boat classes have been the significant areas of adult growth.

Are you going to apply the same critique to the concept of SMOD?

When I look at successful participation sports and unsuccessful ones what I see mostly is a massive difference in the, increasingly professional, promotion of the sport and events; with the sport promoted to a very wide range of the general public. The successful ones also have a framework that encompasses all levels of achievement in a single system. In that respect sailing is barely a single cohesive sport at all. Here sailing is only just catching up with the level of support and training routinely pushed out to volunteers in other sports and it's starting to pay dividends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that if a sport pushes the "extreme" side too far in high profile events, then there is a major risk that it will become perceived to be inaccessible, and that the accessible areas of the sport will be marginalised. That may affect both potential newcomers, who know they will not be able to become involved in the extreme sport they see, and the vast majority of existing participants who can no longer relate to the major events.  And as you say, unless you have sailed you are arguably not going to relate to the AC in any form, so we are possibly turning off many current sailors for little (if any) gain in new ones.

I don't have any issue with skiffs, for example, being "promoted at all". They are great boats that fill a great niche - but apart from one tiny corner of the world where they benefit from liquor and gambling laws, they are just a niche and not "the future" as some have said.  I'm not criticising the J/70 et al because they are actually a very accessible boat. As you say, they are a significant growth type in some areas, and they are widely sailed at local levels in many places. That's great. If the AC was sailed in a giant development-class version of a J/70 that would be great as far as I'm concerned, because the typical sailor can relate to such craft and the newcomer who gets turned onto the sport can wander down to their local club and soon be out there sailing in a boat that is basically a baby version of the one they saw in the AC. That doesn't apply to winged foilers.

We are probably suffering a communication breakdown due to different backgrounds. To some, the J/70 (for example) is a nice little boat but very far from extreme compared to something like a Shaw 750; it's not an object lesson in succeeding by creating a high-performance boat, but in succeeding by creating an accessible one. 

As you say, successful sports are promoted to a very wide range of people. If all the major sailing events are chasing the extreme side of the sport then we are arguably only appealing to an incredibly small proportion of the potential market, and we are also possibly affecting the motivation of the many people who keep the sport alive by buying Beneteaus, J/70s, Aeros, Hobie 16s, etc.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/07/2017 at 10:33 PM, The Jay said:

Yep. And American Eagle set the Fastnet course record in 1971, won the SORC, and got the line honours/IOR double in the '72 Hobart, while Gretel finished 2nd in the 1980 Hobart ahead of Nefertiti. True offshore boats - just as Schuyler said the AC was meant to be raced in.

I just can't imagine a 12m even completing those races let alone beating proper offshore boats at it.

I guess just goes to show how completely fucked IOR was :ph34r:

 

21 hours ago, Mambo Kings said:

After all there is a pretty healthy circuit for racing vintage cars and it is quite entertaining in its own right.

This is probably the greatest car race I've ever watched:

Its great because there are competing design philosophies each with clear advantages & disadvantages, resulting in tight racing and plenty of overtakes as they push those old beasts to the very edge.

Glorious but irrelevant in the same way as 8* Js racing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using our preferred example the top level events in cycling are extremely extreme. Take the TdF as a prime example. OK "be inspired" is a fig leaf the UK Olympic teams like to wear but buy and large participation is promoted through events explicitly aimed at, often none competitive, participation. 10k mass participation runs, charity cycle rides, Grand Fondo/Etap etc.

The problem you highlight is a lack of follow-up on participation and access, rather then the inspirational nature of the AC or otherwise.

Monos or multihulls the impact of the boats used in the AC is marginal. If it has an impact it's in its ability to create heros.

If you wanted to improve the instirational nature of sailings top event, you wouldn't start with the Americas Cup that's for sure.