Team NZ

Cats are finished

Recommended Posts

With these cats foiling 100% of the race tIme what else is there to prove? 

Would they go faster next time?... no... 

Are they now boring?...   yes...

Would bigger cats go faster... maybe.

This AC was to quick, races to short, and competition a bit lame.

Where to next?

 

Maybe old school AC should return for the purists 

Hi tech mono with two crew and a offshore race. Max length 60 foot anything goes...

 

Let push a new boundary that's more relevant to sailors 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This competition has nothing to do with the America's Cup. How stupid is it to carry a bunch of guys around the course peddling bicycles so that the skipper has sufficient hydraulic pressure to turn? This is all about speed. So, what should be next? It was clear from the competition that those damn foils were slowing the boats down. Therefore, get rid of them. Here's the future of this particular cup if they only have the courage to follow their dreams -

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/6/2017 at 5:07 PM, Team NZ said:

With these cats foiling 100% of the race tIme what else is there to prove? 

Would they go faster next time?... no... 

Are they now boring?...   yes...

Would bigger cats go faster... maybe.

This AC was to quick, races to short, and competition a bit lame.

Where to next?

 

Maybe old school AC should return for the purists 

Hi tech mono with two crew and a offshore race. Max length 60 foot anything goes...

 

Let push a new boundary that's more relevant to sailors 

 

 

 

 

 

there aren't many old school AC races that were any closer in racing.  and yes they would go faster 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how do you figure that the races were boring?  Measured in old school 12 meter and iacc standards there was equal engagement in the pre start (yes, they don't go backwards after a dial up, but is that really a requirement) and or the most part the teaching start was more about preventing a 80kt head on collision than anything else.  So go to a traditional upwind start an you solved that.   There were an equal or higher number of passes and those that didn't understand the match racing moves that were going on during the races were just being cursed by bad commenting.   

 

I call all ba on your premise.  If the boats go back to direct drive for everything but the boards (which are better served hydraulically,) they you get what you are seeking.

and not for nothing but a fool assisted monohull is going to need the same hydro power as these cats did....

Share this post


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

there aren't many old school AC races that were any closer in racing.  and yes they would go faster 

 

There were no old school AC races that were sailed inside tiny boundaries over such short legs and such short distances. One may as well say that slalom windsurfers offer much closer racing than AC50s which they do - but only because races are over in 3 to 4 minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

id bet the farm that there will be a brand new design --hence the 2021 proposed date. Maybe even two boats cats and monos will be required. id predict a long challenger series over two months 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Legion of Modernrate Jack said:

A shitload of folks wishing the silly Kiwis will go all mono, so the cup can be won easily.

Ah....could it be any easier than AC35 in cats?

Share this post


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

Why don't organize Formula 1 races with only steam & coal machine.

Steampunk Formula 1. I like it!

museum.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything points to foiling cats for AC36.

Abandoning foilers and starting from scratch with a new design approach would be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Not only has ETNZ developed a success record in designing and building foilers but based on that experience they have an excellent handle on how to spec foilers that will handle the open sea conditions of the Hauraki Gulf. Look for an innovative Protocol springing from the most innovative design team in AC foiler history.

All this presupposing they win over Bertelli's professed preference for monos.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Loose Cannon said:

And how do you figure that the races were boring?  Measured in old school 12 meter and iacc standards there was equal engagement in the pre start (yes, they don't go backwards after a dial up, but is that really a requirement) and or the most part the teaching start was more about preventing a 80kt head on collision than anything else.  So go to a traditional upwind start an you solved that.   There were an equal or higher number of passes and those that didn't understand the match racing moves that were going on during the races were just being cursed by bad commenting.   

 

I call all ba on your premise.  If the boats go back to direct drive for everything but the boards (which are better served hydraulically,) they you get what you are seeking.

and not for nothing but a fool assisted monohull is going to need the same hydro power as these cats did....

Hehehe.

 

He said fool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Races were as boring as NASCAR, after the start not much to watch except wait for a capsize. And really, a team of bicycle racers who never get to touch a line?

how about something where sailors actually change sails. This was a boring as the "little America's Cup" races used to be with a uni rig and two guys.  

(By the way, I don't hate cats, raced Tornados for many years)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be a fair amount of support here for returning to monohulls.  However, since a traditional monohull is pretty slow, the monohull advocates seem to want a canting keels to power the boats up and make them faster.  First of all, if the move back to monohulls is because more people sail monohulls, then canting keels should not be considered because, in fact, more people sail catamarans than sail canting keel monohulls.  

There also seems to be a desire to get rid of the human hamsters providing power.  All well and good, however - if you flip back to a monohull, and add a canting keel to jack up the performance, what is going to cant the keel, a diesel engine?  If so, how is running a diesel engine full time to make the boat workable more 'sailing purist' than human hamsters pumping oil?!  If the AC sailors are supposed to be athletes, and the sport pure sailing, then the keels need to be canted with blocks and tackle, led to a coffee grinder.  That will make a tacking duel in 60-90 footers interesting!  On the other hand...If you're going to cant the keel with an engine, why not turn the winches with one too?! After all, the engine is already running?! Once you're on a roll, the next natural step after that is to put the sheets, halyards, and gennaker furlers on captive reel winches, eliminating the need for a bunch of crew positions.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about going to a canter with stored energy (in the form of a OD fuel cel, if you limit the size etc etc etc) and limit it's use to keel and maybe winches and go to 80-100 Ft??  We all know that watching hampsters dance and heck even gorillas on grinders has proved to be particularly mundane...  Give em some stored energy, a bigger mono boat, and soft sails then you get everything that is cool about monos in a platform that allows for sail changes etc.  Create some sort of mechanism that swaps out the batteries between races and bob's your uncle...   Only downside is that tacking duels will be limited to how much energy is left in the battery..  Maybe no batteries and or canting allowed before the start. Bingo, the backwards starts are back...  

Share this post


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

There seems to be a fair amount of support here for returning to monohulls.  However, since a traditional monohull is pretty slow, the monohull advocates seem to want a canting keels to power the boats up and make them faster.  First of all, if the move back to monohulls is because more people sail monohulls, then canting keels should not be considered because, in fact, more people sail catamarans than sail canting keel monohulls.  

There also seems to be a desire to get rid of the human hamsters providing power.  All well and good, however - if you flip back to a monohull, and add a canting keel to jack up the performance, what is going to cant the keel, a diesel engine?  If so, how is running a diesel engine full time to make the boat workable more 'sailing purist' than human hamsters pumping oil?!  If the AC sailors are supposed to be athletes, and the sport pure sailing, then the keels need to be canted with blocks and tackle, led to a coffee grinder.  That will make a tacking duel in 60-90 footers interesting!  On the other hand...If you're going to cant the keel with an engine, why not turn the winches with one too?! After all, the engine is already running?! Once you're on a roll, the next natural step after that is to put the sheets, halyards, and gennaker furlers on captive reel winches, eliminating the need for a bunch of crew positions.  

 

 

All fair points, but many people are also saying that it doesn't matter if a mono is slower.  There's a fair bit of information to indicate that a Moth is faster than an A Class - how many people gave up As for Moths?  Kitefoilers now seem to be faster than foiling cats and foiling Moths - how many people have given up foiling cats to sail kitefoilers?

If the lure of pure speed is so weak that speed freaks like the stereotyped Moth, A Class and FP sailor didn't give up their boats to go and sail faster craft, why should other people care if something is faster than their mono?  

Share this post


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

All fair points, but many people are also saying that it doesn't matter if a mono is slower.  There's a fair bit of information to indicate that a Moth is faster than an A Class - how many people gave up As for Moths?  Kitefoilers now seem to be faster than foiling cats and foiling Moths - how many people have given up foiling cats to sail kitefoilers?

If the lure of pure speed is so weak that speed freaks like the stereotyped Moth, A Class and FP sailor didn't give up their boats to go and sail faster craft, why should other people care if something is faster than their mono?  

Yup.

I don't much care if the monos are (much) slower.

The preference for this is that they actually promote (or at very least enable) match racing.

I know that peeps will say that we saw tacking duels/covering in AC35, but a busy leg saw 5 or 6 tacks/gybes.

Those cats couldn't engage in full on tacking duels because:

 

1. The cost of performing a manoeuvre was fairly prohibitive.

2. The legs we REALLY short.

3. The supply of hydro was too limited.

Share this post


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

Races were as boring as NASCAR, after the start not much to watch except wait for a capsize. And really, a team of bicycle racers who never get to touch a line?

how about something where sailors actually change sails. This was a boring as the "little America's Cup" races used to be with a uni rig and two guys.  

(By the way, I don't hate cats, raced Tornados for many years)

It's funny because there are so many comments like this around the internet, but myself I find the exact opposite. 4 hour races of slow tugs is boring as fuck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lake Garda style, something like the Libera class in 65ft monos with 8 crew, wing sails,zeros and wide enough to run with foils. Over 25 knots true wind speed they should then have a mandatory change-over to a smaller wing but they keep racing in up to 35 knots true. And 60 minute races; 48 minutes of on-screen racing with 12 minutes for ads, so 1 hour TV time blocks.

What the AC needs is the reintroduction of real sailing with a component of white knuckled fear as seen on those 12m reaches with shy to shy gybes off Freo in '87.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A modern, powerful canting-keel maxi develops 50-80 meter-tons of righting moment. I can't share the numbers for how much energy is required to cant that 90° in 10 seconds, but you can get close enough with a little high school physics. There's simply no way it an be done with human power even without a tacking duel.

 

Share this post


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

No need for canters.  Just get back to sailing with winches, lines, sails and sailors working them.

i dont think you can do monos without canters.  its pretty archaic without them.  you would essentially be getting your butt kicked by an open 40

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Open 40s can not compete match racing on a windward leeward course against a comparable fixed keel boat.  The straight line speed of the Open 40s, Vendee, VOR etc doesn't matter when you need to match race another boat and be able to go upwind.  It's not about the speed.

Share this post


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

No need for canters.  Just get back to sailing with winches, lines, sails and sailors working them.

... and matching uniforms. Don't forget about the matching uniforms. So beutiful. Most important.

Share this post


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

No need for canters.  Just get back to sailing with winches, lines, sails and sailors working them.

What sailman said. ^^^

Share this post


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

i dont think you can do monos without canters.  its pretty archaic without them.  you would essentially be getting your butt kicked by an open 40

 

Really? In the 2015 Fastnet, for example, the fastest fixed keeler (Momo, a Maxi 72) beat the first ORMA 60 home by seven hours or 11%. Momo also beat the two Volvo 70s over the line, and the 60 footers rate slower or similar to the 72s. So since a fixed keel 72 can handle a 60 foot canter fairly easily, why would a fixed keel 75 or 80 be beaten by a 40 foot canter?

Share this post


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

Really? In the 2015 Fastnet, for example, the fastest fixed keeler (Momo, a Maxi 72) beat the first ORMA 60 home by seven hours or 11%. Momo also beat the two Volvo 70s over the line, and the 60 footers rate slower or similar to the 72s. So since a fixed keel 72 can handle a 60 foot canter fairly easily, why would a fixed keel 75 or 80 be beaten by a 40 foot canter?

maybe but like for like a canter would kick arse over a fixed.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And a kitefoiler seems to kick arse over a Moth, which seems to kick arse over an A Class, which seems to kick arse over a sportsboat - and Mothies, A Class sailors and sportsboat sailors don't seem to give a shit. An IOR maxi kicked ass over a 12 Metre, an IMS maxi or IRC maxi kicked ass over an IACC boat, and not many people seemed to give a shit. You could design a racing car that would kick arse over a F1 car, but no one gives a shit about doing it.

Share this post


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

And a kitefoiler seems to kick arse over a Moth, which seems to kick arse over an A Class, which seems to kick arse over a sportsboat - and Mothies, A Class sailors and sportsboat sailors don't seem to give a shit. An IOR maxi kicked ass over a 12 Metre, an IMS maxi or IRC maxi kicked ass over an IACC boat, and not many people seemed to give a shit. You could design a racing car that would kick arse over a F1 car, but no one gives a shit about doing it.

no but all those are generally the best of their type.  i.e.,best single handed cat class = A class.  

F1 has evolved to be fast, safe (ish) and competitive.  

why not do the same with AC class, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 12s weren't the fastest of their type -the offshore maxis and some inshore boats like three surviving M Class (which were still racing well into the 12 Metre era) would have kicked their ass, as would any of the surviving 23 Metres or J Class if anyone had cared.  The IACC boats weren't really the fastest of anything.

The A wasn't the fastest of its type - the 18 Square was a faster singlehanded cat. But pure speed isn't what counts, so the 18 Square died out. Same as the fact that the D Class is potentially a faster two-person cat than a C Class, but no one races D Class.

A fixed keel AC boat could be the fastest fixed keeler. And if pure speed is all that counts a canter is going to be shat on by an offshore multi or a foiling multi. If you are going to cut speed dramatically by requiring the boat to only have one hull, why not cut speed by a fraction more and make it a fixed keeler?

Share this post


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

The 12s weren't the fastest of their type -the offshore maxis and some inshore boats like three surviving M Class (which were still racing well into the 12 Metre era) would have kicked their ass, as would any of the surviving 23 Metres or J Class if anyone had cared.  The IACC boats weren't really the fastest of anything.

The A wasn't the fastest of its type - the 18 Square was a faster singlehanded cat. But pure speed isn't what counts, so the 18 Square died out. Same as the fact that the D Class is potentially a faster two-person cat than a C Class, but no one races D Class.

A fixed keel AC boat could be the fastest fixed keeler. And if pure speed is all that counts a canter is going to be shat on by an offshore multi or a foiling multi. If you are going to cut speed dramatically by requiring the boat to only have one hull, why not cut speed by a fraction more and make it a fixed keeler?

because it isn't that interesting.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the M class had been viable, they would of picked the M class. They picked the fastest and largest viable inshore class they could. But you're right, no one cared about rotting hulks. Arguably the IACCs existed at a time the AC should of already gone multihull.

If we're to persist with the participation nonsense you could also say that the IACC period of the AC coincided with a massive shrinking of the sport that shows signs of a turn around right about the point that the AC went multi hull.

Share this post


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

because it isn't that interesting.  

 

Is it the boat itself that is of interest in A.C. or the racing? The design intrigue, maybe? Or the sailing skill? Or a combination of many things? 

Share this post


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

If the M class had been viable, they would of picked the M class. They picked the fastest and largest viable inshore class they could. But you're right, no one cared about rotting hulks. Arguably the IACCs existed at a time the AC should of already gone multihull.

If we're to persist with the participation nonsense you could also say that the IACC period of the AC coincided with a massive shrinking of the sport that shows signs of a turn around right about the point that the AC went multi hull.

Five of the teams didn't think it was "nonsense" - they signed an accord that indicated that they believe there is a link between the AC and participation.

The Ms weren't rotting hulks and you show your bias in claiming they were. The Ms were wiping out the top maxis of the world when they raced them. No one really cared about the Ms because people accepted that pure speed wasn't very important. 

Your stats bely your claims. They show that the participation in sailing was increasing up to and including 2009 (ie the yearly figures go 3,390 3,786 4,226 4,342) - the era when the IACCs were the Cup class. There is a drop from 2010, when the multis were brought into the Cup, which reached its nadir the following year (ie .3,869 3,725). After three multihull challenges, the sport is still not as popular BY YOUR OWN FIGURES as it was when monos were in the AC. That's a simple fact. 

Of course, you have shown no evidence that all of the participation change is due to the AC. Canoeing and hunting numbers are up too - are you claiming that's because of the cats in the AC?  And you are ignoring the rest of the world and the fact that there are also other ways of assessing the health of the sport of racing under sail - something that the data you use doesn't actually measure. To claim that one set of figures over one period of time for one country demonstrates that multis are a better AC boat is extremely odd.

By the way, since you're so much into speed can we take it that you sail a kitefoiler rather than some arthritic heavyweight like a sportsboat? After all, otherwise wouldn't you just effectively be saying 'do as I say, not as I do."?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those 5 teams have been heavily involved in activation as well as the AC. So they've stood by their word.

3 Ms where clearly not deemed a viable class. The Js where rotting hulks, or on their way to being.

It's a facile argument anyway but 2007 is the last AC with IACC. No one thought the AC was going to continue in IACC after that. And they're not my figures, they're your figures introduced to prove that participation in sailing is declining during the multihull era of the AC.

This entire discussion has been about your repeated assertion that anything but a fairly traditional monohull would be a disaster for the AC and the sport in general. Only you haven't turned up much evidence. Just a participation survey that shows participation in sailing in the US during the period in question is largely static.

All I've said is that I recon the sport deserves a figure head competition worthy of the name. I'm all for the best sailors in the most credible, ie. fastest round an 'inshore' course, boats with the minimum off the water drama. (Unfortunately) the AC is that event and it comes with traditions that should be respected and a DoG that outlines what it means. Everything else is compromise. I'm not pro multihull or anti monohull but I am against hitting reverse and taking the tech back to the late '80s.

I've argued all along that the AC may be important in terms of the visibility of the sport to the general public but it has marginal impact on participation compared to grass root action. The kind of concerted effort at activation we've only seen recently from AC teams.

Me? Couldn't hack a kitefoiler if I tried and not a fan of the dangly carrot thing aesthetically, more power to them though. I race sportsboats and half/quarter tonners mostly. Can't be arsed with anything over 30-32ft to be honest.

Share this post


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

Those 5 teams have been heavily involved in activation as well as the AC. So they've stood by their word.

3 Ms where clearly not deemed a viable class. The Js where rotting hulks, or on their way to being.

It's a facile argument anyway but 2007 is the last AC with IACC. No one thought the AC was going to continue in IACC after that. And they're not my figures, they're your figures introduced to prove that participation in sailing is declining during the multihull era of the AC.

This entire discussion has been about your repeated assertion that anything but a fairly traditional monohull would be a disaster for the AC and the sport in general. Only you haven't turned up much evidence. Just a participation survey that shows participation in sailing in the US during the period in question is largely static.

All I've said is that I recon the sport deserves a figure head competition worthy of the name. I'm all for the best sailors in the most credible, ie. fastest round an 'inshore' course, boats with the minimum off the water drama. (Unfortunately) the AC is that event and it comes with traditions that should be respected and a DoG that outlines what it means. Everything else is compromise. I'm not pro multihull or anti monohull but I am against hitting reverse and taking the tech back to the late '80s.

I've argued all along that the AC may be important in terms of the visibility of the sport to the general public but it has marginal impact on participation compared to grass root action. The kind of concerted effort at activation we've only seen recently from AC teams.

Me? Couldn't hack a kitefoiler if I tried and not a fan of the dangly carrot thing aesthetically, more power to them though. I race sportsboats and half/quarter tonners mostly. Can't be arsed with anything over 30-32ft to be honest.

Actually I think you'll find that survey was brought up as evidence that following the "F1 model" does nothing for a sport's popularity, as demonstrated by the fact that motor racing attracts comparatively few participants. You're the one who chose to use minute fluctuations in sailing's popularity as proof that the current AC was a good thing.  

It's wrong to say that not much evidence has been given to say that the current AC could be bad for the sport, and the argument is far from facile. As has been noted (but ignored) there's the major survey prepared some time ago for Vanguard, which found that "too many people associate sailing with the America's Cup races and with yacht clubs, which come across as exclusive and excluding, and that many people were intimidated by sailboats, viewing them as too expensive, too complicated to operate and too easy to tip over".  The other major study of the perception of sailing is Yachting Australia's Gemba report (also noted earlier but ignored) which says that sailing is perceived as being inaccessible, exclusive and dangerous, for older people, and fun rather than boring.

There is also other evidence independent of sailing itself, like the enormous amount of work that has been done on the drivers and barriers of sports participation by bodies as diverse as Sports England, the Australian Sports Commission, the Outdoor Foundation and many academics - noted earlier but ignored. It's apparent from this that the implication that "extreme boats will interest people and get them into the sport" doesn't stand up to the evidence. For further evidence we can (as already noted) look at other popular sports and see that the ones with an extreme image are less popular. we can see the issues that motor racing has with F1, and that of all the equipment-intensive sports the one where the top event uses the same (slow but convenient) gear as weekend warriors is the most popular. Finally, we can look internally at what people actually race, and we see that most of them choose to use accessible gear rather than hyper-performance stuff (as in the hugely popular scene in your area).

All this has been pointed out. It IS evidence, and it does hang together. It's not perfect proof nor has anyone ever claimed it is, but there is a lot more evidence that going extreme can hurt the sport than that going extreme will help it, which is a common claim or implication. And the craft that most SAers actually sail seems to be relevant. If hyper-performance is so wonderful and exciting, if it is so mesmerising and addictive, then why do so many of its fans never actually get out there and try it?  If the people who already know how to sail think they can't hack it, why will people who can't sail think they can?  

Reading the Deed is one way to work out what the Cup is supposed to be about, but looking at the history in detail also shows that the men who made it a legend - people like Sutton, Vanderbilt, Herreshoff, Conner and Stephens - believed that it was NOT about bleeding edge extremes. Nor is putting restrictions on equipment taking something back in time per se - rules that dramatically reduce performance exist in just about every sport, including F1. None of this means that the people who want to see the fastest possible craft in the AC don't have a valid case. It's merely saying that there IS a logical and evidence-based point of view that indicates that other boats would be better from some angles. What is facile is ignoring the complexity of the issues that underlie many of the claims, and the evidence that is available.

 

PS - I've been reading about Mercer and the choice to bring in 12s, and can't find anything about why they didn't bring in the M Class. I assume it was because they were by then in Cali and there were none in England, which was the country most likely to be involved in a Cup revival. The point is that they did NOT bring in the fastest possible boat - they brought in the second- or third-fastest existing class. When it comes to working out what the AC is about, people like Mercer and his NYYC team probably knew a lot more than we outsiders do.

PPS - Yes, grass roots activation is a key to popularity. A mentality that says the sort of craft that people at the grass roots can sail are examples of boring old technology doesn't seem to help with activation. 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

Actually I think you'll find that survey was brought up as evidence that following the F1 model does nothing for a sport's popularity. You're the one who chose to use sailing's popularity as proof that the current AC was a good thing.  And the discussion started with other people claiming that the general public thought monos were boring and that cats would increase participation, and some of us pointing out there is no evidence for that.

There is evidence, as has been repeatedly noted, to indicate that promoting an inaccessible image of a sport can harm participation and it's far from facile. There's the major survey prepared some time ago for Vanguard (then the largest US dinghy builder), which found that "too many people associate sailing with the America's Cup races and with yacht clubs, which come across as exclusive and excluding. And it's not just the sport's elitist image that turns off consumers. Market research showed that many people were intimidated by sailboats, viewing them as too expensive, too complicated to operate and too easy to tip over".  The other major study of the perception of sailing is Yachting Australia's Gemba report, which says that sailing is perceived as being inaccessible, exclusive and dangerous, for older people, and fun rather than boring.

There is also other evidence independent of sailing itself, like the enormous amount of work that has been done on the drivers that lead people into sport and the barriers that put them off by bodies as diverse as Sports England, the Australian Sports Commission, the Outdoor Foundation and many academics. It's apparent from this that the implication that "extreme boats will interest people and get them into the sport" doesn't stand up to the evidence. For further evidence we can (as already noted) look at other popular sports and see that the ones with an extreme image are less popular. we can see the issues that motor racing has with F1, and that of all the equipment-intensive sports the one where the top event uses the same (slow but convenient) gear as weekend warriors is the most popular. Finally, we can look internally at what people actually race, and we see that most of them choose to use accessible gear rather than hyper-performance stuff.

All this has been pointed out. It IS evidence, and it does hang together. It's not perfect proof nor has anyone ever claimed it is, but there is a lot more evidence that going extreme can hurt the sport than that going extreme will help it, which is a common claim or implication. And the craft that most SAers actually sail seems to be relevant. If hyper-performance is so wonderful and exciting, if it is so mesmerising and addictive, then why do so many of its fans never actually get out there and try it?  If the people who already know how to sail think they can't hack it, why will people who can't sail think they can?

Reading the Deed is one way to work out what the Cup is supposed to be about, but looking at the history in detail also shows that the men who made it a legend - people like Sutton, Vanderbilt, Herreshoff, Conner and Stephens - believed that it was NOT about bleeding edge extremes. Nor is putting restrictions on equipment taking something back in time per se - rules that dramatically reduce performance exist in just about every sport, including F1. 

None of this means that the people who want to see the fastest possible craft in the AC don't have a valid case. It's merely saying that there IS a logical and evidence-based point of view that indicates that other boats would be better from some angles. What is facile is ignoring the complexity of the issues that underlie many of the claims, and the evidence that is available.

PS - I've been reading about Mercer and the choice to bring in 12s, and can't find anything about why they didn't bring in the M Class. I assume it was because they were by then in Cali and there were none in England, which was the country most likely to be involved in a Cup revival. The point is that they did NOT bring in the fastest possible boat - they brought in the second- or third-fastest existing class. When it comes to working out what the AC is about, people like Mercer and his NYYC team probably knew a lot more than we outsiders do.

Thank you for a very well-researched response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

26 to 6. No one ... well hardly anyone, certainly not me ... on here thinks the AC is about participation. As for the impact the AC has that's exactly what I meant by "unfortunately". Cat or massive monohull on that score? It's like arguing whether Everest or K2 is the hardest mountain in the world to climb (yeh I know, neither). You can make a similar argument about the impact of high performance Olympic programs too. Or one guy in the fleet buying new sails to often.

Whose calling for "hyper performance"? Just faster than anything else will do. Not for the sake of encouraging participation, because knowing that you're watching the best the sport has to offer makes it more interesting.

I recon the fellas who wrote the DoG would of rolled over in their graves right about 1964 and pure crawled out of them and done a runner in about 1983. If we're going back to consider their apparent motivations then participation is straight out the window. The DoG is basically: You build a boat and challenge me. I'll build a boat and take your challenge. But lets not get too silly and no hogging it to your self. The original motivation was to prove national maritime superiority.

Boil that down and the spirit of the AC and DoG is progress.

You want to take the edge off, make it more sailor led. They at least are more accessible than some billionaire owner.

 

PS what happened to the argument about exclusivity being good for the sport??

Share this post


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

26 to 6. No one ... well hardly anyone, certainly not me ... on here thinks the AC is about participation. As for the impact the AC has that's exactly what I meant by "unfortunately". Cat or massive monohull on that score? It's like arguing whether Everest or K2 is the hardest mountain in the world to climb (yeh I know, neither). You can make a similar argument about the impact of high performance Olympic programs too. Or one guy in the fleet buying new sails to often.

Whose calling for "hyper performance"? Just faster than anything else will do. Not for the sake of encouraging participation, because knowing that you're watching the best the sport has to offer makes it more interesting.

I recon the fellas who wrote the DoG would of rolled over in their graves right about 1964 and pure crawled out of them and done a runner in about 1983. If we're going back to consider their apparent motivations then participation is straight out the window. The DoG is basically: You build a boat and challenge me. I'll build a boat and take your challenge. But lets not get too silly and no hogging it to your self. The original motivation was to prove national maritime superiority.

Boil that down and the spirit of the AC and DoG is progress.

You want to take the edge off, make it more sailor led. They at least are more accessible than some billionaire owner.

 

PS what happened to the argument about exclusivity being good for the sport??

What a bunch of non-AC sailors on one website in 2017 think is not exactly proof of what a bunch of people in the 1850s thought, or what the ones who raced in the Cup later thought.

The people who wrote the Deed specifically excluded the fastest boat in the world - Maria. That means that it's nonsense to say that the authors of the Deed wanted it to be about the fastest yachts.

Schuyler also said in the covering letter for the second Deed that the boats had to be ocean-going if the Cup was to achieve what it was meant to do, so that rules out AC72s, IACCs and AC50s straight away. No one can say that they fulfil the intent of the Deed when the man who signed off on it specifically said that the boats had to be ocean going. Schuyler also said around that time that what he wanted was for the Cup to be raced under the rating system of the club that held it. He was quite specific. That does NOT mean a special class for the AC like an IACC boat or an AC50. These are historical facts and a website vote in 2017 does not change them.

So sure, there seems to be no recorded instance where Schuyler or anyone else stood up and said "the AC is about this or that". However, actually looking at the history of the Cup and what Schuyler himself said gives us a pretty good idea of their beliefs.  We also know for a historical fact that time and time again, people like the AC organising committee, AC owners and AC designers pulled the boats back from the bleeding edge.and time and time again the men who made the event a legend took it back into the mainstream of sailing in their day. That gives us an indication of their thinking.

Okay, you may think "knowing that you're watching the best the sport has to offer makes it more interesting". Lots of other people disagree, and "best" is completely subjective. I confess I don't understand the line of thought that says "what I personally want to see is what the Cup must offer and fuck everyone else", and that applies whether people are fans of foilers or of J Class. 

Oh, and on the issue of exclusiveness, I once said that in one situation, one group of people (lead by a man who owned a plywood 22 foot cruiser/racer) may have found one positive motive in some form of exclusivity that motivated them to do one thing. That is hardly arguing for exclusivity in the sport.

And to be honest, if your line "I recon the fellas who wrote the DoG would of rolled over in their graves right about 1964" is a reference to the 1956 shift to 12 Metres, then it seems that you consider that you know more about the AC than men like Sears, Goodson and others who were involved in the decision. Some of these men had done the AC, the rest of them would have known people who did such as the Stephens, Vanderbilt, Sopwith, Hoyt etc. If you think you know more about the AC than men like that it's probably not worth discussing anything further.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went to the AC in Bermuda and it was pretty cool, I've really been wondering what I would like to see the AC be, but truth is most people are fighting for what it shouldn't be. 

When I think back to past boats in the AC like the J's they were elegant and made go by Crews of sailors working together to get an advantage. 

I'm for any boat that involves crews working in concert, whether trimming sails with hands, putting sails up and down, skippers managing sailors. America's Cup should get back to ten person crews that do some work Sailing the boat. The best skipper is not the best driver but the best manager of Crew! Now that is how I see this getting back some proper drama. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In memory of Marian...

plus39-challenge-mast.jpgAC-act-13-203.jpgBYM News is where you're going to find all the Louis Vuitton and America's Cup action, on one website, over the coming months. In this new America's Cup section of the website, we'll be bringing you informed opinion and inside stories and, at the end of each month, we'll also be publishing all the stories in pdf format, as a supplement to the popular BYM Magazine, which you will be able to download print and keep. 
We will, of course, continue to publish each day's news and results in BYM Sports News. Of course, it goes without saying that our indefatigable photo editor and her team will be hard at work, throughout the racing, loading more pictures into the BYM Photo Gallery, which already boasts almost 2500 America's Cup images!

HERE'S HOW OUR MAN IN VALENCIA ASSESSED THE TEAMS' CHANCES, AFTER ACT 13

Alinghi-Act13-Ivo_RoviraLVAct13Day4YO8D6301.jpgAreva-34709.jpg

Alinghi (left): They are just too good for words.

Areva Challenge (right): They’ve shown some sparkling moments this last week but too many poor ones to have made much of an impression on this hack.

BMW-Oracle-Day5-Act13-354386887_09ACT13-0355.jpgChina-Team-ACT13-IMG_9094_redimensionner.jpg

BMW/Oracle (left): Very fast with some nice set pieces they have been practicing. Going to be a close one with ETNZ.

Team China (right): After a disastrous week when everything seemed to have failed (crew included, they actually looked pretty good on Saturday. They had a nice start, held on to the others and finished intact. Their start in the final race was a doozy and I began to wonder if they had a “China Syndrome” inside the sail locker and decided they had to get around the course before complete meltdown. Anyway. They are working hard at it and you can see the improvements daily. Louis Vuitton. Not a chance, but I’d love to be proved wrong.

Desafio-espanol-ESP97-5.jpg  ETNZ-Act13-Day4-14152nz.jpg

Desafio Español (left): Well, they definitely have the speed, but too many times over at the start and too many risky manoeuvres are going to send them back to the ranch very early if they are not careful.

Emirates Team New Zealand (right):  Fast as hell, but the speed seems to be affecting crew decisions and actions. In with a very good chance for the Louis Vuitton though.

Luna-Rossa-Act13-LR_070404bc_0314.jpgMascalzone-Latino-Act13-MLCT-ACT13-618.jpg

Luna Rossa (left): Going very well at times and showing some good  upwind speed. Definitely in with a chance, but ooohhh dear, my Italian boys. What the hell was that bit of garbage called a genoa that you were flying during race 6? The leech was fluttering like a set of helicopter blades. You ain’t gonna win with that floor cloth up there.

Mascalzone Latino - Capitalia (right): Good fast boat, but they still seem to have the downwind stuff screwed up. Some funny tactical decisions going on, but definitely the favourite dark horse.

39-challenge.jpg Shosholoza_be6cba8758.jpg

+39 (left): Well, they had the speed, before the mast came tumbling down and I’m left to wonder if they can get it back in time, before the round robins get under way. They are a dedicated bunch of hard workers and so well liked even by the other teams. You can see this by the amount of help they have been given from their rivals.

Shosholoza (right): Come on you guys! You’ve got the boat speed for sure, but your starting is diabolical. Just pretend this is the Boer War and that all the other boats are English. You won the cup that time.

Victory-Challenge-1026.jpgUnited-Internet-Team-GermanyGermanyI_0207_2.jpg

United Internet Team Germany (left): Definitely a go fast/go slow boat. One minute they are mixing it at the head of the fleet, next minute they look as though they have stopped for a spot of lunch and some fishing. Get out there and work on it lads.

Victory Challenge (right): Fast, but not fast enough as yet. Sailing quite well though with few mistakes. Maybe a large plate of pickled herrings will do the trick.

Who will win the America's Cup? No doubt in my mind that it will go back to Geneva. The Louis Vuitton? Between BMW Oracle and ETNZ I reckon, but wouldn't be all that surprised, if Desafio or Mascalzone upset the apple cart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/27/2017 at 4:56 PM, Zonker said:

Bring back the J boats!

Why bother? They've had their day in the sun.

Better to have a modern hull design, which doesn't drag half the fuckin ocean around with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go back to the DoG which specified "country of origin" for everything from sailcloth to design and required contestants to arrive at the venue on their own bottoms.

How do you think the Americans held the cup for so long?  The early challengers "J" and before had to be built to cross the Atlantic in one piece while the defenders only had to sail up Long Island Sound to Newport.

Hood Sails dominated because Hood cloth was so much better than British terylene cloth.  

New Zealand would have a huge advantage if the challengers had to sail there before the race.

Share this post


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

Go back to the DoG which specified "country of origin" for everything from sailcloth to design and required contestants to arrive at the venue on their own bottoms.

How do you think the Americans held the cup for so long?  The early challengers "J" and before had to be built to cross the Atlantic in one piece while the defenders only had to sail up Long Island Sound to Newport.

Hood Sails dominated because Hood cloth was so much better than British terylene cloth.  

New Zealand would have a huge advantage if the challengers had to sail there before the race.

The darned Frenchies will turn up with their ocean racing multis ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now