MidPack

Poll: Who is the America's Cup for?

Who is the America's Cup for?  

48 members have voted

  1. 1. Who is the America's Cup for?

    • It's for existing sailors, attracting non-sailors to increase participation is secondary at best
      36
    • Attracting new generations to sailing/increasing participation should be a top priority, without alienating existing sailors
      12


Recommended Posts

As the multi vs multi, foiling vs displacement, stored vs real time energy - the differing underlying assumptions make any change in POV unlikely if not impossible. This poll is meant to hopefully clarify...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ideally it would be the 2nd one, but:

 

1. They didn't seem to attract a new audience, and

2. They pissed off at least some of the old audience.

 

I just don't think sailing is that exciting for most peeps and is unlikely to ever be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guardedly open to a foiling mono or whatever they come up with but agree strongly with GA when he told Clean he wants a boat that is technically leading-edge. IMO the AC50 is a great starting platform for that, Verdier says much the same, so my guess is that this is what they will decide to pursue. If they can convince P$B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all about making the shift to a sailor lead competition for me, with the best of the best competing, who ever they are, where ever they come from, in what ever they are most interested in designing, building and racing; so long as it has credibility in terms of not being able to say "well there's that over there". Like it or not the AC is it.

If that requires an audience, that's one set of challenges and a compromises. If that requires sugar daddies, that's another set of challenges and compromises. Which ever set of compromises leaves us closer to the punk ethos the better. First: make great sailing and authentic sport.

There is a very good reason that participation is completely separated in most governance structures for sport. It's a totally different challenge that needs tackling in a totally different way. The AC and Olympics can and do make the sport more visible but with out a substantially larger investment in activation then it's completely wasted. The hard work on participation is done on the ground at club level. The AC teams recognise that. When they actually set out to impact participation they are doing it through explicit activities, aimed at encouraging kids to take up and stay in the sport. The racing coverage and general exposure are for the followers.

If you took 400million and put it into volunteer training programs and intervention targeted at clubs and classes with falling participation you'd get a much larger bounce than spending it on the jollies of 15 or so sailors.

...

Also audience and participation are two totally different things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3: It's for the countries, clubs and owners competing, all other aspects are secondary.  We get to go along for the ride, but we certainly aren't the reason the event exists.  Likewise for the sailors lucky enough to compete, they are simply the means to an end for the aforementioned countries, clubs and owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I'm missing the part where it's supposed to attract sailors, or add participants to sailing as a sport. It's about one-upmanship between yacht clubs from different countries.

 

"This Cup is donated upon the condition that it shall be preserved as a perpetual challenge Cup for friendly competition between foreign countries.

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. "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's for any talented and rich individuals/groups who wants to win one of the sports premier trophies while abiding with the general concepts of the DOG.

 

As an event disassociated from any formal sporting body it has no requirement to support the sport in any way. If there is any benefit - great, but that is a spin off, not a driver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I find myself in heated debates. I've felt the AC should do both - attract a large audience to increase participation, and the ACC cats would appeal to sailors (they have according to the AC35 sailors) and non sailors because they're very fast. It appears the majority think it should be what the sailing community, led by elite and wealthy sailors, want to see - with audience and general sailing participation a byproduct if at all. So I've learned what I hoped to from this poll. And I agree, audience is much broader than (potential) participants, but they should correlate some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like any sport its for the people who like that sport first & foremost and the cunts running the show need to understand that.

 

No other top sport competition has commentators who babytalk the audience every fucking time it comes around.

Imagine if the commentators spend 75% of the Superbowl every year talking about how Gridiron passes must always be forward, that Rugby passes must be backwards in the Rugby World Cup final, how you fall on the ground & writhe around at the merest hint of body contact in Soccer World Cup final.

You never get people trying to shorten international Marathons to 20mins, they don't tell Walkers to run because its too boring, you don't give the Venus Williams a 1 set advantage & automatic entry into the the Wimbledon final.

 

This shit is insulting to the core audience: Sailors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a dick measuring contest for a handful of billionaires.
It provides a good paycheck for a few top sailors.
It's nothing to do with the sailing anyone else does. 
It's probably a shit event to be the event that non-sailors think of when someone mentions sailboat racing.
The new boats are pretty cool though the format seems wrong.
A series of events with the new boats would be cool.
 


 

Share this post


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

No other top sport competition has commentators who babytalk the audience every fucking time it comes around.

 

All you'd need to do is watch any US broadcast Indy 500 coverage from the last decade or so to know how untrue that statement is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like they are becoming more and more concerned with turning it into a spectator sport, trying to attract a larger audience (read: bring in more money). And in doing so they lose most of the sailing population.

 

I'd like to see the next winner choose to sail on foiling optis to mix it up

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surfsailor puts before us the sentence Schuyler writes to introduce to us a challenge no one knew until he wrote it.  We would not know the same challenge today but for our successes in meeting the challenge.  Some 160 years past Schuyler turning to trust law, we have shown thirty five times over we know perpetuity and trust law bind us to do what we have just done over and over and we do it without repeating ourselves.  The terms of the march to come need not take their definition from those that governed its precedent.  The liberty to think each match anew allows for the changes a generation of sailors looks for that they might make a competition their own.  The Americas Cup is not the reenactment of a long tradition that, for example, gives definition to every baseball game.  The perpetuity Schuyler writes to is unique to the America’s Cup.  He counts on us knowing we rekindle a Cup competition and it is this understanding Schuyler brings to his invocation of trust law.

 

Read the Deed the other way round and you come to read the terms of the Deed as telling us how we are to achieve perpetuity.  It’s as though the word is a reader’s to coin as his own.  Golden Gate Yacht Club ceded all responsibility that goes with holding the Cup to Oracle Team USA.  OTUSA substituted talk of sustainability for the term Schuyler counts on leading us forever.  Where Schuyler writes perpetuity Oracle Team USA reads fiscal independence.  Reading perpetuity and thinking sustainability in its place imposes an interpretation over perpetuity.  Schuyler writes so we see exactly the challenge he makes to us.  The interpretation, and not what Schuyler writes, creates a means for OTUSA to circumscribe the very liberty that draws generations of sailors to a Cup competition.  Golden Gate Yacht Club does not come to this authority from a reading of the Deed of Gift.  Fitting a carbon fiber sheath to the front five feet of a hull has us read the phrase “constructed in country” in a way that does not come to mind from a reading of the language Schuyler perpetuates through trust law.  To claim the sheath covers what Schuyler means for us to do in the name of the America’s Cup is to perpetrate a fraud so brazen it led me to wonder how such thinking might be sustained.  I got my answer when five of the teams participating in AC35 agreed this sort of direction should carry forward to AC36 and beyond.

 

If we lack the character to act on the challenge Schuyler imposes honesty alone should suffice to make us call what we are willing to do by a name other than the America’s Cup.  Sustaining honesty does not begin with a reading of the Deed of Gift.  Unlike the challenge Schuyler makes of us, dishonesty and its companion fraud are indulgences we perpetuate free of a history others make for us that we might do better.

Share this post


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

Surfsailor puts before us the sentence Schuyler writes to introduce to us a challenge no one knew until he wrote it.  We would not know the same challenge today but for our successes in meeting the challenge.  Some 160 years past Schuyler turning to trust law, we have shown thirty five times over we know perpetuity and trust law bind us to do what we have just done over and over and we do it without repeating ourselves.  The terms of the march to come need not take their definition from those that governed its precedent.  The liberty to think each match anew allows for the changes a generation of sailors looks for that they might make a competition their own.  The Americas Cup is not the reenactment of a long tradition that, for example, gives definition to every baseball game.  The perpetuity Schuyler writes to is unique to the America’s Cup.  He counts on us knowing we rekindle a Cup competition and it is this understanding Schuyler brings to his invocation of trust law.

 

Read the Deed the other way round and you come to read the terms of the Deed as telling us how we are to achieve perpetuity.  It’s as though the word is a reader’s to coin as his own.  Golden Gate Yacht Club ceded all responsibility that goes with holding the Cup to Oracle Team USA.  OTUSA substituted talk of sustainability for the term Schuyler counts on leading us forever.  Where Schuyler writes perpetuity Oracle Team USA reads fiscal independence.  Reading perpetuity and thinking sustainability in its place imposes an interpretation over perpetuity.  Schuyler writes so we see exactly the challenge he makes to us.  The interpretation, and not what Schuyler writes, creates a means for OTUSA to circumscribe the very liberty that draws generations of sailors to a Cup competition.  Golden Gate Yacht Club does not come to this authority from a reading of the Deed of Gift.  Fitting a carbon fiber sheath to the front five feet of a hull has us read the phrase “constructed in country” in a way that does not come to mind from a reading of the language Schuyler perpetuates through trust law.  To claim the sheath covers what Schuyler means for us to do in the name of the America’s Cup is to perpetrate a fraud so brazen it led me to wonder how such thinking might be sustained.  I got my answer when five of the teams participating in AC35 agreed this sort of direction should carry forward to AC36 and beyond.

 

If we lack the character to act on the challenge Schuyler imposes honesty alone should suffice to make us call what we are willing to do by a name other than the America’s Cup.  Sustaining honesty does not begin with a reading of the Deed of Gift.  Unlike the challenge Schuyler makes of us, dishonesty and its companion fraud are indulgences we perpetuate free of a history others make for us that we might do better.

Why wouldn't GGYC be a legitimate defender, regardless of the mechanism by which the club was created/resuscitated? You don't think that kind of stuff happened back in the gilded age? Rich people play by a different set of rules.

Regarding boat construction, I basically agree with you - the result will simply be to move a bunch of business out of the NZ economy and into the challenging countries, but that certainly is more in keeping with the original intent.

Sailor nationality rules were never part of it, and shouldn't be now. Sailors are global, largely unconstricted by the boundaries of landmass, and always have been.

Perpetuity simply means 'ongoing' in this context. Fiscal independence would be one way to achieve that. Another way would be a boatload of willing billionaires. Another way would be long term corporate sponsorship. I don't think any of those models - or any combination of them - violates the basic intent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2017 at 1:00 PM, surfsailor said:

Ok, I'm missing the part where it's supposed to attract sailors, or add participants to sailing as a sport. It's about one-upmanship between yacht clubs from different countries.

"This Cup is donated upon the condition that it shall be preserved as a perpetual challenge Cup for friendly competition between foreign countries.

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. "

That about sums it up.

It sure ain't about what speculators, hangers-on, SA prognosticators, media dicks like Dylan Cleaver, armchair lawyers and their ilk would prefer it to be.

To answer the specific question posed here, the AC is for anyone who wants to compete on the terms outlined by Schuyler in the DoG, or anyone interested in the process or the outcome.  

Of course active players have to be associated with a club defined by the DoG. 

Yes, the game has changed over a century and  half. . . but only through challenger/defender mutual consent or, when contested, the views of the New York State Supreme Court.

Of course it helps to have an abiding passion, more-often than not a bloody big ego, and access to near-limitless stacks of cash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2017 at 0:51 PM, Boybland said:

3: It's for the countries, clubs and owners competing, all other aspects are secondary.  We get to go along for the ride, but we certainly aren't the reason the event exists.  Likewise for the sailors lucky enough to compete, they are simply the means to an end for the aforementioned countries, clubs and owners.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good question, gives me the opportunity to tell a war story ... It was in Valencia at the inception of AC33, and I managed (Jack Griffin's Alinghi Friends was a great idea, should definitely be replicated) to buttonhole Rolf Vrolijk. I asked him should Alinghi win (...), would they continue with multis? He replied that he thought that was unlikely, since the entire AC milieu would be against it.

Fast forward seven years, things haven't changed: if Dalton and Bertelli in their quest for what is good for the AC (and I believe they are both sincerely open-minded on this) consult possible team principals, they'll be swamped with requests for a planing mono, fuck the technology (I pointed out in another thread that a foiling mono is just a red herring). This would be particularly true with the nouveaux riches currently wasting money on J-Class boats, who would gladly swap that with the IACC's coveted "18th (passenger) crew member". So, in a heartbeat you'd have more entrants than AC32, that and the nationality clause would compensate for the bland boat and stoke interest from the general public. That in turn should bring in enough money from sponsorships and broadcasting rights to cover the cost of the event. A no-brainer, right? The only "problem" would be making the event long enough that everybody gets a fair amount of sailing

The alternative ... is that the Precious makes also Dalton succumb to the Vision thing, and he - but then it wouldn't be just his decision, right? - persists with (slightly less) high-tech catamarans. Entrants would likely be just ETNZ, LR, Alinghi, BAR and possibly a couple more from the "London" group: in short, it would be a repetition of AC35, but without the huge amount of money Coutts was historically able to spend (if mostly waste) to organize the event, and we all know with disappointing returns

Long story short, I voted for the first option: not because I believe it, but because it seems to me that's the lesson of experience

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎24‎/‎2017 at 9:00 PM, surfsailor said:

Ok, I'm missing the part where it's supposed to attract sailors, or add participants to sailing as a sport. It's about one-upmanship between yacht clubs from different countries.

 

"This Cup is donated upon the condition that it shall be preserved as a perpetual challenge Cup for friendly competition between foreign countries.

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. "

Most around here have thrown this out with the bath water...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ~HHN92~ said:

Most around here have thrown this out with the bath water...

Some have for sure. But many have not and thankfully GD says he has not either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Despite our last few decades of achievement in America’s Cup yachting, this still seems a surprising field of excellence for this country. The fact New Zealand now reigns supreme once again in the most sophisticated contest in the world’s most elite sport – yacht racing – can’t help but reflect the trajectory the country has been on since the 1980s. Only a fortnight ago, Te Kuiti unveiled a statue to Sir Colin Meads, the epitome of New Zealand’s egalitarian era of amateur sport. Back then, the nation’s multi-tasking sporting heroes would commonly be running their own farms while representing their country. Obviously, that situation had its drawbacks, but one result was that elite sport used to feel more like a collective, shared experience. It was our team, composed of people who lived and worked like us. Now, not so much.

No doubt, the technological expertise – and the sailing prowess – on display in Bermuda has been admirable. It has been a shining example of the high end, added value expertise that New Zealand often talks about as being its future, but which we only rarely deliver on. (The film industry has been our other prime example of tech-driven successful innovation.)

That said, the success in Bermuda also had something of a retro feel to it – in that the victory celebrations have echoed the 1980s sentiment that when an elite succeeds, this supposedly lifts all of our boats. It doesn’t, of course – not on the sports field and nor in the marketplace, either. Increasingly, success is a spectator sport, with the opportunity to participate being reserved for the privileged, and for those blessed (virtually from birth) with the necessary contacts.

Quite an astute observation from our local press

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who's the Cup for?

The AC started as a demonstration of technical superiority by uber wealthy individuals - 130 years ago, better boats meant better navy, meant power.  Kaisers, Queens, and Robber Barons flexing muscles.  Tom Lipton recognized that the these regattas were the Super Bowl of their day.   There was no TV, so the slow pace wasn't an issue, and Naval Power mattered to everyone.  People think of Tom as a loser because he never won the Cup - idiots.  He went from a penniless kid in the slums to one of the 10 richest men in world - by using the original social media and understanding how to market a sporting event in papers and radio 100 years before Clean was born.  

The post-war cup was for every sailor.  It started slowly as a parochial engineering demonstration, but built steam as the only "big boat" one-design regatta.  Post WW2, the world was less enthusiastic about extravagant displays of wealth - fighting a war together put equality in fashion for a while - fewer mega mansions and mega yachts.  The 12's really stood out in any harbor.  It was easy to attract sailors attention to these giant boats, especially when it went down under.  Today we have lots of big-boat one design regatta's and even the J class look modest at Bucket event of the week..  Another big boat one design regatta....Yawn.

For 2 Cups in a row, Larry Ellison brought the Cup back to its roots - an uber wealthy demonstration of technical prowess.  It was awesome to see the giant Trimaran.  Dumb regatta, but awesome demonstration.  It was awesome to see "the race to the moon" on SF bay.  But Larry got soft and decided to make the event a one design regatta again and .... oops ...it went back down under to where the real sailors are.

Who's the Cup for now??  Thanks to Larry, we have a format that combines the ultimate technical and athletic challenge.  For the 1st time ever, the cup was more exciting than a heat of the JJ's.  Great for speed freaks, for geeks, for extreme athletes, for yachties, for reclusive sailors and for media whores.(OK Clean, not perfect for media whores, but is that really measure??).... 

I dont like the Poll choices offered, the America's Cup is for whatever the winner wants.  But there was a new direction established in Bermuda that could please many and we have some pretty good guys in the drivers seat

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now