• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

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

Next VOR on IMOCAs?

Recommended Posts

I haven't seen a comparison drawn to the Mini Transat fleet. I'd imagine that the Volvo/IMOCA fleet would be a more robust fleet, and a proving ground for new sailors to the class in the same vein as the Classe 6.50, while the pure IMOCAs would still be at the bleeding edge of design, and sailed by the icons of the sport as it is today. I don't think having more class compatible boats would be a bad thing for the IMOCA - just look at all the tired old boats that were hauled around (or at least part way) the globe in the last edition... I'm less sold on the Volvo side of things, but a crew of seven (including OBR/navigator or cook?) may be feasible, and interesting enough to watch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some radical designs out there.

http://www.yachtsandyachting.co.uk/articles/news-and-events/ran-fast-40-emerges/

Mini maxi's have been gaining popularity.

This owner intends to compete in all the premium inshore racing events at PalmaVela, Copa Del Ray, and the Maxi Worlds, as well as the offshore events such as the Transpac, Sydney Hobart, and Middle Sea Race, necessitating more than merely a “round the cans” solution. There are also several new boats boats in the 72ft size which will make for tough competition, so along with weather data from these various events, we are assessing their relative performance and design decisions. 

Furthermore,CDP is designing and researching a number of hullform families, looking at how various surface detailing such as chines and planing areas affect the numerous trade offs when it comes to balancing power for offshore reaching and heavy air performance, versus height and efficiency upwind as well as light air performance.

http://www.carkeekdesignpartners.com/portfolio/c72/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of resale, I think this is what owner are interested in - class, monohull, crewed fleet racing.  100's are exponentially more costly.  Haven't heard of a new build.  Mini maxi size has more appeal.  Something that can be raced effectively in all the classic offshore races.

Share this post


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

Some radical designs out there.

http://www.yachtsandyachting.co.uk/articles/news-and-events/ran-fast-40-emerges/

Mini maxi's have been gaining popularity.

This owner intends to compete in all the premium inshore racing events at PalmaVela, Copa Del Ray, and the Maxi Worlds, as well as the offshore events such as the Transpac, Sydney Hobart, and Middle Sea Race, necessitating more than merely a “round the cans” solution. There are also several new boats boats in the 72ft size which will make for tough competition, so along with weather data from these various events, we are assessing their relative performance and design decisions. 

Furthermore,CDP is designing and researching a number of hullform families, looking at how various surface detailing such as chines and planing areas affect the numerous trade offs when it comes to balancing power for offshore reaching and heavy air performance, versus height and efficiency upwind as well as light air performance.

http://www.carkeekdesignpartners.com/portfolio/c72/

If you read that carefully you'll see that's a 3-4 year old article and that Carkeek has never done a 72

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

If you read that carefully

Not my forte.  

Point was, 70's seem like a sweet spot.

Share this post


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

In terms of resale, I think this is what owner are interested in - class, monohull, crewed fleet racing.  100's are exponentially more costly.  Haven't heard of a new build.  Mini maxi size has more appeal.  Something that can be raced effectively in all the classic offshore races.

Debatable, look at the records of recent Maxi 72s in windier offshore races. Proteus dropped out of the 2018 middle sea and RORC 600 races due to gear failure in heavy breezes. Bella Mente had major structural failure in the RORC 600 in 2016 and DNS'dmthe 16 Bermuda Race because there was a heavy forecast. Bellas structural failures also cost Jethou the rest of their sixteen winter season because they had the same components that were prone to failure. then there's the high profile rig failures. Caol Ila dropped their stick just going upwind at the Maxi worlds, and Bella dropped theirs on a bright sunny day at LV SB

 

In the same way I wouldn't bring a super series 52 offshore, a modern 72 isn't a good offshore class because they're engineered to the conditions for the inshore mini Maxi world championships where the race committee will hold you ashore if it gets too rough. The 2008-2010 R/P, Mills and J/V 65+ footers are far better offshore platforms.

IMG_1983.JPG

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

a modern 72 isn't a good offshore class because they're engineered to the conditions for the inshore

Agree.  All I'm saying is a redesign for a Volvo in the 70' range would seem to have a good resale value based on the continued performance of the VO70's and the many venues available.  I don't think a class MiniMaxi would fit the bill.

I picked that article from Carcreek to demonstrate what owners might be interested in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a market for them - not sure about resale value. They cost $20 million to put together in pre-2008 money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that a new breed of IMOCA is going to appear, they will be optimised for the VOR, so probably more all rounders than the current IMOCAs. Some people will build VG optimised boats and sell the VOR to their sponsor as more "exposure time without a real chance to win" and vice-versa.

If we start to see 15 boats at the start of the VOR, it will be more in the spirit of the whitbread IMHO.

Share this post


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

There's a market for them - not sure about resale value. They cost $20 million to put together in pre-2008 money.

How much were the VO65's again?  Not $20MM each, surely.  You must mean the MiniMAxi's.  How much might a new 70 be if all off the same mold?

After two turns in the VOR when some of those costs have have been recouped, a 70 that performed (maybe broke some 24hr records without breaking the boat) could fetch a decent price.

Doesn't matter.  Seems like there is a ground swell building for the IMOCA.

Share this post


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

If we start to see 15 boats at the start of the VOR, it will be more in the spirit of the whitbread IMHO.

That would be something.  

Also, I mentioned earlier, maybe some of the teams could be split over two boats to keep up participants.

Share this post


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

How much were the VO65's again?  Not $20MM each, surely.  You must mean the MiniMAxi's.  How much might a new 70 be if all off the same mold?

After two turns in the VOR when some of those costs have have been recouped, a 70 that performed (maybe broke some 24hr records without breaking the boat) could fetch a decent price.

Doesn't matter.  Seems like there is a ground swell building for the IMOCA.

A seventy on the secondhand market hasn't transacted for more than a million dollars since 2011

Share this post


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

A seventy on the secondhand market hasn't transacted for more than a million dollars since 2011

The boats themselves will never break even (do they ever?).  Don't know what the numbers are or how much the VOR leases the boats to the teams.  How much is a 2 - 3 Edition lease minus the build costs?  $1MM on the resale might not be too bad.  Then again, a 70 with an attractive race record might fetch a higher price. 

Share this post


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

A seventy on the secondhand market hasn't transacted for more than a million dollars since 2011

Groupama and Telefonica sold for more than that.

Share this post


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

The foil decision will be the hard one enticing as it is. However with the China tour enevitable while Volvo are around, the amount of uphill work and need to be tough makes their inclusion hard to justify.

I agree that with the current route and technology, foils won't be too beneficial for the VOR. If the race will be sailed with Imoca60's, it either means that the VOR version will look completely different or that the race would be operated by a new owner who wants to go back to the original route. 

Share this post


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

OTOH, the ability of the Boatyard to offer a unified parts inventory and maintenance service to all teams dramatically reduces the price of entry versus carrying your own maintenance crew. Plus OD means the race organisers are providing leases for boats. So the overall price of entrance is probably at a historical low even for budget teams. When they are trying to cut crew numbers to restrain costs, it is clear the boat isn't the issue anymore.

I guess the difference with VG is that there are fairly cheap second hand boats and skippers who have zero or very modest salary

Share this post


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

I think that a new breed of IMOCA is going to appear, they will be optimised for the VOR, so probably more all rounders than the current IMOCAs. Some people will build VG optimised boats and sell the VOR to their sponsor as more "exposure time without a real chance to win" and vice-versa.

If we start to see 15 boats at the start of the VOR, it will be more in the spirit of the whitbread IMHO.

Whitbread was getting the big numbers in the early years because it was neither a OD or BOX rule race.

If you want numbers, then in my opinion you need to allow a wide range of designs and sizes, perhaps with a minimum speed requirement. So you might have a race with IMOCA, VO70, VO65, VO60 , Whitbread classics and whatever designers and teams come up with for the line honours winners. The diversion to China should be dropped making the race up and down the Atlantic and a lap of the southern ocean with a couple of stops. The costs to the race to the competitors should be minimised to make it economical for owners of existing boats allowing them to spend as much or as little.

Then you will get the big money teams going for line honours, the medium money teams refitting and moding VO70's for class wins and the rest racing for the thrill of it, especially for those already owning the boat.

Then the VOR will be more in the spirit of the Whitbread.

 

Edition Class Legs In-Port Races Entries Start Finish Winning yacht Winning skipper
1973–74 32–80 ft (9.8–24.4 m) 4 0 17 United Kingdom Portsmouth United Kingdom Portsmouth Mexico Sayula II Mexico Ramón Carlin
1977–78 51–77 ft (16–23 m) 4 0 15 United Kingdom Portsmouth United Kingdom Portsmouth Netherlands Flyer Netherlands Conny van Rietschoten
1981–82 43–80 ft (13–24 m) 4 0 29 United Kingdom Portsmouth United Kingdom Portsmouth Netherlands Flyer II Netherlands Conny van Rietschoten
1985–86 49–83 ft (15–25 m) 4 0 15 United Kingdom Portsmouth United Kingdom Portsmouth France L'esprit d'équipe France Lionel Péan
1989–90 51–84 ft (16–26 m) 6 0 23 United Kingdom Southampton United Kingdom Southampton New Zealand Steinlager 2 New Zealand Peter Blake
1993–94 85 ft (26 m) ketchs
& Whitbread 60
6 0 14 United Kingdom Southampton United Kingdom Southampton New Zealand NZ Endeavour New Zealand Grant Dalton
1997–98 Whitbread 60 9 0 10 United Kingdom Southampton United Kingdom Southampton Sweden EF Language United States Paul Cayard
2001–02 10 0 8 United Kingdom Southampton Germany Kiel Germany Illbruck Challenge United States John Kostecki
2005–06 Volvo Open 70 9 7 7 Spain Vigo Sweden Gothenburg Netherlands ABN AMRO I New Zealand Mike Sanderson
2008–09 10 7 8 Spain Alicante Russia Saint Petersburg Sweden Ericsson 4 Brazil Torben Grael
2011–12 9 10 6 Spain Alicante Republic of Ireland Galway France Groupama 4 France Franck Cammas
2014–15 Volvo Ocean 65 9 10 7 Spain Alicante Sweden Gothenburg United Arab Emirates Azzam United Kingdom Ian Walker
2017–18 10 12 7 Spain Alicante Netherlands The Hague TBD TBD
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, hoppy said:

Then the VOR will be more in the spirit of the Whitbread.

Which isn't the VOR. As has been discussed before, a race for dreamers and adventurers is available via the Clipper. Heck, there is nothing stopping a bunch of guys with boats sitting in a bar deciding to have a race around the world right now. It isn't as if the VOR is stopping them. 

IMHO a buzz around the planet that fails to even touch the Pacific Ocean is not a RTW race. It is just a race to cut lines of longitude. 

Share this post


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

Which isn't the VOR. As has been discussed before, a race for dreamers and adventurers is available via the Clipper.

Buying a seat on a slow clipper is not the same as putting together a team to race your VO70

 

5 minutes ago, Francis Vaughan said:

 Heck, there is nothing stopping a bunch of guys with boats sitting in a bar deciding to have a race around the world right now. It isn't as if the VOR is stopping them. 

Not even close to being the same. You still need a race organisation running it, marketing and OBR's to attract sponsors.

9 minutes ago, Francis Vaughan said:

IMHO a buzz around the planet that fails to even touch the Pacific Ocean is not a RTW race. It is just a race to cut lines of longitude. 

so a lap of the southern ocean is not extreme enough for you. Who cares if it does not technically count as RTW? 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is that things change. The idea of the "spirit" of the Whitbread is simply one of nostalgia. They guys that embodied those early races didn't have OBRs, or depend upon sponsorship. That came later. The responsibilities of managing a mixed fleet, not to mention the logistics of boats with significantly different performance, is not something any race office is going to want to take on. Not when the pointy end of the fleet is the moneyed professional teams. Just getting more boats on the start line is clearly not the prime goal of the current race. Indeed they have stated that they consider that there is an upper limit they would want to cope with (12 I think.)

When the Whitbread started there were no other RTW races. Now there are many. They pioneered the race. But things move on. The VOR is never going to go back to mixed fleets and the headaches that brings. Nor do I think there are many, if any, VO70 owners itching to put their boats into a re-run. History has shown that they are mostly marginally built for the job and horrendously expensive to campaign. Indeed one of those old VO70s would probably cost more to try to punt around the planet than a current VO65 race entrant. Look back at the insanely expensive support system each team had in place to nurse those boats around, and the level of breakage and damage that had to be fixed. 

18 minutes ago, hoppy said:

so a lap of the southern ocean is not extreme enough for you. Who cares if it does not technically count as RTW? 

I don't care about extreme. "Life at the extreme" was stupid slogan. MT wanted to do a non-stop SO lap as a race. If the SO is what matters, just do that. A RTW race needs to embrace the world, and that means admitting that the world is not just Europe and a couple of stopovers for more beer. Given the VOR is now majority Chinese owned, maybe we will see the race start and stop in China. The idea that they will drop the leg to China is fanciful.

Share this post


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

My point is that things change. The idea of the "spirit" of the Whitbread is simply one of nostalgia. They guys that embodied those early races didn't have OBRs, or depend upon sponsorship. That came later. The responsibilities of managing a mixed fleet, not to mention the logistics of boats with significantly different performance, is not something any race office is going to want to take on. Not when the pointy end of the fleet is the moneyed professional teams. Just getting more boats on the start line is clearly not the prime goal of the current race. Indeed they have stated that they consider that there is an upper limit they would want to cope with (12 I think.)

When the Whitbread started there were no other RTW races. Now there are many. They pioneered the race. But things move on. The VOR is never going to go back to mixed fleets and the headaches that brings. Nor do I think there are many, if any, VO70 owners itching to put their boats into a re-run. History has shown that they are mostly marginally built for the job and horrendously expensive to campaign. Indeed one of those old VO70s would probably cost more to try to punt around the planet than a current VO65 race entrant. Look back at the insanely expensive support system each team had in place to nurse those boats around, and the level of breakage and damage that had to be fixed. 

I don't care about extreme. "Life at the extreme" was stupid slogan. MT wanted to do a non-stop SO lap as a race. If the SO is what matters, just do that. A RTW race needs to embrace the world, and that means admitting that the world is not just Europe and a couple of stopovers for more beer. Given the VOR is now majority Chinese owned, maybe we will see the race start and stop in China. The idea that they will drop the leg to China is fanciful.

The China stopover is illogical for a RTW race, but obviously that's were the money is. Perhaps they should start the race in China and skip  the ever increasingly irrelevant Europe.

2 hours ago, Francis Vaughan said:

Given the VOR is now majority Chinese owned, maybe we will see the race start and stop in China. The idea that they will drop the leg to China is fanciful.

I missed this comment when I started typing, so we agree.

I think that VOR would be more appealing to Chinese billionaires if they can commission their own builds knowing it will be a competitive race when not in the VOR

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

I think that VOR would be more appealing to Chinese billionaires if they can commission their own builds knowing it will be a competitive race when not in the VOR

If the future of the VOR is to become a dick swinging contest for Chinese billionaires, things could be pretty interesting. The world is competing for the attention of such billionaires, but the VOR may actually manage to raise its profile in China enough that this works. Right now even the AC can't get much traction from the mega-rich, and that has always been the traditional king dick contest. The AC and the VOR are starting to compete for the same sponsorship dollars now. 

A point I made a while ago is that the VOR doesn't lend itself to the attention of billionaires. Of all the things in life that billionaires have, the one thing they don't have any more of than the rest of us is time. A VOR demands a significant investment in time from any enthusiast. The AC 75 boats have a "guest" on board.  Prior to the AC 72 and AC 50, many AC boats had a spot for the billionaire owner to sit and take in the racing. Pretty clear there was a big need to reinstate that. There just isn't an equivalent on a VOR boat. Being the guest jumper at the start is hardly a substitute. It is hard to see how a mega-rich sponsor will perceive the value to them personally that a VOR team provides. Just about every other ocean racing boat owned by a seriously rich person includes that person on board - often as skipper. Otherwise, owning a VOR boat is just an expense with little to show for it.

I don't know what the right answer is for the VOR. They do risk seeking out a local minimum with a continual set of safety plays. The drive to he bottom they currently seem to be on in not good IMHO. But sponsors need a level of certainty. Finding the sweet spot in the range of constraints the VOR has is not going to be easy.

Share this post


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

If the future of the VOR is to become a dick swinging contest for Chinese billionaires, things could be pretty interesting. The world is competing for the attention of such billionaires, but the VOR may actually manage to raise its profile in China enough that this works. Right now even the AC can't get much traction from the mega-rich, and that has always been the traditional king dick contest. The AC and the VOR are starting to compete for the same sponsorship dollars now. 

A point I made a while ago is that the VOR doesn't lend itself to the attention of billionaires. Of all the things in life that billionaires have, the one thing they don't have any more of than the rest of us is time. A VOR demands a significant investment in time from any enthusiast. The AC 75 boats have a "guest" on board.  Prior to the AC 72 and AC 50, many AC boats had a spot for the billionaire owner to sit and take in the racing. Pretty clear there was a big need to reinstate that. There just isn't an equivalent on a VOR boat. Being the guest jumper at the start is hardly a substitute. It is hard to see how a mega-rich sponsor will perceive the value to them personally that a VOR team provides. Just about every other ocean racing boat owned by a seriously rich person includes that person on board - often as skipper. Otherwise, owning a VOR boat is just an expense with little to show for it.

I don't know what the right answer is for the VOR. They do risk seeking out a local minimum with a continual set of safety plays. The drive to he bottom they currently seem to be on in not good IMHO. But sponsors need a level of certainty. Finding the sweet spot in the range of constraints the VOR has is not going to be easy.

With the VOR, the Chinese Billionaires will do their dick swinging from their offices in Shanghai or Hong Kong. Perhaps they will take their private jet to the stop overs and join their toy for the in port races. If they want to do a overnight race, they will join for their pet ocean sprint around Asia or perhaps the S2H

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, hoppy said:

Whitbread was getting the big numbers in the early years because it was neither a OD or BOX rule race.

If you want numbers, then in my opinion you need to allow a wide range of designs and sizes, perhaps with a minimum speed requirement. So you might have a race with IMOCA, VO70, VO65, VO60 , Whitbread classics and whatever designers and teams come up with for the line honours winners. The diversion to China should be dropped making the race up and down the Atlantic and a lap of the southern ocean with a couple of stops. The costs to the race to the competitors should be minimised to make it economical for owners of existing boats allowing them to spend as much or as little.

Then you will get the big money teams going for line honours, the medium money teams refitting and moding VO70's for class wins and the rest racing for the thrill of it, especially for those already owning the boat.

Then the VOR will be more in the spirit of the Whitbread.

 

Edition Class Legs In-Port Races Entries Start Finish Winning yacht Winning skipper
1973–74 32–80 ft (9.8–24.4 m) 4 0 17 United Kingdom Portsmouth United Kingdom Portsmouth Mexico Sayula II Mexico Ramón Carlin
1977–78 51–77 ft (16–23 m) 4 0 15 United Kingdom Portsmouth United Kingdom Portsmouth Netherlands Flyer Netherlands Conny van Rietschoten
1981–82 43–80 ft (13–24 m) 4 0 29 United Kingdom Portsmouth United Kingdom Portsmouth Netherlands Flyer II Netherlands Conny van Rietschoten
1985–86 49–83 ft (15–25 m) 4 0 15 United Kingdom Portsmouth United Kingdom Portsmouth France L'esprit d'équipe France Lionel Péan
1989–90 51–84 ft (16–26 m) 6 0 23 United Kingdom Southampton United Kingdom Southampton New Zealand Steinlager 2 New Zealand Peter Blake
1993–94 85 ft (26 m) ketchs
& Whitbread 60
6 0 14 United Kingdom Southampton United Kingdom Southampton New Zealand NZ Endeavour New Zealand Grant Dalton
1997–98 Whitbread 60 9 0 10 United Kingdom Southampton United Kingdom Southampton Sweden EF Language United States Paul Cayard
2001–02 10 0 8 United Kingdom Southampton Germany Kiel Germany Illbruck Challenge United States John Kostecki
2005–06 Volvo Open 70 9 7 7 Spain Vigo Sweden Gothenburg Netherlands ABN AMRO I New Zealand Mike Sanderson
2008–09 10 7 8 Spain Alicante Russia Saint Petersburg Sweden Ericsson 4 Brazil Torben Grael
2011–12 9 10 6 Spain Alicante Republic of Ireland Galway France Groupama 4 France Franck Cammas
2014–15 Volvo Ocean 65 9 10 7 Spain Alicante Sweden Gothenburg United Arab Emirates Azzam United Kingdom Ian Walker
2017–18 10 12 7 Spain Alicante Netherlands The Hague TBD TBD

I agree that they were getting more entries for different reasons.

But 15 entrants for a VOR on IMOCAs doesn't seem so far fetched. For more than 10 years it's been hovering around 7 entrants, there are 30 entrants for the VG so if 1 in 4 VG entrant decide to do both races you get to around 15 entries.

Only 2 Frenchmen have won the whitbread / VOR, with an offer easier to justify to sponsors there will be candidates.

Share this post


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

I agree that they were getting more entries for different reasons.

But 15 entrants for a VOR on IMOCAs doesn't seem so far fetched. For more than 10 years it's been hovering around 7 entrants, there are 30 entrants for the VG so if 1 in 4 VG entrant decide to do both races you get to around 15 entries.

Only 2 Frenchmen have won the whitbread / VOR, with an offer easier to justify to sponsors there will be candidates.

I think that the key thing with the IMOCA open 60 is that it's a box rule has been around since 1986. As a result, each edition of the Vendee Globe will see a number of new builds and others that were built for the last few or more editions. If VOR wants to get good numbers and remain a fully crewed race, then they need to revert back to a box rule and stick to that rule. 

If VOR returns to VO70, then there will be new builds and maybe a couple of old boats will be bought to be refurbished and upgraded and pressed back into service.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I think that the key thing with the IMOCA open 60 is that it's a box rule has been around since 1986. As a result, each edition of the Vendee Globe will see a number of new builds and others that were built for the last few or more editions. If VOR wants to get good numbers and remain a fully crewed race, then they need to revert back to a box rule and stick to that rule. 

If VOR returns to VO70, then there will be new builds and maybe a couple of old boats will be bought to be refurbished and upgraded and pressed back into service.

The VO70 wasn't viable commercially, the numbers kept going down. You need lot of returns to justify sponsoring an expensive boat designed to do a race every 3 years.

Share this post


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

The VO70 wasn't viable commercially, the numbers kept going down. You need lot of returns to justify sponsoring an expensive boat designed to do a race every 3 years.

That's why in another thread i proposed that the next gen VOR boat should be something that the owners will want to do the S2H, Fastnet etc... This will help with resale. 

Given the timing of the Aus stopover, I'd also be inclined to make the S2H a sprint leg of the VOR for points. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

If VOR returns to VO70, then there will be new builds and maybe a couple of old boats will be bought to be refurbished and upgraded and pressed back into service.

Yep it will be great race watching the three of them go round.

The RTW world has changed in the last decade just in case you haven't noticed.

Back to the future is horseshit in this game.

Back to the future.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, hoppy said:

That's why in another thread i proposed that the next gen VOR boat should be something that the owners will want to do the S2H, Fastnet etc... This will help with resale. 

Given the timing of the Aus stopover, I'd also be inclined to make the S2H a sprint leg of the VOR for points. 

Teams, VOR and one or two sponsors have been trying to get events going (either existing or new) between races since the early 90s and have never managed it.

RTW from China was mooted by MT on alternate cycles to a European start, to avoid the leg north. Also a China Series between VOR cycles. Again, not getting off the ground. 

Bouwe chartered the 65 to take to the Caribbean and do events to keep interest going, but the boat was fucked by the end of it without enough budget for maintenance. Without VOR doing the refit it would not have been fit for the race. 

The honest truth is that there is no magic bullet, but it would take a VERY brave CEO to suggest going for a significantly more expensive option, ie a new box rule, or run what you bring. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one would at least like to see some sort of feasibility study wrt imocas in VOR,  I guess  existing fleet , teams and exiting and fast boats would be net positive. To the negatives  or  unknowns would be: existing teams prioritizing VG,  Economical interests of current IMOCA teams vs event owner VOLVO, boats not in current configuration optimized for crewed sailing + obr, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About IMOCA's being too fragile for full crew: Jeremy Beyou mentioned in a interview that it might actually be a good thing.  WIth the current boast the limiting factor is the crew not the boat strength, and it is the opposite with the IMOCA's. But that would  mean the crew will have to refrain from keeping their foot down no matter what.

Share this post


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

But that would mean the crew will have to refrain from keeping their foot down no matter what

There's the rub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, razcaillou said:

About IMOCA's being too fragile for full crew: Jeremy Beyou mentioned in a interview that it might actually be a good thing.  WIth the current boast the limiting factor is the crew not the boat strength, and it is the opposite with the IMOCA's. But that would  mean the crew will have to refrain from keeping their foot down no matter what.

Which means with a fragile boat the race isn't about the sailors, it is about the boat.  That becomes a very hard sell.

Share this post


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

Which means with a fragile boat the race isn't about the sailors, it is about the boat.  That becomes a very hard sell.

Then again the imoca doesn't need to be pushed as much as an v65, as it's more efficient

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jonas a said:

Then again the imoca doesn't need to be pushed as much as an v65, as it's more efficient

When have Volvo sailors ever said “oh yeah this boat is plenty fast no need to push it harder....”

Wherever the limit is, these guys will find it. 

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that if someone decides to build an IMOCA optimised for the VOR then it will be a very different boat from a Vendee design (be capable of upwind, strong enough to be pushed 100% without autopilot, meet AVS and RM limit with VOR requirements applied, etc) and none of the existing IMOCA boats would stand a chance in the VOR. Similarly, that boat wouldn’t work in the VG. Pindar already proved that to a degree. 

They are different races and that sets a different brief for the designers. My worry is that this might adversely effect both races.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

My worry is that this might adversely effect both races.

Exactly. The entire idea seems to be one based upon a bad premise. I can't see it ending well. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The IMOCA OD that was being worked on May have worked as a OD as the only competition is the same design. But open it up to any IMOCA compliant design and that is a very different story.

Share this post


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

The problem is that if someone decides to build an IMOCA optimised for the VOR then it will be a very different boat from a Vendee design (be capable of upwind, strong enough to be pushed 100% without autopilot, meet AVS and RM limit with VOR requirements applied, etc) and none of the existing IMOCA boats would stand a chance in the VOR. Similarly, that boat wouldn’t work in the VG. Pindar already proved that to a degree. 

They are different races and that sets a different brief for the designers. My worry is that this might adversely effect both races.

At the start of the VG, not many boats can actually win the race, but it doesn't make the race boring, you just end up with races within the race. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

At the start of the VG, not many boats can actually win the race, but it doesn't make the race boring, you just end up with races within the race. 

Not if you are Little Chay, he thinks you should only enter if you have a chance of winning... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors who want to build a VOR optimised boat might not t care, but if there is only one VOR optimised one then no one will be tempted into the VOR against them in an uncompetitive boat. It won’t have the entry list of the VG as not the same type of adventure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Imocas have evolved around two clear primary objectives. Single handed operation, and the race from Les Sables d'Olonne past the great capes and back without any outside assistance. Rather a narrow brief!

A fully crewed boat optimised to sail a multi-leg race over true multi-country RTW routing is a completely different animal, inherently a very expensive project whatever the boat, and from the spectator viewpoint, a very different adventure to watch and follow.

Only an accountant would try to mix the two!

I for one am bored to tears with the VO65 one design and the way it sails in this race. The only things which have interested me in this edition are the drone footage and that I support some of the DF and Mapfre people. I followed the last edition all the way round when there was a girl's boat and the one-design concept was new, but I have lost most of the interest in this one because its "same old", "same old". I am back to following the Figaros, Minis, Multihulls and VG projects.

VOR really has only three alternatives if they want to get my attention back.
 
1. Revert to a rule boat, either monohull or multihull, but faster than the 70s, with teams actually financing the design and build of a boat of their choice.

2. VOR could design, build and finance a whole new set of one-design boats which have to be significantly faster than the present 65s.

3. Give up the unequal struggle.

I would hope that now we are several years past the 2007/8 affair, option 1. might work.

Financially I would think option 2 is unattractive for an organiser. The one-design 65s have not been a success.

With the present race management (RB etc.!) I don't hold out much hope for the VOR future, but Imoca sure needs to give the VOR organisation a wide berth.

Share this post


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

The honest truth is that there is no magic bullet, but it would take a VERY brave CEO to suggest going for a significantly more expensive option, ie a new box rule, or run what you bring. 

 

If this race is to survive it needs a VERY brave CEO!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you imagine how happy professional racers would be trying to helm a VOR IMOCA with visibility greatly restricted?

 

and before some smart arse comments "so you don't think the Vendee Globe sailors are professional", go figure out the bleeding obvious yourself...

Share this post


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

The honest truth is that there is no magic bullet, but it would take a VERY brave CEO to suggest going for a significantly more expensive option, ie a new box rule, or run what you bring. 

It does not need a brave CEO. It just needs a smart CEO. 

A smart CEO would be working quietly behind the scenes talking to existing and potential team owners to see what they would want to see in the next generation of boat and what they are willing to pay. The CEO should have been VERY busy at the Chinese stopovers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Charitably one could regard the current engagement with the IMOCA as a safety play. And a bit of bridge building. MT screwed up by not consulting with the IMOCA. So, even if this whole idea isn't the main game, keeping the IMOCA owners engaged is not a bad thing to do.  I worry it is the main game.

Dead right about being very busy at stopovers, and more as well. Getting the design of the format for the next round to close is clearly absolutely the number one priority. I think you need both brave and smart in a CEO here. The problem is that I don't think anyone is smart enough to be able to say for certain that they have the right answer. Knut was both brave and smart when he went OD IMHO. He got a lot of opposition from all corners, but I don't think anyone thinks he didn't do the right thing at the time. But he didn't know it would be OK. Sure, the VO65 has not been a massive success, but even then, the compromises were not accidental - they were there to address specific concerns - and one of them was to make all female or mixed crews more viable (whether this has worked out or not is another matter - but there was at leas some method to the madness.

My criticism with the desire to go smaller and shorter handed in order to cut cots is that this is not the action of either a brave or a smart CEO. It is a reactive behaviour - simply going in the direction that seems easiest to address the easy problem. This is the hill climbing problem*. You end up in a local maximum that may be quite sub-optimal. Sitting on top of a small hillock whilst there is a mountain nearby, but only accessible if you are brave enough to skip over the valleys in between.   You need to be smart enough to realise you need to traverse the valleys, and brave enough to do so. MT was certainly brave, but maybe not so smart.

*Given only a compass and an altimeter, in the fog, find the highest peak.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Knut may have been brave and smart, and his smartest move was knowing when to bail out!

In a world where progress year by year in sport normally involves going faster, breaking records etc. and where the costs of progress are inevitably rising all the time surely you have to ask yourself "is cost cutting a recipe for success or a recipe for failure?"

Cutting costs can improve efficiency, but it can also result in the purchasing of reduced overall value. The start of a downward spiral which ends with going out of business.

I can understand a need to optimise efficiency and that can make your project/business more cost effective, more bang for the buck, but the concept of cost cutting, if it adversely affects your product performance and reduces your market profile, is entirely counterintuitive if you are aiming to stay as a market leading business.

Is this being done in other professional sports which are an ongoing success? Is the cost of running a top flight Formula One race car team decreasing?

Look at what is happening in France with multihulls and Imocas? It doesn't look to me as if the top projects are struggling for finance and are "cost cutting". On the contrary I should think they are investing for the future, spending more and more each year, and building faster and more spectacular boats.

Increasing spend and investment = optimism, positive attitude, expectation of success

Cost cutting = pessimism, lack of confidence, concern over failure

If this crewed professional RTW race concept can no longer sustain spending growth then surely it will simply die out as it will no longer be "doing what it says on the can"? That may be inevitable. Perhaps the world has simply moved on? But trying to mix in Imocas with the VOR can only damage the Imoca concept and it sure won't re-build the VOR.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2018 at 10:55 AM, Francis Vaughan said:

The responsibilities of managing a mixed fleet, not to mention the logistics of boats with significantly different performance, is not something any race office is going to want to take on.

My comment is only based on this sentence, and realise the VOR is completely different - but it is currently happening in the Melb - Osaka - right now we have a JV62 chasing a SS34 over 5500 miles 2-handed - they may finish within a day of each other. And on handicap ?  Who TF knows.   My point is it is pretty hard to manage, but doable all the same

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Dark Cloud said:

My comment is only based on this sentence, and realise the VOR is completely different - but it is currently happening in the Melb - Osaka - right now we have a JV62 chasing a SS34 over 5500 miles 2-handed - they may finish within a day of each other. And on handicap ?  Who TF knows.   My point is it is pretty hard to manage, but doable all the same

Yeah, for a single leg race it isn't such as big a deal. My point was more that the VOR is a set of legs, with defined start dates, and boat maintenance performed at each stopover. With a mixed fleet, one with wide performance, the logistics of maintenance are going to get difficult. The slower boats will have a much shorter maintenance window, and inevitably the race schedule will lengthen somewhat to accommodate this. This reduces the flexibility the race has in scheduling legs, something that can lead to difficulties keeping out of bad weather and matching other constraints around the circuit. The success of the Boatyard is partly because with a single boat design there is a unified parts inventory. Even with the VO70's I suspect a great many parts were common and the suppliers could keep a manageable inventory. (The diesel engines were of course specific Volvo models.) It isn't the sailing part of the leg that is hard to manage with a widely mixed fleet, it is the stops, and the cascading implications that has.

Share this post


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

If this crewed professional RTW race concept can no longer sustain spending growth then surely it will simply die out as it will no longer be "doing what it says on the can"? That may be inevitable. Perhaps the world has simply moved on? But trying to mix in Imocas with the VOR can only damage the Imoca concept and it sure won't re-build the VOR.

Stay you miss the point. IMOCA has reached the limit of its growth, every measure in France indicates max media/persons saturation and big heeled French sponsors and team promotors know that. Their fear is not no growth but the zenith has been reached and the elevator only has a down button. That is as clear as the nose on your face.

One needs the other to get bigger, arguably the other needs the other to survive. Both probably haven't quite worked out which one is which at this juncture. That will take time.

That scenario is a a recipe for a good marriage but if not in bed together 24/7, then at the very least one of  friends with benefits.

Share this post


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

Yeah, for a single leg race it isn't such as big a deal. My point was more that the VOR is a set of legs, with defined start dates, and boat maintenance performed at each stopover. With a mixed fleet, one with wide performance, the logistics of maintenance are going to get difficult. The slower boats will have a much shorter maintenance window, and inevitably the race schedule will lengthen somewhat to accommodate this. This reduces the flexibility the race has in scheduling legs, something that can lead to difficulties keeping out of bad weather and matching other constraints around the circuit. The success of the Boatyard is partly because with a single boat design there is a unified parts inventory. Even with the VO70's I suspect a great many parts were common and the suppliers could keep a manageable inventory. (The diesel engines were of course specific Volvo models.) It isn't the sailing part of the leg that is hard to manage with a widely mixed fleet, it is the stops, and the cascading implications that has.

Yeah agree

Share this post


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

Stay you miss the point. IMOCA has reached the limit of its growth, every measure in France indicates max media/persons saturation and big heeled French sponsors and team promotors know that. Their fear is not no growth but the zenith has been reached .....

From what I have seen over the years following Imoca racing very closely, every boat and every project seems to be highly individual and focussed entirely around the skipper. The rule is fairly open and allows boats to be modified, tailored to suit individual styles of sailing. The present VOR is all about the team sponsor and the skipper and crews and the technical aspect of the boats are way down in the pecking order
Imoca has almost nothing nothing in common with VOR and Imoca is thriving. VOR is the one in trouble.

Ask a skipper who has had a successful VG behind them and who has also skippered a VO65 in the VOR if they want to skipper an Imoca60 round the world with multiple stops and a crew, and see what answer you get? I think they will tell you they want to go and sail a fast multihull!

I wouldn't argue that the VG has reached an optimum peak level in terms of numbers of entrants, but only because of the size of Port Olonna, and 30 odd boats is a pretty good number to generate interest among the public. The VG does not need to grow in numbers of entrants to remain popular (and financially worthwhile). Whilst there is no sign of a decline or a public loss of interest, what is the point in "fixing something which isn't broke"?

It is the skippers, sailors, which drive the Imoca class because of the ultimate goal, to win in the Vendee Globe which is the Holy Grail. What is the ultimate aim of the mini sailor? the Figarist? All the ambitious ones will tell you it is to win the Vendee Globe, not to sail in the VOR.

Imoca racing will stay top of the list for me just so long as development continues within the class and the boats keep getting faster and the world's most talented and exciting offshore racing skippers keep wanting to enter the VG. Growth is still vibrant in terms of design improvement and sailor development. That is what makes it exciting for me and others who follow the races.

I just can't see how any connection with the VOR could do the Imoca class anything but harm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stay...well you still don't get it after being given a route map from those that know ..them blinkers of yours while sitting in the cheap seats are well and truly glued on.

Share this post


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

Stay...well you still don't get it after being given a route map from those that know ..them blinkers of yours while sitting in the cheap seats are well and truly glued on.

However much you paid for your ticket even you cannot know if the next VOR will be a success, that is if there is one.

Share this post


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

Yeah, for a single leg race it isn't such as big a deal. My point was more that the VOR is a set of legs, with defined start dates, and boat maintenance performed at each stopover. With a mixed fleet, one with wide performance, the logistics of maintenance are going to get difficult. The slower boats will have a much shorter maintenance window, and inevitably the race schedule will lengthen somewhat to accommodate this. This reduces the flexibility the race has in scheduling legs, something that can lead to difficulties keeping out of bad weather and matching other constraints around the circuit. The success of the Boatyard is partly because with a single boat design there is a unified parts inventory. Even with the VO70's I suspect a great many parts were common and the suppliers could keep a manageable inventory. (The diesel engines were of course specific Volvo models.) It isn't the sailing part of the leg that is hard to manage with a widely mixed fleet, it is the stops, and the cascading implications that has.

You could have the slow boats misssome legs like the 2 legs to and back from China.

just do 2 classes, IMOCAs and some class 40 like boats except that the safety requirements are much more onerous (self righting, sheltered crew...). You get the small boats to take the original route (Europe -> SA -> Australia or NZ -> Rio -> Newport -> Europe ) and the big boats to do a few extra legs so that the small ones can catch them up and rest.

If there are rich guys ready to spend lots you can even add a VO80 class!

Share this post


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

Can't even take a hint..OK try reading beforehand and before typing gobblygook to what you are replying to..or sober up.

You re just too clever for me Jack. Previously on this thread you have said the boats can't be less than 65, also that you can't see the end of OD for a raft of reasons, so how does all that fit in with an Imoca 60 for the 2021 VOR?  Isn't an Imoca a boat which is shorter than 65 feet and isn't it not an OD class?

I'm not interested in a slanging match and I do respect much of what you write on these forums but if it's not too much to ask I would like to know where you are coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One problem I also see is that the appeal to sponsors of the VG and VOR are completely different. VG is about advertising whilst VOR has become all about corporate entertainment. 

A hard sell for a skipper/team to get a sponsor to sign up for both. So we see the fleet split and dilute rather than combine and strengthen.

Share this post


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

You could have the slow boats misssome legs like the 2 legs to and back from China.

just do 2 classes, IMOCAs and some class 40 like boats except that the safety requirements are much more onerous (self righting, sheltered crew...). You get the small boats to take the original route (Europe -> SA -> Australia or NZ -> Rio -> Newport -> Europe ) and the big boats to do a few extra legs so that the small ones can catch them up and rest.

If there are rich guys ready to spend lots you can even add a VO80 class!

Dilute the event like that and the few members of the non-sailing public that do follow will most likely drift away (not that it probably makes much difference to the sponsors).  

It’ll be like the Maxi boat versus the W60 fiasco, 2 winners in the same race doesn’t make for an easily understood event to the non-sailing public, especially if they start sailing different legs  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also worth noting that the safety requirements of the IMOCA are way below the VOR. IMOCA structural standards don’t even meet WS plan review level or ISO 12215. They have dispensation. AVS is low and they are even allowed dyneema life lines and have just a single keel ram. Very low freeboards and far less stringent flooded compartment requirements, watertight hatch requirements etc.

All at the minimal level for one crew member. How Volvo could justify reducing safety factors without really good reason would interest me. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Dilute the event like that and the few members of the non-sailing public that do follow will most likely drift away (not that it probably makes much difference to the sponsors).  

It’ll be like the Maxi boat versus the W60 fiasco, 2 winners in the same race doesn’t make for an easily understood event to the non-sailing public, especially if they start sailing different legs  

 

The route du rhum use the many classes approach, there are 120 entrants and it makes prime time TV!

Share this post


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

The route du rhum use the many classes approach, there are 120 entrants and it makes prime time TV!

In France only, barely gets a mention anywhere else...... much like the Volvo and AC

It seems to work for RdR but I can’t see it working for round the world race. The BWR is on hold, and the Class 40 seems to have died as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GENERATION 2020, WHO HAS THE VISION?

THURSDAY 12 APRIL 2018, 19H04 

VPLP and Verdier have gone their separate ways. Juan Kouyoumdjian is back on the scene for the Vendee Globe 2020. Finot-Conq are in action. The new generation of foilers appears to be opening up the choice of designers. And, as usual, everyone is playing their cards close to their chests, all waiting to see what each other will produce.

Nothing has emerged yet. The first design salvo, any early indication of what we might see as the newest innovations and ideas for Vendee Globe 2020, has yet to be seen. The naval architecture studios have been hard at work for more than a year now, for some, shorter periods for others. But no one really knows what to expect when the first Generation 2020 boats finally emerge from the sheds ready for launching. Previously there might have been an informed guess, a smart deduction, but as the number of designers increases again, even if they are all bound by the IMOCA rule, it will be fascinating to see the new generation of foilers.

On the last generation of boats, we did not know if the foils were going to work. There is no point in having a Formula 1 under you but only exploiting it at 30% », says Quentin Lucet, IMOCA expert at VPLP, who are designers for Jérémie Beyou's new boat, Charal, which should be the first to be launched. The doubt about the skipper, the human's ability to use these "wings" on a single-handed round the world really was removed during the last Vendée Globe. « And from then that completely changes the situation. »


"We have undertaken the most important scientific study to be made for this kind of monohull",  says Guillaume Verdier who started working on the study fourteen months ago for the Volvo Ocean Race. Now after recently returning to France from New Zealand, Verdier will work for Charlie Dalin (as chosen by François Gabart) for his new IMOCA. Verdier was with Emirates Team New Zealand in the development of the winning foiling AC72 which lifted the America's Cup.

Verdier says:  "The first boat to fly upwind and downwind will change the whole outlook of sailing."

On the new IMOCA, he says :  "We use a simulator that allows us to test it virtually using  Team New-Zealand's performance prediction tools. We have opened plenty of scientific avenues in this study, it will be up to Charlie to choose the routes and the timing he wants."

The America's Cup is an arena where designers match up to each other in different challenges. In that area, there are some of the best designers, engineers and boatbuilders. Finot-Conq, for example, have a Cup specialist in Michel Kermarec who is charged with the modifications to be made to a previous IMOCA of Armel Le Cléac'h, the design which took second in the Vendée Globe 2008, now owned by Alan Roura, the youngest and twelfth of the last edition.


"In recent years naval architecture firms have software (CFD, Computational Fluid Dynamics) that will model performance as well as any tank testing. So you can consider research in all directions and to retain the figures, not only qualitative but also quantitative", says Pascal Conq.

Blank sheet, high complexity designing a new generation IMOCA involves a complex equation with several unknown factors. « In the world of competitive sailing, it remains one of the most complicated problems to solve in terms of design choices. Even more than for the America’s Cup, where there are a lot of technical refinements, but even then, it is far removed from what you can come up with for an IMOCA. They remain the pinnacle of boat designing", stressed Juan Kouyoumdjian, who although absent from the last Vendée Globe, will be back again in 2020 alongside the young skipper, Sébastien Simon and his project manager, Vincent Riou, the winner of the 2004-2005 Vendée Globe. He added:  "The rules have changed so much that it is rather like starting out from a blank sheet of paper. The foils, not in themselves, but given the new amount of freedom the class now allows, will have a big role to play."

The 2020-2021 Vendée Globe will therefore stand out with boats that are very different from those that have previously been built. « We no longer have to rely on a hull shape to come up with a powerful boat. To build a fast boat, we no longer need a heavy bulb and a lot of ballast; you just need a foil, which produces the same effect ", explained Quentin Lucet, who gave us an inkling of what lies ahead. « The boat is going to be lighter, easier to handle, requiring a smaller sail surface to achieve speeds equal to or above those of the previous generation."

It is hard to find out any more, as we approach the arrival of a new IMOCA, which is likely to be Jérémie Beyou’s.  "It’s a state secret!" laughed Quentin Lucet. The joys of suspense…

A new hand of cards

Van Peteghem-Lauriot-Prévost (VPLP for those that follow these things) in conjunction with Guillaume Verdier left their mark on the last decade of IMOCAs. The 2016-2017 Vendée Globe marked the pinnacle of their achievement, with the two architects being behind six new boats while the first five bore their signatures. As is common, a certain amount of friction could be felt between the two teams with their very different approach to work. Since their first joint project, Safran in 2005, VPLP-Verdier have designed around a dozen IMOCAs among them the best finishers in the Vendée Globe.

Now they have separated from each other and a fascinating new hand of cards is coming into play.  "We design racing boats, because we like a good challenge and the architectural competition. But this is a mechanical sport and seeing ourselves end up with practically all of the new boats for the Vendée Globe was a bit odd… ", Guillaume Verdier admits. The battle between designers is back on again. And no one is going to complain about that.

https://www.vendeeglobe.org/en/news/19302/generation-2020-who-has-the-vision

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

In France only, barely gets a mention anywhere else...... much like the Volvo and AC

It seems to work for RdR but I can’t see it working for round the world race. The BWR is on hold, and the Class 40 seems to have died as well. 

The class 40 is one of the most active class, 50 entrants for the next Route du Rhum.

The AC makes it to prime TV in France (I think thanks to the crazy to us boats). The VOR doesn't since the mid 80´s (Peter Blake was admired here), not enough boats I think. The VOR used to interest the British press when it was the Whitbread I think. These races to be sustainable need media attention, the more boats the better, at the moment in Brittany it is impossible to ignore that it is a Route du Rhum year as all the small teams are communicating (through the media and directly to their sponsor employees, clients and other stakeholders) and it creates a lot of "Noise".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

The class 40 is one of the most active class, 50 entrants for the next Route du Rhum.

The AC makes it to prime TV in France (I think thanks to the crazy to us boats). The VOR doesn't since the mid 80´s (Peter Blake was admired here), not enough boats I think. The VOR used to interest the British press when it was the Whitbread I think. These races to be sustainable need media attention, the more boats the better, at the moment in Brittany it is impossible to ignore that it is a Route du Rhum year as all the small teams are communicating (through the media and directly to their sponsor employees, clients and other stakeholders) and it creates a lot of "Noise".

Apologies, I was referring to the Class 40 round the world event. Yes the Class 40 fleet is looking good for other events. 

Share this post


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

Apologies, I was referring to the Class 40 round the world event. Yes the Class 40 fleet is looking good for other events. 

OK. Still, the class 40 would get a lot more exposure through the VOR and it would be much easier to find sponsors.

Share this post


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

OK. Still, the class 40 would get a lot more exposure through the VOR and it would be much easier to find sponsors.

Sense at last... The Class40s are killing it at the moment. 27 in the Normandy Channel Race. At least 9 in the Atlantic Cup. Japanese teams, Angolan teams, French, British, American, Swiss, Swedish... Need I go on? Class40 and the Mini are the ONLY sustainable Class in offshore racing. 

Share this post


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

You re just too clever for me Jack. Previously on this thread you have said the boats can't be less than 65, also that you can't see the end of OD for a raft of reasons, so how does all that fit in with an Imoca 60 for the 2021 VOR?  Isn't an Imoca a boat which is shorter than 65 feet and isn't it not an OD class?

I'm not interested in a slanging match and I do respect much of what you write on these forums but if it's not too much to ask I would like to know where you are coming from.

Sorry stay maybe I wasn't clear. I was ignoring the boats entirely and looking just at there being two buckets of money, one for crewed one for single handed. Both buckets effectively can't get any bigger and in fact one at the flick of a corporate switch could disapear entirely. However both could get bigger if they linked up, no different than corporations do when they come together either under one umbrella or in joint venture when having different products.

If I knew how IMOCA/VG/VOR go about doing that I wouldn't be writing here.

However it might be as simple as they go to an identical but opposing four year cycle so one occurs every two years with their money pooled. A sponsor then sees their brand investment appearing every two years but supporting two different platforms. For Euro centric underwriters their getting wider global coverage and visa versa for non-euro sponsors. So suddenly the de Rothschilds and a mid west USA toolmaker are in the same horserace.

The concept of VOR rent-a-boat could be adopted for the VG to give less well heeled sponsors alone or as a collective a vehicle to back etc. There are no doubt many other alternatives. 

However one thing that seems to be apparent is the DNA of each can't be messed with. One is SH and for RTW non-stop, the other crewed RTW with stopovers.  That makes the boats themselves so disparite on account of the number of bodies on board, that the prospects of both competing at the same time in a RTW event appears extremely remote. Shorter trans Atlantic courses maybe there is opportunity for a mixed class event.

I hope that makes more sense.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Sorry stay maybe I wasn't clear. I was ignoring the boats entirely and looking just at there being two buckets of money, one for crewed one for single handed. Both buckets effectively can't get any bigger and in fact one at the flick of a corporate switch could disapear entirely. However both could get bigger if they linked up, no different than corporations do when they come together either under one umbrella or in joint venture when having different products.

If I knew how IMOCA/VG/VOR go about doing that I wouldn't be writing here.

However it might be as simple as they go to an identical but opposing four year cycle so one occurs every two years with their money pooled. A sponsor then sees their brand investment appearing every two years but supporting two different platforms. For Euro centric underwriters their getting wider global coverage and visa versa for non-euro sponsors. So suddenly the de Rothschilds and a mid west USA toolmaker are in the same horserace.

The concept of VOR rent-a-boat could be adopted for the VG to give less well heeled sponsors alone or as a collective a vehicle to back etc. There are no doubt many other alternatives. 

However one thing that seems to be apparent is the DNA of each can't be messed with. One is SH and for RTW non-stop, the other crewed RTW with stopovers.  That makes the boats themselves so disparite on account of the number of bodies on board, that the prospects of both competing at the same time in a RTW event appears extremely remote. Shorter trans Atlantic courses maybe there is opportunity for a mixed class event.

I hope that makes more sense.

Thanks Jack, far me eloquently put than my I thoughts. 

Share this post


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

Sorry stay maybe I wasn't clear. I was ignoring the boats entirely and looking just at there being two buckets of money, one for crewed one for single handed. Both buckets effectively can't get any bigger and in fact one at the flick of a corporate switch could disapear entirely. However both could get bigger if they linked up, no different than corporations do when they come together either under one umbrella or in joint venture when having different products.

Thanks for that Jack. I guess I just don't see the financing of Imoca projects in the same way you do. I have friends who have competed (and skippered) in both, including several VG skippers and I know just a little about where their money comes from. Sure there are some deeper pockets behind some Imoca teams but also many Imoca skippers with small budgets supported by three or more quite small businesses, many of which seem to me to have minimal or no interest in markets outside France. They are passionate about sailing and the VG and it seems their involvement is financially positive, simply because the French as a nation are mad keen on sailing in a way that I don't see in any other country. Your analogy of one big bucket of money being the case for the VOR is fine, but I see the Imoca circuit as being financed not by any central organisation but by a group of companies which are all brought together by the skippers and a common passion. Not a single bucket; more like half a dozen cups, twenty egg cups and 50 thimbles full. I just can't see why the company which is getting its VG (and other Imoca race) exposure very happily for a thimble full should want to go near a guy with a bucket!
That and the fact that a fair number of the Imocas are actually owned by their skippers and not by a sponsor company makes the scene totally different from the VOR.
I know the discussions are happening. I guess we just have to wait and see how it all pans out, but with a VG in 2020 I can't see many existing Imocas even being ready to start a race like a VOR in 2021 and I don't see many existing Imoca sponsors stumping up the cash for a crewed multi-stop race. Many of them are simply not big enough businesses.

Do you think VOR will actually build a new OD fleet based on the Imoca rule? and race them in 2021?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Do you think VOR will actually build a new OD fleet based on the Imoca rule? and race them in 2021?

To the rule no, a hybrid yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites