Boybland

4 Solid Teams, this thing is on!

Recommended Posts

So now that we have at least 4 confirmed very well funded teams, I guess we can basically say game on at this point!

Now we just need a couple of underdog teams to add colour and fun and we can call this thing a wrap! 

Well as long as they can get those crazy boats to actually work... But I am guessing people aren't going to throw 200+ million at it if they didn't think that was the case.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes, the cheaper boats and better event to attract more teams on smaller budgets really worked out with only 4 viable teams with one of them leaving sponsors for even more money. After hearing about how much of a failure AC35 was this is really shaping up to be much better. 

My money is on LR or GB, whoever ends up with the biggest budget, just as TNZ intended. 

Share this post


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

Ah yes, the cheaper boats and better event to attract more teams on smaller budgets really worked out with only 4 viable teams with one of them leaving sponsors for even more money. After hearing about how much of a failure AC35 was this is really shaping up to be much better. 

My money is on LR or GB, whoever ends up with the biggest budget, just as TNZ intended. 

4 serious contenders was what Bermuda had last time... + 1 Japanese B team & 1 French social team

We may see further entrants in AC36, but rest assured they won't be ring-ins just to keep up the numbers like some others have been...

Share this post


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

Ah yes, the cheaper boats and better event to attract more teams on smaller budgets really worked out with only 4 viable teams with one of them leaving sponsors for even more money. After hearing about how much of a failure AC35 was this is really shaping up to be much better. 

My money is on LR or GB, whoever ends up with the biggest budget, just as TNZ intended. 

We are still 3 years out and have 3 well funded challengers confirmed for the event and work on others as well, plus plans for what looks to be a pretty top notch venue in the pipeline.  This puts it well on track compared to basically any other recent iteration, some people are just Negative Nellys I guess.

Share this post


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

Ah yes, the cheaper boats and better event to attract more teams on smaller budgets really worked out with only 4 viable teams with one of them leaving sponsors for even more money. After hearing about how much of a failure AC35 was this is really shaping up to be much better. 

My money is on LR or GB, whoever ends up with the biggest budget, just as TNZ intended. 

And they're all stand alone teams with an aim of winning the thing where in Bermuda we had one making up numbers, and another who's sole purpose was to skirt the one boat rule and provide a training crew/ boat to assist the defender in retaining. Nice to see that the sole focus for the challengers is to win the Cup, not help the Defender retain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, rh2600 said:

4 serious contenders was what Bermuda had last time... + 1 Japanese B team & 1 French social team

We may see further entrants in AC36, but rest assured they won't be ring-ins just to keep up the numbers like some others have been...

Yes, we are at the same level and many declared the last cup as garbage. Larry & Co managed to add 2 teams per cup for 34 and 35, Dalton set the expectation to be better, yet to be seen. IMO in the round robin the French races were some of the most interesting with them being unexpectedly competitive. The reason a team with so much less money and time could have been competitive is because the french had tons of experience with multihulls as well as foiling in the C class cats. No one has that experience in the new boats, which I hope are exciting, but makes a higher barrier to entry for a small team.  

9 minutes ago, Boybland said:

We are still 3 years out and have 3 well funded challengers confirmed for the event and work on others as well, plus plans for what looks to be a pretty top notch venue in the pipeline.  This puts it well on track compared to basically any other recent iteration, some people are just Negative Nellys I guess.

Catching on, plenty of Negative Nellys for the last 2 cycles, this one has failed to blow anyone's red socks off. Top notch venue... far from most people. The ACWS racing was pretty bad, especially leading up to the 35th, but it still allowed fans to get out and interact with the teams, and allowed for more sponsor activation which is lacking here. The home team can usually get sponsors on board, but 3 of the teams are now billionaire funded. So really no commercial backers, which is likely due to a region unattractive to most sponsors and racing times that will only see die hards in the rest of the world watching at odd hours. At least streaming is free!

Share this post


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

Yes, we are at the same level and many declared the last cup as garbage. Larry & Co managed to add 2 teams per cup for 34 and 35, Dalton set the expectation to be better, yet to be seen. IMO in the round robin the French races were some of the most interesting with them being unexpectedly competitive. The reason a team with so much less money and time could have been competitive is because the french had tons of experience with multihulls as well as foiling in the C class cats. No one has that experience in the new boats, which I hope are exciting, but makes a higher barrier to entry for a small team.  

Catching on, plenty of Negative Nellys for the last 2 cycles, this one has failed to blow anyone's red socks off. Top notch venue... far from most people. The ACWS racing was pretty bad, especially leading up to the 35th, but it still allowed fans to get out and interact with the teams, and allowed for more sponsor activation which is lacking here. The home team can usually get sponsors on board, but 3 of the teams are now billionaire funded. So really no commercial backers, which is likely due to a region unattractive to most sponsors and racing times that will only see die hards in the rest of the world watching at odd hours. At least streaming is free!

Well, no one can do anything about where NZ is on the map. Can't exactly pick the country up and put it somewhere else because its too inconvenient. To stop it happening, all they had to do was beat ETNZ in Bermuda, but they couldn't, and they didn't, even with 5 teams. Its like it always has been, you want things your way, all you have to do is win, but don't expect the Defender to bend to your will because you don't like where NZ is on the map, or because you don't wanna stay up late and watch TV. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Well, no one can do anything about where NZ is on the map. Can't exactly pick the country up and put it somewhere else because its too inconvenient. To stop it happening, all they had to do was beat ETNZ in Bermuda, but they couldn't, and they didn't, even with 5 teams. Its like it always has been, you want things your way, all you have to do is win, but don't expect the Defender to bend to your will because you don't like where NZ is on the map, or because you don't wanna stay up late and watch TV. 

My point is Dalton and TNZ showed an intention to have more teams in an event less dominated by billionaires/big money and closer to the everyday sailor. Location is a cause of fewer teams/sponsors, I'm not saying needs to be moved or that its an issue, but they (and Anarchists disappointed in the last two cycles) should have considered that when saying 36 will be leaps and bounds better than the last two.

Judging on those three, they have failed. Same number of teams, same number of billionaires, and a Hobie cat is as close to a AC50 as any dingy is to the AC75. 

I'm just excited to explain the diamond boundaries around boats to people.

Share this post


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

My point is Dalton and TNZ showed an intention to have more teams in an event less dominated by billionaires/big money and closer to the everyday sailor. Location is a cause of fewer teams/sponsors, I'm not saying needs to be moved or that its an issue, but they (and Anarchists disappointed in the last two cycles) should have considered that when saying 36 will be leaps and bounds better than the last two.

Judging on those three, they have failed. Same number of teams, same number of billionaires, and a Hobie cat is as close to a AC50 as any dingy is to the AC75. 

I'm just excited to explain the diamond boundaries around boats to people.

Totally agree! Total and utter failures the lot of them!

And a pox to all those that declared the last cup "garbage" because there were only 4 serious challengers!

Share this post


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

My point is Dalton and TNZ showed an intention to have more teams in an event less dominated by billionaires/big money and closer to the everyday sailor. Location is a cause of fewer teams/sponsors, I'm not saying needs to be moved or that its an issue, but they (and Anarchists disappointed in the last two cycles) should have considered that when saying 36 will be leaps and bounds better than the last two.

Judging on those three, they have failed. Same number of teams, same number of billionaires, and a Hobie cat is as close to a AC50 as any dingy is to the AC75. 

I'm just excited to explain the diamond boundaries around boats to people.

Remember, there is only 4 teams AT THE MOMENT. And those are only the ones who have confirmed. The entry window is still open until the end of June, and late entries are accepted at the discretion of RNZYS. So 4 challengers, with potentially more to come 3 years out is a pretty good feat, considering its a brand new, revolutionary design and given last time they had to change the Class of boat late in the piece just to get the challengers they did get.

Share this post


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

Remember, there is only 4 teams AT THE MOMENT. And those are only the ones who have confirmed. The entry window is still open until the end of June, and late entries are accepted at the discretion of RNZYS. So 4 challengers, with potentially more to come 3 years out is a pretty good feat, considering its a brand new, revolutionary design and given last time they had to change the Class of boat late in the piece just to get the challengers they did get.

How close are we to getting more teams and what are their chances of actually being competitive this late in the game? (Genuinely curious)

Hutchinson said in yesterday's scuttlebutt article "It’s a 10-month build so we need to begin soon" with the March 31st 2019 launch opening. We're 2 years 10 months from the match, 2 years 7 months from the the Christmas events, and only a year and a half away from WS events in the second half of 2019 (unless those are being scratched or not everyone will be at them). With a 10 month build even if a second Italian team emerges they need to begin building in the next few months to have training time before the WS event, assuming it is in Europe and they have minimal transport. 

AM/NYYC are doing most of the boat in house and have already acquired the space, just seems like the clock is almost out if other teams want to enter and complete. Not only do they need to design the boat, but learn how to sail them, and if the four now launch in March and build second boats while a new team launches 6 months later I don't see them being competitive in a new type of boat.

After seeing the dud of LRBAR in the last cup the four challengers currently appear to be a stronger than in Bermuda, but we could just as easily see one of them off the pace. 

Share this post


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

How close are we to getting more teams and what are their chances of actually being competitive this late in the game? (Genuinely curious)

Hutchinson said in yesterday's scuttlebutt article "It’s a 10-month build so we need to begin soon" with the March 31st 2019 launch opening. We're 2 years 10 months from the match, 2 years 7 months from the the Christmas events, and only a year and a half away from WS events in the second half of 2019 (unless those are being scratched or not everyone will be at them). With a 10 month build even if a second Italian team emerges they need to begin building in the next few months to have training time before the WS event, assuming it is in Europe and they have minimal transport. 

AM/NYYC are doing most of the boat in house and have already acquired the space, just seems like the clock is almost out if other teams want to enter and complete. Not only do they need to design the boat, but learn how to sail them, and if the four now launch in March and build second boats while a new team launches 6 months later I don't see them being competitive in a new type of boat.

After seeing the dud of LRBAR in the last cup the four challengers currently appear to be a stronger than in Bermuda, but we could just as easily see one of them off the pace. 

Patience...All will be revealed in good time. There was talk of a Chinese team, and a second Italian team, so that would make Luna Rossa, INEOS Team GB, American Magic, a second Italian challenger, a second American team, and a Chinese team. Pretty healthy if its actually true...

Share this post


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

but 3 of the teams are now billionaire funded. 

I don't think so. Ineos is funding the team previously known as BAR and that's a publicly quoted company. I haven't been paying so much attention to LR but I think that's funded by Prada which is also a publicly quoted company. By all means neither would have happened without personal interest from the $Bs associated with those companies but that isn't the same as their being billionaire funded. Compare and contrast to OTUSA which was personally funded by LE. 

I do however agree that if anyone thinks 4 adequately teams is a stellar result, expectations are low.

Questionable whether we will see boats splashing in March 2019. Nobody launched on the earliest date in AC35.

Share this post


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

Patience...All will be revealed in good time. There was talk of a Chinese team, and a second Italian team, so that would make Luna Rossa, INEOS Team GB, American Magic, a second Italian challenger, a second American team, and a Chinese team. Pretty healthy if its actually true...

If that happens it will make six challengers for six available bases.  Latecomers will have to look elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, there is no value in making up hyperbolic straw-man statements that no-one ever actually said and then violently disagreeing with them as if you are somehow making a point...

For instance - @Nauti Buoy please share a quote where someone described the AC35 line-up as 'garbage' due to having 6 entrants

and @dogwatch please share a quote where someone described the current AC36 line-up of 4 as 'stellar'

Until then you are guilty of just yelling at clouds...

Share this post


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

If that happens it will make six challengers for six available bases.  Latecomers will have to look elsewhere.

Yep, which is exactly what GD has stated. First in first served, anyone else will have to look for their own base locations outside of the allocated bases. IMO they will have at least enough teams to fill the allocated base locations, outside of that it will be much more difficult to find another location, unless someone wants to work out of a couple of tents like ETNZ has been for the last 6 years, as once they move into the Viaduct Events Center, their Beaumont Street Location may become available.

Share this post


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

Yep, which is exactly what GD has stated. First in first served, anyone else will have to look for their own base locations outside of the allocated bases. IMO they will have at least enough teams to fill the allocated base locations, outside of that it will be much more difficult to find another location, unless someone wants to work out of a couple of tents like ETNZ has been for the last 6 years, as once they move into the Viaduct Events Center, their Beaumont Street Location may become available.

If challenger #7 makes a last minute debut there is always the old Percy Vos Shipyard which is literally at the back doors of the planned  challenger bases on Hamer Street. Its old railways reach down to the water on the opposite site of Wynyard Point. The yard was headed for the wrecker's ball a few years back but in a series of moves it was saved by Panuku Developments Development, aka the Auckland Council, after they couldn't find takers for a public trust. It's currently being rehabbed and due to reopen next summer as a heritage boatyard with display spaces, offices and a kitchen for catering. The yard has a spectacular history https://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/central-leader/98055958/ratepayers-pick-up-tab-for-million-dollar-makeover-of-historic-vos-yard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, rh2600 said:

4 serious contenders was what Bermuda had last time... + 1 Japanese B team & 1 French social team

We may see further entrants in AC36, but rest assured they won't be ring-ins just to keep up the numbers like some others have been...

So, to make up the number you trash some teams...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the 4th solid team?  I only count 3 at this moment.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

So, to make up the number you trash some teams...

No ones trashing anyone. WTF?

Share this post


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

What is the 4th solid team?  I only count 3 at this moment.

WetHog  :ph34r:

ETNZ

Luna Rossa

American Magic

Not Land Rover GB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Hitcher said:

ETNZ

Luna Rossa

American Magic

Not Land Rover GB

Still only see three solid teams.  One of the 4 is magical but I wouldn't put it in the solid category just yet.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


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

I don't think so. Ineos is funding the team previously known as BAR and that's a publicly quoted company. I haven't been paying so much attention to LR but I think that's funded by Prada which is also a publicly quoted company. By all means neither would have happened without personal interest from the $Bs associated with those companies but that isn't the same as their being billionaire funded. Compare and contrast to OTUSA which was personally funded by LE. 

I do however agree that if anyone thinks 4 adequately teams is a stellar result, expectations are low.

Questionable whether we will see boats splashing in March 2019. Nobody launched on the earliest date in AC35.

Ineos a publicly traded company?  I take it you are not an investment advisor.
Approximate ownership structure:

  • Jim Ratcliffe     62%
  • Andrew Currie  19%
  • John Reece      19%

And, BTW, Oracle did pay for their sponsorship. We're unlikely ever to know how much LE personally kicked in.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct on Ineos. However there is still a difference between a private company and its owners. No I am not an investor adviser but I do own a company so I'd better know the difference between the company's money and mine, otherwise the taxman would be only too pleased to explain the difference.

Plenty who appear to be a position to know have said Oracle paid only for corporate hospitality, the vast bulk was LE's. As you are dead, I'm not sure why you would be better informed than they are on that point.

Share this post


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

And, BTW, Oracle did pay for their sponsorship. We're unlikely ever to know how much LE personally kicked in.

My understanding (from I think it was TE) is that LE did fund it personally, in ‘real’ ‘take-home’ ‘after-tax’ money - as opposed to using Corporate funds and whatever write-offs can be had by going that route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

So, to make up the number you trash some teams...

If you regarded GTF at a *serious* contender to win the cup then that's up to you but I think you'll find yourself in the minority of cup watchers. Even Cammas indicated that although this was an experience he couldn't turn down (who would!) he also publically stated their gear and boat was a generation behind. 

SBTJ was perhaps more serious, but hardly fair to count them as an independent contender vs the alternate template of OTUSA that they were, and of those two OTUSA was certainly the top/A grade option. Hence me referring to them as the B team.

No trash, just stating the facts.

Share this post


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

My understanding (from I think it was TE) is that LE did fund it personally, in ‘real’ ‘take-home’ ‘after-tax’ money - as opposed to using Corporate funds and whatever write-offs can be had by going that route.

Do you think the board and shareholders would have approved such a spend?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody (SR?) know if the percentage of Prada shares on the market is still just 20%?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luna Rossa challenge get the ball rolling with a new TP52

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rh2600 said:

SBTJ was perhaps more serious, but hardly fair to count them as an independent contender vs the alternate template of OTUSA that they were, and of those two OTUSA was certainly the top/A grade option. Hence me referring to them as the B team.

Bullshit, they had a great designer, an excellent sailing team, and they damn nearly beat Artemis!

Despite GD’s constant, accusatory BS about them they provided no help whatsoever to OR and there is zero evidence they were intended to be only that. Who knows, their light-air foils configuration may have been even better suited than Oracle’s, had they made it that far?

Share this post


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

Bullshit, they had a great designer, an excellent sailing team, and they damn nearly beat Artemis!

Despite GD’s constant, accusatory BS about them they provided no help whatsoever to OR and there is zero evidence they were intended to be only that.

Apart from the pre-start practice they provided to Oracle Team USA after they were eliminated, as well as all the two boat testing the two teams did together.

Share this post


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

Apart from the pre-start practice they provided to Oracle Team USA after they were eliminated, as well as all the two boat testing the two teams did together.

They ‘pre-start practiced’ on maybe two evenings, after the wind died down, after (iirc) ETNZ was already up by 3-1. Made no difference whatsoever and the last person needing suddenly learn start practice was JS. JS simply had the wrong boat for the Cup conditions.

The only reason you trash SBTJ is because you are a blind sheep follower of any and every GD conspiracy theory!

Share this post


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

Bullshit, they had a great designer, an excellent sailing team, and they damn nearly beat Artemis!

Despite GD’s constant, accusatory BS about them they provided no help whatsoever to OR and there is zero evidence they were intended to be only that.

Bullshit? You are now discussing how serious they were - I conceded they might have been more *serious* than say GTF, but they are still hard to count as a legitimate independent challenge given their partnership/dependancy with Oracle.

JS and DB openly stated the SBJT boat programme was derivative of OTUSA's. In the same breath JS then went on to say that they didn't give them 'all the good stuff'. Do you need me to find the presser video or do you recall? Perhaps they had an excellent sailing team (I'm probably a bigger DB fan than most), but they simply wouldn't have existed without the influence/support/help/backing of OTUSA, and of the two OTUSA had a significant advantage.

The team was created entirely under the auspices of OTUSA and dissolved accordingly directly after OTUSA ceased to exist. To suggest that SBTJ was anything more than that is pure fantasy.

If Matteo De Nora announced a billionaire mate of his who had never had any relationship with sailing in his life had thrown some money behind a new 'insta-team' from Greece, and their all their IP was coming from ETNZ and there would be sharing of data moving forward (if the rules still permitted), along with a bunch of mercenaries to form a team, I don't think many here would accept it as a legitimate stand-alone challenge.

Share this post


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

They ‘pre-start practiced’ on maybe two evenings, after the wind died down, after (iirc) ETNZ was already up by 3-1. Made no difference whatsoever and the last person needing suddenly learn start practice was JS. JS simply had the wrong boat for the Cup conditions.

The only reason you trash SBTJ is because you are a blind sheep follower of any and every GD conspiracy theory!

That it 'made no difference' does not negate a partnership...

"You tried to murder that guy when you shot him in the head!"
"No I didn't! I missed and it made no difference!"
"Oh alright then"...

There were people in SBTJ who were actually on OTUSA's payroll FFS - I can't believe we are still debating this... talk about blind!

Share this post


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

They ‘pre-start practiced’ on maybe two evenings, after the wind died down, after (iirc) ETNZ was already up by 3-1. Made no difference whatsoever and the last person needing suddenly learn start practice was JS. JS simply had the wrong boat for the Cup conditions.

James Spithill was the ONLY person needing Pre start practice at that point. He was getting dominated in the start box by a rookie! Are you kidding after what happened in San Francisco at 8-1 compared to 3-1, of course it could have made a difference!! 

The only reason you trash SBTJ is because you are a blind sheep follower of any and every GD conspiracy theory!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The deal with SBTJ was one whereby OR sold a base boat built to the one design rules and that SBTJ then developed it. The foils were all the work of SBTJ and the information on the foils was not shared. Many think that SBTJ probably did a better job on foil design than OR. What I never liked and was highly suspicious was that SBTJ was always far more competitive against other teams than they were against OR. How come they took races off Artemis when OR couldn't, yet consistently lost to OR?

36 minutes ago, rh2600 said:

If Matteo De Nora announced a billionaire mate of his who had never had any relationship with sailing in his life had thrown some money behind a new 'insta-team' from Greece, and their all their IP was coming from ETNZ and there would be sharing of data moving forward (if the rules still permitted), along with a bunch of mercenaries to form a team, I don't think many here would accept it as a legitimate stand-alone challenge.

Just a bit of hyperbole. Mercenaries? I guess you are saying any sailor employed by a team of a different nationality than the team is a mercenary, or is it all paid sailors? What makes Dean Barker sailing for SBTJ a mercenary and Glenn Ashby sailing for ETNZ not? I also seem to remember that in AC34, ETNZ sold its design to a team and collaborated with that team in design matters (something that didn't happen with SBTJ who simply bought a package). That team also has "mercenaries" because it was Italian while its 2 helms were British and they had other non Italian sailors. ETNZ and LR trained together. It doesn't matter that SBTJ was new when LR wasn't. On the key things, the situation was very similar.

I would ask one more question. So what? Did anybody break any rules? The answer is no. I also think it is pretty disrespectful to all those at SBTJ because even coming into the AC the way they did, it takes a huge effort to get on the water and get to a point of being reasonably competitive, not withstanding that they were the first team to master the foiling tack. 

Share this post


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

The deal with SBTJ was one whereby OR sold a base boat built to the one design rules and that SBTJ then developed it. The foils were all the work of SBTJ and the information on the foils was not shared. Many think that SBTJ probably did a better job on foil design than OR. What I never liked and was highly suspicious was that SBTJ was always far more competitive against other teams than they were against OR. How come they took races off Artemis when OR couldn't, yet consistently lost to OR?

Just a bit of hyperbole. Mercenaries? I guess you are saying any sailor employed by a team of a different nationality than the team is a mercenary, or is it all paid sailors? What makes Dean Barker sailing for SBTJ a mercenary and Glenn Ashby sailing for ETNZ not? I also seem to remember that in AC34, ETNZ sold its design to a team and collaborated with that team in design matters (something that didn't happen with SBTJ who simply bought a package). That team also has "mercenaries" because it was Italian while its 2 helms were British and they had other non Italian sailors. ETNZ and LR trained together. It doesn't matter that SBTJ was new when LR wasn't. On the key things, the situation was very similar.

I would ask one more question. So what? Did anybody break any rules? The answer is no. I also think it is pretty disrespectful to all those at SBTJ because even coming into the AC the way they did, it takes a huge effort to get on the water and get to a point of being reasonably competitive, not withstanding that they were the first team to master the foiling tack. 

The first team to "publicly disclose" that they had mastered the foiling tack. Rumour was ETNZ were foil tacking at will back in New Zealand before that video was ever released. Not surprising considering by the end of the AC Oracle had tried to copy ETNZ's tacking style.

 

Share this post


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

The deal with SBTJ was one whereby OR sold a base boat built to the one design rules and that SBTJ then developed it. The foils were all the work of SBTJ and the information on the foils was not shared. Many think that SBTJ probably did a better job on foil design than OR. What I never liked and was highly suspicious was that SBTJ was always far more competitive against other teams than they were against OR. How come they took races off Artemis when OR couldn't, yet consistently lost to OR?

Just a bit of hyperbole. Mercenaries? I guess you are saying any sailor employed by a team of a different nationality than the team is a mercenary, or is it all paid sailors? What makes Dean Barker sailing for SBTJ a mercenary and Glenn Ashby sailing for ETNZ not? I also seem to remember that in AC34, ETNZ sold its design to a team and collaborated with that team in design matters (something that didn't happen with SBTJ who simply bought a package). That team also has "mercenaries" because it was Italian while its 2 helms were British and they had other non Italian sailors. ETNZ and LR trained together. It doesn't matter that SBTJ was new when LR wasn't. On the key things, the situation was very similar.

I would ask one more question. So what? Did anybody break any rules? The answer is no. I also think it is pretty disrespectful to all those at SBTJ because even coming into the AC the way they did, it takes a huge effort to get on the water and get to a point of being reasonably competitive, not withstanding that they were the first team to master the foiling tack. 

If the only problem you have now have with my position is the use of the word mercenaries then I'll happily retract, or apply to all and sundry in AC. It's a trivial thing.

In regards to your question of 'So what?' I am not disrespecting the people or effort of STBJ, (as stated I'm a fan of DB and personally corresponded with him in regards to his efforts in AC35).

So if you want to include them in a list of 5 'serious' contenders, then so be it, but given the debate has been around whether AC36 budgets/design/location has actually resulted in increased accessibility for teams and consequently increased participation - and that 4 is regarded as a failure by some, I'd argue that SBTJ can't be included as a measure of how accessible AC35 was given that they wouldn't have been there without the support/deal with OTUSA. See?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rh2600 said:

I'd argue that SBTJ .............................wouldn't have been there without the support/deal with OTUSA. See?

So what? LR wouldn't have been in AC34 without the deal with ETNZ. It doesn't matter. You can do the same this time around. Any of the teams can sell their IP to jump start another team. It's not like SBTJ got a free ride. The whole purpose of the rule that applied for AC34 and 35 a version and which is in the current protocol is to make the event more accessible, particularly to anybody new to the game. It would be a pretty pointless rule to have in the protocol if they didn't think somebody might take advantage of it and how do we know whether there are talks going on between teams about taking advantage of that rule?

This is all mute. SBTJ were in AC35 and they weren't just there to make up numbers. They acquitted themselves well.

Share this post


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

Still only see three solid teams.  One of the 4 is magical but I wouldn't put it in the solid category just yet.

WetHog  :ph34r:

They certainly look far enough down the track that it would a pretty big turn around to suddenly pull the plug now, you don't go hiring rather expensive sailors on the off chance you might be challenging and they are appear to have enough access to cash to make finances an unlikely reason to pull out which is usually the killer of smaller potential teams.

Share this post


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

Patience...All will be revealed in good time. There was talk of a Chinese team, and a second Italian team, so that would make Luna Rossa, INEOS Team GB, American Magic, a second Italian challenger, a second American team, and a Chinese team. Pretty healthy if its actually true...

This is exactly the best case scenario at this time. However (since I am the self-declared negative Nelly when it comes to number of teams) I say that you still need to apply probabilities to each of these and that will get you to the most likely number of teams that make the starting line. For a long time I've been saying 4 is the number, but now I'm going up to 5. 

On the plus side of the ledger: Sir Ben has lined up significant money, a second American team has gone from rumor to rumor-in-the-press, and American Magic has made no indications of being scared off by the rising budget estimates. 

On the down side of the ledger: Everyone in Australia has either thrown up their hands or shrugged their shoulders and walked away, the second Italian team has made no noise at all, no one else out of Europe has made any positive indications, and the estimated budget to compete is not headed in a team-friendly direction.

Share this post


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

This is exactly the best case scenario at this time. However (since I am the self-declared negative Nelly when it comes to number of teams) I say that you still need to apply probabilities to each of these and that will get you to the most likely number of teams that make the starting line. For a long time I've been saying 4 is the number, but now I'm going up to 5. 

On the plus side of the ledger: Sir Ben has lined up significant money, a second American team has gone from rumor to rumor-in-the-press, and American Magic has made no indications of being scared off by the rising budget estimates. 

On the down side of the ledger: Everyone in Australia has either thrown up their hands or shrugged their shoulders and walked away, the second Italian team has made no noise at all, no one else out of Europe has made any positive indications, and the estimated budget to compete is not headed in a team-friendly direction.

I agree, chances of all of these are slim. Even if they launch soon they are in GTF territory of just doing it for fun and not being competitive. Except here it's even harder to see a "discount" challenger as there is no design precedence to shoot down the middle with. 

We have 3 super-funded teams that should be fun to watch, not sure where NZ is on money but they'll be fine, but the costs are soaring with GB leapfrogging sponsors, it's not a less expensive cup to attract more teams as the initial idea presented. 

Also, on the teams not being funded by billionaires, yes all of these teams are being funded by a company, but all of them happen to be owned/founded by extremely wealthy individuals who put their names on the projects as well. For TNZ we don't see the founding families of Toyota and Emirates giving interviews as they are sponsors. Just as Oracle was Ellison's team and Artemis was Tornqvist's, LR is Bertelli's team, AM/NYYC is the joint venture of Fauth/Devos, and according to Land Rover's statements "Land Rover was notified that Ineos had bought the team" and Ainslie said "Amazingly, Jim agreed to underwrite the entire campaign." Where the funding comes from is basically semantics, it is the few wealthy people behind it making the big 3 now happen, with TNZ being the typical sports sponsorship approach of sponsors that can change and the entity remains. 

Share this post


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

This is exactly the best case scenario at this time. However (since I am the self-declared negative Nelly when it comes to number of teams) I say that you still need to apply probabilities to each of these and that will get you to the most likely number of teams that make the starting line. For a long time I've been saying 4 is the number, but now I'm going up to 5. 

On the plus side of the ledger: Sir Ben has lined up significant money, a second American team has gone from rumor to rumor-in-the-press, and American Magic has made no indications of being scared off by the rising budget estimates. 

On the down side of the ledger: Everyone in Australia has either thrown up their hands or shrugged their shoulders and walked away, the second Italian team has made no noise at all, no one else out of Europe has made any positive indications, and the estimated budget to compete is not headed in a team-friendly direction.

Absolutely, it is absolutely the best scenario, but its a scenario which is looking more likely than the worst scenario at this stage. There is provision for 6 Challenger Team bases, including Luna Rossa's base, 7 including the Viaduct Events Centre, So one would assume Dalton and ETNZ at least had a verbal commitment or something, or had contingency plans for back up teams incase those who had priority pulled the plug, otherwise it would be a huge waste of money building bases on Americas Cup row which aren't going to be occupied, especially in the environment which was publicly exposed during the negotiation period. The 6 challenger team scenario looks more likely than not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, rh2600 said:

If you regarded GTF at a *serious* contender to win the cup then that's up to you but I think you'll find yourself in the minority of cup watchers. Even Cammas indicated that although this was an experience he couldn't turn down (who would!) he also publically stated their gear and boat was a generation behind. 

SBTJ was perhaps more serious, but hardly fair to count them as an independent contender vs the alternate template of OTUSA that they were, and of those two OTUSA was certainly the top/A grade option. Hence me referring to them as the B team.

No trash, just stating the facts.

TJ was be a danger for any team and TF beat the brits.

TF was not a social team,, TJ was not a B team, I find it pretty insulting for both and moreover, nothing to do with facts.

If you do the same way with teams for next AC how many real ones then ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, sclarke said:

Patience...All will be revealed in good time. There was talk of a Chinese team, and a second Italian team, so that would make Luna Rossa, INEOS Team GB, American Magic, a second Italian challenger, a second American team, and a Chinese team. Pretty healthy if its actually true...

Where are the press releases. According to you, without those, its just gossip with nothing to back it up. Can you please explain why it's OK for you to do it and expect us to take your word for it, but if anybody else does it you attack them?

Share this post


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

Where are the press releases. According to you, without those, its just gossip with nothing to back it up. Can you please explain why it's OK for you to do it and expect us to take your word for it, but if anybody else does it you attack them?

1) https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2018/03/10/americas-cup-china-wants-win/

2) http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/sport/2018/03/chinese-team-may-be-entering-the-america-s-cup.html

3) http://www.sacbee.com/sports/article210012049.html

See above ^^ See how it works? Its pretty simple really. And if you read the above "Press Releases" they don't state any confirmed deatils, but then again, they don't need to, but there is information out there, if you look for it. Again, where is the so-called information about boats being modified/ built and personnel confirmed )ie Iain Murray, Russel Coutts? and Teams confirmed? There's nothing because its nothing but wishful thinking.

Share this post


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

1) https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2018/03/10/americas-cup-china-wants-win/

2) http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/sport/2018/03/chinese-team-may-be-entering-the-america-s-cup.html

3) http://www.sacbee.com/sports/article210012049.html

See above ^^ See how it works? Its pretty simple really. And if you read the above "Press Releases" they don't state any confirmed deatils, but then again, they don't need to, but there is information out there, if you look for it. Again, where is the so-called information about boats being modified/ built and personnel confirmed )ie Iain Murray, Russel Coutts? and Teams confirmed? There's nothing because its nothing but wishful thinking.

Woulda, shoulda, coulda .....  Get real. These are at best vaporware, wishful thinking, trial balloons. Absolutely zero official announcements. Which of course you have acknowledged. In other words you are contradicting yourself.

If you want some respect around here, know what you're talking about.  A "Press Release" is a written or digital announcement from a team or team leader with hard news about intents or advances. A good press release is never in the third person. It should include direct quotes from responsible individuals.

Which is not to say China or other challenges will emerge. But for now it's just bar talk

For the avoidance of doubt, even a typically off-the-wall Tweet from Donald the Trumpeter is NOT a Press Release!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, KiwiJoker said:

Woulda, shoulda, coulda .....  Get real. These are at best vaporware, wishful thinking, trial balloons. Absolutely zero official announcements. Which of course you have acknowledged. In other words you are contradicting yourself.

If you want some respect around here, know what you're talking about.  A "Press Release" is a written or digital announcement from a team or team leader with hard news about intents or advances. A good press release is never in the third person. It should include direct quotes from responsible individuals.

A press release is actually "an official statement issued to newspapers giving information on a particular matter" Which is exactly what the articles above do. It is nothing to do with "Teams" or "Hard information". A "good press release" is also subjective.

Which is not to say China or other challenges will emerge. But for now it's just bar talk

But there is information being circulated by someone from an official news agency, in this case, Sailing Scuttlebutt/ Sail-World and not just "I spoke to a guy the other day who told me...No one else is reporting it or talking about it, but everyone please believe me.

For the avoidance of doubt, even a typically off-the-wall Tweet from Donald the Trumpeter is NOT a Press Release!

But if CNN announces it, they need to ensure their sources are somewhat correct. Which is a press release.

 

Share this post


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

 

That is not what a press release is. Just because it is "in the press" does not make it a press release.  You are a fucking moron.

idiot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

TJ was be a danger for any team and TF beat the brits.

TF was not a social team,, TJ was not a B team, I find it pretty insulting for both and moreover, nothing to do with facts.

If you do the same way with teams for next AC how many real ones then ?

Until a team (however talented) appears at the last minute with a cheap concession and someone else's old test boat, or ETNZ offers to share their IP with another team that is basically a surrogate for their main effort I'd say we currently have 4 serious contenders for the cup.

But good on you for being insulted on behalf of GTF for me stating what Cammas already said...

Share this post


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

Woulda, shoulda, coulda .....  Get real. These are at best vaporware, wishful thinking, trial balloons. Absolutely zero official announcements. Which of course you have acknowledged. In other words you are contradicting yourself.

If you want some respect around here, know what you're talking about.  A "Press Release" is a written or digital announcement from a team or team leader with hard news about intents or advances. A good press release is never in the third person. It should include direct quotes from responsible individuals.

Which is not to say China or other challenges will emerge. But for now it's just bar talk

For the avoidance of doubt, even a typically off-the-wall Tweet from Donald the Trumpeter is NOT a Press Release!

https://money.howstuffworks.com/business-communications/how-press-releases-work1.htm

'"A press release should read like a news story, written in third-person, citing quotes and sources and containing standard press release information"

Next time, before you get into someone elses conversation, get the basics right first.

 

Share this post


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

That is not what a press release is. Just because it is "in the press" does not make it a press release.  You are a fucking moron.

idiot.jpg

It seems thats exactly what it means.

Share this post


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

https://money.howstuffworks.com/business-communications/how-press-releases-work1.htm

'"A press release should read like a news story, written in third-person, citing quotes and sources and containing standard press release information"

Next time, before you get into someone elses conversation, get the basics right first.

 

"A press release is a short, compelling news story written by a public relations professional and sent to targeted members of the media." 

 

Were those "press releases" written by a PR person on behalf of these teams and sent to the media publishing them like an actual press release? 

Or are they news articles written by journalists discussing rumours and speculations of possible team?

Share this post


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

"A press release is a short, compelling news story written by a public relations professional and sent to targeted members of the media." 

 

Were those "press releases" written by a PR person on behalf of these teams and sent to the media publishing them like an actual press release? 

Or are they news articles written by journalists discussing rumours and speculations of possible team?

Are they not short and compelling? I'd say both, given we've both, well at least I have, read them, along with many other people. If its published in the public domain, on a website such as Sailing Scuttlebutt and Sail World, its obviously been vetted for that purpose. The purpose of releasing information regarding the subject, to the sailing audience (Target Audience). So the articles tick every single box you describe.

Share this post


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

Are they not short and compelling? I'd say both, given we've both, well at least I have, read them, along with many other people. If its published in the public domain, on a website such as Sailing Scuttlebutt and Sail World, its obviously been vetted for that purpose. The purpose of releasing information regarding the subject, to the sailing audience (Target Audience). So the articles tick every single box you describe.

Stop blathering you nitwit.  

Pay attention.

Kawasaki has nailed it, and you too it appears.

The three links you offered as "Press Releases" were each half-baked, unverified rumours.

Share this post


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

https://money.howstuffworks.com/business-communications/how-press-releases-work1.htm

'"A press release should read like a news story, written in third-person, citing quotes and sources and containing standard press release information"

Next time, before you get into someone elses conversation, get the basics right first.

"Next time, before you get into someone elses conversation, get the basics right first."

Unlike you, I don't need to go searching for definitions of Press Releases.  I've lived this stuff for 60 years.

That's a pretty turgid Press Release in Mr. Roos' example.

And guess what?  It includes a long first person quote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, rh2600 said:

Until a team (however talented) appears at the last minute with a cheap concession and someone else's old test boat, or ETNZ offers to share their IP with another team that is basically a surrogate for their main effort I'd say we currently have 4 serious contenders for the cup.

 

No, I will do like you, I'll wait for the results and trash the teams that were not racing the AC.

Share this post


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

They certainly look far enough down the track that it would a pretty big turn around to suddenly pull the plug now, you don't go hiring rather expensive sailors on the off chance you might be challenging and they are appear to have enough access to cash to make finances an unlikely reason to pull out which is usually the killer of smaller potential teams.

All we know is the team would rep the NYYC, it has backers, a Skipper, a Helmsman and other affiliations.  But no team HQ, no website, no sponsors and little to no details on their design team.  Other potential AC teams have been this "far enough down the track" and never sailed in a LVC.  

NYYC affiliation gives the magical American's street cred but there is still a lot more details and financial commitments that need to be made by this team to get to the "solid" level, IMO.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, sclarke said:

Apart from the pre-start practice they provided to Oracle Team USA after they were eliminated, as well as all the two boat testing the two teams did together.

Not sure why you Kiwi's keep bringing up SBTJ like its a big deal.  It was no different than LR basically being ETNZ's B boat for AC34.  Let it go already.

WetHog  :ph34r:

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Not sure why you Kiwi's keep bringing up SBTJ like its a big deal.  It was no different than LR basically being ETNZ's B boat for AC34.  Let it go already.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Challenger/Defender....same same (WetHog - AC Expert  :ph34r:)

Protocol approved/Protocol prohibited....same same (WetHog - AC Expert  :ph34r:)

Team created out of thin air/Long term AC competitor....same same (WetHog - AC Expert  :ph34r:)

Yeah right.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/1/2018 at 11:21 PM, sclarke said:

Patience...All will be revealed in good time. There was talk of a Chinese team, and a second Italian team, so that would make Luna Rossa, INEOS Team GB, American Magic, a second Italian challenger, a second American team, and a Chinese team. Pretty healthy if its actually true...

Luna Rossa, Ainslie & 1 team from NYYC...  The Chinese will be a maybe and non-competitive if they really exist, the 2nd Italian team is also a maybe (and probably funded by Patrizio Bertelli just to fill out the fleet (see SoftBank Team Japan)).  They'll be a Prada B-team at best if they exist.  The 2nd American team won't happen as it is supposedly also coming out of the NYYC.  NYYC isn't going to split its focus and resources between two teams.

Share this post


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

Challenger/Defender....same same (WetHog - AC Expert  :ph34r:)

Protocol approved/Protocol prohibited....same same (WetHog - AC Expert  :ph34r:)

Team created out of thin air/Long term AC competitor....same same (WetHog - AC Expert  :ph34r:)

Yeah right.

No expert but you make me look smart on a regular basis.  Thank you. 

WetHog  :ph34r:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something tells me that if anyone else but our magical, amazing kiwis had "4 solid teams" it would be judged a fucking disaster instead of the amazing success they have deemed it. Seriously you douchebags would make excellent Trump supporters. You just some red Make America's Cup Great Again hats.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

No, I will do like you, I'll wait for the results and trash the teams that were not racing the AC.

You aren't even making any sense...

Share this post


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

"Next time, before you get into someone elses conversation, get the basics right first."

Unlike you, I don't need to go searching for definitions of Press Releases.  I've lived this stuff for 60 years.

That's a pretty turgid Press Release in Mr. Roos' example.

And guess what?  It includes a long first person quote.

Unlike you, I get the facts right before lecturing someone about whats right. Just because you've lived it for sixty years doesn't mean you've been doing it right. I bet Bill Cosby thought what he'd been living for sixty years was right too!

You're opinion doesn't mean shit, all that matters is what is correct. You tried to lecture me without ensuring your facts were correct. I gave you correct definitions, and you gave me "I don't need correct definitions, I've lived it for sixty years" Woopty f**kng doo. Again, get your facts right before you lecture someone else. 

 

Share this post


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

Something tells me that if anyone else but our magical, amazing kiwis had "4 solid teams" it would be judged a fucking disaster instead of the amazing success they have deemed it. Seriously you douchebags would make excellent Trump supporters. You just some red Make America's Cup Great Again hats.

Again please point to anyone declaring 4 entrants years out from any regatta a "disaster", or even AC35s line-up for that matter. And  please point out anyone declaring the current 4 an 'amazing success'.

It must be a fun existence making hyperbolic shit up just to argue against it. 

Btw - What's the name of your imaginary friend?

Share this post


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

No expert but you make me look smart on a regular basis.  Thank you. 

WetHog  :ph34r:

Well, anyone who thinks LR and SBTJ are the same thing is hardly beating down the door at Mensa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rh2600 said:

Well, anyone who thinks LR and SBTJ are the same thing is hardly beating down the door at Mensa.

Established team or not, both were defacto surrogates for another AC team.  That is indisputable and my point.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rh2600 said:

Again please point to anyone declaring 4 entrants years out from any regatta a "disaster", or even AC35s line-up for that matter. And  please point out anyone declaring the current 4 an 'amazing success'.

It must be a fun existence making hyperbolic shit up just to argue against it. 

Btw - What's the name of your imaginary friend?

I’m not going to waste time digging through ancient threads, but it was a common theme among many Kiwi fanboys to bag on the past two Cups based on the amount of entrants. 

I personally don’t care as long as there’s a defender and a challenger, just saying he isn’t wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rh2600 said:

Again please point to anyone declaring 4 entrants years out from any regatta a "disaster",

If I take your flexible AC definitions there are two real teams,  a B one and a social one, which makes 2 real teams. :D

Share this post


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

Established team or not, both were defacto surrogates for another AC team.  That is indisputable and my point.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

I totally missed the part where LR were competing in AC34... must have had my TV on the wrong channel when they raced...

I also must be confusing the AC34 LR that magically appeared in AC34 with funding/IP/partnership with the defender, with the other LR that had existed for the better part of 15 years before said regatta, and continues to exist beyond their deal with the defender.

That irony is that it's OTUSA fans who are most strongly trying to detach SBTJ from any dependance/relationship with Oracle - betraying their own argument in the process. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

^ But I forgot, your definitions only work one way :)

Nothing of the sort - it's just fucking boring and pointless for people to make vague accusations of outrageous statements that no-one actually said, about positions that no-one actually holds, attach them to a group, and then hammer that group.

It's the equivalent of the NRA saying "Democrats want to take away your guns! We say protect the 2nd amendment!".

If the first statement was actually true, who would disagree with the second?

"ETNZ fans called AC34 a disaster for only having 4 entrants! And now they claim their 4 now is an amazing success!. We call hypocrisy!"

Again, if the first statement was actually true, who would disagree with the second?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, rh2600 said:

Again please point to anyone declaring 4 entrants years out from any regatta a "disaster"

ac34

it would be you, indio and sclarke who were saying that it was a fucking awful regatta because of the low enteries

no matter what happens this cup cycle though, no-one will be as much of a fucking joke and disgrace to the sport as luna rossa were in the 72's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, inebriated said:

ac34

it would be you, indio and sclarke who were saying that it was a fucking awful regatta because of the low enteries

no matter what happens this cup cycle though, no-one will be as much of a fucking joke and disgrace to the sport as luna rossa were in the 72's

Awww sure thing bud... please find such statements by *anyone* on here declaring as such let alone either of us three... and whilst you are going back to learn some history, be prepared to discover that there were fourteen official notices of entry into AC34, with many (12!) falling away for due to how things panned out... (and the debate around the roll the defender had in this attrition)

Laughable that this kicked off due to an alleged disrespect due to me stating that SBTJ and GTF weren't typical 'serious challenges' and we've now clueless munters like you calling LR a "fucking joke" for what? Withdrawing like the other 80% of challengers in the regatta? Do please enlighten us with your cluelessness - hahaha.