Kiwing

How many challengers will there be?

How many challengers?  

90 members have voted

  1. 1. How many challengers will race the Prada Cup?

    • 3 - that is no new challengers
    • 4 that is one new challengers
    • 5 that is two new challengers
    • 6 that is three new challengers
    • more than three new challengers


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Isn't it why we are here for ? Or we can just post links and cut & paste, boring. I don't oblige you or anybody to share my guess. I don't pretend, I may right or wrong, w'll see, part of the fun here.

Agreed! This is a Discussion Forum. People have different Opinions. And it's certainly not a Forum where we have to say "Yes and Amen" to this Bertelli show. Time for Dalts to grow some balls here against P$B.

Share this post


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

The CoR is The Challenger, it is not chosen.

That was clearly the intention of the authors of the DoG. However in recent history defenders have not been so casual as to permit a challenge from a hostile challenger and AC36 is no exception. The CoR was chosen.

Share this post


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

Agreed! This is a Discussion Forum. People have different Opinions. And it's certainly not a Forum where we have to say "Yes and Amen" to this Bertelli show. Time for Dalts to grow some balls here against P$B.

It'd be okay if you had something, anything factual, but you don't. You just say anything that pops into your head even if its clearly not true, with nothing to back it up with. And then you tell people to stop bullying you when you get called out on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe I'm saying this but, after reading all the drivel from AFE I'm coming around to your point of view, remarkable since I once considered you for ignore status (for the record I'm still taking SA "unfiltered").

I actually like the COR & would love to see them win the whole thing, it's shake ups in the general order that I love the most (except for the current POTUS), that's why I was pulling for Cayard & IL Moro all those years ago.

And barring an LR win I could go for another round of you guys keeping the "big shiny".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, it is part and parcel of the fun. But normally conjecture starts with some observation of a fact, whether an article,a picture,a video...some yellow lines.

Where do you get"I'm pretty sure the cor is blocking" from? Linky?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

That was clearly the intention of the authors of the DoG. However in recent history defenders have not been so casual as to permit a challenge from a hostile challenger and AC36 is no exception. The CoR was chosen.

You can't know this.
Probably it went like always: The CoR approached the soon-to-be Defender, of course before the soon-to-be Defender, resp. its team crossed the finish line, and agreed that it would challenge in case the soon-to-be Defender wins. There was no choice involved, it's still a challenge, as the initiative came from the CoR. It's not like several YCs were fighting each other to lodge their challenge, at least not to out knowledge.
I assume that there weren't any other YCs/teams around that wanted to be CoR anyway. Usually it's not a position a YC/team wants to be in.

Share this post


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

You can't know this.
Probably it went like always: The CoR approached the soon-to-be Defender, of course before the soon-to-be Defender, resp. its team crossed the finish line, and agreed that it would challenge in case the soon-to-be Defender wins. There was no choice involved, it's still a challenge, as the initiative came from the CoR. It's not like several YCs were fighting each other to lodge their challenge, at least not to out knowledge.
I assume that there weren't any other YCs/teams around that wanted to be CoR anyway. Usually it's not a position a YC/team wants to be in.

Oh, yes he can. You're pretty naive if you think that there wasn't collaboration between the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron and the Circolo della Vela Sicilia behind the scenes before the New Zealanders crossed the Final Finish Line in Bermuda and the Italians signed up as CoR. It's always been that way. Do you really think for example BMW Oracle signed up as CoR at the last minute when Alinghi crossed as Winners of AC 31? No, because there is months of planning involved.

And renaming the LVC the PRADA CUP after the AC 36 Protocol had been released was purely acting in self-interest by Patrizio - Period. Naming it PRADA CUP but sponsoring his own Italian Entry with the PRADA BRAND does create a huge "conflict of interest".

You are severly underestimating Mr. Bertellis intentions here. After coming up short several times that guy will go over dead people to win this thing. He doesn't care if he wins it legally or illegally. He just wants to win it.

While Dalts can be a bit of a hypocrite sometimes which the cost thingy I commend him for trying to put up a great show in 2020/2021 for Auckland, the NZ Economy, Spectators, etc. Make no mistake, Dalts wants as many Teams/Challenges involved, Mr. Bertelli doesn't because with every new Challenger being accepted his chances of winning it are dimming. Mark my words: At the end of the AC 36 Cycle Bertelli is going to be Dalts worst nightmare.

I can't believe I am saying this but should the AC 36 Match be between New Zealand and Italy all the Kiwis here on this board will have "The biggest Supporter Ever" pulling for a Kiwi Team because if the Italians win and that Italian Clown gets his hands on the Trophy the Cup is dead.

Share this post


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

Oh, yes he can. You're pretty naive if you think that there wasn't collaboration between the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron and the Circolo della Vela Sicilia behind the scenes before the New Zealanders crossed the Final Finish Line in Bermuda and the Italians signed up as CoR. It's always been that way. Do you really think for example BMW Oracle signed up as CoR at the last minute when Alinghi crossed as Winners of AC 31? No, because there is months of planning involved.

And renaming the LVC the PRADA CUP after the AC 36 Protocol had been released was purely acting in self-interest by Patrizio - Period. Naming it PRADA CUP but sponsoring his own Italian Entry with the PRADA BRAND does create a huge "conflict of interest".

You are severly underestimating Mr. Bertellis intentions here. After coming up short several times that guy will go over dead people to win this thing. He doesn't care if he wins it legally or illegally. He just wants to win it.

While Dalts can be a bit of a hypocrite sometimes which the cost thingy I commend him for trying to put up a great show in 2020/2021 for Auckland, the NZ Economy, Spectators, etc. Make no mistake, Dalts wants as many Teams/Challenges involved, Mr. Bertelli doesn't because with every new Challenger being accepted his chances of winning it are dimming. Mark my words: At the end of the AC 36 Cycle Bertelli is going to be Dalts worst nightmare.

I can't believe I am saying this but should the AC 36 Match be between New Zealand and Italy all the Kiwis here on this board will have "The biggest Supporter Ever" pulling for a Kiwi Team because if the Italians win and that Italian Clown gets his hands on the Trophy the Cup is dead.

Have you read my post at all?
While confirming what I wrote in your first paragraph, you reply to a totally different post that apparently only you read, but nobody wrote in the first place.
By the way, don't ever try to lecture me about the Deed. It's certainly not you who has the knowledge nor the format to do so. You can put your naïveté where the sun don't shine, A4E.
And now I follow so many here and will ignore you. Bye.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Oh, yes he can. You're pretty naive if you think that there wasn't collaboration between the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron and the Circolo della Vela Sicilia behind the scenes before the New Zealanders crossed the Final Finish Line in Bermuda and the Italians signed up as CoR. It's always been that way. Do you really think for example BMW Oracle signed up as CoR at the last minute when Alinghi crossed as Winners of AC 31? No, because there is months of planning involved.

And renaming the LVC the PRADA CUP after the AC 36 Protocol had been released was purely acting in self-interest by Patrizio - Period. Naming it PRADA CUP but sponsoring his own Italian Entry with the PRADA BRAND does create a huge "conflict of interest".

You are severly underestimating Mr. Bertellis intentions here. After coming up short several times that guy will go over dead people to win this thing. He doesn't care if he wins it legally or illegally. He just wants to win it.

While Dalts can be a bit of a hypocrite sometimes which the cost thingy I commend him for trying to put up a great show in 2020/2021 for Auckland, the NZ Economy, Spectators, etc. Make no mistake, Dalts wants as many Teams/Challenges involved, Mr. Bertelli doesn't because with every new Challenger being accepted his chances of winning it are dimming. Mark my words: At the end of the AC 36 Cycle Bertelli is going to be Dalts worst nightmare.

I can't believe I am saying this but should the AC 36 Match be between New Zealand and Italy all the Kiwis here on this board will have "The biggest Supporter Ever" pulling for a Kiwi Team because if the Italians win and that Italian Clown gets his hands on the Trophy the Cup is dead.

You just proved how ridiculous you can be. If it can survive Larry Ellison and Russell Coutts, it can survive anything

Share this post


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

Have you read my post at all?
While confirming what I wrote in your first paragraph, you reply to a totally different post that apparently only you read, but nobody wrote in the first place.
By the way, don't ever try to lecture me about the Deed. It's certainly not you who has the knowledge nor the format to do so. You can put your naïveté where the sun don't shine, A4E.
And now I follow so many here and will ignore you. Bye.

Don't lecture me what I have to read and what I don't have to read cuz you will come out 2nd best to that.

Crappy mfluder by the way does the same thing. He also reads what he wants to read and is good for ETNZ, the other things he ignores.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

You just proved how ridiculous you can be. If it can survive Larry Ellison and Russell Coutts, it can survive anything

LOL

Maybe to be "fair" they should just line up the Commodores of any and all yacht clubs that want to vie for CoR and as soon as the winner crosses the line they all race/scrummage to hand a paper challenge to the winning Commodore.  Might encourage young, fit club leadership during race years.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, dg_sailingfan said:

I don't think that's the problem T-C. The Problem is "Space in Auckland Habour". If Stars & Stripes are indeed building two boats Wynyard Point Inn is FULL so they have to find/free some space elsewhere and Auckland City Council do not know where at this Point.

I wonder if another limiting factor could be the production of canting mechanisms for the boats. With the mix of one and two boat campaigns it looks like maybe eight boats needing equipment? At two mechanisms per boat that's 16 units to be constructed, tested and maintained. Anybody know who is putting these things together, and what their production capacity is?

Cheers,

Earl

 

Share this post


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

I wonder if another limiting factor could be the production of canting mechanisms for the boats. With the mix of one and two boat campaigns it looks like maybe eight boats needing equipment? At two mechanisms per boat that's 16 units to be constructed, tested and maintained. Anybody know who is putting these things together, and what their production capacity is?

Cheers,

Earl

 

I don't know 100% Earl but I read somewhere that the foil arms are being constructed at Persico in Italy. Hope this helps.

Cheers,

dg_sailingfan

Share this post


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

I don't know 100% Earl but I read somewhere that the foil arms are being constructed at Persico in Italy. Hope this helps.

Cheers,

dg_sailingfan

Thanks. It's the digital-analog-electro-hydraulic gizmo inside the boat that I'm interested in.

Cheers,

Earl

Share this post


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

Under the Deed of Gift, and Protocol there is no such thing as a conditional Challenge. If your club complies with the Deed of Gift, and Protocol - provided that the Protocol does not over-ride the provisions of the Deed of Gift, then the Challenge has to be accepted by the Defender.

I think Gladwell is incorrect here. 

Where the defender has no flexibility is in accepting the FIRST valid challenge. Once that challenge is lodged, the defender is NOT ALLOWED to accept any other challenge until the first challenge is settled or challenger withdraws. 

The idea of there being a protocol that allows other challengers to join in a regatta to determine the ultimate challenger is completely controlled by the Protocol and, I would argue, is fundamentally controlled by the CoR. LR can set any rules it wants for what is essentially it's own private regatta. The defender then MUST hold a race against the winner of that regatta assuming that (a) it meets the criteria to be a valid challenger and (b) all other challengers who have letters of challenge lodged before them officially withdraw. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Don't lecture me what I have to read and what I don't have to read cuz you will come out 2nd best to that.

Crappy mfluder by the way does the same thing. He also reads what he wants to read and is good for ETNZ, the other things he ignores.

Haha don't blame me for the fact that you don't know anything about what you're talking about and just say any stupid thing you can think of at the time.  Do some research, its not hard to do.

 

Share this post


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

I think Gladwell is incorrect here. 

Where the defender has no flexibility is in accepting the FIRST valid challenge. Once that challenge is lodged, the defender is NOT ALLOWED to accept any other challenge until the first challenge is settled or challenger withdraws. 

The idea of there being a protocol that allows other challengers to join in a regatta to determine the ultimate challenger is completely controlled by the Protocol and, I would argue, is fundamentally controlled by the CoR. LR can set any rules it wants for what is essentially it's own private regatta. The defender then MUST hold a race against the winner of that regatta assuming that (a) it meets the criteria to be a valid challenger and (b) all other challengers who have letters of challenge lodged before them officially withdraw. 

 

 

That's a bad thing IMO otherwise I agree with what you've said.

Share this post


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

Haha don't blame me for the fact that you don't know anything about what you're talking about and just say any stupid thing you can think of at the time.  Do some research, its not hard to do.

 

Apparently A4E still has no clue that s/he agrees with me in his/her first para above. Reading comprehension and indeed research and knowledge are not his/her forte. Hence I would like to not have to read him/her be quoted.

Share this post


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

I think Gladwell is incorrect here. 

Where the defender has no flexibility is in accepting the FIRST valid challenge. Once that challenge is lodged, the defender is NOT ALLOWED to accept any other challenge until the first challenge is settled or challenger withdraws. 

The idea of there being a protocol that allows other challengers to join in a regatta to determine the ultimate challenger is completely controlled by the Protocol and, I would argue, is fundamentally controlled by the CoR. LR can set any rules it wants for what is essentially it's own private regatta. The defender then MUST hold a race against the winner of that regatta assuming that (a) it meets the criteria to be a valid challenger and (b) all other challengers who have letters of challenge lodged before them officially withdraw. 

 

 

IMO, Gladwell is right, a lot here seem to forget that in this protocol all challenges are deemed to be received at the same time, so how can you cherrypick one more than the other if they fullfill the Deed and protocol requirements ?

I am not part of those who agree either that the CSS is controlled by the CoR only, first the MC supercedes the conditions of the match, therefore includes the selection of the CoR, second the challengers send their challenge to the defender, not another challenger, that does not exist in the Deed.

Now, I wonder how different challenges can be deemed to be received at the same time while we know it's not possible, a challenger could ask why LR was chosen and not their own YC.

 

Share this post


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

IMO, Gladwell is right, a lot here seem to forget that in this protocol all challenges are deemed to be received at the same time, so how can you cherrypick one more than the other if they fullfill the Deed and protocol requirements ?

I am not part of those who agree either that the CSS is controlled by the CoR only, first the MC supercedes the conditions of the match, therefore includes the selection of the CoR, second the challengers send their challenge to the defender, not another challenger, that does not exist in the Deed.

Now, I wonder how different challenges can be deemed to be received at the same time while we know it's not possible, a challenger could ask why LR was chosen and not their own YC.

 

To be perfectly honest with you T-C I'm not very fond of Richard Gladwell. For me this guy is still a totally, purely partisan New Zealand hack often destroying New Zealands good Media Reporting on Sailing in general with his partisan writings. There are tons of better Sailing Journalists in NZ than him.

During the last Cycle claiming Ainslie's British Squad crashing into ETNZ to keep them out of the Cup was the last straw for me.

If I would live in NZ I would totally mob the guy on Social Media for his behaviour.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tornado-Cat said:

IMO, Gladwell is right, a lot here seem to forget that in this protocol all challenges are deemed to be received at the same time, so how can you cherrypick one more than the other if they fullfill the Deed and protocol requirements ?

I am not part of those who agree either that the CSS is controlled by the CoR only, first the MC supercedes the conditions of the match, therefore includes the selection of the CoR, second the challengers send their challenge to the defender, not another challenger, that does not exist in the Deed.

Now, I wonder how different challenges can be deemed to be received at the same time while we know it's not possible, a challenger could ask why LR was chosen and not their own YC.

 

Re. your last paragraph: Hasn't the first challenge been accepted before a protocol was in place? Hence the CoR challenge cannot be "deemed to be received at the same time". Again, LR was not "chosen", their challenge undisputedly came first and can be deemed to have been initiated by them.

Re. your second paragraph: There is no selecting of the CoR out of a mass of already entered challengers. The CoR has challenged before all the other challengers came on board, it was clear from the beginning, who the CoR is.
All other challengers need to comply to the DoG rules for challengers, in case they are "next in line" due to others losing during the CSS. They all could potentially face the Defender for The Match, therefore the Defender needs to - at least - be able to check, whether the DoG mandated requirements are met by all challengers. This is the part of the Defender in the CSS, and should be its only part there.

Re. your first paragraph: This is tricky. As long as only the respective CSS loser leaves the competition, it doesn't matter, who The Challenger (CoR) is at a given time.
But should another CoR withdrawal occur, it looks like the RNZYS could indeed choose the next CoR. Which is totally against the DoG and the spirit of the AC. There should have been a better, automated or otherwise more Defender independent succession plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have never seen the official challenge from LR/CVS have we?

I would really like to know with what kind of boat a COR is challenging. Is it a 90 foot just in case they can‘t mutually agree on a boat later?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. Interesting. So there is a lot of trust involved since the defender could easily say „thank you for challenging in a monohull, I will defend in a multihull“ (as happened before). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I think it was a consensual process which they both had a tuppence worth and finally, after a lot of pushing and pulling, agreed on an AC75.  I think COR still thinks there will be some displacement sailing in the races - maybe they should be right but given the great advantage of foiling it will be won by a 100% foiling boat ????

Share this post


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

Thanks. Interesting. So there is a lot of trust involved since the defender could easily say „thank you for challenging in a monohull, I will defend in a multihull“ (as happened before). 

Then the Challenger could withdraw and the Defender has no AC. Which, in this day and age of the AC as a commercial endeavor, would not be a favorable situation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if they will postpone races if the sea state is not conducive to foiling, or proceed in displacement mode. They are, after all, supposed to be sailboats. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think COR will want them to continue but I still think a 100% foiling boat will win ! and would foil in most conditions except maybe 5 knots which might them be displacement !

Share this post


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

Re. your last paragraph: Hasn't the first challenge been accepted before a protocol was in place? Hence the CoR challenge cannot be "deemed to be received at the same time". Again, LR was not "chosen", their challenge undisputedly came first and can be deemed to have been initiated by them.

Re. your second paragraph: There is no selecting of the CoR out of a mass of already entered challengers. The CoR has challenged before all the other challengers came on board, it was clear from the beginning, who the CoR is.
All other challengers need to comply to the DoG rules for challengers, in case they are "next in line" due to others losing during the CSS. They all could potentially face the Defender for The Match, therefore the Defender needs to - at least - be able to check, whether the DoG mandated requirements are met by all challengers. This is the part of the Defender in the CSS, and should be its only part there.

Re. your first paragraph: This is tricky. As long as only the respective CSS loser leaves the competition, it doesn't matter, who The Challenger (CoR) is at a given time.
But should another CoR withdrawal occur, it looks like the RNZYS could indeed choose the next CoR. Which is totally against the DoG and the spirit of the AC. There should have been a better, automated or otherwise more Defender independent succession plan.

On a Deed perspective LR was the first because chosen by TNZ, as any hip pocket.

On a protocol perspective, written later, they were all accepted at the same time: "For the purposes of the Deed of Gift, all challenges accepted by RNZYS (“Challenges”) shall be deemed to have been received by the RNZYS at the same time, being the time of the conclusion of the Final Race 2017."

In case of a withdrawal of the present CoR the new one is voted by the challengers but subject to the veto of the Defender, so the new CoR can also be chosen by the defender, I agree with you, it is against the DoG.

Coming back to Gladwell point, if they are deemed accepted at the same time and all comply with the Deed and  protocol, they have to accept them.

 

Share this post


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

@Wolkenzug 23 metre mono hull with soft lower-able sails !

Then ETNZ pushed it to AC75 (I wonder why feet rather than metres?)

If so LR is crazy, or perhaps, they think: "My way or we jump off the boat" as they did last AC.

Share this post


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

To be perfectly honest with you T-C I'm not very fond of Richard Gladwell. For me this guy is still a totally, purely partisan New Zealand hack often destroying New Zealands good Media Reporting on Sailing in general with his partisan writings. There are tons of better Sailing Journalists in NZ than him.

During the last Cycle claiming Ainslie's British Squad crashing into ETNZ to keep them out of the Cup was the last straw for me.

If I would live in NZ I would totally mob the guy on Social Media for his behaviour.

Gladwell is clearly relaying messages for GD and my guess is that the last one was for the italians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only encouraging cyber-bullying and co-ordinated social media attacks was a ban-able offence... I might just look into it...

Share this post


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

On a protocol perspective, written later, they were all accepted at the same time

 

26 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Coming back to Gladwell point, if they are deemed accepted at the same time and all comply with the Deed and  protocol, they have to accept them.

To get really technical, and hypothetical, this theory of the case would depend in part on how the New York courts would view the protocol agreement. If New York law views both the deed and the protocol as carrying equal weight, then your case is probably correct. But if, as I suspect is the case, New York views the deed as superior to the protocol, then ultimately the deed governs. The deed does three things that are relevant:

  • It gives precedence a challenger based on when the challenge is received, and
  • It allows the challenger and defender to set the rules for their match
  • It prevents the defender from accepting ANY other challenge until the accepted challenge is settled.

It does not, strictly speaking, allow the defender and the challenger to set terms related to other challengers. That is done via the protocol, the terms of which the defender and challengers have voluntarily agreed to abide by.

The protocol may say that the defender MUST accept challenges that meet the minimum requirements; but from the perspective of the deed there is only ONE challenger now and may be only one challenger at any given time and anything else the challenger may be doing on the side (the Prada cup regatta, essentially) is unrelated. 

Gladwell wrote "If your club complies with the Deed of Gift, and Protocol - provided that the Protocol does not over-ride the provisions of the Deed of Gift, then the Challenge has to be accepted by the Defender." I believe he is incorrect. I believe that the defender may not accept any challenge at this point. I believe a correct statement would have been "If your club complies with the Deed of Gift, and Protocol - provided that the Protocol does not over-ride the provisions of the Deed of Gift, then the Challenge has to be accepted by the Defender Challenger" as it is the Challenger, not the Defender, running the Prada Cup. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

To get really technical, and hypothetical, this theory of the case would depend in part on how the New York courts would view the protocol agreement. If New York law views both the deed and the protocol as carrying equal weight, then your case is probably correct. But if, as I suspect is the case, New York views the deed as superior to the protocol, then ultimately the deed governs. The deed does three things that are relevant:

  • It gives precedence a challenger based on when the challenge is received, and
  • It allows the challenger and defender to set the rules for their match
  • It prevents the defender from accepting ANY other challenge until the accepted challenge is settled.

It does not, strictly speaking, allow the defender and the challenger to set terms related to other challengers. That is done via the protocol, the terms of which the defender and challengers have voluntarily agreed to abide by.

The protocol may say that the defender MUST accept challenges that meet the minimum requirements; but from the perspective of the deed there is only ONE challenger now and may be only one challenger at any given time and anything else the challenger may be doing on the side (the Prada cup regatta, essentially) is unrelated. 

Gladwell wrote "If your club complies with the Deed of Gift, and Protocol - provided that the Protocol does not over-ride the provisions of the Deed of Gift, then the Challenge has to be accepted by the Defender." I believe he is incorrect. I believe that the defender may not accept any challenge at this point. I believe a correct statement would have been "If your club complies with the Deed of Gift, and Protocol - provided that the Protocol does not over-ride the provisions of the Deed of Gift, then the Challenge has to be accepted by the Defender Challenger" as it is the Challenger, not the Defender, running the Prada Cup. 

 

Agreed for the first part, however, a challenge cannot be accepted by a challenger, it is not envisioned by the Deed, therefore the NYSC could not rule on what is not part of the Deed.

So, theoretically a challenger could go to the NYSC to either ask to:

- respect the protocol as it must be Deed compliant, and challenges are deemed to have been received at the same time

- or respect the Deed itself as the defender declared that present challenges were received at the same time

- or cancel the protocol as it is not Deed compliant because we know challenges were not received at the same time.

Share this post


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

You can't know this.
Probably it went like always: The CoR approached the soon-to-be Defender, of course before the soon-to-be Defender, resp. its team crossed the finish line, and agreed that it would challenge in case the soon-to-be Defender wins. There was no choice involved, it's still a challenge, as the initiative came from the CoR. It's not like several YCs were fighting each other to lodge their challenge, at least not to out knowledge.
I assume that there weren't any other YCs/teams around that wanted to be CoR anyway. Usually it's not a position a YC/team wants to be in.

If rumour is correct, an officer of the RYS was in fact in Bermuda attempting to lodge a challenge and if they had, I suspect we would not be seeing AC36 sailed in AC75s. But even the dogs in the street knew that if ETNZ won, LR would be CoR. The whole thread of the relationship between the teams through the last two cycles led in that direction. LR was the chosen CoR for AC36, it was a thank you for services rendered through the last two cycles and there is nothing wrong with that. I find it a bit bizarre that you are denying it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not denying it (the prearrangement), I find it bizarre that you think I do, as I've never contested it. However, I  don't agree that the Challenger was chosen. It was agreed upfront between LR and ETNZ that LR will be CoR, but this does not imply a choice. An agreement yes, but not a choice.  

I'll rest my case now, because I'm clearly lacking the eloquence to get my point across. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a choice because RNZYS could have made themselves available to accept a challenge from the RYS who. apparently, were prepared to be CoR. By pre-arrangement, they chose to instead make themselves available to the Circolo della Vela Sicilia. Same as OTUSA chose their CoRs in the previous two cycles and other defenders have done ever since, IIRC, the Mercury Bay "ambush".  

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@dogwatch,

Thanks for coming up with some reasonable Posts how this all went down. Much appreciated! Of Course some Kiwi Posters, who are sitting in a NZ Glass House will never understand it.

Also, this comes back what I've said that Dalts choose the Circolo della Vela Sicilia as CoR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What seems to be harangued above is the difference between (1) a rigged jumble  "choice" draw of marbles out of a bowl, rummaging around to find the chosen one and (2) an "agreement" as to whose marble is the ONE in the bowl being drawn from. I have always thought it was the latter.  

Personally, I still prefer my suggestion of lining the Commodores up a la Survivor and letting them race to get their envelope there first.

Share this post


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

Of Course some Kiwi Posters, who are sitting in a NZ Glass House will never understand it.

Who cares? We all saw the footage of the ETNZ RiB racing across the Great Sound presumably either from or to a meeting with the Italians. We all saw the footage of the RYS member standing there feeling like a goose with a folder in his hands. So ETNZ and LR are close, big deal. The boat and event layout they've come up with looks positively inspired, and I'm totally on board with it. Examining the minutia of the protocol and Deed is incredibly fucking boring. AC36 is shaping up to be amazing. Credit to Dalts, the Italians and whomever else.

Share this post


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

@dogwatch,

Thanks for coming up with some reasonable Posts how this all went down. Much appreciated! Of Course some Kiwi Posters, who are sitting in a NZ Glass House will never understand it.

Also, this comes back what I've said that Dalts choose the Circolo della Vela Sicilia as CoR.

They have a relationship, and CVS was the first to lodge a challenge. Challenger of Record. Simple.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

Who cares? We all saw the footage of the ETNZ RiB racing across the Great Sound presumably either from or to a meeting with the Italians. We all saw the footage of the RYS member standing there feeling like a goose with a folder in his hands. So ETNZ and LR are close, big deal. The boat and event layout they've come up with looks positively inspired, and I'm totally on board with it. Examining the minutia of the protocol and Deed is incredibly fucking boring. AC36 is shaping up to be amazing. Credit to Dalts, the Italians and whomever else.

The Course Layout & the Boat are great = I'm totally onboard with you on that although I'd prefer the boat a little less expensive and complex to built.

Dalts trying to put up a good show for everyone = I agree with you on that as well

Ditching Louis Vuitton for PRADA and chosing a CoR that is more acting in self-interest than in all the Challengers interest = Definitly you get a NO from me on that.

Ask yourself why we only have 5 Challengers? I agree with T-C. I think Bertelli is in all likelyhood blocking Dalts here. If Grant could have his way there would be more Teams but I'm guessing that at least 2-3 of the Challengers still being vetted have ACWS conditions which means Dalts needs approval from Mr. Bertelli and the Italians having no desire to amend the Protocol.

Bottom Line: I can't stand the Italians.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

The Course Layout & the Boat are great = I'm totally onboard with you on that although I'd prefer the boat a little less expensive and complex to built.

Dalts trying to put up a good show for everyone = I agree with you on that as well

Ditching Louis Vuitton for PRADA and chosing a CoR that is more acting in self-interest than in all the Challengers interest = Definitly you get a NO from me on that.

Ask yourself why we only have 5 Challengers? I agree with T-C. I think Bertelli is in all likelyhood blocking Dalts here. If Grant could have his way there would be more Teams but I'm guessing that at least 2-3 of the Challengers still being vetted have ACWS conditions which means Dalts needs approval from Mr. Bertelli and the Italians having no desire to amend the Protocol.

Bottom Line: I can't stand the Italians.

So you'd prefer a dumbed down AC.

Dalts is and will put on a good show.

"I think Bertelli is in all likely hood blocking Dalts here" It doesn't matter what you think.

5 Challengers is a good thing considering the damage Ellison and Coutts have done to the event.

Bottom line: Buckle up buttercup. The Italians are here to stay.

 

 

Share this post


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

 

Ditching Louis Vuitton for PRADA and chosing a CoR that is more acting in self-interest than in all the Challengers interest = Definitly you get a NO from me on that.

 

I have a few serious questions I am hoping someone will kindly answer. I am not a history expert for AC.

1) did LVMH actually WANT to continue for AC36?  

2) which Challengers of Record acted in the best interests of all challengers?  Not just said they were to cover up stuff in their own self interest. 

3) of the ones that DID how did that work out for them?

Thanks.

 

 

Share this post


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

I have a few serious questions I am hoping someone will kindly answer. I am not a history expert for AC.

1) did LVMH actually WANT to continue for AC36?  

2) which Challengers of Record acted in the best interests of all challengers?  Not just said they were to cover up stuff in their own self interest. 

3) of the ones that DID how did that work out for them?

Thanks.

 

 

To answer some of your Questions:

1) Yes, Louis Vuitton wanted to continue. Bruno Trouble, the Head of them said that after AC 35 was finished.

2) I think BMW Oracle did a good job as CoR for AC 32 in VLC 2007. There were several Competitor Meetings in the run-up to the LV Acts as well as before the LVC (CSS). They kind of brought all Parties together for Discussions & Ideas particularly after the first 4 Days of planned racing was cancelled because of light winds. They had to work out a compressed Schedule after those Delays. 1987 in Fremantle they had also a good CoR. I think it's not a coincidence that 1987 & 2007 were regarded as the best Cup Cycles ever. A real shame that we don't have these Competitor Forums/Meetings now.

3) As far as it worked out for the CoR, they got elimiated in the Semis by Luna Rossa and everyone was kind of a bit stunned incl. myself as I thought Oracle and ETNZ would contest the 2007 LVC Final.

 

As far as AC 36 is concerned ETNZ/LR could have had a lot more Challengers/Teams if they had a more open, transparent process bringing everyone to the table. Instead they did go all alone. That being said I'm not going to blame Dalts for that, more the Italians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@NeedAClew Now I think you will get a hugely diverse range of answers to those questions.

Being a ETNZ fan the hairs on the back of my neck bristle!

However I guess somewhere in the middle will be the truth.

I hope us NZ fans don't come out fighting but try to give a balanced view.

Unfortunately like LandRover I think LV where out bid.

I think all CORs have some bias depending on your point of view.  Hopefully the sailing does most of the talking.

My pennys worth.

Share this post


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

I have a few serious questions I am hoping someone will kindly answer. I am not a history expert for AC.

1) did LVMH actually WANT to continue for AC36?  

2) which Challengers of Record acted in the best interests of all challengers?  Not just said they were to cover up stuff in their own self interest.

I will answer with questions.

1) Was Prada willing to have LV ? Was LV happy to see their bags tossed ? are they now happy to sponsor Sail GP ?

2) Poodles who could who allowed a competitor forumb, ut do we have a poodle this time ? if the answer is yes, who is he ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tornado-Cat said:

I will answer with questions.

1) Was Prada willing to have LV ? Was LV happy to see their bags tossed ? are they now happy to sponsor Sail GP ?

2) Poodles who could who allowed a competitor forumb, ut do we have a poodle this time ? if the answer is yes, who is he ?

Nice going.  You've got to the heart of the matter.

1.  Unlikely that an Italian fashion empire and a French one would co-exist.  The bag tossing had no relevance outside a few tossers here.  However LV was unhappy with its treatment in Bermuda by Oracle.  Finally at the end of the day LV are merchants and believe sailing sponsorship is worthwhile, thus SailGP.

2. No!

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Nice going.  You've got to the heart of the matter.

1.  Unlikely that an Italian fashion empire and a French one would co-exist.  The bag tossing had no relevance outside a few tossers here.  However LV was unhappy with its treatment in Bermuda by Oracle.  Finally at the end of the day LV are merchants and believe sailing sponsorship is worthwhile, thus SailGP.

2. No!

So why was LV unhappy with OTUSA during the cup  but happy to sign up with SailGP.  Isn't it the same people?

Share this post


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

I have a few serious questions I am hoping someone will kindly answer. I am not a history expert for AC.

1) did LVMH actually WANT to continue for AC36?  

2) which Challengers of Record acted in the best interests of all challengers?  Not just said they were to cover up stuff in their own self interest. 

3) of the ones that DID how did that work out for them?

Thanks.

 

 

Bruno Trouble may have wanted to continue with the America's Cup involvement with LVMH (it is his job after all)  but in all reality Prada is a direct competitor, at least in a number of LVMH's markets so the likelihood of them sponsoring an event where a main competitor would be receiving much of the spin off publicity should always have been seen to be an unlikely. Sponsorship is all abut corporate dollars not altruism. It would be rather like General Motors sponsoring an event where BMW would be a major exposure beneficiary.

It needs to be remembered that the CoR of record and multiple challengers is a relatively (in the long history of the Cup) recent thing. I doubt very much - given the huge corporate spend in sponsorship and the huge potential return to the challenger if victorious - that the CoR didn't have at least SOME self interest in decisions made. Plus of course in the current Cup the defender and CoR have much closer ties than in previous cups with the reported financial support Mr Bertelli gave ENTZ in AC35.

Just hypothesising.

SS

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, I asked if there was a poodle and if it was the case, who.

I was part of those thinking that TNZ might have been the poodle, but thinking twice,

- as LR signed a protocol where they accepted that all challengers challenged at the same time

- as the Protocol is subject to the Deed

- as the defender will remain the defender until losing the cup

Could TNZ cherry pick another CoR is they had a deadlock with the present CoR ?  Then, who is the poodle ?

 

Share this post


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

If rumour is correct, an officer of the RYS was in fact in Bermuda attempting to lodge a challenge and if they had, I suspect we would not be seeing AC36 sailed in AC75s. But even the dogs in the street knew that if ETNZ won, LR would be CoR. The whole thread of the relationship between the teams through the last two cycles led in that direction. LR was the chosen CoR for AC36, it was a thank you for services rendered through the last two cycles and there is nothing wrong with that. I find it a bit bizarre that you are denying it.

DW...Very close description to what happened in Bermuda

The back story will eventually come out so here is the scoop.  As everyone knew ETNZ had agreed ahead of time that if they won the AC , they would accept a challenge from LR as part of the terms of their funding from LR.  Strictly speaking the deed specifies that whoever lodges the first challenge is COR and LR would be on the ETNZ spectator boat to hand over the challenge as ETNZ crossed the finish line.

As ETNZ made their way steadily to the finals, Artemis, OTUSA, BAR and Softbank discussed if there was any way round this. The French were not part of the discussion because they would only have trusted the foreign legion to get the job done properly.  Anyway, the plot was hatched and RYS was selected to do the deed because the Vice Commodore had connections with the British special forces.

A unit of the SBS was detached to Bermuda. The RYS officer that you mention was actually  an officer from M squadron, SBS.  The plan was to use a shallow water combat submersible (SDV 11) to approach the ETNZ's support boat. If ETNZ was clearly winning, then the mission would get the  green light,. As ETNZ turned on the final leg (and obviously all eyes forward distracted by the race) two SBS SCs would hop aboard and quick as flash abduct the Italians.   Then the RYS launch would come alongside and present an unexpected challenge.  

Unfortunately, somehow ETNZ got wind of the plan. Someone had not realized that with so many kiwis milling around as part of all the teams, there was bound to be a leak. ETNZ sent out a decoy boat with a body double for Dalts. If you look closely at the videos of the final race, you can see that although it looks like Dalts was out on the water watching, the body double is heavier and shorter. Anyway, it was all very embarrassing for the Brits who ended up kidnapping two Puerto Rican waiters wearing Prada blazers, while Dalts accepted a challenge from LR in a private villa overlooking Great Sound. It was all hushed up by the Ministry of Defense who dont like to talk about SBS operations while ETNZ and LR agreed to say nothing provided RYS/BAR lodged a challenge.

I have this straight from the same reliable sources who for sure know that OTUSA cheated in the prior cup....so it must be good info.

 

  • Like 7

Share this post


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

I have this straight from the same reliable sources who for sure know that OTUSA cheated in the prior cup....so it must be good info.

That's a good yarn, entertaining to say the least.

Share this post


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

So why was LV unhappy with OTUSA during the cup  but happy to sign up with SailGP.  Isn't it the same people?

That's a fair question.  i thought about that before posting. 

Different cast of Oracle characters, ie not everything flows directly from Larry. Of course, as best we know Bruno no longer in the mix. Assurances  from Coutts, perhaps.  LV in the box seat when negotiating new sponsorship, once bitten twice shy, negotiated better terms for contract this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who knows about these polls can people change their votes?

Remember it is who sails in the Prada Cup that counts!

We have a few dark horses, some well know starters and some notorious Vaders !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, barfy said:

^

you didn't mention the bag toss, which seems to be the factual part of your argument. 

I think people read to much into the "Bag Toss".  I'm pretty sure it was a spontaneous impulse like throwing caps at the end of a graduation ceremony that was probably followed up with a group of overpaid sailors get their balls ripped off by their partners followed by an expensive shopping trip. 

Share this post


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

I think people read to much into the "Bag Toss".  I'm pretty sure it was a spontaneous impulse like throwing caps at the end of a graduation ceremony that was probably followed up with a group of overpaid sailors get their balls ripped off by their partners followed by an expensive shopping trip. 

hahaha, you are right, i didn't use the SA sarcasm colour in my post. I was speaking to TC's post as he is fully into tin hat mode ATM  http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?/topic/205685-how-many-challengers-will-there-be/&do=findComment&comment=6442446

Share this post


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

6 Challengers. That was my pick. Anything from now on is a bonus.

I'm with you on six challengers.  Of course they all have to make it to the Prada Cup!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/13/2018 at 7:02 AM, dg_sailingfan said:

I think that's about it with the "Challengers". At this Point I'd be shocked if a 6th Challenger emerges unless the RNZYS is willing to accept a "Fringe Challenge".

So you're "Shocked" now? lol

Share this post


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

And they won't, trust me.

Coming from you ...... Pretty well guaratees they will then

Share this post


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

Coming from you ...... Pretty well guaratees they will then

Show me the money and the boat first before we talk here. During the ACWS 12/13 we had 10 Challengers accepted, only 3 eventually made it to the LVC.

These AC 75 Monsters ain't easy to built. There is a good change, greater than 70% that the Malta Altus Challenge won't make it to the Prada Cup.

Share this post


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

These AC 75 Monsters ain't easy to built.

Ain't easy to build. I disagree though, the boat itself is just a 75ft composite structure. Foil, sail design, and sailing these boats are going to be the tricky aspects.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys, I've got a couple of questions.

The first, and most important is related to the late entries. There is a late entry fee that I believe is due on New Years day 2019, does that signal the final cut off for entries, even if they may not immediately announce their intentions?

Second question is dg_sailingfan now accepted as A4E incognito. If so, I can safely ignore that users comments.

Thanks in advance.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, laser 173312 said:

Hi guys, I've got a couple of questions.

The first, and most important is related to the late entries. There is a late entry fee that I believe is due on New Years day 2019, does that signal the final cut off for entries, even if they may not immediately announce their intentions?

Second question is dg_sailingfan now accepted as A4E incognito. If so, I can safely ignore that users comments.

Thanks in advance.

 

2. 100% - please do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, laser 173312 said:

Hi guys, I've got a couple of questions.

The first, and most important is related to the late entries. There is a late entry fee that I believe is due on New Years day 2019, does that signal the final cut off for entries, even if they may not immediately announce their intentions?

Second question is dg_sailingfan now accepted as A4E incognito. If so, I can safely ignore that users comments.

Thanks in advance.

 

 

1 minute ago, rh2600 said:

2. 100% - please do

Great, that’s saves me a lot of time. Though it’s probably better to kick him than the cat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, laser 173312 said:

Hi guys, I've got a couple of questions.

The first, and most important is related to the late entries. There is a late entry fee that I believe is due on New Years day 2019, does that signal the final cut off for entries, even if they may not immediately announce their intentions?

Second question is dg_sailingfan now accepted as A4E incognito. If so, I can safely ignore that users comments.

Thanks in advance.

 

laser, I'm not A4E. barfy and all the other NZLers are harrassing me.

Share this post


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

laser, I'm not A4E. barfy and all the other NZLers are harrassing me.

lol

Share this post


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

 

Great, that’s saves me a lot of time. Though it’s probably better to kick him than the cat. 

This forum is no place for hate speech.  Do not kick cats under any circumstances, well, maybe if they kick first with claws out but even so...

:)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are We all honestly thinking there will be 5 or 6 challengers in the Prada Cup?

Anyway Merry Xmas to you all !!

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Are We all honestly thinking there will be 5 or 6 challengers in the Prada Cup?

 

Hard to say. None of the recently announced challenges has revealed where the $$ is coming from. S&S seems the best founded if, as they say, they are building a boat. I am hoping the NL challenge is for real and tend to believe it given who is involved. Malta looks most questionable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not forget that even ETNZ aren't confident of 6 , as evidenced by their statement to the Auckland council regarding bases which they would not have made if they were confident in all the teams now "entered".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2018 at 11:57 PM, A Class Sailor said:

Let's not forget that even ETNZ aren't confident of 6 , as evidenced by their statement to the Auckland council regarding bases which they would not have made if they were confident in all the teams now "entered".

All Teams should boykott the AC and let ETNZ race amongst themselves :D

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@dg_sailingfan where did that come from. Usually the challengers are all spying on everyone else trying to make the best of their $ Euros or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/24/2018 at 3:17 AM, dogwatch said:

Hard to say. None of the recently announced challenges has revealed where the $$ is coming from. S&S seems the best founded if, as they say, they are building a boat. I am hoping the NL challenge is for real and tend to believe it given who is involved. Malta looks most questionable.

Not sure why you say Malta is most questionable as they seem to have the cash. I would think meeting the residency requirements would be tough for them but I can't understand why even a millionaire/billionaire would spend the money on the entrance fee if he hadn't done the rather simple math on the residency days. 

SS and NL are in my mind (pardon the pun) in the same boat, which is to say that they have solid sailors leading the organization with a ton of question marks around money, design, and team.

It has been a while but it certainly used to be the norm for teams to challenge but fail to make the starting line of the challenger regatta because they simply couldn't get that far. Yes, LE lost challengers, but they were more than capable of getting there and chose not to for very different reasons. But historically, especially in the IACC days, there were announced teams that just plain did not make it to the regatta. 

Share this post


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

Not sure why you say Malta is most questionable as they seem to have the cash.

What leads you to believe that? Those who have looked at the team backer seem less certain than you are.

"Yes, LE lost challengers, but they were more than capable of getting there and chose not to for very different reasons."

Not really. Onorato failed to raise the money. HIYC failed to raise the money.

Share this post


Link to post