Stingray~

INEOS Team GB

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, NeedAClew said:

I missed it can someone please summarize the yellow card thing?

It’s the hole in the Main that a line goes through from day one of the Prada cup.

it measured ok, Prada protested and it was found to be 100% not performance enhancing or responsible for Prada losing.INEOS got fined 5k kiwi , put a cover over it and carried on beating Prada 

turns out there is a vote to bring in a new rule that changes this infraction into a yellow card, meaning another issue of similar proportion then they are DQd from a race with no redress.

so there is a vote between all parties to put this new rule into practice or not. If they do, it looks like the lawyers are wagging the dog and perfectly won races are now called into question, Gladwell thinks ETNZ are fed up with Pradas shit and will scrap it. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 The litigious Italians have burned up all the goodwill they might have enjoyed ......

 

.....  very well observed  .... and here we see them enter to the courthouse  ... what a litigious bunch they are .....

 

Alt_Alinghi_SNG-GGYC_cb_0008.jpg

Share this post


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

Hint:  Watch the footage from San Francisco.

Shall I watch all of it (again) or do you want to enlighten the group?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The American’s apparent superior downwind speed paid dividends throughout the eight-leg race but a series of early ‘JK’ early tack leeward gate roundings called by Spithill saw the Italians claw back time each upwind leg.

[By the way, my theory is that a ‘JK’ is nod to the disastrous early tack around the leeward gate manoeuvre called by Oracle Team USA navigator John Kosteki during a key race at the 34th America’s Cup in San Francisco which handed the lead to Emirates Team New Zealand.]

From here: https://yachtracing.life/americas-cup-americans-top-table-as-brits-show-big-improvements/

I've heard LR and UK use it, both have helmsman from Team Oracle back in San Fran.

Share this post


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

Could see LR

Goes to show how they think on their feet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, sailer99 said:

From here: https://yachtracing.life/americas-cup-americans-top-table-as-brits-show-big-improvements/

I've heard LR and UK use it, both have helmsman from Team Oracle back in San Fran.

Jesus, really?

Ben and Jimmy refer to that manoeuvre by the name of the guy who called it, before Jimmy executed it badly, and then Ben took his job? As some sort of piss take?

If that’s how they treat their team mates....

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So based on one persons theory you decide they are both a pair of cunts.. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ex-yachtie said:

Jesus, really?

Ben and Jimmy refer to that manoeuvre by the name of the guy who called it, before Jimmy executed it badly, and then Ben took his job? As some sort of piss take?

If that’s how they treat their team mates....

 

On the other hand, giving JK the credit for the failed manoeuvre, which they have now perfected - a very generous way to treat an ex-team mate.

Share this post


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

So based on one persons theory you decide they are both a pair of cunts.. 

I wouldn’t say that but ironically I figured out you were a cunt without using anyone’s theory. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rumours, rumours, rumours.

"The rumors are not lacking. There is a lot of talk in Auckland about the alleged aid that Emirates Team New Zealand would have granted to Ineos Uk to improve the slow start of his boat at the World Series and arrive at a winning set-up, with an incredible growth (someone has remembered the turning point in Oracle's 2013 America's Cup Match, which led to the comeback of the comebacks on the Kiwis). Not only. There is also aid to the Americans - these concrete, admitted with a lot of thanks by Therry Hutchinson, the skipper of American Magic, by the technicians of the New Zealand shipbuilding to repair the boat damaged in the caps, so that it can return to compete in the semifinal against Luna Rossa. So much so that someone also wanted to read any candidates for future Challenger of record,"

 

https://www.lastampa.it/mare/2021/01/24/news/america-s-cup-quei-contatti-culturali-tra-team-new-zealand-e-ineos-uk-1.39814007?fbclid=IwAR2OkJyON8yeC1JwLkuzKJgYRzDbbEjlzpd8bdO2IbvT-QRXj4UYXjh-jAk

Share this post


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

I missed it can someone please summarize the yellow card thing?

 

2 hours ago, NSP said:

Ineos measured in but were later found to be sailing in a non-compliant set-up after the race.  They got fined $5k and told if they are found to be sailing non-compliant again they'll be docked a race hence they have one yellow and a second equals a red.

What was this infringement for?

Share this post


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

 

What was this infringement for?

The Poms were making spaghetti pizza.

Share this post


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

 

What was this infringement for?

I believe it's something along these lines.

 

They had a control line that passed through the skin of the mainsail.

It was a hole designed so that air didn't pass through it as so they felt it was compliant.

The measurers either appeared to initially agree with this, didn't notice it or didn't realise how it was going to be used.

Someone protested it, presumably on the assumption that if the line could move back and fourth through the hole it can't be truely sealed.

The measurers then decided this was indeed the case and told them to change it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Ripping along at 50kts 

 

I think that's the rounding where Prada came round hot at 48 knots and somehow managed to hold on to the reaching  speed it for a good 20 seconds or so after rounding the mark while simultaneaously soaking down under INEOS.

I suspect it's a moment that will be analysed pretty heavily as it was darn impressive and certainly something you would want to try and rteplicate every rounding!

Share this post


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

 

.....  very well observed  .... and here we see them enter to the courthouse  ... what a litigious bunch they are .....

 

Alt_Alinghi_SNG-GGYC_cb_0008.jpg

Wrong bunch of people, wrong team, wrong AC. Nothing to do with the Italians in any way.

Share this post


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

It’s the hole in the Main that a line goes through from day one of the Prada cup.

it measured ok, Prada protested and it was found to be 100% not performance enhancing or responsible for Prada losing.INEOS got fined 5k kiwi , put a cover over it and carried on beating Prada 

turns out there is a vote to bring in a new rule that changes this infraction into a yellow card, meaning another issue of similar proportion then they are DQd from a race with no redress.

so there is a vote between all parties to put this new rule into practice or not. If they do, it looks like the lawyers are wagging the dog and perfectly won races are now called into question, Gladwell thinks ETNZ are fed up with Pradas shit and will scrap it. 

Thanks

Share this post


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

I think that's the rounding where Prada came round hot at 48 knots and somehow managed to hold on to the reaching  speed it for a good 20 seconds or so after rounding the mark while simultaneaously soaking down under INEOS.

I suspect it's a moment that will be analysed pretty heavily as it was darn impressive and certainly something you would want to try and rteplicate every rounding!

Indeed. ETNZ used it very successfully against OTUSA in Bermuda too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Often on Ineos, the guys are talking about an "intersection", could someone explain that? Is that to do with the layline? Many thanks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ex-yachtie said:

I wouldn’t say that but ironically I figured out you were a cunt without using anyone’s theory. 

Glad you figured it out finally, it’s not my fault it took you this long. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Rumours, rumours, rumours.

"The rumors are not lacking. There is a lot of talk in Auckland about the alleged aid that Emirates Team New Zealand would have granted to Ineos Uk to improve the slow start of his boat at the World Series and arrive at a winning set-up, with an incredible growth (someone has remembered the turning point in Oracle's 2013 America's Cup Match, which led to the comeback of the comebacks on the Kiwis). Not only. There is also aid to the Americans - these concrete, admitted with a lot of thanks by Therry Hutchinson, the skipper of American Magic, by the technicians of the New Zealand shipbuilding to repair the boat damaged in the caps, so that it can return to compete in the semifinal against Luna Rossa. So much so that someone also wanted to read any candidates for future Challenger of record,"

 

https://www.lastampa.it/mare/2021/01/24/news/america-s-cup-quei-contatti-culturali-tra-team-new-zealand-e-ineos-uk-1.39814007?fbclid=IwAR2OkJyON8yeC1JwLkuzKJgYRzDbbEjlzpd8bdO2IbvT-QRXj4UYXjh-jAk

Salty Italians.. 

Share this post


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

Salty Italians.. 

As they would be. They've been good dogs. Why should American Magic and Ineos get the table scraps instead of the loyal poodle?

Share this post


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

Often on Ineos, the guys are talking about an "intersection", could someone explain that? Is that to do with the layline? Many thanks.

Good question. One can only guess. I am surprised you have not got an answer seeing as some of the posters on here could sail a boat better than Ben

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

In plan view there was no hole. As there was no material missing and you could not see through it. 

in the rules everything is discussed in plan view , laid flat looking from above so there was no material missing and no hole. 

Plan view laid on it's side?? That's an ortho I reckon..anyway, don't see that mentioned..

18.1 Other than as required for sail hardware, intentional openings through sail skins are prohibited. This rule
does not prohibit access panels that are covered or closed whilst racing.

Easy..close the panel..how could you miss this, first clause in"sails general".

Share this post


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

Plan view laid on it's side?? That's an ortho I reckon..anyway, don't see that mentioned..

18.1 Other than as required for sail hardware, intentional openings through sail skins are prohibited. This rule
does not prohibit access panels that are covered or closed whilst racing.

Easy..close the panel..how could you miss this, first clause in"sails general".

Yeah ornithological view, and that was the definition on the original submission by INEOS  as to its legality when asked to explain it 

there was a link on sail-world that showed it all.

the solution /fix that was deemed acceptable was to cover it. 

Share this post


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

Rumours, rumours, rumours.

"The rumors are not lacking. There is a lot of talk in Auckland about the alleged aid that Emirates Team New Zealand would have granted to Ineos Uk to improve the slow start of his boat at the World Series and arrive at a winning set-up, with an incredible growth (someone has remembered the turning point in Oracle's 2013 America's Cup Match, which led to the comeback of the comebacks on the Kiwis). Not only. There is also aid to the Americans - these concrete, admitted with a lot of thanks by Therry Hutchinson, the skipper of American Magic, by the technicians of the New Zealand shipbuilding to repair the boat damaged in the caps, so that it can return to compete in the semifinal against Luna Rossa. So much so that someone also wanted to read any candidates for future Challenger of record,"

 

https://www.lastampa.it/mare/2021/01/24/news/america-s-cup-quei-contatti-culturali-tra-team-new-zealand-e-ineos-uk-1.39814007?fbclid=IwAR2OkJyON8yeC1JwLkuzKJgYRzDbbEjlzpd8bdO2IbvT-QRXj4UYXjh-jAk

Italian paranoia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unleash the lawyers. :lol:

Share this post


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

 

".....harking back to an era when people were hung for poaching rabbits." RG

 

I agree with him, this is fucking ridiculous.

As far as I'm concerned if you pass measure without having made a concerted effort (i.e. lead in kingpost) to subvert the rules then that should be the end if it.

Stupid protocol with LR being dicks about it.

Share this post


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

I agree with him, this is fucking ridiculous.

As far as I'm concerned if you pass measure without having made a concerted effort (i.e. lead in kingpost) to subvert the rules then that should be the end if it.

Stupid protocol with LR being dicks about it.

So who’s been caught fucking whose wife? 

Share this post


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

So who’s been caught fucking whose wife? 

Next time you talk to yours, just don't mention me ;)

Share this post


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

If the MC measured Brittania with the illegal hole-in-the-main, they shouldn't have to answer for it. I hope ETNZ refuse to sign off on the 2-strikes-you're-dq'ed nonsense.

The stuff article seems to say the two strike rule has always been there, discussion is around getting rid of it. Good luck getting LR to agree was my point

Share this post


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

Often on Ineos, the guys are talking about an "intersection", could someone explain that? Is that to do with the layline? Many thanks.

I heard that too. I don’t know, but here’s my guess. 
 

A boat sailing the course will find itself in positions/moment where they can efficiently sail on either tack, to the top mark, with the same number of manoeuvres, bouncing off the boundaries as they go. Those points could be found by drawing both hypothetical courses on the course, creating “intersections”. These intersections would change with wind shifts and wind speed. 
 

As the boat sails upwind they would find themselves at those intersections, where, if everything stayed the same, they could sail equally on either tack without adding unnecessary manoeuvres or short tacks. If you were sailing independently from other boats, they would be key decision making moments. 

But it’s only a guess  

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, rh3000 said:

More hidden video gems on NZH - Freddie talks their grinding strategy vs the other teams

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/video/beyond-the-cup-freddie-carr-on-ineos-team-uks-grinders/ZRHNQ2DBTRYL3CUEH53A73FOAU/

 

And the key message is that UK don't need to be faster than the competition, just similar. And then with Ben helming and Giles free for the tactics they can squeeze the opposition out, as we have seen.

But also interesting that they have adapted training regimes from cycling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

Good interview.... almost said too much if I were a senior INEOS strategist watching 

Too late for the others to change their grinders now

Share this post


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

I know that comms on each boat has been scrutinised but this video sums it up very well....

 

Awesome footage. I think this race proved the AC75 concept and I have to say I am converted that this is a great spectacle and could certianly see a lot more of this to come.

Penalty?!

I have not seen the overhead like the umpires, but to me this was a Penalty.

  • Whilst I dont think Prada would have hit, how close do you want to make the call before taking action to avoid collisions?
  • It would only have taken a minor shift to have made this into an incident rather than a spectacular cross.
  • As much as 'James' pisses me right off, I dont think he was pulling  a Hollywood... I honestly think he thought it was close
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

Too late for the others to change their grinders now

I would agree, yes.

But reinforcing the use of Giles with a team shirt on was the point I was more interested in.

Example - Pulling TH off the pumps in AM and giving him a role similar to Giles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

Awesome footage. I think this race proved the AC75 concept and I have to say I am converted that this is a great spectacle and could certianly see a lot more of this to come.

Penalty?!

I have not seen the overhead like the umpires, but to me this was a Penalty.

  • Whilst I dont think Prada would have hit, how close do you want to make the call before taking action to avoid collisions?
  • It would only have taken a minor shift to have made this into an incident rather than a spectacular cross.
  • As much as 'James' pisses me right off, I dont think he was pulling  a Hollywood... I honestly think he thought it was close

the cross looks less close from the INEOS onboard footage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

Awesome footage. I think this race proved the AC75 concept and I have to say I am converted that this is a great spectacle and could certianly see a lot more of this to come.

Penalty?!

I have not seen the overhead like the umpires, but to me this was a Penalty.

  • Whilst I dont think Prada would have hit, how close do you want to make the call before taking action to avoid collisions?
  • It would only have taken a minor shift to have made this into an incident rather than a spectacular cross.
  • As much as 'James' pisses me right off, I dont think he was pulling  a Hollywood... I honestly think he thought it was close

For it to be a penalty JS had to hold a straight course and then duck down, instead he aimed up as he got closer to INEOS. The other thing is that the umpires can look at a display generated by a GPS I presume. A diamond is drawn around both boats which is the safety box. That box was not breached. This means the umpires can be fair and impartial as the penalty can be signalled electronically  and not depend on the eye sight or partiality of the umpire. Lastly the distance is not as close as you think because of the way a camera foreshortens distance.  Lastly if INEOS gave way  and ducked behind Prada I still think INEOS was better placed to get to the line first. PRADA still had to gibe one more time and if INEOS had to gibe it would put them on starboard at the finish line.  Fair play to JS, it was the correct thing to do and his last roll of the dice. 

Share this post


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

the cross looks less close from the INEOS onboard footage. 

But still close considering the potential outcome

In this instance, the sailors sailed very well and seemed to be in full control; the jury/event are relying on this

However, If I am right that 'James' (I take great pleasure in that), felt that he was making avoiding action then maybe the safety diamond is too small.

Share this post


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

Glad you figured it out finally, it’s not my fault it took you this long. 

Great answer Jaz!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

And the key message is that UK don't need to be faster than the competition, just similar. And then with Ben helming and Giles free for the tactics they can squeeze the opposition out, as we have seen.

But also interesting that they have adapted training regimes from cycling

Hopefully without the drugs and blood transfusions etc...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

But still close considering the potential outcome

In this instance, the sailors sailed very well and seemed to be in full control; the jury/event are relying on this

However, If I am right that 'James' (I take great pleasure in that), felt that he was making avoiding action then maybe the safety diamond is too small.

possibly... the safety diamond doesn't extend beyond the back of the does it? I guess if it did it would make overlap rules confusing... but, doesn't leave any margin from crosses. 

Share this post


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

possibly... the safety diamond doesn't extend beyond the back of the does it? I guess if it did it would make overlap rules confusing... but, doesn't leave any margin from crosses. 

I saw a diagram of the diamond and it did if i remember correctly extend out the back as far as it did forward. I wish I could remember where I saw it.  They were looking at the umpires hutch with all the screens. Remember cameras are very poor at showing distance. Be nice to see the helicopter footage though. I also think there were 2 diamonds. One inside the other

Edited by dullers
might as well old chap. Had an after thought.

Share this post


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

possibly... the safety diamond doesn't extend beyond the back of the does it? I guess if it did it would make overlap rules confusing... but, doesn't leave any margin from crosses. 

I agree, it would make normal racing rules complicated, but I felt that the point of this was the limit dangerous contact etc.

I am under no illusion that this was a No Penalty situation, but my point was should it have been after seeing just how close the boats got in the matter of seconds.

Very happy to see this whole regatta play out like this and I hope that we dont see any more issues in boats being broken (hopefully nothing else), but moving forward a few subtle rule changes could limit accidents before they happen.

What I do take from this, was how cool Ben and the team kept themselves going into this cross - Superb control

Share this post


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

I saw a diagram of the diamond and it did if i remember correctly extend out the back as far as it did forward. I wish I could remember where I saw it.  They were looking at the umpires hutch with all the screens. Remember cameras are very poor at showing distance. Be nice to see the helicopter footage though.

I agree, I think it would be great to have more on this as it showcases the umpiring very nicely!

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

possibly... the safety diamond doesn't extend beyond the back of the does it? I guess if it did it would make overlap rules confusing... but, doesn't leave any margin from crosses. 

It's possible that the umpires would have precise GPS tracks available and they could have extended the paths to see if there would ever have been a collision?

From the Luna Russa onboard it looks very close (it was!), but it's difficult to judge the real distance ahead of the bow to Ineos.

Share this post


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

It's possible that the umpires would have precise GPS tracks available and they could have extended the paths to see if there would ever have been a collision?

 

They do, they did, there wouldn't

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

I agree, I think it would be great to have more on this as it showcases the umpiring very nicely!

It  improves the accuracy of the umpires. We could not ask for more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

They do, they did, there wouldn't

Case closed.

Only thing left to do is to apply some butt hurt cream to Luna Rossa...

Share this post


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

So who’s been caught fucking whose wife? 

Next time you talk to yours, just don't mention me ;)

She's been gone a long time, you're welcome. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Marinatrix447 said:

W4UZ3O4CHJAWPAM467FBM3GS7M.thumb.jpg.19b0948b0fe261e04cec14af3bc9bdd8.jpg

Bernie Sanders imposimg some equality for port tack? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Marinatrix447 said:

W4UZ3O4CHJAWPAM467FBM3GS7M.thumb.jpg.19b0948b0fe261e04cec14af3bc9bdd8.jpg

:P

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

They do, they did, there wouldn't

This is true and fact!

So where is the what if factor in this?

What if:

  • There was a small shift?
  • There was a slightly lull or gust on one boat for a short duration?
  • Ben got the fear and made a small error causing a loss in boat speed?
  • 'James' was closer and right of way boat, and INEOS failed to recognise this early enough?

I should reiterate that I am not suggesting the result should be changed, but more have the ACRM set the rules correctly to avoid major incidents.

Share this post


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

It's possible that the umpires would have precise GPS tracks available and they could have extended the paths to see if there would ever have been a collision?

From the Luna Russa onboard it looks very close (it was!), but it's difficult to judge the real distance ahead of the bow to Ineos.

Yeah they have predictive analytics, it's not that hard really, even so there are 3 of them there to make sure the computer is not running amok 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

This is true and fact!

So where is the what if factor in this?

What if:

  • There was a small shift?
  • There was a slightly lull or gust on one boat for a short duration?
  • Ben got the fear and made a small error causing a loss in boat speed?
  • 'James' was closer and right of way boat, and INEOS failed to recognise this early enough?

I should reiterate that I am not suggesting the result should be changed, but more have the ACRM set the rules correctly to avoid major incidents.

Both have an obligation to avoid contact. Even if JS was unsighted BA had a clear view so would have been able to take avoiding action. Even if BA got into a position where he was unable, JS takes action to keep clear, so you need a big mistake from both parties before a collision is a real risk. These guys will be able to anticipate most likely outcomes so won't be caught totally unawares too.

Clearly there is a risk, but you can't eliminate that, but also a penalty needs to be one if there was an actual infringement, so can't bundle the boats in a cotton wool rule that awards a penalty where none was warranted.

I think what was said above is right. The umpires have the technology to effectively see into the future by extending tracks forward so the boats don't need to come super close for a protest to be adjudicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

This is true and fact!

So where is the what if factor in this?

What if:

  • There was a small shift?
  • There was a slightly lull or gust on one boat for a short duration?
  • Ben got the fear and made a small error causing a loss in boat speed?
  • 'James' was closer and right of way boat, and INEOS failed to recognise this early enough?

I should reiterate that I am not suggesting the result should be changed, but more have the ACRM set the rules correctly to avoid major incidents.

OK these boats are faster, but this is not exactly a new problem. And at least on these boats no-one is near the bow or stern. So whilst expensive it is less likely to harm anyway

A good mate of mine had his wrist broken by another yacht misjudging it. The guy on port still has to avoid a collision if it becomes clear there would be one. The point is that in this case there wasn't going to be. WhetherJimmy misjudged it (very easy to) or it was purely an acting class I don't know, but they were actually a fair way apart. Much further than happens all the time in big boats coming together.

If Jimmy did misjudge it then maybe he should think about a bow camera to make it easier

Share this post


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

Often on Ineos, the guys are talking about an "intersection", could someone explain that? Is that to do with the layline? Many thanks.

Watch from 5.10 on the first race between Magic and INEOS.  I think it is Nathan "I cant call a cross right" Outridge talking about an intersection. That might help.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, enigmatically2 said:

If Jimmy did misjudge it then maybe he should think about a bow camera to make it easier

These boats are already so full of technology, some sort of distance radar would be trivial technology to apply. It's on my 7 year old VW Golf as Adaptive Cruise Control!

Edit - waits for Kiwi joke about Ben using it to park up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Living_in_a_box said:

These boats are already so full of technology, some sort of distance radar would be trivial technology to apply. It's on my 7 year old VW Golf as Adaptive Cruise Control!

Much harder on boats than that. Adaptive cruise control relies quite a lot on the fact that cars are going in the same direction. Not true here obviously. But the driverless systems are more complex than boats. So it is certainly possible. But no-one will choose the weight penalty voluntarily

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

Much harder on boats than that. Adaptive cruise control relies quite a lot on the fact that cars are going in the same direction. Not true here obviously. But the driverless systems are more complex than boats. So it is certainly possible. But no-one will choose the weight penalty voluntarily

But if it was a mandatory safety feature...

Guess you'd need two, to get stereoscopic ability?

 

Edit - and it wouldn't need to work at long range and would be accurate enough at close quarters.

Edit 2 - the ACC unit in my car is pretty small too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, rh3000 said:

More hidden video gems on NZH - Freddie talks their grinding strategy vs the other teams

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/video/beyond-the-cup-freddie-carr-on-ineos-team-uks-grinders/ZRHNQ2DBTRYL3CUEH53A73FOAU/

 

So that is the key, not necessarily because of super winch technology.  UK figures that a grinder loses 20% by grinding backwards. 

So, UK with 6 forward grinders at 100% gives 600 units of power.

other teams with 4 forward (100%) and 4 (80%) backward grinders give 720 units of power.

And on AM, if you take away one grinder as TH is looking around, it drops them down into the 620 to 640 units of power.

If you add onto that a variable speed winch, the ability to grind at you own cadence and moving more crew weight towards the foils.

It really does seem like the old "two men on a winch" is just a descendant of the times when you had excess crew on board.  (Hey, if we can figure out how to get two people on those winches we can get more power).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s was the physical gains they made that let them put out the power they needed coupled with the efficiency gain to cut the grinder numbers down.

The challenge was for the grinders to be capable of the target numbers to make the design choice work 

and yes the new harken pedestal helped make it all work together 

Share this post


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

She's been gone a long time, you're welcome. :lol:

Well played!

Share this post


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

I saw a diagram of the diamond and it did if i remember correctly extend out the back as far as it did forward. I wish I could remember where I saw it.  They were looking at the umpires hutch with all the screens. Remember cameras are very poor at showing distance. Be nice to see the helicopter footage though. I also think there were 2 diamonds. One inside the other

 

Border.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

Border.png

Thats the one so nothing like my description at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so on the basis of that diagram being used to prove a infringement then they were no where near triggering the alarm.

yes the closing speeds are scary etc but if that's going to be the point of contention, 'the boats are too fast' then I suggest you try asking the teams to all slow down to settle your nerves.

the reality is that INEOS was well clear, that image above proves it when put in context of the actual race footage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that was a very showy duck borne of desperation. If it had been closer I think there's a decent chance the umpires get LR on 16.2 for the way the were bearing away to press the issue. Given the fact that they splashed off foil right after makes me think they overdid it a bit!

Share this post


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

so on the basis of that diagram being used to prove a infringement then they were no where near triggering the alarm.

yes the closing speeds are scary etc but if that's going to be the point of contention, 'the boats are too fast' then I suggest you try asking the teams to all slow down to settle your nerves.

the reality is that INEOS was well clear, that image above proves it when put in context of the actual race footage.

Also up thread a bit is a graph of headings which shows Jimmy continuously altering course throughout the encounter. He was never going to impress the judges by doing that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to throw a cat amongst the pigeons, but at what point are these guys deemed as being in a manoeuvre (tacking/gybing)? And the rules regarding this. As soon as they drop both foils in are they manoeuvring or can they use this to simply soak with no change to their rights (ineos crossing the finish for example)? When I was young and match racing we used to use the foot of the jib relative to the mast as a indicator, especially in dial ups etc. The racing rules also used to feel a bit different for match racing too. I guess my question is, for these boats how much can they use the foils to bend the rules? Will we ever see any dial up/downs in these boats?

Share this post


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

Not to throw a cat amongst the pigeons, but at what point are these guys deemed as being in a manoeuvre (tacking/gybing)? And the rules regarding this. As soon as they drop both foils in are they manoeuvring or can they use this to simply soak with no change to their rights (ineos crossing the finish for example)? When I was young and match racing we used to use the foot of the jib relative to the mast as a indicator, especially in dial ups etc. The racing rules also used to feel a bit different for match racing too. I guess my question is, for these boats how much can they use the foils to bend the rules? Will we ever see any dial up/downs in these boats?

INEOS pretty much always do the bottom mark rounding with both foils. Pretty sure it's to prevent the slippage everyone else is getting on the roundings.

It seems to work really well and some of the power slides we see are really slowing teams down, so I am surprised no one else is doing it.  Perhaps it was too late to adopt it mid series.

My guess is if you asked the umpires rounding a mark is considered a manuavere regardless of whether it includes a tack or a gybe. If it's within say 10 seconds either side of this they are probably within the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any turn whether or not it has a gybe or tack, or even a deliberate change in speed (or slowing down) is a manoeuvre where they have to give the other boat opportunity to keep clear. That does not mean that any change absolves the other yacht though.

Much has been said of to this incident, I was more surprised by AM getting away with it when they were off their foils at the start and GB sailed round them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit puzzled by NZ in practice earlier today. After 24:30 they gybe onto stbd and continue downwind; at 24:50 they come up onto the wind, but drop the stbd foil during the turn. Is it an example of controlling heel with the wward foil, a mistake - or something else?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Boybland said:

INEOS pretty much always do the bottom mark rounding with both foils. Pretty sure it's to prevent the slippage everyone else is getting on the roundings.

It seems to work really well and some of the power slides we see are really slowing teams down, so I am surprised no one else is doing it.  Perhaps it was too late to adopt it mid series.

My guess is if you asked the umpires rounding a mark is considered a manuavere regardless of whether it includes a tack or a gybe. If it's within say 10 seconds either side of this they are probably within the rules.

The rules dont prohibit 2 foils down. They say the yacht isnt designed for downforce on the foil, and that the regatta director MAY limit the use, and list conditions when use may be limited.  But I haven't seen any agreement or such notice. Has anyone else?

They cruise around with 2 foils down for lengthy times in the pre start. 

They may even be applying downforce during the turn.

However, they're not sailing at max cant much, so i think they'd do that before putting a second foil down. A second foil is a lot of drag and useless you can double downforce its probably not worth it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The rules dont prohibit 2 foils down. They say the yacht isnt designed for downforce on the foil, and that the regatta director MAY limit the use, and list conditions when use may be limited.  But I haven't seen any agreement or such notice. Has anyone else?

Been watching for the past 2 years but haven’t see it either. As you say, given the RM these boats have it must not be worth it and so not necessary to adjudicate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bumpity Bump, and meanwhile back in the tent I wonder what dastardly changes the wily Brits are up to behind the closed doors?  The extra week as all the teams have said is like gold.  The clock doesn't stop ticking, time is the one commodity there never is enough of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Purple Headed Warrior said:

This is true and fact!

So where is the what if factor in this?

What if:

  • There was a small shift?
  • There was a slightly lull or gust on one boat for a short duration?
  • Ben got the fear and made a small error causing a loss in boat speed?
  • 'James' was closer and right of way boat, and INEOS failed to recognise this early enough?

I should reiterate that I am not suggesting the result should be changed, but more have the ACRM set the rules correctly to avoid major incidents.

I've posted it in the other thread:

 cross2.thumb.JPG.6dc89950ed1863abd1ce4bc2dcaaff23.JPG

LR missed INEOS by about 31.5m or 1.4 sec. I think at this level, that's a pretty safe margin. INEOS didn't risk collision. They risked being penalized. There was no sudden turn, the boats were approaching each other on mostly straight trajectory, and LR would have avoided collision anyway. What the umpires knew from the GPS tracks, probably seconds before the boats met, that the boats were not on collision course, so even if LR continues straight, they would have never touched INEOS' diamond. Therefore, no penalty.

Share this post


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

 What the umpires knew from the GPS tracks, probably seconds before the boats met, that the boats were not on collision course, so even if LR continues straight, they would have never touched INEOS' diamond. Therefore, no penalty.

This is likely to be the most relevant thing, the umpires off the water will have a pretty good idea of what is about to happen. 

Share this post


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

The rules dont prohibit 2 foils down. They say the yacht isnt designed for downforce on the foil, and that the regatta director MAY limit the use, and list conditions when use may be limited.  But I haven't seen any agreement or such notice. Has anyone else?

They cruise around with 2 foils down for lengthy times in the pre start. 

They may even be applying downforce during the turn.

However, they're not sailing at max cant much, so i think they'd do that before putting a second foil down. A second foil is a lot of drag and useless you can double downforce its probably not worth it.

I agree the only time it would seem worth it is if your trying to do something other than go in a straight line.

Share this post


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

I've posted it in the other thread:

 cross2.thumb.JPG.6dc89950ed1863abd1ce4bc2dcaaff23.JPG

They risked being penalized.

Really good reply.... Thanks. Especially the above statement, if the risk is a penalty then I would agree we are working with safe constraints.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, what improvements will GB be making. Any theories? And what is that inner wheel:

Gearing for rudder: I don't think so because as I posted previously they wouldn't be continually adjusting that in a pre-start bear away.

Rudder tab - not allowed

Main foil flaps - don't think so, there are twist grips for those

Rudder pitch - ditto

Tab on the bustle - Can't see that being worth it, certainly it was in the air when he adjusted it

Main traveller - doesn't seem to correlate with movement

Fine tune of cant- only one that makes sense to me personally at the moment. Buttons for normal operation when they round marks, inner wheel for ducks and pre-start bearaway adjustment?

Only other thought I had was jib traveller - as they bear away you could widen the angle. But why that would be the helm rather than someone else I don't know

Something sneaky? I cannot think what#

Ever video I have seen, the tape marking the nominal position is vertical except in that pre-start bear away

 

Share this post


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

 

Border.png

To trigger the aft part of the keep clear border in a cross you would chop the stern off with your windward foil. Maybe a foil arm and a half length on the rear would have been prudent.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, barfy said:

To trigger the aft part of the keep clear border in a cross you would chop the stern off with your windward foil. Maybe a foil arm and a half length on the rear would have been prudent.

Remember that shape is round both boats, so the foil wouldn't have to come close to the stern as its diamond would extend beyond the foil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

Remember that shape is round both boats, so the foil wouldn't have to come close to the stern as its diamond would extend beyond the foil

True..just need to tell jimmy to eat a concrete pill and harden up :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites