strider470

Future of challengers' selection Cup (AC37), formerly LV and Prada Cup

Recommended Posts

^Back in the real olden days, when NYYC held defender trials, didn't the contenders fund their own boats and vie to sail for NYYC? Charley Morgan built his own boat, for example. 

Share this post


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

As an aside, Fremantle was the first and only time the measurers had a dedicated, protected measurement pen for doing critical flotation measurements (no longer required for the AC75 class). It had sheet metal sides that extended well above and below water level to protect from wind and swells that made in-water measurement a challenge at the best of times.

It blew bloody stink nearly every afternoon in Fremantle, but was often dead calm in the middle of the night, when the measurers usually did this work.

You can bet Bondy and Bexy made sure the measurers were up to the job in Freemantle having slipped one past them (and the venerable NYYC) with the illegal wing keel in 1983!

Share this post


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

^Back in the real olden days, when NYYC held defender trials, didn't the contenders fund their own boats and vie to sail for NYYC? Charley Morgan built his own boat, for example. 

Yes. That does not mean that defense candidates did not have funding from individual NYYC members or syndicates made up of NYYC members.

Share this post


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

I miss the Italian Rascals, they were a LOT of fun.

I always feel a little melancholy when I see Mascalzone in Naples, on permanent display near the harbor.

 

Share this post


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

You can bet Bondy and Bexy made sure the measurers were up to the job in Freemantle having slipped one past them (and the venerable NYYC) with the illegal wing keel in 1983!

Well, we can debate that one forever. You can't "slip" a wing keel past anyone. There was nothing in the 12mR rule that disallowed the wing keel. The issue was the CiC (Constructed in Country) question around the design of that keel. That is not specifically a measurement question.

At least one of the measurers in Fremantle was also the one who originally measured Australia 2 and her wing keel prior to the 1983 AC, by the way.

The Protocol for AC36 (and other recent ones) requires the measurers to do the necessary inspections in the place of construction of whatever components are controlled by CiC limits. In 1987, a boat was required to have its initial class certificate issued by the national authority of the country it represented before the first stage of competition. Boats were completely re-measured in Fremantle prior to any stage of competition.

Today, all the class certificates are issued by the AC Measurement Committee. There is no involvement of any national authority or World Sailing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, strider470 said:

One of the qualities Italians have most is persuasion through discussion :D

Lets have a talk about the fishes, the sea and concrete shoes :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, strider470 said:

I always feel a little melancholy when I see Mascalzone in Naples, on permanent display near the harbor.

 

At least its on display as opposed to dumped to rot like so many former competitor yachts.

Share this post


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

Lets have a talk about the fishes, the sea and concrete shoes :lol:

We evolved! Now we use concrete foils :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jaysper said:

Lets have a talk about the fishes, the sea and concrete shoes :lol:

Joy to the fishes in the deep blue sea, joy to you and me. (3 dog night)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  42 minutes ago, accnick said:

As an aside, Fremantle was the first and only time the measurers had a dedicated, protected measurement pen for doing critical flotation measurements (no longer required for the AC75 class). It had sheet metal sides that extended well above and below water level to protect from wind and swells that made in-water measurement a challenge at the best of times.

It blew bloody stink nearly every afternoon in Fremantle, but was often dead calm in the middle of the night, when the measurers usually did this work.

28 minutes ago, winchfodder said:

You can bet Bondy and Bexy made sure the measurers were up to the job in Freemantle having slipped one past them (and the venerable NYYC) with the illegal wing keel in 1983!

 

9 minutes ago, accnick said:

Well, we can debate that one forever. You can't "slip" a wing keel past anyone. There was nothing in the 12mR rule that disallowed the wing keel. The issue was the CiC (Constructed in Country) question around the design of that keel. That is not specifically a measurement question.

At least one of the measurers in Fremantle was also the one who originally measured Australia 2 and her wing keel prior to the 1983 AC, by the way.

Today, all the class certificates are issued by the AC Measurement Committee. There is no involvement of any national authority or World Sailing.

Don't you just love the AC when it comes around every few years. It gives us old buggers the chance to endlessly rehash and debate all the same old conspiracy theories that never die and allows the newbies a peak into the never ending mystique of the Cup that refuses to give up its secrets........now what was that about a Herbie?

So here we go again!

Yes, you can slip a wing keel past the measurement authority. That is exactly what happened!

And that is separate from the failed CIC argument pursued by the NYYC about the evolution of the design of the wing keel in the towing tank in Holland.

Subsequent claims from Dutch experts who worked in the tank with Bexy now appear to confirm what the NYYC believed. That the idea of adding wings to the keel during the tank tests came from.one of the technicians not Bexy.

Not the first time such a thing has happened in a towing tank or a wind tunnel because there are usually some very bright young students or PhD's assisting with the models who contribute to the work. That is in part what you pay for.

The problem with the wing keel on Australia II was that it was clearly a significant enough anomaly that the local measurer, at that time working for the IYRU (now World Sailing), should have referred back to the Chief Measurer in the head office in London for clarification before issuing a Certificate. 

Instead he issued the Certificate in Perth and no one was aware of the "problem" until Australia II arrived in Newport, RI. By that time it was too late. Bondy and Bexy could wave their official 12m Certificate in the NYYC officials faces. Hard luck.

Intrestingly that Australian measurer went on to head an independent AC measurement authority bypassing the IYRU.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/21/2021 at 5:41 AM, EYESAILOR said:

 

I wonder if a defender series will ever reemerge again?   I guess its unlikely.

But for much of AC history , before we had Challenger series, we had Defender trials. Typically there were single challenges and the Defender held a series to determine the defender. Then, commencing in 1970, we had multiple challenges and so the Challenger series was introduced and has remained ever since (except for 2 DOG challenges).

For a time we had both Challenger and Defender series. Then the Defender series died out. The last one (I think) was 1995 when SDYC accepted multiple US entries seeking to defend the cup.  I wonder if AM had won, if NYYC would have accepted more than one syndicate to submit for the defense.

The challenger series continued unabated . 

As long as Defender and CoR continue to favor multiple challenges , there will be a challenger series . Who sponsors it will depend on the sponsorship benefits.

I’ve wondered about that since the defender series died. When there was a defender series, America had some serious $$$, interest in the process,  and enough grace to accept the outcome.  What changed?  Maybe things changed to there can be only one, ever?  Or it was too expensive?  
 

(I still think that an owner/driver one man boat would be the way to go- kind of a skeeter class on water, racing around an island) :)

Share this post


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

I’ve wondered about that since the defender series died. When there was a defender series, America had some serious $$$, interest in the process,  and enough grace to accept the outcome.  What changed?  Maybe things changed to there can be only one, ever?  Or it was too expensive?  
 

(I still think that an owner/driver one man boat would be the way to go- kind of a skeeter class on water, racing around an island) :)

The cup got waaaaay more expensive. 

The last multi defender series was 1995 where the victor ran their campaign on $20 million (about $35 million adjusted for inflation).

This cup cycle only one yankee team made it to the cup and there is a lot more motivation to raise funds for a challenger than for a syndicate in a multi defender situation IMO.

So people can blather all they want about NZ killing the defender series, but the reality is that with a credible syndicate requiring $100 million plus, the number of participants is unlikely to ever return to the halcyon days of Fremantle or San Diego. 

Share this post


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

The problem with the wing keel on Australia II was that it was clearly a significant enough anomaly that the local measurer, at that time working for the IYRU (now World Sailing), should have referred back to the Chief Measurer in the head office in London for clarification before issuing a Certificate. 

Instead he issued the Certificate in Perth and no one was aware of the "problem" until Australia II arrived in Newport, RI. By that time it was too late. Bondy and Bexy could wave their official 12m Certificate in the NYYC officials faces. Hard luck.

Intrestingly that Australian measurer went on to head an independent AC measurement authority bypassing the IYRU.

What you say is true, and reflects a weakness in the old measurement system. This was when there was no collective AC measurement committee responsible for the initial measurement of the boats. If you want to go back even further, prior to the adoption of the 12mR class, the NYYC's measurer was the only measurement authority, and no other opinion mattered.

At least in the 12mR class, there was a class structure and a class Technical Director who ruled on such matters. In Fremantle, the English 12mR class Technical Director (Tony Watts) chaired the measurement committee, which consisted of the Australian measurer (nominally representing the Defender) and as I recall a Swiss measurer (nominally representing the challengers). That structure carried over to the 1988 DOG Match in San Diego, but with a partial change of personnel. Of course, since there was no class of yachts, there was no Technical Director.

The individual yachts were still measured by home-country 12mR class measurers in 1987. Not all of them were professionals, as yacht racing in general was not quite  a "professional" activity yet.

In 1992, the new IACC  had a Technical Director, who chaired the measurement committee, but the other measurers on the committee were no longer nominal representatives of the Challenger and Defender. You might say it was the beginning of fully-professional measurement and rule management.

Independent, professional race management, including the PRO, IJ, umpires, and measurers, is a fairly modern construct that runs parallel to the development of professional sailing. The AC had a lot to do with this increasing professionalism, since so much is at stake.

 

Share this post


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

The cup got waaaaay more expensive. 

The last multi defender series was 1995 where the victor ran their campaign on $20 million (about $35 million adjusted for inflation).

This cup cycle only one yankee team made it to the cup and there is a lot more motivation to raise funds for a challenger than for a syndicate in a multi defender situation IMO.

So people can blather all they want about NZ killing the defender series, but the reality is that with a credible syndicate requiring $100 million plus, the number of participants is unlikely to ever return to the halcyon days of Fremantle or San Diego. 

IIRR, Sopwith spent ~$ 40 on one campaign in the J boat era in today’s $$$......now we’re back to big boats.....maybe there’s an inverse correlation between sailing’s popularity in general :lol:and the size of AC boats... something about concentration of capital?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It hardly matters what the boat is, there is no realistic way to stop billionaires spending money on the cup. The budgets went up when Bertarelli took a run at it.

If a wealthy team sponsor/owner thinks they will get an advantage or a realistic chance of winning from spending an extra $10million then they will do it. Only a fraction of the cash goes directly on the boat. Most of it goes on design, R&D, and especially on the salary bill.

Even if you make the boats almost one design the teams will spend tens of millions on the few bits they can, and the budgets will still be about the same. Look at the last cup. Most of that boat was prescribed, with only the control systems and foils not closely controlled yet budgets remain astronomical.

Share this post


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

It hardly matters what the boat is, there is no realistic way to stop billionaires spending money on the cup. The budgets went up when Bertarelli took a run at it.

If a wealthy team sponsor/owner thinks they will get an advantage or a realistic chance of winning from spending an extra $10million then they will do it. Only a fraction of the cash goes directly on the boat. Most of it goes on design, R&D, and especially on the salary bill.

Even if you make the boats almost one design the teams will spend tens of millions on the few bits they can, and the budgets will still be about the same. Look at the last cup. Most of that boat was prescribed, with only the control systems and foils not closely controlled yet budgets remain astronomical.

I don't think you can solely blame Bertarelli for the budget bulge and trust me, I want to blame the cunt for as much as I can.

The budgets were already starting to climb in 2000. Not to the same extent obviously but yeah, the trajectory was there.

But you are correct that people will always spend a fortune.

The next cup could be races in Optis and the bill would still top $50 million for better sails, sailors, special NASA engineered super slippery wax, whatever the fuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, jaysper said:

The cup got waaaaay more expensive. 

The last multi defender series was 1995 where the victor ran their campaign on $20 million (about $35 million adjusted for inflation).

This cup cycle only one yankee team made it to the cup and there is a lot more motivation to raise funds for a challenger than for a syndicate in a multi defender situation IMO.

So people can blather all they want about NZ killing the defender series, but the reality is that with a credible syndicate requiring $100 million plus, the number of participants is unlikely to ever return to the halcyon days of Fremantle or San Diego. 

I would argue that NZ did not kill the defender series. There was only one defender because NZ was a small country and with limited resources they were focused but if another syndicate had come along, I think they would have been welcome to throw their hat in the ring in 2000 or 2003 but in 2007, Allinghi moved to a site designated by the dfender in Valencia and the defense was clearly controlled by Allinghi and not the YC.

Its not a problem and it is perfectly possible albeit unlikely that a defender series will crop up again in some distant future.  If NYYC had won it and another syndicate presented it self to compete with AM, I think the club would be open to the possibility as long as it did not dilute the best possible defense. I think a defender series is most effective held well before the competition is .

 

Share this post


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

I would argue that NZ did not kill the defender series. There was only one defender because NZ was a small country and with limited resources they were focused but if another syndicate had come along, I think they would have been welcome to throw their hat in the ring in 2000 or 2003 but in 2007, Allinghi moved to a site designated by the dfender in Valencia and the defense was clearly controlled by Allinghi and not the YC.

Its not a problem and it is perfectly possible albeit unlikely that a defender series will crop up again in some distant future.  If NYYC had won it and another syndicate presented it self to compete with AM, I think the club would be open to the possibility as long as it did not dilute the best possible defense. I think a defender series is most effective held well before the competition is .

 

I'm not convinced how welcome they would have been by ETNZ.

Also, I doubt whether the yanks could have mustered more than one defender when they couldn't muster more than one challenger.

You could see the game change around 2000 when Dennis Connor become an also ran simply because the $20 million he was able to raise was no longer sufficient for a credible challenge.

It's a shame but it's life.

Share this post


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

RNZYS has no decision making power over ETNZ, it was made obvious in their recent post reaction after the embarrassing Venue Bid doc got posted publicly. 

I'm pretty sure that after the legal shenanigans of the last few cups the ifs and buts are ironed out well in advance of competing. Water tight agreement probably goes like this these days and is signed well in advance of anything the public ever hears of a challenge.

1)XXX yacht consortium agrees to race the america's cup under the burgee of YYY yacht club with ZZZ yacht.

2)in the event of ZZZ yacht winning the cup XXX will dictate to YYY all conditions of the subsequent defence.

3)in the event of YYY failing to fulfill the conditions of term 2, the skipper of ZZZ can pork the YYY commodore's wife once daily and twice on sundays 

Share this post


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

It hardly matters what the boat is, there is no realistic way to stop billionaires spending money on the cup. The budgets went up when Bertarelli took a run at it.

Raul Gardini and Bill Koch may have spent more in 1992 than Bertarelli spent  a decade later in 2003. They both knew how to throw money at things.

There is little doubt as to who has spent the most money over time in pursuit of the Cup, and it wasn't any of these three.

Money has always made the Cup go 'round. It ain't a sport for  the light of wallet or faint of heart.

The only funding competitor who might have made a commercial success of the AC might have been Sir Thomas Lipton, whose image (wearing a yachting cap and holding a cup) and tea were everywhere in the US after his five failed challenges. Lipton's Tea was pretty much "tea" to generations of Americans.

See the source image

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I’ve wondered about that since the defender series died. When there was a defender series, America had some serious $$$, interest in the process,  and enough grace to accept the outcome.  What changed?  Maybe things changed to there can be only one, ever?  Or it was too expensive?  
 

(I still think that an owner/driver one man boat would be the way to go- kind of a skeeter class on water, racing around an island) :)

Well yeah it got waaay more expensive.

That said, the ultrarich in the US got waaay richer. 

I think one important factor is the classes got waaaay more technical in terms of reducing the number of people  you could hire to design and build 

AND requirements for sailing on the boats, even as "afterguard" or "ridealong" got waaay waaay waaay more athletically demanding. Thus, the richuns could only write checks and watch younger alpha males sail. Hence the youngish fit rich do race in other classes.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Whilst I love this smack down of Spindio, would you mind not quoting her?

It's her sycophantic rants that made me put her on ignore 2 cups ago.

Quoting her defeats the ignore function.

My apologies, I don't use the ignore function. I try to skip past her posts, plus a few others, but sometimes the total insanity of her comments gets me hooked. I will do my best to refrain, for both our sakes.

Share this post


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

My apologies, I don't use the ignore function. I try to skip past her posts, plus a few others, but sometimes the total insanity of her comments gets me hooked. I will do my best to refrain, for both our sakes.

LOL! All good.

I only use it sparingly for people like her who have a very low signal to noise ratio.

She probably thinks she is on ignore cos if all the racist rants about my wife, but honestly I couldn't give a fuck. 

But the constant blind defence of NZ and all things ETNZ just gets old fast and sheds a bad light in the rest of us Kiwis who can actually think critically.

As you said, GDs semen is not an attractive adornment, although I think it is dribbling out the side of her mouth rather than leg.

Share this post


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

Thankfully ETNZ won and this was consigned to the bin.

You said it mate, love the optimism in this paragraph: 

"Emirates Team New Zealand is not here today, but they have been kept updated on all developments throughout the creation of the framework agreement,” Whitmarsh said. “We remain optimistic that they will come on board in the future and it is clear that cooperation is better for all of the stakeholders in the America’s Cup."

:lol::lol::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect much of what this agreement attempted is similar to what Ratcliffe would like to see. It will be interesting to see what is cooked up with ETNZ if INEOS becomes the next COR.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

LOL! All good.

I only use it sparingly for people like her who have a very low signal to noise ratio.

She probably thinks she is on ignore cos if all the racist rants about my wife, but honestly I couldn't give a fuck. 

But the constant blind defence of NZ and all things ETNZ just gets old fast and sheds a bad light in the rest of us Kiwis who can actually think critically.

As you said, GDs semen is not an attractive adornment, although I think it is dribbling out the side of her mouth rather than leg.

You do realise the leg dribble is just leakage from grasping ankles. :ph34r:

Share this post


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

You said it mate, love the optimism in this paragraph: 

"Emirates Team New Zealand is not here today, but they have been kept updated on all developments throughout the creation of the framework agreement,” Whitmarsh said. “We remain optimistic that they will come on board in the future and it is clear that cooperation is better for all of the stakeholders in the America’s Cup."

:lol::lol::lol:

Yep.

We've all agreed to sodomise etnz. They haven't agreed to it yet, but we're sure they will.

Share this post


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

I suspect much of what this agreement attempted is similar to what Ratcliffe would like to see. It will be interesting to see what is cooked up with ETNZ if INEOS becomes the next COR.

He can want whatever the duck he wants, but the AC is one of the few things money can't buy.

 Money is necessary but not sufficient. 

Share this post


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

You said it mate, love the optimism in this paragraph: 

"Emirates Team New Zealand is not here today, but they have been kept updated on all developments throughout the creation of the framework agreement,” Whitmarsh said. “We remain optimistic that they will come on board in the future and it is clear that cooperation is better for all of the stakeholders in the America’s Cup."

:lol::lol::lol:

At the time I was disappointed that EYNZ did not join the agreement. We discovered later that LR had done a back room deal in exchange for helping fund and resource ETNZ but in exchange ETNZ had to agree to monohulls if ETNZ won. 

I was wrong to be disappointed because the monohulls and the upwind starts are incredible.

However I hope the AC can stabilize and bring campaigns down to $30-50m

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, jaysper said:

He can want whatever the duck he wants, but the AC is one of the few things money can't buy.

 Money is necessary but not sufficient. 

Ernie and Larry both thought they'd bought it but found they only had a short term lease. :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

However I hope the AC can stabilize and bring campaigns down to $30-50m

I would share your hope but think it’s unlikely. Hard to see it not continuing to be the play think of gazillionaires. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, strider470 said:

I see having more defenders a resource for LR, in case, rather than a threat, given they would have a huge head start.

That would instead be a massive liability, as you would be splitting the human resources of italian sailors, designers, shore team between multiple syndacates. 

Much better to concentrate all the resources into one single team representing the country, especially if the nationality rule remains in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like others have pointed out, $150M is chump-change fun to one guy or a few of his friends nowadays. These are people simply looking for fun. That wealth concentration also relegates most YC’s to being meaningless, AC-campaign-wise, unless perhaps if for example the NYYC had a bunch of $B’s willing to challenge each other in a Defender series. 
 

I read an account once where it said that EB was willing to fund an NZ Defender alongside whatever was left of the NZ defender after 2000. That offer ran into headwind because the locals in NZ thought they could profit off the AC and didn’t want to risk losing that profiteering. GD’s approach is (rightly or wrongly) based on selling the event to venues and commercial sponsors but he has no serious multi-$B on board. The multi-$B’s are not interested in trying to profit out of this yacht race, it’s (as Ratcliffe said recently) more just a mission and a fun endeavor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 45Roller said:

 

5 hours ago, marlowe said:

Thankfully ETNZ won and this was consigned to the bin.

 

5 hours ago, marlowe said:

I suspect much of what this agreement attempted is similar to what Ratcliffe would like to see. It will be interesting to see what is cooked up with ETNZ if INEOS becomes the next COR.

A very interest scenario is brewing if ETNZ win, as most of us agree they will. My money is already down at far better odds than the 1.50 that the NZ Tab are now offering.

I think we can also agree that FIC (fracker in chief) and the RYS will become the COR.

ETNZ/RNZYS and these two can then write the protocol that sets the dates, format, venue, boats, entry fees and conditions for additional challengers to join in. 

In most AC's since the1970's this has been pretty straightforward. The only aberrations being the two one on one DoG events where other challengers were excluded.

In the best of the previous protocols the later challengers were given a pretty fair run at setting the terms and conditions of the challenger selection series with the COR.

There was a majority voting system which specifically excluded the Defender, who only had a say in the conditions of the Match itself.

In the current 36th AC it is less than ideal with most decisions made between just the Defender and the COR. The two other challengers had little say, or voting rights and both complained about this.

Their only option was to appeal to the independent Arbitration Panel that would hopefully rule with an eye to upholding the terms of the DoG within the Protocol that had been written for the series. The logic being that the Arbitration Panels finding would be accepted rather than the dissatisfied party making a direct application to the NY Supreme Court which would be expensive and could potentially bog the Cup down for several years. 

So what are the dangers looming for the 37th AC in 2024 or beyond (not to clash with the 2024 Olympics).

Beyond the terms of the current series that give too much say in the challenger series to the Defender and effectively exclude the challengers from the Defender/COR discussions (for instance the selection of the race courses and the upper and lower wind limits), the seeds were already sown by RC and Ellison in Bermuda. 

What they concocted and then foisted on the gang of five (ETNZ refused to play), was an agreement that covered all the terms for not only the next Match, but the subsequent Match as well. 

An agreement for the next two Cups which set in advance the yachts as relatively one-design catamarans and a series of interim regattas to keep the whole circus rolling.

The aim being to commercialise the Cup for sponsors and TV, reduce the costs, maintain continuity of employment for the sailor, stimulate and grow public interest and attract more teams. 

I guess all very commendable. Though sadly not the Cup as we know and love.

The five teams all signed up for the accord, ETNZ refused and the rest is history. 

Well not quite!

Because RC and LE, in a fit of pique at losing, just went ahead on their own and set up SailGP to just about the same format as the accord.

LE's gazillions are still funding that; paying for boats, crews, venues, prize money,  TV etc. The boats are flying, the events are great and a level of nationality has been introduced which makes it even better and more accessible to the public although the recent announcement of the new US team has caused some consternation at home with an Australian helmsman currently employed as an Italian, Jimmy Spithill. Yes he did helm the previous three (two wins and a loss) US AC entries and he does have an American wife and children and variously lives in the USA, but surely RC could have found a suitably qualified US native to please the masses.

Anyway, love it or hate it, SailGP is not the AC and hopefully never will be.

But hang on. What if ETNZ and INEOS as COR went ahead and set up a protocol that required all subsequent challengers to agree to a similar format as the Gang of Five (GoF) Bermuda accord as condition of entry. 

The FIC has already been quoted in the news as wishing for such a format and you can be sure that Sir Ben would jump at the chance. Put him in a semi-one-design boat with an even chance of winning and I would not be betting against him.

Just look what he did in his first SailGP event in Sydney at the end of the series when all the top SailGP crews were well battle hardened after a full season. Five straight wins and a concessionary sixth race handed to his Australian hosts. 

The point being that when the GoF accord was presented in Bermuda the COR protocol had already been agreed two years before so ETNZ did not have to sign up and were still allowed to compete.  

So how will ETNZ play it if they have a successful defence in the next few weeks? Will they remember how they managed to escape the clutches of RC/LE in Bermuda or will they, most probably for commercial reasons, decide to head down a similar route with the financial support of the FIC?

Hopefully respect for the Cup and the DoG that has given them a great run for many years will prevail.

If not then I will be burning my betting slips and wishing for a sweet Italian victory. 

The Cup in Italy would most likely match the very best AC racing that we have ever seen. Vintage Hauraki Gulf, vintage Valencia and vintage Fremantle combined. 

The food, the setting, the architecture, the enthusiasm, the style, the passion, the food again, the clothes, the people, the scenery, the history, the women, the wine, the weather. It would be magnificent and would generate more entries than any SailGP.

Viva Italia

Forza Luna Rossa         

Grazia Prada

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

Whilst I love this smack down of Spindio, would you mind not quoting her?

It's her sycophantic rants that made me put her on ignore 2 cups ago.

Quoting her defeats the ignore function.

You still stalking those Vietnamese mail-order brides Jason? B)

Share this post


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

...However I hope the AC can stabilize and bring campaigns down to $30-50m

Why?? If it was affordable, everyone will be challenging and it'll be just another regatta. I hope the cost of challenging stays astronomical so that only the truly egotistical rich punters get seduced by the presumption that their $$$ will win them the Auld Mug.

Share this post


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

 

 

A very interest scenario is brewing if ETNZ win, as most of us agree they will. My money is already down at far better odds than the 1.50 that the NZ Tab are now offering.

I think we can also agree that FIC (fracker in chief) and the RYS will become the COR.

ETNZ/RNZYS and these two can then write the protocol that sets the dates, format, venue, boats, entry fees and conditions for additional challengers to join in. 

In most AC's since the1970's this has been pretty straightforward. The only aberrations being the two one on one DoG events where other challengers were excluded.

In the best of the previous protocols the later challengers were given a pretty fair run at setting the terms and conditions of the challenger selection series with the COR.

There was a majority voting system which specifically excluded the Defender, who only had a say in the conditions of the Match itself.

In the current 36th AC it is less than ideal with most decisions made between just the Defender and the COR. The two other challengers had little say, or voting rights and both complained about this.

Their only option was to appeal to the independent Arbitration Panel that would hopefully rule with an eye to upholding the terms of the DoG within the Protocol that had been written for the series. The logic being that the Arbitration Panels finding would be accepted rather than the dissatisfied party making a direct application to the NY Supreme Court which would be expensive and could potentially bog the Cup down for several years. 

So what are the dangers looming for the 37th AC in 2024 or beyond (not to clash with the 2024 Olympics).

Beyond the terms of the current series that give too much say in the challenger series to the Defender and effectively exclude the challengers from the Defender/COR discussions (for instance the selection of the race courses and the upper and lower wind limits), the seeds were already sown by RC and Ellison in Bermuda. 

What they concocted and then foisted on the gang of five (ETNZ refused to play), was an agreement that covered all the terms for not only the next Match, but the subsequent Match as well. 

An agreement for the next two Cups which set in advance the yachts as relatively one-design catamarans and a series of interim regattas to keep the whole circus rolling.

The aim being to commercialise the Cup for sponsors and TV, reduce the costs, maintain continuity of employment for the sailor, stimulate and grow public interest and attract more teams. 

I guess all very commendable. Though sadly not the Cup as we know and love.

The five teams all signed up for the accord, ETNZ refused and the rest is history. 

Well not quite!

Because RC and LE, in a fit of pique at losing, just went ahead on their own and set up SailGP to just about the same format as the accord.

LE's gazillions are still funding that; paying for boats, crews, venues, prize money,  TV etc. The boats are flying, the events are great and a level of nationality has been introduced which makes it even better and more accessible to the public although the recent announcement of the new US team has caused some consternation at home with an Australian helmsman currently employed as an Italian, Jimmy Spithill. Yes he did helm the previous three (two wins and a loss) US AC entries and he does have an American wife and children and variously lives in the USA, but surely RC could have found a suitably qualified US native to please the masses.

Anyway, love it or hate it, SailGP is not the AC and hopefully never will be.

But hang on. What if ETNZ and INEOS as COR went ahead and set up a protocol that required all subsequent challengers to agree to a similar format as the Gang of Five (GoF) Bermuda accord as condition of entry. 

The FIC has already been quoted in the news as wishing for such a format and you can be sure that Sir Ben would jump at the chance. Put him in a semi-one-design boat with an even chance of winning and I would not be betting against him.

Just look what he did in his first SailGP event in Sydney at the end of the series when all the top SailGP crews were well battle hardened after a full season. Five straight wins and a concessionary sixth race handed to his Australian hosts. 

The point being that when the GoF accord was presented in Bermuda the COR protocol had already been agreed two years before so ETNZ did not have to sign up and were still allowed to compete.  

So how will ETNZ play it if they have a successful defence in the next few weeks? Will they remember how they managed to escape the clutches of RC/LE in Bermuda or will they, most probably for commercial reasons, decide to head down a similar route with the financial support of the FIC?

Hopefully respect for the Cup and the DoG that has given them a great run for many years will prevail.

If not then I will be burning my betting slips and wishing for a sweet Italian victory. 

The Cup in Italy would most likely match the very best AC racing that we have ever seen. Vintage Hauraki Gulf, vintage Valencia and vintage Fremantle combined. 

The food, the setting, the architecture, the enthusiasm, the style, the passion, the food again, the clothes, the people, the scenery, the history, the women, the wine, the weather. It would be magnificent and would generate more entries than any SailGP.

Viva Italia

Forza Luna Rossa         

Grazia Prada

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The one difference to that agreement is that i think they would keep the AC75 as the boat.

will that ever be as cheap as an AC45/ 50 as Larry had planned?

I think there's still enough development in this new concept of boat to keep going for a V2. the IACC made it to V5!

one change i would make is to allow a wider range of foils to select. needing to just go with one for the entire regatta/wind range just seems to ask for compromises all round.

 

Share this post


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

A very interest scenario is brewing if ETNZ win, as most of us agree they will. My money is already down at far better odds than the 1.50 that the NZ Tab are now offering.

I think we can also agree that FIC (fracker in chief) and the RYS will become the COR.

ETNZ/RNZYS and these two can then write the protocol that sets the dates, format, venue, boats, entry fees and conditions for additional challengers to join in. 

In most AC's since the1970's this has been pretty straightforward. The only aberrations being the two one on one DoG events where other challengers were excluded.

In the best of the previous protocols the later challengers were given a pretty fair run at setting the terms and conditions of the challenger selection series with the COR.

There was a majority voting system which specifically excluded the Defender, who only had a say in the conditions of the Match itself.

In the current 36th AC it is less than ideal with most decisions made between just the Defender and the COR. The two other challengers had little say, or voting rights and both complained about this.

Their only option was to appeal to the independent Arbitration Panel that would hopefully rule with an eye to upholding the terms of the DoG within the Protocol that had been written for the series. The logic being that the Arbitration Panels finding would be accepted rather than the dissatisfied party making a direct application to the NY Supreme Court which would be expensive and could potentially bog the Cup down for several years. 

So what are the dangers looming for the 37th AC in 2024 or beyond (not to clash with the 2024 Olympics).

Beyond the terms of the current series that give too much say in the challenger series to the Defender and effectively exclude the challengers from the Defender/COR discussions (for instance the selection of the race courses and the upper and lower wind limits), the seeds were already sown by RC and Ellison in Bermuda. 

What they concocted and then foisted on the gang of five (ETNZ refused to play), was an agreement that covered all the terms for not only the next Match, but the subsequent Match as well. 

An agreement for the next two Cups which set in advance the yachts as relatively one-design catamarans and a series of interim regattas to keep the whole circus rolling.

The aim being to commercialise the Cup for sponsors and TV, reduce the costs, maintain continuity of employment for the sailor, stimulate and grow public interest and attract more teams. 

I guess all very commendable. Though sadly not the Cup as we know and love.

The five teams all signed up for the accord, ETNZ refused and the rest is history. 

Well not quite!

Because RC and LE, in a fit of pique at losing, just went ahead on their own and set up SailGP to just about the same format as the accord.

LE's gazillions are still funding that; paying for boats, crews, venues, prize money,  TV etc. The boats are flying, the events are great and a level of nationality has been introduced which makes it even better and more accessible to the public although the recent announcement of the new US team has caused some consternation at home with an Australian helmsman currently employed as an Italian, Jimmy Spithill. Yes he did helm the previous three (two wins and a loss) US AC entries and he does have an American wife and children and variously lives in the USA, but surely RC could have found a suitably qualified US native to please the masses.

Anyway, love it or hate it, SailGP is not the AC and hopefully never will be.

But hang on. What if ETNZ and INEOS as COR went ahead and set up a protocol that required all subsequent challengers to agree to a similar format as the Gang of Five (GoF) Bermuda accord as condition of entry. 

The FIC has already been quoted in the news as wishing for such a format and you can be sure that Sir Ben would jump at the chance. Put him in a semi-one-design boat with an even chance of winning and I would not be betting against him.

Just look what he did in his first SailGP event in Sydney at the end of the series when all the top SailGP crews were well battle hardened after a full season. Five straight wins and a concessionary sixth race handed to his Australian hosts. 

The point being that when the GoF accord was presented in Bermuda the COR protocol had already been agreed two years before so ETNZ did not have to sign up and were still allowed to compete.  

So how will ETNZ play it if they have a successful defence in the next few weeks? Will they remember how they managed to escape the clutches of RC/LE in Bermuda or will they, most probably for commercial reasons, decide to head down a similar route with the financial support of the FIC?

Hopefully respect for the Cup and the DoG that has given them a great run for many years will prevail.

If not then I will be burning my betting slips and wishing for a sweet Italian victory. 

The Cup in Italy would most likely match the very best AC racing that we have ever seen. Vintage Hauraki Gulf, vintage Valencia and vintage Fremantle combined. 

The food, the setting, the architecture, the enthusiasm, the style, the passion, the food again, the clothes, the people, the scenery, the history, the women, the wine, the weather. It would be magnificent and would generate more entries than any SailGP.

Viva Italia

Forza Luna Rossa         

Grazia Prada

3 hours ago, shebeen said:

The one difference to that agreement is that i think they would keep the AC75 as the boat.

will that ever be as cheap as an AC45/ 50 as Larry had planned?

I think there's still enough development in this new concept of boat to keep going for a V2. the IACC made it to V5!

one change i would make is to allow a wider range of foils to select. needing to just go with one for the entire regatta/wind range just seems to ask for compromises all round.

 

Yes, I am all for keeping the AC75 (in various versions as they become more refinded, even faster and more impressive) for as many Cup cycles as it takes, like the 12mR and the IAAC's.

No problem and I believe all four current syndicates want that as well. Especially the sailors.

But that can easily be achieved within a protocol that does not put constraints on the winning team preventing them from having much say at all in the future of the Cup that they have deservedly and probably doggedly won at great expense. 

I believe this is fundamental to the ethos and is the attraction of the Cup to the billionaires that have made it what it is; a magnificent sporting obsession set on the water

Win it and own it, ever so briefly. Set your own stamp on it. 

If you then make it too difficult, or too expensive, then maybe others won't come and challenge you so it will be an empty chalice.

So be careful with it and treasure it and enjoy your moment.

P.S. I can add Italian cars and motorbikes and Wally yachts and Riva motorboats to that list, and of course parmigiano reggiano.

Share this post


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

one change i would make is to allow a wider range of foils to select. needing to just go with one for the entire regatta/wind range just seems to ask for compromises all round

That's the quickest way to add cost. The foils are easily the most expensive part of the boats.

Share this post


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

Why?? If it was affordable, everyone will be challenging and it'll be just another regatta. I hope the cost of challenging stays astronomical so that only the truly egotistical rich punters get seduced by the presumption that their $$$ will win them the Auld Mug.

What if ETNZ corp has to go offshore so they can keep enough money flowing through an open spigot to keep the team intact and remain competitive?

The AC will never be just another regatta, 2 boats or 20.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2021 at 5:47 PM, winchfodder said:

 

 

A very interest scenario is brewing if ETNZ win, as most of us agree they will. My money is already down at far better odds than the 1.50 that the NZ Tab are now offering.

I think we can also agree that FIC (fracker in chief) and the RYS will become the COR.

ETNZ/RNZYS and these two can then write the protocol that sets the dates, format, venue, boats, entry fees and conditions for additional challengers to join in. 

In most AC's since the1970's this has been pretty straightforward. The only aberrations being the two one on one DoG events where other challengers were excluded.

In the best of the previous protocols the later challengers were given a pretty fair run at setting the terms and conditions of the challenger selection series with the COR.

There was a majority voting system which specifically excluded the Defender, who only had a say in the conditions of the Match itself.

In the current 36th AC it is less than ideal with most decisions made between just the Defender and the COR. The two other challengers had little say, or voting rights and both complained about this.

Their only option was to appeal to the independent Arbitration Panel that would hopefully rule with an eye to upholding the terms of the DoG within the Protocol that had been written for the series. The logic being that the Arbitration Panels finding would be accepted rather than the dissatisfied party making a direct application to the NY Supreme Court which would be expensive and could potentially bog the Cup down for several years. 

So what are the dangers looming for the 37th AC in 2024 or beyond (not to clash with the 2024 Olympics).

Beyond the terms of the current series that give too much say in the challenger series to the Defender and effectively exclude the challengers from the Defender/COR discussions (for instance the selection of the race courses and the upper and lower wind limits), the seeds were already sown by RC and Ellison in Bermuda. 

What they concocted and then foisted on the gang of five (ETNZ refused to play), was an agreement that covered all the terms for not only the next Match, but the subsequent Match as well. 

An agreement for the next two Cups which set in advance the yachts as relatively one-design catamarans and a series of interim regattas to keep the whole circus rolling.

The aim being to commercialise the Cup for sponsors and TV, reduce the costs, maintain continuity of employment for the sailor, stimulate and grow public interest and attract more teams. 

I guess all very commendable. Though sadly not the Cup as we know and love.

The five teams all signed up for the accord, ETNZ refused and the rest is history. 

Well not quite!

Because RC and LE, in a fit of pique at losing, just went ahead on their own and set up SailGP to just about the same format as the accord.

LE's gazillions are still funding that; paying for boats, crews, venues, prize money,  TV etc. The boats are flying, the events are great and a level of nationality has been introduced which makes it even better and more accessible to the public although the recent announcement of the new US team has caused some consternation at home with an Australian helmsman currently employed as an Italian, Jimmy Spithill. Yes he did helm the previous three (two wins and a loss) US AC entries and he does have an American wife and children and variously lives in the USA, but surely RC could have found a suitably qualified US native to please the masses.

Anyway, love it or hate it, SailGP is not the AC and hopefully never will be.

But hang on. What if ETNZ and INEOS as COR went ahead and set up a protocol that required all subsequent challengers to agree to a similar format as the Gang of Five (GoF) Bermuda accord as condition of entry. 

The FIC has already been quoted in the news as wishing for such a format and you can be sure that Sir Ben would jump at the chance. Put him in a semi-one-design boat with an even chance of winning and I would not be betting against him.

Just look what he did in his first SailGP event in Sydney at the end of the series when all the top SailGP crews were well battle hardened after a full season. Five straight wins and a concessionary sixth race handed to his Australian hosts. 

The point being that when the GoF accord was presented in Bermuda the COR protocol had already been agreed two years before so ETNZ did not have to sign up and were still allowed to compete.  

So how will ETNZ play it if they have a successful defence in the next few weeks? Will they remember how they managed to escape the clutches of RC/LE in Bermuda or will they, most probably for commercial reasons, decide to head down a similar route with the financial support of the FIC?

Hopefully respect for the Cup and the DoG that has given them a great run for many years will prevail.

If not then I will be burning my betting slips and wishing for a sweet Italian victory. 

The Cup in Italy would most likely match the very best AC racing that we have ever seen. Vintage Hauraki Gulf, vintage Valencia and vintage Fremantle combined. 

The food, the setting, the architecture, the enthusiasm, the style, the passion, the food again, the clothes, the people, the scenery, the history, the women, the wine, the weather. It would be magnificent and would generate more entries than any SailGP.

Viva Italia

Forza Luna Rossa         

Grazia Prada

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nicely thought out, interesting post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2021 at 2:36 AM, AeroSail1 said:

Image result for coppa del nonno

If LR wins i can totally see Nestle' sponsoring the "Coppa del Nonno challenger selection series". The cup is also conveniently shaped as an flipped buoy mark too.

Dangerously close to, " ... a vulgar beach event smelling of sunscreen and french fries."

No wait.That was a whole lot of trouble from that other mob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the ETNZ/Ineos cozy plan goes forward, does AC become a SailGP clone in a different boat?  

Share this post


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

If the ETNZ/Ineos cozy plan goes forward, does AC become a SailGP clone in a different boat?  

Can't happen.

SailGP has a single enduring governing body that is immutable regardless of the victor.

The AC is a total shit show where governance changes hands each time a new victor emerges.

The victor chooses the boat, the venue and most of the rules unless of course they fuck up the challenge document in which case some other cunt comes along and smacks you with a DoG match.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting to read about GD shopping the host out. I can't help but think most people will consider that no different to RC and Butters shopping themselves to EB and the backlash they got at home for it.

The talk of the Brits already having an agreement to be CoR has me thinking.

If EB is interested in a return to the circus, and I have not seen anything substantive to suggest he is, then I think he would be wiser to be discussing being the CoR in the event LR wins. If TNZ wins, EB is better off letting the Brits do the heavy lifting with TNZ, styles and approaches are too different.

Just thinking out loud.

Share this post


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

Interesting to read about GD shopping the host out. I can't help but think most people will consider that no different to RC and Butters shopping themselves to EB and the backlash they got at home for it.

The talk of the Brits already having an agreement to be CoR has me thinking.

If EB is interested in a return to the circus, and I have not seen anything substantive to suggest he is, then I think he would be wiser to be discussing being the CoR in the event LR wins. If TNZ wins, EB is better off letting the Brits do the heavy lifting with TNZ, styles and approaches are too different.

Just thinking out loud.

They are way ahead of you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

They are way ahead of you.

Wouldn't surprise me. I haven't really looked into it, I don't have the interest I used to have.

Share this post


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

Can't happen.

SailGP has a single enduring governing body that is immutable regardless of the victor.

The AC is a total shit show where governance changes hands each time a new victor emerges.

The victor chooses the boat, the venue and most of the rules unless of course they fuck up the challenge document in which case some other cunt comes along and smacks you with a DoG match.

Wasn't that Framework Agreement going to make AC a lot like SailGP?  The agreement that had the ghost of George Schuyler rolling in his grave and sparing us all litigation about DoG by summoning Karma to moot it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Wasn't that Framework Agreement going to make AC a lot like SailGP?  The agreement that had the ghost of George Schuyler rolling in his grave and sparing us all litigation about DoG by summoning Karma to moot it?

Sure and look what happened as soon as a victor that didn't want it won.

Lasted all of about 6 months.

This is why the AC will never EVER be like any other sailing regatta and I do wonder if there is indeed any other sports event like it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GD shopping the host venue is exactly like RC/LE shopping the venue and getting Bermuda. Except maybe GD has a bit of an excuse being as LE was and is one of the richest creatures on the planet.

How do Europeans feel about UAE? Would they go spectate there? 

Share this post


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

Sure and look what happened as soon as a victor that didn't want it won.

Lasted all of about 6 months.

This is why the AC will never EVER be like any other sailing regatta and I do wonder if there is indeed any other sports event like it.

That was the Karma, lol!

 

Share this post


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

GD shopping the host venue is exactly like RC/LE shopping the venue and getting Bermuda. Except maybe GD has a bit of an excuse being as LE was and is one of the richest creatures on the planet.

How do Europeans feel about UAE? Would they go spectate there?  

Spectators count more on TV nowadays.

But in my opinion, it would be a very sad decision for NZ people.

Share this post


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

How do Europeans feel about UAE? Would they go spectate there? 

Assuming the Covid scare will be over by AC37, Dubai - but also Doha, Qatar - would be much more convenient for Europeans than NZ. Consider:

- only 3 time zones ahead of CET in the winter

- comparatively short, cheap flights

- potentially vast venue money, free infrastructure as a result of bidding war between UAE and Qatar

- tourists welcome, alcohol available in international hotels, consumerism attractions

- plenty of hotels, Qatar particularly will have hosted the Soccer World Cup

- constant light wind (LR weather :) )

- composite facilities available

Actually, weather wise the best place would be Oman, but they’ve got little money

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Sure and look what happened as soon as a victor that didn't want it won.

Lasted all of about 6 months.

 

SailGP's issue was COVID. You can't run an international traveling sailing circus with a pandemic going on.

You have to wonder if Oracle or one of the others (besides ETNZ) had prevailed in AC 35, whether they would have completed AC36 in 2019, before the pandemic shut the world down.

The updated AC50 Class Rule was written, and teams could easily have rolled into racing within 18 months. The CiC rules were lax, so new teams could have bought and used old boats (except needing new bows).

Of course, it would have shut down again in 2020, and who knows where we would be at this stage?

You can't re-write history in any case.

Share this post


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

SailGP's issue was COVID. You can't run an international traveling sailing circus with a pandemic going on.

You have to wonder if Oracle or one of the others (besides ETNZ) had prevailed in AC 35, whether they would have completed AC36 in 2019, before the pandemic shut the world down.

The updated AC50 Class Rule was written, and teams could easily have rolled into racing within 18 months. The CiC rules were lax, so new teams could have bought and used old boats (except needing new bows).

Of course, it would have shut down again in 2020, and who knows where we would be at this stage?

You can't re-write history in any case.

That wasn't my point.

My point it is not practically possible to write any rules into the AC in addition to those in the DoG that are guaranteed to endure beyond the current defender's tenure.

The NYYC managed to get some amendments to the DoG but those are as rare as rocking horse shit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

That wasn't my point.

My point it is not practically possible to write any rules into the AC in addition to those in the DoG that are guaranteed to endure beyond the current defender's tenure.

The NYYC managed to get some amendments to the DoG but those are as rare as rocking horse shit.

That is certainly true, but it is not what I was addressing. If one of the other teams had won (besides ETNZ) and there was a hip-pocket challenge in place with an agreed framework, it certainly could have survived at least one iteration. After that, it gets trickier, but a similar structure could have prevailed beyond that. We have seen that it is easy for a defender to manipulate who the next challenger will be if there is a potentially-friendly challenger. That has been going on forever.

Any agreement may or may not be enforceable, so you have to be prepared for a challenger going rogue.

Would it all hold up to legal scrutiny? The jury is out on that one, as it would change the character of the event. If another gazillionaire came along and had deep enough pockets to do what LE did after 2007, who knows how it could end up?

Anyhow, it's idle speculation at this point. We've got what should be a great regatta coming up shortly, in the more-or-less modern tradition.

 

Share this post


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

GD shopping the host venue is exactly like RC/LE shopping the venue and getting Bermuda. Except maybe GD has a bit of an excuse being as LE was and is one of the richest creatures on the planet.

How do Europeans feel about UAE? Would they go spectate there? 

It's the $80 million Host Fee, GD is after. Not spectators, Clew.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

It's the $80 million Host Fee, GD is after. Not spectators, Clew.

Indeed.

I'm guessing others would pay more, but he is just looking for what is considered a reasonable fee to cover the hosting.

Now you can very easily argue whether this fee represents good value for money. I for one don't think the business cases for events like this ever stack up.

But if Malibu Cindy wants NZ to host the cup, then it's not unreasonable to expect her to pony up.

Share this post


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

 I for one don't think the business cases for events like this ever stack up.

Agree, the numbers are always smoke and mirrors, readily accepted by those in charge in exchange for photo ops.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

GD shopping the host venue is exactly like RC/LE shopping the venue and getting Bermuda. Except maybe GD has a bit of an excuse being as LE was and is one of the richest creatures on the planet.

How do Europeans feel about UAE? Would they go spectate there? 

Not that happy, I will be. 
Wakin' up at 04:00 is shit, but at least there's a good reason for it.
NZ hosts the cup because they won it, and we're talkin about Kiwis and sailing, so it sound logical to bend to to the timezone of the best in the game.
UAE has money, and that's it (and yes, I know they put quite a lot of it in the AC trough the years).
I may be just upset 'cause as a F1 (former) enthusiast I started develop a personal hate por these pointless new circuits (the "Tilkodromes") that make no sense and ended up cutting off actual historical races well more interesting. When money become the only thing racing sports start to became boring. And when it comes to money almost no country can beat Gulf's and southern Asian countries.
Valencia was some kind of a made up venue, but, well, in  Switzerland there was some issue finding a venue on the sea.
Bermuda was, to a certain extent, the perfect venue for the cats (as maybe UAE can be).
I would still prefer to keep some "reality" in the background of the regattas. And for reality I mean getting out the the boats in a place where people around you actually knows what you're doing there and are emotionally involved in what's going on on the water. 
And, as Strider said, it will be sad for NZ people.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

That wasn't my point.

My point it is not practically possible to write any rules into the AC in addition to those in the DoG that are guaranteed to endure beyond the current defender's tenure.

The NYYC managed to get some amendments to the DoG but those are as rare as rocking horse shit.

Conjecture I know.

Would it have been possible if one of the Gang of Five (GoF) had won in Bermuda that the Framework they signed could actually have fixed the conditions and class for two Cup iterations? 

Legally as a signed agreement the five teams would probably have had to stick with it, but what if a new challenger came forward, or ETNZ who had not signed it, decided they did not want to play. 

A hip pocket challenge and protocol would already be in place that any new challenger would have to agree to. 

So would it then be a case of appealing to the Arbitration Panel,  and how might they rule.

And then of course final resort the New York Supreme Court. How would they rule on the legality of the two-cup Framework?

The reason I ask is because it is possible that ETNZ (if the RNZYS agree) and the FIC as COR could resurrect a two-cup Framework if they win.

Share this post


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

Assuming the Covid scare will be over by AC37, Dubai - but also Doha, Qatar - would be much more convenient for Europeans than NZ. Consider:

- only 3 time zones ahead of CET in the winter

- comparatively short, cheap flights

- potentially vast venue money, free infrastructure as a result of bidding war between UAE and Qatar

- tourists welcome, alcohol available in international hotels, consumerism attractions

- plenty of hotels, Qatar particularly will have hosted the Soccer World Cup

- constant light wind (LR weather :) )

- composite facilities available

Actually, weather wise the best place would be Oman, but they’ve got little money

- Daughters kidnapped and tortured

- Human rights violated

- Slave workers killed 

- Slave workers raped 

- Terrorism supported

-...

I'd take New Zealand without hesitation. 

  • Like 8

Share this post


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

Conjecture I know.

Would it have been possible if one of the Gang of Five (GoF) had won in Bermuda that the Framework they signed could actually have fixed the conditions and class for two Cup iterations? 

Legally as a signed agreement the five teams would probably have had to stick with it, but what if a new challenger came forward, or ETNZ who had not signed it, decided they did not want to play. 

A hip pocket challenge and protocol would already be in place that any new challenger would have to agree to. 

So would it then be a case of appealing to the Arbitration Panel,  and how might they rule.

And then of course final resort the New York Supreme Court. How would they rule on the legality of the two-cup Framework?

The reason I ask is because it is possible that ETNZ (if the RNZYS agree) and the FIC as COR could resurrect a two-cup Framework if they win.

I'm no lawyer (sea or otherwise), but a contract is not enforceable if you never signed it.

So ETNZ can sign whatever the fuck they want with the CoR, but if the NEXT cup's winner is neither ETNZ nor the CoR then that contract has as much value as the toilet paper I just flushed down the loo.

Share this post


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

It's the $80 million Host Fee, GD is after. Not spectators, Clew.

 

13 hours ago, jaysper said:

 

But if Malibu Cindy wants NZ to host the cup, then it's not unreasonable to expect her to pony up.

 

In the Gulf, we’d be talking a Valencia-size purse - nothing Jacinda could top or even approach. The problem I see is that, if AC37 is to follow closely, the venue/financial arrangements need to be known very shortly since the number of Challengers would be greatly affected

Share this post


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

- Daughters kidnapped and tortured

- Human rights violated

- Slave workers killed 

- Slave workers raped 

- Terrorism supported

-...

I'd take New Zealand without hesitation. 

Yeah, why I asked. Cheap air fares, convenient time zone and alcohol in hotels balance this out? Not so much imo. 

 

Share this post


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

- Daughters kidnapped and tortured

- Human rights violated

- Slave workers killed 

- Slave workers raped 

- Terrorism supported

-...

I'd take New Zealand without hesitation. 

And yet the likes of Saudi are allowed to sit on the UN Human Rights Council and criticize the likes of NZ, US, UK, etc. For human rights abuses.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Yeah, why I asked. Cheap air fares, convenient time zone and alcohol in hotels balance this out? Not so much imo. 

 

Unfortunately, I seem to belong to a minority, looking at the tourism numbers (pre-Covid) and influencer reports :(.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, jaysper said:

And yet the likes of Saudi are allowed to sit on the UN Human Rights Council and criticize the likes of NZ, US, UK, etc. For human rights abuses.

 

Well the US, my country, likely does have human rights abuses. We had enslaved people for hundreds of years, put kids in cages, etc 

Share this post


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

Unfortunately, I seem to belong to a minority, looking at the tourism numbers (pre-Covid) and influencer reports :(.

Mr Clew went to Dubai for work. I sure didn't go.  

Share this post


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

Well the US, my country, likely does have human rights abuses. We had enslaved people for hundreds of years, put kids in cages, etc 

Do you have slaves now?????

Let's be clear, the US did not invent slavery.

Plenty of countries, including african countries, practiced slavery and yet the US is the only county that keeps getting kicked over it.

When do people let shit go?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Do you have slaves now?????

Let's be clear, the US did not invent slavery.

Plenty of countries, including african countries, practiced slavery and yet the US is the only county that keeps getting kicked over it.

When do people let shit go?

We had slavery here in NZ for a long time as well. History needs to be remembered, in the context of the day, not judged every day in present day values.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to me that if a venue suitor wants to offer up a few $m’s then they should approach and make a deal with RNZYS not ETNZ. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one indicator would be when there is no longer a toxic legacy. Not there yet by any means.  

 

1 hour ago, jaysper said:

 

When do people let shit go?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

one indicator would be when there is no longer a toxic legacy. Not there yet by any means.  

 

Oh FFS!

Most of the toxic legacy is derived from people not letting this shit go.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

one indicator would be when there is no longer a toxic legacy. Not there yet by any means.  

 

That is an example of a Catch 22,  as there will be a toxic legacy as long as people won't let it go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, someone  who saw the difference between how police treated BLM protestors to clear the way for a photo op and white people attacking the Capitol might see why there are reasons not to just say "bygones."  

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Look, someone  who saw the difference between how police treated BLM protestors to clear the way for a photo op and white people attacking the Capitol might see why there are reasons not to just say "bygones."  

Yes, you do,   NeedAClew.      And now back to our regular programs.    ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites