Jump to content


How many entries?


  • Please log in to reply
100 replies to this topic

#1 Bill R

Bill R

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Location:NZ
  • Interests:sailing

Posted 08 June 2014 - 01:59 AM

So the protocol is out, we know its going to cost shit loads just to enter, we don't  know where the event will be held, and the rules look a bit shit, so here's the question how many teams will sign up?

 

I'm guessing not many 2 may be 3.  What's everyone else think.

 

Personally I would find it quite funny if Oracle were given the fingers and no one entered, that way we may get back to some sensible rules, protocol and  a place  to sail announced before the teams have to commit large wads of non returnable cash.



#2 joeboy

joeboy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 154 posts
  • Location:Nunya

Posted 08 June 2014 - 02:40 AM

Well. I guess you can count AUS.



#3 nroose

nroose

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,556 posts
  • Location:Berkeley

Posted 08 June 2014 - 03:19 AM

I don't know.  They do seem to have consulted with many people, though.  I think it is a hard thing to come up with sensible rules.  Can you post what you think is sensible?  I have read many opinions recently about the new rule, but few of them seem to really discuss the complexity of coming up with a fair rule.  The chief complaint seems to be that challengers get one boat and the defender gets 2, even though they can only race the first one.  If the defender can't race, and can't 2-boat test, then they are at a distinct disadvantage.  The rule seems to me like a decent way to make the compromise.

 

I personally think they should make the boats a little smaller still, perhaps 17 meters, and allow all syndicates to have 2 boats.  And I think the rule should be a bit looser.  Perhaps that drives up the cost of increased chance of winning the whole thing, but it reduces the cost of entry and enables smaller teams to get in the game and try to innovate.

 

And I think they should sail all events in SF.  :)



#4 Scarecrow

Scarecrow

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,668 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, Aus

Posted 08 June 2014 - 03:44 AM

Well if you're right it'll be a two boat event.

Restrictions: GGYC will:

(a) not accept any additional challenges for AC35 unless and until at
least three (3) additional challenges complying with Articles 16.1
and 16.2 have been received by GGYC;

Basically they're making sure they don't get a repeat of the last LVC non event.

#5 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,658 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 08 June 2014 - 04:31 AM

TNZ will be there, so that's 2. I'm assuming the UK will be in as well. So that's 3. Beyond that?



#6 Bill R

Bill R

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Location:NZ
  • Interests:sailing

Posted 08 June 2014 - 05:07 AM

well they have been racing the event for 150 years, so I would have thought that they could have ironed out all the bugs, gripes irregularities etc. in the rules and protocols by now. But no every event they seem to start from scratch and create more. If they get 3 entries its not much of a world series,  I am rapidly thinking the whole thing is turning into a farce.  Or has it always been.    

 

The not knowing where the main event is going to be is a bit of a joke, if they can't find somewhere, do you get your money back? what the hell are sponsors going to think of that. $50 mill on sponsorship for a race that can't happen because no city or Port wants to spend millions on an event, that will get them nothing in return.



#7 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,041 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 05:16 AM

I suggest with your optimistic attitude you go track other events and leave this forum. That way you might be happy for the next three years.

 

That should make several other people happy too :)



#8 Bill R

Bill R

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Location:NZ
  • Interests:sailing

Posted 08 June 2014 - 05:23 AM

perhaps Mr SW Sailor you should do the same and make lots of people happy



#9 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,041 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 05:41 AM

But I'm not the one ragging about how unfair the world is like a crying little baby.

 

Maybe you missed that subtle point :) .

 

Please do pay attention.



#10 K38BOB

K38BOB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,535 posts
  • Location:Bay Area

Posted 08 June 2014 - 05:41 AM

TNZ will be there, so that's 2. I'm assuming the UK will be in as well. So that's 3. Beyond that?

march 19, 2014

Alt_P111035812.JPG

http://www.sail-worl...- -Video/120268



#11 Bill R

Bill R

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Location:NZ
  • Interests:sailing

Posted 08 June 2014 - 05:48 AM

I can see you are a complete knob and have no manners, I am not crying like a baby or saying the world is unfair. I am wondering how many teams would want to enter. My guess is not many and this Americas cup will be a bit of a fizzer. I may be wrong but I won't cry about it.



#12 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,658 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 08 June 2014 - 05:49 AM

TNZ will be there, so that's 2. I'm assuming the UK will be in as well. So that's 3. Beyond that?

march 19, 2014

Alt_P111035812.JPG

http://www.sail-worl...- -Video/120268

Oh yeah...sorry. I forgot about AR. Where did they end up again last time?



#13 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,041 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 05:50 AM

Come on guys - your bumming Billy the bummer out with your inputs of possible entrants.

 

He's only looking for how many teams won't enter, not those that will.



#14 vij

vij

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 202 posts
  • Interests:Born Swedish. Lives in Switzerland

Posted 08 June 2014 - 07:53 AM

Why dont they just allow one boat for each team. That is fair for every one. Then oracle will race in the defender series and if they win the defender series they can defend the cup. I dont see any problem with this at all as it will be a lot of teams as it will now be so cheap to race this time. It must be a lot of american team with wallets full of cash willing to race. That is what I keep hearing from RC and JS and they dont bullshit at all.

#15 SimonN

SimonN

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,035 posts
  • Location:Sydney ex London

Posted 08 June 2014 - 07:58 AM

I see 4 probable, 2 possibles and some long shots

 

Probables

Artemis

ETNZ

Team AUS

LR

 

Possibles

BAR

Cammas (whatever his team will be called).

 

Of those 6, I expect at least one not to make the start line.

 

Long shots - the rumours

a Middle Eastern entry such as Abu Dhubi 

Far East - China, Korea 

Swiss (guess who!)

Russia

 

I suspect we will see some on the AC45 start line but they will fade away when the real money needs to be spent.

 

So, all told, I think we will see 4-6 challengers in total, an improvement on last time but still well short of the sort of numbers that we were promised when OR first won the cup.



#16 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 01:22 PM

What's important to me is if they can get strong teams at the sharp end. The 4 probables above look set to provide that, plus BAR who might be strong too. That would make 5 plus OR = 6 good teams to follow. And perhaps one or two newbies beyond that out of Cammas, RUS, CHN, whoever.

#17 nroose

nroose

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,556 posts
  • Location:Berkeley

Posted 08 June 2014 - 03:38 PM

What's important to me is if they can get strong teams at the sharp end. The 4 probables above look set to provide that, plus BAR who might be strong too. That would make 5 plus OR = 6 good teams to follow. And perhaps one or two newbies beyond that out of Cammas, RUS, CHN, whoever.

It would be awesome to have 5+ challengers, but as I read the prot, that means some of them don't even get to the final venue.  And if they don't get 4, they don't have a CSS.  Seems like 4 is the sweet spot and then all get to go to the venue.  And were it not for the possible point in the final, I would guess that they would all sandbag when racing OR.



#18 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 04:15 PM

What's important to me is if they can get strong teams at the sharp end. The 4 probables above look set to provide that, plus BAR who might be strong too. That would make 5 plus OR = 6 good teams to follow. And perhaps one or two newbies beyond that out of Cammas, RUS, CHN, whoever.

It would be awesome to have 5+ challengers, but as I read the prot, that means some of them don't even get to the final venue.  And if they don't get 4, they don't have a CSS.  Seems like 4 is the sweet spot and then all get to go to the venue.  And were it not for the possible point in the final, I would guess that they would all sandbag when racing OR.

Yep, agreed.

 

While us Cupheads will follow everything closely the much larger interest will surely begin only once the top (hopefully there are at least that many, sure looks like there will be) 4 teams get to the AC venue. And so yes, at least 4 strong teams is indeed the sweet spot if we are to get a more competitive CSS than last time.

 

In this new format with just 4 Challengers making it to the racing in that final venue, it makes it all the less interesting to have teams that later turn out to be vaporware efforts, the Green Comms and Alephs from last time. Were it a big Round Robin series at the venue, then making up numbers would matter more.

 

Capping the size of the event at the AC venue should also help on venue-negotiations and arrangements, since it removes that 'number of teams' uncertainty. Hopefully it makes a SF agreement much quicker and easier to achieve this time too..



#19 K38BOB

K38BOB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,535 posts
  • Location:Bay Area

Posted 08 June 2014 - 04:19 PM

 

TNZ will be there, so that's 2. I'm assuming the UK will be in as well. So that's 3. Beyond that?

march 19, 2014

Alt_P111035812.JPG

http://www.sail-worl...- -Video/120268

Oh yeah...sorry. I forgot about AR. Where did they end up again last time?

ahead of the Brits, Germans, French, Ozzies, Koreans, Chinese. Recovered/ soldiered on from several big setbacks and a tragedy. 2nd boat seemed promising and great learning base. Team and families base in place in great training venue which is probable AC venue. well funded by respected owner. Very motivated team. http://www.telegraph...Iain-Percy.html



#20 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 08 June 2014 - 05:04 PM


What's important to me is if they can get strong teams at the sharp end. The 4 probables above look set to provide that, plus BAR who might be strong too. That would make 5 plus OR = 6 good teams to follow. And perhaps one or two newbies beyond that out of Cammas, RUS, CHN, whoever.

It would be awesome to have 5+ challengers, but as I read the prot, that means some of them don't even get to the final venue.  And if they don't get 4, they don't have a CSS.  Seems like 4 is the sweet spot and then all get to go to the venue.  And were it not for the possible point in the final, I would guess that they would all sandbag when racing OR.
Yep, agreed.
 
While us Cupheads will follow everything closely the much larger interest will surely begin only once the top (hopefully there are at least that many, sure looks like there will be) 4 teams get to the AC venue.
I think it's going to become a spectacle before the final venue - AC62's plus wind plus the drama of the teams matching up will be unlike anything we've seen before (well, almost anything).

#21 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 06:03 PM

It's ironic (Clean's favorite word today so there it is) that GD is hoping to land the Qualifier Series in Auckland. If he wants to draw interest in it, then he's likely happy that OR will be participating too.

#22 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,755 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 06:22 PM

 

 


What's important to me is if they can get strong teams at the sharp end. The 4 probables above look set to provide that, plus BAR who might be strong too. That would make 5 plus OR = 6 good teams to follow. And perhaps one or two newbies beyond that out of Cammas, RUS, CHN, whoever.

It would be awesome to have 5+ challengers, but as I read the prot, that means some of them don't even get to the final venue.  And if they don't get 4, they don't have a CSS.  Seems like 4 is the sweet spot and then all get to go to the venue.  And were it not for the possible point in the final, I would guess that they would all sandbag when racing OR.
Yep, agreed.
 
While us Cupheads will follow everything closely the much larger interest will surely begin only once the top (hopefully there are at least that many, sure looks like there will be) 4 teams get to the AC venue.
I think it's going to become a spectacle before the final venue - AC62's plus wind plus the drama of the teams matching up will be unlike anything we've seen before (well, almost anything).

 

I agree, and the cost savings provided by the protocol/Class Rule will make it more likely teams will take the chance of not making it to the CSS Finals as part of the final 4.  Between the ACWS and the early rounds with the AC62s, there will be a good amount of racing/exposure to make the risk attractive.  Remember, Energy & Korea were not THAT far from pulling the trigger last time, with WAY more expensive boats/logistics and less "proven" product.

 

Sticking my own neck out so that the whiners will have something to "get" me with if it does not come true, my prediction is as follows:

 

High-Probables (by order of sureness)

Artemis

Team AUS

LR

BAR

ETNZ

 

High Possibles (50% chance, or better)

Cammas / France (whatever his team will be called).

Far East (one or maybe even more of China / Korea / Japan)

 

Long shots (Less than 50% chance)

Middle Eastern entry

Russia

 

So, my prediction is 7-8 entrants by October, and at least 6 end up building AC62s.



#23 6924

6924

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 758 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 06:49 PM

Very likely only 1

#24 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,224 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 08:01 PM

For AC 34 at this point we were looking at 15+ possibles .

This time the wildest predictions are less than half .

And This is with a better economy than the pervious go around .

Not a good looking trend at all .

Is it the boats , the players or the growing lack of interest ?

#25 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 08:09 PM

An intentionally higher entry fee, to intentionally separate the wheat from chaffe, could be a contributor too.

RC said in the early-June interview posted at SButt that the futility of trying to help weak efforts was a lesson well learned.

#26 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,224 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 08:16 PM

An intentionally higher entry fee, to intentionally separate the wheat from chaffe, could be a contributor too.
RC said in the early-June interview posted at SButt that the futility of trying to help weak efforts was a lesson well learned.


2 mill in a AC budget is pocket change .

As for RC's comments , he won't be getting any free LV swag this XMAS :)

#27 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,658 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 08 June 2014 - 08:24 PM

An intentionally higher entry fee, to intentionally separate the wheat from chaffe, could be a contributor too.

RC said in the early-June interview posted at SButt that the futility of trying to help weak efforts was a lesson well learned.

And yet for $3 million and the cost of campaigning an AC45, exposure at that level is pretty cheap, surely? If anything, it will encourage also-rans.


Edited by Sailbydate, 08 June 2014 - 08:24 PM.


#28 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 08:26 PM

^^ I paid pretty good money, well a few hundred bucks anyway, for a prime view spot during the ACWS event in San Diego aboard some big tub floating alongside the main event dock. The food was fine, the viewing terrific, but the presentation by Trouble basically sucked. His heart was no longer in it even back then and it really showed. Tired, worn out, irrelevant.

#29 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,041 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 08:29 PM

Agreed max

 

A couple ideas.

 

Limiting the finals to four is the first that comes to mind. If you don't have something on par with the four best teams in terms of talent and resources, your chance to win vaporizes as quickly as it appeared.This is the reality of the event anyway, but limiting the finals to four will make teams second guess if they have it or not early on, as well as those funding them. Six or even eight may have been a better choice given the intent to commercialize the event.

 

Last go around anyone with cat experience, $1M to buy an AC45 (and some without it) and the entry fee got a free ride in the ACWS on Larry's dime. Haven't read the protocol in this regard, but I suspect the teams may have to bear more of the infrastructure cost.

 

I'm guessing the cost and logistics to host a lead-up event also has to be carried by the team wanting to host, vs GGYC, which shifts a potentially difficult administrative responsibility to the hosting team.

 

I don't think this protocol is in general, competitor friendly - certainly not compared to AC34.



#30 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,658 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 08 June 2014 - 08:31 PM

^^ I paid pretty good money, well a few hundred bucks anyway, for a prime view spot during the ACWS event in San Diego aboard some big tub floating alongside the main event dock. The food was fine, the viewing terrific, but the presentation by Trouble basically sucked. His heart was no longer in it even back then and it really showed. Tired, worn out, irrelevant.

That's a bit sad when you're only worth your last $50 million. 



#31 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,041 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 08:38 PM

^^ I paid pretty good money, well a few hundred bucks anyway, for a prime view spot during the ACWS event in San Diego aboard some big tub floating alongside the main event dock. The food was fine, the viewing terrific, but the presentation by Trouble basically sucked. His heart was no longer in it even back then and it really showed. Tired, worn out, irrelevant.

 

Bruno's main issue with AC34 was with the introduction of Red Bull to the event. He didn't want LV to sit next to them as an event sponsor, and would have preferred to be associated with brands like BMW, etc. This decision was probably reached 3 years ago, and not exactly a secret at the time. I think he's into it, but feels he was somewhat snubbed with the "extreme" image of Red Bull. Not his style.



#32 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 08:45 PM


^^ I paid pretty good money, well a few hundred bucks anyway, for a prime view spot during the ACWS event in San Diego aboard some big tub floating alongside the main event dock. The food was fine, the viewing terrific, but the presentation by Trouble basically sucked. His heart was no longer in it even back then and it really showed. Tired, worn out, irrelevant.

 
Bruno's main issue with AC34 was with the introduction of Red Bull to the event. He didn't want LV to sit next to them as an event sponsor, and would have preferred to be associated with brands like BMW, etc. This decision was probably reached 3 years ago, and not exactly a secret at the time. I think he's into it, but feels he was somewhat snubbed with the "extreme" image of Red Bull. Not his style.
Agreed

There is still some luxury branding associated (Corum, TH, etc) but LV looks best on J class yachts.

#33 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,041 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 09:10 PM

 


^^ I paid pretty good money, well a few hundred bucks anyway, for a prime view spot during the ACWS event in San Diego aboard some big tub floating alongside the main event dock. The food was fine, the viewing terrific, but the presentation by Trouble basically sucked. His heart was no longer in it even back then and it really showed. Tired, worn out, irrelevant.

 
Bruno's main issue with AC34 was with the introduction of Red Bull to the event. He didn't want LV to sit next to them as an event sponsor, and would have preferred to be associated with brands like BMW, etc. This decision was probably reached 3 years ago, and not exactly a secret at the time. I think he's into it, but feels he was somewhat snubbed with the "extreme" image of Red Bull. Not his style.
Agreed

There is still some luxury branding associated (Corum, TH, etc) but LV looks best on J class yachts.

 

On the same token you have to give him credit as one of the most tenured sponsors of the cup.

 

Never forget him dancing on the docks of Valencia when EB lost - that alone gives him strong credibility.



#34 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 08 June 2014 - 09:22 PM


Very likely only 1

i guess you would find a few takers on that bet - given at least three teams have already staffed up and are actively training.

#35 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 08 June 2014 - 09:33 PM

For AC 34 at this point we were looking at 15+ possibles .

This time the wildest predictions are less than half .

And This is with a better economy than the pervious go around .

Not a good looking trend at all .

Is it the boats , the players or the growing lack of interest ?

its surely the simplest thing of all: money.

Reviewing that old footage of Fremantle is a reminder just how affordable campaigns used to be. Today, only the wealthiest individuals in the world can consider a campaign. Before, the average multi-millionaire from NYYC could mount a credible campaign.

What led to the incredible inflation: Perhaps EB buying Coutts out of TNZ.

I guess Coutts is the common denomination in the ridiculous present cost to tilt for the cup.

#36 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 09:35 PM



Very likely only 1

i guess you would find a few takers on that bet - given at least three teams have already staffed up and are actively training.
It's been encouraging to hear GD be so confident as to say he's in his best financial position EVER, if he can get to the end of the year with a venue named. Think about that, it suggests an enormously powerful budget stick to take a whack at AC35 with, possibly like taking a sledge to a finish nail.

#37 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,870 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 08 June 2014 - 09:41 PM

For AC 34 at this point WE were looking at 15+ possibles .


We?? Speak for yourself (and Larry). Another attempt at revisionist history ..

#38 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,224 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 09:47 PM

For AC 34 at this point WE were looking at 15+ possibles .
 


We?? Speak for yourself (and Larry). Another attempt at revisionist history ..

 

The " we " was in the general SA sence .

 

Personally I thought it was a joke and expressed that point several times. 

 

As for an " attempt " you must be new here or have a very short memory as it was a topic of discussion on several threads for many weeks . 



#39 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 09:49 PM



For AC 34 at this point WE were looking at 15+ possibles .

We?? Speak for yourself (and Larry). Another attempt at revisionist history ..
22 parties in Dubai, 15 entries received, 12 self-announced, at least 10 different AC45 teams racing at times, it was for sure a clamor to try get into the AC72's. To ignore that interest level was to be blind to the chances.

If you take a jaundiced view to team potentials then you should also applaud a higher up-front entry barrier.

#40 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,870 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 08 June 2014 - 09:50 PM

It's ironic (Clean's favorite word today so there it is) that GD is hoping to land the Qualifier Series in Auckland. If he wants to draw interest in it, then he's likely happy that OR will be participating too.


For the Nth time: there's just three months from the end of Qualifiers to the start of (bleah!) Playoffs. Transportation time from AKL would be a big disadvantage (for Challengers only)

#41 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 08 June 2014 - 09:52 PM


It's ironic (Clean's favorite word today so there it is) that GD is hoping to land the Qualifier Series in Auckland. If he wants to draw interest in it, then he's likely happy that OR will be participating too.

For the Nth time: there's just three months from the end of Qualifiers to the start of (bleah!) Playoffs. Transportation time from AKL would be a big disadvantage (for Challengers only)
how is the breeze at the Whitsundays that time of year?

#42 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 09:54 PM






It's ironic (Clean's favorite word today so there it is) that GD is hoping to land the Qualifier Series in Auckland. If he wants to draw interest in it, then he's likely happy that OR will be participating too.

For the Nth time: there's just three months from the end of the Qualifiers to the start of (bleah!) Playoffs. Transportation time from AKL would be a big disadvantage (for Challengers only)
For the Zth time: the Qualifiers aren't even at the venue, so completely different conditions; and big gains happened very late in AC34 (as is usual) and ~far!~ closer to and even ~during~ the Match date than 3 months prior in some other series.

The only people whinging about OR participating in the Q's are the far-right winghers. Those who understand, even including Dalton, have no issue to make of it.

Like the "two against one" diatribes, it is uninformed, hyperbolic, shock-attempt journalism.

Funnily, the OR-guided press releases play it up too, it adds outrage and therefore interest.

#43 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,870 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 08 June 2014 - 10:05 PM

^
So, you're saying it makes no difference whether Challengers sail at the Venue 2 1/2 months or 1 1/2 months prior to Playoffs, depending on duration of transportation. This, while the Defender will have been sailing there continuously for five months

#44 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 10:13 PM

^
So, you're saying it makes no difference for Challengers to be sailing at the Venue 2 1/2 months or 1 1/2 months prior to Playoffs. This, while the Defender will have been sailing there continuously for five months

Okay, let's try figure this out.

My understanding so far is that OR has to have their B1, the race boat, at the Qualifiers venue just like everyone. And everyone can spend just exactly as much time at the venue prior to and after the Quals as OR can with all their B1's.

OR is not allowed to launch their B2 (basically the same hulls as B1, and having to share B1's equipment) until ~after~ the Qualls and even then will be only a B boat backup because of the rules.

I think it's beyond crazy for even the crazies to expect OR to agree a situation where they sail around on their own forever with one boat, with no tune up whatsoever, no fun, no sponsorship benefit, and almost no chance in hell of matching up to the competition-improved winning Challenger. They'd be nuts to agree it, the situation they're facing is hard enough as it is.

#45 bottlerocket

bottlerocket

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 240 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 08 June 2014 - 10:13 PM

Why no South American teams?   Brazil?   I know these aren't Lasers, Sunfish or 470s but why not?  



#46 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,870 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 08 June 2014 - 10:21 PM



^
So, you're saying it makes no difference for Challengers to be sailing at the Playoffs/Match Venue 2 1/2 months or 1 1/2 months prior to Playoffs. This, while the Defender will have been sailing there continuously for five months (with B2 initially, with B1 and B2 from the same time Challenger boats arrive)


Okay, let's try figure this out.

My understanding so far is that OR has to have their B1 at the Qualifiers venue just like everyone. And everyone can spend just exactly as much time at the Qualifiers? venue prior to and after the Quals as OR can with their B1.

OR is not allowed to launch their B2 (basically the same hulls as B1, and having to share B1's equipment) until ~after~ the Qualls and even then will be only a B boat backup because of the rules.Not quite, launch one month before start of Qualifiers - B1 and B2 may sail together only after the end of Qualifiers

I think it's beyond crazy for even the crazies to expect OR to agree a situation where they sail around on their own forever, with no tune up whatsoever, no fun, no sponsorship benefit, and almost no chance in hell of matching up to the winning Challenger. They'd be nuts to agree it, the situation they're facing is hard enough as it is.

Don't understand your last paragraph. Are you considering the need of going from Qualifier to Match venues? I don't see why B2 should appear at Qualifiers venue at all

#47 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 10:30 PM

You're arguing that B2, the B boat for OR, can be launched the moment the Q's end, but at the venue, while others (the top 4 Challs along with OR's A boat) are still in transit? And that that will prove the winning difference in AC35?

Could be, I guess.. But even if that helps OR they still can't ever race Challs in heat at the venue once the A boats do all arrive.

Not seeing the injustice yet; perhaps you can clarify the point.

#48 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,870 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 08 June 2014 - 10:40 PM

You're arguing that B2, the B boat for OR, can be launched the moment the Q's end, but at the venue, while others (the top 4 Challs along with OR's A boat) are still in transit?.


No, unless I'm tragically wrong, OR B2 may be launched anywhere one month before Qs begin. But since it cannot sail together with B1 until Qs' end, when all boats have to rush to the Venue, it seems obvious to me that B2 will be launched at the Venue and stay there / sail there all the time for five months. When B1 (as well as Challenger boats) arrives, they start training together.

Anyway, my original point was that it's in the Challengers' interest that Qualifiers and Playoffs/Match venues are as close as possible, transportation wise.

#49 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 10:47 PM

You could be right.

Time for testing kit will be important and so it's a valid enough question to answer correctly.

Perhaps that crafty Coutts really is trying to just screw everyone out of a competitive AC.

#50 SimonN

SimonN

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,035 posts
  • Location:Sydney ex London

Posted 08 June 2014 - 11:26 PM

How times have changed.

 

Back in the day, I got seriously abused by Stingray and others when i said there would only be a maximum of 4 challengers for AC34. Back then, the party line was that the future of the cup was all about it becoming a professional circuit that attracted lots of teams. IIRC, the vision was at least 12 teams, or else it wouldn't be sustainable.

 

The next big U turn is over this over the quality of the fleet issue. There was a time when the likes of Stingray insisted that the cup had to accomodate new teams which might not have a chance of winning because that is how teams develope into becoming winners (just look at how long it took TNZ to win). In fact, there remains only one challenger who has won first time out. Many of the current "stars" of the AC circuit gained their initial experience with teams that were never going to get to the semis, but who were an important part of the long term health of the event.

 

So now, in the light of RC and LE having totally failed to deliver what they promised, namely an affordable AC that could really become a sustainable top level professional circuit, the fanboys do a complete about turn. Now it's about quality, not quantity. Now they argue the cup has always been about those who can afford to spend spend spend nad that the small, low budget teams no longer have a place.

 

Again, I would expect to get attacked by the OR bully boys, but I have to go back to their earlier arguments. We need the smaller teams on the limited budgets because it is them who give the next generation of sailors their first chance. Under the current system, somebody like JS would never get a chance. There is no denying he deserves to be where he is today, but his track record when younger would never have got him into a team today. And I am sure there would be many other examples of that. The same goes for other essential parts of a team, such as designers and shore staff.

 

Most important of all, you Americans should be screaming your protests from the rooftop about the closed shop that GGYC has created in the USA. If OR loses, who has the experience to step into the gap that i am sure will be left by LE exiting the AC. The reason why the USA kept the Cup for so long and then won it back at first time of asking was its long history of multi boat defender trials. Now there doesn't seem to be an American capable of organising an AC team. This has the same feeling as US Olympic sailing - while you have a few key winners on the team, all was rosy but once they retired, success just disappeared. 

 

So, at the risk of being verbally abused (yet again), I hope that this edition really is more affordable than before and that we can see significantly more teams, even if they don't stand a chance of winning the challenger series. As long as we see only 4 or 5 challengers building AC62's, the event is really on the "endangered" list. We need to see 10+ teams. As for the USA, you had better hope OR doesn't lose because it seems likely that it would be a long time before you see the cup again



#51 nroose

nroose

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,556 posts
  • Location:Berkeley

Posted 08 June 2014 - 11:29 PM

How long will it take to get an AC62 from, say, NZL to SFO, including de-commissioning and commissioning?  If they are all going together, probably they could have one ship just to themselves and go straight.  And hopefully that way, it would be a fast move through customs.  Or perhaps they will be coming from NZL to HI.  Or NZL to Burmuda?  Probably more than a month...  No?  Seems like a very valid question.



#52 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,228 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 11:30 PM

OR has the advantage to lauch B2 30 days prior to Qs, sail before challengers arrive at the venue and modify B1 following their comparison test. Quite a huge advantage when their research budget is unlimited.



#53 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,224 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 11:39 PM

When do we see the amendment that all competitors must arrive to the finals on their own bottom ? 

 

Then you will really have something to bitch about :) 



#54 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 11:42 PM

Si, yes my view evolved too while watching the EA reaching for just numbers last time. So what? They tried, with good intentions backed by big bucks in a fully fledged effort.

This AC35 Ptotocol is ambitious too. 3 years of racing, maybe 2 YC events, points-counting ACWS and Playoff and CSS events, it's not like LE is laying a bare table this time either. That guy is about to suck up another huge bill, to try enable good eating.

A few big-appetite teams turns out to be a better dinner party.

#55 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,228 posts

Posted 08 June 2014 - 11:45 PM

When do we see the amendment that all competitors must arrive to the finals on their own bottom ? 

 

Then you will really have something to bitch about :)

Let's remember your post when US have to sail on their own bottoms to Europe or NZ.



#56 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,481 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 12:00 AM


Anyway, my original point was that it's in the Challengers' interest that Qualifiers and Playoffs/Match venues are as close as possible, transportation wise.

Perhaps equally important is that they be closely matched in weather/sailing conditions.  One of the big asymmetries in this protocol is that the challenger boats have to perform well in two different venues, while the defender boat can be optimized for the match venue. They will sail elsewhere but it is not critical for them as it will be for the challengers. 



#57 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 09 June 2014 - 12:07 AM

How times have changed.
 
Back in the day, I got seriously abused by Stingray and others when i said there would only be a maximum of 4 challengers for AC34. Back then, the party line was that the future of the cup was all about it becoming a professional circuit that attracted lots of teams. IIRC, the vision was at least 12 teams, or else it wouldn't be sustainable.
 
The next big U turn is over this over the quality of the fleet issue. There was a time when the likes of Stingray insisted that the cup had to accomodate new teams which might not have a chance of winning because that is how teams develope into becoming winners (just look at how long it took TNZ to win). In fact, there remains only one challenger who has won first time out. Many of the current "stars" of the AC circuit gained their initial experience with teams that were never going to get to the semis, but who were an important part of the long term health of the event.
 
So now, in the light of RC and LE having totally failed to deliver what they promised, namely an affordable AC that could really become a sustainable top level professional circuit, the fanboys do a complete about turn. Now it's about quality, not quantity. Now they argue the cup has always been about those who can afford to spend spend spend nad that the small, low budget teams no longer have a place.
 
Again, I would expect to get attacked by the OR bully boys, but I have to go back to their earlier arguments. We need the smaller teams on the limited budgets because it is them who give the next generation of sailors their first chance. Under the current system, somebody like JS would never get a chance. There is no denying he deserves to be where he is today, but his track record when younger would never have got him into a team today. And I am sure there would be many other examples of that. The same goes for other essential parts of a team, such as designers and shore staff.
 
Most important of all, you Americans should be screaming your protests from the rooftop about the closed shop that GGYC has created in the USA. If OR loses, who has the experience to step into the gap that i am sure will be left by LE exiting the AC. The reason why the USA kept the Cup for so long and then won it back at first time of asking was its long history of multi boat defender trials. Now there doesn't seem to be an American capable of organising an AC team. This has the same feeling as US Olympic sailing - while you have a few key winners on the team, all was rosy but once they retired, success just disappeared. 
 
So, at the risk of being verbally abused (yet again), I hope that this edition really is more affordable than before and that we can see significantly more teams, even if they don't stand a chance of winning the challenger series. As long as we see only 4 or 5 challengers building AC62's, the event is really on the "endangered" list. We need to see 10+ teams. As for the USA, you had better hope OR doesn't lose because it seems likely that it would be a long time before you see the cup again

Hey Simon - I am sure you're right - the Americas Cup has become so elitist, it surely is in danger of extinction.

And it's not Larry winning it for the USA - why, it's Russell Coutts of course. Where he goes the Cup seems to follow.

But why don't you tell us about something really interesting: are those A's flying TNZ style drubbing the conforming foil boats - or at least having more fun?

I guess people are nuts if they think it's worth thousands just to conform to an existing rule preventing reasonable development in a development class.

So, how about it, give some love to the trickle down thread! You are helping to drive the bus in one of the most interesting developments in sailing - IMO.

And to anybody else who wonders WTF I am going on about - it is AC related!

PS: if you can get the A cat more affordable, perhaps the Class can help become a training ground for aspiring AC youth.

#58 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 09 June 2014 - 12:11 AM

OR has the advantage to lauch B2 30 days prior to Qs, sail before challengers arrive at the venue and modify B1 following their comparison test. Quite a huge advantage when their research budget is unlimited.

it remains to be seen whether research - or just plain sailing talent - win this one.

Most folks are anticipating sailing.

#59 pjh

pjh

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,849 posts
  • Location:San Francisco

Posted 09 June 2014 - 01:05 AM

When do we see the amendment that all competitors must arrive to the finals on their own bottom ? 

 

Then you will really have something to bitch about :)

Let's remember your post when US have to sail on their own bottoms to Europe or NZ.

Let's remember that the America did sail on her own bottom to Europe to race the British.



#60 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,041 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 03:10 AM

How times have changed.
 
Back in the day, I got seriously abused by Stingray and others when i said there would only be a maximum of 4 challengers for AC34. Back then, the party line was that the future of the cup was all about it becoming a professional circuit that attracted lots of teams. IIRC, the vision was at least 12 teams, or else it wouldn't be sustainable.

So, at the risk of being verbally abused (yet again), I hope that this edition really is more affordable than before and that we can see significantly more teams, even if they don't stand a chance of winning the challenger series. As long as we see only 4 or 5 challengers building AC62's, the event is really on the "endangered" list. We need to see 10+ teams. As for the USA, you had better hope OR doesn't lose because it seems likely that it would be a long time before you see the cup again

 
Simon,
 
Good for you if you called it right. I don't recall that but take your word for it.
 
Many of your comments are specific to aspects of the event intended to make it commercially viable and self sustaining, I didn't think it was feasible then and I don't now. I just don't think the math works given the infrequency of the match and size of the sailing audience. My position from the start with AC34 was that I will wait until the event was over before calling it a success or failure, regardless of the effort to commercialize it. I'd much rather see 4 to 5 $125M formidable challenges rather than see the event get watered down with weak challengers.
 
Say what you will about he said/she said of the past, their is little disagreement that the finals provided the closest and most suspenseful match in the history of the cup, along with one of the most unlikely and dramatic comebacks in sports history. I'll take that any day of the week, win or lose.
 
I could also go on about all the myths and criticisms that were dis proven with AC34. How many times did we hear cat's can't match race, no pre-start dial-ups, reaching starts suck, their will be no lead changes, etc ? And the list goes on. No need to confirm the fact that their are more naysayers than risk takers, and throw politics into the equation and it becomes even more lopsided with less reasoning. 
 
I give LE and RC tremendous credit for taking on the challenge - very few would, especially if they had to fund it, and they may well have changed the direction of the cup for years to come.
 
In terms of calling out all the OTUSA bullies and all Americans - those are pretty broad generalizations. I speak for myself and don't always agree with the party line, but I suspect you're referring to Stingray as much as anything.
 
In terms of having any great fear of the US losing AC35, get real. It's a frigging sailboat race and life will go on regardless of who wins. I simply hope the most capable and deserving team wins and comes up with a fair rule to compete with in the next edition.

 

BTW, glad to see your using your spell check more often :)
 



#61 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,224 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 03:41 AM


When do we see the amendment that all competitors must arrive to the finals on their own bottom ? 
 
Then you will really have something to bitch about :)

Let's remember your post when US have to sail on their own bottoms to Europe or NZ.
Let's remember that the America did sail on her own bottom to Europe to race the British.

Somebody gets it !

That's how this whole shindig started .

One USA boat against an entire fleet and today people bitch about a possible " two " against a fleet .

#62 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,224 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 03:44 AM

When do we see the amendment that all competitors must arrive to the finals on their own bottom ? 
 
Then you will really have something to bitch about :)

Let's remember your post when US have to sail on their own bottoms to Europe or NZ.

Well there is one little detail , US has to lose first .

Last time around we gave up a two race head start to make it interesting , what is it going to take this time ?

#63 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,658 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 09 June 2014 - 04:02 AM

 

When do we see the amendment that all competitors must arrive to the finals on their own bottom ? 
 
Then you will really have something to bitch about :)

Let's remember your post when US have to sail on their own bottoms to Europe or NZ.

Well there is one little detail , US has to lose first .

Last time around we gave up a two race head start to make it interesting , what is it going to take this time ?

+1 starting in the actual match? 



#64 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,041 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 04:19 AM

 

When do we see the amendment that all competitors must arrive to the finals on their own bottom ? 
 
Then you will really have something to bitch about :)

Let's remember your post when US have to sail on their own bottoms to Europe or NZ.

Well there is one little detail , US has to lose first .

Last time around we gave up a two race head start to make it interesting , what is it going to take this time ?

 

I'm sure you probably already know, but just as a friendly reminder throwing too many facts at TC can be like conducting an exorcism and strange things can happen.



#65 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 09 June 2014 - 05:53 AM


How times have changed.
 
Back in the day, I got seriously abused by Stingray and others when i said there would only be a maximum of 4 challengers for AC34. Back then, the party line was that the future of the cup was all about it becoming a professional circuit that attracted lots of teams. IIRC, the vision was at least 12 teams, or else it wouldn't be sustainable.

So, at the risk of being verbally abused (yet again), I hope that this edition really is more affordable than before and that we can see significantly more teams, even if they don't stand a chance of winning the challenger series. As long as we see only 4 or 5 challengers building AC62's, the event is really on the "endangered" list. We need to see 10+ teams. As for the USA, you had better hope OR doesn't lose because it seems likely that it would be a long time before you see the cup again

 
Simon,
 
Good for you if you called it right. I don't recall that but take your word for it.
 
Many of your comments are specific to aspects of the event intended to make it commercially viable and self sustaining, I didn't think it was feasible then and I don't now. I just don't think the math works given the infrequency of the match and size of the sailing audience. My position from the start with AC34 was that I will wait until the event was over before calling it a success or failure, regardless of the effort to commercialize it. I'd much rather see 4 to 5 $125M formidable challenges rather than see the event get watered down with weak challengers.
 
Say what you will about he said/she said of the past, their is little disagreement that the finals provided the closest and most suspenseful match in the history of the cup, along with one of the most unlikely and dramatic comebacks in sports history. I'll take that any day of the week, win or lose.
 
I could also go on about all the myths and criticisms that were dis proven with AC34. How many times did we hear cat's can't match race, no pre-start dial-ups, reaching starts suck, their will be no lead changes, etc ? And the list goes on. No need to confirm the fact that their are more naysayers than risk takers, and throw politics into the equation and it becomes even more lopsided with less reasoning. 
 
I give LE and RC tremendous credit for taking on the challenge - very few would, especially if they had to fund it, and they may well have changed the direction of the cup for years to come.
 
In terms of calling out all the OTUSA bullies and all Americans - those are pretty broad generalizations. I speak for myself and don't always agree with the party line, but I suspect you're referring to Stingray as much as anything.
 
In terms of having any great fear of the US losing AC35, get real. It's a frigging sailboat race and life will go on regardless of who wins. I simply hope the most capable and deserving team wins and comes up with a fair rule to compete with in the next edition.
 
BTW, glad to see your using your spell check more often :)
 
its interesting - and I agree that much has been accomplished - there is very little clamor for mono hulls anymore.

Looks like the lead mine chapter of AC racing has been closed.

#66 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,775 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 09 June 2014 - 06:51 AM

(Artemis) well funded by respected owner.

Whether the co-founder of Gunvor is "well-respected" is a matter of some debate. http://en.wikipedia....unvor_(company) - read "ownership" and "controversies".

#67 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 09 June 2014 - 03:04 PM



(Artemis) well funded by respected owner.

Whether the co-founder of Gunvor is "well-respected" is a matter of some debate. http://en.wikipedia....unvor_(company) - read "ownership" and "controversies".
"well-feared"?

This brings up an entirely new methodology for cheering on a team - for what they might do with the cup once won:
- NZ, AUS, and GBR. Shipshape and Bristol fashion.
- ITA. A new twist likely, but probably good looking.
- SWE. ISAF voluntarily withdraws, fearing Polonium cocktail for adverse ruling.

#68 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,775 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 09 June 2014 - 03:09 PM

One USA boat against an entire fleet and today people bitch about a possible " two " against a fleet .

 

That one boat did miss out a mark of the course though. Brits too polite to complain much.



#69 aldo

aldo

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,469 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 04:03 PM

One USA boat against an entire fleet and today people bitch about a possible " two " against a fleet .

 
That one boat did miss out a mark of the course though. Brits too polite to complain much.

they're making up for lost time now.

#70 idontwan2know

idontwan2know

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,825 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 05:09 PM


One USA boat against an entire fleet and today people bitch about a possible " two " against a fleet .

 
That one boat did miss out a mark of the course though. Brits too polite to complain much.

The "mark" you speak of wasn't in the sailing instructions and several other boats went inside it as well.

Don't think Brits can take too much credit for accepting that they didn't proofread or intelligently follow their own SIs.

#71 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,224 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 10:44 PM

 

 

When do we see the amendment that all competitors must arrive to the finals on their own bottom ? 
 
Then you will really have something to bitch about :)

Let's remember your post when US have to sail on their own bottoms to Europe or NZ.

Well there is one little detail , US has to lose first .

Last time around we gave up a two race head start to make it interesting , what is it going to take this time ?

+1 starting in the actual match? 

 

 

If 2 behind only ended up contributing to " the greatest sports comeback of all time  "  how would 1 make it fair ?

 

Perhaps this time they need 3 or more? 



#72 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,658 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 09 June 2014 - 10:57 PM

 

 

 

When do we see the amendment that all competitors must arrive to the finals on their own bottom ? 
 
Then you will really have something to bitch about :)

Let's remember your post when US have to sail on their own bottoms to Europe or NZ.

Well there is one little detail , US has to lose first .

Last time around we gave up a two race head start to make it interesting , what is it going to take this time ?

+1 starting in the actual match? 

 

 

If 2 behind only ended up contributing to " the greatest sports comeback of all time  "  how would 1 make it fair ?

 

Perhaps this time they need 3 or more? 

That depends on the outcome THIS time. I'm looking forward to the battle again....after a long and very painful convalescence.  :)



#73 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,203 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 10:59 PM

The title of this thread is actually pretty self-defining when you consider "what regatta?"

 

By definition, there will only be 4 boats in what we used to call the Louis Vuitton Cup, which we probably should start calling the Red Bull America's Cup Semi-Finals (RBACSF) (though lets not confuse SF with San Fran, because if things go the way the tea leaves are blowing right now, San Fran is stale burned toast, enjoy the memories of AC 34).

 

So, the real question will be: who will be the chumps that don't make it to the RBACSF?  Will anyone be dumb enough to sign up for something they have no chance of making to the semi-big show?

 

Like Raul Gardini said: The America's Cup is a street fight with cold knives.



#74 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,224 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 11:11 PM

The title of this thread is actually pretty self-defining when you consider "what regatta?"

 

By definition, there will only be 4 boats in what we used to call the Louis Vuitton Cup, which we probably should start calling the Red Bull America's Cup Semi-Finals (RBACSF) (though lets not confuse SF with San Fran, because if things go the way the tea leaves are blowing right now, San Fran is stale burned toast, enjoy the memories of AC 34).

 

So, the real question will be: who will be the chumps that don't make it to the RBACSF?  Will anyone be dumb enough to sign up for something they have no chance of making to the semi-big show?

 

Like Raul Gardini said: The America's Cup is a street fight with cold knives.

 

If it is difficult for a team to generate sponsor dollars for the Americas Cup think how hard it will be to get those bucks for the Semi Cup . 



#75 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 11:24 PM

There has always been a cutdown to 4 for the CSS semifinals, under LV sponsorship included. Can't see how this is too radically different since the likes of Shosh and others never made it that far either; and probably never expected to.

I suppose there's an argument to make about having what is now being called the Qualifying Series (used to be Round Robins) last for months to please the also-rans but seriously: who besides us few and the local venue crowd pays much attention that far ahead of the sharp end anyway?

Were I a new team out of Hong Kong or someplace then I'd take the experience of management team building, AC62 designing and boat building, and young-gun foiling-sailing team building, as the big takeaways for a future shot at making it to the 'SF.' Meaning in this case hopefully, making it into The Sail To 'San Francisco.'

I see few excuses given a 5 team max event in SF that the event authorities and the City can't make it happen. Even if the Event has to pay for it, it should be a relatively cheap, sure-shot, tight parameters AC Venue setup. Between P80 and P32 there is Plenty of Space.

#76 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,658 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 09 June 2014 - 11:26 PM

The title of this thread is actually pretty self-defining when you consider "what regatta?"

 

By definition, there will only be 4 boats in what we used to call the Louis Vuitton Cup, which we probably should start calling the Red Bull America's Cup Semi-Finals (RBACSF) (though lets not confuse SF with San Fran, because if things go the way the tea leaves are blowing right now, San Fran is stale burned toast, enjoy the memories of AC 34).

 

So, the real question will be: who will be the chumps that don't make it to the RBACSF?  Will anyone be dumb enough to sign up for something they have no chance of making to the semi-big show?

 

Like Raul Gardini said: The America's Cup is a street fight with cold knives.

It'll still only cost $3 million plus the cost of campaigning an AC45 - which I'd suggest is great value education at that level. Maybe there are some new teams who will be taking the "long view".



#77 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 11:38 PM

PH: you claim that "if things go the way the tea leaves are blowing right now, San Fran is stale burned toast"

What's the problem with the direction the leaves are blowing? Who's blowing the wind, and in what direction?

I can see everyone (the event, the competitors, all involved) not providing the City some half-$Billion AC charge line that police and other departments can indulgently grovel in for their charge time and charged overtime but: surely smarter minds can prevail and make what is obviously the right thing happen?

It is GGYC's Cup. That Cup should obviously be contested right in front of them. Why even contest otherwise? The CLUB is what matters in the DoG. If they can't Defend there then IMO they shouldn't be Challenging, let alone Defending.

Bermuda? really?? nice place but geezus - it's just too far gone at that point.

#78 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,755 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 12:27 AM

There has always been a cutdown to 4 for the CSS semifinals, under LV sponsorship included. Can't see how this is too radically different since the likes of Shosh and others never made it that far either; and probably never expected to.

I suppose there's an argument to make about having what is now being called the Qualifying Series (used to be Round Robins) last for months to please the also-rans but seriously: who besides us few and the local venue crowd pays much attention that far ahead of the sharp end anyway?

Were I a new team out of Hong Kong or someplace then I'd take the experience of management team building, AC62 designing and boat building, and young-gun foiling-sailing team building, as the big takeaways for a future shot at making it to the 'SF.' Meaning in this case hopefully, making it into The Sail To 'San Francisco.'

I see few excuses given a 5 team max event in SF that the event authorities and the City can't make it happen. Even if the Event has to pay for it, it should be a relatively cheap, sure-shot, tight parameters AC Venue setup. Between P80 and P32 there is Plenty of Space.

 

Fact of the matter, they should have made it the top-8 teams to SFO.  No way they couldn't have found a way to make 8 teams work, particularly with the option of Alameda, etc.  That, IMO, is the worst part of the protocol, and easily the most justified thing that the whiners have to bitch about (I would if I were them, too).



#79 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 01:17 AM

Maybe restricting it to 4 Challs at the venue makes SF much more possible, is the best light it can be seen in.

#80 Chris 249

Chris 249

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,479 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 02:07 AM

 


How times have changed.
 
Back in the day, I got seriously abused by Stingray and others when i said there would only be a maximum of 4 challengers for AC34. Back then, the party line was that the future of the cup was all about it becoming a professional circuit that attracted lots of teams. IIRC, the vision was at least 12 teams, or else it wouldn't be sustainable.

So, at the risk of being verbally abused (yet again), I hope that this edition really is more affordable than before and that we can see significantly more teams, even if they don't stand a chance of winning the challenger series. As long as we see only 4 or 5 challengers building AC62's, the event is really on the "endangered" list. We need to see 10+ teams. As for the USA, you had better hope OR doesn't lose because it seems likely that it would be a long time before you see the cup again

 
Simon,
 
Good for you if you called it right. I don't recall that but take your word for it.
 
Many of your comments are specific to aspects of the event intended to make it commercially viable and self sustaining, I didn't think it was feasible then and I don't now. I just don't think the math works given the infrequency of the match and size of the sailing audience. My position from the start with AC34 was that I will wait until the event was over before calling it a success or failure, regardless of the effort to commercialize it. I'd much rather see 4 to 5 $125M formidable challenges rather than see the event get watered down with weak challengers.
 
Say what you will about he said/she said of the past, their is little disagreement that the finals provided the closest and most suspenseful match in the history of the cup, along with one of the most unlikely and dramatic comebacks in sports history. I'll take that any day of the week, win or lose.
 
I could also go on about all the myths and criticisms that were dis proven with AC34. How many times did we hear cat's can't match race, no pre-start dial-ups, reaching starts suck, their will be no lead changes, etc ? And the list goes on. No need to confirm the fact that their are more naysayers than risk takers, and throw politics into the equation and it becomes even more lopsided with less reasoning. 
 
I give LE and RC tremendous credit for taking on the challenge - very few would, especially if they had to fund it, and they may well have changed the direction of the cup for years to come.
 
In terms of calling out all the OTUSA bullies and all Americans - those are pretty broad generalizations. I speak for myself and don't always agree with the party line, but I suspect you're referring to Stingray as much as anything.
 
In terms of having any great fear of the US losing AC35, get real. It's a frigging sailboat race and life will go on regardless of who wins. I simply hope the most capable and deserving team wins and comes up with a fair rule to compete with in the next edition.
 
BTW, glad to see your using your spell check more often :)
 
its interesting - and I agree that much has been accomplished - there is very little clamor for mono hulls anymore.

Looks like the lead mine chapter of AC racing has been closed.

 

Or maybe more sailors are ignoring the AC altogether, or ignoring this forum because it has proven to be the wrong place to try to have reasoned discussion about such issue.



#81 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,224 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 03:16 AM


 



How times have changed.
 
Back in the day, I got seriously abused by Stingray and others when i said there would only be a maximum of 4 challengers for AC34. Back then, the party line was that the future of the cup was all about it becoming a professional circuit that attracted lots of teams. IIRC, the vision was at least 12 teams, or else it wouldn't be sustainable.
So, at the risk of being verbally abused (yet again), I hope that this edition really is more affordable than before and that we can see significantly more teams, even if they don't stand a chance of winning the challenger series. As long as we see only 4 or 5 challengers building AC62's, the event is really on the "endangered" list. We need to see 10+ teams. As for the USA, you had better hope OR doesn't lose because it seems likely that it would be a long time before you see the cup again

 
Simon,
 
Good for you if you called it right. I don't recall that but take your word for it.
 
Many of your comments are specific to aspects of the event intended to make it commercially viable and self sustaining, I didn't think it was feasible then and I don't now. I just don't think the math works given the infrequency of the match and size of the sailing audience. My position from the start with AC34 was that I will wait until the event was over before calling it a success or failure, regardless of the effort to commercialize it. I'd much rather see 4 to 5 $125M formidable challenges rather than see the event get watered down with weak challengers.
 
Say what you will about he said/she said of the past, their is little disagreement that the finals provided the closest and most suspenseful match in the history of the cup, along with one of the most unlikely and dramatic comebacks in sports history. I'll take that any day of the week, win or lose.
 
I could also go on about all the myths and criticisms that were dis proven with AC34. How many times did we hear cat's can't match race, no pre-start dial-ups, reaching starts suck, their will be no lead changes, etc ? And the list goes on. No need to confirm the fact that their are more naysayers than risk takers, and throw politics into the equation and it becomes even more lopsided with less reasoning. 
 
I give LE and RC tremendous credit for taking on the challenge - very few would, especially if they had to fund it, and they may well have changed the direction of the cup for years to come.
 
In terms of calling out all the OTUSA bullies and all Americans - those are pretty broad generalizations. I speak for myself and don't always agree with the party line, but I suspect you're referring to Stingray as much as anything.
 
In terms of having any great fear of the US losing AC35, get real. It's a frigging sailboat race and life will go on regardless of who wins. I simply hope the most capable and deserving team wins and comes up with a fair rule to compete with in the next edition.
 
BTW, glad to see your using your spell check more often :)
 
its interesting - and I agree that much has been accomplished - there is very little clamor for mono hulls anymore.
Looks like the lead mine chapter of AC racing has been closed.
 
Or maybe more sailors are ignoring the AC altogether, or ignoring this forum because it has proven to be the wrong place to try to have reasoned discussion about such issue.

The clamor for mono hulls is more from those sailors that actually own boats or sail themselves .

The AC is a interesting diversion and has increased multi sales to perhaps 5% of all boats raced ?

#82 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,203 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 03:57 AM

PH: you claim that "if things go the way the tea leaves are blowing right now, San Fran is stale burned toast"

What's the problem with the direction the leaves are blowing? Who's blowing the wind, and in what direction?

I can see everyone (the event, the competitors, all involved) not providing the City some half-$Billion AC charge line that police and other departments can indulgently grovel in for their charge time and charged overtime but: surely smarter minds can prevail and make what is obviously the right thing happen?

It is GGYC's Cup. That Cup should obviously be contested right in front of them. Why even contest otherwise? The CLUB is what matters in the DoG. If they can't Defend there then IMO they shouldn't be Challenging, let alone Defending.

Bermuda? really?? nice place but geezus - it's just too far gone at that point.

 

My preference is SFO, for sure.  But the tea leaves...they be ablowin' in a different direction right now.  Big time.



#83 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,203 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 04:00 AM

The title of this thread is actually pretty self-defining when you consider "what regatta?"

 

By definition, there will only be 4 boats in what we used to call the Louis Vuitton Cup, which we probably should start calling the Red Bull America's Cup Semi-Finals (RBACSF) (though lets not confuse SF with San Fran, because if things go the way the tea leaves are blowing right now, San Fran is stale burned toast, enjoy the memories of AC 34).

 

So, the real question will be: who will be the chumps that don't make it to the RBACSF?  Will anyone be dumb enough to sign up for something they have no chance of making to the semi-big show?

 

Like Raul Gardini said: The America's Cup is a street fight with cold knives.

It'll still only cost $3 million plus the cost of campaigning an AC45 - which I'd suggest is great value education at that level. Maybe there are some new teams who will be taking the "long view".

 

I'll bet for a whole lot less money, and grief, someone could buy a GC 32 and enter that series, have a ton of fun, and learn a great deal about foiling.  $3 million would go a long way beyond entry fees for that sort of thing.



#84 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 10 June 2014 - 04:40 AM



 




How times have changed.
 
Back in the day, I got seriously abused by Stingray and others when i said there would only be a maximum of 4 challengers for AC34. Back then, the party line was that the future of the cup was all about it becoming a professional circuit that attracted lots of teams. IIRC, the vision was at least 12 teams, or else it wouldn't be sustainable.
So, at the risk of being verbally abused (yet again), I hope that this edition really is more affordable than before and that we can see significantly more teams, even if they don't stand a chance of winning the challenger series. As long as we see only 4 or 5 challengers building AC62's, the event is really on the "endangered" list. We need to see 10+ teams. As for the USA, you had better hope OR doesn't lose because it seems likely that it would be a long time before you see the cup again

 
Simon,
 
Good for you if you called it right. I don't recall that but take your word for it.
 
Many of your comments are specific to aspects of the event intended to make it commercially viable and self sustaining, I didn't think it was feasible then and I don't now. I just don't think the math works given the infrequency of the match and size of the sailing audience. My position from the start with AC34 was that I will wait until the event was over before calling it a success or failure, regardless of the effort to commercialize it. I'd much rather see 4 to 5 $125M formidable challenges rather than see the event get watered down with weak challengers.
 
Say what you will about he said/she said of the past, their is little disagreement that the finals provided the closest and most suspenseful match in the history of the cup, along with one of the most unlikely and dramatic comebacks in sports history. I'll take that any day of the week, win or lose.
 
I could also go on about all the myths and criticisms that were dis proven with AC34. How many times did we hear cat's can't match race, no pre-start dial-ups, reaching starts suck, their will be no lead changes, etc ? And the list goes on. No need to confirm the fact that their are more naysayers than risk takers, and throw politics into the equation and it becomes even more lopsided with less reasoning. 
 
I give LE and RC tremendous credit for taking on the challenge - very few would, especially if they had to fund it, and they may well have changed the direction of the cup for years to come.
 
In terms of calling out all the OTUSA bullies and all Americans - those are pretty broad generalizations. I speak for myself and don't always agree with the party line, but I suspect you're referring to Stingray as much as anything.
 
In terms of having any great fear of the US losing AC35, get real. It's a frigging sailboat race and life will go on regardless of who wins. I simply hope the most capable and deserving team wins and comes up with a fair rule to compete with in the next edition.
 
BTW, glad to see your using your spell check more often :)
 
its interesting - and I agree that much has been accomplished - there is very little clamor for mono hulls anymore.
Looks like the lead mine chapter of AC racing has been closed.
 
Or maybe more sailors are ignoring the AC altogether, or ignoring this forum because it has proven to be the wrong place to try to have reasoned discussion about such issue.
The clamor for mono hulls is more from those sailors that actually own boats or sail themselves .

The AC is a interesting diversion and has increased multi sales to perhaps 5% of all boats raced ?
now that's interesting - any sailor who owns a boat - owns a mono. And any sailor who sails a boat - sails a mono.

Surely, some of your best friends must sail a multihull?

But frankly, it is noteworthy that prior to AC34 there was lots of handwringing over the loss of lead and spinnaker. It was generally thought that had TNZ won - the spinnaker might return.

#85 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,224 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 07:22 AM

^

 

I think you may have missed the point .

 

Lets put it another way. The reason you do not see a clamor as you put it for monos is that many of those interested in them have lost interest in the current AC and as such would not be populating sites such as SA etc. As the overwhelming number of sailors and boat owners are mono oriented that leaves the multi fans to hash it out on the web which creates more of a illusion than may be accurate. 

 

Yes I do have friends that sail mulits and I have had a few adventures myself on a Renolds 33 and smaller multis as well so I have a vested interest in both . 

 

As for the loss of the spinnaker I do miss that and the boat handling skills that went along with it . 

 

There was a lot more sailing ability used in the old lead mines that you will ever see on the current AC platforms .

 

What was it for AC 34 one guy steering, a couple of guys trimming and 8 guys grinding and running from side to side?

 

As a grinder I should be happy that its keeping the boys employed but come on now it used to be a lot more than just spinning the handles and hanging on . 



#86 fireball

fireball

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 728 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 07:53 AM

 

The title of this thread is actually pretty self-defining when you consider "what regatta?"

 

By definition, there will only be 4 boats in what we used to call the Louis Vuitton Cup, which we probably should start calling the Red Bull America's Cup Semi-Finals (RBACSF) (though lets not confuse SF with San Fran, because if things go the way the tea leaves are blowing right now, San Fran is stale burned toast, enjoy the memories of AC 34).

 

So, the real question will be: who will be the chumps that don't make it to the RBACSF?  Will anyone be dumb enough to sign up for something they have no chance of making to the semi-big show?

 

Like Raul Gardini said: The America's Cup is a street fight with cold knives.

It'll still only cost $3 million plus the cost of campaigning an AC45 - which I'd suggest is great value education at that level. Maybe there are some new teams who will be taking the "long view".

 

I'll bet for a whole lot less money, and grief, someone could buy a GC 32 and enter that series, have a ton of fun, and learn a great deal about foiling.  $3 million would go a long way beyond entry fees for that sort of thing.

 

 

I really don't see why teams shouldn't be able to turn up with an AC62 and race in 2017. Why force teams to compete in the AC45s if they don't wish to do so.

 

If there is a commercial purpose to racing AC45s then there should be prize money, so the teams make a profit.

 

If they make a loss then it's just another expense which they should have the option of avoiding.

 

I would expect that racing GC32s would be much more useful practice than racing non-foiling AC45s.



#87 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,203 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:27 AM

PH: you claim that "if things go the way the tea leaves are blowing right now, San Fran is stale burned toast"

What's the problem with the direction the leaves are blowing? Who's blowing the wind, and in what direction?

I can see everyone (the event, the competitors, all involved) not providing the City some half-$Billion AC charge line that police and other departments can indulgently grovel in for their charge time and charged overtime but: surely smarter minds can prevail and make what is obviously the right thing happen?

It is GGYC's Cup. That Cup should obviously be contested right in front of them. Why even contest otherwise? The CLUB is what matters in the DoG. If they can't Defend there then IMO they shouldn't be Challenging, let alone Defending.

Bermuda? really?? nice place but geezus - it's just too far gone at that point.

 

My preference is SFO, for sure.  But the tea leaves...they be ablowin' in a different direction right now.  Big time.

 

 

Tea leaves confirmation here.  SFO looks out.

 

http://bigstory.ap.o...-sf-appears-out



#88 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 02:09 PM

Tea leaves confirmation here.  SFO looks out.

 

http://bigstory.ap.o...-sf-appears-out

'They' (who the heck is doing the deciding, anyway?) should absolutely not throw SF under the bus and give up on what in many ways the best AC venue ever - and where the GGYC  dang Club is.



#89 Alpha FB

Alpha FB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 971 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 02:20 PM

Great...

 

after all the dubious lead up to AC34, they manage to actually hold a fantasticly exciting race series in a great place, creating an opening for 'regular folks' to start looking at yacht racing as something more that some rich dudes jerking each other off.  Friends of mine in SF, not AT ALL interested in sailing, actually started coming down to the waterfront every day to watch and enjoy the racing as an actual SPORTING event.  The comeback made headlines all over the world, further reinforcing the credits of the event as a genuine sporting contest.

 

So what happens next?  They're seriously considering holding it in Bermuda.  The very name is synonimous with 'millionaires playground' (right or wrong).

 

In effect they're just confirming to all and everyone the long standing perception that yacht racing IS just a bunch of rich guys playing with their toys

 

Nothing to do with sport, nothing to do with anybody else, just move along, and don't spoil our party...

 

 

When EB tendered out for a location for the Cup, at least that had SOME logic to it, Lake Geneva not being a arm of the sea.  GGYC not holding it in SF? It's the final death knell to the concept of 'home waters'.



#90 K38BOB

K38BOB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,535 posts
  • Location:Bay Area

Posted 10 June 2014 - 09:12 PM

(Artemis) well funded by respected owner.

Whether the co-founder of Gunvor is "well-respected" is a matter of some debate. http://en.wikipedia....unvor_(company) - read "ownership" and "controversies".

by the team during tragedy was the context.



#91 porthos

porthos

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 535 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 09:19 PM

Great...

 

after all the dubious lead up to AC34, they manage to actually hold a fantasticly exciting race series in a great place, creating an opening for 'regular folks' to start looking at yacht racing as something more that some rich dudes jerking each other off.  Friends of mine in SF, not AT ALL interested in sailing, actually started coming down to the waterfront every day to watch and enjoy the racing as an actual SPORTING event.  The comeback made headlines all over the world, further reinforcing the credits of the event as a genuine sporting contest.

 

So what happens next?  They're seriously considering holding it in Bermuda.  The very name is synonimous with 'millionaires playground' (right or wrong).

 

In effect they're just confirming to all and everyone the long standing perception that yacht racing IS just a bunch of rich guys playing with their toys

 

Nothing to do with sport, nothing to do with anybody else, just move along, and don't spoil our party...

 

 

When EB tendered out for a location for the Cup, at least that had SOME logic to it, Lake Geneva not being a arm of the sea.  GGYC not holding it in SF? It's the final death knell to the concept of 'home waters'.

Chicago is a weird but yet very interesting option.



#92 PeterHuston

PeterHuston

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,203 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 09:57 PM

Tea leaves confirmation here.  SFO looks out.

 

http://bigstory.ap.o...-sf-appears-out

'They' (who the heck is doing the deciding, anyway?) should absolutely not throw SF under the bus and give up on what in many ways the best AC venue ever - and where the GGYC  dang Club is.

 

 

"They" is Russell and Sam Hollis.



#93 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:24 PM

"They" is Russell and Sam Hollis.

That's who is leading the Event Authority now?

I doubt Comm Bajurin is happy with the direction they're trying to take it. They should for sure give SF a decent shot at this before apparently just writing them off like what RC apparently is doing.

#94 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:35 PM

^
 
I think you may have missed the point .
 
Lets put it another way. The reason you do not see a clamor as you put it for monos is that many of those interested in them have lost interest in the current AC and as such would not be populating sites such as SA etc. As the overwhelming number of sailors and boat owners are mono oriented that leaves the multi fans to hash it out on the web which creates more of a illusion than may be accurate. 
 
Yes I do have friends that sail mulits and I have had a few adventures myself on a Renolds 33 and smaller multis as well so I have a vested interest in both . 
 
As for the loss of the spinnaker I do miss that and the boat handling skills that went along with it . 
 
There was a lot more sailing ability used in the old lead mines that you will ever see on the current AC platforms .
 
What was it for AC 34 one guy steering, a couple of guys trimming and 8 guys grinding and running from side to side?
 
As a grinder I should be happy that its keeping the boys employed but come on now it used to be a lot more than just spinning the handles and hanging on . 

for some reason I think that jibing a spinnaker pretty plain stuff - happens all the time around here. Hell, done that myself - plenty of times.

But:
- sailing faster than the wind
- hunting down pressure from behind
- orchestrating flying jibes
- balancing on the foils upwind
- and soon, orchestrating flying tacks

All of that blows my mind with the sailing skill required.

And I am not a multihull specialist either, but simply a fan of sailing - in all it's forms.

#95 randomlurker

randomlurker

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 17 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:47 PM

There has always been a cutdown to 4 for the CSS semifinals, under LV sponsorship included. Can't see how this is too radically different since the likes of Shosh and others never made it that far either; and probably never expected to.
 

 

Just like Oracle in 2003, one of those also ran, make up the numbers, teams who didn't make the semis.. ;-) #shrug #jusayin



#96 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:55 PM


"They" is Russell and Sam Hollis.

That's who is leading the Event Authority now?

I doubt Comm Bajurin is happy with the direction they're trying to take it. They should for sure give SF a decent shot at this before apparently just writing them off like what RC apparently is doing.
SF Bay is nuking right now - surely gusting near 30.

...but looking kind of empty out there...

#97 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:56 PM

^^ OR did make the semi's in '03, right? Their winning race against Seattle's JS-helmed OneWorld came off a very unlikely final leg windshift whle on a desperate gambit, on a flukey H Gulf day, to get there. Pissed me off..

#98 kiwi_jon

kiwi_jon

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,623 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 10 June 2014 - 11:08 PM

^

 

The 2003 LV Cup final was between Alinghi and Oracle BMW Racing. Alinghi won 5 - 1. So yes they did make the semi's.



#99 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,658 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 10 June 2014 - 11:09 PM

^
 
I think you may have missed the point .
 
Lets put it another way. The reason you do not see a clamor as you put it for monos is that many of those interested in them have lost interest in the current AC and as such would not be populating sites such as SA etc. As the overwhelming number of sailors and boat owners are mono oriented that leaves the multi fans to hash it out on the web which creates more of a illusion than may be accurate. 
 
Yes I do have friends that sail mulits and I have had a few adventures myself on a Renolds 33 and smaller multis as well so I have a vested interest in both . 
 
As for the loss of the spinnaker I do miss that and the boat handling skills that went along with it . 
 
There was a lot more sailing ability used in the old lead mines that you will ever see on the current AC platforms .
 
What was it for AC 34 one guy steering, a couple of guys trimming and 8 guys grinding and running from side to side?
 
As a grinder I should be happy that its keeping the boys employed but come on now it used to be a lot more than just spinning the handles and hanging on . 

for some reason I think that jibing a spinnaker pretty plain stuff - happens all the time around here. Hell, done that myself - plenty of times.

But:
- sailing faster than the wind
- hunting down pressure from behind
- orchestrating flying jibes
- balancing on the foils upwind
- and soon, orchestrating flying tacks

All of that blows my mind with the sailing skill required.

And I am not a multihull specialist either, but simply a fan of sailing - in all it's forms.

+1 Absolutely blows me away too. Bring it on.



#100 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,112 posts

Posted 11 June 2014 - 12:57 PM

If anyone has the Protocol handy,

When will we know who has filed entries and when?

Can, will, teams be announcing it for themselves and/or does an entry list get published on August 8 at the end of the entry period?

It opened Monday so there could already be some that have been sent in, surely from at least OTUSA and from Team Australia.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users