Jump to content

Regular Swimmer

Members
  • Content Count

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

31 Kiss-ass

About Regular Swimmer

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Newcastle
  • Interests
    technology, sailing

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks SBD. I was trying stimulate discussion of ideas that were a bit more "extreme" so didn't think that topic was quite right. But given the animosity this thread has already created I'll... actually probably not even bother
  2. Actually, I thought it was a perfectly appropriate response given Dog-breath's tone. So anyway... I actually did an < innovate ac37 race format > search and got no topic that was a fit. Since you guys seem to be very familiar with it perhaps I'd have had more luck if I'd also put "dickhead" in the search term.
  3. Probably because I didn't see the first one. Perhaps you could stop being a smart arse and point me to it.
  4. Here's one idea. I quite liked the way they put Shark Island into the Sydney Sail GP course. If we could do that for AC it would inject some randomness and potentially provide a circuit-breaker for "win the start, win the race". If the island was big enough it would also mess with the wind. So how about putting a cruise ship in the middle of the course. This would allow a boat to chose a split where they can't be covered. As a bonus, the host could sell berths and day tickets - and every course would be a "stadium course".
  5. Personally, I thought the AC36 racing was plenty exciting and I wish there'd been more of it. But there's been a ton of whinging, on this and other forums, that the racing was "boring". So I'd like to see ETNZ apply some of its innovative thinking to the cup format for AC37. Put a bit more "spice" into race day. Broaden the audience appeal.
  6. But LR can still win this thing if they're "lucky" with the weather
  7. For the starts? Yup. For the race results? That's a different story - we now have a truckload of telemetry data.
  8. That's not what I said. Being able to get up again in a timely manner was lucky. And you'll recall that both PB and BT admitted that their win was "lucky". Let's not get bogged down in which events were lucky and which weren't - I'm just saying that luck is a big part of the results we're seeing. And you can't read any start box superiority into a 5:3 result because the sample size isn't large enough. Stats 101.
  9. Yes, they both made mistakes. TR was "lucky" that they were on a part of the course that enabled them to get foiling again. That luck was perhaps enhanced by a better take-off design choice but it was luck none-the-less.
  10. Fuck me. Sample size of 8 - 5:3 is not statistically significant. I know we all want to talk about starting genius, better positioning, timing etc. but it's all just probabilistic noise (luck) influenced by the weather and the boat design choices. Tell yourself whatever you like, but PB is doing fine.
  11. And they're still doing it. I remember seeing the ad on TV in I think 2011 when I was living in SF. "Sir Thomas Lipton Tea... America's cup, America's cup, America's cup of tea." I had to chuckle, because finding a good cup of tea in America is even harder than finding a good cup of coffee.
  12. Geez, I wish you guys would stop banging on about what a start box genius JS is. These are the facts: The boat with the big foils is easier to manouver and has won 5 of 8 starts. The boat with the small foils is faster and has won 5 of 8 races.
  13. Seriously? Olympics, Americas Cup and Volvo in the same year?
  14. Both. When there are only two types these boys can still be "nothing alike" and still fit in the same box
  15. Motivation would be the deciding factor for these two Type As, I'd imagine. Both boats get written off at 3:3 and the cup stays in NZ
×
×
  • Create New...