Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Launched te kahu in Jan with the knowledge that they can keep sailing while the 75 was shipping 

https://emirates-team-new-zealand.americascup.com/en/news/430_EMIRATES-TEAM-NEW-ZEALAND-REVEAL-TE-KHU.html

After a short you tube search extensive footage of the sailing through sailing in March -June examples below 

 

 

sailing in May

75 back on the water 30th June 


so the team say the plan was to sail teKahu while the 75 was away, the only inconvenience was sailing it slightly longer, to say that they were the only team off the water when evidence proved otherwise , to quote you is ‘100% false’

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 10.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

shes legit ... foil arm looks to be in the front end of the box ... opposite of all other teams ... what are we going to read into that?

ETNZ are probably favorites .....but win or lose....Team New Zealand have firmly established themselves as the all time great AC nation in the modern era.   From the time they first emerged, they have

And so it begins. Image credit and copyright Allesandro Spiga  

Posted Images

14 hours ago, JALhazmat said:
14 hours ago, chesirecat said:

And the most budget crippling as most teams will be approaching their limits

That depends on your billionaire.. 

And Ineos has the one with the deepest pockets this time round.

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

And Ineos has the one with the deepest pockets this time round.

Lets be real. None of the teams are short of money to get the boats to their potential.

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

No

Here is your original answer.  Covid hindered all teams as countless articles have proved. We all get things wrong.  Even you RH3000.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JALhazmat said:

Launched te kahu in Jan with the knowledge that they can keep sailing while the 75 was shipping 

https://emirates-team-new-zealand.americascup.com/en/news/430_EMIRATES-TEAM-NEW-ZEALAND-REVEAL-TE-KHU.html

After a short you tube search extensive footage of the sailing through sailing in March -June examples below 

 

 

sailing in May

75 back on the water 30th June 


so the team say the plan was to sail teKahu while the 75 was away, the only inconvenience was sailing it slightly longer, to say that they were the only team off the water when evidence proved otherwise , to quote you is ‘100% false’

They lost pretty much all of April due to lockdown.

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

They lost pretty much all of April due to lockdown.

3-4 weeks? 
That’s a little way off the 5 months suggested by your compatriot 

ironically even though that interrupted the schedule  for te kahu they recovered it with the delay getting the 75 back. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JALhazmat said:

3-4 weeks? 
That’s a little way off the 5 months suggested by your compatriot 

ironically even though that interrupted the schedule  for te kahu they recovered it with the delay getting the 75 back. 

They lost 5 months on the AC75, where AM lost nothing as did LR.

 

  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, crashtack said:

Interesting phenomenon where the boat closest to the camera always seems to be a bit faster... can anyone explain this to me?

The area you're looking at gets bigger the further away it is. Think of a camera outside, where right in front of the camera it only shows a few inches but far away it shows vast distances.

When one object is closer than another it has less distance to cover to cross the screen, so viewing two objects moving at the same speed will have the near object move across the screen more quickly and already to be faster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, crashtack said:

Interesting phenomenon where the boat closest to the camera always seems to be a bit faster... can anyone explain this to me?

The area you're looking at gets bigger the further away it is. Think of a camera outside, where right in front of the camera it only shows a few inches but far away it shows vast distances.

When one object is closer than another it has less distance to cover to cross the screen, so viewing two objects moving at the same speed will have the near object move across the screen more quickly and already to be faster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, crashtack said:

Interesting phenomenon where the boat closest to the camera always seems to be a bit faster... can anyone explain this to me?

The area you're looking at gets bigger the further away it is. Think of a camera outside, where right in front of the camera it only shows a few inches but far away it shows vast distances.

When one object is closer than another it has less distance to cover to cross the screen, so viewing two objects moving at the same speed will have the near object move across the screen more quickly and already to be faster.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The ‘who sailed what when’ is part of it but the Design is where ETNZ handed themselves an unfair 6 month advantage. They spent $6M during that design time, by their own admissions in the MBIE imbroglio. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, crashtack said:

Interesting phenomenon where the boat closest to the camera always seems to be a bit faster... can anyone explain this to me?

The area you're looking at gets bigger the further away it is. Think of a camera outside, where right in front of the camera it only shows a few inches but far away it shows vast distances.

 

When one object is closer than another it has less distance to cover to cross the screen, so viewing two objects moving at the same speed will have the near object move across the screen more quickly and appear to be faster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Thistle3841 said:

The area you're looking at gets bigger the further away it is. Think of a camera outside, where right in front of the camera it only shows a few inches but far away it shows vast distances.

 

When one object is closer than another it has less distance to cover to cross the screen, so viewing two objects moving at the same speed will have the near object move across the screen more quickly and appear to be faster.

I suspect crashtack was being sarcastic. I got tired of pointing out that when people said that boat x was clearly faster it was almost always the closest.. People think they can still judge it but forget that the zoom of the camera lens distorts our perspective in this matter

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

INEOS often are using only 6 grinders, 7 maximum. All the other teams often have 8 on the handles. Are INEOS making best use of this extra afterguard free time?
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

I suspect crashtack was being sarcastic. I got tired of pointing out that when people said that boat x was clearly faster it was almost always the closest.. People think they can still judge it but forget that the zoom of the camera lens distorts our perspective in this matter

Of course I try to be nice and get made to look like an idiot. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Thistle3841 said:

Of course I try to be nice and get made to look like an idiot. 

That was not my intent (and I may even have been wrong, it has been known, July 1993 I think it was)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

They lost 5 months on the AC75, where AM lost nothing as did LR.

 

Because they had to ship it around the world for the ACWS events? ( that didn’t happen) 

events they knew about, that they sanctioned, that they had built into the development plan?

it wasnt some big Surprise one morning when They woke up and realise that there is 75 was gone “ah  boys what the fuck are we going to do now? “


baby boat Was built and launched precisely to account for that time period where they wouldn’t have to 75 so sailing the 75 was never in the plan.

It’s another one for the poor me narrative where the poor unsuspecting kiwis were dealt a  rough hand By design or circumstance so I don’t expect you to agree. when your own team in the launch for baby boat article I posted above are admitting to the purpose of having something to sail and develop with while the 75 is away I don’t know how you can disagree.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mozzy Sails said:

INEOS often are using only 6 grinders, 7 maximum. All the other teams often have 8 on the handles. Are INEOS making best use of this extra afterguard free time?
 

 

So who’s making the tea??:mellow:

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

The ‘who sailed what when’ is part of it but the Design is where ETNZ handed themselves an unfair 6 month advantage. They spent $6M during that design time, by their own admissions in the MBIE imbroglio. 

Is this your 1st America’s Cup??:mellow:

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

Launched te kahu in Jan with the knowledge that they can keep sailing while the 75 was shipping 

https://emirates-team-new-zealand.americascup.com/en/news/430_EMIRATES-TEAM-NEW-ZEALAND-REVEAL-TE-KHU.html

After a short you tube search extensive footage of the sailing through sailing in March -June examples below 

 

 

sailing in May

75 back on the water 30th June 


so the team say the plan was to sail teKahu while the 75 was away, the only inconvenience was sailing it slightly longer, to say that they were the only team off the water when evidence proved otherwise , to quote you is ‘100% false’

Awww cmon J are you are better than this! You know TK isnt an AC75 

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

Here is your original answer.  Covid hindered all teams as countless articles have proved. We all get things wrong.  Even you RH3000.

But what was the original question? Context matters.

COVID hindered all teams - only one lost their only AC75 for 5 months.

Nuance matters....

I was wrong in my assertion that INEOS didn't lose sailing time on their boat - they lost 1 month. But the point continues to stand - ETNZ are not 6 months down the road due to having a 6 month head start.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

America's Cup: Grant Dalton warns challengers - write off Ben Ainslie at your peril

Team New Zealand boss Grant Dalton has warned the America’s Cup challenging fleet to “write off Ben Ainslie at your peril”.

Ainslie’s INEOS Team UK syndicate has endured a nightmare start to their racing campaign, failing to win a race at the world series warm-up regatta a month ago and failing to finish most of them as they endured speed and technical problems.

They have worked overtime to try to remedy those issues and look to have made good progress, though doubts still remain about their boat Britannia's performance in light airs as the Prada Cup challenger series starts on Friday.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/americas-cup/123944002/americas-cup-grant-dalton-warns-challengers--write-off-ben-ainslie-at-your-peril

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

The ‘who sailed what when’ is part of it but the Design is where ETNZ handed themselves an unfair 6 month advantage. They spent $6M during that design time, by their own admissions in the MBIE imbroglio. 

That’s BS. In that 6 months they had to design a generic design package available for purchase by ALL teams - presumably they wrote the rule around this design. This is what the disputed cost was. A cost Dalton and ETNZ said was an event cost, as opposed to a Team cost. As Dan Bernasconi stated, after that design package was complete, they could go off and design their OWN boat. There is no doubt every Defender has an advantage every cycle, including ETNZ this time, but that’s the whole point of the AC. It’s supposed to be near impossible to win. Thats why only the best compete and the best of the best win. That’s what makes it so elusive. If you want a completely fair, and completely level playing field you’re in the wrong event. The only way to achieve that is to make the boats completely one design. The day the AC goes in that direction is the day it ceases to be the AC.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

There is no doubt every Defender has an advantage every cycle, including ETNZ this time, but that’s the whole point of the AC.

Name the last time any Defender intentionally gave themselves a 6 month design head start. Name it! 

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

Name the last time any Defender intentionally gave themselves a 6 month design head start. Name it! 

How about that time they changed the class of boat six months after everyone had actually started designing and building.... Oh yeah that was last time.

How about that time the wind limits and racing rules were changed so much that they pretty much perfectly fitted the boat the defender had been designing for several years and clearly disadvantaged the eventual challenger... Oh yeah that was the time before that.

Intentionally or otherwise and for a variety of reasons the defender always has an advantage. Not least of which is that they are extremely unlikely to ever make changes even in an emergency that are likely to disadvantage themselves.

 

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, rh3000 said:

But what was the original question? Context matters.

COVID hindered all teams - only one lost their only AC75 for 5 months.

Nuance matters....

I was wrong in my assertion that INEOS didn't lose sailing time on their boat - they lost 1 month. But the point continues to stand - ETNZ are not 6 months down the road due to having a 6 month head start.

All resolved.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@rh3000 

so they didn’t get a head start of 6 months and they lost 5 months of water time...

it’s a miracle I tell you.. the plucky underdog strikes again ;-) 

how do you lose time in a boat that you were never going to have access too because you decided to host a fucking stupid ACWS? 

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

 There is no doubt every Defender has an advantage every cycle, including ETNZ this time, but that’s the whole point of the AC. It’s supposed to be near impossible to win.

There is no doubt the defender has an advantage.

The results over decades bear that out, but more recently the "defender edge" has declined.

Gilded Age : Defender 15  Challenger 0 

 12 meters 8 : 2

IACC   3:2

Cats 1: 1

Foiling Mono.......time will tell.

Its getting more interesting

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sea Breeze 74 said:

America's Cup: Grant Dalton warns challengers - write off Ben Ainslie at your peril

Team New Zealand boss Grant Dalton has warned the America’s Cup challenging fleet to “write off Ben Ainslie at your peril”.

Ainslie’s INEOS Team UK syndicate has endured a nightmare start to their racing campaign, failing to win a race at the world series warm-up regatta a month ago and failing to finish most of them as they endured speed and technical problems.

They have worked overtime to try to remedy those issues and look to have made good progress, though doubts still remain about their boat Britannia's performance in light airs as the Prada Cup challenger series starts on Friday.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/americas-cup/123944002/americas-cup-grant-dalton-warns-challengers--write-off-ben-ainslie-at-your-peril

He'll know more than most. Ineos has spent the most time "racing" against them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bazzer-racing said:

I can promise you INEOS lost two whole weeks at the start of lockdown, not a single thing done anywhere, then work restarted but with caution all around and hence a slower pace . INEOS staff were really cautious of Covid all through the summer with good social distancing measures in place.

I made parts that are on the B1 and B2 as a sub contractor, I did not hear of a single covid case in the whole operation, larger sub contractors had INEOS supplied security guards just relating to Covid, every single person going in and out was logged and checked.

All good people to work with.

So many questions for you!

After NDA is lifted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ainslie "Since the World Series we've got a new rudder, a new elevator, a new mast, a new mainsail, new headsails, we put aero modifications to the hell and we've changed the systems of the hull....so we've been quite busy"

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, RobG said:

I think that original advantage is now well and truely diluted. Given the crop of B2s, LR seemed to be closer to the mark with their B1 than ETNZ, but all teams have had sufficient time to test and compare boats so it's now more or less even in terms of design and development opportunity.

You can only see 50% of the boat. ETNZ still have a 6 month jump on everyone. You've only got to look at how far a team can progress in week's to know how big of a deal 6 months is.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stingray~ said:

Name the last time any Defender intentionally gave themselves a 6 month design head start. Name it! 

So umm...how long did Oracle take to develop the ac72 design rules? :ph34r:.....Hmmm they won the 33rd cup in February 2010 and released the AC72 rule in September 2010.....So that would be...7 months? Did I count that right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rh3000 said:

But what was the original question? Context matters.

COVID hindered all teams - only one lost their only AC75 for 5 months.

Nuance matters....

I was wrong in my assertion that INEOS didn't lose sailing time on their boat - they lost 1 month. But the point continues to stand - ETNZ are not 6 months down the road due to having a 6 month head start.

Please, try to use some logic and at least look up the facts.  

NZ lost time on their AC-75 because it got shipped around the world.  You do recall that AM lost at least a month of sailing in Florida because of covid and then they also shipped their only AC around the world.  It is not the fault of other teams that NZ decided to use the slow boats to ship their stuff around the world.

NZ had hardships, but all teams had hardships (e.g. AM several month waits to launch B1).  Just stop crying on peoples shoulders about how "tough" it has been for NZ.  It sounds like you are already making excuse for them to lose!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, IPLore said:

There is no doubt the defender has an advantage.

The results over decades bear that out, but more recently the "defender edge" has declined.

Gilded Age : Defender 15  Challenger 0 

 12 meters 8 : 2

IACC   3:2

Cats 1: 1

Foiling Mono.......time will tell.

Its getting more interesting

I think, in this discussion another party has been forgotten. LR must have known basically everything regarding the design process, right from the start. If they didn’t they were asleep at the wheel. If at any point they felt they were being bullshitted they would have said “ 90ft on the waterline etc.  see you in 9 months. 
so I don’t think it is strictly correct to say ETNZ had a head start over everyone. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rh3000 said:

But what was the original question? Context matters.

COVID hindered all teams - only one lost their only AC75 for 5 months.

Nuance matters....

I was wrong in my assertion that INEOS didn't lose sailing time on their boat - they lost 1 month. But the point continues to stand - ETNZ are not 6 months down the road due to having a 6 month head start.

But I thought they had always planned not to have the boat for that long? And did they just stop work? Computers off, lights out and feet up? I doubt that very much. So the smaller test boat was planned for the period. So with that in mind, not having the ac75 for 5months wasnt unexpected. You could even say covid had less effect on them than it did Ineos. Ineos planned tonhave their boat out on the water but couldn't. ETNZ never intended to use theirs 

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

Name the last time any Defender intentionally gave themselves a 6 month design head start. Name it! 

I can name a defender who made the opposition sail to the USA while the defender built a boat that was so extreme in design and un seaworthy that it would of been suicide to try crossing the pond with it. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, uflux said:

how long did Oracle take to develop the ac72 design rules?

I forget how many months (look it up yourself) but the point is: They did not do it in secret, they let all interested parties listen in during the entire process. ETNZ could and should have let parties in on the design possibilities, even if design opinions by those other parties were going to be ignored. No Defender in AC History has pulled this shit before and guess what? You can bet your bottom dollar the advantage taken was intentional. 
 

Do I love what they designed? Yes. Was the process fair? Hell no! 

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

I forget how many months (look it up yourself) but the point is: They did not do it in secret, they let all interested parties listen in during the entire process. ETNZ could and should have let parties in on the design possibilities, even if design opinions by those other parties were going to be ignored. No Defender in AC History has pulled this shit before and guess what? You can bet your bottom dollar the advantage taken was intentional. 
 

Do I love what they designed? Yes. Was the process fair? Hell no! 

I did....7 months with no challenger input....Next question 

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

I did....7 months with no challenger input....Next question 

The AC72 design was put together at M&M’s studio in Southern California. Lots of parties accepted the invitation to stay involved, ETNZ included. Later, M&M were free agents and chose to sign with ETNZ.

That was fair play. Big difference! 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

Name the last time any Defender intentionally gave themselves a 6 month design head start. Name it! 

If you think Oracle didn't have a head start for 2013 you've got rocks in your head.

If they wanted a fair boat they would have gone back to the IACC.

They started designing a multihull in 2007 and a rigid wing in 2009.

They were miles ahead of the other teams with regard to designing and sailing a rigid wing multihull by the time the rules came out.

The spanner in the works for Oracle was ETNZ got theirs to foil.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

I forget how many months (look it up yourself) but the point is: They did not do it in secret, they let all interested parties listen in during the entire process. ETNZ could and should have let parties in on the design possibilities, even if design opinions by those other parties were going to be ignored. No Defender in AC History has pulled this shit before and guess what? You can bet your bottom dollar the advantage taken was intentional. 
 

Do I love what they designed? Yes. Was the process fair? Hell no! 

As did ETNZ (Unless you're calling Dan Bernasconi a liar too). Bernasconi talked about how they communicated regularly with all teams during the design process.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Chapter Four said:

If you think Oracle didn't have a head start for 2013 you've got rocks in your head.

They were miles ahead of the other teams with regard to designing and sailing a rigid wing multihull by the time the rules came out.

The spanner in the works for Oracle was ETNZ got theirs to foil.

Do you forget facts ? M&M let a door opened to foiling in the rule and than later joined TNZ giving them at least 6 months advantage, once again. Oracle tried to copy and and could only come back during the last races.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oracle seemed to have tried to get a head start. Then M&M did go to TNZ...  Then the rules committee gave TNZ the biggest gift ever. And at that point, it looked like OR spent their head start time going in the wrong direction. But also the TNZ direction was better all around! It was a typical AC Cluster Fuck.

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

Do you forget facts ? M&M let a door opened to foiling in the rule and than later joined TNZ giving them at least 6 months advantage, once again. Oracle tried to copy and and could only come back during the last races.

 

Yes, M&M designed a non foiling multi, it was only in consultation with ETNZ that the loophole was discovered.

But to say that Oracle didn't have a head start on the design on a rigid wing multihull is delusional.

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

I forget how many months (look it up yourself) but the point is: They did not do it in secret, they let all interested parties listen in during the entire process. ETNZ could and should have let parties in on the design possibilities, even if design opinions by those other parties were going to be ignored. No Defender in AC History has pulled this shit before and guess what? You can bet your bottom dollar the advantage taken was intentional. 
 

Do I love what they designed? Yes. Was the process fair? Hell no! 

'Today [the announcement of the Protocol] is the start of that process,' explains Bernasconi. 'We have had informal discussions with members of our team, and various members of other potential teams. We are aiming to have the concept completed for the class of boat in November which is only eight weeks away. Hopefully, we will get all the teams together, have a lot of discussions on the class, what our vision is and start to draft a rule around that.

'The rule is not going to be out at the end of November what will be available then is a presentation of the concept of the boat, so it will be pictures of the boat, a vision for how it will sail, ideas of what will be one-design or supplied components.

'That will be a good time to get all the potential teams together and get input from them and start putting a rule around that boat.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Guillaume Verdier designed the boat, Dalton decided the process, a french design with a kiwi process.

The ETNZ design team designed the boat whether you like it or not

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

Oracle seemed to have tried to get a head start. Then M&M did go to TNZ...  Then the rules committee gave TNZ the biggest gift ever. And at that point, it looked like OR spent their head start time going in the wrong direction. But also the TNZ direction was better all around! It was a typical AC Cluster Fuck.

Agree, Oracle spent their lead going the wrong direction - remember the orginal tiller bar on B1 :wacko: WTF.

ETNZ eventually got screwed by the rules committee too.

Their boat was designed to sail in 30 knots and proved to be capable of it. Artemis and Oracle both did not.

The lowering of the wind limits significantly helped Oracle retain the cup.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

The ETNZ design team designed the boat whether you like it or not

The design is from Guillaume Verdier, the first design was for a private sailor and included a small central keel, Ray Davies asked him if he could modify the design and get rid of the keel, he did. Team members are good troopers as in any team. The rest is part of kiwi folklore.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Chapter Four said:

Yes, M&M designed a non foiling multi, it was only in consultation with ETNZ that the loophole was discovered.

But to say that Oracle didn't have a head start on the design on a rigid wing multihull is delusional.

Right for the wing, regarding the design I would have to find an interview from M&M telling that they intentionnally let a loophole in the rule, he did not tell that they had the solution at that time though, probably conceived with TNZ, but they had the advantage to know the loophole was there.

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

Agree, Oracle spent their lead going the wrong direction - remember the orginal tiller bar on B1 :wacko: WTF.

ETNZ eventually got screwed by the rules committee too.

Their boat was designed to sail in 30 knots and proved to be capable of it. Artemis and Oracle both did not.

The lowering of the wind limits significantly helped Oracle retain the cup.

Agreed for that, however B2 last version was faster in strong wind after the lay day, mainly upwind.

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

The design is from Guillaume Verdier, the first design was for a private sailor and included a small central keel, Ray Davies asked him if he could modify the design and get rid of the keel, he did. Team members are good troopers as in any team. The rest is part of kiwi folklore.

So Bernasconi just watched it all happen? he had nothing to do with it? Yeah right. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been hashed over at length with input from at least one well respected SA poster that was involved around the edges.

Oracle made a good attempt to "level the playing field" on the AC72 design effort by outsourcing the design rule to M&M and not locking in M&M for their program.  

ETNZ got a 6 months head start on the design of the current boat as allowed by how the AC works.  This is totally legal and no one has said different.

Although Oracle did a bunch of smelly stuff that ETNZ supporters love to bring up, the AC72 design effort was one of the notable items where they were a good example of how to play at least reasonably fair.  How ETNZ did the design for the AC75 is  pretty much the opposite (100% legal, as unfair as possible).  

It is pretty obvious that some ETNZ fans have a really hard time admitting the simple fact that ETNZ did use the design head start to their advantage.  All of the denials, excuses and general abuse of those who post contrary to their liking are incredibly "un-sportsmanlike" and just go to reflect very poorly on their team and their country.  

When ETNZ recently put their boat on it's side, the ETNZ team was quick to admit that they messed up.  That is good behavior.  Refusing to admit facts (use of an allowed defender advantage) by ETNZ fans is not good behavior.  

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

The design is from Guillaume Verdier, the first design was for a private sailor and included a small central keel, Ray Davies asked him if he could modify the design and get rid of the keel, he did. Team members are good troopers as in any team. The rest is part of kiwi folklore.

https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2018/01/19/americas-cup-writing-ac75-rule/

"Rules are needed for the overall parameters of the vessels including length, weight and sail area. They then have to go into specifics on materials, the types of appendages permitted, hydraulic and electronic control systems – covering every aspect of the design.

The process is currently about halfway through, with the rule issue date of March 31 fast approaching. About 12 designers from both Team New Zealand and Luna Rossa are working together to pool ideas and turn concepts and systems into words on a page.

Other interested challengers are kept up to date as the process progresses, with questions regarding the rule being answered and all feedback being taken under advisement.

The need to meet the March 31 deadline is important, and a number of possible challengers will want know the set rules before paying their US$1 million entry fee by the June 30 entry cut-off later this year"

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, P Flados said:

This has been hashed over at length with input from at least one well respected SA poster that was involved around the edges.

Oracle made a good attempt to "level the playing field" on the AC72 design effort by outsourcing the design rule to M&M and not locking in M&M for their program.  

ETNZ got a 6 months head start on the design of the current boat as allowed by how the AC works.  This is totally legal and no one has said different.

Although Oracle did a bunch of smelly stuff that ETNZ supporters love to bring up, the AC72 design effort was one of the notable items where they were a good example of how to play at least reasonably fair.  How ETNZ did the design for the AC75 is  pretty much the opposite (100% legal, as unfair as possible).  

It is pretty obvious that some ETNZ fans have a really hard time admitting the simple fact that ETNZ did use the design head start to their advantage.  All of the denials, excuses and general abuse of those who post contrary to their liking are incredibly "un-sportsmanlike" and just go to reflect very poorly on their team and their country.  

When ETNZ recently put their boat on it's side, the ETNZ team was quick to admit that they messed up.  That is good behavior.  Refusing to admit facts (use of an allowed defender advantage) by ETNZ fans is not good behavior.  

https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2018/01/19/americas-cup-writing-ac75-rule/

"Rules are needed for the overall parameters of the vessels including length, weight and sail area. They then have to go into specifics on materials, the types of appendages permitted, hydraulic and electronic control systems – covering every aspect of the design.

The process is currently about halfway through, with the rule issue date of March 31 fast approaching. About 12 designers from both Team New Zealand and Luna Rossa are working together to pool ideas and turn concepts and systems into words on a page.

Other interested challengers are kept up to date as the process progresses, with questions regarding the rule being answered and all feedback being taken under advisement.

The need to meet the March 31 deadline is important, and a number of possible challengers will want know the set rules before paying their US$1 million entry fee by the June 30 entry cut-off later this year" 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.sail-world.com/news/203544/Americas-Cup-class-rule-published-ahead-of-time?fb_comment_id=1312128495555313_1312537155514447

“We are pleased to publish the Class Rule on time as per the Protocol. It has been a detailed collaboration with the Challenger of Record on all aspects of the rule, including the one design and supplied parts. We feel we have done a great job containing costs on certain aspects, while leaving the rule open enough for the America’s Cup to continue as the driving force of innovation and technology in sailing,” said Dan Bernasconi, Design Coordinator for Emirates Team New Zealand.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, P Flados said:

This has been hashed over at length with input from at least one well respected SA poster that was involved around the edges.

Oracle made a good attempt to "level the playing field" on the AC72 design effort by outsourcing the design rule to M&M and not locking in M&M for their program.  

Are you saying they decided not to employ M&M, potentially passing up a successful defense because that would be unfair? Really? Even you don't believe that!

ETNZ got a 6 months head start on the design of the current boat as allowed by how the AC works.  This is totally legal and no one has said different.

This is clearly a common assumption made by those who are looking for excuses as to why Challengers may not win.

Although Oracle did a bunch of smelly stuff that ETNZ supporters love to bring up, the AC72 design effort was one of the notable items where they were a good example of how to play at least reasonably fair. 

"Smelly stuff" like getting caught red handed cheating

How ETNZ did the design for the AC75 is  pretty much the opposite (100% legal, as unfair as possible).  As opposed to replacing one rule with another half way through the cycle?

It is pretty obvious that some ETNZ fans have a really hard time admitting the simple fact that ETNZ did use the design head start to their advantage.  All of the denials, excuses and general abuse of those who post contrary to their liking are incredibly "un-sportsmanlike" and just go to reflect very poorly on their team and their country.  

Piss off. After all the BS Kiwi's have to put up with from bitter losers who never got over Bermuda that continue to play the "Oh they're being unfair" card, while refusing to admit all the crap Oracle tried to stop the Kiwi's from even being part of the last AC (unfair replacement of Class Rule half way through a cycle, Qualifier breach of contract) claiming "its in the past, move on"

Remember those who just a few weeks ago claimed ETNZ and Dalton were misappropriating public money, and heads must and were going to roll? Never happened. Why? Because it was all fake news, just like your entire comment.

When ETNZ recently put their boat on it's side, the ETNZ team was quick to admit that they messed up.  That is good behavior.  Refusing to admit facts (use of an allowed defender advantage) by ETNZ fans is not good behavior.  

Yeah, yet when Ainslie's team had issues it was all ETNZ's fault. I guess you think that wasn't good behaviour too right?

Making up baseless claims and trying to pass them off as facts is also not good behaviour.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, zenmasterfred said:

FFS, let the actual sailing and the childish bickering rest for a few minutes.  The past is gone and none of us has been to the future, all we have is the present moment.

Thank god the racing starts tomorrow 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Inside INEOS Team UK's radically redesigned America's Cup race boat Britannia II

13 JANUARY 2021BY BEN AINSLIE

Armed with knowledge from sailing their previous design, Sir Ben Ainslie and his team will take a radically re-tooled boat to the America’s Cup.

 

https://www.boatinternational.com/yachts/americas-cup/intelligent-redesign?fbclid=IwAR3U89dyVfq2WxmI3tR-FoFMZ5jeRZrP1tjPTI1f9D9upZ7HOu3Uz2JRT0g

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

It is pretty obvious that some ETNZ fans have a really hard time admitting the simple fact that ETNZ did use the design head start to their advantage.  All of the denials, excuses and general abuse of those who post contrary to their liking are incredibly "un-sportsmanlike" and just go to reflect very poorly on their team and their country.  

There are more denials of Oracles administration of the AC as defender than there is of ETNZs - some here have asked

"Name the last time any Defender intentionally gave themselves a 6 month design head start. Name it! " Oracle 2013 is the first answer.

I am actually an Oracle Supporter - what they did through 2007 - 2010 was fantastic.

2010 - 2013, yes there was some "smelly stuff" - cheating is never acceptable and the cover up was worse. But to say they didn't get an advantage going in to the cycle is, as i've said, delusional. But the boats were great, regatta was great and the final, epic.

2013-2017 they tried to even up the comp, which I'm not a fan of . Again, there was some "smelly stuff" going on here with their treatment of ETNZ and the realationship with SBTJ, but again, overall, a pretty good regatta with great racing.

The AC is not a one design regatta, never was and shouldn't be made to look like one. Your claim of "100% legal, as unfair as possible" is silly. Watch the interviews from Spithill, Ainslie and Hutchinson. They all know it's not a level playing field and that is the nature of the game - that's the challenge that attracts them - beat the defender on their home turf with the cards stacked against you. It's not for everyone, but that is the AC.

If Oracle were in this cycle, they would be my second favourite team. The last 2 cups were great, my 2 favourite teams in the final and a win a piece, it's a shame they didn't come back for a rematch.

7 minutes ago, zenmasterfred said:

FFS, let the actual sailing and the childish bickering rest for a few minutes.  The past is gone and none of us has been to the future, all we have is the present moment.

You realise this is Sailing Anachy, you might be on the wrong forum :P

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

There are more denials of Oracles administration of the AC as defender than there is of ETNZs - some here have asked

"Name the last time any Defender intentionally gave themselves a 6 month design head start. Name it! " Oracle 2013 is the first answer.

I am actually an Oracle Supporter - what they did through 2007 - 2010 was fantastic.

2010 - 2013, yes there was some "smelly stuff" - cheating is never acceptable and the cover up was worse. But to say they didn't get an advantage going in to the cycle is, as i've said, delusional. But the boats were great, regatta was great and the final, epic.

2013-2017 they tried to even up the comp, which I'm not a fan of . Again, there was some "smelly stuff" going on here with their treatment of ETNZ and the realationship with SBTJ, but again, overall, a pretty good regatta with great racing.

The AC is not a one design regatta, never was and shouldn't be made to look like one. Your claim of "100% legal, as unfair as possible" is silly. Watch the interviews from Spithill, Ainslie and Hutchinson. They all know it's not a level playing field and that is the nature of the game - that's the challenge that attracts them - beat the defender on their home turf with the cards stacked against you. It's not for everyone, but that is the AC.

If Oracle were in this cycle, they would be my second favourite team. The last 2 cups were great, my 2 favourite teams in the final and a win a piece, it's a shame they didn't come back for a rematch.

You realise this is Sailing Anachy, you might be on the wrong forum :P

Blah, Blah, Blah, wasn't born yesterday my man and I am fully capable of HTFU when necessary.  Oracle fucking Trump supporting LE, what has he done for us recently?

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, zenmasterfred said:

FFS, let the actual sailing and the childish bickering rest for a few minutes.  The past is gone and none of us has been to the future, all we have is the present moment.

"actual sailing BEGIN"

Link to post
Share on other sites

call me whatever

but imo this is one of the few times where the am cup has been pretty even for the challengers and defenders

they may have had 6 months of added time for design .. and a package anyone could buy from it ...

but

this is a long throw design

nobody has stuck rigidly to their first design .. of which etnz were of the last to put their design into the water ..

 

the design for the am cup didnt start till b1's were well tested on the water .. by all teams

huge gains were made for b2's in all aspects and all started designing their b2's at about the same time

 

so basically all have had the same time to design build and develop their boat to race for the am cup

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, zenmasterfred said:

FFS, let the actual sailing and the childish bickering rest for a few minutes.  The past is gone and none of us has been to the future, all we have is the present moment.

The past is NEVER gone in the Americas Cup. I would argue, the past is what makes the AC as special as it is, even today.

Without the past, the history, the controversy, the shit slinging by teams and fans, we wouldn't have what we have today - or tomorrow.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just don't forget that this AC is "almost" even (as far as an AC can be) mainly because the COR is not a Defender puppet but a strong one, and they have had a clear and defined deal well before the end of the last AC.
That drove to way less bullshitting from the Defender and no DOG race from the COR.

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

The past is NEVER gone in the Americas Cup. I would argue, the past is what makes the AC as special as it is, even today.

Without the past, the history, the controversy, the shit slinging by teams and fans, we wouldn't have what we have today - or tomorrow.

 

Perhaps, but could you at least keep the sterile arguments about history of spats between NZ and US to. A separate thread rather than splodge it all over the GB thread?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, enigmatically2 said:

Perhaps, but could you at least keep the sterile arguments about history of spats between NZ and US to. A separate thread rather than splodge it all over the GB thread?

It seems those who bang on and on and on about ETNZ having some kind of mythical 6 month advantage are the ones polluting the thread. 

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

FFS, let the actual sailing and the childish bickering rest for a few minutes.  The past is gone and none of us has been to the future, all we have is the present moment.

This is the whole point of the Cup.

Thomas Lipton had to sail across the Atlantic, New York had to sail down the river.

The defender always has the opportunity to engineer an advantage. We won it, let's keep it.

And of course it needs lawyers. Alinghi: we won it but oops we forgot to have a yacht club which had an annual regatta. Dennis we won it but we stuffed around until there was the Big Boat Deed of Gift Challenge.

Now we have the artifice of the pre-ordained Challenger of the Record. The deal is stitched up before anyone can rush in the door. Mr Coutts thought he had engineered a World Series in Bermuda, and his boat was too slow.

New York want big slow boats. Win it back and sail whatever you want. 

NZ are the holders. We are entitled to use every advantage, we have been planning this design, winds are lighter in March than Jan, we can look at challenger and make some changes.

This is the Cup. Money, law, arguing, but oh such drama when the sailing begins. 

Schnopp

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

Name the last time any Defender intentionally gave themselves a 6 month design head start. Name it! 

We're all thankful you took time off from Jim Jordan's speech writing to draft such dingenious rhetoricals as this...

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

I forget how many months (look it up yourself) but the point is: They did not do it in secret, they let all interested parties listen in during the entire process.

It's always telling, the things people choose to know, and the things they declare ignorance of....

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

It sounds like you are already making excuse for them to lose!!

Quite the contrary, I'm trying to point out the folly of attributing a 'six months head start' to being the excuse for them winning...

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

But I thought they had always planned not to have the boat for that long? And did they just stop work? Computers off, lights out and feet up? I doubt that very much. So the smaller test boat was planned for the period. So with that in mind, not having the ac75 for 5months wasnt unexpected. You could even say covid had less effect on them than it did Ineos. Ineos planned tonhave their boat out on the water but couldn't. ETNZ never intended to use theirs 

This is a pretty good blend of bullshit... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rh3000 said:

This is a pretty good blend of bullshit... 

Which bit?

So according to you , if what you quoted mulitimino as saying is bullshit, it was a total surprise  that the 75 was put on a ship and they had to sail the little boat? 

the little boat appearing was totally by chance and wasn’t a planned development platform 

or that no one came to work for five months because Covid hence they lost so much time? 

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Mozzy Sails said:

INEOS often are using only 6 grinders, 7 maximum. All the other teams often have 8 on the handles. Are INEOS making best use of this extra afterguard free time?

It's a big call losing a grinder to have Giles as standalone tactician. The conspiratorial side of me can't help seeing this being a result of the inner circle keeping GS onboard or perhaps keeping BA happy after he requested a tactician who's not on the pumps. The logical side says they must have run the numbers and been happy with the power output in this configuration... 

When you see Terry Hutchinson managing to get stuck in on the handles on AM whilst checking his fore-arm display and chatting with DB it does make me wonder why INEOS felt they were better off with less power. Extra interesting when LR and ETNZ don't even have a specific tactician (I think this is correct, if not I'm confident I shall quickly be corrected...)

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

Extra interesting when LR and ETNZ don't even have a specific tactician (I think this is correct, if not I'm confident I shall quickly be corrected...)

LR have 2 helms, one of whom is effectively a dedicated tactician when on the lee side, so similar to GB no?

 

Ignore that, just remember the lee helm is foil trimmer

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

LR have 2 helms, one of whom is effectively a dedicated tactician when on the lee side, so similar to GB no?

Leeside helmsman is doing flight control as well as tactics. Giles in a straight line is seeming just dedicated to tactics.

For lunna rossa I'd say both helmsmen are splitting the tactics 50-50 all the time, then swapping roles between rudder and flight control.

Giles is freed to do tactics except when Ben is crossing. But INEOS are often only grinding with 6, which also frees up the windward flight controller to help out ben with rudder pitch. Like the video says, they're often controlling the boat with 5 people, whereas the other teams are mostly using 3 (maybe 4 in the case of AM if you count terry as contributing to the afterguard). 

Link to post
Share on other sites