Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just now, Rennmaus said:

None, I just remember when you joined. Sorry if my memory works every now and then.

Nice that you noticed. I have no idea about you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 16.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's pissing down outside and yes, we are back to Level 3. To all those moaning and bitching about it and calling the PM childish names, get a grip, we are the luckiest people in the world right

They towed out around 11am and the breeze was light and puffy to start with. Foiled down the Channel and headed out to the Bays. The breeze started to build around midday and they got some long runs i

Posted Images

3 minutes ago, dullers said:

Nice that you noticed. I have no idea about you.

That's good, I like to be noticed by my friends here, for the rest I don't care anyway. Nevertheless, I recognize noobs, because some have interesting things to write. Some less so.

As in real life.

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

That's good, I like to be noticed by my friends here, for the rest I don't care anyway. Nevertheless, I recognize noobs, because some have interesting things to write. Some less so.

As in real life.

Eh?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, alphafb552 said:

As others mentioned above, I have no clue what involvement Mercedes GP had in the design of B2.

But Ineos clearly mentioned that they had extra input from the F1 team after the Christmas regatta to get the boat sorted. 

Now, considering the following:

- the major issues that Ineos had during that regatta were centered around control and maintenance, reliability and control of the foil cant system

- many F1 components such as gearbox shift mechanisms etc are managed by high pressure hydraulics

- Ineos subsequently no longer displayed any issues with the FCS

I strongly suspect it was in this area that the F1 team provided most input

Once those issues were sorted the sailing team could start learning how to actually sail the boat, leading to their performance improvements in the round robins.

This makes a lot of sense, the FCS is somewhere that Mercedes would definitely have a valuable input.

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

It would be generous to describe my attacks on ETNZ since the cup as scathing.

Scathing would be an understatement 

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, dullers said:

None of them were in the team. I and you have no idea what the culture is in INEOS. It is not your criticism of INEOS it is the lack of evidence to support that as my delightful posts have shown.

True that there is no direct evidence like somewhere in Ineos making a statement. However there is some evidence such as Audio on the boat. In my opinion they way Ben spoke to his crew was very much command and control, versus I’m a just a team member like everyone else. To be fair I felt RITA was sailed quite well. But communication was better on LR and ETNZ.  On both these boats ideas were bounced about the boat with multiple inputs.  The end results was better tactical results. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mako23 said:

True that there is no direct evidence like somewhere in Ineos making a statement. However there is some evidence such as Audio on the boat. In my opinion they way Ben spoke to his crew was very much command and control, versus I’m a just a team member like everyone else. To be fair I felt RITA was sailed quite well. But communication was better on LR and ETNZ.  On both these boats ideas were bounced about the boat with multiple inputs.  The end results was better tactical results. 

Strange enough, it were Ineos' communications that were lauded pre-CSS. Probably because Spithill/Bruni still had to work on theirs. It all got reversed during the Prada Cup, and the results speak for themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mako23 said:

True that there is no direct evidence like somewhere in Ineos making a statement. However there is some evidence such as Audio on the boat. In my opinion they way Ben spoke to his crew was very much command and control, versus I’m a just a team member like everyone else. To be fair I felt RITA was sailed quite well. But communication was better on LR and ETNZ.  On both these boats ideas were bounced about the boat with multiple inputs.  The end results was better tactical results. 

I think the communication was excellent on INEOS especially in the round robin. In fact I felt LR lost in the final to ETNZ because of a lack of communication and idea bouncing. When INEOS was up against it in the PRADA final they were on hail Mary solutions so I don't think it is fare to say there was a culture issue because of some audio. It makes for interesting discussion and speculation and that is all. Facts are thin on the ground. Usually a team with these issues blow apart soon after. We will have to wait and see.

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

I think the communication was excellent on INEOS especially in the round robin. In fact I felt LR lost in the final to ETNZ because of a lack of communication and idea bouncing. When INEOS was up against it in the PRADA final they were on hail Mary solutions so I don't think it is fare to say there was a culture issue because of some audio. It makes for interesting discussion and speculation and that is all. Facts are thin on the ground. Usually a team with these issues blow apart soon after. We will have to wait and see.

To be fair the boat with the worst communication was AM, in my “opinion” I felt they had a fast boat, but sailed it poorly. I’d take Ben any day over Dean Barker.  As for criticism I’ve got a lot of negative things to say about AM and how they sailed the boat.  But I don’t care about AM but do care about Ineos. I’m also a UK citizen so why wouldn’t I want them to do well. 


Ben has now had two goes at the cup and came up short. It’s time to let someone else manage the team  leaving Ben at the Helm. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What’s is with all the bullshit shots taken at guys like BA and others?

These 4 teams were all excellent! 
 

I know it’s an unpopular opinion but the Bermuda match races were raced in conditions that advantaged ETNZ’s foils better than OR’s, and on every other day of that month the breeze was much fresher. Would ETNZ have still won 7-1? yes it’s perfectly possible but here’s the real point: 

Like the foils for the AC50’s were, the AC75 foilers were windspeed optimized too. In BOTH these past two foiling AC’s, syndicates should have been allowed to choose their race day foils on the night before. 
 

Gambles taken years or weeks ahead of time, about how heavy or light the conditions may be, is a gamble too big and expensive. 

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

In BOTH these past two foiling AC’s, syndicates should have been allowed to choose their race day foils on the night before. 

The foil limitation rule was designed to keep costs down, and produce all around boats. I think it succeeded. There's a fair bit more to changing the foils out on an AC75, than there were with the cats.

2 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

the Bermuda match races were raced in conditions that advantaged ETNZ’s foils

The AC36 races were sailed in conditions that advantaged Prada....curious you don't mention that.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Horn Rock

Place your bets: I think this Yacht Declaration Rule is going to be waived for AC37. It is a stupid Rule IMO that you have to declare your Yacht Configuration four Days out from Sailing like it was in the Prada Cup Final. You wonder how much faster the Brits would have gotten with the unlimited Resources they had if they had been able to change configurations "Daily".

Auckland could have done better as well. This AC was dubbed as "Stadium Racing" yet only one single Race in the Match was contested on Stadium Course C. The Problem with Course C is it allows only Southwesterly Wind Direction and as we have seen during the Month of March Aucklands preferred Wind is a Northeasterly Sea Breeze. If Auckland hosts again they have to do something about that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah well, if any team could have made use of unlimited foil allocation it was Ineos, considering they made a complete hash of foil development in 36.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

Yeah well, if any team could have made use of unlimited foil allocation it was Ineos, considering they made a complete hash of foil development in 36.

Well, you were the one who said Ineos would not win a single Race in the Prada Cup before it started on January 15 so you can eat your words now:D

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

you were the one who said Ineos would not win a single Race in the Prada Cup

I did say that. Their form leading into it wasn't great, so it wasn't an entirely without merit prediction.

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

What’s is with all the bullshit shots taken at guys like BA and others?

These 4 teams were all excellent! 
 

I know it’s an unpopular opinion but the Bermuda match races were raced in conditions that advantaged ETNZ’s foils better than OR’s, and on every other day of that month the breeze was much fresher. Would ETNZ have still won 7-1? yes it’s perfectly possible but here’s the real point: 

Like the foils for the AC50’s were, the AC75 foilers were windspeed optimized too. In BOTH these past two foiling AC’s, syndicates should have been allowed to choose their race day foils on the night before. 
 

Gambles taken years or weeks ahead of time, about how heavy or light the conditions may be, is a gamble too big and expensive. 

ETNZ's foils were "apparently" optimised for moderate to heavy breeze. LR was "apparently" optimised for the light conditions, Yet ETNZ managed and handled the light conditions and the racecourses better than LR.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Forourselves said:

ETNZ's foils were "apparently" optimised for moderate to heavy breeze. LR was "apparently" optimised for the light conditions, Yet ETNZ managed and handled the light conditions and the racecourses better than LR.

I suspect ETNZ's foils were optimised for speed (less drag), helped by experience they gained in AC35 on how to control the boat with precision whilst using them. :)

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

I suspect ETNZ's foils were optimised for speed (less drag), helped by experience they gained in AC35 on how to control the boat with precision whilst using them. :)

I agree. I also think this was the case in Bermuda. @Stingray~ keeps going on about ETNZ optimising for light winds, but I don't think they were. I think ETNZ optimised in Bermuda, as well as Auckland for speed. Speed was the main focus in Bermuda and Auckland. The issue was, ETNZ had to develop systems to help them learn how to handle the foils they had. This was evident in both the development of the AC50 and the AC75.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, mako23 said:

To be fair the boat with the worst communication was AM, in my “opinion” I felt they had a fast boat, but sailed it poorly. I’d take Ben any day over Dean Barker.  As for criticism I’ve got a lot of negative things to say about AM and how they sailed the boat.  But I don’t care about AM but do care about Ineos. I’m also a UK citizen so why wouldn’t I want them to do well. 


Ben has now had two goes at the cup and came up short. It’s time to let someone else manage the team  leaving Ben at the Helm. 

I think the last part holds merit.  We can only guess if his other rolls hindered his steering.

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

I agree. I also think this was the case in Bermuda. @Stingray~ keeps going on about ETNZ optimising for light winds, but I don't think they were. I think ETNZ optimised in Bermuda, as well as Auckland for speed. Speed was the main focus in Bermuda and Auckland. The issue was, ETNZ had to develop systems to help them learn how to handle the foils they had. This was evident in both the development of the AC50 and the AC75.

Yep!  I recall someone (?) from ETNZ saying they were up to the 7th or 8th iteration of the flight controller, for example.  This is not easy.  As an ex-computer program developer, I'd look at  a number of ways to help manage certain maneuvers, together with the flight controller. 

For example, for a flight controller to manage a gybe, there might be a sequence like this:

  1. Activate windward foil down, to same cant as leeward foil, but with zero lift flap preset.
  2. Switch "mode" to transfer lift between the foils
  3. Transfer lift during maneuver, even to the degree of extra lift to leeward plus negative lift to windward
  4. Activate windward foil up to preset position, simultaneously adjusting lift to 100% leeward foil
  5. Resume normal lift (flying height) control

Considering "severe" heel, with the resulting pitch up and possibly consequences like the AM capsize, a flight controller might want a very prominent warning light to flash urgently for "pitch rise". Plus an emergency button to both immediately reduce lift on the main foil, plus increase lift from the rudder foil, to help level the boat.

Of course there are many variations of many circumstances... so with input from the flight controller, I could imagine a lot of changes to the controller in design and programming.

 

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

We can only guess if his other rolls hindered his steering.

I think its the other way around. 

Imagine the disaster if Burling and Tuke took over the CEO role.

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

I think its the other way around. 

Imagine the disaster if Burling and Tuke took over the CEO role.

We know he is a good helmsman. BA has been around a bit longer than the other 2. We will have to wait 10 or more years to find out about the Kiwis. It is an age thing. Anyway sail gp coming soon. You going to watch it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to make a BOLD PREDICTION when it comes to Emirates Team New Zealand:

They are going to win every single America's Cup that is contested in Foiling Boats.

They introduced Foiling in the lead up to AC34 and although they lost that Cup Match by the skin of their teeth everyone is playing catch to the Kiwis with their Foiling Technology ever since for sort of 8 years now.

They have some kind of Advantage when it comes to "Foiling Boats" IMO.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dullers said:

We know he is a good helmsman. BA has been around a bit longer than the other 2. We will have to wait 10 or more years to find out about the Kiwis. It is an age thing. Anyway sail gp coming soon. You going to watch it?

Yup, prolly not live tho.

I think calling BA a good helmsman is a pretty serious understatement.

I think he is quite feasibly better than Burling, but IMO (<- Note here opinion not fact) he needs to check his ego at the door and focus on one role and do it well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/29/2021 at 1:29 AM, Mambo Kings said:

I think Ratcliffe would be happy to sponsor racing around isle of wight, or at least make sure the costs of hosting are covered  and he wants TNZ to be a well funded defense . BUT (and its a big but) he is extremely wary of  any optics of being seen to "buy" the cup, so the amount of money that flows from an Isle of Wight event to TNZ will be limited .  This is not because Ineos cannot afford to be generous but because Ineos does not want to buy the cup.   Ratcliffe wants his team to demonstrate that they won the cup on the water....or its not worth winning at all.

If TNZ is not well funded for the next cup then its a problem for all the challengers because none of them want to beat a decimated Team New Zealand. 

GD will hopefully find the money and I suspect that will determine decisions of where and how to host the defense. ratcliffe has made it clear that the decision rests with NZ.

 

ETNZ will never choose to defend abroad if not for a huge amount of money, and if such a choice will end up in a 1 - 1 match, it will be difficult to deny having bought direct access to the Match. If Ratcliffe really wants to win on the water, he should win the CSS first, without any shortcut.

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

ETNZ will never choose to defend abroad if not for a huge amount of money, and if such a choice will end up in a 1 - 1 match, it will be difficult to deny having bought direct access to the Match. If Ratcliffe really wants to win on the water, he should win the CSS first, without any shortcut.

You put Ratcliffe in a difficult position.

He admits he would love to see an AC hosted in the Solent (cant blame him for being honest about that) but emphasized that the location choice is up to NZ.

Of course he is going to sponsor hosting the event in the UK and why should he do anything other than pay an entrance fee if it is hosted in NZ.

He doesn't want to buy the cup, he wants to win it on the water....and that will not be easy because NZ are hard to beat.  

But if TNZ want a 1 vs 1 to keep more of the money for themselves and if NZ govt cant come up with money......how does Ratcliffe handle this?    Ideally, he would like 3 or more teams  to challenge and share the cost.  Do you see Italy subsidizing an event hosted in UK or NZ and some of that money flowing back to TNZ?

Ratcliffe is between a rock and a hard place if NZ put the event location out for bidding (Obviously UK will bid) .  Ultimately I dont think he will care too much either way.

 

 

 

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

Will Ratcliffe fund the Challenger Selection Series in 2024 just like PRADA did with the PRADA CUP this year?

Ineos is not a consumer brand so lets be honest....the only reason he is here is to win the cup using his own money.

Prada at least can feel it is putting its brand name in front of a wealthy yachting crowd.

But he would probably throw in something to help make it happen. But lets not forget.....he is primarily a competitor and when he met Ben, he decided the challenge of bringing back a cup that was lost 150 years ago and that probably needed $200-$300m over two cycles was his kind of challenge because realistically there is nobody else in the UK who can write those kind of checks.

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

because realistically there is nobody else in the UK who can write those kind of checks.

Thats a false assumption. Across the world in many countries, there are many billionaires who could write the cheques to fund an AC team, but only a select few feel the competitive need to...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JonRowe said:

Thats a false assumption. Across the world in many countries, there are many billionaires who could write the cheques to fund an AC team, but only a select few feel the competitive need to...

In the UK? $300 million?

Okay.

But Ratcliffe is pretty unusual .   Team UK is very lucky to have found him

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/5/2021 at 11:20 AM, dg_sailingfan said:

I'm going to make a BOLD PREDICTION when it comes to Emirates Team New Zealand:

They are going to win every single America's Cup that is contested in Foiling Boats.

They introduced Foiling in the lead up to AC34 and although they lost that Cup Match by the skin of their teeth everyone is playing catch to the Kiwis with their Foiling Technology ever since for sort of 8 years now.

They have some kind of Advantage when it comes to "Foiling Boats" IMO.

With what money?

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

In the UK? $300 million?

Okay.

But Ratcliffe is pretty unusual .   Team UK is very lucky to have found him

Not disputing that Jim is a great backer for Ben and Co, as he has the money and the nationalistic pride required to fund an AC team. Just saying he's not the only one with the cash, Dyson for example was higher on the times "rich list" in 2020.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/5/2021 at 2:20 PM, dg_sailingfan said:

I'm going to make a BOLD PREDICTION when it comes to Emirates Team New Zealand:

They are going to win every single America's Cup that is contested in Foiling Boats.

They introduced Foiling in the lead up to AC34 and although they lost that Cup Match by the skin of their teeth everyone is playing catch to the Kiwis with their Foiling Technology ever since for sort of 8 years now.

They have some kind of Advantage when it comes to "Foiling Boats" IMO.

That is a bold prediction.

I  predict that as long as the AC continues to be held in foiling boats over 60 feet on the waterline, TNZ will eventually lose the AC to a challenger.

The law of averages and the combined budget stacked against them will eventually kick in.  But in the meantime, Peter Burling is 2 and 0......and the team is looking very strong.

 

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

Not disputing that Jim is a great backer for Ben and Co, as he has the money and the nationalistic pride required to fund an AC team. Just saying he's not the only one with the cash, Dyson for example was higher on the times "rich list" in 2020.

Yup the times that $20bn+ overlaps with sailing is increasingly rare.

 

FWIW, count me a skeptic, regarding the estimates of Dyson's net worth. Brilliantly successful inventor but it has not really compounded into a succession of businesses

Ratcliffe's Ineos is throwing off cash....which he has reinvested time and again in a surprisingly successful way. Onlookers keep on expecting him to stumble and get one wrong in such a tough industry.....but thus far he has made it work and grow. + He has made at least two of his colleagues at Ineos worth over $5bn each.

Anyway....I agree with you that there is more than one with enough dough to finance a campaign.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, strider470 said:

ETNZ will never choose to defend abroad if not for a huge amount of money, and if such a choice will end up in a 1 - 1 match, it will be difficult to deny having bought direct access to the Match. If Ratcliffe really wants to win on the water, he should win the CSS first, without any shortcut.

Agreed. I still think this is all a negotiating ploy by Dalton.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Mambo Kings said:

Ineos is not a consumer brand so lets be honest....the only reason he is here is to win the cup using his own money.

Prada at least can feel it is putting its brand name in front of a wealthy yachting crowd.

But he would probably throw in something to help make it happen. But lets not forget.....he is primarily a competitor and when he met Ben, he decided the challenge of bringing back a cup that was lost 150 years ago and that probably needed $200-$300m over two cycles was his kind of challenge because realistically there is nobody else in the UK who can write those kind of checks.

Grenadier, Belstaff, Ineos Hygenics, plus his hotel brand are all consumer brands

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2021 at 5:28 PM, JALhazmat said:

No they fucking didn’t. 
 

that was Bermuda or about 1 month with Land Rover BAR before  he realised it was nearly all one design and there was fuck all aero fiddling he could do  as well as he didn’t know how to design a boat. 

So still involved in there team didn’t say when ! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2021 at 11:54 AM, dg_sailingfan said:

No, they didn't! At least not for this Campaign! Newey was briefly involved for their 2017 Campaign but was never put in any Official Capacity of the AC Challenge.

I made a slight mistake: 30 Members from the Mercedes Applied Science Division were involved with ITUK Boat 2 from the start of their Performance Partnership in 2019 through the end of their Challenge in February 2021.

https://www.ineosteamuk.com/en/articles/299_Pushing-to-the-leading-edge-of-design-with-Mercedes-F1-Applied-Science.html

I think Merc found the missing pieces after the Christmas Regatta and got ITUK Designers to implement it onto the Race Boat hence the Performance Gains in the Round Robin. BA consistently mentioned Merc after his Race Wins.

One Wonders if Merc had more time what they would have come up with. They ain't amateurs. They haven't won the F1 Constructors Championship for six straight years for naught.

I didn’t mention which campaign did I ? . 

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

Ineos is not a consumer brand so lets be honest....

It is not a consumer brand but it has a crap public image and has good business reasons to want to improve that. That is why Radcliffe is buying up sports teams that can be (mis)-represented as national.

"the only reason he is here is to win the cup using his own money. realistically there is nobody else in the UK who can write those kind of checks."

Absolute nonsense. UK is the 5th biggest economy in the world, with £B£s to match.

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

It is not a consumer brand but it has a crap public image and has good business reasons to want to improve that. That is why Radcliffe is buying up sports teams that can be (mis)-represented as national.

"the only reason he is here is to win the cup using his own money. realistically there is nobody else in the UK who can write those kind of checks."

Absolute nonsense. UK is the 5th biggest economy in the world, with £B£s to match.

Merc F1,  his French and swiss football teams? how are they being mis represented as National teams? the cycling team have never had a GB suffix.

the AC effort? yep that's the only one and its rightfully a GB team

 

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

unless GD stops fucking around your mob  might not even have a next boat ;)

Whatever GD might be doing it's to try and ensure there is a next boat.

My Theseus reference might not have worked as intended.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2021 at 11:46 AM, strider470 said:

ETNZ will never choose to defend abroad if not for a huge amount of money, and if such a choice will end up in a 1 - 1 match, it will be difficult to deny having bought direct access to the Match. If Ratcliffe really wants to win on the water, he should win the CSS first, without any shortcut.

CSS is a new thing and traditionally it was a one on one.

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

CSS is a new thing and traditionally it was a one on one.

True, but it is also what modern AC has evolved into, and the only 1-1 matches in recent history were not among the brightest moments of AC history, in my opinion.

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

True, but it is also what modern AC has evolved into, and the only 1-1 matches in recent history were not among the brightest moments of AC history, in my opinion.

Good point.

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

CSS is a new thing and traditionally it was a one on one.

Only if ~50 years is considered "a new thing"?

"From the first defence of the cup in 1870 until the twentieth defence in 1967, there was always only one challenger. In 1970 multiple challengers applied, so a selection series was held to decide which applicant would become the official challenger and compete in the America's Cup match. This approach has been used for each subsequent competition."

- Wikipedia

 

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

Only if ~50 years is considered "a new thing"?

"From the first defence of the cup in 1870 until the twentieth defence in 1967, there was always only one challenger. In 1970 multiple challengers applied, so a selection series was held to decide which applicant would become the official challenger and compete in the America's Cup match. This approach has been used for each subsequent competition."

- Wikipedia

 

So only 50 out of the 170 years. I get your point though and yes it does not happen now.

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

Only if ~50 years is considered "a new thing"?

"From the first defence of the cup in 1870 until the twentieth defence in 1967, there was always only one challenger. In 1970 multiple challengers applied, so a selection series was held to decide which applicant would become the official challenger and compete in the America's Cup match. This approach has been used for each subsequent competition."

- Wikipedia

 

There were 1 vs 1 matches in 1988 and 2010.  Both were unhappy litigious events .

Prior to 2000, (for the first 150 years) there was a Defender Selection Series .

If a wealthy sponsor decides they want an alternative (for whatever reason) to GD. Could they approach RNZYS and demand a defender series? Does GD have a contract with RNZYS prohibiting a DSS? Does he have any contract that extends beyond AC 35?  

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

Prior to 2000, (for the first 150 years) there was a Defender Selection Series .

I think this was one of the main reasons USA held on to the cup for so long.  A number of quality teams honing their skills and increasing their boat speed with the fastest defending the Cup.  Without a defender series, a defender is at a massive disadvantage of lack of racing  which is why Oracle joined in on the challenger series in Bermuda.  I am sure whatever format is decided on, ETNZ will have a lot more pre-Cup racing this time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Something that still puzzles me:

Who (or how) decides on a One-on-One Match, versus a CSS?   :unsure:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Name me a billionaire who chose to "win on the water" by waiting to go thru CSS when he (no shes realistically to date) had the chance to "win on the water" by going directly to an AC match against the Defender? A team? 

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

Something that still puzzles me:

Who (or how) decides on a One-on-One Match, versus a CSS?   :unsure:

The DoG default is1:1. Anything else needs mutual consent, which means agreement between challenger and defender. That is the answer to your question.

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

The DoG default is1:1. Anything else needs mutual consent, which means agreement between challenger and defender. That is the answer to your question.

Does that mean the CoR can refuse to hold a CSS if they want to do so, regardless of how many other teams want to challenge?

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

The DoG default is1:1. Anything else needs mutual consent, which means agreement between challenger and defender. That is the answer to your question.

Yes.

So to be clear there are 2 ways to arrive at 1 vs 1. 

(i) Defender and Challenger mutually agree that they want a 1 vs 1.  They happily agree on class, number of races etc but simply choose not to invite other challengers.

(ii) Defender and Challenger cannot agree on anything and the match defaults to a 1 vs1 under the default conditions specified by the deed of gift.

Multi challenger event needs Defender and Challenger to mutually agree that is what they want to happen.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, NeedAClew said:

Name me a billionaire who chose to "win on the water" by waiting to go thru CSS when he (no shes realistically to date) had the chance to "win on the water" by going directly to an AC match against the Defender? A team? 

Here you are. Bertelli didn't even thought of a 1 - 1 match when became COR, and in 2017 he was in a position to easily ask for that if he wanted, considering the huge help given to ETNZ.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/7/2021 at 10:30 PM, 1eyedkiwi said:

I think this was one of the main reasons USA held on to the cup for so long.  A number of quality teams honing their skills and increasing their boat speed with the fastest defending the Cup.  Without a defender series, a defender is at a massive disadvantage of lack of racing  which is why Oracle joined in on the challenger series in Bermuda.  I am sure whatever format is decided on, ETNZ will have a lot more pre-Cup racing this time.

I think many were won by the US because the challengers had to sail across the Atlantic to challenge.

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

I think many were won by the US because the challengers had to sail across the Atlantic to challenge.

That was not true post WW2.

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

If Matteo (who seems to be the owner of ETNZ) can’t or won’t fund a proper Defense then GD needs to find a bigger $Billionaire. 

Billionaires are over rated.

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

That was not true post WW2.

That is why i used the term many and not all.

Link to post
Share on other sites


 

 

18 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

If Matteo (who seems to be the owner of ETNZ) can’t or won’t fund a proper Defense then GD needs to find a bigger $Billionaire. 

Gabe Newell net worth $5.5B.

FEF6B615-2DB3-41B0-9AEA-32EF81CB7F56.thumb.jpeg.5adda8ef925acf6d6a7f1ede068db67c.jpeg

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/sport/american-tech-billionaire-gabe-newell-throws-support-behind-team-new-zealand

12 hours ago, Forourselves said:

Billionaires are over rated.

Only if the kiwi Government pays out social welfare to TNZ.

The Motor Neurone Disease Association of NZ  and Starship Children’s Hospital wouldn’t agree with you at all Four about billionaires being over rated.

https://emirates-team-new-zealand.americascup.com/en/news/500_The-Heart-of-Racing-Sponsors-Emirates-Team-New-Zealand.html

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2021 at 7:34 AM, Priscilla said:


 

 

Gabe Newell net worth $5.5B.

FEF6B615-2DB3-41B0-9AEA-32EF81CB7F56.thumb.jpeg.5adda8ef925acf6d6a7f1ede068db67c.jpeg

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/sport/american-tech-billionaire-gabe-newell-throws-support-behind-team-new-zealand

Only if the kiwi Government pays out social welfare to TNZ.

The Motor Neurone Disease Association of NZ  and Starship Children’s Hospital wouldn’t agree with you at all Four about billionaires being over rated.

https://emirates-team-new-zealand.americascup.com/en/news/500_The-Heart-of-Racing-Sponsors-Emirates-Team-New-Zealand.html

 

 

 

Depends how long that sponsorship contract lasts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2021 at 12:05 PM, dg_sailingfan said:

Will Ratcliffe fund the Challenger Selection Series in 2024 just like PRADA did with the PRADA CUP this year?

The CSS was funded by a combination  of fees paid by the Title Sponsor (Prada), and entry  fees paid by each Challenger.

Almost 75% of the Challenger entry fees went to help underwrite the CSS. in addition, all the Challengers were bound by this clause in the Protocol:

"7.9. As well as the amounts referred to in Clauses 7.5a) and 7.6a) the Challengers shall share equally all further costs of the Preliminary Regattas, the CSS and other activities of the Challengers as a group associated with the challenge for the 36th America’s Cup. Such costs may be offset from money raised from commercial activities. Any calls on Challengers to contribute funds to assist with meeting such costs may be required at such time and in such amount as is determined by COR and approved by RNZYS (such approval not to be unreasonably withheld). See Protocol Amendment 03."

There was no "free ride" for the Challengers when it came to participation in the CSS, just because there was a Title Sponsor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...