Jump to content

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, K4W said:

Q) would a foiling kite boarded beat an AC boat around the course? 
:huh:

I don't think so, but they sure are fast. Here's a fun race from Mauritius a few years ago.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 8.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Having a race like that is why the committee was correct in postponing the race so many times. I think that the race was worth the wait.  Cheers to the Race Committee!

Semi Final Race 1 book is open - hit like for an AM win, dislike for LRPP.  Don’t sit on the fence now!

Funny when I click on the cup site I get this:

Posted Images

That interview with Nathan was great, and I loved the end of it. I never thought I would get into foiling, but at the age of 65 I love kitefoiling when the wind is light, and even getting into it when the wind builds (but only if there is no decent surf to enjoy).

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

None of the teams use a trim tab. It may be prohibited in the Rules, not sure if this one would cover that:

16.10 No device shall be used to induce deformation in the rudder; any deformation may only be the result of external forces and reactions by components permitted in Rule16.7

Rule 16.6.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lat35sowth said:

Viable racing would ruin the Americas cup.

Its the espionage, the secrecy, the lawyers and the jumped up billionaires spending megabucks turning barges into competitive racers like Rita that makes the cup exciting.

If at some point this all comes to an end then so be it. I'd rather watch paint dry than some stupidly even contest where participation is the name of the game.

Yet it had more teams in the past and still all of that... what did France operate on last time and still had a couple wins? 

and maybe Oracle and ETNZ are just pulling everyone’s legs by wanting it to be more affordable for more teams, but if they aren’t the very people winning it and making the choices disagree with you. Don’t need 30 teams but 10 would be better than 4, creates a spinwheel of more events and exposure and therefore more teams if one can even be financed by sponsors, which the defenders show isn’t even possible at the moment. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2021 at 4:04 PM, nav said:

+1

I don't think the officials should be encouraging or tacitly approving getting this close, It seems a close cross turned into what should have been a duck as it developed due to a shift. There was no pulling out at the last second for Ineos without disaster but they should have been penalised IMO.

Saying that I haven't heard anything from the officials that Flags mentions above

If it had been even close the umps would have taken considerably longer than the less than 6 seconds they did to green flag it IMO

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Enzedel92 said:

Link 

Don't have the link but it came from a well connected friend on Facebook - if not true i will go back and call him out on it

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, shanghaisailor said:

If it had been even close the umps would have taken considerably longer than the less than 6 seconds they did to green flag it IMO

The software the umpires in the booth are using is very good at judging this. The umpires on the water are largely there as back-up, although their opinion may be sought by the booth, and they are still acting as umpires.

The keep clear border used for umpiring is a term defined  and illustrated in RRSAC 3.02. RRSAC 3.02 is the only form of the RRS applicable to the AC. There are substantial differences between RRSAC and RRS, even if much is the same.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, idontwan2know said:

Sure, but what is RNZYS going to do if ETNZ say "we're off, mates" ? Legally, they are the holder. Practically, they have no cards. They have nothing with which to defend the cup and would be at mercy of the first challenger without ETNZ.

I'm sure GGYC wasn't thrilled about AC35 being held in Bermuda, but at the end of the day there wasn't much of anything they could do about it.

The deed of gift states, and  I quote "Any organised yacht club" The Cup is currently held by the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron and The Cup is displayed in their HQ in Auckland. Emirates Team New Zealand is their nominated team. AS such RNZYS are the current trustees of The Cup. Having said that ETNZ has a large say in how the cup is competed for either as defenders or challengers as it is doubtful if any other organisation in NZL would challenge against them as defenders. Basically it is the the club's cup and not the teams. The NYYC held the cup for 132 years, not Charlie Barr, Mr Vanderbilt or DC, they represented the NYYC. Alan Bond won it, if i remember correctly for the Royal Perth Yacht Club. If that wasn't the case then how come Kookaburra defended and not Bond's Australia 4?  

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

I tried listening to this, but they speak far too quickly for me. They need to slow down a little.

NOT! That should have been a five minute video, not 20. I gave up half way through.

Youth of today! You just want everything in a 230 character twitter friendly blurb, or a 60 second tiktok clip... no time for detail or back story :lol:
 

But I'll pass on your comments to whoever 'they' are. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one of the best things you can do to keep costs down and make lower-budget teams viable is not change the boat. Billionaires will always find ways to spend money on a campaign, so all you can do is reduce the return on that investment; a stable rule helps in that regard because, after a few cycles, everyone knows which corner of the rule is optimal, so the designs converge, the gains to be made from a massive R&D budget are limited, and the risk of turning up on the start line with a dog of a boat is reduced. That's exactly what happened with the IACC class, and the 12 meters before it.

The current boats are visually exciting (which the leadmines rarely were), faster than anything else out there (which the leadmines definitely weren't), appear to provide close tactical racing, and do make some concessions to cost control - soft sails and a platform that's easier to transport than a multihull. If the boats don't change significantly, I think we'll see more competitors in future cycles.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, shanghaisailor said:

The deed of gift states, and  I quote "Any organised yacht club" The Cup is currently held by the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron and The Cup is displayed in their HQ in Auckland. Emirates Team New Zealand is their nominated team. AS such RNZYS are the current trustees of The Cup. Having said that ETNZ has a large say in how the cup is competed for either as defenders or challengers as it is doubtful if any other organisation in NZL would challenge against them as defenders. Basically it is the the club's cup and not the teams. The NYYC held the cup for 132 years, not Charlie Barr, Mr Vanderbilt or DC, they represented the NYYC. Alan Bond won it, if i remember correctly for the Royal Perth Yacht Club. If that wasn't the case then how come Kookaburra defended and not Bond's Australia 4?  

Yes, I'm aware of the legalities around the Deed of Gift.

What we're getting at is separating the legal fictions from the practical reality of the situation. ETNZ holds all the assets, resources and relationships and makes all the decisions related to defending the cup, with RNZYS being involved, if at all, as a courtesy.

This conversation arose around whether ETNZ could host the event somewhere other than New Zealand and it was suggested that RNZYS wouldn't allow this. From a practical perspective, RNZYS would not "fire" ETNZ and defend the cup themselves no matter how upset they were about this because they have no assets, experience, sponsorships, talent, etc. that would enable them to do so. Everything that makes a cup defense possible belongs to ETNZ and therefore ETNZ calls the shots.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Video from JM on instagram shows last minute avoidance manoeuvre. Tell me that is a safe cross and where is Jimmy hunting down, even though he is allowed to. 

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CKZ7H5XgmuD/?igshid=1hr8j5a4cycky

22 hours ago, sailer99 said:

I'd say the umpires are airing on the side of safety. In all of these incidents, the ROW boat is either constantly changing course or makes a very rapid course change. As the give way boat, it is hard to react to a sudden changion or a constant change in direction. For the incidents listed above:

  • Dial down: AM was clear across until LR altered course down. AM started to gybe after LR altered course, LR had to avoid AM during the gybe. Better move for LR: come down earlier to make AM think they won't cross and have them gybe earlier.
  • Luff: Sudden luff from LR, UK responds. Another sudden luff, UK responds. UK decides they don't like the closed gauge and tack away. The problem with the luffs is they are a quick up and then back to close-hauled, not change in heading and holding the new heading.
  • Downwind cross: Almost the same as the dial down. UK clear across until LR starts hunting down, by the time LR start their hunt down, the UK doesn't have the space to gybe. Better: Hunt down early, the UK will see they might not cross and gybe.

Jimmy doesn't give his competitor appropriate time and opportunity, that is why he doesn't get the calls. The umpires want the ROW boat to make decisive course changes and allow the other boat to respond, that is a safer scenario and follows the intention of the 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, winchfodder said:

Video from JM on instagram shows last minute avoidance manoeuvre. Tell me that is a safe cross and where is Jimmy hunting down, even though he is allowed to.

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CKZ7H5XgmuD/?igshid=1hr8j5a4cycky

FFS, how many times. Yes Jimmy took avoidance action BUT HE DIDN'T NEED TO.

Look at the video which starts from the last heli shot we have and before Jimmy heads up. Stop it there and you can see that if you draw Jimmy's line forward it will intersect GB about 3/4 the way back on GB, but that LR still has about the length of the hull from the sprit to get to that intersection. They are both going the same speed (to within 0.1kt) so by the time that LR's bowsprit gets to that intersection, UK will be 3/4 a of a hull length away. 

So if LR had not taken avoiding action he would have missed by about 3/4 length. The "avoiding action" was either him misjudging it or pure acting to try and get a penalty

 

 

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

The current boats are visually exciting (which the leadmines rarely were), faster than anything else out there (which the leadmines definitely weren't), appear to provide close tactical racing, and do make some concessions to cost control - soft sails and a platform that's easier to transport than a multihull. If the boats don't change significantly, I think we'll see more competitors in future cycles.

I agree that the current boats are visually exciting

I agree that the racing is (occasionally ) close.

I don't agree that it has been particularly "tactical" - mostly the people claiming it is very tactical have something to sell..., announcers, competitors etc...

I am not saying there is no tactics, or that there are never incidents where tactics come into play, just that by the standards of normal match racing, this racing is not that tactical.

Does ETNZ even have an experienced and accomplished match racer on the boat? 

I am pretty sure that the last thing ETNZ wants, is for this AC to turn into a match race...

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I and many kiwis will be getting behind AM to take out Prada.

Even though I prefer this version of Jimmy Spithall... 

The ultimate, underwater, underdog story.... 

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

Video from JM on instagram shows last minute avoidance manoeuvre. Tell me that is a safe cross and where is Jimmy hunting down, even though he is allowed to.

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CKZ7H5XgmuD/?igshid=1hr8j5a4cycky

I found this whole thing quite interesting and spent some time trying to understand the rule(s) and how they were interpreted. Clearly you can see on the video from LR stern cam that they did some hunting early but I do agree that they held course for some time prior to turning up. Being unable to judge depth in this piece of video makes it very hard to judge how close the incident was and made me feel for the on the water umpires. 

What it does bring up for me is the question of how close should we let them go before saying that was potentially safe but too close to judge from the boats at that speed. If there had been a collision we would all be blaming LR for not turning up more quickly. 

In addition, I am still trying to reconcile the element of giving room to keep clear at these speeds. I can see the application in my club racing if we are dancing around at the start but in this situation there are such large stakes based on some 1 second judgements. How long would LR have to hold course and would it be in time or in distance before you would remove the obligation to keep clear? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Race umpire has a diamond around each boat, if they intersect, then it’s an issue.

they didn’t, so it wasn’t an issue. Jimmy and the Prada apologists need to stfu. 
 

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

FFS, how many times. Yes Jimmy took avoidance action BUT HE DIDN'T NEED TO.

Look at the video which starts from the last heli shot we have and before Jimmy heads up. Stop it there and you can see that if you draw Jimmy's line forward it will intersect GB about 3/4 the way back on GB, but that LR still has about the length of the hull from the sprit to get to that intersection. They are both going the same speed (to within 0.1kt) so by the time that LR's bowsprit gets to that intersection, UK will be 3/4 a of a hull length away. 

So if LR had not taken avoiding action he would have missed by about 3/4 length. The "avoiding action" was either him misjudging it or pure acting to try and get a penalty

It's certainly not obvious from any of the videos I have seen that LR needed to avoid INEOS

Is the computer view that the umpires have of the diamonds available anywhere?

From what I have seen so far, LR could not have hit INEOS even if they wanted to.

Was there even an overlap when LR made their turn up?

what's needed is a view from above

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, us7070 said:

I agree the current boats are visually exciting

I agree that the racing is (occasionally ) close.

I don't agree that it has been particularly "tactical" - mostly the people claiming it is very tactical have something to sell..., announcers, competitors etc...

I am not saying there is no tactics, or that there are never incidents where tactics come into play, just that by the standards of normal match racing, this racing is not that tactical.

Does ETNZ even have an experienced and accomplished match racer on the boat? 

I am pretty sure that the last thing ETNZ wants, is for this AC to turn into a match race...

 

 

 

Bingo. This is certainly a form of sailboat racing that is fun to watch, but the only thing this event has in common with the established discipline of match racing is that there are only two boats on the course at a time. In particular (and I'm sorry to keep harping on this) the boundaries and windward gates really nerf the match racing tactics. I'd be interested to see how the racing would change if they used a shorter version of the 2007 course. Try going back to 5 minute starts, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boundaries help match racing tactics. Otherwise they often bang the corners. This forces them back together.

You won't get match racing tactics if the boats are mismatched in speed. But so far we have seen plenty of (attempts at) lee bow tacks, some tacking for loose cover, JKs to split, luffing on the start line etc

It will only get more. 

And matching racing tactics includes other more generic tactics like seeking out windshits and puffs. And that has been huge so far. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention that great pass Ben did on LR when they tried to tack in front of him and he ducked underneath and took the inside line. 

One thing with these boats- make a mistake and you can  look really bad. 

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

Boundaries help match racing tactics. Otherwise they often bang the corners. This forces them back together

some important tactics of match racing - and fleet racing for that matter - involve the laylines.., and those tactics are removed from this racing.

normally, laylines provide one of the main ways for a trailing boat to get ahead, particularly down wind.

additionally, a wider course makes it more important for boats ahead to cover when the trailing boat tries to separate - the leverage can get greater.

with the current narrow geometry, the boat ahead knows that the leverage obtained by the trailing boat, if it separates, is severely limited, and on many occasions we have seen the lead boat ignore the separation.

also - good match racers don't "bang  the corners" just because they can...

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

Not to mention that great pass Ben did on LR when they tried to tack in front of him and he ducked underneath and took the inside line. 

One thing with these boats- make a mistake and you can  look really bad. 

Actually, that's kind of my point - it seems like when anyone tries to make a traditional match racing move (close cover, aggressive prestart, etc...) they end up blowing it. I remain open to the possibility that the boats and sailors will get better, but right now it seems like typical match racing doctrine backfires more often than it pays off.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, us7070 said:

some important tactics of match racing - and fleet racing for that matter - involve the laylines.., and those tactics are removed from this racing.

normally, laylines provide one of the main ways for a trailing boat to get ahead particularly down wind.

additionally, a wider course makes it more important for boats ahead to cover when the trailing boat tries to separate - the leverage can get greater.

with the current narrow geometry, the boat ahead knows that the leverage obtained by the trailing boat, if it separates, is severely limited, and on many occasions we have seen the lead boat ignore the separation.

also - good match racers don't" bang  the corners" just because they can...

You still have laylines, They just start from part way up

The leverage obtained by the trailing boat has worked fine for GB on several occasions

Still favours good match racers (far more than the AC for several cycles anyway)

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sisu3360 said:

Actually, that's kind of my point - it seems like when anyone tries to make a traditional match racing move (close cover, aggressive prestart, etc...) they end up blowing it. I remain open to the possibility that the boats and sailors will get better, but right now it seems like typical match racing doctrine backfires more often than it pays off.

I'll say again. GB have pulled a few successfully.  If you foil up a move it has never paid off. It only favours good match racers

 

The AC is traditionally been a design competition, this is more biased towards sailing skills than it has been for a long time

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, us7070 said:

I am pretty sure that the last thing ETNZ wants, is for this AC to turn into a match race..

I kinda agree. Whomever wins the Prada - ETNZ is just going to come out and blow them away with pure boat speed. Well that's the plan anyway.......

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

Not to mention that great pass Ben did on LR when they tried to tack in front of him and he ducked underneath and took the inside line.  

Sure - it was great to watch...

But it was not an example of high-level match racing tactics, which Ben is certainly capable of, in the right setting...

i've seen similar moves in opti regattas...

That's one of the things that is annoying about the coverage of this event - boat on boat interaction that in normal circumstances would be thought of as fairly unremarkable.., is, in this event, promoted as a move of match racing genius

again, there have been some great moments, and the boats are exciting,  i'm watching all of it.., i just don't agree that it's great match racing

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Boundaries don't help match racing tactics.

Boundaries help keep the boats in the same patch of water which makes for good TV. The entire point of match racing tactics is for the trailing boat to try to get a split for pressure/shifts and the leading boat trying to deny that to them. 

When the course is too small and the max separation between the boats is limited and the cost of extra maneuvers is relatively high, you get what we have seen in most races...the boats banging off the boundaries in such a way as to spend the most time in pressure or on the lifted tack with little consideration to relative placement of the opposing boat and the mark unless it's going to be close at the rounding.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, us7070 said:

, i just don't agree that it's great match racing

Perhaps I was too robust in my response for which I apologies.  I agree that it has not been great match racing. I was merely arguing that there had been some. 

But then the AC has rarely been known for great match racing. I can remember more than a few poor examples, 

And this one is looking better for it than most, in that at least such things matter for the first time in a while

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Horn Rock said:

I kinda agree. Whomever wins the Prada - ETNZ is just going to come out and blow them away with pure boat speed. Well that's the plan anyway.......

Nothing can make you look more like a tactical genius than superior boatspeed.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

INEOS are going to have to get a whole lot quicker if they want to beat the Kiwi's. However, ETNZ are going to have to be up for a fight if the boats turn up equal in speed. I imagine, as always though, by AC time, one will have got it right, and the other will be playing catch up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, idontwan2know said:

Boundaries don't help match racing tactics.

Boundaries help keep the boats in the same patch of water which makes for good TV. The entire point of match racing tactics is for the trailing boat to try to get a split for pressure/shifts and the leading boat trying to deny that to them. 

When the course is too small and the max separation between the boats is limited and the cost of extra maneuvers is relatively high, you get what we have seen in most races...the boats banging off the boundaries in such a way as to spend the most time in pressure or on the lifted tack with little consideration to relative placement of the opposing boat and the mark unless it's going to be close at the rounding.

 

 

First, they have to decide which boundary to bounce off

Second, Ineos has demonstrated a few times that it pays not to sail across the entire course.  They often tack or gybe back half way across the course to get back to what they perceive as the favored side.

Third these boats are so fast, that watching them sail upwind with one tack would be boring. They have to look for every shuft and pressure point because they know they have to tack. It is not just a drag race to a corner.

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

INEOS are going to have to get a whole lot quicker if they want to beat the Kiwi's. However, ETNZ are going to have to be up for a fight if the boats turn up equal in speed. I imagine, as always though, by AC time, one will have got it right, and the other will be playing catch up.

Lot of assumption there. 

GB in the ACWS were nowhere, however AM and LR weren't far behind NZ, indeed they had a better record against NZ then than they did against GB in the RRs.

Between ACWS and RRS all the boats improved, it is pure guesswork to assume that NZ improved more.

Plus as they develop, they will all approach the theoretical optimum and so margins will get smaller, 

Thus logic and Occam's razor (I know someone was keen on that) both suggest they will be close, unless you have kiwi-tinted glasses

 

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

First, they have to decide which boundary to bounce off

Second, Ineos has demonstrated a few times that it pays not to sail across the entire course.  They often tack or gybe back half way across the course to get back to what they perceive as the favored side.

Third these boats are so fast, that watching them sail upwind with one tack would be boring. They have to look for every shuft and pressure point because they know they have to tack. It is not just a drag race to a corner.

I don't disagree with you, I was just pushing back on the idea that course boundaries were for or help match racing. They don't. They make for better television than having the boats with kilometers of lateral separation across the course.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, enigmatically2 said:

Lot of assumption there. 

GB in the ACWS were nowhere, however AM and LR weren't far behind NZ, indeed they had a better record against NZ then than they did against GB in the RRs.

Between ACWS and RRS all the boats improved, it is pure guesswork to assume that NZ improved more.

Plus as they develop, they will all approach the theoretical optimum and so margins will get smaller, 

Thus logic and Occam's razor (I know someone was keen on that) both suggest they will be close, unless you have kiwi-tinted glasses

 

WE dont know who will be faster because there has been so much development. The differences were not huge at ACWS between ETNZ and the two leading challengers at the time but the difference was slightly in favor of ETNZ.

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

WE dont know who will be faster because there has been so much development. The differences were not huge at ACWS between ETNZ and the two leading challengers at the time but the difference was slightly in favor of ETNZ.

Exactly

Link to post
Share on other sites

In AC34 and AC35, ETNZ brought new and unique developments and by this point in the cycle, we knew what it was. It's unclear, so far, that they have made that a triple. Does anyone think they can so far identify a key winning development that is unique to ETNZ in this cycle? By all means, we might yet be surprised.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

In AC34 and AC35, ETNZ brought new and unique developments and by this point in the cycle, we knew what it was. It's unclear, so far, that they have made that a triple. Does anyone think they can so far identify a key winning development that is unique to ETNZ in this cycle? By all means, we might yet be surprised.

In AC34 and AC35 ETNZ were the challenger so we had seen a lot more of them by this point. From what we have seen it doesn't appear there's anything as obvious as foiling in 34 and cyclors in 35. There's some speculation that the secret weapon lies between the two skins of the mainsail and how it is being trimmed.

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

In AC34 and AC35, ETNZ brought new and unique developments and by this point in the cycle, we knew what it was. It's unclear, so far, that they have made that a triple. Does anyone think they can so far identify a key winning development that is unique to ETNZ in this cycle? By all means, we might yet be surprised.

No mainsail trimmer. Whether that is good or not remains to be seen

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, enigmatically2 said:

Exactly

So then we come down to personal preferences.

Im American so my first choice would have been AM but I dont think they deserve it. Great looking boat. But they were not ruthless enough seeking best talent for the afterguard

So after AM, I would like either Ineos or Prada to bring it home because after decades of trying , it would be great to see it go to one of these two teams .

Ineos I like the afterguard talent. Prada, I like the idea of the Italians winning, there would be lots of tears and emotion.   On balance, I think that if they had a competitive boat, Giles and Ben would be very deserving winners.....combination of talent and never giving up.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

...... I would like either Ineos or Prada to bring it home because after decades of trying , it would be great to see it go to one of these two teams ........

In the case of the UK it's centuries of trying!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, enigmatically2 said:

Lot of assumption there. 

GB in the ACWS were nowhere, however AM and LR weren't far behind NZ, indeed they had a better record against NZ then than they did against GB in the RRs.

Between ACWS and RRS all the boats improved, it is pure guesswork to assume that NZ improved more.

Plus as they develop, they will all approach the theoretical optimum and so margins will get smaller, 

Thus logic and Occam's razor (I know someone was keen on that) both suggest they will be close, unless you have kiwi-tinted glasses

 

First of all, any comparison between the ACWS is useless. If you’re going to compare the two events you might as well take INEOS out of the equation, because there is no comparison with that team. The performance of Britannia from then to now is completely different.

I would say AM were quite a way behind ETNZ. What stood out for them was they had weeks of training time under their belt, where ETNZ had about 3 weeks from launch of TR till race time. But once Patriot got behind, she fell further behind, where TR got behind and was able to make significant gains on AM especially through manoeuvres. 
 
LR have been consistently average to date. Fast but not faster. Remains to be seen whether they can find the pace to match INEOS and ETNZ.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, idontwan2know said:

I don't disagree with you, I was just pushing back on the idea that course boundaries were for or help match racing. They don't. They make for better television than having the boats with kilometers of lateral separation across the course.

Boundaries help to keep the spectator fleet alive.

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

don't mean the horizontal foil at the bottom of the rudder, I'm wondering whether it's a trimmer for the rudder itself (ie to induce/remove weather and lee helm)

I was talking about what mozzy and co suggested: that the inner wheel controlled the rate at which the outer wheel turns the rudder.

Not sure if a trimmer in the sense you speak of is necessary...in a plane the control returns to neutral position and it as advantageous to have this trimmed. A wheel doesn't return to neutral, and the feedback given by how far off neutral the boat is working can be quite useful.

I'm still not sold on either, I reckon more obs are needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, us7070 said:

I agree that the current boats are visually exciting

I agree that the racing is (occasionally ) close.

I don't agree that it has been particularly "tactical" - mostly the people claiming it is very tactical have something to sell..., announcers, competitors etc...

I am not saying there is no tactics, or that there are never incidents where tactics come into play, just that by the standards of normal match racing, this racing is not that tactical.

Does ETNZ even have an experienced and accomplished match racer on the boat? 

I am pretty sure that the last thing ETNZ wants, is for this AC to turn into a match race...

 

 

 

With a "match racer" you mean how match racing used to be some time ago? That is history, this is match racing now.

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

With a "match racer" you mean how match racing used to be some time ago? That is history, this is match racing now.

 

ok, forget "match racing"...

how tactical would you say the current racing is?

with 0 being no tactics at all.., and 10 being like the battle of Austerlitz.., where are we?

i would probably say 5

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, us7070 said:

 

ok, forget "match racing"...

how tactical would you say the current racing is?

with 0 being no tactics at all.., and 10 being like the battle of Austerlitz.., where are we?

i would probably say 5

Separate out tactics (boat-on-boat interaction) and strategy (picking the fastest way around the course). Strategy-wise maybe 6 (again, it's hard to execute good strategy when you're arbitrarily forced to tack), tactically around 2 or 3, for the simple reason that maneuvers are so costly. Cross, boundary, cross, boundary. Maybe if one side is heavily favored you tack a little early on the unfavored side, but that's about it. Forget tacking to lead your opponent back - unless you have a huge lead you'll just get run over. Foilers will be much better for match racing once they can maneuver faster and more frequently. If they can get to that point I'll shut up about missing the keelboats.

It's funny that the big debate in the last few days has been over a really-not-that-close port/starboard, not a millimeter-tight leebow tack. Your point is well taken that it says something when routine ducks, crosses, and loose coverages are treated as big events. But, maybe that will improve as the boats and crews mature - we're watching them learn with every race, and that's a lot of fun.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/01/2021 at 4:15 AM, Salty Seacock said:

Listen up little man, (or wo) . Abuse is something that must be structured and have some argument built in to be respected around here. Your abuse, as above could be taken as a physical threat and therefore a breach of the terms of this site. Speaking for my own opinion, I read your words as that of a coward with not enough fibre in his/her diet and an underlying and untreated case of depression buried beneath and very thin skin of the very minimum of resistance to any criticism or suggestions.

Ergo, go and sniff your mums panties one more time before your future is really fucked.

P.S.

Darts is too complex for you, try something easier like, hopscotch.

 

Took you three days to think of that??? Fucking LOLZ

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, idontwan2know said:

Yes, I'm aware of the legalities around the Deed of Gift.

What we're getting at is separating the legal fictions from the practical reality of the situation. ETNZ holds all the assets, resources and relationships and makes all the decisions related to defending the cup, with RNZYS being involved, if at all, as a courtesy.

This conversation arose around whether ETNZ could host the event somewhere other than New Zealand and it was suggested that RNZYS wouldn't allow this. From a practical perspective, RNZYS would not "fire" ETNZ and defend the cup themselves no matter how upset they were about this because they have no assets, experience, sponsorships, talent, etc. that would enable them to do so. Everything that makes a cup defense possible belongs to ETNZ and therefore ETNZ calls the shots.

Not quite. RNZYS "own" the Cup, and can sack ETNZ any time they want - not that it'll ever happen any time soon!! Everything ETNZ does for AC36 is by delegated authority from RNZYS. Per the Deed of Gift:

It is distinctly understood that the Cup is to be the property of the Club subject to the provisions of this deed, and not the property of the owner or owners of any vessel winning a match.

If ETNZ were to walk, RNZYS will simply organise another team to defend the Cup - they can even invite Team Ineos to be their representative team, in which case they can draw up a new Protocol to address Deed-specific requirements for constructed-in-country, etc.

So no, ETNZ cannot simply decide to host AC37 in another country without RNZYS's consent.

 

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

Anyone have a decent forecast for the semis?  From what I can tell it will be medium the first day and then it goes light the rest of the way. Maybe that favors LRPP?

Correct, only Friday has consistent winds from what I can tell.  LR really shines in the light stuff

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

Not quite. RNZYS "own" the Cup, and can sack ETNZ any time they want - not that it'll ever happen any time soon!! Everything ETNZ does for AC36 is by delegated authority from RNZYS. Per the Deed of Gift:

It is distinctly understood that the Cup is to be the property of the Club subject to the provisions of this deed, and not the property of the owner or owners of any vessel winning a match.

If ETNZ were to walk, RNZYS will simply organise another team to defend the Cup - they can even invite Team Ineos to be their representative team, in which case they can draw up a new Protocol to address Deed-specific requirements for constructed-in-country, etc.

So no, ETNZ cannot simply decide to host AC37 in another country without RNZYS's consent.

 

It was a lot more interesting when there was a defender and challenger series. 

Having said that, I understand why we (NZ) doesn't have one. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, barfy said:

I was talking about what mozzy and co suggested: that the inner wheel controlled the rate at which the outer wheel turns the rudder.

Not sure if a trimmer in the sense you speak of is necessary...in a plane the control returns to neutral position and it as advantageous to have this trimmed. A wheel doesn't return to neutral, and the feedback given by how far off neutral the boat is working can be quite useful.

I'm still not sold on either, I reckon more obs are needed.

Yeah - the rate control idea's quite plausible. No idea how the mechanics would work, but if it's already a thing in powerboats the systems should be mature. Like you, I'm not convinced either way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2021 at 3:22 AM, TheDragon said:

Not likely, although nothing is certain.

We got through the circumstances of the last case with a minimum of disruption. It is just after midnight on Wednesday morning as I write this but thus far zero secondary infections despite extensive ongoing testing and tracking, Seems almost inevitable we'll see some infectious clusters stemming from this but nothing we haven't dealt with before.

This is the price NZ pays for allowing controlled numbers of residents to return to our shores despite an otherwise general lockdown.

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

Not likely, although nothing is certain.

We got through the circumstances of the last case with a minimum of disruption. It is just after midnight on Wednesday morning as I write this but thus far zero secondary infections despite extensive ongoing testing and tracking, Seems almost inevitable we'll see some infectious clusters stemming from this but nothing we haven't dealt with for.

This is the price NZ pays for allowing controlled numbers of residents to return to our shores despite an otherwise general lockdown.

Anybody know how many kiwis are still "stuck" overseas and actually want to return? Or are these kiwis who have travelled since the pandemic started and now are returning as if that is a birthright? Seems really weird to let the latter back in, almost as weird as allowing all the AC teams in! Not that I have any leg to stand on complaining, except I wish I was there too, as was my plan when I bought a boat in 2019.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, idontwan2know said:

Yes, I'm aware of the legalities around the Deed of Gift.

What we're getting at is separating the legal fictions from the practical reality of the situation. ETNZ holds all the assets, resources and relationships and makes all the decisions related to defending the cup, with RNZYS being involved, if at all, as a courtesy.

This conversation arose around whether ETNZ could host the event somewhere other than New Zealand and it was suggested that RNZYS wouldn't allow this. From a practical perspective, RNZYS would not "fire" ETNZ and defend the cup themselves no matter how upset they were about this because they have no assets, experience, sponsorships, talent, etc. that would enable them to do so. Everything that makes a cup defense possible belongs to ETNZ and therefore ETNZ calls the shots.

ha Ha - legalities are NEVER fictions. Ask those who have taken DoG issues to the New York Supreme Court and lost.

The realities of the AC and the DoG is that it is a challengers trophy and if the holders were unable/unwilling to defend then The Cup would be forfeit.

There is not a gulf between the thinking of ETNZ and RNZYS as far as i am aware and a greater challenge might just be the willingness of government at either city or national level given the relatively poor ROI that has been caused by the lack of visiting VVIs or superyachts caused by COVID and New Zealand's entry restrictions.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Weather looking decidedly dodgy for the Amway corporation. Light on Friday, even lighter on Saturday and virtually no wind on Sunday. At least not capsize, boat testing conditions. 

Unless they have improved their light wind performance they are in danger of being excused after completing just six races (the semifinal is first to four wins). 

Screenshot_20210126-102646_Windguru Lite.jpg

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

 

Unless they have improved their light wind performance they are in danger of being excused after completing just six races (the semifinal is first to four wins). 

 

Completing? Then 5

(harsh I know, but true)

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

Completing? Then 5

(harsh I know, but true)

It is my understanding that the teams are limited in how many foils they can develop (3 I believe) but can they switch back to older foils if they were better in some conditions? In other words could they switch foils to suit conditions? 

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

It is my understanding that the teams are limited in how many foils they can develop (3 I believe) but can they switch back to older foils if they were better in some conditions? In other words could they switch foils to suit conditions? 

they can choose any of their foils on the day of measurement (i.e. today for the semis) and then have to stick with them for that round

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not going to continue arguing the pedantics about the ETNZ/RNYS relationships. We're saying the same thing.

Legally, RNZYS can elect whatever defender they want and decide where to host the event. From a practical perspective, ETNZ and RNZYS are in lockstep on this and will likely continue to be so. If there ever was acrimony over these kinds of things, it's highly likely that ETNZ would win the internal argument because they have greater leverage.

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

Weather looking decidedly dodgy for the Amway corporation. Light on Friday, even lighter on Saturday and virtually no wind on Sunday. At least not capsize, boat testing conditions. 

Unless they have improved their light wind performance they are in danger of being excused after completing just six races (the semifinal is first to four wins). 

Screenshot_20210126-102646_Windguru Lite.jpg

European shows a bit different picture:

wind.JPG.21c1cc894a2bf7edef90bd2eea94af32.JPG

Friday's going to be exciting and potentially good for AM (if they can keep the boat upright). Saturday is going to be light, but maybe too light for racing. Sunday seems fine, and Tuesday is again breezy and will stay breezy for the reserve days, too, if it comes to that.

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

Took you three days to think of that??? Fucking LOLZ

And three days for you to read it. Hmmmm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sisu3360 said:

Separate out tactics (boat-on-boat interaction) and strategy (picking the fastest way around the course). Strategy-wise maybe 6 (again, it's hard to execute good strategy when you're arbitrarily forced to tack), tactically around 2 or 3, for the simple reason that maneuvers are so costly. Cross, boundary, cross, boundary. Maybe if one side is heavily favored you tack a little early on the unfavored side, but that's about it. Forget tacking to lead your opponent back - unless you have a huge lead you'll just get run over. Foilers will be much better for match racing once they can maneuver faster and more frequently. If they can get to that point I'll shut up about missing the keelboats.

It's funny that the big debate in the last few days has been over a really-not-that-close port/starboard, not a millimeter-tight leebow tack. Your point is well taken that it says something when routine ducks, crosses, and loose coverages are treated as big events. But, maybe that will improve as the boats and crews mature - we're watching them learn with every race, and that's a lot of fun.

Aren’t these keelboats?  Moveable ballast......

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

The realities of the AC and the DoG is that it is a challengers trophy and if the holders were unable/unwilling to defend then The Cup would be forfeit.

Wrong. The only way the Cup is "forfeited" is if the current holder is dissolved and no other NZ Yacht Club steps up to defend it. Then and ONLY then, it reverts to the immediate past holder.

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

Wrong. The only way the Cup is "forfeited" is if the current holder is dissolved and no other NZ Yacht Club steps up to defend it. Then and ONLY then, it reverts to the immediate past holder.

Isn't the question here what happens if there is a challenge and the defending club refuses to defend? In that case, the challenger would win by forfeit, as confirmed by the MBBC vs NYYC litigation. The immediate past holder doesn't come into play unless they happen to be the CoR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 more days and it’s time for the 2 remaining Challengers to put up or shut up. Personally, I want to see an INEOS v LR final as I still believe those two teams are the strongest of the Challengers. LR are vulnerable but desperate, and AM are wounded but have nothing to lose now. AM have no wins and no points but have an opportunity to go through to the final. LR have no wins but 2 points, so essentially both teams are still looking to get their first race win. Gonna be a barn burner I think!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sisu3360 said:

Isn't the question here what happens if there is a challenge and the defending club refuses to defend? In that case, the challenger would win by forfeit, as confirmed by the MBBC vs NYYC litigation. The immediate past holder doesn't come into play unless they happen to be the CoR.

If the challenge received meets all requirements of the DoG, the Defending club has no choice but to defend. If they don’t show up, and the race starts with the Challenger crossing the line, the race is awarded to the Challenger. It almost happened in 2010 when Alinghi refused to race, ordered their race officials to stand down and tried to mutiny the RC boat so the race wouldn’t start, but the RO found some more officials to start the race. 

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

 

Nathan Outerridge has a nice calm presence about him - he'll have an excellent career as a yachting commentator in-between sailing assignments. Complements well Kenny Read and Shirley and her infectious giggling:)

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

2 more days and it’s time for the 2 remaining Challengers to put up or shut up. Personally, I want to see an INEOS v LR final as I still believe those two teams are the strongest of the Challengers. LR are vulnerable but desperate, and AM are wounded but have nothing to lose now. AM have no wins and no points but have an opportunity to go through to the final. LR have no wins but 2 points, so essentially both teams are still looking to get their first race win. Gonna be a barn burner I think!

Both teams are at 0-0 and both are desperate to survive this first knockout. 
 

As far as ‘barn burner’ well let’s hope so but dammit, if races get started at borderline conditions in a dropping breeze then it’ll be a shit-show. These foilers are so extreme that it is a case of either ON or OFF, on the foils or not. If any boat falls off, well it’s just no longer an actual foiler design competition of any kind at all. 
 

Pray, pray, pray for wind!  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

10 minutes ago, Sisu3360 said:

Isn't the question here what happens if there is a challenge and the defending club refuses to defend? In that case, the challenger would win by forfeit, as confirmed by the MBBC vs NYYC litigation. The immediate past holder doesn't come into play unless they happen to be the CoR.

No, that's not the question to which I replied in my post: shanghaisailor postulated that "if the holders were unable/unwilling to defend then The Cup would be forfeit."

A Challenger wins by default if a Defender fails to front after accepting the Challenge. The Cup is forfeited and reverts to the previous holder if no other yacht club in the country of the holder is available to defend IF the holder is dissolved.

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

. LR have no wins but 2 points, so essentially both teams are still looking to get their first race win. Gonna be a barn burner I think!

LR have 1 win and 3 points. They definitely won their race against AM on day 2 even if you don't count day 3. And they have 3 points because of the one they got from the ghost race

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

Pray, pray, pray for wind!  

Well, I mainly wonder on what criteria IM choses his race course, he is the one whose choice decides the winner. If AM doesn't have wind they are done.

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

One very good race, the last one, but more drifting shows and postponements than good ones upt to now.

That race was absolutely epic! Either team could have won, NINE LEAD CHANGES was just stunning! And like erdb points out, the final cross was only 1.4 secs from a penalty - wow! 
 

We won’t see another barn burner quite like that but geezus, let’s all pray we don’t see any more where boats are drifting around aimlessly at times. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

If one boat can keep foiling most of the course in 6.5 knots they have won the design race!

The fastest in displacement mode is is the most likely to get back up on the foils? sail design race again.

Given that foiling at breakneck speeds is amazing to watch, if they can finish the course inside 45? minutes then they win !!!???!!! and that in my opinion is the harder feat.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2021 at 10:32 AM, underperformer said:

You realize they don't see it that way ? They think (and rightly so) that they are the middle of the world.

I lived in NZ and it is the end of the world. That is the attraction and it is also pretty to boot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Well, $ 100 M for a drifting constest is not my ideal, optis ca do a better job at it ;)

I haven't seen too many optis get a puff and accelerate to 30kts. Day 2 was fascinating. And tested sailing skills and the design. 

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

Well, I mainly wonder on what criteria IM choses his race course, he is the one whose choice decides the winner. If AM doesn't have wind they are done.

It is obvious the priority courses are those that provide the best access for spectators both on and off the water.  I have no problem with that.  Course selection is more a factor of wind direction and safety than wind strength.  If the winds are light for the day then there is very little variance across all the courses - with A and E least likely to be affected by land geography.  If the wind is at the top end of the allowable range then courses A and E are the safest.  9-18 knots then either B, C or D with the final decision being based on wind direction.  

The last course raced on was a composite of C and D with one end relatively fixed due to land and navigation obstacles.  So they chose this composite so they could move one end of the course on an axis relative to the wind direction.

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

I lived in NZ and it is the end of the world. That is the attraction and it is also pretty to boot.

Not quite the end of the worid, Dullers (Antartica is down there somewhere, I believe) but close. Normally I bitch about it, but not lately. ;-)

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

If the challenge received meets all requirements of the DoG, the Defending club has no choice but to defend. If they don’t show up, and the race starts with the Challenger crossing the line, the race is awarded to the Challenger. It almost happened in 2010 when Alinghi refused to race, ordered their race officials to stand down and tried to mutiny the RC boat so the race wouldn’t start, but the RO found some more officials to start the race. 

One of the more dastardly days in the history of the cup. Tom Ehman himself, who was onboard the committee boat as GGYC's rep, hauled down the postponement flag at Harold Bennet's direction.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites