Jump to content

Recommended Posts

23 hours ago, smackdaddy said:

GBR hits 53.1 knots in Aarhus today. Fastest boats on the planet...and just getting started...

https://twitter.com/SailGP/status/1428046536668291078?s=20

You got to be incredibly skilled to keep a Boat afload that is doing nearly 100 kph!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 554
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The Denmark SailGP has a new look with two Women coming onboard https://sailgp.com/news/den-unveils-star-studded-crew/

GBR hits 53.1 knots in Aarhus today. Fastest boats on the planet...and just getting started... https://twitter.com/SailGP/status/1428046536668291078?s=20

Got the app sussed on my iPhone. So now collecting the screenshots of race 4 now. It's pretty incredible - both the app and the race. Just wait.

Posted Images

Wow...

And I love how NZL is presented in the intro...

"And last but surely not least, the wooden spoon sits with the America's Cup holders, New Zealand."

HAHAHAHA. Coutts had to have been the one to write that one.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pauley's leg...

483315308_ScreenShot2021-08-21at12_01_32AM.thumb.png.068912dcb55f43c2f1d4a5a3e21f04ca.png

And he climbed back up the net and into the cockpit at 45° with that thing flapping around under the skin. Tough dude.

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

Rubbish call by the umpires at the top mark

I'd have sailed off the course and retired. BA can afford to be fired and a withdrawal would have sent a far bigger message to SailGP ... 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Sea Breeze 74 said:

I'd have sailed off the course and retired. BA can afford to be fired and a withdrawal would have sent a far bigger message to SailGP ... 

It is a strange event - speeds in kph presumably to  make it 'look' more exciting than it really is when every REAL sailor is trying to do the knots conversion, penalties that penalise the incident in such a way that it becomes inordinately expensive, the Japs were never going to turn into that mark it would have cost them as much as the umpire decision cost GBR,  a 3 boat final that is neither fleet racing nor match racing, a clear attempt to make it more exciting - is it? . I watched 10 minutes by accident, i was looking for something else on Youtube - 10 minutes was more than enough.

Well it is Larry's money, up to him how he spends it I suppose but not worth the dollars

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree kph is annoying and the penalties to harsh and IMO there was no penalty as BA had given enough room which was what the penalty was for.  However I have no problem with a 3 boat final it does avoid getting stuck in the fleet and those who can manage the shifts and keep the sailing well have better opportunity to get a good result.

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

Rubbish call by the umpires at the top mark

 

Yeah, it was. But GBR looked in dire straights in the Final Fleet Race. I thought they wouldn't make the Podium Race.

But this is Ben Ainslie. Dealt with the Situation like a Pro and sailed them back into 2nd Place.

I think consistency is the KEY here winning the SailGP Championship.

GBR reminds me a little bit of Dongfeng in the last Volvo. They won it because they were the most consistent.

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

I agree kph is annoying and the penalties to harsh and IMO there was no penalty as BA had given enough room which was what the penalty was for.  However I have no problem with a 3 boat final it does avoid getting stuck in the fleet and those who can manage the shifts and keep the sailing well have better opportunity to get a good result.

The Podium Race is great for the Events. However I do not want a Podium Race at the Final Event in San Francisco next year to decide the Championship. The Final Race of Season 2 should be a Match Race and I think it will be.

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

Yeah, it was. But GBR looked in dire straights in the Final Fleet Race. I thought they wouldn't make the Podium Race.

But this is Ben Ainslie. Dealt with the Situation like a Pro and sailed them back into 2nd Place.

I think consistency is the KEY here winning the SailGP Championship.

GBR reminds me a little bit of Dongfeng in the last Volvo. They won it because they were the most consistent.

I can concur with that but hopefully GBR doesn't leave it to the last leg. :D

I remain to be impressed by this circus it is NOT new, stadium racing was developed by OC Sport with the eXtreme Sailing Series. There were more teams, the courses were tighter and the rules more equitable. All SailGP is really is eXtreme 40s lengthened and put on foils. Hard sail/soft sail? The wider public hasn't got a clue about the difference. 

So much of this event is how fast they are but when they are so spread out the viewer gets little impression of their relative speeds while with eXtreme they were so often so close that it appeared faster and for the non-sailing public it is that interaction which is the draw.

Just my opinion.

SS

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

I can concur with that but hopefully GBR doesn't leave it to the last leg. :D

I remain to be impressed by this circus it is NOT new, stadium racing was developed by OC Sport with the eXtreme Sailing Series. There were more teams, the courses were tighter and the rules more equitable. All SailGP is really is eXtreme 40s lengthened and put on foils. Hard sail/soft sail? The wider public hasn't got a clue about the difference. 

So much of this event is how fast they are but when they are so spread out the viewer gets little impression of their relative speeds while with eXtreme they were so often so close that it appeared faster and for the non-sailing public it is that interaction which is the draw.

Just my opinion.

SS

To be fair, SailGP got a little bit unlucky with the "Wind Gods" in the last 3 Events (Italy, Great Britain & Denmark) mate. This Circuit definitly needs more BREEZE like they had in Bermuda. Maybe with the new 29M Wing for Season 3 next year light wind performances get better.

That being said the Teams you would expect at the Top of the Leaderboard are now at the Top (Australia, GB, Japan & USA) with the exception of the Kiwis. I call them the big FIVE. Burling has some work to do though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Light air - but actually fantasic racing...

 

I'll do the in-app analysis as usual - but immediate takeaways:

1. I don't think shanghaisailor watched the same event as everyone else. He clearly has an axe to grind and/or simply doesn't understand what's going on. Of course, he's perfectly willing to take the time to spout nonsense about the thing he says he's not interested in. Is he Forourselves' sock-puppet? Heh.

2. The call on GBR was exactly right per the rules. Yes, Nathan put a bruising screwing on Ben with his protest, but he was within rights to do so. It was brilliant strategy by Nathan. Period. Stop pouting Ben - and sail better.

3. Light air racing is painfully slow, yes - but really exciting in its own right. What makes it fun is the acceleration of these boats with the lightest puff. Light air sailing on "slow boats" like we've always seen IS NOT EXCITING AT ALL. But this is different. You immediately and clearly see the strategy pay off for whatever boat finds that puff. And you see the light-air brilliance of guys like Nathan who just outshines everyone else in these conditions. So, it's just a completely different strategy and dynamic that is simple part of sailing. And if you don't like that - you obviously don't sail.

4. That said, the use of the big wing is going to be really fun to watch as to how it will change the racing in conditions like today.

5. Slingsby HAS to be on cloud9 having just beaten his nemeses. This final 3 was unquestionably THE final 3 in terms of consistent overall performance across these races (and across racing in general for a good while now). It was a real accomplishment for AUS - especially as a repeat. Out of all the top skippers, Slingsby seems to be the most susceptible to pressure and doubt. But if he keeps gaining confidence like this - he's going to be unstoppable. His talent is undeniable.

6. NZL just can't compete with the best pro sailors on the planet in equal boats. That's just fact. They suck. No wonder the NZ government doesn't want this show in their front yard. It's freakin' humiliating after all the money their Nigerian Prince, GD, took from them in the AC, only to prove that's not actually the pinnacle of sailing as we are clearly seeing now.

7. Overall, SailGP is absolutely rocking it. It just doesn't get better than this. And we've got lots more to come. Love it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

PS - Here is the moment (and reason) ESP blew up their starboard dagger in Day 1 practice...

1616370534_ScreenShot2021-08-21at12_17_11PM.png.9aebe8d3055f4379d5a4c6992a45c502.png

That Phil - he's never afraid to cut it close. You gotta give him that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@smackdaddy

Slingsby can gain as much confidence as he wants. If AUS & GBR make the Grand Final in San Francisco I'll pick GBR and Ben because it's a MATCH RACE between two Boats and Ben is a better Match Racer Head-to-Head! There is a good chance of that happening.

Spithill sucks as much as Burling does in a OD Class.

If you remember the 2015/2016 America's Cup World Series where we had 9 Events which was raced in a OD AC45F Class Spithill, at that time with OTUSA then, didn't win a single Event.

2015 Portsmouth: Land Rover BAR (Ainslie)

2015 Gothenburg: Emirates Team New Zealand (Burling/Ashby)

2015 Bermuda: Artemis Racing (Outteridge/Percy)

2016 Muscat/Oman: Land Rover BAR

2016 NYC/New York/USA: Emirates Team New Zealand

2016 Chicago/USA: Artemis Racing

2016 Portsmouth: Land Rover BAR

2016 Toulon/France: Artemis Racing

2016 Fukuoka/Japan: Land Rover BAR

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015–16_America's_Cup_World_Series

I think Spithills sailing skills are somewhat negated in a OD Class like the World Series 15/16 was or SailGP is now.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll see, dg. I'll grant that if anyone is going to self-destruct - it will be Slingers. But you also can't deny that he's dominating right now. He's the only one that smells like champagne.

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

Yeah, it was. But GBR looked in dire straights in the Final Fleet Race. I thought they wouldn't make the Podium Race.

But this is Ben Ainslie. Dealt with the Situation like a Pro and sailed them back into 2nd Place.

I think consistency is the KEY here winning the SailGP Championship.

GBR reminds me a little bit of Dongfeng in the last Volvo. They won it because they were the most consistent.

Except to win the SailGP championship you just have to win the final race.

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

2. The call on GBR was exactly right per the rules. Yes, Nathan put a bruising screwing on Ben with his protest, but he was within rights to do so. It was brilliant strategy by Nathan. Period. Stop pouting Ben - and sail better.

Explain please.....

Screenshot 2021-08-21 224943.png

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

Except to win the SailGP championship you just have to win the final race.

True but you will need consistent Results to even make the Grand Final. Would you agree with me on that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Desert Wings said:

Explain please.....

Screenshot 2021-08-21 224943.png

Looks like plenty of room to me.  It is like BA said at the time, "how much room does he want?"  Bad call by the umps

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dg_sailingfan said:

True but you will need consistent Results to even make the Grand Final. Would you agree with me on that?

Nope. You can come third in every event (consistent), and maybe not make the final because the French get seconds and fifths...or because the US start the Season slowly and win the last few events. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Potter said:

Except to win the SailGP championship you just have to win the final race.

 

37 minutes ago, dg_sailingfan said:

True but you will need consistent Results to even make the Grand Final. Would you agree with me on that?

Seems like there are many sports that have the characteristic that one race or game decides things. Sailing has long had drops and many series for most of the championships, though some races (like passage races and ocean races) are one chance. It does increase the importance of luck. But that's life. I think the idea is to make the final race more appealing to the audience. All of the boats that get there have proven they are worthy.

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

 

Seems like there are many sports that have the characteristic that one race or game decides things. Sailing has long had drops and many series for most of the championships, though some races (like passage races and ocean races) are one chance. It does increase the importance of luck. But that's life. I think the idea is to make the final race more appealing to the audience. All of the boats that get there have proven they are worthy.

I think the whole concept is a little like moving to Kph, to simplify for non sailors,so the winner of the last race is....the winner.

It is pure Russelvision.

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

Nope. You can come third in every event (consistent), and maybe not make the final because the French get seconds and fifths...or because the US start the Season slowly and win the last few events. 

How likely is this happening? I mean, I am not saying it will be BUT we could have the two Finalists by the end of the Cadiz SailGP Event in Mid October. By then we certainly know that some Teams won't be making the Final. My money is that Denmark, Spain and France won't make it. It will be two of the "Big5" (Australia, Great Britain, Japan, USA, New Zealand) as I call them who will contest the Grand Final in San Francisco next year I think.

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

Explain please.....

Screenshot 2021-08-21 224943.png

From the SGP Rules:

Similarly to boundaries, marks have a circle zone around them of 45m in diameter with the mark at its center.

When boats overlap as they enter the mark zone, the boat on the inside must be given room to go around the mark. The boat on the outside must allow the inside boat to take the turn as they wish.

When boats are not overlapped, the boat that entered the zone first has the right to go around the mark.

+++++

Pretty simple. Had Ben made a move to starboard right at this point, I don't think the penalty would have stuck.

I'll take a closer look in the ump view of the app when I do my analysis (i.e. - what they were seeing in the data). But it was good call per the rules - though it was a close one. And even though I don't think for a minute that Nathan was actually going to round that mark to port - it doesn't really matter. He had the right to. And if he tells the umps that he couldn't because of what you see in that pic - and Ben didn't show a course deviation to give that room - there you go.

Racing is not for wimps.

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

PS - Here is the moment (and reason) ESP blew up their starboard dagger in Day 1 practice...

1616370534_ScreenShot2021-08-21at12_17_11PM.png.9aebe8d3055f4379d5a4c6992a45c502.png

That Phil - he's never afraid to cut it close. You gotta give him that.

Rewind… the board broke before they reached the mark

 

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

I think the whole concept is a little like moving to Kph, to simplify for non sailors,so the winner of the last race is....the winner.

It is pure Russelvision.

 

1 hour ago, dg_sailingfan said:

How likely is this happening? I mean, I am not saying it will be BUT we could have the two Finalists by the end of the Cadiz SailGP Event in Mid October. By then we certainly know that some Teams won't be making the Final. My money is that Denmark, Spain and France won't make it. It will be two of the "Big5" (Australia, Great Britain, Japan, USA, New Zealand) as I call them who will contest the Grand Final in San Francisco next year I think.

Seems like it's similar to a pro league team making the playoffs as a wildcard, and then winning the championship. Possible, but not likely, and doesn't happen often. It does happen pretty often that the first seed doesn't win, or even gets eliminated early.

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

 

Seems like it's similar to a pro league team making the playoffs as a wildcard, and then winning the championship. Possible, but not likely, and doesn't happen often. It does happen pretty often that the first seed doesn't win, or even gets eliminated early.

All 5 of these Superteams won't flinch. SailGP reminds me a little of the Louis Vuitton Acts between 2005-2007 in the lead up to the 2007 Louis Vuitton Cup & America's Cup. We've had 11 Teams then but really 4 Superteams in Alinghi, Oracle, ETNZ and LR and Desafio, Mascalzone among others were trying to catch up.

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

Rewind… the board broke before they reached the mark

 

You're right, it happened right here (you can just see the sprit dip and the boat shudder) - as you see a funky splash at the board - but then it really lets go at the buoy...

1275859205_ScreenShot2021-08-21at7_37_27PM.png.3bcd41783a5a9483ca3b6f0c782ab906.png

Good eye. It had to be something in the water, because the steering was whacked too (rudder strike after the foil strike? or was it just the capsize?)...

Link to post
Share on other sites

@smackdaddy

SailGP CEO Russell Coutts replied to a Question on FB I asked SailGP.

BIG NEWS smack:

The Grand Final in San Francisco in 2022 will be a Podium Race not a Match Race.

STANDINGS AFTER AARHUS

E9Uct9WWEAMY9S6?format=jpg&name=medium

Given that the "GRAND FINAL" will be a Podium Race Australia & Great Britain sitting pretty. The Brits have already a 4-Point lead over 4th Place United States and 7-Point lead over the New Zealanders.

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

@smackdaddy

SailGP CEO Russell Coutts replied to a Question on FB I asked SailGP.

BIG NEWS smack:

The Grand Final in San Francisco in 2022 will be a Podium Race not a Match Race.

STANDINGS AFTER AARHUS

E9Uct9WWEAMY9S6?format=jpg&name=medium

Given that the "GRAND FINAL" will be a Podium Race Australia & Great Britain sitting pretty. The Brits have already a 4-Point lead over 4th Place United States and 7-Point lead over the New Zealanders.

Hopefully that will mean more money in the Grand Final. And, as we saw today, the 3 boat final can be very, very interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, smackdaddy said:

When boats are not overlapped, the boat that entered the zone first has the right to go around the mark.

The issue I see is that a right to go around the mark has to expire at some point.  As you say, Nathan did not appear to have any intention to go round the mark.  Both boats have turned to starboard (partly a right shift perhaps), as seen from both wakes.  With Ben still keeping outside the circle, there is room for Nathan to tack...with Ben then holding his course to keep clear.  Once it was apparent that Nathan wasn't tacking, Ben was free to round the mark with no restrictions.

It would appear from the umpires decision that the rights are not expiring when the opportunity to tack has passed!

Do SGP issue interpretations/updates to their rules?

Yep, not for wimps, but rules need to be understandable and interpretations consistent for both the participants and us sailors watching..... not a concern for SGP perhaps?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

@smackdaddy

These Statisticians at SAILGP definitly need to do a better job when they pull these kind of Stats out of their bag because it is nowhere near accurate

vlcsnap-2021-08-22-19h02m26s706.png

They left out Bens Race Win in Aarhus (Race 3) and they throw Bens Performance in Sydney 2020 completely under the bus.

NOT GOOD, NOT GOOD AT ALL!

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Desert Wings said:

The issue I see is that a right to go around the mark has to expire at some point.  As you say, Nathan did not appear to have any intention to go round the mark.  Both boats have turned to starboard (partly a right shift perhaps), as seen from both wakes.  With Ben still keeping outside the circle, there is room for Nathan to tack...with Ben then holding his course to keep clear.  Once it was apparent that Nathan wasn't tacking, Ben was free to round the mark with no restrictions.

It would appear from the umpires decision that the rights are not expiring when the opportunity to tack has passed!

Do SGP issue interpretations/updates to their rules?

Yep, not for wimps, but rules need to be understandable and interpretations consistent for both the participants and us sailors watching..... not a concern for SGP perhaps?  

First, what you just went through happens in probably 2 seconds within the critical window of this particular rule. So this idea of "expiration" is a little far-fetched. Here you can see that JPN has just entered the mark zone - WAY ahead of GBR even being close...

IMG_0148.thumb.PNG.955d605589efc3d47c343f3319800640.PNG

JPN's track shows they are moving toward WG1. And GBR is slowly arcing upward - but not making any significant moves to avoid.. The umps see this developing and immediately zoom into the area as you can see below...

IMG_0149.thumb.PNG.c070980506993486d774f83effc41339.PNG

And just now, less than 2 seconds later, JPN starts a clear dip down to avoid GBR - who is still not in the zone. Yet GBR has still not yet altered their course in any significant way and is headed right into the zone just ahead of JPN.

My hunch is that this is exactly when JPN calls the protest. They absolutely have the right to round WG1 - but clearly can't with GBR on its current course. So JPN takes evasive action to avoid a collision and calls the protest. That's the story the umps hear.

Again, this is all perfectly kosher per the rules. JPN has every right to protest this rule as GBR continues its course into the zone, crowding JPN even more - and, again, the umps are all over this with the data (not just watching it on the tele like most)...

IMG_0150.thumb.PNG.f439864370d050e1e877a942b83fd042.PNG

Looking at these tracks it's clear that JPN, not GBR, took the evasive action. This is what umps see, and they make their call. And it is the right call per the rules.

Second, as to "expiration of rights", I think we would agree that those rights certainly will not have expired in the 2-3 seconds in the above 3 screenshots while JPN was still in the zone. How and at exactly what time JPN might choose to whip their boat to port for some crazy tack around WG1 is NOT the concern of - nor the business of - the umpires. Only the rule I pointed out is at play right now. And GBR clearly took away JPN's option at WG1 for the entire 2-3 seconds that opportunity to tack was available to JPN. So - easy call. Game over.

Finally, there is the issue of "intent" - like "C'mon, there is no way Nathan would have tacked around WG1 there. That would be a stupid tactical move. So it's all a BS call." None of that matters. He had the right to do it, so if he says he couldn't due to GBR - and you see the data above - then, again, game over. Easy call.

I think it was a brilliant tactical protest that, though right on the edge of believability, worked perfectly. That's racing. Well-done to Nathan. And Ben just needs to nut up, quit whining, and sail better.

 

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

First, what you just went through happens in probably 2 seconds within the critical window of this particular rule. So this idea of "expiration" is a little far-fetched. Here you can see that JPN has just entered the mark zone - WAY ahead of GBR even being close...

IMG_0148.thumb.PNG.955d605589efc3d47c343f3319800640.PNG

JPN's track shows they are moving toward WG1. And GBR is slowly arcing upward - but not making any significant moves to avoid.. The umps see this developing and immediately zoom into the area as you can see below...

IMG_0149.thumb.PNG.c070980506993486d774f83effc41339.PNG

And just now, less than 2 seconds later, JPN starts a clear dip down to avoid GBR - who is still not in the zone. Yet GBR has still not yet altered their course in any significant way and is headed right into the zone just ahead of JPN.

My hunch is that this is exactly when JPN calls the protest. They absolutely have the right to round WG1 - but clearly can't with GBR on its current course. So JPN takes evasive action to avoid a collision and calls the protest. That's the story the umps hear.

Again, this is all perfectly kosher per the rules. JPN has every right to protest this rule as GBR continues its course into the zone, crowding JPN even more - and, again, the umps are all over this with the data (not just watching it on the tele like most)...

IMG_0150.thumb.PNG.f439864370d050e1e877a942b83fd042.PNG

Looking at these tracks it's clear that JPN, not GBR, took the evasive action. This is what umps see, and they make their call. And it is the right call per the rules.

Second, as to "expiration of rights", I think we would agree that those rights certainly will not have expired in the 2-3 seconds in the above 3 screenshots while JPN was still in the zone. How and at exactly what time JPN might choose to whip their boat to port for some crazy tack around WG1 is NOT the concern of - nor the business of - the umpires. Only the rule I pointed out is at play right now. And GBR clearly took away JPN's option at WG1 for the entire 2-3 seconds that opportunity to tack was available to JPN. So - easy call. Game over.

Finally, there is the issue of "intent" - like "C'mon, there is no way Nathan would have tacked around WG1 there. That would be a stupid tactical move. So it's all a BS call." None of that matters. He had the right to do it, so if he says he couldn't due to GBR - and you see the data above - then, again, game over. Easy call.

I think it was a brilliant tactical protest that, though right on the edge of believability, worked perfectly. That's racing. Well-done to Nathan. And Ben just needs to nut up, quit whining, and sail better.

 

Complete Joke Explaination from you smack I am sorry. Nathan made no intent to round that gate.

Ben to Nathan: "SHUT UP"

 

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

And still, the call and the results stand. Just facts. Nathan beat Ben.

Nathan cheated like he always does! He pulled similar moves to Tom in 2019. Cheating should not been rewarded.

You want to talk facts. Outteridge has only beaten Slingsby once at the New York SailGP in 2019 and he would not have beaten Ainslie either if it weren't for that Penalty. Ainslie is the biggest Threat so far in 2021 to Slingsby so the Umpires gave Slingsby a nice Present by relegating Ainslie to 3rd.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's this thing that is happening in many sports. The rules are designed to protect the athletes, and the athletes take advantage of them by faking the fouls. It happens in soccer, basketball, sailing, etc. I guess that is the way it has to be. But it also kinda sucks. And I am not sure it doesn't make some situations more dangerous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not cheating, nor faking. It's called match racing. Ok this was a 3 boat race but Australia has got away, leaving 2 boats to duke it out.

Taking unnecessary avoiding action and pushing the penalty button is part of the game.

This one was a bit soft, but it doesn't change the fact that it's better to protest than to risk contact to prove you were not given room.

In this case i think Japan were not sailing to the mark, so took a bit too much room, but the penalty may already have been given by then? 

 

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

First, what you just went through happens in probably 2 seconds within the critical window of this particular rule. So this idea of "expiration" is a little far-fetched. Here you can see that JPN has just entered the mark zone - WAY ahead of GBR even being close...

IMG_0148.thumb.PNG.955d605589efc3d47c343f3319800640.PNG

JPN's track shows they are moving toward WG1. And GBR is slowly arcing upward - but not making any significant moves to avoid.. The umps see this developing and immediately zoom into the area as you can see below...

IMG_0149.thumb.PNG.c070980506993486d774f83effc41339.PNG

And just now, less than 2 seconds later, JPN starts a clear dip down to avoid GBR - who is still not in the zone. Yet GBR has still not yet altered their course in any significant way and is headed right into the zone just ahead of JPN.

My hunch is that this is exactly when JPN calls the protest. They absolutely have the right to round WG1 - but clearly can't with GBR on its current course. So JPN takes evasive action to avoid a collision and calls the protest. That's the story the umps hear.

Again, this is all perfectly kosher per the rules. JPN has every right to protest this rule as GBR continues its course into the zone, crowding JPN even more - and, again, the umps are all over this with the data (not just watching it on the tele like most)...

IMG_0150.thumb.PNG.f439864370d050e1e877a942b83fd042.PNG

Looking at these tracks it's clear that JPN, not GBR, took the evasive action. This is what umps see, and they make their call. And it is the right call per the rules.

Second, as to "expiration of rights", I think we would agree that those rights certainly will not have expired in the 2-3 seconds in the above 3 screenshots while JPN was still in the zone. How and at exactly what time JPN might choose to whip their boat to port for some crazy tack around WG1 is NOT the concern of - nor the business of - the umpires. Only the rule I pointed out is at play right now. And GBR clearly took away JPN's option at WG1 for the entire 2-3 seconds that opportunity to tack was available to JPN. So - easy call. Game over.

Finally, there is the issue of "intent" - like "C'mon, there is no way Nathan would have tacked around WG1 there. That would be a stupid tactical move. So it's all a BS call." None of that matters. He had the right to do it, so if he says he couldn't due to GBR - and you see the data above - then, again, game over. Easy call.

I think it was a brilliant tactical protest that, though right on the edge of believability, worked perfectly. That's racing. Well-done to Nathan. And Ben just needs to nut up, quit whining, and sail better.

 

At no time could Japan have turned and rounded and been impeded by GBR. This is room to round as she wishes not ROW. Japan's move to the right was to go fast to the other mark and perhaps to tease the UMP software. This is a BS call. This is an unsportsmanlike protest and is outside the fundal mental principals of the RRS.

 

Tink

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

This is an unsportsmanlike protest and is outside the fundal mental principals of the RRS.

You're obviously free to have your opinion on the call. But you're flat wrong about the part above. The fundamental tenet within SailpGP's RRS is to avoid collision. And the reason is abundantly clear when you understand the closing speeds of these boats (hence the size of the mark zone).

The bottom line is that an umpire would have to do far more logical gymnastics to forgive GBR in this incident, than to simply call it per the rule. It was a valid protest by Nathan - and the right call by the umps - even if Nathan "teased" them. That's what great sailors do...and the very essence of intelligent sportsmanship.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who thinks Ainslie would not have protested had the situations been reversed is seriously deluded. He is the master of pushing the letter - as he is entitled to do - and as Nathan was in this case. 

Had Nathan taken the risk and tried to round, and made any contact with GBR, they could have been subject to a points deduction. They couldn't take that risk which meant JPN had to take the unfavorable mark rounding. I don't understand these comments that JPN never intended to take WG1 - of course they wanted to round WG1! Rounding WG2 effectively put them out of the race (had it not been for the penalty).

It was a fair penalty. The only lack of sportsmanship on display was Ainslie's hissy fit and telling Nathan to "shut up".

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/22/2021 at 4:53 AM, Desert Wings said:

Explain please.....

Screenshot 2021-08-21 224943.png

Exactly Desert Wings. I rather think it is smackdaddy who is somewhat biased or lacking in understanding what Mark Room actually is. For JPN to have had a piece of GBR then JPN would have had to take more mark room than they were entitled to and therefore the penalty on GBR was wrong.

TO clarify the SailGP RRS 18 states that the inside boat be given mark room

MARK ROOM is the right to leave the mark on the required side - GBR allowed JPN to do this

MARK ROOM is room to sail to the mark. JPN sailed to the mark unimpeded, GBR was 3 boat lengths away

MARK ROOM is the room to round or pass the mark as necessary to sail the course. JPN could have tacked at the mark while GBR was 3 boat lengths away. If a boat takes more than the room they are entitled to it is penalty on them, not the other boat

MARK ROOM IS NOT a free pass to take as much room as you want and it most certainly does not allow a tactical rounding. I think JPN tried it on and caught the umpire flat footed.

By the time their course actually intersected GBR's course they would most certainly NOT have just been taking just the Mark room and as such they would be a port tack boat Vs a starboard tack boat.

In fact if you look at GBR's wake she has come up considerably to allow the mark room to JPN

At no time did GBR deny JPN "room to round the mark". It is often a good idea to read the definitions when discussing the rules because the rules hang off the definitions, not the other way round.

As nroose said a bit of faking going on. In soccer such an obvious 'dive' would get a yellow card at least.

Watch Mozzy sails video, it explains it very well.  

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a lot of words. But this is all you need to see the clear penalty. And this is exactly what the umpires saw - and evaluated. It was the right call per the rules. Period.

IMG_0149.PNG

It's funny how there's so much drama over second place. Heh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed,  good video.  My point isn't about Ben vs Nathan, it's that the rule needs an official interpretation to provide clarity for all.

The comments from smackdaddy regarding speeds are fallacious, as Nathan executes a tack after rounding from a reach (30 knots approx) during race 1, remaining inside the 45m circle for the whole manoeuvre....so not challenging from upwind on a lighter day.

 

Screenshot 2021-08-24 175152.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mozzy's analysis is excellent.

I don't particularly mind Nathan inflicting pain on Ben (ask Robert Scheidt!), and umpires sometimes mess it up. But the penalty system gets in the way here, and gives too much power to the infringed boat.

The 'get behind boat X' penalty is appropriate for some fast paced situations, but it's downright awful in others. Replace it with "get behind X OR do a 360, your choice".

This would have allowed GBR to take the penalty, not be bound to JPN's bad rounding, and go chase AUS. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, martin 'hoff said:

This would have allowed GBR to take the penalty, not be bound to JPN's bad rounding, and go chase AUS. 

Beyond whatever one thinks about the call itself, this is the rub in terms of the consequences of the penalty. In other words, IF JPN is pushed into a wind-hole by the infringing GBR (which could be argued in this case) - then your described solution isn't fair. JPN drops into the hole through no fault of its own while GBR gets the good pressure - does the loop - and sails up the podium while JPN is dead in the water. Nope.

I don't know what the perfect answer is. But I think the existing "relative-to" approach makes a lot of sense. It simply murdered GBR in this particular situation the way it played out. But if the penalty call is valid, they deserved it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also GBR sailed an excessively long time to clear the penalty. If they had sailed back to JPN early on they would have had more time to come back.

I think the Umpire just made a mistake, and I'm ok with that, it happens in every sport. 

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

Beyond whatever one thinks about the call itself, this is the rub in terms of the consequences of the penalty. In other words, IF JPN is pushed into a wind-hole by the infringing GBR (which could be argued in this case) - then your described solution isn't fair. JPN drops into the hole through no fault of its own while GBR gets the good pressure - does the loop - and sails up the podium while JPN is dead in the water. Nope.

I don't know what the perfect answer is. But I think the existing "relative-to" approach makes a lot of sense. It simply murdered GBR in this particular situation the way it played out. But if the penalty call is valid, they deserved it.

You are right, the perfect answer probably doesn't exist as mother nature is involved.

In this case it doesn't help (as Mozzy correctly pointed out) that the umpires didn't 'flag' for 17 seconds after the non-incident.

That said what the umpires saw only compounds the error. They have mis-interpreted Mark Room.  AN F50 catamaran does not need to go to the edge of the zone (where GBR's projected course is) to round the mark. Under the definition they are only allowed sufficient room to round the mark which in this instance was to tack at the mark. They chose not to, even though they had ample room.

The diagram even shows GBR coming up (their course is curved) ro ensure JPN had Mark Room to tack at the mark as they were entitled to.

Of course it would have involved a tack and likely falling off the foils but Mark Room makes no mention of allowing room for a tactical rounding, just a rounding. They took that risk by coming into a mark in light air where they would have to tack if they wanted that mark and GBR paid the price of a wrong call (in my opinon)

Mark Room  doe not allow allow a boat to sail their proper course to the mark, only to "sail to the mark when their proper course is to round the mark" Subtle but meaningful difference. 

It is perhaps worth having a look at the following cases RYA 25; 70; 114 & 118 as they all touch on Mark Room entitlement.

The whole thing shows that no one is perfect and as I have said elsewhere, the umpires have to make a decision VERY quickly (my mentor always told/tells me you have 3-5 seconds) and they don't have the benefit of video replays or discussion forums. This decision took rather longer and that compounded the situation.

Just sayin'. As usual if I am wrong, i will eat humble pie.

See ya on the water

SS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Answers below in red...

2 hours ago, shanghaisailor said:

You are right, the perfect answer probably doesn't exist as mother nature is involved.

In this case it doesn't help (as Mozzy correctly pointed out) that the umpires didn't 'flag' for 17 seconds after the non-incident.

It was an incident. And I know that for certain because the professional umpires who where there called the penalty as we all know. The elapsed time has nothing to do with the infringement, but only the amount of distance GBR gained over JPN in that interim - making the redress far more painful for GBR. If you think about it, you should be pleased that they did take that time to analyze and likely discuss it prior to calling it. That's good officiating.

That said what the umpires saw only compounds the error. They have mis-interpreted Mark Room.  AN F50 catamaran does not need to go to the edge of the zone (where GBR's projected course is) to round the mark. Under the definition they are only allowed sufficient room to round the mark which in this instance was to tack at the mark. They chose not to, even though they had ample room.

This is both assumptive and wrong. Saying "an F50 catamaran does not need...blah" is ridiculous. First, I'm not sure you're qualified to make that assertion with such confidence. There are a hell of a lot of variables there. But second, it doesn't matter at all in terms of the rule. You're assuming you know for certain what Nathan "chose" to do or not do in that moment. You don't. He had the right to the room he wanted/needed for the rounding while in that zone. Period.

The bottom line, as you'll see, is that had Ben steered to starboard for just 1-2 seconds more staying outside that zone until JPN left it, no call. He didn't. He actually turned into the zone. And GBR paid dearly for it.

The diagram even shows GBR coming up (their course is curved) ro ensure JPN had Mark Room to tack at the mark as they were entitled to.

You're looking at a couple of stills. The video of the umpire app makes it clear that GBR did not alter course enough to give JPN the room the turn without the risk of collision. In fact, as I said above, Ben pushed it. There's no question about this.

Of course it would have involved a tack and likely falling off the foils but Mark Room makes no mention of allowing room for a tactical rounding, just a rounding. They took that risk by coming into a mark in light air where they would have to tack if they wanted that mark and GBR paid the price of a wrong call (in my opinon)

This is purely guessing at what Nathan's intention was while in that zone. And this is a fundamental problem in most of these discussions about the call. Here is the fact: It doesn't matter. If he SAID in his protest that he wanted to round but couldn't because of the danger of colliding with GBR, and there is the slightest evidence that he's right, that's all there is to it. And we saw how that played out - with the right call being made per what you see in the umpire app.

Mark Room  doe not allow allow a boat to sail their proper course to the mark, only to "sail to the mark when their proper course is to round the mark" Subtle but meaningful difference. 

If you're going to talk about subtle but meaningful differences in wording - at least use the actual wording from the actual rules:

Mark-Room Room for a boat to sail her proper course to round or pass the mark on the required side.

It is perhaps worth having a look at the following cases RYA 25; 70; 114 & 118 as they all touch on Mark Room entitlement.

The whole thing shows that no one is perfect and as I have said elsewhere, the umpires have to make a decision VERY quickly (my mentor always told/tells me you have 3-5 seconds) and they don't have the benefit of video replays or discussion forums. This decision took rather longer and that compounded the situation.

Just sayin'. As usual if I am wrong, i will eat humble pie.

See ya on the water

SS

To those who are interested, I'm doing the in-app analysis on this one. It's very, very interesting to say the least.

Cheers.

 

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

Answers below in red...

To those who are interested, I'm doing the in-app analysis on this one. It's very, very interesting to say the least.

Cheers.

 

You are right, the perfect answer probably doesn't exist as mother nature is involved.

In this case it doesn't help (as Mozzy correctly pointed out) that the umpires didn't 'flag' for 17 seconds after the non-incident.

Corrections in blue

It was an incident. And I know that for certain because the professional umpires who where there called the penalty as we all know. The elapsed time has nothing to do with the infringement, but only the amount of distance GBR gained over JPN in that interim - making the redress far more painful for GBR. If you think about it, you should be pleased that they did take that time to analyze and likely discuss it prior to calling it. That's good officiating.

So you are certain from a distance that no error was made?  What? Are umpires robots? The amount that GBR gained is immaterial as to whether the call was correct or otherwise. Umpires are trained to be talking to each other all the time or was this a unilateral decision by ONE umpire? That would be good to know. If I ever took 17 seconds to flag (or whatever means of signalling is used) an incident my CHUmp would have my balls in a sling in the post race debrief.

That said what the umpires saw only compounds the error. They have mis-interpreted Mark Room.  AN F50 catamaran does not need to go to the edge of the zone (where GBR's projected course is) to round the mark. Under the definition the inside boat is only allowed sufficient room to round the mark which in this instance was to tack at the mark. They chose not to, even though they had ample room.

This is both assumptive and wrong. Saying "an F50 catamaran does not need...blah" is ridiculous. First, I'm not sure you're qualified to make that assertion with such confidence. There are a hell of a lot of variables there. But second, it doesn't matter at all in terms of the rule. You're assuming you know for certain what Nathan "chose" to do or not do in that moment. You don't. He had the right to the room he wanted/needed for the rounding while in that zone. Period.

The bottom line, as you'll see, is that had Ben steered to starboard for just 1-2 seconds more staying outside that zone until JPN left it, no call. He didn't. He actually turned into the zone. And GBR paid dearly for it.

Neither assumptive and wrong. There are hours of SailGP video showing that these F50 catamarans DO NOT NEED 3 boat lengths to tack. One primary thing that is NOT variable is  Mark Room.  He categorically DID NOT have the “Right to the room he wanted” as you state he had the right to the Mark Room  the definition allowed him. The call does not depend on whether GBR was in the zone or not, it is whether JPN had the room to comply with the definition of Mark Room

The diagram even shows GBR coming up (their course is curved) ro ensure JPN had Mark Room to tack at the mark as they were entitled to.

You're looking at a couple of stills. The video of the umpire app makes it clear that GBR did not alter course enough to give JPN the room the turn without the risk of collision. In fact, as I said above, Ben pushed it. There's no question about this.

Completely wrong, I am looking at the video

At 1.44.47 when at the mark JPN actually turns down away from the mark WHEN THEY COULD/SHOULD HAVE HEADED UP INTO A TACK as is their right under Mark Room and is already clearly crossing GBR’s stern while GBR is on the edge of the zone therefore 3 boat lengths from the mark having headed up to give JPN room. An F50 does not need 3 boat lengths to tack. Of course it might not have been fast to tack at the mark but that is what Mark Room allows. Anything more is taking more than the definition states you can have.

Of course it would have involved a tack and likely falling off the foils but Mark Room makes no mention of allowing room for a tactical rounding, just a rounding. They took that risk by coming into a mark in light air where they would have to tack if they wanted that mark and GBR paid the price of a wrong call (in my opinon)

This is purely guessing at what Nathan's intention was while in that zone. And this is a fundamental problem in most of these discussions about the call. Here is the fact: It doesn't matter. If he SAID in his protest that he wanted to round but couldn't because of the danger of colliding with GBR, and there is the slightest evidence that he's right, that's all there is to it. And we saw how that played out - with the right call being made per what you see in the umpire app.

What JPN’s intention is immaterial. All that matters is his rights under Mark Room. “The slightest evidence he is right” is BS, the umpires should understand the manoeuvrabity these boats are capable of. It is the rights & rules  that are “all there is to it”.

Mark Room  doe not allow allow a boat to sail their proper course to the mark, only to "sail to the mark when their proper course is to round the mark" Subtle but meaningful difference. 

If you're going to talk about subtle but meaningful differences in wording - at least use the actual wording from the actual rules:

Mark-Room Room for a boat to sail her proper course to round or pass the mark on the required side.

What the hell are you talking about. That is a 100% WRONG quote. There is nowhere in the definition of Mark Room that gives a boat the right to sail her proper course to round or pass the mark.

The actual definition states “Room for a boat to leave a mark on the required side. Also, (a) room to sail to the mark when her proper course is to sail close to it, and (b) room to round or pass the mark as necessary to sail the course without touching the mark. Read it carefully, it catches out a lot of people. (Clearly)

There is NOTHING in the definition that gives an inside boat the right to sail her proper course. I do admit though that this is a pretty common assumption by less experienced racers. Causes all sorts of problems at roundings.

It states the boat entitled to Mark Room has room to sail to the mark – not her “proper course to the mark” and room to round the mark, NOT “room to pass the mark on her proper course”.

Might I suggest you go to www.sailing.org. Then Technical, then Documents and Rules and  read what the Mark Room definition ACTUALLY says.

 

It is perhaps worth having a look at the following cases RYA 25; 70; 114 & 118 as they all touch on Mark Room entitlement.

The whole thing shows that no one is perfect and as I have said elsewhere, the umpires have to make a decision VERY quickly (my mentor always told/tells me you have 3-5 seconds) and they don't have the benefit of video replays or discussion forums. This decision took rather longer and that compounded the situation.

Just sayin'. As usual if I am wrong, i will eat humble pie.

See ya on the water

SS

Once again, if I am wrong I will gladly stand corrected. Interesting discussion though.

SS

Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet, the call was made just as I said. So that in itself might indicate you are wrong.

As for the rules, you really should avail yourself of the actual SGP RRS, which is conveniently available via Mozzy's video (link in his description). The quote I gave you came directly from there.

That's about all I can do for you.

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

And yet, the call was made just as I said. So that in itself might indicate you are wrong.

As for the rules, you really should avail yourself of the actual SGP RRS, which is conveniently available via Mozzy's video (link in his description). The quote I gave you came directly from there.

That's about all I can do for you.

Now where did I put my humble pie. Got that one wrong.

Changing the definitions that govern a sport - It's life Jim but not as we know it

Did JPN really think bearing away would be quicker and give more chance of not dropping off the foils? 

Does anyone else know of an event that changes the Definitions because that well and truly caught me out

Apologies smackdaddy

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No pie or apologies needed Shang. It's all in good fun.

The video I was talking about is the umpire view video. I'll have that in my in-app analysis with a couple of other interesting views on the situation. Should be good.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A direct quote from the World Sailing Umpire's Manual 

"Decisions can and should be given promptly - normally within a period of 5-10 seconds after the protest. If the decision takes much longer than this, it is probably due to the umpires being in doubt as to whether a boat broke a rule"

And if you are in doubt - which mean your are NOT certain -  you green it!

17 Seconds eh? Pretty decisive!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If I had to guess, the delay was because they were discussing Nathan's intent. If he had no intent to round WG-1, it was a typical port/starboard and Ben was in the clear. If he intended to round, the penalty was clear.

But, if Nathan did intend to round and claimed so in his protest, the penalty was valid. This call obviously was a tricky one. And it came down to Nathan's stated intent. And the umpires, though suspect like everybody else of Nathan's intent, made the call.

Wait 'til you see the in-app analysis. Very interesting.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great article from Jimmy...

https://www.sail-world.com/news/241003/Jimmy-Spithill-on-the-SailGP-Rollercoaster

Quote

When you're racing at almost 100kph on these fully-loaded SailGP F50 boats, the G-forces on the turn are insane - hitting as much as 3Gs, about the same as astronauts experience during a rocket launch.

Quote

The level of competition in SailGP is off the charts. We've now seen every team win races this season, and there are no excuses. We've all got the same equipment, and every team has what it takes to win in SailGP.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In-app analysis of the Aarhus final is up. It's a tad long, but very informative...an wildly entertaining of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2021 at 12:17 AM, smackdaddy said:

If I had to guess, the delay was because they were discussing Nathan's intent. If he had no intent to round WG-1, it was a typical port/starboard and Ben was in the clear. If he intended to round, the penalty was clear.

But, if Nathan did intend to round and claimed so in his protest, the penalty was valid. This call obviously was a tricky one. And it came down to Nathan's stated intent. And the umpires, though suspect like everybody else of Nathan's intent, made the call.

Wait 'til you see the in-app analysis. Very interesting.

Here again the umpire(s) goes against the Umpires Manual. 

The manual clearly states in Section B.3 Decisions that "If the umpires are in doubt they should go back to the last known point of certainty" 

Umpires also are not mind readers, they have no way of knowing JPN's "intent", any attempt to assess that intent was is a pure guess. That is pretty weird when umpires are supposed to deal with the facts and the 'now'. 

The last known point of certainty was when JPN was approaching the mark to pass close to it. The umpires did not KNOW JPN's intent and therefore cannot, or at least should not rule on it.

Having said that the 'controversy' is caused by a number of factors, not least because the umpires a) guessed  what JPN was intending to do. Can they prove they bore away to stay on their foils to do a foiling tack round the left hand mark or did they bear away to take the right hand mark? No way at all of them knowing which was reality.

Did the umpires comply with the expected time to make and deliver the decision?

Again referring to the Umpires Manual "Decisions can and should be delivered promptly - normally within a period of 5-10 seconds after the protest. 17 seconds is 70% longer than the Umpires Manual states as 'promptly'.

In developing situations they should be 'talking their  boats' (umpires will know what I mean) so the decision is normally made almost as quickly as a skipper decides to fly the flag. In every instance my mentors have mentioned a time they have told me that you should be able to make a call in 3-5 seconds if you are doing the job right. For the record my mentors have 5 x ACs between them.

If the umpires were so uncertain that it took 17 seconds they should have 'greened' the protest.

Again referring to the Umpire Manual "It is better to dismiss a protest against a boat that broke a rule than to give an incorrect penalty to a boat that has not broken a rule".

A final quote from the Umpires Manual "Absence of doubt is the mark of a good umpire".

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

Here again the umpire(s) goes against the Umpires Manual. 

The manual clearly states in Section B.3 Decisions that "If the umpires are in doubt they should go back to the last known point of certainty" 

Umpires also are not mind readers, they have no way of knowing JPN's "intent", any attempt to assess that intent was is a pure guess. That is pretty weird when umpires are supposed to deal with the facts and the 'now'. 

The last known point of certainty was when JPN was approaching the mark to pass close to it. The umpires did not KNOW JPN's intent and therefore cannot, or at least should not rule on it.

Having said that the 'controversy' is caused by a number of factors, not least because the umpires a) guessed  what JPN was intending to do. Can they prove they bore away to stay on their foils to do a foiling tack round the left hand mark or did they bear away to take the right hand mark? No way at all of them knowing which was reality.

Did the umpires comply with the expected time to make and deliver the decision?

Again referring to the Umpires Manual "Decisions can and should be delivered promptly - normally within a period of 5-10 seconds after the protest. 17 seconds is 70% longer than the Umpires Manual states as 'promptly'.

In developing situations they should be 'talking their  boats' (umpires will know what I mean) so the decision is normally made almost as quickly as a skipper decides to fly the flag. In every instance my mentors have mentioned a time they have told me that you should be able to make a call in 3-5 seconds if you are doing the job right. For the record my mentors have 5 x ACs between them.

If the umpires were so uncertain that it took 17 seconds they should have 'greened' the protest.

Again referring to the Umpire Manual "It is better to dismiss a protest against a boat that broke a rule than to give an incorrect penalty to a boat that has not broken a rule".

A final quote from the Umpires Manual "Absence of doubt is the mark of a good umpire".

That all sounds great except for 1 thing, Nathan told them his intent. So there was no guessing. And it was the right call as is clear in my in-app anaylisis.

As for the time delay, I think it's completely inconsequential. think about it this way - Nathan was in that zone a total of ~8 seconds. He had 2 seconds to make the call of whether to round or not. And in that to seconds it's clear from the data that had he done so he would of collided with GBR - who weren't giving room.

So, I'm sure he was a bit busy avoiding GBR to make the call at that moment. My guess is he called the protest either just before or just after rounding WG2...another 5 seconds or so. The umpires were already zoomed into and looking at the situation on their app. Nathan makes that call and within 10 seconds of that protest, the call is made.

So your scenario above doesn't apply. And there was no doubt about this call when you see it on the app.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW - I'm finishing up the analysis of R5 in Plymouth - and I'll be no one around here saw that Nathan actually "practiced" this very situation against NZL.

The intrigue grows. Stay tuned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/26/2021 at 11:11 AM, shanghaisailor said:

Now where did I put my humble pie. Got that one wrong.

Changing the definitions that govern a sport - It's life Jim but not as we know it

Did JPN really think bearing away would be quicker and give more chance of not dropping off the foils? 

Does anyone else know of an event that changes the Definitions because that well and truly caught me out

Apologies smackdaddy

 

The best part about SGP is the rule changes, in earlier America Cups the race was decided in the prestart manoeuvres and then the race called in the court hours afterwards. In SGP racing there’s no one in court proving they were scared into making a tack 300 metres from the other boat. These boats are going so fast with apparent wind changing so often they have to have options open to them and to say it’s obvious they wouldn’t use one mark or the other is just hindsight as the slightest wind change or sighting of wind on the opposite side of the course would change which mark they went to. Railing at it taking whatever seconds to make a decision is incredible because I could never make decisions like that on the spot, in that time frame and if team GB had taken a turn straight away to get behind the other boat it wouldn’t have been such a big penalty. Lastly all these sailors are given the rules of the competition long before they turn up to race so there is no way the offending boats didn’t know they were offending, they were just pushing boundaries and at the end of the race we knew who won as soon as they crossed the line

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

For the most part - I really try to stay focused on the SailGP season events in these threads of mine. But as I watch ETNZ and AC37 slowly fall apart (see latest Herald story about Grant about to get the boot), I'm reminded of why LERC were so smart in building SailGP as they have - truly making it the new "pinnacle of sailing".

To wit:

1. SailGP has - unquestionably - all the best sailing talent in the world competing in the league. And it has become - unquestionably - some of the most exciting racing ever.

2. SailGP has successfully brought the costs of this "pinnacle" down to very manageable levels.

3. SailGP runs for most of the calendar year each season - around the globe - giving these sailors, their teams, and their sponsors continuous value for their participation and investment.

4. They've moved away from "club-based" sponsorship to team/corporate-and-or-country-based sponsorship. This is a perfectly sustainable model, especially in light of the above. But most importantly under this model - the sailors (not the billionaires) - can run, and and profit from, their own teams. This is absolutely ground-breaking.

Since I've been around this conversation for the past couple of years, there has always been talk about whether SailGP will eclipse the AC.

The simple answer to that is no and yes.

First, as we know, and as listed in item 4, the AC is completely and irrevocably tied to yacht clubs. Just run the numbers on how well those are doing in this day and age - and what future expectations for them are. Second, the costs for the AC have ballooned so completely out-of-control, and AC36 has just proven how commercially nonviable it is from a corporate value perspective, that it can never truly be sustainable by anyone other than a couple of billionaires every few years (see the story). So...

No - the AC is and always will be the oldest (yet increasingly "quaint") trophy in sailing. And, if it continues to remain funded at current levels, it will be the place where boat design completely pushes boundaries. That's great. SailGP neither can nor will never eclipse that. The AC will always draw those clubs and billionaires who enjoy the challenge and want the prestige in this narrow focus of sailing. But this model, its recent economic dumpsterfire (which still burns brightly as you see in that article), and its current direction also means it won't ever be anything but that.

Yes - in terms of actual sailing talent and competition, we've already seen the clear answer: SailGP is unquestionably the pinnacle.

So, both will do just fine...in their respective areas. But one will set a course for an exciting future for new generations of sailors - while the other reminisces in a smokey, clubhouse with a dwindling gaggle of wealthy grayhairs.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen to Slingsby, Outteridge, and Ainslie at the end of this video regarding the Aarhus final penalty (cued up for you)...

Slingsby nails it at 25:40..."He [NO] plays the rules really well. He's very smart with that..."

What no one seems to know is that Nathan played this exact same game in R5 of Plymouth against NZL. And he won that call too. Practice makes perfect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only 5 days to St. Tropez. And here's where we are...

422468774_ScreenShot2021-09-05at5_20_53PM.thumb.png.650e8ae1b5eeddf761561c3aca617f12.png

It's been very interesting to watch ESP go from top to bottom - as AUS does the opposite over the last couple of events. Phil's aggressiveness has really hurt the team, while Slingsby seems to be getting his head right again.

USA just hasn't been able to get it going. The kraken-strike definitely hurt them, but they've just been off - even before the PCJ leg-snap.

These results also show how Sydney was a fluke for Ainslie. It's clear he just got in everyone's head when be burst though the doors there, and hasn't been able to repeat that dominance...despite (or probably because of) his time in the AC.

Speaking of, NZL is showing to be about the same level of sailing talent as FRA and DEN. And even though DEN is at the bottom of the board, you really have to respect their performance as such a young team in this very stacked field. When you're able to keep up with the "America's Cup World Champions" you definitely shouldn't hang your head. After all, they can't keep up with these other teams either. And it's only a 1 point difference.

Looking forward to next week!

Link to post
Share on other sites

After 3 days of the Moths Worlds

Pos Sail No Boat Name Helm Club Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 F7 F8 F9 Pts
1 AUS 1 JOHNNY DRAMA Tom SLINGSBY Gosford sailing club 1 1 1 1 1 1 ‑2 1 1 8
2 AUS 4739 CPSC Iain JENSEN WASC 1 1 1 4 1 1 7 ‑10 3 19
3 AUS 2 BLOOD EAGLE Kyle LANGFORD GKSS 2 2 9 2 4 2 1 ‑18 7 29
4 AUS 4629 MACH 2.6 Nathan OUTTERIDGE Wangi Sailing Club ‑9 3 2 3 5 4 6 5 2 30
5 ITA 4725 VIVIANI KIA TRENTINO Ruggi TITA SEZIONE VELA GUARDIA FINANZA 8 2 2 3 6 ‑13 4 2 8 35
6 NZL 4740   Phil ROBERTSON RNZYS/GKSS 4 6 6 6 3 6 ‑15 3 4 38
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 out of 6 in SailGP.  Must know a thing or two about foiling !!!  Mind you the top 4 were all very good Moth sailors before Sail GP.

Slingers with a picket fence with his drop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

AUS is kind of sending it. No question. And even the NZL entry is actually ESP!

I do love the boat names: "Johnny Drama" and "Blood Eagle".

You think ITA will be the next team in? Or will it be DEU? We'll find out soon.

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

You think ITA will be the next team in? Or will it be DEU? We'll find out soon.

It will probably be DOA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there you go! Now the world know how Lundin Energy is.

So one more team slot available. It's now starting to get way more competitive to keep these team slots.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/6/2021 at 12:30 AM, smackdaddy said:

Only 5 days to St. Tropez. And here's where we are...

422468774_ScreenShot2021-09-05at5_20_53PM.thumb.png.650e8ae1b5eeddf761561c3aca617f12.png

It's been very interesting to watch ESP go from top to bottom - as AUS does the opposite over the last couple of events. Phil's aggressiveness has really hurt the team, while Slingsby seems to be getting his head right again.

USA just hasn't been able to get it going. The kraken-strike definitely hurt them, but they've just been off - even before the PCJ leg-snap.

These results also show how Sydney was a fluke for Ainslie. It's clear he just got in everyone's head when be burst though the doors there, and hasn't been able to repeat that dominance...despite (or probably because of) his time in the AC.

Speaking of, NZL is showing to be about the same level of sailing talent as FRA and DEN. And even though DEN is at the bottom of the board, you really have to respect their performance as such a young team in this very stacked field. When you're able to keep up with the "America's Cup World Champions" you definitely shouldn't hang your head. After all, they can't keep up with these other teams either. And it's only a 1 point difference.

Looking forward to next week!

You are waaay too harsh on Ainslie here. Compare how many Events Slingsby & Outteridge sailed since the Start of SailGP in 2019 to Ainslie. The more Events Ben sails the better he will probably get.

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

You are waaay too harsh on Ainslie here. Compare how many Events Slingsby & Outteridge sailed since the Start of SailGP in 2019 to Ainslie. The more Events Ben sails the better he will probably get.

I have no doubt Ben will improve - but so will everyone else. All I'm saying is his performance right now shows that his complete dominance in Sydney was a fluke. Maybe he'll come back to that form. Who knows? But that's not being harsh. That's just the way it is. Look at the results.

The bottom line is that the competition now is incredible. This truly is F1-level stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/6/2021 at 7:58 AM, random. said:

It will probably be DOA.

I have Smack on ignore, but I think the Italians have most of the money...and then got beaten to the entry by a team from the Americas.  So the next team unlikely to be Italian.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh. I have to say I do get a kick out of people proclaiming I'm on their IL. Nobody ignores me. Just look at the view numbers on my threads. People obviously want to know what I think.

I get it though. I'm pretty intimidating. You do have to bring your A-Game if you're going to try to engage. So silently reading along is a lot safer I suppose. And if you are going to post, waving the white IL flag is understandable if you're nervous but can't help yourself. As you might suspect, I don't have an IL.

In any case, just a few more days 'til St. Tropez!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the answer to that probably lies in the question of whether the big wings are ready. 6+ knots is sailable from what we saw in Aarhus.

Link to post
Share on other sites