Jump to content

The AC 37 has started, news and rumours


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

Understandable.......

But it means that Italians miss opportunity to hone skills vs 5 of best AC  helms in the business. On one race course to have Peter Burling, Jimmy Spithill, Ben Ainslie, Nathan Outrridge, and Tom Slingsby each helming a boat in the fastest one design class currently on the planet...,well that opportunity doesn’t come along too often, 

Emotion getting in the way of opportunity?  
 

Although hmmm the world would be a poorer place without Italian emotion. Opera, Venice, the Sistine Chapel, Red Tuscan wine , Dante, Virgil and Luciano Pavarotti ..,,all of the food .   I vote to keep the emotion. 

But LR have one of their helmsman in the game, free of charge.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I’m not calling this out for the sake of ostracizing you, nor to play PC police on a forum that is notorious for the opposite of that. I could just hit ignore, delete or whatever. I’m calling this out

Hilarious to watch Kiwis who've been around since AC35 twist themselves into intellectual pretzels to give ETNZ a pass on what they screamed bloody murder about when Oracle did it. Even Oracle di

Wow, 13 pages, a frenzy of outraged indignation over something that hasn't even been decided yet? This must set some new kind of SA record??! (... probably not )

Posted Images

36 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

Understandable.......

But it means that Italians miss opportunity to hone skills vs 5 of best AC  helms in the business. On one race course to have Peter Burling, Jimmy Spithill, Ben Ainslie, Nathan Outrridge, and Tom Slingsby each helming a boat in the fastest one design class currently on the planet...,well that opportunity doesn’t come along too often, 

Emotion getting in the way of opportunity?  
 

Although hmmm the world would be a poorer place without Italian emotion. Opera, Venice, the Sistine Chapel, Red Tuscan wine , Dante, Virgil and Luciano Pavarotti ..,,all of the food .   I vote to keep the emotion. 

Nathan,Tom, and Jimmy have to sail for different "nations" altho I guess Jimmy is American (but maybe still dual as Australian?). The Italians can hire Jimmy back. 

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

Is something happening AC wise at the end of the year? I see SailGP has ditched both San Fran and Lyttleton as season 2 venues this year.

Jesus Fucking Christ you are an insufferable dick. We get you don't like SailGP. Why do you keep repeating it? You only advertise it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, idontwan2know said:

Sure.

I'd be interested to see how GGYC members feel about their interactions with Larry and the Cup. We could discuss it from the patio of their beautiful new building.

It's very nice indeed and they seem keen to rent it as an event venue. 

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

Jesus Fucking Christ you are an insufferable dick. We get you don't like SailGP. Why do you keep repeating it? You only advertise it.

Calm down. It was a simple fucking question! Jesus must be that time of the month for you smfh

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, NeedAClew said:

Nathan,Tom, and Jimmy have to sail for different "nations" altho I guess Jimmy is American (but maybe still dual as Australian?). The Italians can hire Jimmy back. 

Nathan is sailing for Japan. Japan are considered an emerging nation I guess so they can rent-a-Aussie.   (Although there has been a Japanese entry in 4 AC cycles since the 12 meters vs 3 for Australia).

Tom is sailing for Australia

Jimmy is an American citizen, pays US taxes , and lives in San Diego with his American wife and 2 American kids.

 

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

Is something happening AC wise at the end of the year? I see SailGP has ditched both San Fran and Lyttleton as season 2 venues this year.

What are you smoking? They haven't ditched Wellington & San Francisco!

There is a difference between eSailGP and SailGP!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, trt131 said:

Tom has a USA passport also

I did not know that. It would mean that he has to pay US tax on his worldwide income.    Any reason why he wants to do that? Does he live in US?

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

I did not know that. It would mean that he has to pay US tax on his worldwide income.    Any reason why he wants to do that? Does he live in US?

If you have an American passport but you live and work abroad, let's say in Italy, I think you will be required to pay taxes in Italy. Or not?

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

You read it here first as reported in the local Mahurangi Matters facebook page. Venue and date decided.

image.png.84696b255d731276c5cdd24ccf5eeb38.png

The purchase of a second deep fryer was a nice touch.  Good fun. 

WetHog  :ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, strider470 said:

If you have an American passport but you live and work abroad, let's say in Italy, I think you will be required to pay taxes in Italy. Or not?

If you work and live in Italy and you are a US citizen (passport), you will be required to pay Italian taxes (I think) and file US tax return (I know).

The Italian taxes can be offset vs most of your US tax.   US is rather unique in this regard so US workers going to low tax regimes as ex pats (eg middle East) dont benefit. They pay full US tax on income.

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

If you work and live in Italy and you are a US citizen (passport), you will be required to pay Italian taxes (I think) and file US tax return (I know).

The Italian taxes can be offset vs most of your US tax.   US is rather unique in this regard so US workers going to low tax regimes as ex pats (eg middle East) dont benefit. They pay full US tax on income.

In Italy taxes are more expensive then in the US, what would happen in this case?

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

In Italy taxes are more expensive then in the US, what would happen in this case?

His italian income will be taxed at italian rates and he will get tax credit. But his non-Italian income gets taxed at US rates.  They will probably pay him overseas.....eg NZ or Bermuda

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, strider470 said:

If you have an American passport but you live and work abroad, let's say in Italy, I think you will be required to pay taxes in Italy. Or not?

You get US tax credit for foreign tax paid on income earned outside US, or at least you used to.

Sorry didn't see other posts

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh well, I was hoping this was true then I looked at the post date. It doesn't say anything about Rum rations though

From Scuttlebutt. https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2021/04/01/americas-cup-real-boats-more-sailors/

America’s Cup: Real Boats, More Sailors

Published on April 1st, 2021

 

America’s Cup defender Emirates Team New Zealand and their club, Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron, alongside the Challenger of Record for the 37th America’s Cup (AC37), the Royal Yacht Squadron Racing (GBR) represented by INEOS TEAM UK, have agreed to terms for the next match in 2024.

“The Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron is pleased to present a format, alongside our British colleagues, which will be welcomed by sailing enthusiasts worldwide,” said Aaron Young, RNZYS Commodore.

Bertie Bicket, Chairman of Royal Yacht Squadron Racing, added, “This direction reconnects the America’s Cup with its history, and ensures that older guys like INEOS TEAM UK Skipper and Team Principal Sir Ben Ainslie can remain onboard for successive events.”

Recognizing how the America’s Cup had been hijacked since 2007 by pro sailors that like going fast, and television network executives chasing the Red Bull fan, terms of the Protocol will include the following:

Scuttlebutt-Banner-Ad-TC.png

• Use boats that can showcase the many skills required by athletes in this complex sport to race a modern, planing monohull, including sailors serving on the bow or mast, as grinders, tailers, helm, tactician, and/or strategist and navigator.
• Maintain the “Majesty” of America’s Cup yachts while maintaining a connection with—and passing on technological advances to—boats used by almost all of the rest of the sport
• Limit costs to attract numerous challengers and defense candidates worldwide.
• Make sailing in the Cup a realistic goal for the very best of young sailors and match racers everywhere, whether or not they are, or intend to become professional sailors.
• End, the “circular” reasoning: “Why is a Cup campaign so expensive?” Because of the technology.” “Why do you need such exotic technology?” “To attract commercial sponsors.” “Why do you need that level of commercial sponsorship?” “Because a Cup campaign is really expensive!”
• Appeal to the type of billionaires that would prefer to race more J-Class boats alongside the 2017 edition in Bermuda than competing teams for the Cup.

“I’m thrilled with this announcement,” shared Terry Hutchinson, Skipper & Executive Director of American Magic. “I most certainly was to be forced off the boat for the next edition, and now I can stay onboard and show I’m more than just a grey-haired grinder.”

Here are the key elements for the 37th America’s Cup:

The Boats
75-80 foot planing monohulls built to a “box” rule (like that used for TP52s), fractional rigs with asymmetrical spinnakers, canting keels whose maximum cant must result in the bulb remaining underwater. The boats will have a useful life after each campaign.

Nationality Rule
A “sliding” nationality rule whereby countries with significant America’s Cup and “Maxi Boat” experience will be required to have 100% of the crew as citizens or permanent residents, the latter with at least five years of such status; other countries with less such experience would have a somewhat lesser percentage requirement.

Campaign Limit
Fifteen months from the splash of the first boat of a campaign until the first day of the Cup Match. No “World Series” matches without assurance of a net $0 additional cost to campaigns.

Home Waters
Challenger Series and Cup Match must be held in the home waters of the defending Club or where it holds its annual regatta.

A Mutually Agreed Upon Salary Limit
Reduce campaign costs and encourage new challengers by limiting the total amount paid for salaries of team members and administrators. This is routinely done and enforced in professional sports. Necessarily, financial information will be required from challenger and defender candidates

Rationale for the Plan
• While foiling boats are exciting, that part of the sport will undoubtedly continue to grow but as far as “passing down” technology, there is little that would be useful for boats used by the vast majority of sailors worldwide as was the case when the Cup was sailed in non-foiling monohulls.

• In fact, match racing is only exciting when the boats are engaged with—and in close proximity to—each other. A fleet race with the current boats would likely be more “exciting”, but would be either pretty dangerous and/or rules adopted which keep them way from each other which sort of defeats the purpose—and in any event, the America’s Cup is and should be a match race.

• Embrace the proven excitement of pre-starts with two maxi boats just a few feet from each other. Recognize the excitement of 12-15 person crew maneuvering in tactically close race – spinnaker hoists and douses, gybe sets,etc.

• Accept that sailing will never be a “mass market” sport. Given that, the theme is no longer to let the “tail wag the dog” and change the rules, technology, crew requirements, race course sizes, etc. to somehow make it so.

• Rather than trying to attract great numbers of non-sailor spectators to an audience, the focus is on attracting and making it realistic for more sailors on the bow, mast, sewer, etc. who are good enough to aspire to actually sail in the America’s Cup.

• Return the America’s Cup to the progression of match racing events in the sport. From youth events to World Match Racing Tour events, it is the intent of the Defender and Challenger of Record for the America’s Cup to be that final and greatest rung of the ladder.

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

Oh well, I was hoping this was true then I looked at the post date. It doesn't say anything about Rum rations though

From Scuttlebutt. https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2021/04/01/americas-cup-real-boats-more-sailors/

America’s Cup: Real Boats, More Sailors

Published on April 1st, 2021

 

America’s Cup defender Emirates Team New Zealand and their club, Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron, alongside the Challenger of Record for the 37th America’s Cup (AC37), the Royal Yacht Squadron Racing (GBR) represented by INEOS TEAM UK, have agreed to terms for the next match in 2024.

“The Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron is pleased to present a format, alongside our British colleagues, which will be welcomed by sailing enthusiasts worldwide,” said Aaron Young, RNZYS Commodore.

Bertie Bicket, Chairman of Royal Yacht Squadron Racing, added, “This direction reconnects the America’s Cup with its history, and ensures that older guys like INEOS TEAM UK Skipper and Team Principal Sir Ben Ainslie can remain onboard for successive events.”

Recognizing how the America’s Cup had been hijacked since 2007 by pro sailors that like going fast, and television network executives chasing the Red Bull fan, terms of the Protocol will include the following:

Scuttlebutt-Banner-Ad-TC.png

• Use boats that can showcase the many skills required by athletes in this complex sport to race a modern, planing monohull, including sailors serving on the bow or mast, as grinders, tailers, helm, tactician, and/or strategist and navigator.
• Maintain the “Majesty” of America’s Cup yachts while maintaining a connection with—and passing on technological advances to—boats used by almost all of the rest of the sport
• Limit costs to attract numerous challengers and defense candidates worldwide.
• Make sailing in the Cup a realistic goal for the very best of young sailors and match racers everywhere, whether or not they are, or intend to become professional sailors.
• End, the “circular” reasoning: “Why is a Cup campaign so expensive?” Because of the technology.” “Why do you need such exotic technology?” “To attract commercial sponsors.” “Why do you need that level of commercial sponsorship?” “Because a Cup campaign is really expensive!”
• Appeal to the type of billionaires that would prefer to race more J-Class boats alongside the 2017 edition in Bermuda than competing teams for the Cup.

“I’m thrilled with this announcement,” shared Terry Hutchinson, Skipper & Executive Director of American Magic. “I most certainly was to be forced off the boat for the next edition, and now I can stay onboard and show I’m more than just a grey-haired grinder.”

Here are the key elements for the 37th America’s Cup:

The Boats
75-80 foot planing monohulls built to a “box” rule (like that used for TP52s), fractional rigs with asymmetrical spinnakers, canting keels whose maximum cant must result in the bulb remaining underwater. The boats will have a useful life after each campaign.

Nationality Rule
A “sliding” nationality rule whereby countries with significant America’s Cup and “Maxi Boat” experience will be required to have 100% of the crew as citizens or permanent residents, the latter with at least five years of such status; other countries with less such experience would have a somewhat lesser percentage requirement.

Campaign Limit
Fifteen months from the splash of the first boat of a campaign until the first day of the Cup Match. No “World Series” matches without assurance of a net $0 additional cost to campaigns.

Home Waters
Challenger Series and Cup Match must be held in the home waters of the defending Club or where it holds its annual regatta.

A Mutually Agreed Upon Salary Limit
Reduce campaign costs and encourage new challengers by limiting the total amount paid for salaries of team members and administrators. This is routinely done and enforced in professional sports. Necessarily, financial information will be required from challenger and defender candidates

Rationale for the Plan
• While foiling boats are exciting, that part of the sport will undoubtedly continue to grow but as far as “passing down” technology, there is little that would be useful for boats used by the vast majority of sailors worldwide as was the case when the Cup was sailed in non-foiling monohulls.

• In fact, match racing is only exciting when the boats are engaged with—and in close proximity to—each other. A fleet race with the current boats would likely be more “exciting”, but would be either pretty dangerous and/or rules adopted which keep them way from each other which sort of defeats the purpose—and in any event, the America’s Cup is and should be a match race.

• Embrace the proven excitement of pre-starts with two maxi boats just a few feet from each other. Recognize the excitement of 12-15 person crew maneuvering in tactically close race – spinnaker hoists and douses, gybe sets,etc.

• Accept that sailing will never be a “mass market” sport. Given that, the theme is no longer to let the “tail wag the dog” and change the rules, technology, crew requirements, race course sizes, etc. to somehow make it so.

• Rather than trying to attract great numbers of non-sailor spectators to an audience, the focus is on attracting and making it realistic for more sailors on the bow, mast, sewer, etc. who are good enough to aspire to actually sail in the America’s Cup.

• Return the America’s Cup to the progression of match racing events in the sport. From youth events to World Match Racing Tour events, it is the intent of the Defender and Challenger of Record for the America’s Cup to be that final and greatest rung of the ladder.

I've never read a satirical article that I agreed with so much.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sisu3360 said:

I've never read a satirical article that I agreed with so much.

Yep. Ironically it's the best vision I've seen in over a decade.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Ah ah ah, read the title again :)

 

Capture.PNG

Gee I wonder why Larry doesn’t hold an event in NZ he could put as many E in front as he likes

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/28/2021 at 5:51 PM, NeedAClew said:

We're going to see who (all) helm the Ineos SGP cat next month and through that season. It's a cat foiler, not a mono foiler though. 

BA is a very good sailor and has the tools to win Sail GP.  But that ain't the Cup.  SailGP boats are fixed one design where as the Cup is 90% speed development camp and 10% racing.  Ben's sailing resume is totally amazing, but it isn't even strong in speed development of high-preformance/foiling boats. The last 2 cycles he has been miles behind the GA/PB/BT - not even close.  That's part of his resume too.

So how's a guy who is taking on the CEO role, CoR role, syndicate celebrity and driver going to find the time to catch-up to the Kiwi speed squad (who remain 100% focused)... and then pass them?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, cbulger said:

BA is a very good sailor and has the tools to win Sail GP.  But that ain't the Cup.  SailGP boats are fixed one design where as the Cup is 90% speed development camp and 10% racing.  Ben's sailing resume is totally amazing, but it isn't even strong in speed development of high-preformance/foiling boats. The last 2 cycles he has been miles behind the GA/PB/BT - not even close.  That's part of his resume too.

So how's a guy who is taking on the CEO role, CoR role, syndicate celebrity and driver going to find the time to catch-up to the Kiwi speed squad (who remain 100% focused)... and then pass them?

This is why many say that BA should step away from the wheel when it comes to the America's Cup and take a role in the Management. Let Leigh McMillan or Giles Scott drive the Boat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Be pretty funny if he wins the first SGP event (again) by a landslide. No saying he will, just that it'll be a rotflmao moment for some, myself included, even tho I like AUS. 

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

Be pretty funny if he wins the first SGP event (again) by a landslide. No saying he will, just that it'll be a rotflmao moment for some, myself included, even tho I like AUS. 

Ben's skill as a sailor is by no means the problem. The problem is how INEOS as a team functions.

Nobody knows for sure the root cause, but it could be that his role is too big, his ego is too big, or something else.

Whatever it is, the buck does however stop with him since he is the top dog.

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

Ben's skill as a sailor is by no means the problem. The problem is how INEOS as a team functions.

Nobody knows for sure the root cause, but it could be that his role is too big, his ego is too big, or something else.

Whatever it is, the buck does however stop with him since he is the top dog.

Ben has 3 Roles all at once: Team Principal, Skipper & Helmsman. That is the problem here. No way can INEOS win the AC until they shake up their Management. I said this over and over again because it has become evident over the last two AC Cycles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the AC is that it is normally so out there, that the bat shit crazy April fools posts I'm seeing everywhere for it, all sound plausible!

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it true that Ineos had spent more than twice or even three time the budget of ETNZ and LR? And American megic was not far behind in this regard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/1/2021 at 12:43 PM, Mambo Kings said:

If you work and live in Italy and you are a US citizen (passport), you will be required to pay Italian taxes (I think) and file US tax return (I know).

The Italian taxes can be offset vs most of your US tax.   US is rather unique in this regard so US workers going to low tax regimes as ex pats (eg middle East) dont benefit. They pay full US tax on income.

US is unique, as far as I know, in requiring citizens to do this for their life time, but a lot of countries have the tax residency concept, where you are required to file a tax return in that country if you live there or have other controlling interests for a period of months in a year.

 

On 4/1/2021 at 12:51 PM, strider470 said:

In Italy taxes are more expensive then in the US, what would happen in this case?

 

On 4/1/2021 at 3:29 PM, Mambo Kings said:

His italian income will be taxed at italian rates and he will get tax credit. But his non-Italian income gets taxed at US rates.  They will probably pay him overseas.....eg NZ or Bermuda

Its more complicated that that, countries can and do tax foreign income, so any country where tax is due will tax you, and other countries will, if they have a dual taxation treaty (US and Europe do), give you a credit for that tax due in the non resident countries. So you will always pay the most expensive tax rate in that scenario.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, strider470 said:

Is it true that Ineos had spent more than twice or even three time the budget of ETNZ and LR? And American megic was not far behind in this regard.

INEOS spent 110 British £ which equals about 150 Million US$!

American Magic spent about 130 Million US$!

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

INEOS spent 110 British £ which equals about 150 Million US$!

American Magic spent about 130 Million US$!

 

I think it is fine to speculate approximately how much each team spent but we have no idea with enough exactitude to guess whether AM spent more or less than Ineos. Ineos overall sailing budget is surely higher than AM because they are participating in several events outside just the AC in order to create the Ineos team. Ineos has a better funded, better managed feel to it but again that is just speculation on my part.

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

BA is a very good sailor and has the tools to win Sail GP.  But that ain't the Cup.  SailGP boats are fixed one design where as the Cup is 90% speed development camp and 10% racing.  Ben's sailing resume is totally amazing, but it isn't even strong in speed development of high-preformance/foiling boats. The last 2 cycles he has been miles behind the GA/PB/BT - not even close.  That's part of his resume too.

So how's a guy who is taking on the CEO role, CoR role, syndicate celebrity and driver going to find the time to catch-up to the Kiwi speed squad (who remain 100% focused)... and then pass them?

At the risk of repetition. Ben was not CEO. Grant Simmer was CEO of Ineos Team UK . https://www.ineosteamuk.com/en/articles/78_Meet-the-team-Grant-Simmer.html 

Ben's principal role is driver. He also had the passion and drive to assemble the funding and attract the best sailing talent. I agree, we do not know if he did a good job as principal and how the partnership with GR worked.  It is up to Jim Ratcliffe to assess that from close quarters. My 2 cents is that I would ask Ben to focus on sailing and putting together the best sailing team and find a stronger manager to handle everything else.

  Ben has the foiling chops to win the AC if Jim Ratcliffe and he can select the right CEO and head designer to develop the right boat.   His record in Auckland was remarkable. He clearly had a slower boat and yet with a combination of boat adjustments and amazing sailing was able to win every race in the round robin.

Im not sure that even PB could have done as well at the sailing.  Clearly Ineos could do a better job at design.

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

This is why many say that BA should step away from the wheel when it comes to the America's Cup and take a role in the Management. Let Leigh McMillan or Giles Scott drive the Boat.

I would go the other way and BA should step away from management and focus on the sailing.

Giles , Leigh  and Dylan Fletcher  are all extremely talented sailors.  But any CEO is going to be ruthlessly meritocratic about this and be data driven.  The simple fact is that Ben is the better driver than all three of these other options. I would throw Paul Goodison into the mix as well (3x International moth world champion ..).   Ben has outperformed these sailors directly in events when he has competed against them and indirectly by outperforming in peer events.  Dylan could not do as well in the GP50 as Ben....and yes it is important because it is a measure of foiling large boats.  Giles won a gold in the Olympics ...incredible achievement.....but the reality is that when Ben was sailing Finns, Giles was the second best Finn sailor in the world. Leigh has lined up many times alongside Ben , and Ben has an edge.  Whatever it is that gives Ben that edge, they wont be able to replicate it. He is still at the peak of his game ......focus him on the sailing and giving feedback to the design team.

My personal choice for CEO would be Ian Percy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Mambo Kings said:

At the risk of repetition. Ben was not CEO. Grant Simmer was CEO of Ineos Team UK . https://www.ineosteamuk.com/en/articles/78_Meet-the-team-Grant-Simmer.html 

Ben's principal role is driver. He also had the passion and drive to assemble the funding and attract the best sailing talent. I agree, we do not know if he did a good job as principal and how the partnership with GR worked.  It is up to Jim Ratcliffe to assess that from close quarters. My 2 cents is that I would ask Ben to focus on sailing and putting together the best sailing team and find a stronger manager to handle everything else.

  Ben has the foiling chops to win the AC if Jim Ratcliffe and he can select the right CEO and head designer to develop the right boat.   His record in Auckland was remarkable. He clearly had a slower boat and yet with a combination of boat adjustments and amazing sailing was able to win every race in the round robin.

Im not sure that even PB could have done as well at the sailing.  Clearly Ineos could do a better job at design.

They have to jettison Grant Simmer. Simmer is a born LOSER. He's the reason they performed so bad!

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, strider470 said:

Is it true that Ineos had spent more than twice or even three time the budget of ETNZ and LR? And American megic was not far behind in this regard.

I doubt it was three times as much as any of them.

I reckon twice and much as ETNZ and 1.5 times as much as the others.

ETNZ will have spent less because they didn't have the expense of operating on foreign shores plus I suspect generally they are more frugal through necessity.

With regards to AM, I reckon their boat was possibly better than LR but I doubt they could have made the cup itself because Hutch and Deano made stupid tactical decisions with an unfortunate level of regularity.

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

I doubt it was three times as much as any of them.

I reckon twice and much as ETNZ and 1.5 times as much as the others.

ETNZ will have spent less because they didn't have the expense of operating on foreign shores plus I suspect generally they are more frugal through necessity.

With regards to AM, I reckon their boat was possibly better than LR but I doubt they could have made the cup itself because Hutch and Deano made stupid tactical decisions with an unfortunate level of regularity.

The impression I had of AM was of a fast boat in strong winds, but barely under control, with rudder feedback that would have scared any helmsman. Every challenger was possibly better than Luna Rossa but in the end, was effectively much worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, strider470 said:

The impression I had of AM was of a fast boat in strong winds, but barely under control, with rudder feedback that would have scared any helmsman. Every challenger was possibly better than Luna Rossa but in the end, was effectively much worse.

Fair enough.

My feeling is that Bruni and Jimmy would have gotten close to ETNZ with the AM boat.

Certainly the boat would have done a LOT better with them than Hutch and Deano.

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

Fair enough.

My feeling is that Bruni and Jimmy would have gotten close to ETNZ with the AM boat.

Certainly the boat would have done a LOT better with them than Hutch and Deano.

I think that with the light wind we had in the Match, it would have been a 7-0 with AM instead of LR.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, strider470 said:

The impression I had of AM was of a fast boat in strong winds, but barely under control, with rudder feedback that would have scared any helmsman. Every challenger was possibly better than Luna Rossa but in the end, was effectively much worse.

I do remember Dean Barker gripping that shuddering wheel with both hands.....like he was holding onto a bull rope at a rodeo

 

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

They have to jettison Grant Simmer. Simmer is a born LOSER. He's the reason they performed so bad!

Except .....

He played an important role in winning the cup in 1983, 2003, 2007, 2013........

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

Is it true that Ineos had spent more than twice or even three time the budget of ETNZ and LR? And American megic was not far behind in this regard.

No.

jim has several times in print stated both before and after AC36 that meeting ben and  agreeing sponsorship  cost him 110 mil.

 

it was only Max having a winge in the media during the round robins that the 200mil figure came out 

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

They have to jettison Grant Simmer. Simmer is a born LOSER. He's the reason they performed so bad!

Born a ‘loser’ ( with a fuck load of AC winners medals in storage) or born as you... 

no one chooses you. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mambo Kings said:

Except .....

He played an important role in winning the cup in 1983, 2003, 2007, 2013........

I'll give you 1983, 2003 and 2007!

However Simmer was shitting pants in 2013. The Oracle Team USA Defence was going a long way downstream until Russell, Larry & Jimmy decided to put matters in their own hands. Simmer was basically degraded after OTUSA got down 0-6.

It was Jimmys & Russells Decision to jettison Kostecki and put Ainslie in charge as Tactician not Simmers.

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

I'll give you 1983, 2003 and 2007!

However Simmer was shitting pants in 2013. The Oracle Team USA Defence was going a long way downstream until Russell, Larry & Jimmy decided to put matters in their own hands. Simmer was basically degraded after OTUSA got down 0-6.

It was Jimmys & Russells Decision to jettison Kostecki and put Ainslie in charge as Tactician not Simmers.

Except you forget that Simmer got Orifice to the point where they had the better boat.

If they had a dog, then it wouldn't matter who they'd brought on board.

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

Except you forget that Simmer got Orifice to the point where they had the better boat.

If they had a dog, then it wouldn't matter who they'd brought on board.

I am just not very found of Grant Simmer. I think he is bad!

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dg_sailingfan said:

I am just not very found of Grant Simmer. I think he is bad!

So you can't be objective about his talents?

Even I think Coutts is the best skipper in cup history despite thinking he's a total cunt.

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

So you can't be objective about his talents?

Even I think Coutts is the best skipper in cup history despite thinking he's a total cunt.

Simmer didn't get Orifice to a faster Boat in 2013. You are wrong there big time. Slingsby actually was the one who said "If we get our boat up on the foils upwind it would be a Game Changer". Has nothing to do with that Australian Grandpa Simmer.

Simmer is too old and weak to be in this Cup Game!

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, dg_sailingfan said:

Simmer didn't get Orifice to a faster Boat in 2013. You are wrong there big time. Slingsby actually was the one who said "If we get our boat up on the foils upwind it would be a Game Changer". Has nothing to do with that Australian Grandpa Simmer.

Simmer is too old and weak to be in this Cup Game!

So as a leader in 2013 he did not contribute to the winning of the cup but as a leader in 2021 he is largely responsible for the failure?

Sure, seems legit. LOL!

There is nothing like objective rational thought. And THAT is nothing like objective rational thought.

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

So as a leader in 2013 he did not contribute to the winning of the cup but as a leader in 2021 he is largely responsible for the failure?

Sure, seems legit. LOL!

There is nothing like objective rational thought. And THAT is nothing like objective rational thought.

I am not going to let you off the hock you 'Armchair Expert'.:P

Give me something specifically where Simmer contributed to OTUSA's Defence in 2013 because he didn't. It was Slingsby who said get that Boat on the Foils upwind.

In fact, you could argue that Simmer, once he was completely in charge of Oracles Defence in 2017, he failed miserably and the same thing happened with ITUK this time.

Why Sir Ben Ainslie has such a "Kumbaya Relationship" with Simmer is beyond my belief.

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

I am not going to let you off the hock you 'Armchair Expert'.:P

Give me something specifically where Simmer contributed to OTUSA's Defence in 2013 because he didn't. It was Slingsby who said get that Boat on the Foils upwind.

In fact, you could argue that Simmer, once he was completely in charge of Oracles Defence in 2017, he failed miserably and the same thing happened with ITUK this time.

Why Sir Ben Ainslie has such a "Kumbaya Relationship" with Simmer is beyond my belief.

Can you point to the bit in the program where slingsby said please design and build the boat like this so in 8 months time when we are getting smashed I can come up with the miracle idea... 

if the boat wasn’t capable of it Slingers couldn’t have come up with the master plan you think he was responsible for.

 

that inherent capability was the responsibility of the designers and the people in charge (simmer)

 

I could say a topper needs to sail faster to get on the foils  upwind but unless it’s been designed to do it and the platform is capable it’s all bullshit.

just like your analysis. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We dont know the precise details of how the come back worked in 2013.

We can objectively observe the following:

  • Oracle knew that NZ was foiling well before the AC.  Its not like Spitbull or Couuts suddenly said, "Oh we've got to start foiling"  
  • The surprise to Oracle (and the other challengers) was that New Zealand were partial foiling upwind. Slingsby was the first to alert Coutts that this was going to be a problem. But that was prior to the start of the Final series.
  • The boat's performance and tactical decisions improved when Ben replaced John.  Jimmy and Russell have described that as a decision they made.  But Oracle still lost 2 races.
  • It was coming back from a break that Oracle suddenly was sailing wider tacking angles, trading off height for more seed. It worked....they were semi -foiling much better. Ben was calling great angles and Spitbull was sailing much faster and the engineers had tweaked the boat.
  • We can only conclude that Coutts, Slingsby , Spitbull and the design engineers worked as a team to make the turnaround possible.   Was Grant part of the winning formula that stimulated the meetings and exchange of ideas encouraged the change to the sailing stayle and resulting engineering changes? and motivated the engineers to work all night executing the ideas?  Who knows?  But Ben came away from the experience as a ringside participant observing that Grant made a difference because Ben wanted to hire him for BAR.  Russell knows exactly who made positive contributions and Russell fought to keep Grant.  So without knowing exactly what Grant did....I am guessing he made a positive contribution.
  • Morale was an enormous part of the turn around. A large part of that was certainly Spitbull.  We dont know who also contributed back at team base .

It was one of the great turn arounds in sport. Coutts and Spitbull undoubtedly played key roles. Grant was there in a leadership role and Oracle were sufficiently impressed that they wanted to keep him> Ben was sufficiently impressed that he wanted to poach him.  I think it is wrong to say that Grant was the single major force behind the 2013 cup success but I also think it is probably wrong to say he did not contribute to the win.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Mambo Kings said:

We dont know the precise details of how the come back worked in 2013.

We can objectively observe the following:

  • Oracle knew that NZ was foiling well before the AC.  Its not like Spitbull or Couuts suddenly said, "Oh we've got to start foiling"  
  • The surprise to Oracle (and the other challengers) was that New Zealand were partial foiling upwind. Slingsby was the first to alert Coutts that this was going to be a problem. But that was prior to the start of the Final series.
  • The boat's performance and tactical decisions improved when Ben replaced John.  Jimmy and Russell have described that as a decision they made.  But Oracle still lost 2 races.
  • It was coming back from a break that Oracle suddenly was sailing wider tacking angles, trading off height for more seed. It worked....they were semi -foiling much better. Ben was calling great angles and Spitbull was sailing much faster and the engineers had tweaked the boat.
  • We can only conclude that Coutts, Slingsby , Spitbull and the design engineers worked as a team to make the turnaround possible.   Was Grant part of the winning formula that stimulated the meetings and exchange of ideas encouraged the change to the sailing stayle and resulting engineering changes? and motivated the engineers to work all night executing the ideas?  Who knows?  But Ben came away from the experience as a ringside participant observing that Grant made a difference because Ben wanted to hire him for BAR.  Russell knows exactly who made positive contributions and Russell fought to keep Grant.  So without knowing exactly what Grant did....I am guessing he made a positive contribution.
  • Morale was an enormous part of the turn around. A large part of that was certainly Spitbull.  We dont know who also contributed back at team base .

It was one of the great turn arounds in sport. Coutts and Spitbull undoubtedly played key roles. Grant was there in a leadership role and Oracle were sufficiently impressed that they wanted to keep him> Ben was sufficiently impressed that he wanted to poach him.  I think it is wrong to say that Grant was the single major force behind the 2013 cup success but I also think it is probably wrong to say he did not contribute to the win.

Checking in to see if there is any news on AC37 and I see this.  I guess not. 

WetHog  :ph34r:

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

We dont know the precise details of how the come back worked in 2013.

We can objectively observe the following:

  • Oracle knew that NZ was foiling well before the AC.  Its not like Spitbull or Couuts suddenly said, "Oh we've got to start foiling"  
  • The surprise to Oracle (and the other challengers) was that New Zealand were partial foiling upwind. Slingsby was the first to alert Coutts that this was going to be a problem. But that was prior to the start of the Final series.
  • The boat's performance and tactical decisions improved when Ben replaced John.  Jimmy and Russell have described that as a decision they made.  But Oracle still lost 2 races.
  • It was coming back from a break that Oracle suddenly was sailing wider tacking angles, trading off height for more seed. It worked....they were semi -foiling much better. Ben was calling great angles and Spitbull was sailing much faster and the engineers had tweaked the boat.
  • We can only conclude that Coutts, Slingsby , Spitbull and the design engineers worked as a team to make the turnaround possible.   Was Grant part of the winning formula that stimulated the meetings and exchange of ideas encouraged the change to the sailing stayle and resulting engineering changes? and motivated the engineers to work all night executing the ideas?  Who knows?  But Ben came away from the experience as a ringside participant observing that Grant made a difference because Ben wanted to hire him for BAR.  Russell knows exactly who made positive contributions and Russell fought to keep Grant.  So without knowing exactly what Grant did....I am guessing he made a positive contribution.
  • Morale was an enormous part of the turn around. A large part of that was certainly Spitbull.  We dont know who also contributed back at team base .

It was one of the great turn arounds in sport. Coutts and Spitbull undoubtedly played key roles. Grant was there in a leadership role and Oracle were sufficiently impressed that they wanted to keep him> Ben was sufficiently impressed that he wanted to poach him.  I think it is wrong to say that Grant was the single major force behind the 2013 cup success but I also think it is probably wrong to say he did not contribute to the win.

Well,

We can argue back and forth here? I still maintain and stand by it that the INEOS TEAM UK Management is badly botched up. Grant Simmer isn't a good CEO. The Brits are not going to win the Cup anytime soon unless they shake up their Management.

A few reasons why I love Mercedes F1 so much. It's not about them keeping winning, that's just a nice effect, it's about how the Team is managed. I've followed them for the last 10 years or so and I was mightily impressed with Wolffs Predecessor Norbert Haugg and now Toto Wolff himself. More than once when Merc made a mistake or mishap with a tyre selection Wolff stood in front of the cameras and said "We made a mistake. We own it! It has nothing to do with Lewis!" That's what you have to do as CEO, protecting your Star Driver or in the ITUK case your best Sailor. Simmer didn't do that at all. Why did Ainslie have to attended all the Pressers, Max Sirena barely attended Pressers after the racing for example.

And there is something I do not like about Ben: Everytime he loses he blames somebody else. You have to take responsibility for your own mishaps & mistakes!

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

Well,

We can argue back and forth here? I still maintain and stand by it that the INEOS TEAM UK Management is badly botched up. Grant Simmer isn't a good CEO. The Brits are not going to win the Cup anytime soon unless they shake up their Management.

A few reasons why I love Mercedes F1 so much. It's not about them keeping winning, that's just a nice effect, it's about how the Team is managed. I've followed them for the last 10 years or so and I was mightily impressed with Wolffs Predecessor Norbert Haugg and now Toto Wolff himself. More than once when Merc made a mistake or mishap with a tyre selection Wolff stood in front of the cameras and said "We made a mistake. We own it! It has nothing to do with Lewis!" That's what you have to do as CEO, protecting your Star Driver or in the ITUK case your best Sailor. Simmer didn't do that at all. Why did Ainslie have to attended all the Pressers, Max Sirena barely attended Pressers after the racing for example.

And there is something I do not like about Ben: Everytime he loses he blames somebody else. You have to take responsibility for your own mishaps & mistakes!

Apparently you do not know Norbert Haug (one "g").

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

Well,

We can argue back and forth here? I still maintain and stand by it that the INEOS TEAM UK Management is badly botched up. Grant Simmer isn't a good CEO. The Brits are not going to win the Cup anytime soon unless they shake up their Management.

A few reasons why I love Mercedes F1 so much. It's not about them keeping winning, that's just a nice effect, it's about how the Team is managed. I've followed them for the last 10 years or so and I was mightily impressed with Wolffs Predecessor Norbert Haugg and now Toto Wolff himself. More than once when Merc made a mistake or mishap with a tyre selection Wolff stood in front of the cameras and said "We made a mistake. We own it! It has nothing to do with Lewis!" That's what you have to do as CEO, protecting your Star Driver or in the ITUK case your best Sailor. Simmer didn't do that at all. Why did Ainslie have to attended all the Pressers, Max Sirena barely attended Pressers after the racing for example.

And there is something I do not like about Ben: Everytime he loses he blames somebody else. You have to take responsibility for your own mishaps & mistakes!

So by your own logic Toto is a poor manager as it should be Lewis owning his mistakes, not Toto covering him. 

it’s also a shit example from you as Lewis hasn’t made an error in a GP fir nearly three years and any operational examples have been owned by the individual strategist (not Toto) 
 

 

 

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

So by your own logic Toto is a poor manager as it should be Lewis owning his mistakes, not Toto covering him. 

it’s also a shit example from you as Lewis hasn’t made an error in a GP fir nearly three years and any operational examples have been owned by the individual strategist (not Toto) 
 

 

 

Are you guys still wasting time with this moron??;)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mambo Kings said:

We dont know the precise details of how the come back worked in 2013.

We can objectively observe the following:

  • Oracle knew that NZ was foiling well before the AC.  Its not like Spitbull or Couuts suddenly said, "Oh we've got to start foiling"  
  • The surprise to Oracle (and the other challengers) was that New Zealand were partial foiling upwind. Slingsby was the first to alert Coutts that this was going to be a problem. But that was prior to the start of the Final series.
  • The boat's performance and tactical decisions improved when Ben replaced John.  Jimmy and Russell have described that as a decision they made.  But Oracle still lost 2 races.
  • It was coming back from a break that Oracle suddenly was sailing wider tacking angles, trading off height for more seed. It worked....they were semi -foiling much better. Ben was calling great angles and Spitbull was sailing much faster and the engineers had tweaked the boat.
  • We can only conclude that Coutts, Slingsby , Spitbull and the design engineers worked as a team to make the turnaround possible.   Was Grant part of the winning formula that stimulated the meetings and exchange of ideas encouraged the change to the sailing stayle and resulting engineering changes? and motivated the engineers to work all night executing the ideas?  Who knows?  But Ben came away from the experience as a ringside participant observing that Grant made a difference because Ben wanted to hire him for BAR.  Russell knows exactly who made positive contributions and Russell fought to keep Grant.  So without knowing exactly what Grant did....I am guessing he made a positive contribution.
  • Morale was an enormous part of the turn around. A large part of that was certainly Spitbull.  We dont know who also contributed back at team base .

It was one of the great turn arounds in sport. Coutts and Spitbull undoubtedly played key roles. Grant was there in a leadership role and Oracle were sufficiently impressed that they wanted to keep him> Ben was sufficiently impressed that he wanted to poach him.  I think it is wrong to say that Grant was the single major force behind the 2013 cup success but I also think it is probably wrong to say he did not contribute to the win.

There is no doubt that Grant Simmer played his part, and Ben hiring him because he was impressed by what he saw also makes sense. I have no axe to grind with Grant Simmer at all. 
On the negative side Ineos B2 boat was most  probably the slowest of the B2 fleet. Their B1 boat was such a dog that it defied belief. Grant has to take some of the blame for both these boats. 
 

It’s fair to say Grant does deserve some criticism for such poor hardware

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

Well,

We can argue back and forth here? I still maintain and stand by it that the INEOS TEAM UK Management is badly botched up. Grant Simmer isn't a good CEO. The Brits are not going to win the Cup anytime soon unless they shake up their Management.

A few reasons why I love Mercedes F1 so much. It's not about them keeping winning, that's just a nice effect, it's about how the Team is managed. I've followed them for the last 10 years or so and I was mightily impressed with Wolffs Predecessor Norbert Haugg and now Toto Wolff himself. More than once when Merc made a mistake or mishap with a tyre selection Wolff stood in front of the cameras and said "We made a mistake. We own it! It has nothing to do with Lewis!" That's what you have to do as CEO, protecting your Star Driver or in the ITUK case your best Sailor. Simmer didn't do that at all. Why did Ainslie have to attended all the Pressers, Max Sirena barely attended Pressers after the racing for example.

And there is something I do not like about Ben: Everytime he loses he blames somebody else. You have to take responsibility for your own mishaps & mistakes!

Im not disagreeing with your thesis that Ineos needs to step up management.   I second those who think that Ian Percy might be a good choice.

So we are not really going back and forth. I am merely pointing out that there is some grey rather than black and white.  I doubt that Grant was terrible. He might even have been good. Based on his track record and how heavily recruited he was for the last 3 cups.....there must be a skill set that people who worked with him observed.

However, "good" or even "very good" does not win the AC. It takes "exceptional" .  Ineos has some "exceptional" sailors. I would argue that ERNZ and Ineos had the strongest sailing talent on the boats...but ETNX also had exceptional management and design leadership.  So...where we agree is that the Brits need to shake up management if they want to win.

The Americans and AM also have to shake up management if they want to win.....but I think they also have a harder task because they need to find the sailing talent as well.

Max did a superb job managing the Italian effort.

I think Max did pressers at least as much as Grant D.  Unfortunately I dont think the press want quotes from management and the guys doing the heavy lifting in the background, they want to see the helms at the presser. Which is why it was Jimmy, Cecco, Peter, Ben and Dean at the pressers.   All the more reason to have great management pressing the objectives forward while the rock stars are talking to the press.

 

Toto Wolff is a superb manager who has placed his team so that it exploits both good decisions and good luck.

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

So by your own logic Toto is a poor manager as it should be Lewis owning his mistakes, not Toto covering him. 

it’s also a shit example from you as Lewis hasn’t made an error in a GP fir nearly three years and any operational examples have been owned by the individual strategist (not Toto) 
 

 

 

Lewsi does not make many mistakes.  He also congratulates the team on every win. 

 

Sliding off the pit lane in the 2007 Chinese grand prix still hurts Lewis to this day.   He would have been an 8 time world champion if he had managed to turn the corner on the pit lane. He merely needed to collect 1 or 2 points from the penultimate grand prix.

Then to compound it by a poor start in Brazil and finishing 7th from 2nd place in the grid .   Losing the world championship by 1 point after being 12 points in the lead going into China....in an age where 1st only got 10 points. It hurts and he was analytically self critical and has not made such a series of mistakes ever again and still talks about how much we learn from losing.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ideas for the next cup

A universal launch day....every syndicate has to launch their boat one year before the cup. Stops teams gaining a design advantage such as ETNZ delaying their launch and copying from other boats. ETNZ can always delay launching because their racing starts months later than anyone else

Existing syndicates must put their B2 boats on the market as soon as they start building their second boat. If their are competing offers for a boat the B2 owner can sell to who ever they want as long as the new syndicate is not related to the B2 boat owner
 

No nationality rule for B1 and B2 boats. Any new syndicate from any country can buy a B2 boat and modify it to race. However such syndicates can not build a B3 boat. Creates a low cost entry point for syndicates wanting to start in the AC

New syndicates with Old B2 boats can modify 50% of deck and 25% of hull

Masts should be a one design component that is bought from southern spars at a set price. Masts are allocated from random allocation observed by all parties.

 

Rudder length increased by six inches and larger minimum foils size on the rudder. A lot of crashes caused by rudder foils surfacing

 

Just my thoughts ...feel free to discuss or rubbish 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, mako23 said:

Stops teams gaining a design advantage such as ETNZ delaying their launch and copying from other boats.

Didn't see much of anything on Te Rehutai that was copied from the other competing syndicates.

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

Didn't see much of anything on Te Rehutai that was copied from the other competing syndicates.

Yes fair point, the reveal day would be a good media exercise and puts everyone on the same foot.  Even if ETNZ doesn’t copy they can still gain from extra design time 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mako23 said:

Yes fair point, the reveal day would be a good media exercise and puts everyone on the same foot.  Even if ETNZ doesn’t copy they can still gain from extra design time 

The design and build time lines were exceedingly tight for the last cycle most probably the Communist virus contributed to that from memory the Frackers B2 design was literally signed off only a matter of weeks after their B1 was launched.

Maybe the one boat rule change will save syndicates a shed load of loot which they can now divert towards foils rigs and sails.

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Priscilla said:

The design and build time lines were exceedingly tight for the last cycle most probably the Communist virus contributed to that from memory the Frackers B2 design was literally signed off only a matter of weeks after their B1 was launched.

Maybe the one boat rule change will save syndicates a shed load of loot which they can now divert towards foils rigs and sails.

AC36 was the 1st Cup Cycle with the AC75 Class. If these Boats stay for a couple of more Cycles things will in my mind unquestionable get tighter. That's always been the case when a Boat Class stays and doesn't get swapped out after one Cup Cycle. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Priscilla said:

The design and build time lines were exceedingly tight for the last cycle most probably the Communist virus contributed to that from memory the Frackers B2 design was literally signed off only a matter of weeks after their B1 was launched.

Maybe the one boat rule change will save syndicates a shed load of loot which they can now divert towards foils rigs and sails.

Having to design two boats in one cup cycle certainly made things tough in regards to time.  8 boats have now been built and we now have an idea of what works and what doesn’t in regards to hull shape.  It should be a no brainer to design a hull that is not bad. Certainly more speed is to be gained in sail and foil design than hull shape.  So it shouldn’t be hard for syndicates to design a new hull in short time that will not be a dog.  I imagine LR and ETNZ hulls will be used as templates for any new boat. 
 

What ETNZ need to do is to reduce costs as much as possible for several reasons.

More syndicates means more viewers and more reason why a corporate sponsor might sponsor ETNZ

ETNZ is likely to have a smaller budget, so dropping costs help them

Stopping the cup being a pissing contest between billionaires

Lots of good races for everyone to enjoy

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

AC36 was the 1st Cup Cycle with the AC75 Class. If these Boats stay for a couple of more Cycles things will in my mind unquestionable get tighter. That's always been the case when a Boat Class stays and doesn't get swapped out after one Cup Cycle. 

This has the advantage of making it a sailors race, which I think has been missing in the two previous cups

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mako23 said:

This has the advantage of making it a sailors race, which I think has been missing in the two previous cups

And it will be! The Advantage LR had as CoR this time co-designing the AC75 Class may not be there or it will be at least greatly diminished for AC37 and beyond if these Boats stay.

AC32 in VLC with the IACC Version 5 Boats was pretty exciting!

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

Stopping the cup being a pissing contest between billionaires

No billionaires would mean a very poor turnout very poor indeed.

Last cycle four entrants three teams directly funded by billionaires and TNZ has one if not two or three as consultants or board members.

 

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

No billionaires would mean a very poor turnout very poor indeed.

Last cycle four entrants three teams directly funded by billionaires and TNZ has one if not two or three as consultants or board members.

 

Having Billionaires is fine,  but the cup shouldn’t be who spends the most money wins. You should be able to have a competitive campaign for 60 million USD. Limiting the campaign to one boat and two masts would be a great help. Also limiting the number of sails will also help reduce costs. 
The biggest cost is staff and limiting that number will also help 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mako23 said:

Ideas for the next cup

... 

No nationality rule for B1 and B2 boats. Any new syndicate from any country can buy a B2 boat and modify it to race. However such syndicates can not build a B3 boat. Creates a low cost entry point for syndicates wanting to start in the AC

New syndicates with Old B2 boats must can modify 50% of deck and 25% of hull

... 

There needs to be a certain amount of CiC, as it's mandated by the DoG. But I think it could be agreed that this requirement is met by the bold part above (bold changes mine). 

Link to post
Share on other sites