Jump to content

Recommended Posts

No. Races that you can mostly fast forward through until the marks (or wish you could) because nothing to see other than a boat a few hundred meters ahead of the other. 

You can see an onboard camera of helmets, but nothing very interesting to see as they mostly grind away.  

Looks like SailGP but with better boats and sailing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that the one meaningful thread at the moment, bombed. But think about it: if GD wants money - and more than last time - from the NZ Government, he has to deliver the six challenging teams that he previously carpetbagged. And no, Covid had nothing to do with the turnout

Ditto for the Arabs who would have to shell out an even larger amount but who, contrary to popular opinion, are no fools.

Now, with a strict interpretation of the new Prot and exceptions to the 100% crew nationality requirement applied only to the likes of Team North Korea [but what about France, btw?] how many Challengers will there be in addition to the CoR and LRPP? That’s why the requirement is simply unenforceable

Also, note his is just the first step in order to get a decent turnout. The second is an early declaration of how much simpler/cheaper AC75V2.0 will be. And this cannot wait until the mooted (by Jack Griffin ) design symposium to be held during the 2022 event, at least the guidelines MUST be stated asap

 

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

A part of not enough teams is surely not enough coverage/exposure. 
I’m in WA, from the launch of the design to the final series it did not make free to air telly. Not the news, current affairs or sport. Nothing. 
Who would sponsor that ?

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

A part of not enough teams is surely not enough coverage/exposure. 
I’m in WA, from the launch of the design to the final series it did not make free to air telly. Not the news, current affairs or sport. Nothing. 
Who would sponsor that ?

Outside of  the SAAC the reality is that its not that big at all. When I say The World Cup, everyone understands that I mean Football (Soccer to our US friends) and that coverage/media exposure is total. The rich mens pissing match has hardcore followers but outside of the bubbles, not much. If NZ lost the cup, no one would give a rats until they started winning in the challenger series, mainly because we are so parochial and have to believe we are the best at everything, that and the boofhead rugby culture that get transferred to the cup event.

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

Outside of  the SAAC the reality is that its not that big at all. When I say The World Cup, everyone understands that I mean Football (Soccer to our US friends) and that coverage/media exposure is total. The rich mens pissing match has hardcore followers but outside of the bubbles, not much. If NZ lost the cup, no one would give a rats until they started winning in the challenger series, mainly because we are so parochial and have to believe we are the best at everything, that and the boofhead rugby culture that get transferred to the cup event.

Hush you heathen. Such sacrilege. Where are my pitchforks and torches.

This is the most amazing, well watched sport in the universe.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Growing numbers will be difficult. In the old days - design, build practice race.

Now design, test, redesign, retest. Get the high powered computers fired up and run the simulators. Sit and see how boat works, redesign, re test simulation.

Finally build boat, loaded with sensors so your AI can give you lessons on where you went wrong.

Not the sort of game for the light hearted. Without all the high level tech help a new team would be an embarrassment. Losing by 20 minutes is not a good look for anyone.

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

Interesting that the one meaningful thread at the moment, bombed. But think about it: if GD wants money - and more than last time - from the NZ Government, he has to deliver the six challenging teams that he previously carpetbagged. And no, Covid had nothing to do with the turnout

Ditto for the Arabs who would have to shell out an even larger amount but who, contrary to popular opinion, are no fools.

Now, with a strict interpretation of the new Prot and exceptions to the 100% crew nationality requirement applied only to the likes of Team North Korea [but what about France, btw?] how many Challengers will there be in addition to the CoR and LRPP? That’s why the requirement is simply unenforceable

Also, note his is just the first step in order to get a decent turnout. The second is an early declaration of how much simpler/cheaper AC75V2.0 will be. And this cannot wait until the mooted (by Jack Griffin ) design symposium to be held during the 2022 event, at least the guidelines MUST be stated asap

 

WOW,

It is not fair from you to blame Grant Dalton for only having 3 Teams in Auckland this time.

LRPP should be blamed for that. They made it as hard as they could for further Teams to participate while Dalts was helping the DutchSail Team + S&S in every way to make it. Remember the late Entry Fee spat between ETNZ and LRPP!

This already has changed as ETNZ and INEOS already have stated that they will help new Teams to make the Start Line!

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

Considering what the choice of TV programmes was back then it is no wonder...

I think you would find about 80% of Kiwis eyeballs would have been on the cup this time.

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

I think you would find about 80% of Kiwis eyeballs would have been on the cup this time.

Do you remember the programmes available back then. Would have been a blessing to have something else. :lol:

Actually I watched this one in Hong Kong.

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

yeah, thats a marketing message

 

3 hours ago, Caecilian said:
3 hours ago, snaerk said:

It iz claymed that in 95, over 90% of NZ TV ordients wotched Am Cup Fynalz

yeah, thats a marketing message massage

FIFY

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2021 at 9:54 AM, Caecilian said:

Not enough teams

not  nearly enough course, same crew much much longer courses and run with what ya brung................ live it within your means in otherwords

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

WOW,

It is not fair from you to blame Grant Dalton for only having 3 Teams in Auckland this time.

LRPP should be blamed for that. They made it as hard as they could for further Teams to participate while Dalts was helping the DutchSail Team + S&S in every way to make it. Remember the late Entry Fee spat between ETNZ and LRPP!

This already has changed as ETNZ and INEOS already have stated that they will help new Teams to make the Start Line!

It is not the CoR's job to get teams to the series. Their job is to represent them once they are there. They have a responsibility and a duty to represent the teams entered, to keep the competition as fair for those already there, as they can.

It was GD's job to get teams to the event, BECAUSE HE TOLD THE NZ GOV HE WOULD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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

I think you would find about 80% of Kiwis eyeballs would have been on the cup this time.

actually no not that many. big danger being in the bubble- we are all in it. Meanwhile in the real world there are lots of people who dont give a flying fuck about the AC

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 36thLatitude said:

The bloody holders had to give everyone canting foil arm designs this time because noone would have had a clue how to design and build in time.

So you have an issue with a team having more time to think and develop a new concept than anyone else sharing development of that concept because they might not be an event without doing that? What is your issue?

I could have sworn I saw a YT where the original design failed in lab testing. I might be wrong though, I came into this cycle late due to a lack of interest after the last few cycles.

 

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

So you have an issue with a team having more time to think and develop a new concept than anyone else sharing development of that concept because they might not be an event without doing that? What is your issue?

I could have sworn I saw a YT where the original design failed in lab testing. I might be wrong though, I came into this cycle late due to a lack of interest after the last few cycles.

 

Yep

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, 36thLatitude said:
3 minutes ago, The Advocate said:

So you have an issue with a team having more time to think and develop a new concept than anyone else sharing development of that concept because they might not be an event without doing that? What is your issue?

I could have sworn I saw a YT where the original design failed in lab testing. I might be wrong though, I came into this cycle late due to a lack of interest after the last few cycles.

1 minute ago, 36thLatitude said:

Yep

Cool story bro, solid response.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, The Advocate said:

So you have an issue with a team having more time to think and develop a new concept than anyone else sharing development of that concept because they might not be an event without doing that? What is your issue?

I could have sworn I saw a YT where the original design failed in lab testing. I might be wrong though, I came into this cycle late due to a lack of interest after the last few cycles.

 

Surely the question is why chose a design that is so complicated that you need to share parts and knowledge when the claim was a yacht that would bring down costs and encourage new teams.

As for making things like arms and control one design helps NZ. One less area for a challenger to make a break through. Just another example of ETNZ's hubris during the last cycle that they are bringing into the next.

Do we get even more one design this time? You can only build one hull, so make them the same to cut costs?

A boat so complicated it was considered to difficult to design and build in 4 years and it was going to bring in new teams because of the low cost. Yeah, right.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ineos and AM were struggling to fill the specialised roles, cant see 3 or 4 new teams getting up to speed in only a few years unless the boats are made a lot simpler or the whole software/hydraulic/electronic package was supplied like Moto Marelli does for electronics in MotoGP

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gissie said:

Surely the question is why chose a design that is so complicated that you need to share parts and knowledge when the claim was a yacht that would bring down costs and encourage new teams.

As for making things like arms and control one design helps NZ. One less area for a challenger to make a break through. Just another example of ETNZ's hubris during the last cycle that they are bringing into the next.

Do we get even more one design this time? You can only build one hull, so make them the same to cut costs?

A boat so complicated it was considered to difficult to design and build in 4 years and it was going to bring in new teams because of the low cost. Yeah, right.

Agree with all this.

I commented on another thread that you could make the hulls OD and the costs wouldn't change.

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

Ineos and AM were struggling to fill the specialised roles, cant see 3 or 4 new teams getting up to speed in only a few years unless the boats are made a lot simpler or the whole software/hydraulic/electronic package was supplied like Moto Marelli does for electronics in MotoGP

3-4 new teams makes me think of the Castle.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Caecilian said:

Ineos and AM were struggling to fill the specialised roles, cant see 3 or 4 new teams getting up to speed in only a few years unless the boats are made a lot simpler or the whole software/hydraulic/electronic package was supplied like Moto Marelli does for electronics in MotoGP

Ineos had Goobs sat on the bench, which roles were they struggling to fill? 

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

Ineos had Goobs sat on the bench, which roles were they struggling to fill? 

That's one of the problems with the new PRT, monied teams taking people out of the game through the clause. People that need to have employment ongoing that the teams effectively fuck over.

I suspect @Caecilianwas referring to design roles.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Advocate said:

It is not the CoR's job to get teams to the series. Their job is to represent them once they are there. They have a responsibility and a duty to represent the teams entered, to keep the competition as fair for those already there, as they can.

It was GD's job to get teams to the event, BECAUSE HE TOLD THE NZ GOV HE WOULD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

5 hours ago, Gissie said:

Surely the question is why chose a design that is so complicated that you need to share parts and knowledge when the claim was a yacht that would bring down costs and encourage new teams.

......

A boat so complicated it was considered to difficult to design and build in 4 years and it was going to bring in new teams because of the low cost. Yeah, right.

 

Correct. Let’s not forget that - Guillaume Verdier being the latest to confirm - Bertelli wanted a souped-up IMOCA, but was tricked into the AC75 concept. LR’s out of the picture now, let’s see if INEOS goes along

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

Considering what the choice of TV programmes was back then it is no wonder...

Thats a great point. I was reading about the original Star Trek series. It was a flop and was cancelled after 3 seasons...  because it only had a 30% market share for its time slot. THIRTY PERCENT.   These days, a blockbuster show might get 5%.  But back then, there were literally 3 channels. If you didn't get 33% of the eyeballs you were sucking. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Who cares you only need TWO teams to have an America's Cup match.  That's how it has always been.

I care. Matches without a CSS are not entertaining and only once has a challenger ever won.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blitzkrieg9 said:

Thats a great point. I was reading about the original Star Trek series. It was a flop and was cancelled after 3 seasons...  because it only had a 30% market share for its time slot. THIRTY PERCENT.   These days, a blockbuster show might get 5%.  But back then, there were literally 3 channels. If you didn't get 33% of the eyeballs you were sucking. 

Great to watch and see what old school special effects were. :rolleyes:

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

WOW,

It is not fair from you to blame Grant Dalton for only having 3 Teams in Auckland this time.

LRPP should be blamed for that. They made it as hard as they could for further Teams to participate while Dalts was helping the DutchSail Team + S&S in every way to make it. Remember the late Entry Fee spat between ETNZ and LRPP!

This already has changed as ETNZ and INEOS already have stated that they will help new Teams to make the Start Line!

You are really a LR hater. Do you have a any badge?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

×
×
  • Create New...