No tears here, as long as the challengers know the rules up front it's not for met to complain on their behalf.Sounds like *you* need to do the crying then mate
I just think the restrictions are unnecessary and may throttle innovation. If two boat testing isn't worth it, there's no need to ban it. Teams will spend whatever funds they can talk sponsors into coughing up, and presumably will spend it where they think they'll get the best return. It seems illogical for a rule to limit physical but not virtual assets, and to prescribe a key aspect of a team's development methodology.
Just because teams are doing better now with simulation and one boat than they were with legacy two boat development methodologies doesn't mean there isn't a better two boat methodology (say with simulation and real-time learning) that delivers even better results in less time and maybe lower overall cost. That option is simply ruled out. There may be all sorts of benefits as spinoffs that will never be discovered (or not) because that path wasn't allowed to be followed.
BTW, the boats don't need to be identical, there just needs to be sufficient data on each to be able to calibrate one against the other (like PHRF on steroids). ;-)