INEOS Team GB

Horn Rock

Super Anarchist
3,253
1,807
Byron Bay
Simmer's thoughts on Bermuda were interesting as well. They knew they were in trouble before ETNZ left NZ. They'd already identified that the Kiwis had a better control system. The lower windage of the bikes, and the more aggressive boards and rudders.

 

JALhazmat

Super Anarchist
4,853
1,850
Southampton
Shirley has a new podcast up interviewing Grant Simmer. It's a good interview, with some interesting insights into all the campaigns he's been involved with. With regards to this cycle he hints they've been done some blind alleys - he might be referring to the interesting shape of Britannia. Says he happy with B2 and where they are now.

http://shirleyrobertson.com/podcast/ 
I think the blind alley refers to the hull shape, no bustle/skeg,  rather than the frontal treatment of the bow as that has been retained as has a reduced version of the high sides plus appendage underneath 

 

Horn Rock

Super Anarchist
3,253
1,807
Byron Bay
There was some oblique references with B2 being described as "racier" than B1, and much different. Grant also said that he had to make some difficult changes - maybe referring to some of the disquiet rumored to have occurred within the team.

 

Horn Rock

Super Anarchist
3,253
1,807
Byron Bay
^^^ Stuff turns Shirley's  podcast into a story a few hours after I post the link......funny......

 
Last edited by a moderator:

JJD

Anarchist
894
220
“I don’t think it was right that Team New Zealand and Luna Rossa were writing the rule in isolation really,” Simmer told the Shirley Robertson podcast.

How many teams did Grant Simmer have in to help write the rule with Oracle? 

 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
13,682
3,788
PNW
“I don’t think it was right that Team New Zealand and Luna Rossa were writing the rule in isolation really,” Simmer told the Shirley Robertson podcast.

How many teams did Grant Simmer have in to help write the rule with Oracle? 
It is nuts, the way GD schemed the Rule Writing, in excluding the wider design community from not only contributory comments but even from informative progression updates too. Grant says that over time that advantage has dimished but, damn, the advantage taken is unprecedented. Not to mention how he then took the design also as a multimillion $ money making opportunity from ACE..
 

The DR should have been done in a far better way, exactly as Grant pointed out. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Horn Rock

Super Anarchist
3,253
1,807
Byron Bay
It is nuts, the way GD schemed the Rule Writing,
They wrote the rule for a completely new class of a very sophisticated boat, in like 6 months. If they'd added input from the wider design community, that time would have likely blown out - especially because of the radical nature of the new boat. It would have inspired all sorts of wrangling. GD did the right thing in pushing it through with just two teams. Sometimes you just have to get things done.

 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
13,682
3,788
PNW
They wrote the rule for a completely new class of a very sophisticated boat, in like 6 months. If they'd added input from the wider design community, that time would have likely blown out - especially because of the radical nature of the new boat. It would have inspired all sorts of wrangling. GD did the right thing in pushing it through with just two teams. Sometimes you just have to get things done.
That argument could have been made during any Class change before, but was not.

It is a major, major factor for why ETNZ will very likely win this next Cup, I just wish they hadn’t resorted to it. Grant and others have pointed to it, it’s an obvious fairness problem as well as, apparently, a strategic (and deeply contested) money grab on top.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

trig42

New member
18
10
Auckland, NZ
That argument could have been made during any Class change before, but was not.

It is a major, major factor for why ETNZ will very likely win this next Cup, I just wish they hadn’t resorted to it. Grant and others have pointed to it, it’s an obvious fairness problem as well as, apparently, a strategic (and deeply contested) money grab on top.

money
Surely that is the major advantage in winning the cup - making the rules?

Has been that way all the way through the history of the cup has it not?

 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
13,682
3,788
PNW
Surely that is the major advantage in winning the cup - making the rules?

Has been that way all the way through the history of the cup has it not?
Choosing a new Class Rule is good but doing it all in secret is not. Listen to Grant S and to the SR Designers interviews before that. 

 

Sailbydate

Super Anarchist
12,453
3,833
Kohimarama
“I don’t think it was right that Team New Zealand and Luna Rossa were writing the rule in isolation really,” Simmer told the Shirley Robertson podcast.

“They had a head start on everyone and I think you can see that when you compare the boats.”

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/americas-cup/122708053/americas-cup-british-challenger-promises-radical-different-new-boat-for-auckland-2021
Tough. Get over it. Better yet, try and win the bloody Cup and then design your own AC boat rule.

But stop the bitching already.

 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
13,682
3,788
PNW
Tough. Get over it. Better yet, try and win the bloody Cup and then design your own AC boat rule.

But stop the bitching already.
There’s a legitimate argument being made by Grant S and others, that if you do ‘win the bloody Cup’ you don’t also get nasty about it. Creating a new Class in secret is unprecedented, the (apparent) money and design-lead motivations are for sure questionable and likely won’t go down well in AC History. Where is the promised transparency and ‘honor’? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top