Larry's AC50 Circus

Monkey

Super Anarchist
10,495
2,154
But then again, the entry period has not closed yet, so entries are not officially accepted, and teams aren't officially entered until after the entry period closes. The Volvo has officially finished. The Cycle doesn't officially start until at least after the first entry period has ended which is June 30th (Saturday), and after the second period ends November 30th, so my claim is not wrong. Teams don't have to be final until November 30th.
So now you’re saying ETNZ isn’t officially entered in the America’s Cup?  That’s funny. 

 

NotSoFast

Member
272
13
What a dumb question!!. Since when did the Defender have to "enter" an AC cycle??
Does the expression defender mean the club holding the cup or the team that won it or the team that is supposed to defend it?

In the first case the team defending the cup always has had to enter to defend for the club holding the cup, in some rare cases even win a competition called defenders trials first.

In any case the claim mfluder made did not include entry periods. He wrote it as an absolute factual statement and now indirectly admitted it was not correct by changing it.

 

Tornado-Cat

Super Anarchist
16,290
1,023
The competitor is well defined, a crew is not a competitor:  "Competitor means the Defender or a Challenger, as the context requires;"

However this will be more fun to define if required:

[SIZE=12pt]"A Competitor shall not participate, without the prior written approval of COR/D, in any non-Event regatta that is presented in a way that is or could be perceived to be an ambush" [/SIZE]

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Monkey

Super Anarchist
10,495
2,154
Yes Indio. That was exactly Monkey's point.
Thank you. I was just mocking SClarkey’s stupid response. Despite the fact that perfectly rational explanations exist as to why it’s fine, our resident idiot just couldn’t resist chiming in with the dumbest response possible!

 

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
9,830
2,281
New Zealand
Thank you. I was just mocking SClarkey’s stupid response. Despite the fact that perfectly rational explanations exist as to why it’s fine, our resident idiot just couldn’t resist chiming in with the dumbest response possible!
If you're gonna take things at face value without context, thats your problem.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Indio

Super Anarchist
10,970
884
Auckland
Does the expression defender mean the club holding the cup or the team that won it or the team that is supposed to defend it?

In the first case the team defending the cup always has had to enter to defend for the club holding the cup, in some rare cases even win a competition called defenders trials first.

In any case the claim mfluder made did not include entry periods. He wrote it as an absolute factual statement and now indirectly admitted it was not correct by changing it.
The Yacht Club defends, and they appoint the sailing team as their Defender. In the case of the RNZYS, ETNZ has been, and will be for AC36, their America's Cup Defender. mfluder's comment was obviously referring to the entry period for Challengers, yet Monkeynuts posed a facetious comment about ETNZ's "entry".

So what was your point again?? View attachment 248659

 

Monkey

Super Anarchist
10,495
2,154
The Yacht Club defends, and they appoint the sailing team as their Defender. In the case of the RNZYS, ETNZ has been, and will be for AC36, their America's Cup Defender. mfluder's comment was obviously referring to the entry period for Challengers, yet Monkeynuts posed a facetious comment about ETNZ's "entry".

So what was your point again?? View attachment 248659
Cute meme. You guys actually still have payphones?!?  That’s awesome!  I haven’t seen one in years!

 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
9,573
2,432
PNW
The competitor is well defined, a crew is not a competitor:  "Competitor means the Defender or a Challenger, as the context requires;"

However this will be more fun to define if required:

[SIZE=12pt]"A Competitor shall not participate, without the prior written approval of COR/D, in any non-Event regatta that is presented in a way that is or could be perceived to be an ambush" [/SIZE]
‘Ambush’ or not, nothing prevents any sailor from participating on a team with a different name in the F-50 Circuit unless their AC team contract prevents them from doing so.

There is a Protocol clause somewhere that prevents ‘Competitors’ (not sailors) from racing surrogates over 12m but surrogates are defined as being yachts that can provide ‘meaningful learning’ or something like that. Since the F50’s are an entirely different boat, OD and with no articulating arms and shifting RM, it’d be very hard to make the case that F50’s provide design-learning for the AC75.

I could easily see a Burling racing in both circuits, should his coming ETNZ negotiated contract allow it. JS is another example, should any big-bucks backer offer them a helm in the F50’s. Even signed with LR, you’ll notice that JS still displays his Red Bull with completely unabashed exuberance. He is already free to earn money beyond what LR pays him. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tornado-Cat

Super Anarchist
16,290
1,023
‘Ambush’ or not, nothing prevents any sailor from participating on a team with a different name in the F-50 Circuit unless their AC team contract prevents them from doing so.

There is a Protocol clause somewhere that prevents ‘Competitors’ (not sailors) from racing surrogates over 12m but surrogates are defined as being yachts that can provide ‘meaningful learning’ or something like that. Since the F50’s are an entirely different boat, OD and with no articulating arms and shifting RM, it’d be very hard to make the case that F50’s provide design-learning for the AC75.

I could easily see a Burling racing in both circuits, should his coming ETNZ negotiated contract allow it. JS is another example, should any big-bucks backer offer them a helm in the F50’s. Even signed with LR, you’ll notice that JS still displays his Red Bull with completely unabashed exuberance. He is already free to earn money beyond what LR pays him. 
I could hardly see the AC50 considered a surrogate, but the MC has sole responsability, and we know who decide the members of the MC

[SIZE=11pt]a)             [/SIZE]The interpretation, calculation and enforcement of the above limitations on the modification of the Original Hull Surface and the determination as to whether a yacht is a Surrogate Yacht or not shall be the sole responsibility of the Measurement Committee whose decision shall be final.

 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
9,573
2,432
PNW
I could hardly see the AC50 considered a surrogate, but the MC has sole responsability, and we know who decide the members of the MC

[SIZE=11pt]a)             [/SIZE]The interpretation, calculation and enforcement of the above limitations on the modification of the Original Hull Surface and the determination as to whether a yacht is a Surrogate Yacht or not shall be the sole responsibility of the Measurement Committee whose decision shall be final.
It will be truly amazing if GD, through ETNZ and RNZYS and their selected MC and whoever all, choose to take Larry on in court over Larry’s own, seperately funded boat class and race series. 

Good luck with that :D

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tornado-Cat

Super Anarchist
16,290
1,023
They won't take Larry to court but could try to prevent competitors to use the AC50.

However a competitor is a challenger, and a challenger is a YC or a team selected to represent it. So a team could compete until chosen to represent the YC.

A bit far fetched though.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

NotSoFast

Member
272
13
The Yacht Club defends, and they appoint the sailing team as their Defender. In the case of the RNZYS, ETNZ has been, and will be for AC36, their America's Cup Defender. mfluder's comment was obviously referring to the entry period for Challengers, yet Monkeynuts posed a facetious comment about ETNZ's "entry".

So what was your point again??
Really? Thats a funny claim.

According to you, mfluder's comment about the entry period for Challengers is relevant for the issue if Burling & Tuke are allowed to participate in the next AC due to their partipication of the VOR just finished. I wonder if he shares that opinion or disagrees with you.

 

AKL wino

Member
119
42
Auckland
Don't know if this has been mentioned prev but goss at the squadron last night is that work is well underway up at Warkworth fitting out 40' containers as workshops etc for Ellison's folly (aka AC50 regatta). No word on Core suddenly ramping up AC50 hull production though...

 

rh3000

Super Anarchist
3,693
1,725
Auckland, New Zealand
It will be truly amazing if GD, through ETNZ and RNZYS and their selected MC and whoever all, choose to take Larry on in court over Larry’s own, seperately funded boat class and race series. 

Good luck with that :D
It will be truly amazing if LE, through OTUSA and GGYC and their selected MC and whoever all, choose to take GD on in court over ETNZ’s own, separately funded boat class and race series. 

Good luck with that :D

 

Indio

Super Anarchist
10,970
884
Auckland
Really? Thats a funny claim.

According to you, mfluder's comment about the entry period for Challengers is relevant for the issue if Burling & Tuke are allowed to participate in the next AC due to their partipication of the VOR just finished. I wonder if he shares that opinion or disagrees with you.
It's fucking hilarious - but it's a FACT! The entry period is there only for the Challengers to comply with. The Defender (ETNZ) do not have to "enter" within the entry period because they are...waiting for the Challenger to be determined by the Prada Challenger Selection Series.

Blair and Tuke can do what they want, until ETNZ needs them for whatever in-house assignments they have for them. Whether or not they have restricted movements under their individual employment agreements with ETNZ is no one else's business.

 
Top