Luna Rossa Challenge. AC 37

I think Lipton was far too polite to win the cup. Although Bertelli and Prada have always been a great team, they lacked that mongrel streak required to win the cup up until this one.

I don't know if Jimmy brought that to the team, if Max Sirena brought it to the team from ETNZ or how else they may have gotten it.

But I think Prada now have a genuine ability to win this thing.

Even this time around, had ETNZ taken just a few more days to get a handle on their boat it might have happened for Prada.
Yes I agree it was really bad luck that Prada never won this 7-1 as ETNZ came into the match not ready

 

jaysper

Super Anarchist
10,172
1,295
Wellington
They should try asap the same foil shape of the Kiwis and see of and how much the boat improves
I don't think it would improve the boat at all champ. I personally think those foils absolutely required the extra 3 square meters of sail the NZ boat had down low. Without that, the foils were likely too small.

 

Sailbydate

Super Anarchist
11,849
3,419
Kohimarama
Max Sirena has been very clear:
Naturally, LRPP would be very pissed off if this DoG Challenge goes ahead.

At the moment they are very competitive. There is no way they want to lose that advantage to ITUK, as an exclusive DoG Challenger. But there's nothing they can do about it, unless they can nail ETNZ on the AC75 acceptance requirement for entry into AC37 and AC38.

Will we see a challenge through the NYSC, or a backdown from GD/CoR?

 

strider470

Super Anarchist
Naturally, LRPP would be very pissed off if this DoG Challenge goes ahead.

At the moment they are very competitive. There is no way they want to lose that advantage to ITUK, as an exclusive DoG Challenger. But there's nothing they can do about it, unless they can nail ETNZ on the AC75 acceptance requirement for entry into AC37 and AC38.

Will we see a challenge through the NYSC, or a backdown from GD/CoR?
I think that, even if I'm contrary on principle on the AC37 AC38 bundle (probably non legal as per the DoG, and who knows how it could end in NYSC), LR wish to use that class of boats as well. The only issue we have is on the 1 - 1 match. If this will happen, it will have future consequences.

 

Sailbydate

Super Anarchist
11,849
3,419
Kohimarama
I think that, even if I'm contrary on principle on the AC37 AC38 bundle (probably non legal as per the DoG, and who knows how it could end in NYSC), LR wish to use that class of boats as well. The only issue we have is on the 1 - 1 match. If this will happen, it will have future consequences.
Yes it will. But what can excluded teams do to try and block the move? It's over to LRPP and AM to try and block it, if they can.

Otherwise, it's all on in Cowes.

 

strider470

Super Anarchist
Yes it will. But what can excluded teams do to try and block the move? It's over to LRPP and AM to try and block it, if they can.

Otherwise, it's all on in Cowes.
I think there is nothing they can do to stop a 1 - 1 match, which is perfectly legal (albeit very disrespectful towards other challengers and awful sportsmanship). It is essentially INEOS buying access to the Match, something that they couldn't win on the water, they will get with a ton of money. They could easily stop the dual AC37 38 bundle, but they won't, because that would be against their interest, LR like the class as well and wish to continue in AC75)

What I fear is that, with a precedent in place, we will have more 1 - 1 matches in the future, and this is something that should concern ETNZ too...

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sailbydate

Super Anarchist
11,849
3,419
Kohimarama
I think there is nothing they can do to stop a 1 - 1 match, which is perfectly legal (albeit very disrespectful towards other challengers and awful sportsmanship). It is essentially INEOS buying access to the Match, something that they couldn't win on the water, they will get with a ton of money. They could easily stop the dual AC37 38 bundle, but they won't, because that would be against their interest, LR like the class as well and wish to continue in AC75)

What I fear is that, with a precedent in place, we will have more 1 - 1 matches in the future, and this is something that should concern ETNZ too...
Word here is that ETNZ is fighting for survival (the usual post successful Defence syndrome) because they are broke. So, from GD's point of view, Sir James offers continuance. He'll not back away from that unless he's forced to.

 

Dolphin65

Member
197
64
Italy
Can someone, who spent the last three years following the pre-cup events, explain how the honey moon between the kiwis and team Prada gradually got spoiled?

 

Thewas

Member
257
168
The simple answer is that while it's easy to go along with a COR that is not a threat on the water, things change when they can win.
That was one of my first thoughts.

There must be something else.
But this sounds pretty more likely. 

Still I don't get how this relationship (a long time one) managed to get THAT bad. Tina's PR and the (forced) absence of Bertelli were pretty serious stuff, even for the AC standards.

 

Rennmaus

Super Anarchist
10,553
2,085
Really I can't remember, did it also happen in other cup editions?
The initially good relationship between Def and Chall has fallen foul during protocol negotiations at least once. SNG was enormously disappointed by GGYC during the run-up to AC32, for example. It was the initial fall-out between Ernie and Larry. Worse was to come.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

The Advocate

Super Anarchist
The initially good relationship between Def and Chall has fallen foul during protocol negotiations at least once. SNG was enormously disappointed by GGYC during the run-up to AC32, for example. It was the initial fall-out between Ernie and Larry. Worse was to come.
'83, not quite the same but after the LV.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Blitzkrieg9

Member
220
62
It is essentially INEOS buying access to the Match, something that they couldn't win on the water,

What I fear is that, with a precedent in place, we will have more 1 - 1 matches in the future, and this is something that should concern ETNZ too...
That is the crux of the issue right there. In a perfect world, the winner of the previous CSS should at least get first right of refusal to be the next COR. It seems crazy that they can be boxed out like this.   On the other hand, a system like that it could lead to two strong teams always being COR/D and that might effectively box out the rest of the world.  There are just too many ways the DoG/AC can be manipulated.   

Assuming this 1on1 goes forward, I'm just really really hoping it will be viewed as a truly one time unique situation that we can chalk up to "the world was in a fucked up place because of COVID.  It was a one time thing that brought money and exposure to the sport."

 

strider470

Super Anarchist
That is the crux of the issue right there. In a perfect world, the winner of the previous CSS should at least get first right of refusal to be the next COR. It seems crazy that they can be boxed out like this.   On the other hand, a system like that it could lead to two strong teams always being COR/D and that might effectively box out the rest of the world.  There are just too many ways the DoG/AC can be manipulated.   

Assuming this 1on1 goes forward, I'm just really really hoping it will be viewed as a truly one time unique situation that we can chalk up to "the world was in a fucked up place because of COVID.  It was a one time thing that brought money and exposure to the sport."
Sadly it will be a precedent on how to have a defence making money and how to directly challenge for the Match without the hassle of winning a CSS on the water

 
Last edited by a moderator:




Top