Fuck the POMS. Those sucmbags deserve every AC failure behind them and forward for another 180 years.Nice! But the wealthiest team as COR maybe is a little too close. Here a quote from Philip II the Macedon (Alexander the Great's father) :
"No fortress that a mule laden with gold can reach is inexpugnable". And Ineos has a lot "gold"
Judging from the RYSR members regatta earlier this year, all RYS full members are members of RYSR.
Classy. Do you want some salt for that chip on your shoulder? I think I've just about got enough
According to the RYSR rules, which I read a while ago, the memberships aren't identical. I accept practice may differ from theory.
Correct. The Deed contemplates that the challenger sets the dates by providing the 10 months' notice. In the absence of mutual consent, those dates govern, and the defender gets to set the location. The court in the SNG/GGYC litigation confirmed these roles in a series of rulings.
It's a good question. In the SNG/GGYC litigation, the court required SNG to give GGYC six months' notice of the venue, but there is nothing in the Deed requiring the defender to provide the location by any particular time. There are obviously logistical limitations -- the defender has to let the challenger know the venue in enough time to actually get there -- but beyond that your question remains largely open.
INEOS and TNZ have clearly gone done the "mutual consent" path, as they are already 6+ months into the challenge and haven't even agreed upon a venue. By the ten months' Deed standard, AC37 should take place in January (which would mean the Southern hemisphere). If negotiations break down and this becomes a Deed match, there is almost certainly no way the parties could hold AC37 in less than four months. So they'd either have to agree on a new date or get a date from the court. The date they agreed upon or the date set for them by the court would dictate the hemisphere.
If it is a DoG match with tight time constraints couldn’t they use their existing boats but then remove all the other restrictions from AC36? Better flight controls, etc.
There wouldn’t be any restrictions (other than length) but I’m not sure INEOS would want to contest AC37 in the current boats. TNZ had a clear advantage there. Moreover, I’m not sure if either team would want to take boats designed for inshore sailing offshore as required by the Deed.
True. Would surely be 90' cats with retractable foils, auto-flight control, solid wings (different sizes for different winds). Fast and expensive
If there's mutual agreement on the boat, that is not what is described as a DoG match.
A DoG match just specifies the max LWL of the vessel. Are these current AC boats faster than the Oracle DoG?
I'm not convinced JR has an appetite for spending at that level. Poor chap struggles along at $15B estimated net worth. LE estimates are around $115B and even he reined in his spending by the time of AC35.
