The AC 37 has started, news and rumours

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"  :)  
Fuck the POMS. Those sucmbags deserve every AC failure behind them and forward for another 180 years. 

 

enigmatically2

Super Anarchist
3,472
1,781
Earth
Fuck the POMS. Those sucmbags deserve every AC failure behind them and forward for another 180 years. 
Classy. Do you want some salt for that chip on your shoulder? I think I've just about got enough

GteOo9ZRa3P7aNphrboj0X6_QFHmNFbhoXRvbeIG5l0.jpg


 

porthos

Super Anarchist
1,086
417
Michigan, USA
I’ve a hypothetical DoG question. Suppose we had an accepted challenge. The defender says, OK, the match is to be in the Faroe Islands next July. It’s a DoG compliant venue and date. The challenger says no, we like dolphins. So what happens? Ultimately, it appears to me, in the absence of MC, the defender decides the venue, subject to hemisphere/date. Any other thoughts?
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.

 

enigmatically2

Super Anarchist
3,472
1,781
Earth
If the CoR triggers that 10 months, how long do the defender have to announce the venue?

Because if that happens I could see the announcement being delayed so that the CoR don't know what wind conditions to build for. 

Just not sure how Ineos will feel about Jeddah or anywhere else in ME so a DoG challenge does seem a possibility

 

porthos

Super Anarchist
1,086
417
Michigan, USA
If the CoR triggers that 10 months, how long do the defender have to announce the venue?

Because if that happens I could see the announcement being delayed so that the CoR don't know what wind conditions to build for. 

Just not sure how Ineos will feel about Jeddah or anywhere else in ME so a DoG challenge does seem a possibility
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.

 

enigmatically2

Super Anarchist
3,472
1,781
Earth
Hmm, googling this question I find HR's page which includes the question:

"May a challenger dictate the timing and even the hemisphere of a match through careful selection of dates and notice timing?" 

So if they really don't like Jeddah, possibly Ineos could trigger a DoG match at such a time that it has to be held in Southern hemisphere, thus ruling out Jeddah. But they couldn't trigger that until 1st Feb. NZ could challenge that in court but don't have cash, especially if there is a risk they lose and thus don't get Saudi money.

So that would end up with 90' foilers at Auckland. Spectacular but a big expensive for TNZ.

So it does seem that Ineos hold quite a lot of cards

 

porthos

Super Anarchist
1,086
417
Michigan, USA
Hmm, googling this question I find HR's page which includes the question:

"May a challenger dictate the timing and even the hemisphere of a match through careful selection of dates and notice timing?" 

So if they really don't like Jeddah, possibly Ineos could trigger a DoG match at such a time that it has to be held in Southern hemisphere, thus ruling out Jeddah. But they couldn't trigger that until 1st Feb. NZ could challenge that in court but don't have cash, especially if there is a risk they lose and thus don't get Saudi money.

So that would end up with 90' foilers at Auckland. Spectacular but a big expensive for TNZ.

So it does seem that Ineos hold quite a lot of cards
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.

And they could be 44' foilers. I'm not sure bigger is necessarily better when it comes to foiling, but I leave that discussion to people better qualified to have it.

 

sailman

Super Anarchist
8,323
436
Portsmouth, RI
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.

And they could be 44' foilers. I'm not sure bigger is necessarily better when it comes to foiling, but I leave that discussion to people better qualified to have it.
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.

 

porthos

Super Anarchist
1,086
417
Michigan, USA
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.

 

enigmatically2

Super Anarchist
3,472
1,781
Earth
 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

 

dogwatch

Super Anarchist
16,863
1,576
South Coast, UK
True. Would surely be 90' cats with retractable foils, auto-flight control, solid wings (different sizes for different winds). Fast and expensive
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.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

enigmatically2

Super Anarchist
3,472
1,781
Earth
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 reigned in his spending by the time of AC35.
JR could get closer than GD could if the latter had to race it in Auckland

 




Top