Sydney-Hobart 2006-Battle of the Canters

Originally Posted by CT 249

Remember, much of the justification for bigger boats with Power Ballast Systems* is that they are more exciting to the public. Would you be so kind as to inform us, with details, how they are more spectacular.

CT, sure, I'd be glad to. They are more exciting to the general public because they win and win and win-almost everything almost all the time. They represent the state of the art; the essence of the most significant development in monohull sailing technology for big boats so far. Oh, and did I mention: they win and win and win......

and win
*Fixed using the RHOUGH TECHNIQUE as pioneered by him in several previous posts.

[CT 249]

IOR maxis won, and won, and won. Then IMS maxis won, and won, and won. Then IRC maxis won, and won, and won...... So there's nothing intrinsically better about bigger boats and canters according to your theory. Big state-of-the-art boats have always won. The rule-restricted IOR maxis were just as "winning". They were also state of the art in their time. Farr 40 1 tonners won and won and won and won.

It seems that there 's nothing intrinsically more spectacular about the looks of supermaxis, judging from the fact that you cannot tell us what makes the canter in post 115 look so much more exciting to the naked eye, as was requested.

And may I ask how many times have you been with a bunch of the general public watching a maxi canter? Where did you get this knowledge of what interests the general public as they watch a maxi canter?

PS not all CBTF maxis win. Maximus, the biggest boat in the Bermuda, finished behind smaller fixed keel boats. It then finished only about 8 minutes ahead of the Volvo 70 ABN Amro in the Round the Island race, despite being 28 feet longer. And in a major Med race, it was beaten by the 80' (I think) Maxijena. And Genuine Risk, at 90ft, got beaten over the line by the 68.5ft fixed-keel Peligroso in the Ensenada Race.

If you talk about CBTF then it's probably best to refer to the CBTF boats designed and engineered by Reichel-Pugh. The other designers may have paid the patent fee(better late than never) but didn't quite have the knack of CBTF designing at their boats' early stages-at least not to the extraordinary level of Reichel-Pugh.Perhaps boats like Maximus and Genuine Risk could have used the consultation denied them during design and construction-you know: when they still thought they could rip-off the technology.
Now that they are in the CBTF fold I'm sure they're getting some technical assistance.....
CT, you neglected to mention the new record recently set by Maximus--why was that?

[RHough]

Originally Posted by Doug Lord

CT, you neglected to mention the new record recently set by Maximus--why was that?

Because record setting is not relevant in the context of what makes racing interesting for sailors or the public?

The point being that high tech boats with the latest systems are not required to make racing interesting. You and I find them interesting, because we are "into" the technology in ways that the general public is not. These things make a difference to us, but not to my mother or cousin Bruno.

You are correct that foiling Moths are of passing interest to the public, they are visually different from other sailboats they have seen. This is not the case for maxi's. Canting keel maxi's look just like conventional maxi's, even someone that knows the technology has to look hard to tell the difference between a conventional boat, a water ballasted boat, and a canter ... much less the difference between a CBTF boat and other canters.

Randy

[CT 249]

I didn't mention the record because it's not a great example of superior efficiency.

The old record was set by a cruiser-racer taking part in a race at a set time and taking the conditions as they found them. Previous records were set by smaller boats.

Maximus' record was set by a crew who pulled out of the race they were going to do because conditions were perfect for the RTI. Of course in such conditions they got a faster run. If you select an ideal day for your racer, you have a big advantage over a crew who took the conditions they happened to get when they were racing their racer/cruiser.

"Today the conditions were perfect with none of the four major legs of the course on the wind; you need them free to the wind, and today they were. We had just a small bit of a beat from Bembridge to the Forts, just a couple of miles and the rest was free. It was a good as we could get for the conditions" said Harold Cudmore.

But of the course I mentioned those failures by CBTF boats was because if someone chooses to endlessly trumpet the successes of a style of boat, for the sake of balance other people must point out when they fail to win and indeed get beaten by much smaller yachts.

[Chris Ostlind]

Just to offer a total rebuttal to Doug's claims of Wild Oats XI line honors placement in the S/H as a "Crushing".

I present the following results for a well known and very recent big water race; The Pacific Cup which sails from San Francisco to Hawaii in even years. Take a long moment to scope-out the size and style of boat that took these honors. Not a full-horse race boat, not equipped with a canting keel or full-time running engine for keel movement, no deck mounted ballast track for wanky hunks of lead that fly back and forth, no bi-foil system for catching weed enroute... just a straight-forward well appointed sailing machine that was sailed with brilliance to a remarkable set of victories.

Doug... This is a crushing, dominant win:

In last summer's Pacific Cup, Tom Akin's Belvedere-based Santa Cruz 52 Lightning made a clean sweep: first to finish, first on corrected time in class, first on corrected time in fleet.
Photo and report courtesy of Latitude 38