34th America's Cup: multihulls!

Discussion in 'Multihulls' started by Doug Lord, Sep 13, 2010.

  1. CT 249
    Joined: Dec 2004
    Posts: 1,709
    Likes: 82, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 467
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT 249 Senior Member

    Doug, do you believe the person who wrote;

    "(i) These recommendations are made by the Regatta Director after the Review
    Committee interviewed team personnel from all Competitors, and will be refined
    as the further work identified above is completed.
    (ii) The majority of the Regatta Director recommendations represent a consensus
    of the Competitors."

    was a liar?

    It's a simple question, it only needs a simple answer.
     
  2. groper
    Joined: Jun 2011
    Posts: 2,467
    Likes: 123, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 693
    Location: australia

    groper Senior Member

    Another thing, the fact that ETNZ said it had contentious issues after the 22nd May, and nothing was signed, PROVES that there was NO AGREEMENT at that time, and this also implies that Ian Murray`s statement, that ALL TEAMS AGREED on the 22nd is in fact false...

    Which way would you like your cake doug?

    Why dont you offer an explaination, hypothetically, of how refuting these changes to rudders, allows ETNZ and LR a performance advantage over the 2 other teams? Humor me, what do they stand to gain from refuting the changes, that is changing the current design rule? What are the performance reasons, that Ian Murray refers to? Justify your answer...
     
  3. Doug Lord
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 16,679
    Likes: 346, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 1362
    Location: Cocoa, Florida

    Doug Lord Flight Ready

    ===========
    Do you have a link?(2nd time)
     
  4. Doug Lord
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 16,679
    Likes: 346, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 1362
    Location: Cocoa, Florida

    Doug Lord Flight Ready

    34th AC

    ------------------------
    I don't think anything of the kind was "proved"-you simply can't get around the fact that in discussing "contentious issues" the rudders were not mentioned-not once. They hadn't yet figured they could use that to their advantage!
    You can't get around what Murray said about Dalton and the fact he hasn't denied it(as far as I know).
    I believe Murray 100% so far.
     
  5. CT 249
    Joined: Dec 2004
    Posts: 1,709
    Likes: 82, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 467
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT 249 Senior Member

    That IS an eye-opening document, because it backs up the fact that the Kiwis, at least, were;

    1- already concerned about the lateness of the changes; "It is daunting to arrive at the venue after years of planning to find the “goalposts moving” so late in the campaign, etc"

    2 - were told about the changes AFTER the public had been - a very unusual step!

    3 - not aware of exactly what changes the recs would require until AFTER the meeting of the 22nd, leaving them with a lot of analysis AFTER the recs had been announced; " Thursday was a day of digestion and analysis ashore...Next there will be a series of meetings (with people like) structural engineer Gio Belgrano at a meeting on structural issues".

    4 -the teams had apparently NOT been informed of all the rules changes so therefore they could not have agreed to them in total, hence the need for a three-hour meeting and further design analysis.
     
  6. groper
    Joined: Jun 2011
    Posts: 2,467
    Likes: 123, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 693
    Location: australia

    groper Senior Member

    Ok Doug, so hypothetically, explain how ETNZ and LR are using this to their advantage?

    How is it even possible that not changing the rudder rules from the original 3 year old rule which everyone already had to design to, be used to ANYONES advantage?

    What are the "performance reasons" that Ian murray is referring to with regard to ETNZ and LR?
     
  7. CT 249
    Joined: Dec 2004
    Posts: 1,709
    Likes: 82, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 467
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT 249 Senior Member

    Do you have an answer, Doug (3rd time).

    It's from the official site, Doug.

    It's a letter written on 22 May by IM, Doug.

    So IM himself said on that day that the recommendations were NOT final and needed refinement, therefore there was NO final set of recs for the Kiwis and others to agree to.

    IM himself says that the "majority" of the recs represent a "consensus"
    of the Competitors.

    A majority is not "all" and a "consensus" does not require - and normally does not imply - unanimous agreement. That's a matter of simple English.

    Therefore to say "“At that meeting, all of the teams agreed to all 37 of the safety recommendations" is at odds with what IM wrote on the day of the meeting, when he specifically said that the consensus agreed on the majority.

    Link is at

    http://www.americascup.com/en/news/3/news/15572/regatta-director-presents-safety-recommendations

    Link fixed, but as a matter of logic it did not matter where the statement could be found or who made it. The question was whether you thought it was correct.
     
  8. Doug Lord
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 16,679
    Likes: 346, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 1362
    Location: Cocoa, Florida

    Doug Lord Flight Ready

    That link is non-functional.....?

    corrected link:
    http://www.americascup.com/en/news/3/news/15572/regatta-director-presents-safety-recommendations

    From May 22:
    " “All four competing America’s Cup teams have cooperated in an open, helpful and constructive way,” Murray said, “and the Review Committee noted there is a clear desire on the part of the teams to ensure the safety of the America’s Cup as much as possible.”

    “I want to thank the members of the Review Committee for their exceptional and efficient work,” Murray concluded.
     
  9. Doug Lord
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 16,679
    Likes: 346, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 1362
    Location: Cocoa, Florida

    Doug Lord Flight Ready

  10. CT 249
    Joined: Dec 2004
    Posts: 1,709
    Likes: 82, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 467
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT 249 Senior Member

    Link fixed and the link to the letter itself is halfway down the page.

    After reading the letter I have more sympathy for the challengers.
     
  11. powerabout
    Joined: Nov 2007
    Posts: 2,933
    Likes: 66, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 719
    Location: Melbourne/Singapore/Italy

    powerabout Senior Member

    maybe the 37 recommendations verbally aren't the 37 recommendation now on paper???
     
  12. CT 249
    Joined: Dec 2004
    Posts: 1,709
    Likes: 82, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 467
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT 249 Senior Member

    So please answer the question, Doug.

    Do you think that the statement that a CONSENSUS of the teams accepted the MAJORITY of the recommendations was correct? Or do you think that the statement that the teams "all of the teams agreed to all 37 of the safety recommendations" was correct.

    Let me say again, as I understand it IM is a good man, his remarks about Dalts were caused by the pressure IMHO.
     
  13. Doug Lord
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 16,679
    Likes: 346, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 1362
    Location: Cocoa, Florida

    Doug Lord Flight Ready

    34th AC

    In the corrected link the " concensus of the teams accepted the majority" is not there.
    Further, Murrays description of that meeting does not equivicate:" All of the teams agreed to all 37 of the safety recomendations". There is nothing at the link you provided that changes that.
    http://www.americascup.com/en/news/3/news/15572/regatta-director-presents-safety-recommendations



     
  14. CT 249
    Joined: Dec 2004
    Posts: 1,709
    Likes: 82, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 467
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT 249 Senior Member

    Of course the passage
    "(ii) The majority of the Regatta Director recommendations represent a consensus
    of the Competitors" - which is what I asked you about quite clearly twice in post 1969 and 1981 - is there....a few lines above the printed name of Murray on page 3.

    Basic English 101 is that you don't say "the majority" when you mean "all". Look up "majority" in a dictionary.

    Murray's own accounts of what GD said are NOT exactly the same. That is a fact and it indicates the problems with trying to recall what someone said. Therefore his account and recollection of what GD said may also be incorrect.

    Murray's own written account speaks of "majority" when he speaks of all. That is also a fact and therefore his account and recollection of what GD said may not be correct.
     

  15. CT 249
    Joined: Dec 2004
    Posts: 1,709
    Likes: 82, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 467
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT 249 Senior Member

    Once again showing that you have very little to offer except abuse and insults. Well done, Gary.

    I think your racist attitudes are embarrassing to many of us from the South Pacific.
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.