34th America's Cup: multihulls!

Ok, what are the admissible arguments in this thread and how much can we disagree with the opposing (but allowed by the regime) views?

 

==============
Frankly, my post the other night summed it up. After the "Americas Cup Declining " thread was shut down due to continuous arguments, I thought I might say something when it seemed that refugees from that thread might do the same thing to this thread.
I have too much to do to give much of a damn anyway-do what you want....

 

Doug's direction change to moderator can ALL be blamed on CT249 for his surprising praise of Doug's (quite correct) admonishing of the negative brigade here - and he enjoyed very much the novelty ... but it is finished now, old mate, high on carbon has blown your facade away - so now back to business as usual, you (and a few others) righteously defending and holding the baying brigade back a few steps (temporarily).

 

Doug,
I’m very confused. At times during this thread you have stated you want facts, just facts. Yet you are constantly supplying endless hearsay and links to what people said - to support your views, note views not facts.

When someone asks/states a fact pertaining to the AC, in this case Lwl, you now don't think it is applicable. Is this because it doesn't mention a foil in its definition, or any advantage of a foil? Or just its someone else view/opinion?

If you're going to call people out, at least be consistent and be consistent with your own request.

As Slavi has pointed out repeatedly, whether one raises the subject of lawyers, or CT about Marketing etc etc...it is all part of the AC. Whether you accept that, is another matter. But clearly others do think this and others do wish to discuss this as being part and parcel of the whole AC farce that is currently unfolding, as always.

Thus are you now going to go down the same route of the AC itself, and limit the discussion to your own version and views of the event and the boats simply to control the narrative, just as each AC cup holder appears to do?

 

Looks like this one was for me. I have legitimately raised a potential issue about the upwind foiling, and High on carbon has replied, in quite an agreeable way and with good arguments.

No facade to blow away, no parties to defend, sorry to let you down. It is called discussion, an exchange of opinions. That is what this forum is about, and one just has to live with it. Possibly without insulting those who think differently from him. And that one was for... well, you try to make a guess.

So let's carry on with a constructive (not just accommodating one-way opinions) discussion.

Cheers

 

=================
I disagree emphatically with your assesment of my posting on this thread.

 

I am pulling out temporarily from this ugly mess of a thread, hoping to find it more civilized and respectful of others' opinions and contributions the next time.
Just to make it clear - it has nothing to do with you, Doug. I have never seen you insult other person's opinions, contrary to someone else here who keeps doing it with insistence.

 

Judging by the comments in the last few posts, if ever this discussion falls into the hands of the lawyers, ---they will have a field day.

 

Daiquiri, not aimed at you but Doug - and tongue in cheek, not serious.
Doug will understand - but if not, put it down to my poor literary skills.

 

==============
wuz understooded asit was meaned( lizerary skillz)

 

34th AC

=================
Don't go away-just remember what happened to the other thread and lets try not to let that happen here....And anyway, while I might make suggestions to prevent a sorry demise to this thread -I don't make the law...

 

Ok can we get back to discussions about specific performance issues with the current AC boats (3 teams, 4 boats). Over at SA, I just get tired of trying to have any real conversation.

OR seems to have gone legal on B2 rudder stabilizer but probably not on B1. Probably trying to tune up B2 for actual race. The last videos I looked at did not look good for Flybes (or even fast gybes). Someone on AC said they saw better today on the web cam, but as a nervous OR fan, I am still waiting for an independent video show more fast than slow gybes.

Some over at AC are claiming that the secret to the ETNZ flybing percentage is better control that gives them more/quicker wing/sail power after they cross over.

I personally do not think that flybing alone will be the difference that matters. If OR are really faster in a straight line, just keeping the losses in the gybes to a minimum coupled with good starts and no screw ups would have a chance. If OR is not faster, and OR does not get better in the gybes, the outcome will not be close.

For those seriously trying to figure out what they can from what info is available, lets hear some speculation. What do you guys really think is going to be the difference?

 

34th AC

=============
I think flying gybes may be critical but I think the most important thing will be whether or not "they"can get the boats to fly upwind and if so, can they tack on foils? Moths can most of the time but I doubt these boats will be able to but it makes a good target and a good vehicle for disinformation(!).
Randy pointed out somewhere that the wind may be lighter in September and depending on how much lighter foiling itself may be called into question. I'd imagine all the teams are giving a lot of thought to that-and to a foiling solution.

 

34th AC

Here's a TNZ video from Pete Carney : http://vimeo.com/72229994

 

Holy defecation, that was some sweet art, the sailing, helming, crew choreography, fly gybes, steady foil assist beating ... and the excellent videoing. Thanks Pete Carney.
Well, from that to race reality prophesying; Oracle's gybing, I'm pretty damned sure, will never reach the level of ETNZ's expertise; it was so smooth it was hardly noticeable. But wind looked up around 18 knots - so if lower figures in September, maybe O will have a chance. Certainly O looks fast straight lining. But then so does the red winged beast. The racing I think will be close.