Americas Cup: whats next?

For the sake of argument let's say 25% of sailors are multi sailors. We know that's not true, but let's imagine.

So why would that matter to the AC? If true, that means 75% of sailors are mono sailors. If I've done my math correctly 75% is still 3x bigger than 25%.

It really doesn't matter if the 75% or the 25% prefer their type of boat to be in the AC. What matters is what makes the better match racing, until the AC becomes something other than a match racing event.


It is strange that multis could be considered for the top match racing event on the planet if they have not even been used for any of the world class events currently sailed. Seems that would be a good place to start to prove the theory before jumping in with both feet.


We do know there has been one multi match race series, no one could be arsed to participate from 1997 until 2007, and hasn't had any races since (although they will race again next month). Those races have historically had almost no real match racing tactics, they are exhibitions of speed.


The latest version of the AC proved the boats used lacked abilities required for match racing tactics, so were unsuitable for the job.


I would be surprised to see the multi route taken. However, if BMWO thinks they have an advantage in that direction it could happen...

 

I think it is a question of what kind of boat was required to win on the day. If the race is an around-the-buoys affair you will see racing tactics.

 

Personally, Paul, if cat were the most popular form of racing I'd say that there was a good point to have them in the AC. But they're not, and there's no apparent evidence that they are getting more popular.

You make a good point when you ask why multis shouldn't prove themselves at the top end of match racing, Paul. Yes, the IACC has had some fantastic boats and sailors and over the long term the losers have won more races than in the AC, but there have been some lopsided events as well as some cliffhangers where tactics ruled.

Here's some research for the early matches and from the only close recent match c(The Edge v Freedoms Wing, 1991?), taken from contemporary sources. It proves nothing, but could be food for thought;

Over the 19 mile course, these are the margins I can find;

1 second (after 8 changes of the lead)
"less than 4 sec" (R1, defender selection trials)
"less than 4 sec" (R2, defender selection trials)
15 secs
34 sec (all the way win)
35 sec (R3, same series as above two)
45 seconds (all the way win?)
48 seconds (all the way win)
59 seconds (3m 10s lead reduced due to damage)
1.5 min (defender selection trials)
1 min 41s (early lead changed due to damage)
1 min 42s
1m 49s (six changes of lead)
2 min (all the way win)
2 min 35s (all the way win)
3 min (1 change of lead)
3 min (defender selection trials, with tactics of "paramount importance")
4 min (Defender selection trials, ditto)
4.5 min (all the way win)
5.5 min
6 min
"over 7 min"
7 min 14s ("a procession")
10 min (all the way win)
11 min
11.5 min (after one lead change)
12 min
14 min
16 min 6 s (USA margin v France in the challenger selection series - this was the only race the French finished.Over 30 min (challenger DNF'd due to time limit);
16 min 20s
27 min
Over 30 min (this was the lead at the last mark; Aus didn't make the time limit)
And in the final race in 1969, the Brits had to use match racing tactics to hold off the Danes from lapping them A SECOND TIME.

So when you finish, you're about as likely to get a close race (ie margin under 1 minute) or a complete walkover (ie margin over 10 minutes).

There were many gear breakages including 25 DNFs and DNSs in the series I checked, including;
4 DNSs in 1989 - UK challenger broke before starting a single race.
4 DNFs in 1987 - the US challenger only started one race before breaking.
3 DNFs in the 1991 challenger selection series.

so that's very, very close to 1/3 of the races featuring a DNF.

Overall, there seems to be a very high possibility of a large win; for example, the "crushing" victory of Courageous in the 1974's America's Cup saw her take the gun by margins that would be about average for a Little America's Cup race. There doesn't seem to have been any post WW2 mono victory by margins as vast as sometimes seen in the cats, and that's ignoring the very low DNF rate of the monos. However, there's also about a 1 in 7 chance of a very tight and thrilling race with a win by less than 1 minute.

So IMHO, the idea that cats are closer in racing seems completely wrong (and when I've analysed fleet races the cats have also had wider margins than comparable monos) and the margins can be huge, but you CAN have fairly close racing. However, lead changes are NOT common and have often been caused by gear failure (which is the downside of the wonderful performance of these fantastic boats). I haven't checked the margins in all the modern monohull AC races or the last IACCs, but the last 12 Metre match was won by margins of between 1 and 2 min; America 3 won with an average margin of about 45 seconds, and the Kiwis won the Cup with an average margin of under 3 min. So the racing in the monos seems a lot tighter, especially considering their longer courses and longer elapsed times.

It can of course be said that you can't compare C Class cats to AC monos, but since other people are comparing widely different classes I thought I may as well join in.

Significantly, there is NO evidence to support the claim that the racing gets closer in terms of wins v losses, and apparently little if any evidence that it gets closer in terms of winning margins.

 

AC is big buisness. Having a professional circut, dare I say a Formula 1 style competition would be good for the sport. Racing in older fleets might be interesting as part of the run up to the AC. A series of 12M races, a series of J Class races using both the older and newer Js. Having a single governing body will help, not eliminate, keep the race on the water and out of the court room in NY. I am originally from Albany, the home of the Gift of Deed...not a great sailing town, but one unfortunately that has often had a greater impact than wind and tide.

 

There is one major basic that many posters on this site are forgetting: the average Joe in the street believes thew AC boats to be the fastest, bestest, expensivest designs on the planet and although they are wrong, they are right ... because that is exactly what the AC SHOULD be .... so sorry chaps, that rules out all variations of lead mines ... because they don't even come close to the multihulls. And by the way the wind is blowing it looks as if this is going to occur for the next round.
Here's a quote from Jim Young, the (most) innovative, free thinking New Zealand designer:
"There’s no limit to what you might be able to do in these yacht (multihull) types and there are so many unknowns that you could produce something which will outsail everything. I’ve always held that the Americas Cup should be for the fastest boat possible, regardless of any rules, cost or size- with one proviso that the test has to be over courses to test all points of sailing, upwind, tacking duels, reaching and running and in ALL weather conditions. Possibly someone could design an enlarged version of a foiling moth."
The last comment will be sweet news to Doug - but note, Jim makes no mention of ballast.

 

Americas Cup-Flying Monohulls

====================================
He didn't have to Gary-everybody knows the moth has a 71% (movable)ballast/ displ. ratio-give or take a few points.
As soon as a monofoiler beats a multi around a course you can bet it won't be long before it's in the Americas Cup!
Oh, wait: the Moth has been doing that for years!
Won't be long now, I guess....

 

Not to mention, that is what the AC has never been.

Why should sailors care what the average Joe in the street thinks?

The AC is the premiere Match Racing competition. The equipment used should reflect the nuances of match racing tactics. At least it should until the race changes to some other style of racing.

Today we had the Indy 500 auto race here in the USA. Most 'mericans believe those cars are the fastest, bestest, expensivest designs on the planet. They are wrong, and there doesn't seem to be any need to change.

 

Continue in la la land Doug. Actually I'll ask Jim just what he would do with a larger foiling Moth. I'll bet he would go just large enough (guess around 40 feet) for a number of crew, say 10 or so, to be still capable of keeping the boat upright. Why? Because he designed the Rocket 31 way back in 1980, the first sport boat and an extreme one) which had absolutely minimal ballast in the lifting keel, very large beam on an extremely flared hull and a large number of crew on the rail. The boat weighed less than equivalent sized multihulls of the time ... and it was very fast. So continuing what he did 30 years ago, it would not be much of a change up to make a foiling version. If he would contemplate deck ballast, it would be water, so it could be dumped when unnecessary - because he pioneered that in NZ too. He's too clever to dumb the boat down lugging useless lead around. I will ask him and maybe post a sketch here ... you could maybe downsize it for your Trapped Under Wing replacement.
Nice analogy Paul - but the average bloke in the street has a more realistic view of the AC than the conservatives who have run the show in the past.

 

Gary, you've given no reason why the AC should be the fastest, bestest etc designs on the planet.

It was an event created by a bunch of guys who took something that was NOT the fastest boat they had (1) and raced it against another bunch of guys with comparable boats. And that's pretty much the way it has always been. Every single time the competitors in the AC have been able to agree on what boat they should race, they have agreed on monos, despite the fact that everyone has known for decades that multis are faster.

Those who prefer conventional monos created the event, spent decades making it the most prestigious event, and shouldn't have it taken away from them just because some people are ignorant.

There's no real move towards fast boats becoming more popular, or that showing the public faster boats turns more people onto sailing, so why assume that faster is better? Your tris are slower than a kite or speed board, does that make them inferior? Hell no. Pleasure boats are for pleasure, if they make people happy then who cares how fast they go? The facts are that slower boats are ALWAYS the most popular classes so there is no link between increasing speed and making the sport stronger.

There's no evidence that the major trophy in any comparable sport is run under rules that develop the fastest possible device. The average guy in the street probably thinks that F1 cars are the fastest, bested things around, when in fact they are hedged in with many severe restrictions and the second-fastest race ever happened almost 40 years ago.

The average guy who sees Tiger Woods hit a golf ball may not realise that the performance and design of the ball is heavily restricted.

Motorbikes are slower than cars - does that mean that there should be no Moto GPs? Or are people who like motorbikes all ignorant stick-in-the-muds?

The average guy who watches the Red Bull air race doesn't think it's stupid because many of the planes are carrying ballast, and because the planes have a lower top speed than planes did in 1923, and only one-third as fast as the top speed over 50 years ago.

I suppose it gets down to what you want in sailing. Personally, I want a popular, fascinating sport, with lots of different events for different craft, where individuality and diversity are celebrated and enjoyed. I don't want this small, bland, monochrome, one-size-fits-all sport, where diversity is hated, where accessibility is reviled, where anyone who dares to think differently is abused, and where all must worship at the altar of speed without room for personal taste and preference.





(1) America was comprehensively beaten by Maria in trials before she left the USA.

 

"Personally, I want a fascinating sport, with lots of different events for different craft, where individuality and diversity are celebrated and enjoyed. I don't want this bland, monochrome, one-size-fits-all sport, where diversity is hated, where accessibility is reviled, where anyone who dares to think differently is abused, and where all must worship at the altar of speed without room for personal taste and preference."

Exactly CT, couldn't agree more.

 

Except they HAVE to be fast.

 

....which means we go back to one-size, one-colour, one-cut fits all boredom.

In that world, no boat will be sailed apart from something, perhaps, like a 1000 foot long version of Hydroptere.

No Emmies. No classic Kauri. No long, lean, curvey Metre boats. No cheerful but slow Mirrors sailed happily by ex-Tornado champs with their kids. No windsurfers. No R Class foilers. No 12 Foot Skiffs. No PTs, or Piedies, or happy families sailing H 28s, or tight fleets of Stewart 34s.

In that world, Ranger would be cut up, Ariki burned, Firebugs left to moulder. Sounds pretty crap to me. A world where diversity is treasured, including diversity in design and speed, sounds a lot better than a speed-blurred one-eyed singleminded greyscape.

Plenty of us who enjoy slow boats have sailed fast stuff; Tornadoes and 18s with the national champs, slalom boards at world titles, Lock Crowther's own offshore racing cat, etc. They are fantastic. But they are just one part of the spectrum, and without other craft for contrast there would be nothing to compare them with and no colour or life. Bleaghh.... I'd rather have the full orchestra than just one note, no matter how loud that note is played.

And it leaves the question - what is so important about speed?

 

Hold up CT, who said Ranger was slow, she was top boat in Auckland for years, decades, Ariki ditto, R Class performance was always high, Paper Tigers, Pied Pipers, Stewart 34's - all of them were high performance boats for their time, what in hell are you saying? Anyway we're discussing AC .... and the new AC boats to come ... and to quote you,
" I don't want this bland, monochrome, one-size-fits-all sport, where diversity is hated, where accessibility is reviled, where anyone who dares to think differently is abused," - absolutely .... maybe what you say is a two bladed sword.

 

Not for good match racing they don't.

The June Sailing World magazine just arrived. There's an article about the Elliott 6m to be used in the Olympic Match Racing event. They interviewed the top American Woman Match Racer Anna Tunnicliffe. Here's an excerpt:

Q: The hull has a sportboat look to it, but the boat sails with a fractional symmetric spinnaker. Would it be better with a masthead assymetric on a sprit?

A: The boats would be a lot of fun with an assymetric on there, but this is the best option for match racing.


I realized Doug is too far gone to ever understand what match racing is about. I can't understand why Gary doesn't get it. I also wonder why he never addresses the areas where these "fast" boats can't use match racing tactics. Better to avoid the facts if you have no leg to stand on I guess.

 

Sure they were fast - but only for their time, size, purpose and/or number of hulls, just like an AC mono is fast for its time, size, numer of hulls whatever. Ranger wasn't fast compared to the fastest contemporary yachts, like Westward and Endeavour II. Same as Ariki was slower than Satanita or Britannia. And yes, everyone knows big monos are faster than small monos, just like everyone knows multis are faster than monos. That didn't stop Rainbow and Ariki becoming icons, because they were seen in context, just as AC monos should be seen in context.

The Stewart 34 wasn't fast compared to Waikiki Surf, which came out about the same time, or a much smaller Z Class Renjolle of the German lakes. The Piedie wasn't fast compared to the older and smaller Flying Fifteen according to Racetrack, which means that it's a lot slower than a Jollenkreuzer which also has a cabin. The PT was (maybe is) rated slower than the contemporary Hobie 14 here, and it was of course much slower than a Stanton A Class, which was slower than an Australis or Unicorn.

So these boats are only fast compared to other comparable craft, and an America's Cup monohull also need only fast compared to other comparable boats. That's why this discussion is relevant to the AC.

And no, I don't think the call for diversity is a double edged sword, because it calls for equal respect for those who like fast boats AND those who like slow craft. I'd like to see a big-multi match-race, just like I loved crawling over ORMA 60s - that doesn't mean I think the multis should take over the mono's trophies, any more than foiler Moths and windsurfers should take over the Paper Tiger and Piedy regattas. Given that fast and slow types demand (IMHO) equal respect, there is no reason for the 'fast' boats to come in and sieze a trophy that the 'slow' craft created.

A few years ago, when the club that had rights to the Little America's Cup took it away from the C Class cats, the C Class cats publicly complained about it. They said, if I recall correctly, that the event had been always run in C Class cats, the C Class had basically created the event and the legend, and therefore had moral rights to the LAC. The same points apply to the big America's Cup - the type of boat that created it has the right to keep it. To me, that's the crux of the matter in some ways.

If (say) photographers of New Zealand had been competing for the major photography prize for years, they may not be very happy if (say) computer graphics people came in and said "we can make brighter colours, therefore you suck and we'll take over your prize".

When the world's motorbike riders have been spending years building up a fantastic heritage, of Hailwoode and Schwantz and others, they wouldn't enjoy it if car racers came along and said "we go faster, therefore you can **** off and we'll take over your biggest event".

There is an almost unlimited number of examples of sporting contests in which the rules of the game reduce 'performance' (ie the Olympic breastroke, backstroke, medley and butterfly medals, the Tour de France, longboard surfing, boxing, many types of shooting, Le Mans, Formula One, Superbikes, other racing motorbikes, yada yada yada) and no one seems to complain about them - why is the AC different?

Multihull sailors have no more right to the AC than car racers have to take over the top prizes in motorbike racing, IMHO. And the fact that multis are faster is no more relevant to the AC than the fact that a F1 car is faster than a MotoGP bike is relevant to GP motorcycle racing.