Breaking News - New America's Cup Class

And where in Europe might that be?

 

Maybe we should have a poll to decide between ourselves at least, what the AC is all about. I seem to have a consistent theme in my own postings here and elsewhere that it is a form of entertainment that should aim at attracting larger audiences as well as the competitive aspects. Others, I suspect see only the part it can play in advancing technology with the true test played out with full exposure to the might of the ocean far from land. There is always a group that want to convert it into a sailing class so it can promote improvement within the restrictions of consistent rules. Certainly, we will all agree that it does not belong in a courtroom with a judge of all people attempting to decide policy; if that progresses further we'll end up with it in the hands of the UN! I hope we can all agree on one thing, it is unique and should stay unique. We already have the Volvo and any number of class boats with more or less restrictions IMHO, so in what direction should the future of the AC be steered?

My poll suggestions are:

1: it's theater; lets aim for big TV audiences with rules intended to make its development, testing and races highly visible
2: It's the purest form of sailing, no rules, go for speed in delicate and pampered sailing monsters
3: it's all about man and machine against the elements; you must race "on the day, at the time" no matter the weather so design for that
4: Lets set class rules, reduce the costs to get many entries, maybe set up a round-robin eliminator and playoffs like hockey

Indicate your interest in a poll and suggest more options if you are interested in pursuing this further.

 

Terry:

Your career history of pragmatic discovery of what people REALLY want is rearing it's head here. Problem is, there is no one client and consensus will never be reached. Fanatics on all of the hundred faces of this debate aren't willing to compromise their views, therefore we will end up exactly where we start, just with less hair remaining.

Personally, I'm for walking away from the discussion. Like you I enjoy rational debate and discussion, but I need to see the possibility of a compromise and resolution to make the effort worthwhile.

I'm more concerned with more people having fun in boats - new people, young and old. Cost-no-object technology spending wars and millionaire ego fights interest me not at all.

One man's view.

--
Bill

 

I thick it is a fun idea.
3-I find it the best
5-Reestablish the county rule
6-Every winner should have a complete physiological examine and a follow up to cure the "malignant ego"
7-Sponsor prohibited, can provide only booze, parties and girls
8-Inventing a yacht club in Valencia is not authorize
9-To boost the TV audience, "American Idol" can be held on deck of each boat during the race.
10-Everyone who is sleeping watching the race on TV should be awarded a "Serta" mattress

Just kidding. I am not making fun at your idea, I am just mocking the AC as it is right now.
I think your poll is valuable between us and please start a thread with it.
It will be interresting to see the result.
Daniel

 

I'm for 2, Terry - but with a 22 knot true wind speed limit - also agree with 1 (they both belong together) - not interested in one designs - we already have ocean racing - AC should be the apotheosis of yacht design development and sailing skills. Will anyone listen to me? - pigs arse. That's the thing about blog forums, comments have a half life of 2.5 minutes maximum, only historian cranks (include myself) will wade through all this (fascinating) stuff.

 

AC boats

One of the things that has not surfaced in this discussion other than a very brief mention, is that the Americas Cup is about match racing, and big heavy boats with lots of ballast and momentum make for hugely interesting pre start maneuvers, the slow acelleration that makes tacking too often costly so tactics and planning are very important, the relatively limited top speed is not so much of an issue for the average non technically minded spectator, as long as they are big enough a quick enough to be impressive, its the racing that grabs them and when you get 70 footers still within seconds of each other after a couple of hours, thats what keeps the punters glued to the sets.
Being a techo minded type myself, I'd love to see more innovation and sheer speed, but suspect that it would not sell the event at all.
Thats sadly why in car racing Nascar gets more spectators than Formula one. ( Go McLaren!)
But how about a 35 m long shunting proa with a massive wing sail, hydrofoils and a four line kite of about 150 sq m flown on 200m long lines for downwind and reaching. Could be done, 50 knots anyone?
But not for match racing.

John Welsford

 

=================
You know, match racing is NOT the "idea" behind the Cup-its relatively new and only rarely provides real excitement. I've watched almost every Cup ever televised and the last race was exciting to me. If the rule used in the last race was continued the racing would get closer and closer.
Plenty of speed and tough conditions make a pretty -and exciting- picture.

EDIT-4/19/10 :This may be wrong-I found this quote: "The first match race in the America's Cup occurred in 1870 between the U.S. defender Magic and the English challenger Cambria . Since then every race in the 29 events which have followed, as well as all of the defender and challenger trial races, have been match races."
http://www.sailing.org/sailors/856.php

 

Consistent rules maintained over a reasonable period of time should allow evolutionary development to take place, and might to lead to closer results and perhaps a resumption of public interest and understanding. A set of consistent rules would at least define what the AC is all about other than being a kind of rich man's club.

I reiterate my opinion that public interest is something that should be encouraged. Without public interest the AC is a matter between obscenely rich private individuals who should be free to do whatever they wish without interference or comment from the great unwashed.

 

The AC not about match racing? Match racing "new" to the cup?

America won the hardware in a fleet regatta.

The first defense almost 20 years later was a fleet event (1870).

EVERY contest since has been a match race.


The DOG multihulls are not well suited to match racing.

 

The "idea" behind the Cup changes with each new winner - as each new winner has a great degree of latitude in which they can interpret the boats sailed and the venue. Generally, each winner tailors the next contest to their own strengths, budgets and motivations.

This ever-changing "idea" is probably a good thing, as the series can evolve to fit the times and technologies. Without this ongoing evolution the contest would lose relevance quickly.

Each spectator as well had their own interpretation of what is exciting. What turns your crank Doug may not have the same effect on the next guy. You have a habit of projecting your own personal "desire" as one everyone agrees with.

It really depends on whether you want to see a contest of boats, or a contest of sailors. Match racing optimizes a contest of sailors. Contests of boats favor radical spending, radical rules bending and often unbalanced results.

I expect the "idea" of the Cup is changing quite radically from the recent contest, as Mr. Ellison probably needs to ratchet down the spending from pre-bubble Oracle levels to the new economic realities of the world today. I think he's gained some confidence in his ability to field a winning team of sailors as well, which may steer the contest more towards match racing than the last one.

Personally, I'd rather that the contest be much more financially accessible, and if people feel the need to spend more it be allocated to bringing more people to the sport.

--
Bill

 

Actually, the challenger has control over the type of boat.

We just has the Congressional Cup in Long Beach. It is the only top level match race event in North America. It uses the slowest boats of any in the year-long match racing circuit that travels the world. The sailors prefer these slow boats to every other boat on the circuit, since their slow acceleration and non-planing offwind speeds make the best match racing.

It also makes for great spectating, since the well sailed boats are always close and the trailing boat can attack on the runs.

The nature of the DOG multihulls precludes any ability for the trailing boat to attack after rounding the windward mark. The IACC designs also had this problem to some extent.

 

ISAF: The History of Match Racing

"Match race sailing, as opposed to fleet racing, started evolving with the America's Cup races, whose foundation was layed 144 years ago, and which have been growing steadily since. The first match race to be sailed in one-design i.e. technically identical boats, was the Omega Gold Cup in Bermuda, that was first sailed in 1937 and is currently marking its 56th anniversary. The skipper who won it was Briggs Cunningham, who was also the one to win the first America's Cup in 12-metre boats."

http://www.sailing.org/sailors/854.php

=======================
EDIT: 4/19/10 See post 52 and post 69

 

No, the challenger does not control the type of boat, as Michael Fay discovered in 1988. The challenger may propose the type of boat, but whether or not the defender meets it with the same type is up to mutual consent. That issue was settled by the Mercury Bay decision.

I disagree. The notion that multihulls make it impossible for the trailing boat is exactly backwards. The speed of a multihull is very dependent on wind pressure. A gust can easily allow a trailing multihull to gain a lot of ground on the leader. Bot races saw differences of 600 m - 800 m overcome by the trailing boat. You can hardly say the trailing boat had no opportunity to attack.

Say Alinghi 5 had done a better job of judging the layline in race 2 and tacked earlier. They would have rounded the windward mark first. USA 17 gained 100 m per minute (for over 15 minutes!) on the reach, and there would definitely have been a lead change after the windward mark.

There were several lead changes in the 33rd AC. In race 1, USA 17 lost the start by 800 m, and there was a lead change just over 15 minutes into the windward leg. In race 2, USA 17 won the start, but A5 took the lead by virtue of being on the right side of the course for a wind shift. Then there was another lead change just below the windward mark, for two lead changes in the same leg.

In both races, classic match racing tactics were used - the dial-up in race 1's start, and the timing of USA 17's tack that drove A5 to over-stand the layline in order to avoid tacking in front of USA 17. USA tacked to cover A5 shortly after the start in race 2, minimizing the leverage between them instead of each boat sailing their race separately as had been speculated before the regatta. Judging the wind and picking the right side of the course mattered. Sailing ability and setting up the boat for the conditions mattered - as evidenced by the difference in Alinghi 5's upwind performance between race 1 and race 2.

Bottom line is we saw multiple lead changes and classic match-racing tactics in a 2-race regatta where one boat was 10% - 20% faster than the other boat. With 12 meters or IACC boats, if you had one boat that was 1% - 2% faster, you might not expect any lead changes at all. And these were the first times these boats had raced against any other boat at all! USA 17 hadn't even sailed a complete practice race before race 1. If you gave each boat a sparring partner for a couple months before the regatta, I'll bet the racing would have been even closer and more tactical.

If multihulls were designed to a more restricted rule, there wouldn't be as much difference in the speed potential of the boats. But their ability to achieve large differences in speed by playing the puffs would mean a boat is never out of contention unless it's a total horizon job. That would make for more interesting racing, not less.

 

First class analysis, Tom - and hopefully it will put to rest the ad nauseum repetition emanating from the ponderous heavy brigade about multis being not ..... blah, blah etc. etc. If anything, multihulls will be light years superior for exciting match racing once, as you say, boats are of similar platform, and training. And the public are going to be more interested in lead changes at high speed - rather than (how riveting) two overweight porkers poking occasionally past each other - and very occasionally at that, usually it is following the leader .... marvelous paint dry viewing?

 

That's incorrect, by a couple of hundred years. It's well known that the first recorded yacht race, the 1 October 1661 event between Katherine and Anne, the yachts of the Duke of York and King Charles II, was a match race. It took place from Greenwich to Gravesend.

In July 1663, William Pepy's first catamaran won a match race. Incidentally, Pepy's cats were supported by the Royal Society and the King.... since cats got such heavyweight supporters early on, and the New Yorkers didn't ban them after Herreshoff re-created the type, we have plenty of evidence that the multi cause was not destroyed simply by conservatism as so often said.

Fleet racing as we know it didn't start until the Cumberland Fleet came along in 1775. Match racing was popular for many years thereafter.

The 5th and 6th races the NYYC itself held were match races, in 1847.

The USA and UK had already had a match race before the AC, in the form f the Pearl v Brenda race in Bermuda in 1849.

Before the race which began the AC took place, America's owners arranged a match with the cutter Alarm (which fell through) and the schooner Titania (which actually took place after the fleet race despite being arranged before it).

The above facts show that match racing was extremely common in the early years of the sport.