Originally Posted by jameswilson29
Ding, ding, ding...this is the correct answer! (By the way, some of you don't know what "elapsed time" means: Hello, the Hobie 33 beat most of the fleet, boat to boat, without regard to any PHRF handicap rating!!!)
Applying rocket science to sailboats does not necessarily produce a rocket, but is does produce an extremely expensive sailboat.
While technological advances such as carbon fiber and computer assisted design have greatly increased the cost of new sailboats, they have not greatly increased the speed potential of monohulls in all conditions.
The 70s and 80s were the heydey of sailing in the U.S.: all the recent technological advances have not produced a better Hobie 33 or a better J/24. If so, such boats would have won the race.
What are you talking about? What you say makes not any sense. it is evident that new technologies materials and advancements in design produced faster boats in all conditions.
You are talking about a backwater race where the only two modern racers were a Fart 400 and a TP 52. The fact that the Hobie 33 made a great race regarding that size of boat and was miles ahead of all has nothing to do with a being a boat with a similar performance of a modern carbon similar sized recent sailboat, but with the fact that in that race there was not any, not to mention sailed with an equally competent crew.
If you want to proof your point look at the results of major races on the states or elsewhere with top crews sailing top modern carbon boats and compare the results with the ones with older boats (I am sure you will see the difference). The Fastnet, that is almost here would be a good place to look at.
If that was as you say nobody would buy very expensive top recent sailing boats for racing. They would race in old boats with similar performance (if they existed) that would cost a fraction of the price.