I apologize, paolo. I misunderstood what you meant when you said "the record is relative'". If you say you were not denigrating the record, I have a hard time figuring out how what you wrote was at all complimentary, when your entire post was basically a slam, pointing out why the record run wasn't really a record run.
Nice of you, and I mean it
. But you are right, I mean that what was beaten was not a comparable record but that it was a new record that was set, not a record that was beaten as the news that I have read pointed clearly out.
The existent previous record was a race
record, not a record set with ideal conditions (as normally the records are set) and therefore they were not trying to beat a previous record, but to make a record time. Besides in what regards records monohulls and multihulls have different records, as there are record times to solo sailing and crewed boats.
Simply there was not any previous record time set by a multihull so they had not really much to beat, except a race monohull record that has nothing to do with what they were doing in two counts: Race record, and Monohull record.
I was pissed when I read the article on the newspaper by the sensationalist way it was given, like if it was a huge accomplishment over a precious record:
Sydney-Hobart sailing record smashed
Well the previous record was not smashed, the previous record remain as race record and mono-hull record. The previous record was not comparable, not in the conditions (race record), not in the type of boat (monohull). This is a new set record for Multihulls and I don't think there was any reference time before for multihulls. That was what I wanted to say with the word "relative"
I am sorry if I was not clear.