SailNet Community banner
  • SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!

AC 34 - What If?

22K views 190 replies 32 participants last post by  downeast450 
#1 ·
Anyone watching the AC races today was probably surprised NZ soundly handed Team Oracle two losses in a row. The announcers were surprised. The hushed crowd at the docks seemed shocked. The few articles I've read so far expressed surprise. Everyone seemed to think Oracle was the easy favorite, until the jury handed down the penalties a few days ago, considered by many as being severely harsh and unprecedented.

Team Oracle was forced to enter the America's Cup with a negative two points (-2 race wins) and without their head trimmer. Today's race started NZ 0, USA -2. And today, based on the results, it looked like Oracle never had a chance. They are now down 4 races.

So, what if NZ wins the next 7 races? How would that go down in the annals of the America's Cup, considering the penalties the jury cast down? Then, who really wins?
 
#2 ·
"IF" NZ wins the next 7, they won 9 in a row. Oracle won ZERO!!!!!! at that point in time, it would probably not matter about the penalties, altho some might say a missing person was the issue......then again.

Oracle shot themselves in the foot! no ifs ands or buts! 52 secs for a loss with these rigs, is a big distance!

Oracle is the home team, if they did not like how the potential penalties could be given out, they should have litigated some more. I would prefer to go back to the 12m time, ea country had to have a crew of all their own, etc etc.......BUT, I have to admit, these beasts are much more fun to see and watch, Hence why I would not like to see 12m come back. The politeness of the time, could come back. BUT< then from things I am reading, even back int he early days, BS that is going on today, was going on then, so things have not changed! Spoiled rich boyz with there toyz! and no manners!

Marty
 
#4 ·
There are a few of these threads running so forgive me if I repeat.

As far as I understand it, OTUSA decided to campaign their slower boat because it was more stable. Now they may have done that because their "rookie" mainsail trimmer was not skilled enough to guarantee that he wouldn't serve up a nosedive.

So where is the mainsail trimmer that sailed on the Ben Ainslee boat? If their current mainsail trimmer is not him then where is he? If it is him, why is he struggling to get things right? He didn't appear to have a problem keeping up during their testing/training.

Have they got their slower boat? It would seem so. But where is the logic? If you are being beaten on speed what is the point of being stable? If you're up there with speed and competing, then the stability is an issue but if it can be controlled then it has to be the first choice. Seems to me that was OTUSA's first error and as it happens it is critical.

So IMHO if they chose their slower boat then one should not wonder that they're being beaten. And ETNZ should not have to be embarrassed about beating them. As Julie says, everyone was surprised that ETNZ was quicker - seems even OTUSA never considered that a possibility - if they did they would never had opted for the slower boat.

There were also clear signs that OTUSA were not sailing well. Example: when rounding the top mark ETNZ were already foiling at 40 kn+ as they rounded. If you can watch that part of the race again, see how OTUSA had their leeward hull firmly buried on the water until they were effectively around the mark. Only then did they get up on the foil. That alone would cost them 100yds.

And their starting was not up to Barker's standard. Especially on the second start, Spithill had every opportunity to get to weather of Barker and give him dirty air to start in - he deliberately chose not to. WTH?? Then he compromised his boat speed to try and get a penalty on ETNZ and payed the price.

I could go on but then this post will get long enough not to be read. Suffice it to say that ETNZ may well go to 9-zip. It's not their fault.
 
#7 ·
Then he compromised his boat speed to try and get a penalty on ETNZ and payed the price.
It was a penalty. The boats clearly touched.

Example: when rounding the top mark ETNZ were already foiling at 40 kn+ as they rounded. If you can watch that part of the race again, see how OTUSA had their leeward hull firmly buried on the water until they were effectively around the mark. Only then did they get up on the foil. That alone would cost them 100yds.
Not sure what part of the race you are referring to Andre. If it was the first mark after the start of the first race they got hit with bad air so the hull touching the water was the result. That is why the start is so important but I am sure I am not telling you anything you don't already know. I look forward to Oracle to having a good start in one of these races. That said - Go ETNZ!
 
#24 ·
Not sure what part of the race you are referring to Andre. If it was the first mark after the start of the first race they got hit with bad air so the hull touching the water was the result.
No, I'm speaking of the top mark, where ETNZ did their spectacular nosedive and where the bear-away is so spooky. Oracle kept their boat real quiet around the bear-away mark to the point were their leeward hull was firmly in the water all the way round the mark. By contrast ETNZ were foiling and boat speed climbing into the thirties by the time they got to the mark. There is a 100yd advantage right there. In races 3 and 4 Oracle did that better and look at the results.

That said - Go ETNZ!
Couldn't say it better. And recent news in NZ (last night) is that if ETNZ wins, the government will seriously consider another contribution of $40m - if they lose, move on. So it would seem they have one shot - "Go hard or go home".
 
#8 ·
Anyone watching the AC races today was probably surprised NZ soundly handed Team Oracle two losses in a row. The announcers were surprised. The hushed crowd at the docks seemed shocked. The few articles I've read so far expressed surprise. Everyone seemed to think Oracle was the easy favorite, until the jury handed down the penalties a few days ago, considered by many as being severely harsh and unprecedented.
"Anyone", and "everyone seemed to think ORACLE was the easy favorite"? Really?

You obviously haven't been following the AC threads at Sailing Anarchy, for one... Lots of pretty informed opinion over there, much of it has long been postulating that ETNZ was the team to beat...

Why would anyone be totally "surprised" by their performance today? ETNZ was the first team to launch their AC 72, and the first ones to be able to fly both hulls on their foils... Not to mention, they've yet to do anything like this to one of their boats...

 
#9 ·
If Oracle chose their slower, more stable boat because of the loss of their trimmer (they also lost grinder Matt Mitchell for four races), and choosing the slower boat is why they were so soundly beaten upwind, couldn't one say the penalties handed down to Oracle made it impossible for Oracle to win the Cup? From there couldn't one conclude the jury wanted Ellison out for AC 35?

Apparently, the actions of three members of a 130 member team were enough for the jury to feel justified in handing down the penalties they did. Is it possible Team Oracle wants to send a message to the jury, something like: they rigged the outcome of the America's Cup with the severe penalties? If the Kiwis dominate the two races today...
 
#11 ·
I'd first look at the Jury...

Paragraph 96 of the decision:
96. The Jury has no intention to impose a penalty that will determine the outcome of the Match, which should best be determined on the water and not in the Jury room. But for these mitigating factors the penalty would have been heavier.

Paragraph 99 of the decision:
99. Pursuant to Protocol Article 15.4(d)(iv), OTUSA shall be penalised one point for each of the first two races of the Match in which they would otherwise score a point.

In all of sports have you ever heard of a team starting a championship event with their score in the negative column? Imagine a Super Bowl with one team starting out -14 points, or a World Series with one team needing to win two more games than the other to take the Series or the same kind of thing in basketball, soccer, etc. The fans would be screaming bloody murder.

But therein lies the difference. Most sailing fans don't care about this decision, or if they do, they aren't getting any press. Some fans don't even know that the infraction occurred during the 2012 ACWS, when the AC45s were racing. (Even the Jury admitted the AC45s are not the same as the AC72s and, therefore, what advantage could have been gained?) It really seems like the only people screaming bloody murder about the ruling is Team Oracle, and maybe a handful of devoted fans.
 
#13 ·
Scott, it's just pure speculation, as I'm sure you know. And really, if Oracle wanted to send the message to the Jury that they did in fact decide the outcome of the Match, Oracle would make sure they got the 9 wins (exclusive of the two penalty points) before NZ secured their 9 wins.

Who knows? Maybe they still will.

But if one imagines starting off in a negative points/wins situation, isn't it possible something like that could take the momentum/desire/drive out of the penalized team? And then, doesn't that mean the penalty did actually determine the outcome of the Match?
 
#16 ·
Minne,

I think you are correct. The full banning in this sport is not unfounded. Has been done before. no different than some of the bannings of players for full seasons, college teams from playoffs and bowl games for 2-4 yrs, loss of scholarships etc.

More may come out later from the international side of things, Maybe even US Sailing........ after this is over. Even if Oracle wins, I can see and should see harsher penalties.

Marty
 
#17 ·
After reading the decision I really don't understand how they could penalize the entire team. The Jury said several times they could find no evidence that anyone other than the named team members knew about the infraction. If the Jury imposed the penalties they did just to ensure Ellison was out of the game for the next Cup, they are a bunch of hypocrites.

In the decision they said the integrity and good of the sport comes before anything else, then said they don't want to decide the outcome and then penalize Oracle by putting them two races in the hole. It's a joke and it wouldn't surprise me if they did more harm than good to the sport of sailing by doing this.

Imagine you're a newbie to baseball and you decide to sit down and watch the World Series. Before the first pitch is thrown, you see one team has -2 wins. "Oh, they cheated," is the response you get when you ask why. What will your opinion of baseball be when you hear that?

I get taking away their wins in the ACWS. I get banning the participants in the infraction from the Match. But there was absolutely no evidence shown in the decision that any of the rest of the team had any knowledge of the infraction until after the fact. I think the Jury made this worse than it was and in doing so gave sailing a black eye.

If the powers-that-be don't like where Ellison has taken the AC, they should have created rules to prevent it.
 
#18 ·
Julie,

I'm just not buying that no one else knew. Why would lower ranking crew members mess with balance and not want the helmsman or skipper to know? I think it's just cover for why they didn't ban the entire team, which would therefore eliminate the Cup race entirely and many innocent bystanders (San Fransisco, NBC, vendors, etc) would have suffered.

If you are reading hipocracy and question integrity, you are reading it correctly. IMO.
 
#20 ·
Julie,

I'm just not buying that no one else knew. Why would lower ranking crew members mess with balance and not want the helmsman or skipper to know? I think it's just cover for why they didn't ban the entire team, which would therefore eliminate the Cup race entirely and many innocent bystanders (San Fransisco, NBC, vendors, etc) would have suffered.
I agree, odds are there were higher-ups who knew and the named team members were just thrown out as an attempt to sacrifice a few so the team could carry on. But the problem I have is that the Jury decision offered no evidence anyone else was involved. They should therefore rule only on the evidence at hand. Suspicions have no place in making their decision.

If the Jury felt strongly enough that there were higher-ups who knew, they should have said so. (They kept mentioning in the decision no one seemed to know who removed the weights, and it appeared that really bothered them.) And if they felt that for the good of the sport the Cup Match needs to carry on, they could have said that too and, IMHO, that would be a pretty stand up thing to do. Don't punish the innocents.

But I really have a tough time believing Ellison had prior knowledge about the infraction. I can't believe anyone would risk hundreds of millions of dollars AND their reputation just to win some World Series matches. And then I have to ask myself just how far down the ladder does one have to be where the risk-reward balance out enough to justify the action?
 
#19 ·
If one looks at other sports, they see that teams, individuals get banned, lose past races, games etc be them temporary or or permanent.... you shrug your shoulders and move on. Professional hockey has penalized players sit in a penalty box for a period of time. That persons team is now down a player!

To put it bluntly, what happened as far as penalties go, are WELL founded through out sports! BUT as noted, many millions if not billions of dollars would have been thrown away if oracle had been given a complete ban for what happened. Hopefully ISAF does this to ALL who knew, participated etc over the next few months.

Marty
 
#22 ·
Minnewaska,

After reading your post it made me wonder how long this behavior has been going on and not just at the America's cup. I don't think these guys just got up one morning and out of the blue decided to rig the game.

One usually learns bad behavior from their peers.

You're a cynic and I'm jaded. :)

Ken
 
#23 ·
I actually can't imagine a person like Ellison compromising his integrity for something this insubstantial. This is a hobby to him. Who puts their very considerable professional integrity on the line for a hobby? Only a stupid person. And Ellison is not one of those. So based on that I reckon he didn't know.

I also don't believe some shore-side personnel or sailing crew would take it upon themselves to illegally modify a boat. What have they to gain? Especially if their superiors don't know.

So who gets to win or lose?

Only the direct team management. If they keep losing races they don't only lose races, they lose their jobs. If they keep winning, they keep winning at a lot more than just sailing. These guys don't get paid peanuts. I would take one of their jobs in a heartbeat.

And it is (at least it is to me) interesting that none of the guilty parties were actually fired or if they were it wasn't made public. Is that perhaps because they can't be? For good reason? If they compromised the professional integrity of the 5th richest man in the world and weren't fired, there's more to this than we can see.
 
#26 ·
I actually can't imagine a person like Ellison compromising his integrity for something this insubstantial. This is a hobby to him. Who puts their very considerable professional integrity on the line for a hobby?.......
Google the dozens of interviews with Ellison over the years, on all matters, and tell me he gives a hoot what anyone thinks about him. He is very clear in both business and sailing, its all about winning. Nearly a quote.
 
#33 ·
I realize ego can blind someone and usually the richer you are, the bigger your ego. But I still can't believe Ellison had prior knowledge of the infraction. That super ego also compels these people to maintain their super reputation.

From what I've read, as the AC45 required repair, the Measurement Committee increased the parameters to allow for the additional weight the repairs added. But they outlined very specific areas where additional weight can be added. Along the line, one Oracle AC45 and one BAR AC45 were found to have weights added outside those specific areas.

It started when the BAR boat was being measured and they found the infraction. Oracle then did their own inspection and found their two boats were also outside the rules and self-reported. The committee later found one of the Oracle boats passed, the other didn't.

The BAR boat is owned by Oracle and on loan to BAR. What would Team Oracle gain through BAR successes? Would Ellison be boasting, "Oh, hey! Ben Ainslie won but it was with my boat!"? I'm not seeing the advantage. That would be kind of petty to me. Would Team Oracle risk their reputation to set up Ben Ainslie for the fall? I kinda doubt it.

Now if whoever loaned the boat to BAR knew about the illegal weights, wouldn't they have removed them before they gave the boat to BAR? For one, they would lose control of access to the boat in the event they wanted to remove the weights. And if in fact the illegal weights improved performance, why would you want to give that to a competitor?

I have no idea how the mind(s) of the perpetrators were working when the weights were added. Logic isn't always logical. But I don't think the knowledge of the infraction went very high up on the ladder, considering the implications... Unless the top brass felt invincible. And that's always a possibility.
 
#35 ·
....That super ego also compels these people to maintain their super reputation.......
What super reputation? He is known as an SOB that must win at whatever he does. There was an article written about his professional career that describes him as somewhere between a bad boy and insane.

I don't need to pound on this. None of us know what we don't know. I just don't think he is good for the sport, for a variety of reasons. He sets many bad examples. You can be a fierce competitor and still have a drink with your opponent when the game is over.
 
#34 ·
Hard to have any sympathy for Larry, the biggest ego in the valley. Culture starts at the top. If someone who works for me cheated, then I cheated. No hiding behind the troops. If the team wins, great leaders give their people the credit, and take little for themselves, and all successful people aren't great leaders.

That said, watching those big cat's fly around SF bay is kinda fun!
 
#36 ·
I'm not trying to argue in defense of the guy. I'm just trying to wrap my head around why anyone, Ellison, Coutts, de Ridder, et al, who cares at all about their reputation in the sailing world would knowingly do something so blatantly stupid.

Just the idea of rigging a boat outside the rules and then lending it to someone else boggles my mind. It's not just shooting yourself in the foot, it's shooting yourself in the head! And then to do that in the ACWS and put risking being banned from participating in the Cup? What's to be gained? Why would winning the ACWS be more important than winning the Cup? It makes no sense to me.
 
#37 ·
....Why would winning the ACWS be more important than winning the Cup? It makes no sense to me.
Here's a hypothesis. I'm not saying its true. We don't know the truth. That much is in evidence, with so many unanswered questions. Perhaps they were testing techniques that would carry over. Who won the WS didn't matter at all. Oracle is still the AC defender. Nothing like insuring those that may get caught are separated from the mofia boss. :)
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top