U
UCLAN
One down, four to go.
M
~misfit~
UCLAN said:
Hehee, one each now.
Exciting racing though, very closely matched boats and crews. Looks like
it's going to come down to sail choice, weather conditions and mistakes (if
any). Alinghi looks like it may be a slightly faster hull, although that
could be a reflection of sail choice and their excellent mainsail trimmer.
Oh, I answered my own question as to how many Kiwis would be on Alingi
during the races. It's 5 (of 17) including the mainsail trimmer. Also, a
Kiwi heads up their weather team.
Cheers,
U
UCLAN
~misfit~ said:
A couple of early tacks, and a left wind shift. Plus, a number of on-air
analysts were questioning some of skipper/tactician Butterworth's
decisions. One even called him "over-confident." The 9-11 knot wind is
also more to NZ's liking than Race #1's 12-14 knot winds. NZ's big gain
on the second windward leg was in 10 knot winds.
But an American (Ed Baird) at the helm. It looks like the NZ tactician
(American Terry Hutchinson) outfoxed Alinghi's tactician (Kiwi Brad
Butterworth.)
8-10 knot sea breeze forecast for Tuesday. We'll see if Alinghi adjusts.
M
~misfit~
UCLAN said:
Yep, I know all that.
Yeah. Well, he'd have to be good to get included in a boat full of Kiwis
huh? said:
That's TNZ's territory. Looking good for us. I'm pleased it's so close,
makes it worth staying up late to watch.
U
UCLAN
~misfit~ said:
By your own statement, 5 of 17 are Kiwis. That's "boat full of Kiwis" ??
I've told you a million times not to exaggerate. said:
On at 5:30am here, with a start time of 6am. I record it for later
viewing.
I'm hoping for a 15 knot wind. Those Kiwis would get sea sick. <g>
M
~misfit~
UCLAN said:
Please! I thought it was obvious that I was refering to Terry Hutchinson.
Re-read what I wrote please. Maybe you require that I snip more to make
things crystal for you?
Heh! The Kiwi boat handles a rough sea better than Alinghi. Having a
narrower beam does have it's advantages.
Turned out to be an event-filled race, the best I've seen for a while, even
though I had to wait until 3am for a start.
It seems that the series is going to come down to vagaries of weather and
judgement calls. The boats and crews are *very* evenly matched.
Still, 2 - 1 to ETNZ, looking potentially promising.
Oh, the talk of "country of origin" rules for the next series? You know,
where they're thinking of putting a limit on how many "foreign" team-members
are allowed, in the same way that currently the hull has to made in the
country it represents? There was a comment by an american presenter who TVNZ
interviewed during the long wait for the race this morning. She said that,
if the proposed changes are adopted, NZ will have to try to find funding to
field three teams in the next Americas Cup or there will be a lot of
world-class sailors out of work. ;-)
Cheers,
U
UCLAN
~misfit~ said:
Yup. Rough seas and light winds. Not a usual combination. That's why
I was hoping for 15 knot winds. TNZ's boat might tip over.
ACK! My recording ended just after the Kiwi bowman decided to go
swimming. Luckily, I caught a replay later in the day and viewed
the ensuing comedy. 'Twas high drama.
Wind speed seems to be paramount in importance. If it goes to 12 knots
or above, advantage Alinghi.
Last two legs were contested in *SIX* knot winds today (9 knots at the
second mark.) 6 knots? That's not sailing; that's drifting. And it was
shifting around, making the contest a crap shoot. Common belief by non
affiliated parties is that it should have been postponed. But, it's
done now. Wind forecast for Wednesday is 10-12 knot NE sea breeze
early, decreasing to 8-10 knots and shifting easterly later. Protect
the right side of the course...
M
~misfit~
UCLAN said:
Heh! I doubt it.
'Twas indeed.
That is the common consensus.
Yeah, to a point. Spotting the puffs and using them, as well as
tacking/jibing between waves also made a difference.
Indeed. I saw a bit of sour grapes from an Alinghi spokesman who said that
they may as well have stayed on the dock and tossed a coin. I bet he
wouldn't have said that if they'd won. said:
Was another interesting race. 2-all now. Alinghi does seem to be a damn good
boat though, hard to beat.
U
UCLAN
~misfit~ said:
Didn't hold true, today (Wednesday.) The breeze was under 10 knots
the entire race, and Alinghi still prevailed. Impressive.
I liked using a wave to your advantage in the leeward legs. It reminded
me of the action off of Freemantle, and to a lesser extent San Diego.
TNZ's slim shape, while being an advantage going *into* the swell, is
a detriment when trying to harness a swell.
If he would have won, they would have asked that question of the Kiwi
skipper. It's no secret Alinghi would like to have all of the races
occur in 12 knot or greater winds. Same as Dennis Connor and "Stars
& Stripes." It was a wide boat that thrived in stiffer breezes.
9 knot winds the entire race, dropping to 8 knots at the final mark.
Yet, Alinghi prevailed. Very impressive. Two competitive boats. Crews
can't afford to make any mistakes. Which is usually when they make
them, correct?
M
~misfit~
UCLAN said:
Very. They called the weather right and sailed well.
So true. However, most races are won or lost on the windward legs so it's a
small price to pay, especially when you're building a boat to race in the
Mediterranean, where there aren't usually ocean-type swells.
Sure, but I don't think he would have answered in /quite/ that way.
Yeah, well, they've know where the races were to be run for quite a while
now and the prevailing conditions. Horses for courses...
Usually. However:
Just before I turned off my TV I heard Luigi give a message to the crews
about not swapping any gear with the tenders and to drop the mainsail
*without* a man up the mast. (And asking each boat if they "copied" the
message) The TVNZ commentator said that this was a spot-check to make sure
that the boats were sticking to the rules about how many sails they have on
board etc. He turned to the guest commentator, Jimmy Spithill, and asked the
significance of the "without a man up the mast" thing.
Jimmy said that it's a requirement, written into the AC rules, (and most
regatta's rules) that you have to be able to drop the mainsail without
having to put a man up the mast. Jimmy said that it's primarilly a safety
measure in case it suddenly blows a gale out of nowhere. However, he went on
to say that the length of halyard from the top of the mast to the deck is
then part of the equation of the force of the mainsail, there's give in it
and it makes the boat slightly more slugish to respond. Then he said that
he'd noticed Alinghi had put a man up the mast after every race before
lowering the mainsail and it looked to him like he was operating a release.
He said obviously the umpires had noticed it too, hence the request to drop
without a man up the mast.
Meanwhile, in the background of the shot I saw a man go up Alighi's mast! He
fumbled with something at the top of the mast quickly, then held his hands
out to the sides as if to say "I'm not touching anything, honest". Then the
mainsail proceded to drop. (Actually, I wonder if he was dropping a pin into
the sea and disguising it with the spread hands thing?)
So it seems that Alinghi has been running with an illegal rig. There's a
hearing tomorrow and, if justice is done, the score should stand at 4 - nil
to NZ after that. Rules are rules, break them and you lose. I'd say the same
thing if NZ were caught cheating, believe it or not.
Shameful.
U
UCLAN
~misfit~ said:
Which makes me wonder about the importance of having a narrow hull
to knife through oncoming swells. I suppose their computer simulations
showed that it was best for the conditions off Valencia.
I don't think he would have complained about having the race in
I guess *their* computer model and TNZ's computer model gave somewhat
different results. Not surprising. The local weather service uses
FIVE computer models, then decides which one to believe before issuing
a forecast. Not an exact science.
Well, that's "sort of" what happened. For the full story on what
occurred, and TNZ's protest, read:
http://www.americascup.com/en/news/detail.php?idRubr=70&idContent=27990
Fridays weather forecast: Build SE breeze - 15 to 18 knots. Is that
Alinghi's computer model kicking in?
Saturday's forecast: Same 15-18 knot SE winds.
Alinghi better hope seas remain relatively calm!
M
~misfit~
UCLAN said:
So justice wasn't done. :-(
So what Jimmy said was true; Alighi don't have their mainsail attached to a
halyard at the top of the mast, running back to the deck. Therefore they
don't get a 'spring' effect from that extra give in the equation. A
five-hour hearing ay? Well, that shows that it wasn't a cut'n'dried
decision, leeway was given to Alinghi.
Simply put, they didn't comply with the original directive from the
measurements commitee, TNZ did. I would have liked the measurements commitee
to have put Alinghi into "park firme" and then tested Alinghi's given
response instead of sitting around a table. See if in fact they *could* drop
the main without a man up the mast. That wasn't established to _my_
satisfaction. If they don't have a halyard attached (as they claim) then how
do they raise it? They must hoist it, then connect it to something up there
that holds it in place right? The Alinghi bowman didn't take a halyard up
the mast with him, so there was obviously one already up there. Why wasn't
it attached to the main? Can whatever is holding the main up be released
from deck level? (I bet it can now*) Alinghi told a story which, after 5
hours deliberation, (and possibly not wanting a scandal when there are
multi-billions of dollars involved), the 5 man commitee _chose_ to believe,
in a /majority/ decision. Not unanimous.
(* From your URL:
"In its decision, the Jury noted it is at the discretion of the Measurement
Committee to take any further steps it feels necessary to ensure yachts are
in compliance with the America's Cup Class Rule."
Why would they say that if Alinghi was already in compliance? No. Therefore
they gave the wrong ruling.)
The 'measurer' on-board Alinghi at the time should never have agreed to
their request to put a man up the mast when the original directive was
perfectly clear. Luigi repeated it twice and asked each boat to confirm.
Alinghi should have taken their request to Luigi via the radio, not asked a
lone man, surrounded by grinders on their deck, in privacy. I wonder if
'Alighi's' measurer is still employed? Or now has a Swiss bank acount? Or
both.
There are lies, damn lies and politics. (Winston Churchill? Bastardising a
Benjamin Disraelli quote? Or maybe just me.)
I'm disgusted with that decision, it stinks. It sours the whole regatta in
my eyes.
Possibly. Last I heard was 20 knots forecast. That's getting back into TNZ's
comfort zone, with their keel designed to perform well in those conditions.
There could be some surprises yet.
Hehee! For sure. Could be an interesting race. Shame that it's a sham now,
it's just a yachting demonstration, an example of what billions of dollars
can buy. Justice was shunned in the commitee room, I just hope that Karma
ensures that it's implemented on the water.
Arghhh! The Sunday race coincides with the French Grand Prix. I do like my
Formula 1 and would prefer to watch both live.
Cheers,
U
UCLAN
~misfit~ said:
Or it was, depending on your point of view.
The rule (31.6) says "Mainsails shall be able to be lowered to the deck
without the necessity of a crew member going aloft." The only reason
they sent a crew member aloft (and they received permission from an AC
official on board before doing so) was to fix the halyard to the main-
sail for safety reasons. The only reason New Zealand filed their protest
was television footage showed Van Niewenhuyzen’s foot making contact
with the mainsail as he swung around the mast with the boat rolling in
the unsettled sea state. And, according to the article "that was enough
to question whether he had interfered in the process."
According to the on-board AC official, they did. The crewman's hands
were free before the sail was dropped. Only because of the incidental
touching of the sail by the crewman's leg did TNZ file a protest. I
guess they figure that the crewman had a very talented leg.
I'm rather sure they will at some point in time. Perhaps what transpired
on-board as witnessed by the AC official makes that unnecessary. Dunno,
as I wasn't there.
Why doesn't that surprise me? said:
It was damaged, as stated in the article. [You *did* read it, didn't
you?] *When* it was damaged was my only question. They had a lay day
today (appropriate name for the married crewmen), so it should be
repaired for racing on Friday.
According to the article, yes. "The halyard lock was tripped, and
the mainsail was lowered to the deck. At the time, the measurer was
satisfied with the demonstration."
LOL! The Jury merely noted the Committee's power to continue to enforce
compliance, as in have future tests. Maybe they got wind of a TNZ plan
to alter *their* setup? Your conclusion is not a logical one. Sorry.
What was he told? Do you know? Perhaps he was told by Alinghi that they
could do it either way, but it was safer if the halyard was fixed first.
After all, in the directive, "The measurers asked both teams to lower
their mainsails, without the assistance of a man aloft." In the opinion
of the official, the man aloft did not assist the lowering of the sail.
TNZ was fishing in arguing that the inadvertent touching of the sail by
the crewman's leg was somehow "assistance." The Jury didn't buy it.
I didn't see *this* video. The poor frail AC official surrounded by thug
grinders with big wrenches (and sardine breath, I suppose.) Methinks you
are letting your imagination run a bit uncontrolled.
Why? You have some inside info that nobody else has? You think that
Alinghi had a illegal mainsail take down configuration for the four
Finals races, and it somehow gave them two wins? You're convinced
that Alinghi *didn't* have a perfectly legal take down system until
the halyard broke in Race 4? The boats were measured and inspected
before Race One, Alinghi was in compliance, and won the race anyway.
Methinks you are just setting the stage for rationalization after
Alinghi wins the Cup. [BTW, they run that test as part of the boat
measurement after *every* race. So even if the Jury had ruled against
Alinghi, the *worst* punishment they could give them would be to
reverse the outcome of Race Four, making it 3-1 TN. That's worst case.]
Man, you remind me of a Pony League baseball coach I remember that
protested a game because the opposing pitcher's sanitary stirrups
were too high. It had *nothing* to do with the game outcome, and
he lost his protest. Don't know if he insisted that the whole
season was now a sham. Give it up. Team NZ has.
Latest weather forecast: 9-12 knot SE winds building to 14-18 knots.
http://www.americascup.com/en/news/detail.php?idIndex=0&idContent=27993&idRubr=63
M
~misfit~
UCLAN said:
Really? Did a TNZ spokesman say that or is that simply a journalist's
interpretation? That isn't what we're being told in NZ. There is no mention
of a leg touching a sail, merely that a man was put up the mast to
facilitate the lowering of the mainsail, contrary to the directive.
According to the on-board AC official, they did. The crewman's hands
were free before the sail was dropped. Only because of the incidental
touching of the sail by the crewman's leg did TNZ file a protest. I
guess they figure that the crewman had a very talented leg.
Did you write the article?
Nah, I just looked at the pictures.
Can you quote the bit where it says that *it* was damaged? [You *did* read
the artivle didn't you?]
So what was holding the sail up *before* it was attached to the halyard so
that the halyard lock could be tripped?
You can laugh all you like. The competitors are well aware of the commitee's
power, there was a reason that the jury felt it needed to make that
statement, same way as there was a reason the decision wasn't unanimous.
You continue to mock me, talking about Pony League further on, as if I'm
being completely unreasonable. Yet one or two of the five jury members
agreed with me.
Once again, if you can find me a copy of the official complaint and show me
anything about a leg being the cauise for it I'll buy you dinner.
LOL! You're the one talking about wrenches and sardines. *My* imagination?
Jimmy Spithill mused that he thought there was something fishy about the
Alinghi takedown on live TV here in NZ. He said he'd been noticing it after
each race. That's why.
You put words into my mouth. Nowhere did I say that it gave them two wins.
All I said was that non-compliance with rules should result in forfeiture of
the wins. Stands to reason right? Anyway, moot point, most of the jury
decided not to create a scandal.
Where do you get this info? That the halyard broke?
They certainly do *not* run that test after every race. I don't know what
your TV coverage in the US is like (If it's anything like SpeedTV's coverage
of Formula 1 then it's a joke) but, in NZ we hear everything that Luigi says
to the teams via VHF about course changes etc., TVNZ have a live mike on his
boat. He even talks to the NZ commentary team on cellphone sometimes
before/during/after the race about the course and conditions. That's the
first time I've heard him announce that test and the commentator, who's
covered 10 AC's, had to ask Jimmy Spithill about it. Jimmy said that it's
rare they run that test, they only did it twice to his knowledge during the
whole of the Louis Vuitton Cup.
Please, facts only huh?
Really? Perhaps so. It's still James Spithill's stated opinion (live on NZ
TV) that there was "something fishy" about Alinghi's takedown for all four
races. What would he know? He's just Luna Rossa's helmsman, the youngest
helmsman ever in AC history (2000) and 2005 Match Race World Champion.
Thanks for that.
Damn! I was looking forward to a race in strong(ish) winds. Still, I'll be
watching.
U
UCLAN
~misfit~ said:
The story was not by "a journalist." It was from the official AC website
of the organizing Committee in Valencia. The official TNZ protest called
it "kicking." In their protest, they also conceded, "that there was no
prohibition on a man going aloft to lower the mainsail but rather that
ACC Rule 31.6 required that it must be possible to lower the mainsail
without relying on a man aloft.
Of course not, but I read the official protest and the official minutes
of the jury hearing.
As explained at the hearing, "Grant Simmer submitted that they had used
the same mainsail system for all 5 masts that had been manufactured
under the Version 5 ACC Rule and the system had been used in ten Acts
(being from Acts 4 to 13). It was also submitted that on 19th May 2007
the Technical Director, Ken McAlpine, had sailed aboard the Alinghi
yacht SUI 91 and they had demonstrated the halyard lock system and
tested its release, and that Ken McAlpine had been happy with such
system." And, "Grant Simmer stated that it was standard procedure of
Alinghi for a man to go up the mast to fit a halyard to the mainsail
prior to its release. This was to ensure that in releasing the mainsail,
damage or injury could not occur to the sail, the boat or the people
as a result of the mainsail suddenly falling down which was quite
unpredictable especially in rough seas like that after Race 4. Video
evidence was presented of the Technical Director, Ken McAlpine, being
interviewed by the Media about the incident at the Alinghi base during
the course of the post-race measurement on 27th June, whereby he stated
that the Measurement Committee was satisfied with Alinghi having
complied with the ACC Rules. Grant Simmer stated that after he became
aware that there was going to be a protest, he was advised by 3 members
of the Measurement Committee that they were satisfied with the Alinghi
halyard trip system and the test." And, "The Jury allowed the evidence
of Murray Jones, the person who is in charge of Alinghi’s rigging, to be
given confidentially in the presence of ETNZ representatives and the
Technical Director Ken McAlpine. Murray Jones produced an Alinghi
halyard release system as well as its technical drawing and explained
its operation. He said that it worked in conformity with the ACC Rule
31.6 requirements and that it had always worked. It had been approved by
the Measurement Committee and had never been changed since. He stated
that in his view depending on the position of the mainsail battens, if
it was released without a halyard attached it was possible for damage to
occur to the runners or battens, or damage to the helm wheels as a
result of the boom suddenly coming down.
That statement by the Jury was in respect to the jurisdictional battle
that took place before the Jury ruled on the protest. "The Jury notes
that under Article 20.1 of the Protocol, all matters relating to “the
determination as to whether a yacht meets the ACC Rules” are for the
Measurement Committee. And, "The Jury considers that it is within its
jurisdiction to decide whether there is sufficient evidence to convince
the Jury to refer the case to the Measurement Committee in order for
the Measurement Committee to further assess compliance of the boat with
the ACC Rules.
Not surprising since one member is New Zealand's Graham McKenzie.
From the official protest, "The halyard then took the load and the crew
member kicked the mainsail and spread his arms." What TNZ described as
"kicking" was not shared by all. "Pieter Van Nieuwenhuyzen stated that
he was hoisted up the mast to clip the halyard to the mainsail. He
stated that it was standard Alinghi procedure prior to dropping the
mainsail for a halyard to be fitted in order to avoid its sudden falling
down. He stated that he did not assist the release of the mainsail lock,
that due to the rough nature of the sea there was very substantial
movement at the top of the mast (7 to 8 metres) and that he did not kick
the mainsail lock system off. The apparent kicks (there were several of
them before and after the release) were due to the mast movement
especially when his hands were not holding the mast which he did in
order to show that he was not helping the release process. He stated
that the trip mechanism fully released itself in the normal way and
without assistance."
I take my steak medium-rare. No sheep, please.
No. According to various news sources, including Reuters, "If the
five-member race jury had ruled against Alinghi they could have imposed
penalties ranging from fines to a point deduction or a re-sail."
The LV Cup is not the AC Finals. From the AC site, "Emirates Team New
Zealand filed the protest after watching television footage that showed
one of the normal post-race measurement checks." And in the Jury
minutes, we learn it was inspected and OKed before Race One.
The US television gets the same pool audio and video feeds as everyone
else. It would be a mess if each country fitted the yachts with their
own cameras and microphones. We hear (and see) the course change
announcements, as well as the acknowledgments. Our commentators
vary from day to day, but Peter Isler is there every day, Paul Cayard
spent a day or two there, there are two commentators in a boat following
the action, and interviews with crew members of various AC teams.
The general take on the protest was that it's not an official AC event
until New Zealand drags their opposition into the Jury Room on a lay
day. And one Australian AC veteran (who wished to remain nameless)
said the word around the AC docks was that TNZ wanted to keep Brad
Butterworth off of the golf course.
Those Kiwis sure put on an entertaining show. I was expecting a laugh
track, slide whistles, and maybe some "Keystone Kop" music during their
spinnaker ordeal. A shame, too, as they might have won the race. Then
again, Alinghi may not have sailed so conservatively...
Good luck in Race 6.