GGYC (BMWO) filed with the New York Supreme court on several points this morning (or last night). Copying from "Peelman" over at SA, here is the basic summary of pages of legal documents.




One of the surprises is that there is no contention about the venue - RAK in the United Arab Emirates...we kind of thought this might come up about how the deed specifies the match be held on an "ocean course free of headlands" while RAK is in a gulf and it could be argued that the arabian peninsula has an affect on the wind around RAK....but anyway...

The biggest point here is one of the recent rulings by the New York court granted Alinghi the absurd ability to change the rules at will up to the second before the match - that particular ruling will apparently be appealed by BMWO as part of this action.

In addition, SNG stated several times in court that they will not use the rules to DSQ BMWO - but their measurement rule that was published several weeks ago includes an unsual provision that the rudders will be included in the waterline length measurement. This is a particular issue for BMWO because their hull sterns are overhung (suspended above the water) forward of the rudders. By now including the rudders in the measurement, it increases the measured waterline length of the boat (there are not many instances of measurement rules including rudders in sailing long history).

This whole rule thing gets particularly weird because SNG copied the measurement rules from the 1988 DoG match when Conner's 60' catamaran went up against Mercury Bay (New Zealand). That campaign was also run by Tom Ehman - the same guy running much of BMWO's current operation. Those rules, while not specifically stating that the rudders were part of the measurement, established that water line length was measured between the furthest fore and aft planes where the yacht breaks the water line plane (emphasis is mine). The title of that section is called "hull measurement" but this detail was omitted in the published Alinghi rule along with all the procedures for setting up an impartial measurement committee staffed with personnel from both teams and the sport's international governing body. (Side Note: Alinghi has also stated that they will appoint a measurer and a "guy to hold the other end of the tape" and there is no need for BMWO to have someone on the measurement team.) The boats that ran in the 1988 match were completely unaffected by whether or not the rudder was included in the measurement so it's likely that there was no specific intent to measure them in some funny way. This clearly has a significant bearing on the current vessels that are set to contend for the cup in February and Alinghi has confirmed that the measurement rule is to include the rudders. By using these rules, Alinghi intends to either DSQ the BMWO boat or at least force some sort of extensive and expensive redesign on part of BMWO in the short 5 months leading up to the match in order to meet the rules.

But don't forget, Alinghi contended in court repeatedly that they would not use the rules to DSQ BMWO's boat.

Another sticky point in the new rules is that Alinghi contends that the BMWO boat needs to meet exactly the 90' waterline length and 90' beam specified in the challenge certificate. The wording in the deed is not entirely cut and dry on this issue but it does mention "which dimensions are not to be exceeded" in reference to the two sailing vessels. The BMWO trimaran has at least three different mast, rig, and sail combinations of pretty significant dimensional and weight differences. It is unclear exactly what these do to the waterline length of the boat but it's conceivable that they designed it so that the heaviest rig puts the boat at the limit of 90' while the other rigs see a slight drop in waterline length measurement. While it's conceivable to add ballast to the BMWO trimaran to mitigate the lesser weight of the smaller rigs, Alinghi did make one change to the 1988 rule stating that ballast used to make measurement cannot be moved or removed.

When Alinghi first showed their vessel to have a gasoline driven hydraulic system, they stated that this was an "open design competition" as well as a sailboat race. They then chucked rules 49 through 52 in the RRS to pretty much allow anything (power/computer assisted trimming/steering, friction reducing ejections from the boat into the water, movable ballast, etc.). However, the haven't sought to really make this an open design competition. Instead, Alinghi has used the rules to paint BMWO into a technical corner and make their entire design concept as unqualified as possible. Alinghi hasn't made this an "open design competition" and hopefully this round in the courts will set this back to a fair match.

I think this ceased to become a yacht race some time ago. I am sure if you were pedantic enough in measuring Alinghi it would also fail to meet the 'exact' measurements. Also, with load/ballast being in their normal position during measurement, even any member of the crew not in the position when measured could be protested(?). Could any of the boats then actually be sailed?
If Alinghi has stated they will not use the rules to DSQ BMWO then surely they cannot DSQ them for a measurement rule can they? If so can they be held in contempt of court with appropriate penalties?

I'm sticking to round the cans under SCHRS.

Cheshirecatman

Too many lawyers and not enough racing

Agreed. Anyone actually think we'll see a race in Feb?

So this is how rich people entertain themselves. Too bad our tax dollars are being spent to hear this idiocy.

Ted Turner would never let this happen!

Lawyers only represent greedy people....

I was asked to remove this comment. i feel i should explain it vs. remove it.

Lawyers only represent people who want/need legal services.. (some greedy, some not, some looking for windfall results, others only justice)..

(admittedly the lawyers get paid, some vey well to do it.. and are happy to do it).. but this was an attempt to say ... "dont hate the lawyers for doing a service"

I only have two things to say.

First, why am I not surprised? I would have probably been shocked if this didn't happen (and if this is the end of it).

Secondly, the "headlands" issue would probably only make sense for a lawyer to try to contend. Has anyone ever sailed offshore in Newport (you know, the place the Americas Cup lived forever)? The islands, bay and river entrances make that place nothing but a series of headlands. That says nothing about Brenton's Reef. To get decent racing, you need to go at least 2 miles offshore.

Mike

(and your bonus)

Our tax dollars? Only if you live in New York state.

aren't there fees to file appeals? and other fee's to cover the costs of the courts?

Umm,

New York Supreme Court.

Not a federal court.

To me, its worth making sure the rules are nailed down so we don't have a case where someone wins the race and then the court hands the cup to the other team.

I'm all for getting the slippery swiss team to put their cards on the table and sack-up enough to be crystal clear about the rules governing the race.

Otherwise it becomes a sham of an event - not worthy of paying attention to.

Too late.

Isn't this the main issue?

Cheshirecatman

Not anymore.

Getting the rules on paper - is paramount to any legitimate competition.

Rules that are not recorded or communicated to all participating parties is tantamount to a sham dog and pony show - something that Alinghi has been trying to make out of the cup since they accepted the CNEV challenge.

Its sickening and I hope EB falls off the top of his capsized deathtrap.

I really fail to understand why anyone would put themselves through all this agro 'just' for a bloody boat race. For the price of the sheets on one of those things, you could buy yourself a new F18 and go and race the best in the world.

I guess that I should assume that its not about a boat race any more - it a business that happens to involve boats.

The best thing would be for the Oracle lot to say - ' sod it Ernesto, keep your cup, we are going to sail something else' the AC could then take a break until someone wants to make it a boat race again

My guess would be a few F-18s.

It's not about a race or business, it's about to rich guys with oversized egos. But that's what the AC has been about since it began , just newer faces taking it a little farther. In the big picture , none of this is new. It's just exposed more because of today's technology. You just know more about it,faster.

Well when the little ac was taken from the c-class and made into a F18 event Steve Clark and a few others jumped back in and formed the I4C to replace it. I know that the little ac was run once, but has it seen the light of day since then? If LE walks away, which I do not think that he will, who would step up to challenge for it next?