Game over for GBR.

Unbelievable third race between SWE and JPN, SWE forces a penalty at the last windward gate, and sweeps the day! Barker looking pretty dejected after that.

Mike

Really close racing. That port/starboard overlap situation at the mark was terrifying at those speeds, both boats could have been destroyed.

I think watching that replay may convince some people (that matter) that some new rules are needed for foiling sailboats.

Nathan did an amazing job of stopping that boat. That had major T-bone written all over it. I still can't believe that NZL forced that situation in the zone. Really, really bad idea.

I just listened to the on-water post-race interview with Burling from the first race today. Apparently, right before the start, the port board came up (on its own). They had to nearly stop to get it back down, which is how Ainsle got that giant lead. NZL then just stayed focused and ran him down. Amazing.

Mike

Onboard GBR after their last finish, Ainsle said to his crew, "F-ing button got me." Any idea what he's talking about? He set them up for a horrible pre-start, after losing 4 of the prior 6. Now's he's going to blame the boat???

He was trying to walk it back afterwards, but WOW.

Mike

In the presser...

Ainsle announced that Land Rover and 11th Hour have re-signed for the next campaign.

He did blame the boat several times, in several ways (new team, having to catch up with technology, etc.).

Of course this is easy to say from here, but he needs to watch the footage. They need to spend more time on the water practicing how to stay on the foils all the way around.

Mike

FYI, even team on team testing before the actual event was extremely limited by the rules

True, that hurt - they were also constantly at least a knot lower in boat speed compared with the kiwis on most angles of sail.

At first blush, I was surprised that Japan got the penalty there. Artemis looked like they turned really wide for the mark...Japan had to sail outside the two boat length zone to avoid the collision and I thought they gave Artemis just enough room (not a ton mind you - but it looked like they had enough). I'll have to re-watch and digest again. Again, like the other zone situation that Artemis was in last week, Japan would have been better served just to sail around the mark and stay outside the zone (keeping it straight up port/starboard). They would have passed Artemis as they slowed in the tack and been gone.

Totally agree Damon, these mark rounding (and penalty serving) rules need some tweaking for these boat speeds and handling capabilities....and I think the judges need some practice somehow too. I can't imagine having to make those snap decisions on all the new situations that are presenting themselves at these speeds.

They took forever to make the call, so I don't think they winged it. I agree with the call, watched it over a few times, and there was no way, even if they could have started turning sooner, that the result would have changed. I was stunned that there wasn't any impact.

I agree, and said it before, in those situations with the speed of these boats, you basically need to stay outside of the zone to give enough room.

Mike

Today's ​presser.



Looking at the comments, Ainsle has gathered a lot of support. I'm still having trouble coming around....

Mike

Personally, I like him. He's got a history of being a bit of a hot head but he has really been a respectable leader of that team and it's hard to not respect a fierce competitor. Team GBR certainly would not exist if not for Sir Ben.

That is true, and I like him more than Burling, but that's not saying much.

I think I've always liked Barker, and I'm really impressed with Nathan.

I'm on the fence with Spithill, just for the record, LOL...

Speaking of whom, has Oracle been sailing in their off-time, especially in the heavy stuff?

Mike

Wind forecast upper teens this afternoon. SWE needs one more win to advance. JPN needs to sweep two or they're going home.

Mike

I'm not well versed in the rules so I'll ask a dumb question: if Japan had stayed out of the zone then they wouldn't have had to give room and then there would have been no penalty? They were not very far from being out of the zone, another 5-10 feet and it could have been a very different result.

BTW that took some big ones to pull off!

That penalty on JPN was pretty hard to tell - glad I'm not a judge...

Closing speeds were enormous. Center of rotation on these boats is somewhere around the foil, but there is side slip and other factors to consider.

Is causing a nose-dive because of a super-sharp turn to avoid another boat considered "seamanlike fashion"? Can I close the door at A-mark such that a port-tacker has to "crash tack" to avoid me?

I mean, I can see NZL making some of their tacks in what appears to be 1/2 boatlength, but this was a 270 degree turn around an obstruction.

Given the fact, too, that you can't throw the helm over without a foil being down, among other things in the turning sequence...

So does the umpire have to consider "seaman like fashion" the whole process (foil down, wing trim, crew movement) when determining the room to tack? Or a set distance (say 1 boatlength) from the mark?

If it's the process, then I can see it takes several boatlengths to change tack if you start from foil lowering to opposite foil retraction.

If it's just "start-of-turn" type judgement then I think Nathan went a little long before throwing the helm (to draw the foul)


Now Barker didn't have the benefit of that big yellow circle around the mark, and may have actually thought he'd sail up an over Outerage... while keeping the door closed as much as feasible.

At 30 kts closing speed, it may be difficult to judge just how much room someone needs... Especially when that big giant spear-like carbon sprit is pointing RIGHT AT YOU going 20 kts

Absolutely right. If they were outside the zone (which wasn't far), it would have been a simple port/starboard I do believe.

I did a little more reading this morning and they really hacked up the match racing version of Rule 18 for this event. I was working on some of the edit revisions and I'm not completely sure this is in the final version, but rule 18.3 seems to turn off the bit where the inside overlap boat needs to round the mark tightly if it's a gate. They only need to round the mark tightly if it's a mark....The marks at the top of the course are a gate....so sounds like Sweden knew the rules there and didn't need to make a close turn to the top mark...just needed to stay in the zone.(assuming this made it to the final revision...I'll keep digging).

edit; I got to the final version and it did get some other changes...I've updated it here - the same point exists...the overlap and tacking and sailing "no further than needed from the mark" ONLY applies at a mark and not a gate.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...ub3RpY2Vib2FyZHxneDpiMWU3ZmY2OWY2ZGQ1OWI

Official version:

Just as in the regular racing rules, AC rule 18 applies when "...at least one of them is in the zone".

Unlike the regular racing rules, AC rule 18 does apply between boats on opposite tacks on a beat to windward. The definition of overlap is different too, so the boats were overlapped.

Therefore, JPN was obligated to give SWE "mark-room", even if she never entered the zone (which is 3 boat-lengths from the mark) herself.

The AC rules, however, define "mark-room" as "room for a yacht to sail her proper course to round or pass the mark on the required side. If room includes a change of tack, such tack or gybe shall be done no quicker than a tack or gybe to sail her proper course."

Therefore:

(1) Even though rule 18.3 does not apply at a gate mark, JPN only needed to give SWE enough room to sail her proper course, and

(2) JPN could not force SWE to tack quicker than she would to sail her proper course.

I think the umpires called a penalty on JPN because SWE had to tack more quickly than she would have in the absence of JPN (and therefore JPN did not give SWE mark-room).

Both the penalty on SWE in her race against NZL, and the penalty on JPN vs. SWE could have been avoided had the outside boat sailed a little wider around the mark. In both cases, the penalty decided (most likely changed) the outcome of the race.

Match racing is supposed to be aggressive and close boat-on-boat maneuvering, but getting a bit too aggressive, and too close can be catastrophic.

Regards,
Eric

Thanks Jake.

I was listening to an interview and Outerage said that they were really practicing this exact situation and had thoroughly discussed it as late as that morning. He also said that he couldn't really see the other boat at all, just a black blur through a small window in the jib.

I think that Barker made an error having to dodge the first mark up the course that cost them a bit of the lead, possibly enough difference that Sweden was able to get close enough to create the penalty situation. If he had waited slightly longer to tack then he would have cleared the mark and not been dodging. These races come down to the smallest of differences, one error leads to another.

Of course, I say this from my arm chair and not at 30-40 knots with my heart hammering.

winds 18.3 knots 19 peak @ 193

Eric, thanks for that continued interpretation - I'm still learning how they're using rules here....the history of their amendments is pretty fascinating. http://noticeboard.acracemgt.com/home/racing-rules/rrsac-changes

Kent, they were really stuck with that tack. I don't think they could go any further because of the boundary but I agree that mark seemed to have surprised them and certainly wasn't helpful. Good to know that even the professionals make that mistake ;-)....and also a good indicator about how much of a difference those little mistakes make.