I'm not saying they don't know what they're doing. I'm also not saying they don't know a lot more than me and maybe they had some magic plan (that clearly didn't work out - repeatedly). I've clarified that I don't get paid to sail. But, for the sake of discussion, I just don't see how that split helped Oracle at all. I understand leverage - but that only works if you are sailing into better wind and/or better angle for a shorter distance. They were not AND they sailed a longer path to get there. Professionals are capable of making mistakes.

As far as the "in-crowd" goes...Aussies and New Zealand sailors became the hot ticket item when the cup was finally taken from the US. I use the team nationality makeup as an example of the "in-crowd" mentality because there are a lot of good and great sailors from other nations but the perception has been that you need to have a New Zealand or Australian sailors on your team to be competitive. You generally need to either start your own team, or have an OUTSTANDING resume to get a roll on teams compromised from "little lake in inland Australia and a guy from a small-boat club in a mining suburb somewhere on the Australia coast" You are basically making my point for me in this regard. A guy in a little inland lake in Australia can make it but that generally doesn't happen from other countries.

I'm not bitter - it's not like I ever tried to get on a team or anything...but there is definitely an in-crowd that teams like to depend on for cup sailors - otherwise, it wouldn't be as difficult to have some sort of nationality requirement for some percentage of the team.

I'm not going as far as to say that, but fleet racing and match racing could be considered different disciplines.

It has been said that two-boat tactics in a fleet race are quite slow. Splitting with your opponent in a match race could be death, too.


All of these folk are at the pointy end of (any) fleet which justifies why they were picked for the AC campaign and can adapt/interpret very quickly.

If your boat was ever so slightly slower than the other boat, would you risk splitting the course on the chance the leading boat picked the wrong side of the course? Even if this meant an extra set of tacks/gybes which we all know costs several boatlengths (possibly more in AC boats)?

That's a gamble these teams have to make. In some cases, I think they'd have a hard time explaining to management why they didn't split (since I assume the management/coaches are "old school" match racers as well?).

But these new boats certainly call for new match racing tactics. How can you pressure the other team into a mistake... a mistake being dipping the windward hull or dropping off a foiling tack, or even having to point higher than the optimal angle for that team's foil package?

I noticed that the hunting maneuvers did seem to be more effective than I would have originally thought due to the speeds involved...

Seeing SWE drive all over NZL on many of the starts brought it home that new match racing tactics had to be employed... Simple things like off-wind starting lines all the way to complex things like different foils on each side of the boat to capitalize on that first/last reaching leg.

If NZL doesn't build fluid pressure as quickly, maybe USA needs to force them to make multiple maneuvers in the hopes that they'll drop off the foil.

"Your Majesty, there is no second."

In the AC or Olympics, if you don't win, you're not a success. Period. Harsh? Sure, but it's reality. Top 10 is not winning, it's a list of the top nine teams that lost.

I have no problem with the splitting (unless it's complete desperation), but if not well planned, results in poorly executed (and extra) maneuvers, which is a horrific idea in fast boats that turn slowly.

Am I a world-class sailor? No. But I'm friends with more than a few, and have seen first-hand that extra tacks or gybes rarely work out on cats, and leebowing is a concept that is a complete joke on a catamaran. Anyone who tries it (leebowing) should be immediately removed from the course, along with the tactician and anyone else responsible for the decision, and never allowed back on a cat. Ever.

Mike

Ahh...I meant to bring up NZ hydraulics earlier too. I hope we get a full technical breakdown of the boats at some point but I doubt we'll ever be left with more than our own conjecture based on some limited guesswork.

NZ should have more capacity to generate hydraulic pressure with their pedaling stations vs. the hand crank grinding stations. However, we have seen them have hydraulic power limitations at least as much as the other teams...which means, either they're not generating more power with the biking stations or they're using more hydraulic power than the average team. Given that they've even elected for a push-button hydraulic mainsheet system over the hydraulic powered drum winch, they probably elected to have more hydraulic controls throughout their wing than the others...and knowing that this was on the table, went with the bike stations so they could have a chance to keep up with that hydraulic demand. I think Ashby has more detailed control of the wing than other teams and that it consumes a good deal of hydraulic power....or, possibly, their ride height system moves more giving them better control on their side grip upwind while consuming more stored energy.

Man, what I would give for an hour alone with either boat with the wing skin off and hatches open ;-).

I think you're right that they may have more hydraulic demand on NZL.

Your earlier point about the cyclors having free hands to adjust things seems to me as a key strategy so you can designate people certain tasks rather than have one or two folks control all that while they are trying to get their head out of the boat and watch strategy, wind, etc.

Did you all watch the Red Bull Youth AC races?

Was that last mark on last race (Day 2, Race 6) the most unbelievable regatta finish ever?

And the cameras missed most of it.

It was epic. Sorry I forgot to post the link. Here it is for replay.

There was some rumor circulating that the rear cyclor had twist handle grips to control the flight height of the boat...I'm not sure about that. After reading several of the rule clarifications, I suspect he has a gear ratio control for the group of cyclors there. One of the requests specifically asked about an automatic gear change system based on hydraulic pressure and the measurement committee said that any gear change had to be manual. While they can probably do some simple tasks, their heads are mostly down and they're really cranking out the energy - I don't think they can really do much else.

I don't think any top sailor I know really has that attitude. In fact if you do have that attitude what does it say about all of us. Everyone is a failure by that standard.

The point is that you don't get 6th or 7th in a world title in a significant class like As or Moths by being crappy at tactics and making lots of mistakes. It can also be said that foiling cats are tacking faster than seahuggers and that it could be "old school seahugger tactics" to be too concerned about an extra tack.

We could either learn from these experts or sit back and say that they are getting it all wrong and that we are much smarter than they are. Surely the former is more logical and useful.

One of the cyclors confirmed that he controls the foils from his handlebars.
In some of the racing footage you can also see that they do not all output the same amount of power, the guy doing the foils doesn't go into the red like the other guys do.

wow. Crazy finish! Thanks for sharing link PM. The youth teams are such much fun to watch because they make so many mistakes!

Which brings up a point of our earlier rules discussion. 10 seconds (or any set reasonable time) would not have been adequate for penalizing the swiss. Having them get behind the German boat was probably a fair penalty there...and a good example of when to sail clean...Germany could have aborted their rounding, spun up, tacked, and rounded again in a much less painful way that forking the mark.

I suppose it depends on what you call having an "in crowd" and how strong it is, and to what extent it's just getting people who are known quantities on small boats and big. The Aussies and NZ sailors (and now the British sailors) became a hot ticket item when their nations were on top at the Olympics. Most, if not all, of them got their spots on AC teams by winning multiple world titles and Olympic medals. There's no recent 49er gold medallist sitting at home. There's no recent cat gold medallist sitting at home. That seems more like a meritocracy than an in-crowd.

The guy from the little country lake got there by winning multiple world A Class titles. The guy from the little mining surburb got there by winning multiple world titles and gold in 49ers and Moths. They weren't handed anything on a platter and the support they got in their early careers largely came from middle-class family and friends. They earned their spots by winning lots.

There are a couple of gaping holes in the rosters, though (there's no women, no 470 sailors and no windsurfers) but there seems to be no evidence that it's an in-crowd/out-crowd issue. Given the close links between Aussie Olympians from different classes, for example, it would seem unlikely that people like Slingsby are excluding the 470 sailors and windsurfers.

Anyway, I'll end by just saying that these guys are there because they are brilliant sailors in slow boats and fast ones, and the moves they are making are likely to be the best ones in the situation they are in.

Garda, you're helping to make my point. You don't get a ticket to the AC without winning. Not placing, but winning. And, none of those guys actually go to the AC just to place. If you truly believe that, watch the losers at each of their pressers. They all try to put on a good face for the team, but none of them really accept losing (which is a GOOD thing).

And, I never once referred to any of us, who would be thrilled to be top 10 in any regatta, so don't be confused about that.

And, since you obviously missed this too, a flying boat that is tacking is MUCH slower than a flying boat going straight. True, a flying boat also risks coming off the foils by tacking, but a flying tack is still slower than a flying boat going straight. It's the same concept as any floating cat (extra tacks are slow and should be avoided unless a significant gain can be made). Look at the meters on the replays if you don't believe me.

Mike

On to more important things...

It's Thursday night. The current forecast for Saturday is a repeat of last weekend.

What has Oracle been doing? Are there any news reports of their progress or practice sailing?

Have we missed any pressers since last weekend?

Mike

I believe I heard one of the announcers (Outterage??) say that each maneuver cost them at least 30-50 meters. And that was if everything was ideal.

Minimizing your maneuvers and forcing the other team to make more would seem to me to give you the best chance. More chances for the opponents to make a bad gibe or tack and that seems to be where the biggest gains are made. Going to the wrong side just to split seems to me to be a fool's gamble.

Yes, you get to the AC by winning, but that does not mean that everyone bar the winner in other regattas is a "loser". AC winners DO sometimes accept losing when it's for reasons out of their control - I've sailed with a couple. To say that people like Steve Brewin are "losers" when they run second in a worlds is pretty damn insulting.

I didn't say that you don't lose by tacking. The point was that many say that you lose less by tacking a foiler then by tacking a seahugger. The only other choice is to follow but somehow put the leader "under pressure". Even when you're just winning at national level (and I know for a fact that you are wrong to say that we would all be thrilled to be top 10 in any nationals regatta - to some here, 10th is losing) you're not normally "under pressure" when you have a comfortable lead and the other boat is following you - especially when you are sailing the Kiwi boat with its bigger foils and therefore probably more reliable tacking.

[u][/u][s][/s]

Well, if these guys are fools then I look forward to you showing how much smarter you are, by beating them or at least winning the H16 worlds.

The Kiwis DID do a fairly bad tack when OTUSA split, and OTUSA gained. If you don't split then they can just cover you out to the boundary and/or tack when they have the right pressure and angle, and extend their lead. Ironically, on other forums the Kiwis are getting bagged for not covering enough.

I get what Garda is saying about the in-crowd...a lot of jobs in the America's Cup are, indeed, born out of Olympic success and that does define a path that's not necessarily a closed door system. I still think they were slow to adopt any multihull sailors during the DOG match, but we've belabored this point.

I do still stand by Oracle's splits as a mistake and what happened afterwards is pretty solid evidence of it not being the correct move. As far as this being "hindsight", just ask my wife how much I was expressing the same thought as it was happening live ;-). When they were behind by one boat length at the leeward gate, it was as if they gave up and sailed a longer route to the wrong side of the course because they had absolutely zero confidence that they could do anything to pass New Zealand. This wild chance "roll the dice" move hardly ever works in real life. My entire growth as a racer has been to abandon risky moves and build the patience to focus on getting small gains. When someone is faster than me and I need to beat them, I try to stay as close as possible and see what I can do to match or improve on their speed. When I'm behind by only a little, stay close, look for small gains. Use the other boat as a tell as to the wind that I'm about to get and pounce on it to pick up a boat length every tack and nibble away at that small lead. Look for an opportunity to tack just a little sooner or a little later and get a little advantage. That said, if I find myself behind by a huge amount and I'm entering the last lap of the race, yeah, I'm probably going to roll the dice but only after I've exhausted all hope. I do still struggle sometimes with this patience and the result is pretty obvious when I haven't controlled it.

If you are in the lead, as in New Zealand's case in the last four races, Oracle's expended so much race course just getting to a split that it gave NZ enough of a lead that they could sail across the entire course on the wrong shift, maintain cover, and still maintain their lead (and they were NOT on the wrong shift coming around the bottom). Absolutely NZ should just sail their own race at that point. The tight cover, cover, cover, is also a bit of a standover of monohull sailing. Now, it is certainly still valid in a good deal of multihull sailing but again, if you have enough of a lead and the wind is obviously stable enough that you can count on your lead being enough to get to your competitor and still maintain a lead no matter what, just sail on. I mean, seriously, New Zealand stretched on just about every leg - it's hard to find fault in their tactics.

Of course, with NZL consistency, it's hard to just sit there on the hip and "wait" for them to make a mistake....

As agressive as Spithill is, I'm sure there would be stuff they'd try to get Burling to blink and do something just 'wrong' enough to gain... Sort of Jake's strategy. Pick small things and eventually they add up ...

Also, in the light air, it almost appears as they are just barely keeping the foils working... So a major move like tack/gybe would be a gamble

But yes, I'm THAT GUY who always thinks taking a flyer is a good idea (at the time)... so my armchair skippering is just as flawed as my lower mid-fleet standing