Update
Winner of the last Transat Jacques Vabre, the David Raison-designed scow Crédit Mutuel was fourth in the Normandy Channel Race – the first time skipper Ian Lipinski lost a big race in a very long time. It’s hotting up between the scows, which took the top five places; though the latest, winning Raison design got a jump at the Channel Islands the next four home were covered by just six minutes after five days’ racing. The first ‘skiff’ finished a further two hours behind – although even she is one of Marc Lombard’s V1D2 demi-scows
WHAT’S IT ALL ABOUT? – Jack Griffin By the time you read this we may have news from New Zealand about the venue and dates for the next America’s Cup. The exclusive negotiating period for the Auckland and New Zealand governments ended on 17 June. Speculation has intensified that the event will not be held in Auckland. Sir Stephen Tindall, head of the largest retail group in the country,
has resigned as chairman of Team New Zealand. The Kiwi press has reported that the team have turned down an offer of NZD100 million (US$71 million), although there were no details about how much of that was cash and how much value in kind. There have been further reports that some members of the Royal
New Zealand Yacht Squadron are very unhappy about the idea of defending the Cup anywhere other than Auckland. Clearly the decision on where to hold the next defence is stirring strong emotions. What are the issues in play? The Deed of Gift makes it clear that the Royal New Zealand Yacht
Squadron is the holder of the Cup, and not Team New Zealand: ‘It is distinctly understood that the Cup is to be the property of the club subject to the provisions of this deed, and not of the owner or owners of any vessel winning a match.’ RNZYS appointed TNZ to be their representative in the Match and
to organise the event. Can RNZYS also delegate to TNZ their powers as trustee, which include the power to decide the venue of the Match? If the trustee powers may not be delegated who at RNZYS has the authority to make the decision on the venue? Is it the executive committee? Is there a way for the membership to challenge a decision by the executive committee? No doubt the interested parties are
14 SEAHORSE
studying the RNZYS bylaws as closely as the Deed of Gift. We don’t know where, but we know what. The AC75s will be racing
again. No doubt there will be refinements to the class rule and improvements in the designs. Expensive and fast, the AC75s would be admired by designers and syndicate heads from the 19th and 20th century. When Sir Thomas Lipton sent a challenge in 1907, proposing to downsize from 90ft yachts to 75ft, New York Yacht Club Commodore Cass Ledyard replied that the Cup should be raced for by yachts ‘that can be produced with all the money, labour and ingenuity that can be expended’. Commodore JP Morgan seconded Commodore Ledyard’s
proposal, stating that the America’s Cup, ‘is a trophy which stands pre-eminently for speed… and should be served for by the fastest and most powerful vessels that can be produced.’ GL Watson, who designed the challengers Thistlein 1886, Valkyrie
in 1891 and Valkyrie II in 1893, said in an 1881 lecture in Glasgow, ‘When we do arrive at perfection in shape, we can then set to look out for better material. The frames and beams, then, of my ideal ship shall be of aluminium, the plating below water of manganese bronze, and topsides of aluminium; while I think it will be well to deck her too with that lightest of metals, as good yellow pine will soon only be seen in a museum. For ballast, of course, we should have nothing but platinum, unless the owner grudged the expense, when we might put a top tier of gold. By that date I hope we won’t care for sailing in such a sluggish element as the water. I firmly believe that some day the air will become as easily traversed as the earth or ocean.’ Watson predicted the foilers 132 years before they first appeared in an America’s Cup.
CupExperience.com
JEAN-MARIE LIOT
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120
