Slashdot Mirror
Billionaire Boys Cup (America's Cup 2003)
morpheus 2001 writes "Wired has a story on
the fight to win the America's Cup
2003, a sailing race held every 3 years. The story carries the
title 'Billionaire Boys Cup', referring to both the competitors and the millions of dollars that it now takes to field a team. This time around the two US teams pit Craig McCaw and Larry Ellison against each other using their respective technological prowess to beat each other and the rest of the world.
The story mentions that all of the teams competing will drop collectively over $700 million, with $30 - 40 million to be spent on R&D (per team)
alone. The story gives an excellent description of how the use of technology and massive databases work in concert to give a team an edge of mere seconds, which can be the difference between winning and losing a race."
the REAL story is the parties! I grew up near Newport, RI where the race had been held until the Aussies won the Cup with their very controversial hull/keel design. The design gave them the winning edge, but it also caused some major litigation. Anyway, I digress. In a race year, the streets/bars/etc. of Newport were PACKED with people all having a great time partying. The race itself may be boring to many people, but if it still creates the kinds of parties I remember, it is worth all the money spent (so long as I am not footing the bill).
Laws affecting technology will always be bad until enough techies become lawyers.
... and before the 2 US teams can even try to compete against New Zealand for the Cup, one of them needs to win the Louis Vitton Cup, against all other challengers.
Only then does the winner get to sail against the Kiwi defenders.
Take a look outside those borders - there's more to the America's Cup than 2 yanks with too much money.
-- You can't give it, you can't even buy it, and you just don't get it!
Those who think Sail boat racing is boring have obviously never been on a crowded start line, jockeying for the best position, while observing all the right-of-way rules ("STARBOARD")... For those of you in the Boston area I'd highly recommend the Courageous Sailing Center (http://www.courageoussailing.org/) The FrostBite league is starting soon, and it wont cost you much to get involvoed.
I've been in enough races where there is so little wind, that no one even starts. You just float, sometimes drifting backwards.
Sometimes, if you're lucky, there might be enough of a breeze that a half hour after the gun goes off, you finally make it across the line.
In the series that I raced in, there was a two-hour time limit to finish. Even with the race shortened to the first mark, still no one finishes. Usually those kind of races degenerate into water balloon fights once everyone realizes that all the tech in the world isn't going to get you moving anywhere.
Granted, these boats are nowhere near as advanced as the Cup boats are, but it is still possible to have so little wind that there might as well be none.
No Formula 1 is extremely boring. The problem with the tech is that it really doesn't not bring any benefit anymore.
OK there's a double negative that's a little tricky to parse, but I'll assume you meant "it doesn't really bring any benefit anymore", you're wrong.
Previously it made engines faster, stronger and influenced cars. But now we have 500 HP monsters on the road. So I ask you what are you going to do with a 500 HP monster? Only in Germany can you semi use that speed, but even then it is dangerous. My car is limited to 250 KPH (cheaper insurance) and 250 KPH is damm fast. My average speed is probably about 160 KPH (traffic, other people, etc).
There is more to improving an automobile's performance than increasing horsepower. For example as far as engines are concerned: driveability in the form of a flat torque curve over a wide range of rpm is useful in racing especially in F1 where circuits typically have tight corners connected by straight sections so being able to accelerate out of a corner is key to victory. In a road going car this helps in giving you the ability to accelerate when merging onto a highway without requiring you to floor it and potentially fishtail. Mercedes Benz engines of the last 10 years are noted for particularly flat torque curves, is it any surprise that Mercedes powered McLarens dominated F1 in the latter half of the 90's. Fuel efficiency is still a concern since in racing it opens up your options for pit strategy. Since most forms of racing have displacement limits volumetric efficiency is still a concern which has led to the highly efficient yet powerful 100HP/liter engines from Honda, BMW, and Ferrari available in their road cars. However engine technology is not the primary focus in Grand Prix and other high end racing anymore, the two key technologies to victory are aerodynamics and tires. With the F360 and 550 Maranello Ferrari has started to apply racing aerodynamic technology to increase high speed stability of normal road cars. Porsche has also paid a lot of attention to the high speed stability of their road going cars. Regardless of national speed limits, the real factor limiting driver speeds is comfort with the car's handling at speed (I have a link for this but can't find it right now). Admitedly this technology is only available on high cost automobiles but like nearly every other automotive technology of the last 30 years: ABS, traction control, airbags, in car navigation systems, active suspension etc. it will trickle down to cars available to the general public over time. Perhaps the biggest change in automotive technology over the last decade is not from the major manufacteres but the tire companies. Off the shelf I can buy Pirelli POne and PZero or Michelin Pilot tires which can improve the handling capabilities of my car by nearly 10% over typical (cheap) OEM tires. Winter and rain tire technology has improved even further. In fact, modern supercars like the Ferrari 360 and Dodge Viper can nearly match pure race built GT cars (I'm talking about nonstreet legal versions of cars like the 911, RX7, Mustang etc. that you see bringing up the back of the pack in the ALMS series or in the Speedvision GT series not GT prototypes) of 10 to 15 years ago off the showroom floor without having significantly more horsepower or lighter structures. This performance advantage is not as apparent in more mass market cars like the Accord or Camry because chassis engineers have used the extra traction to provide softer damping rates for a smoother ride. Using aftermarket shock and spring packages on these cars quickly demonstrate how much more capable they are than their previous generation models.
The fuel limit was dropped so fuel efficiency is not important. The body of the car is made with kevlar, carbon fibre, which has about a snow's ball's chance in hell in making it to regular cars.
Again, untrue. Audi is already building lightweight aluminum unibodies for the A8 and will probably move the technology down their product line over time. Lotus (which has close ties to GM) also is doing pioneering work in lightweight chassis and bodies with the Elise. The Opel Speedster that GM may bring to the US uses the same technology. You can get road going cars with Carbon Fiber bodies from Lamborghini (although their space frame construction makes it unlikely that anyone else will adopt their approach) or BMW (in the M3 CSL although only some portions of the car are Carbon Fiber). For those of us with incomes closer to the median, there are plenty of aftermarket suppliers for carbon fiber body panels for production automobiles like the Ford Focus, Honda Civic, Honda Accord etc.
Also there is a de facto fuel efficiency limit in Formula 1 since you are required to make at least one pit stop. Given the sensitivity of a modern Formula 1 car to fuel weight, in some circumstances it pays to run a lighter fuel load and make more pit stops. If you are not fuel efficient then you'll have to carry more fuel on the multistop strategies slowing you down. CART has a de facto fuel efficiency limit too since there is a minimum number of laps one is allowed to run between stops and a maximum tank size in the rules.
As for boring or elitist entertainment. That's almost entirely a matter of taste. The wealthy tend to prefer to be with people in their own income group and one method of excluding the nonwealthy is to choose pursuits in which they cannot participate. They can then use their wealth to further exclude participation by increasing equipment costs. Golf and Tennis are two examples of sports which should be relatively cheap (if Golf equipment was cheap stainless steel instead of hard to forge titanium heads on highly engineered carbon fiber shafts, and likewise for tennis racket materials) but aren't. On the other hand, I can play chess but have little interest in devoting a lot of time to watching it, but I can imagine how a more devoted fan would find a well played game very interesting to observe.
The America's Cup is not held every three years. There is no set schedule. At the start of each cycle, the Defender and the Challenger of Record sit down and negotiate a schedule. This time around, Team New Zealand and Prada decided on a three year schedule. Last time around, Team New Zealand and the New York Yacht Club agreed on a five year schedule. To my knowledge, the shortest schedule was one year (with the New Zealand "big boat" challenge against Dennis Connor's catamaran - what a fiasco!) in 1988.
Second, there are three American syndicates this year. The poster was correct that two of them are backed by Larry Ellison (Oracle BWM from the Golden Gate Yacht Club) and Craig McCaw (OneWorld from the Seattle Yacht Club). However, there is a third American syndicate this time around: Dennis Connor's Stars and Stripes campaign, from the New York Yacht Club. Dennis Connor (aka Mr America's Cup) has participated in every America's Cup going back over 20 years. He's lost the cup twice, and won it four times. This is also the first time in several America's Cup cycles that Dennis Connor has had the money from his backers to support a two-boat campaign, making him very dangerous to retake the cup.
I also want to take issue with the tone of the original posting. Yes, it takes a lot of money to run a competitive America's Cup campaign these days, but that money isn't being thrown away. There is a lot of community service being done by most of the syndicates. Also, the research done into boat design does trickle down to the common man, making sailing more fun for everyone else. Plus, it's a good venue for advertising and since each syndicate by definition must represent its home country, a good way to be patriotic as well. Most of all though, it's a grand spectacle. Why not sit back and enjoy the show?
Halmonster
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" --Salvor Hardin
As a sailor (just went sailing last night) and a daily slashdot reader I like the fact that this article was mentioned. I follow the AC and I am looking forward to whatever TV coverage I can find. I love the camera work, technology, strategy and team work that occurs during a race.
Being a Oracle DBA I have a soft spot (my head maybe) for the Oracle boats. But I also would have to tip the hat for Dennis COnner and his bid to return the cup to NY. I would also like to see a European team win as they elevate sailors to rock star status and have rabid sailing fans.(case in point Ellen MaCarthur and Kingfisher in the Vendee Globe) I would like to see the Kiwis lose. (sorry NZ)
I've raced as well. As helmsman in Wedneday night PHRF (perfromance handicap racing fleet) races. PHRF is a method of adding and subtracting time to make different boats competitive with each other. Its not pefrect but its fun mixing it up with powerful sail boats weighing many tons. Steering a 30 foot sailboat carrying 3 tons of lead ballast travelling at 6 knots in close quarters in waves is exciting to say the least. A big bonus is the party and buffet after the race. Ever seen a gas powered margarita blender?
The AC on TV is too cool These boats are highstrung. Stuff breaks, sails blow, people start yelling. These people push these boats hard. They only need to sail for 5 hours at a time or so. So everything is engineered light and on the edge. This coming Louis Vitton cup should be exciting. These guys don't race for big bucks like spoiled american pro athletes. Its the contest. Its being in the oldest continous sporting challenge in history.
Its high tech. Its obnoxiously expensive, its got complicated rules and it has hard partying sailors hell bent for a good time.
It also represents part of our heritage. When all our travel and goods moved via the water. Smallish harbor Pilot vessels would sail out to incoming ships to guide them into port. These were private escort vessels and they competed for business by being the first out to the incoming ships. There was much gambling associated with these "races". The first one out got the job as pilot. That was the skill we used when the schooner "America" first brought a fancy silver cup home from England after winning a race. (America's Cup) She was built for speed based on pilot vessels of the time.
Sailing was part of everyday life for many thoughout the world and still is today. Just not for those of us who would rather watch football on a beautiful breezy sunday afternoon watching overpaid whiners.
Keep in mind whenever there are two sailboats within site of each other there is a race.
Sailing in any form is a wonder of technology, art, science, nature and history. It teaches us about history, weather, areodynamics, electricity, internal combustion engines, leadership, planning, navigation and most importantly it builds confidence and courage.
When out on the water miles from shore any decision you make can have life and death ramafications. You have to learn to know what they are. Run scenarios in your mind and always have a plan.
I say follow the Americas Cup. It will teach you much about ourselves and remind us that we live on a planet that is still mostly water.
See you out there.
bodland
Raido