From the feedback - 4/5/01

Each contribution may be subjected to a rigorous process of editing for language, taste and imparted wisdom. The opinions expressed in From the Feedback do not necessarily reflect those of the management, staff or investors of madfor sport.com. Instead, and much more importantly, they reflect your views.

Editor's plea. If you write to us, as hundreds of you do every week, and you want to see your thoughts in print, then please include your full name on your e-mail. Anonymous contributions will not be published.


From Julian Bates
So what would you go for, the owners or the professionals? Does it have to be either/or? The Farr 40 class manages to combine an owner driver rule with opportunities for professionals to compete (witness the list of illustrious tacticians at any top event). One-design further keeps the owner and/or corporate sponsor happy by keeping costs within reason (unlike the antics at Auckland). Significantly dissimilar boats racing under handicap rules are very rarely going to provide a satisfactory basis for competition or a compelling prospect for spectators. Oh, and don't dismiss offshore races - apart from the fact that a lot of owners and crew enjoy them it's a real opportunity to introduce strategy. There is something very special about the Fastnet which is missing in a windward-leeward...

From Frederico Pinheiro
So what would you go for, the owners or the professionals? I'd go for the owners, definitely, but is the Farr 40 really such a shining example? Having the owners at the helm with a bevy of, I assume, highly paid professionals at his elbow (not to mention several boats in their quiver - one each in Europe, the US East and West Coasts, Australia - is not quite what I have in mind. What I'd like to see is boats that can be efficiently sailed with relatively few crew (J/Boat types come to mind, or something more radical, see below), with sail limitations. Do not restrict the teams to one-design classes. Either use one of the existing rules or make up a development rule similar to the Whitbread/Volvo boats (water ballast or swing keels, carbon rigs), but adaptable to several sizes. All boats to race against each other, with an overall classification, not separated by sizes. Finally, shock horror, how about minimal (but genuine; not the joke that is the IMS cruiser-racer) accommodations. Why, crews could even sleep aboard their boats if they so wished. This would be possible since there would be relatively few of them not only because the boats would be easy to sail, but also because water ballast or swing keels (or simply a healthy ballast ratio as on J/Boats) would make crew on the rail redundant, up to a point. Before you ask, no I am not a J/Boat dealer and I can't afford one, though I'd like to. I do realise, however, that I am a romantic whose idea of ideal sailing is to take a boat somewhere with a bunch of family and friends, race it, and then take it for a coastal cruise. I once thought the Commodore's Cup was going to be something like that, but it isn't really, so maybe the Admiral's Cup could be again ... Nah, it can't, can it? It would be nice though.

From Andy at Harken
What would you do to save the Admiral's Cup? Mark's comments are as incisive as ever. I firmly agree that the professional route is now closed, however, I question the one-design route. Admiral's Cup was once an elite event where wealthy men pitted their team against the best. Part of all this was the ego trip of joining a very exclusive club and displaying their wealth - even though most would deny it. An essential part of a successful campaign was to select the winning team including the designer, the builder, the sailmaker etc. Yes, it was cheque book sailing and quite often there was an avowed intent to get the best money could buy. These guys didn't want a level playing field, they wanted to tilt it in their favour. Sure, the level playing field does save some money and sure not everybody was like this and sure it wasn't fair and equal but this elitism was part of the appeal. Another part of this elitism was the difficulty of the event. You might have got the right boat with the right speed, but you still had to be pretty clever to point it in the right direction with the Solent tides. Once you got through all that, you then had to finish a Fastnet. But now we have a level playing field, windward/leeward courses in constant tides and no Fastnet race. The event got dumbed down until it was no longer an elite event. So if it was just another regatta, why not do the one that is the most fun? I really don't believe it was all about the cost. There are plenty of other boats sailing around that cost a hell of a lot to run. Bring back the elitism of the event.

From J McLeod
What would you do to save the Admiral's Cup? You might think about splitting the event with teams made up of two owner/driver boats and one VO 60. All the boats would be from the same nation. The owner/driver crews would compete inshore using one-design boats that are owner/driver. These races would be part of Cowes Week. The VO 60s would compete in a much longer event involving point to point offshore races that would culminate with the Fastnet. This format would be attractive to both types of customers

From Roland Lennox King
What would you do to save the Admiral's Cup? I think Mark's article is one of the best I have seen on this sorry saga of the Admiral's Cup. It is true the RORC have not moved with the times and owners are sick of being 'cheque book caddies'. There are very ,very few owners who do not want to be part of the action. Why else would you go sailing? The Admiral's Cup used to be the pinnacle of ocean racing and there is a huge amount to do to bring it back to that level. What is needed is to make the regatta a one week event, owner driven, in conjunction with Cowes Week ,fun for all and in set classes as Mark has suggested. Just look at the successful regattas at present and one will see they are moulded along these lines.