America’s Cup devastated? No, it’s simply the Cup, baby

In response to the letter from our reader Adriano Tagliavento, who was decidedly polemical about the new direction the America’s Cup has taken(here all the details and the aforementioned letter), we publish a nice response that was emailed to us by Giovanni Fontana. Do you agree with his opinion as a “progressive”?

BUT WHAT A SCANDAL! THIS IS THE CUP, BABY

Dearly beloved,

Your Adriano Tagliavento, a reader acclaimed by the people of the Web, probably stood still on that Italian night of September 20, 2013 when, in San Francisco, Emirates Team New Zealand came within a mile of the finish line and winning the America’s Cup. Perhaps yours truly, having not accepted the verdict of that edition, forgets that the defender, who won the cup on the water at the end of one of the most incredible comebacks in the history of sailing and sports, is now called Oracle Team USA. The defender has always made and unmade the cup as he pleased, ever since that distant August 22, 1851 when the winner changed its name from the 100 Guineas Cup to the America’s Cup.

I am therefore writing to you because I find your reader’s opinion overly conditioned by a certain romanticism and a vision that hardly matches the speed that characterizes the changing nature of modern sailing. Indeed, Tagliavento cites an era and names that, while they have made the history of sailing and the America’s Cup, have little or nothing to do with the modern evolution of our sport.

We may or may not like it, but in the sailing world, not only the boats but also the sailors and especially the owners are changing. Modern Tycoons have nothing to do with characters like Alan Bond, Bertelli or Gardini: the golden days of yachting, of romantic challenges, are gone, we have long since sailed into another era.

Prorompent is the increasingly strong “foil generation”: young sailors, perhaps less sailors than their colleagues of a few decades ago, but with a decidedly multi tasking technical background. Today’s super pros move from one-designs to moths, through multi and ocean sailing, never forgetting the basic principle of the years we are living: speed, speed, speed.

I don’t think the foil or no foil debate is at issue anymore, which is largely outdated by the empirical data certifying this technology as extraordinary in terms of performance gains. Therefore, the opinion of many who call for a return to a “golden age” past, when America’s Cup boats boated at 9 knots and sailors were more sailors, is frankly inconceivable. Technology in the sailing world, as in all areas of human knowledge, is made to look forward.

The America’s Cup from this point of view represents a perfect paradigm, having always been a competition where technology has played a key role. Future AC50s are being criticized as being considered boats with too narrow a monotype, contrary to tradition, which in fact has always provided box rules that gave designers wide latitude. The detail that in my opinion has been greatly overlooked and belittled is that of the appendages: the fact that these will be freely chosen by the designers, albeit within certain limits, preserves the original spirit of the cup. The fate of the regatta will be decided on the choice of the right foil shape, and it will be the designers, and the best sailors, who will win the game, as they should and always have. Where then is the scandal of this America’s Cup?

The introduction of numerous One Design elements can only be welcomed if we think rationally about a few points: future AC50s are likely to sail at peaks in excess of 40 knots, and the cat platforms all the same will be a great safety feature for sailors who will have the opportunity to push hard on a suitably solid craft without the design exasperations seen in San Francisco. At the same time, the One Design elements will also significantly reduce the cost of building these vehicles: has the public who are outraged that the cup is attended today only by wayward paperons not thought this through? Potentially, a less expensive regatta in the future may attract many more participants resulting in an increased spectacle. And then again, after all, the history of the America’s Cup is made almost exclusively of paperons who, out of personal ambition, literally threw themselves into this venture: the old jug has never in its history been a game of thrift.

If the problem then is that Team New Zealand was excluded (or self-excluded?) from the famous London agreement, then let’s get over it: since time immemorial, whoever wins in the Cup decides the rules, for better or worse. Yes, it is true, the protocol stipulates that it should be the defender, with the challenge of record, to determine the manner and timing of the next challenge, whereas in this case the decision is projected onto the next editions whose defender is obviously not known at the moment. And so it is clear that the Italic public, outraged by Oracle’s move and powerless in the face of past vain attempts by Luna Rossa and other Italian challenges to win the Cup, will side in full support of Team New Zealand. Hoping that the Kiwis will win it and change the rules again, as, after all, they have been doing since that distant August 22, 1851. It is the baby cup and, as her majesty (who will be sick and tired of being called on it all the time) well knows, only the winner counts and there is no second.

Yours,
John Fountain