Home - BMW Oracle Racing Blog - Burning Question: Who's Gonna Win?

Burning Question: Who's Gonna Win?

Posted 1 year, 2 months ago

Burning Question: Who's Gonna Win?
OK, enough! Am getting mails from all over wanting to know who your Ed. thinks is going to win. We had it right for the LVC finals, and now let's see if we can repeat for the Match.... First some few observations, and questions. + In three Cup finals ('95, '00 and '03) Brad Butterworth (NZL, Alinghi tactician) has never lost a Match. Can he win another five straight races? Doesn't seem likely. It will be some amazing run if he does. + Ed Baird (USA, Alinghi helmsman) has never raced in an AC Match. But he is the helmsman, not skipper (Brad is). Hence the leadership role is on Brad's shoulders. Starting well, however, is mostly in Ed's hands. Is he a better starter now than he was in Act 13? Presumably, but the proof of the pudding is the eating, and will he get eaten alive tomorrow at 14:55 by Deano & Co., who chewed up and spat out Jimmy "Top Gun" Spithill in the LVC finals? Head held high: Deano at this morning's skippers' press conference.+ Dean Barker has raced six AC matches. He helmed and won the last race of TNZ's sweep in 2000 over Prada, but lost all five matches to Alinghi in 2003. Unlike Baird, Barker is the skipper. In 2003 against his countryman Coutts he appeared to wilt. After that deflowering by Alinghi, has Deano blossomed anew? Is he up to the task in 2007? Has he become a leader of men?? + NYYC held the Cup for 132 years, from 1851 to 1983. In 1970 Baron Marcel Bich convinced the NYYC to allow his French team to race off against the Aussies for the right to challenge that year. Thus the Challenger Selection Series,(which became the Louis Vuitton Cup in 1983, was born. Most Cup historians credit the CSS with ending NYYC's AC hegemony -- and it took only a short 13 years to do so (in 1983, with Australia II's win). From '83 forward, a challenger has won four times, the defender three: 1983, challenger 1987, challenger 1988, defender* 1992, defender 1995, challenger 2000, defender 2003, challenger *no CSS/LVC as there was only one challenger. So in the "modern history" of the Cup, the challenger has had the edge, even more so when you consider that the 1988 match did not have a CSS. However, the defender has an admittedly large home-court advantage, and the defender has always won on their first defense -- the only exception being '87, which was arguably the worst conceived and executed selection series (defender or challenger) ever. So students of Cup history can, and do, argue it either way. + As to the number of races the match will go? There have only been three close matches in the history of the Cup: 1920, 3-2 1934, 4-2 1983, 4-3 The rest have sweeps or nearly so, including of late: 1987, 4-0 1988, 2-0 1992, 4-1 1995, 5-0 2000, 5-0 2003, 5-0 The only close LVC final was the 5-4 barnburner between Cayard's AmericaOne and Prada in 2000. Considering this year's LVC final also went 5-0 and neither semifinal was much better, would it be crazy to predict anything other than a 5-0 or maybe 5-1 series? Head in the Clouds? Dr. Roger Badham.One of the main reasons why AmericaOne, which as a campaign was a day late and a dollar short, did so well in 2000 against the massively better-resourced Prada? Dr Roger "Clouds" Badham (AUS) was their (our -- your Ed. was the team's rules advisor) weatherman. Now Clouds is with ETNZ, and the Kiwis have been consistently good at choosing the right mainsail for the eventual conditions (another weather team call), and for getting the good side of the first leg. Obviously, the wx team plays a key role in that. However, Alinghi's weather program is no slouch. Remember, too, that they spec'd the MDS weather-buoy system that all teams use, and which is managed by the Alinghi-owned ACM. Alinghi probably understand/exploit the MDS even better than ETNZ. Your Ed. suspects that a key reason why a given series turns into a rout, especially when it appears boatspeed and crewwork are otherwise on par, is when one of the weather programs has a leg up on the other. OK, enough of the analysis. Here's who your Ed. thinks has the edge with each of the specific critical success factors: Management - Even Resources - SUI Skipper - NZL Tactician - SUI Starting - Even Weather Team (mainsail call, first shift) - NZL Intangibles (home court advantage, etc) - SUI Your Ed.'s infamous, and oft-repeated formula for winning the Cup, is fast boats, well sailed, that don't break. In those three general departments: "Fast Boats" - SUI "Well Sailed" - Even "Don't Break" - Even I am picking (by a nose) Alinghi, unless it is light and shifterly -- then it is anyone's game. 5-0 sweep or maybe 5-1? Based on the assumption that Alinghi is a little quicker but that ETNZ will get a couple weather calls right that Alinghi won't, and that that will be enough to win races for ETNZ, I will go against recent history (and even further out on a limb) and say: Alinghi 5, ETNZ 3 Again, maybe there is some wishful thinking given we have eight race-days of VIP guests (300+ each day) to take care of? Perhaps. Regardless, for the Cup, the sport and all concerned, one fervently hopes neither team wins it in five straight. Better yet still, let's have some close racing with no breakdowns, some lead changes, no penalties (at least no umpire errors), and great tactical and boathandling battles. No doubt the better team will win. But bring on a barnburner. Truth is, no one really knows until the first leg of the first race tomorrow. Full Story »

Comments are currently disabled