wrote in message
ups.com...
OzOne wrote...
Biggest problem with foam cores is that they will break down and
granulate.
Seen this on many Syd-Hobart racers after the really big races
pounding to windward.


"Maxprop" wrote:
Most unusual circumstances, Oz. 99.9% of the rest of the boats in the
world
won't ever see that level of abuse.

Sailing to windward in higher winds is "abuse"? Funny, I had the idea
that's what boats were supposed to be built for.

Are you serious? Where have you been, Doug? Higher winds are only part of
the issue. How about monstrous waves, a team of youngsters (plus an
occasional oldtimer) pushing the rig and hull to its breaking point,
pounding and dropping off shear wavefronts, did I mention monstrous waves?


And those Hobart boats are generally
throw-away boats after a single race.

Utter nonsense. They are no more "throw-away boats" than your 1D35...
less so, if anything (correct me if I'm wrong, but have 1D35s sailed
any mjor offshore races?)

Again you've pretended to a throne without the proper credentials. Those
who build boats for such races seldom race them again. They sell them to
those who don't have the means to employ the latest technology and design:
throwaway. Ellison's boat in Holland, MI, is a prime example. And your
comment about the 1D35 doesn't deserve a response.

Ellison's "Sayonara" is in a building
in Holland, MI, looking brand new, with the material for a new keel lying
under her, and she hasn't been touched in over a decade. Larry must have
lost interest in her, and it's "easier" to pay the rent to keep her
stored
than to worry about what to do with her.


It's more a matter that nobody else will buy her for more than scrap
value. It will take a tremendous wad of cash to put her back in
sailing order again. And if she's "looking brand new" then she must
not have been a "throw-away boat" eh?

She was completely rebuilt by Ellison, for what reason is anyone's guess.
She was near trash after she won the Hobart in a year when others died and
boats sank. Your presumption that nobody will buy her is speculation of the
most absurd kind. Larry Ellison doesn't have to sell anything, nor does he
worry about the cost of rebuilding such a boat. My best guess is that he
considers her too far out of the mainstream of current race boat design to
mess with. Thus she sits.


Save the self-contradiction for political stuff, Max!

Once again you've jumped in with both feet in your mouth, pretending to be
an expert in everything and smarter to boot. Your arrogance is appalling,
Doug, but not quite as appalling as your complete lack of civility. Oh, and
you are wrong on all points.

Max

Sailing to windward in higher winds is "abuse"? Funny, I had the idea
that's what boats were supposed to be built for.


"Maxprop" wrote:
Are you serious?

Yes.

Are you serious in suggesting that boats should *not* be built to sail
hard in strong winds?


Where have you been, Doug?

Around

Higher winds are only part of
the issue. How about monstrous waves, a team of youngsters (plus an
occasional oldtimer) pushing the rig and hull to its breaking point,
pounding and dropping off shear wavefronts, did I mention monstrous waves?


Yeah, so what? Do *you* encounter those conditions on a regular basis?

And you're contradicting yourself again- first you say the boats are
flimsy throw-aways because they come apart after a Sydney-Hobart Race,
then you rant & rave about monstrous waves.



Utter nonsense. They are no more "throw-away boats" than your 1D35...
less so, if anything (correct me if I'm wrong, but have 1D35s sailed
any mjor offshore races?)


Again you've pretended to a throne without the proper credentials.


??

Those
who build boats for such races seldom race them again. They sell them to
those who don't have the means to employ the latest technology and design:
throwaway.

And said boats often have racing careers spanning decades.... hardly
"throw-aways."


... Ellison's boat in Holland, MI, is a prime example.


Yep- raced hard, looks like new. Proves the opposite of what you
claim, doesn't it?


... And your
comment about the 1D35 doesn't deserve a response.


Meaning that you don't have an intelligent answer? If you're a member
of the class then you should have a good idea about what races they go
to.

Do 1D35s race in the Mac? Seems like a great boat for it.

But is it a "throw-away"?





Once again you've jumped in with both feet in your mouth, pretending to be
an expert in everything and smarter to boot. Your arrogance is appalling,
Doug, but not quite as appalling as your complete lack of civility. Oh, and
you are wrong on all points.


yeah, sure, whatever

DSK

wrote in message
ups.com...
Sailing to windward in higher winds is "abuse"? Funny, I had the idea
that's what boats were supposed to be built for.


"Maxprop" wrote:
Are you serious?

Yes.

Are you serious in suggesting that boats should *not* be built to sail
hard in strong winds?

Hunters, Catalinas, Beneteaus, Jeanneaus, shall I continue? None of them
are built for conditions similar to the 'average' Hobart.

Where have you been, Doug?

Around

Higher winds are only part of
the issue. How about monstrous waves, a team of youngsters (plus an
occasional oldtimer) pushing the rig and hull to its breaking point,
pounding and dropping off shear wavefronts, did I mention monstrous
waves?


Yeah, so what? Do *you* encounter those conditions on a regular basis?

I avoid them like the plague. Whether my boat is up to the task is unknown,
but I suspect she is. (Clover, not the 1D35)

And you're contradicting yourself again- first you say the boats are
flimsy throw-aways because they come apart after a Sydney-Hobart Race,
then you rant & rave about monstrous waves.

No, no, no. You used the word "flimsy." I never used that word, nor did I
imply it. 99% of what you believe to me *my* contradictions are words *you*
have gratuitously attributed to me. Hobart boats are built very tough, but
not beyond what is expected to be needed for the race. They are built light
and fast. A crab-crusher would stand up to the abuse of the Hobart with
ease, but it wouldn't win anything but a seasick crew who had to spend an
additional week enroute. Like America's Cup boats, the boats are not
overbuilt, but they are built strong enough. The designers/builders/owners
don't expect to go cruising with them ten years later--they expect to build
something better next year or the year after, if the boat stands up to the
race without significant damage or hull/deck degradation during the race,
AND if the design hasn't been significantly superceded by technology and
superior design over the intervening year. Ergo: throwaway boats. And
we're talking about the serious racers--the ones that race to win--not the
rest of the fleet that competes for the honor of saying they did the Hobart.



Utter nonsense. They are no more "throw-away boats" than your 1D35...
less so, if anything (correct me if I'm wrong, but have 1D35s sailed
any mjor offshore races?)


Again you've pretended to a throne without the proper credentials.


??

Those
who build boats for such races seldom race them again. They sell them to
those who don't have the means to employ the latest technology and
design:
throwaway.

And said boats often have racing careers spanning decades.... hardly
"throw-aways."

How many Hobart boats has Larry Ellison raced a second time? Or ever raced
again? I don't have the answer, but I'm guessing not a single one. He, and
others with similar means, seldom campaign the same boat for more than a
year. They build all-out racing machines for the races in question,
"discard" them, and build something better and faster the next year. Ergo:
throwaway boats.


... Ellison's boat in Holland, MI, is a prime example.


Yep- raced hard, looks like new. Proves the opposite of what you
claim, doesn't it?

Not at all. Once again you've presumed to put words in my mouth. It looks
brand new because it has been completely rebuilt, ostensibly with Ellison's
money, but no one I've spoken with knows for sure. The boat was
significantly damaged following its win in the Hobart. Had it not been
rebuilt, it wouldn't look like new.



... And your
comment about the 1D35 doesn't deserve a response.


Meaning that you don't have an intelligent answer? If you're a member
of the class then you should have a good idea about what races they go
to.

I've been involved for a couple of months. I have a life beyond one-design
racing, meaning I haven't spent the last year on a trawler with nothing more
to do than study the history of the class. I do know that there are a
number of fleets throughout the country, and perhaps elsewhere. Beyond that
I really don't give a rat's ass. I race for fun, not for glory. I have a
lot of work to put in before I'm going to be competitive on a consistent
basis, despite my racing history with dinghies. Ours if far from the
toughest fleet around--none of our fleet members have competed successfully
at the national level yet, but some are very talented and will do so in the
future, I'm confident.


Do 1D35s race in the Mac? Seems like a great boat for it.

I've been told they have.

But is it a "throw-away"?

Exactly the opposite. They are designed and built to be raced indefinitely,
thus the one-design designation. The class is tightly controlled (one
builder, for example) therefore the boats built early should be competitive
with newer ones a decade later.





Once again you've jumped in with both feet in your mouth, pretending to
be
an expert in everything and smarter to boot. Your arrogance is
appalling,
Doug, but not quite as appalling as your complete lack of civility. Oh,
and
you are wrong on all points.


yeah, sure, whatever

I'd be surprised if you ever did otherwise, Doug. You never fail to
disappoint.

Max