When is a backstay a maststay?

by nzeditor@sail-world.com on 22 Jun 2007 On Tuesday, we broke the news of a Jury hearing which had taken place in Valencia regarding the issuing of several Public Interpretations concerning the use of backstays in the 32nd America’s Cup Match.

There two issues, the first relates to the position of the topmast backstay, and the second the position of running backstays. Essentially the Class Rule was altered in 2005 with the intention that they should remain attached between their fixing points on the mast and yacht, throughout the race, unless the runner were required to be eased to allow the boom to go out.

Essentially Alinghi want to move their topmast backstay forward to the aft edge of the mast, while still attached with a long rope tail back to the normal fixing point. They then tension the topmast backstay with a handy-billy (pulley) system, when sailing upwind.

The objective of being able to stow the topmast backstay alongside the aft face of the mast is to reduce windage or drag upwind. Alinghi have hit on a work-around for the new rule.

You may remember that in the 2000 Ametrica’s Cup, Team New Zealand physically unpinned the backstay and a crew member led it forward where it was secured behind the mast. Before turning downwind, the stay was taken back to its normal position, hooked in place and provided topmast support to offset spinnaker loads.

In the 2003 America’s Cup round, every competitor adopted Team New Zealand’s practice, and there was no advantage to be gained.

For the 2007 America’s Cup, the intention of the new rule was clear - that the practice was to be banned. There was no point - as all competitors were shifting the stay.

In the 2007 Louis Vuitton Cup all competitors sailed with their topmast backstays in place. Had Alinghi been in the Challenger Selection Series and moved the topmast backstay as they clearly intend to, then they would surely have been protested.

And, as we saw with Mascalzone Latino-Capitalia, who were protested for removing their backstay; they had a win taken off them, the race was ordered to be resailed (which they lost); and a fine of 10,000 Euros was levied, prompting the 'Ice Cream Money' comment from their Patron.

At first glance, the process of Rule Questions and Interpretations seem to be more of the eye glazing gobbledegook which is too often associated with the America’s Cup.

The process is designed to allow design innovation within a restricted class rule, while putting an end to the flurry of measurement protests that would otherwise arise, were there not some sort of query system in place.

The Question and Interpretation process does put some pressure on the Measurement Committee. Do they look at the intentions of the rulemakers, or should they just consider the strict meaning of the words used in the rules?

On the first count, the Measurement Committee are asked to read the minds of the rulemakers; on the second they risk making some very silly decisions because of poor rule drafting through a bad choice of words. It’s a bit of a 'heads you win, tails I lose' situation for the Committee.

The other relevant issue here is that in the case of a measurement protest or query, it should be raised at the earliest opportunity. Just when Alinghi first developed this work-around is only known to them. However for the Event to be in a position just two days before the start of an America’s Cup Match where the class rules are unclear is unacceptable.

The topmast backstay is a big inconvenience in the America’s Cup Class from both windage and mainsail interference perspectives. Emirates Team New Zealand would be significantly disadvantaged through having to sail with their stay fixed in its Louis Vuitton Cup position. It is unfair on them to make a last minute change by a new interpretation of rule and force them to modify their boat and sailing systems.

The intention of the rule was clear. The wording was agreed between all the Challengers and Defenders two years ago. To our mind, it is a long stretch to even get the words to accommodate Alinghi’s work-around. The Measurement Committee should make an Interpretation accordingly and back the accepted position.

The Event doesn’t need this sort of carry on. We'll update this story on www.sail-world.com/nz as there are further developments.