IMO this would have made much more sense upon her graduation from college than at 16 years of age. Her maturity, mental and physical state at 22 would be much more conducive for a favorable outcome. I am guessing this has more to do with the parents cocktail party chatter then the kids best interest at their young age...
While that may be true, the 16/17 year olds that have attempted this recently (that I'm aware of) are 3 for 3.
Maybe all three (and Abby, too, for having made it as far as she did) were incredibly lucky. I think that's probably a fair statement, but it can be equally applied to anyone that solos the world. So in that case, her age is irrelevant.
Maybe the other three were better prepared, smarter, better trained or simply better equipped than Abby. Certainly possible, however, one of the 3 is Abby's older brother. I would
assume (perhaps erroneously) that her equipment was comparable to his, and she probably had the benefit of having heard in intimate terms about his experience. He succeeded, and she followed him, so it's probably reasonable to believe she was more qualified than him, simply because she went second.
Her being out in the Southern Indian Ocean this time of year is perhaps the most fateful part of the decision. Maybe an older, wiser sailor would have aborted the trip, or hugged the coast(s) and paid the time penalty. However, once she was out there, it's hard to say her disablement (is that a word? well, it is now) had anything to do with her age. Once the wave sets itself upon you, it doesn't give a damn about demographics. A 50 year old grizzled veteran might have suffered the same vessel damage in that situation. Maybe or maybe not, we just don't know.
We can all sit here and say how foolish it was for her to go, for her parents to let her, or indeed, send her.
But what it boils down to is this, did she fail because of her age? Or would any other sailor have faced the same failure all other things being equal?
