Oeps....! Didn't see that!

QUOTE [should the title of this thread not be

No more cats in the Olympics after 2008 !] end quote.

You are of course absolutely correct. (stuff the ISAF)

Wouter, that page seems to have serious technical faults. It doen't display well on my browser [Int Exp].

Berny

I have the same issues, been having them on the AHPC website for close to 2 years now. I don't know what is causing it.

Wouter

seems to work ok in Firefox 2.0.. So guessing OK in Netscape which also uses a mozilla engine..

Maybe its because Microsoft decided to go it alone on the web interface protocols rather than use the existing standards and their extensions?

From Yachting Australia

Multihulls and the 2012 Olympic Games – Yachting Australia’s position

ACtion at the Tornado World Championships 2005
Phil Jones, Friday, 16 November 2007

Yachting Australia has expressed both disappointment and concern over the decision taken last week by the ISAF Council to drop the Multihull from the list of events for the 2012 London Olympic Games. Yachting Australia delegates supported the retention of the multihull event throughout the ISAF Annual Meetings which took place in Estoril, Portugal from 3-11 November.

ISAF was challenged with reducing the number of Olympic events from 11 in 2008 to 10 for 2012 in Weymouth. "To not include the multihull in 2012 is to disenfranchise a large part of the sport of sailing," says Phil Jones, CEO of Yachting Australia and member of the ISAF Events Committee, which recommended that the multihull should be retained. "The speed and excitement of catamarans is a real draw to young people. They are the speed machines of sailboat racing. Whilst there is only a limited number of countries involved in the Tornado Olympic Class, multihull sailing is an attractive and truly global part of the sport."

ISAF has been heeding the clear message from the International Olympic Committee (IOC) over recent years that for the sport to maintain its place on the Olympic Program it must take steps to become more attractive to the media and the public. Changes to the format of the competition have been made and a World Cup Series has been agreed in effort to ensure more regular exposure for Olympic sailing.

"Catamaran racing is fast and comes across as really exciting," says Phil Jones. "The Tornado is one of the most telegenic boats in the Olympic Regatta. The boats are big enough to carry on board cameras and tracking devices that can really bring the contest to life for the viewer. To not have a place for it, or another multihull, is a real step backwards for a sport that has the challenge of building its profile. For us, there was just no focus on the bigger, long-term picture."

Yachting Australia is also concerned over the process by which the multihull was excluded. The ISAF Council voted to change the process recommended for the selection of the events. This meant that there was no "run-off" vote between the Multihull and the Keelboat.

"There was no real discussion over the implications of the change. It altered the fundamental principles of the recommended system." says Phil Jones. "Some consider that the change, which was taken on a motion from the floor, was taken with undue haste. Certainly many around the Council did not seem to appreciate the full implications of the change. Those that used their first vote to support other events may well have backed the multihull over the keelboat had they had the opportunity. This change denied them this opportunity. I am sure that having had time consider the implications, many will recognise that the change, put forward as a mere simplification, was much more than this."

Yachting Australia is concerned over the reaction to the ISAF Council decision. "We understand that some will be very disappointed but the personal and vitriolic attacks that we have seen do nothing to help the cause of those making them. In fact, they only do damage. Yachting Australia does not consider this type of reaction appropriate in any way."

Yachting Australia is considering what further action, if any, can be taken to revisit the decision. "However much we might disagree, if we felt the decision had been properly considered and made with those around the table fully understanding the implications, we would accept it. Obviously we don't consider that this is the case. We shall be discussing the issue with colleagues from other countries and IOC representatives over the next few days before deciding how we proceed."

It'd be interesting to know who put the motion??

Berny

I don't pretend to know anything about this but I am wondering if there is a connection behind the US claiming they were aiming at two multihull classes and the motion. Possibly the people thinking and wanting more cats thought this motion would help them achieve that when in fact it was aimed at getting them out.
Like I said. I have no idea, possibly someone in the know can
give their take on the possibility of there being a connection.

Regards,
Phill

I personally dont think there is a conspiracy going on her, but I dont understand the mandate of the representatives from the US either. John Williams tried to explain it on the open forum. Supposedly the US representatives had a "gameplan" issued from US Sailing according to their motion with two multi classes, which is what I would expect. But when the voting process was changed at the meeting, after a motion from the floor, this gameplan forced the US votes to keelboats instead of the multihulls. It is no secret that US Sailing think their medal chances are greater in keelboats than multis for 2012 so I _think_ US Sailings representatives did as US Sailing wanted to. Not necessarily pushing multihulls out of the games, but putting their votes with their perceived medal chances.

What I want to know is who made the motion of changing the well tried voting process, where the votes are cast for each class separately and each vote discussed before the next class is decided. This made the selection last just some hours instead of the scheduled two days. It also made for this situation, which I feel is due to a hasty decision made without understanding what the change in the voting procedure meant. This just adds more weight to those who now try to find ways to change the decision made by the ISAF Council, or finding some other way of including a multihull in the 2012 games.


BTW: Check..
http://www.monohullandfatoldmensailing.org/ and then isaf.org
Also worthwhile to read:http://sailjuiceblog.com/2007/11/16/australia-calls-for-a-multihull-re-vote/
Looks like Andy Price is having a field day, even if he came across as a multihull hater before the selection.

So these people are making decisions with far reaching worldwide implications without understanding what they are doing ? Think about this for a while ........ Read it again..... I would not allow people, who don't know what they are doing and/or who are without a proper vision on the field they are dealing with, or who are unable to take proper decisions, even to clean my toilet. It is a devastating conclusion that Yachting Australia presents here and far worse than any vitriol, and I am afraid that they are right.

You make a very good point! But I do think there were people who did know the full implications of the revised process, namely those who put the motion so the more that is known about it, the worse it looks to me.

****

to the ISAF
The integrity and future of the ISAF are at stake here. The was a time when narrow self-interest could assert itself, but not now. There is no valid interest served by your decision to remove the multihull from the Olympic classes, nor the inclusion of a women's match-racing keelboat over a modern high-performance single-hander.

All the stated aims of the ISAF and of modern Olympic sailing are ignored by your decision and all those who perpetrated it left open to public contempt. Is this the legacy to the sport that you wish to be remembered by. Go back to square one, re-open the debate, and make a decision that serves world-wide interests, not narrow ones.
David Ingram - auckland - New Zealand

Voting out the fastest class in the Olympics is a giant leap backwards in the sport of sailing... sailing needs to be promoting the high performance disciplines (Windsurf, Skiff, Catamaran, Foiling) to the Olympics as these are the classes that communicate athleticism and excitement to future participants, media and public.

Wake up ISAF!!! The future of yachting is not the slowest boats available....The future is young people, not you and your archaic attitude.

Wankers

We want exciting boats to watch

What an insane decision, to remove one of the only exciting olympic classes and one of the more modern catagories. Put the multihulls back in and remove one of the mens double handers, preferably the 470, what hope with the dropping of high performance for match racing not good for spectaters

Young people need something to aspire to; the T provides the only cat at the Olympics. Please keep the variety of craft as wide as we can at these show case events.

____________________________________________________

From: André Raoult

As president of the Oceania Sailing Federation (OSAF) I have been much disapointed by the ISAF concil decision to drop off the multihulls from the Olympic series ! More : looking at the votes the group L New Zealand sailing association representative(Mr Joe Butterfield) voted against multihulls as the Australian (David Tillett) voted for ...As I know none of the Group 'L' countries were informed of the decision made by their representatives ...

____________________________________________________

For a further five pages of NZ comment see: Crew.org

It would appear that the NZ rep' voted contrary to his and other countries in his regions, true wishes?
This has got to be re voted on at the next ISAF meeting.

I don't think so. The CEO of YNZ has publicly expressed their support for the decision and, like the US, cites a rationale that is plainly outside the criteria specified in ISAF regulations.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/4/story.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10475891

Also, as far as I know, the AUS and NZL delegates are not explicitly expected to represent the views of other nations in Group L.

"YNZ chief executive Des Brennan said New Zealand at present had greater strength in keelboats than in multihulls."
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/4/story.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10475891

I guess that sums it up nicely. Why would anybody vote to keep an event that they know they are going to get flogged in? I am sure that if the current Tornado world champions happened to be from the US or UK the vote may have turned out differently, however as Bundock and Ashby appear unstoppable why bother?

It's the Mumbles Yacht Club (MYC) Prize giving this Saturday and apart from organising it and presenting the Cups I will be saying a prayer before we eat which I have thought long and hard about!!
Our father who sails on two hulls, Catamaran be thy name. Thy wind will come and racing will be done, on sea as it is in the MYC Bar. Give us this day a race which starts on time, and forgive those who are always late. As we forgive the RYA who trespass against us and lead us not into the 2012 Olympic Games. But deliver us to the hot showers this Winter for my willy is small enough. For thine is not the losing but the wining and the glory. To go faster and faster. Amen.
Should raise a few eyebrows <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Mark, that is very very good !

I'd blame the ISAF !

Carolijn Brouwer found time from her busy Tornado training schedule in Sydney to write to SailJuice with her views on what happened two weeks ago in Estoril. You could read the frustration between the lines of what Laser Radial sailor Laura Baldwin wrote a few days ago. Here, Carolijn is much more explicit with her feelings. By the way, a quick reminder that Carolijn finished runner-up in the Tornado World Championships this year, showing the men the way round the track in the manliest of weather conditions. So this is a girl who knows what she’s talking about.


“Dear Andy

I was gutted after the ISAF meeting in Estoril. I felt empty, confused and especially useless. I am a member of the Events Committee but at this moment I truly don’t really know what I’m doing there and whether it has any meaning.

Of course I’m very disappointed ISAF kicked out the Multihull and is taking a huge step backwards in sailing by not including the High Performance dinghy for Women. They are too scared to take a possible risk and move forward.

But most of all, I am disappointed about the Events selection procedure. The members of the Events Committee have been chosen by their MNAs because they are the so called experts in the issues/areas that involve Events, including Olympic Games and Olympic Event Selection.

The normal procedure is that the voting on respective issues that involve Events is done on our Committee and we then put them forward as a recommendation to Council. Council usually accepts our recommendation.

This time however they just chucked it out the window and started all over again. So, what are we actually doing there as an Events Committee if our expertise is not being used anyway?

This is really disappointing and to be honest I don’t understand what ISAF is doing. It’s frustrating being part of it, and having the feeling that you are completely useless. It’s not about the sailors, it’s about the blazers. So many people have told me already, don’t try and understand, it’s a waste of time. And I still keep thinking I can make a difference in there.

The past week I have been on the verge of resigning from the Committee. But that would be giving up. We need more active sailors on the committees, not less.

I have a very straightforward, simple and symmetric opinion of how easily we can have only ten events for sailing in the Olympics and still cover the whole range that our beautiful sport has to offer:
• Singlehanded Men/Women
• Doublehanded Men/Women (High Performance)
• Multihull Men/ Women
• Windsurfer Men/Women
• Keelboat Men/Women (matchracing)

It doesn’t have to be difficult, it can be easy.

And regarding the Women’s situation. This might sound a little contradictory with what I just wrote above, but it’s just a matter of time. I am more in favour of 6:4 than 5:5. If you look at any Olympic sport out there at the moment there are more men than women.

I wonder whether we will find enough women to fill all the Olympic classes if we go 50:50. And I’m afraid if we do, this might bring the women’s level in sailing down, and that is the last thing we want.

So an easy solution to this would be consider the Open events. Not all the events have to be open but I definetely think some events CAN and should be open. There are many people that think the Tornado is not suitable as an Open Event discipline.

I think I’m the living proof that that is not entirely true.

But I can live with that because in my eyes there are more disciplines out there that are equally and maybe more suitable for men and women. We are talking Multihull here, not Tornado. So the F18 or any other catamaran class could be more suitable for men and women.

Or take for example the 470. The boys now (especially due to the conditions in Qingdao) but normally as well, the boys have to be very light and skinny to suit a 470. A mixed combination could be the perfect solution for this problem. And also here it has been proven in the past that it is possible (1984 Olympics with Cathy Foster and Pete Newlands).

And with this approach, you can solve the whole situation by keeping the wide diversity, still cover all the ranges in sport, keep all the sailors happy and most important of all not put our sport in danger of losing its Olympic status!

Which is exactly what is happening now by removing the Multihull and not introducing the High Performance.

Regards,

Carolijn”