Peter,
I am in the process of composing my own letter. It is a slow and difficult process, because I have to try to avoid sarcasm, which is my normal style. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Thanks for the e-mail update.

I thought at first that had to be a joke...then I realized you were serious...

Finally some progress!! Thanks Danish Sailing!! Terrific!! Any musings of US Sailing officials, either present or future should be considered agenda oriented by everyone, until a demonstration good faith towards the future of amateur sailing, and MH sailors. Write the IOC with a POLITE letter, but Keep the heat on US Sailing any way you please.

As of May, Chip no longer has any association with Vanguard. Infact, as of the first of this year Vanguard doesn't exist anymore it is now LaserPerformance Inc.

Wouter, exactly right. I had a lively exchange with s-Butt on this exact point after a terse retort to one letter I submitted. I told them that while the process (vote)was technically 'correct' it was 'hardly proper' and the manipulation of the process 'lacked integrity'.

Well, terrific, but I did this back in Novemeber, and the chowderheads at US Sailing blew me off with lip service. That nonsense about the 'correctness of the vote' is insulting to any intelligent person familiar with US Sailing's manipulation of the vote process.

There is a saying; "There is no man so deaf as they that will not listen." Why waste energy on these people when they wont hold themselves accountable for their actions? My old fashioned and polite paper letter goes to the IOC.

I'm getting a gateway timeout on all of those links.

It is down for me as well. Perhaps their server/connection buckled under the load..

You can find the same documents on: http://sailjuiceblog.com/

Thanks Rolf - got it.

We are gaining formal international momentum on the ISAF MH governance issue!

Some details in sailingscuttlebutt.com.

It is heartening to see the international interest in this issue take precedence in the monohull sailing blogs!
Don't underestimate your role as a sailor!
R

From Scuttlebutt Europe:
This though does not help the fight. I know that for many of us the emotions run high on this issue, but sometimes we keep shooting ourselves in our own feet.


Tornado Warnings
Sounds like things got a bit ugly at the Tornado World Championship prizegiving, after Darren Bundock's old crew John Forbes took the opportunity to have a go at Yachting New Zealand President Jan Dawson over the Tornado's ejection from the Olympic slate. Sail World's Richard Gladwell gave his verdict on the affair. Here's a snippet:

The class did itself no favours at the Worlds prizegiving with an attack on Yachting New Zealand by past ITA President John Forbes, seemingly endorsed by the new ITA President and echoed with the booing from the competitors tables as Yachting New Zealand President Jan Dawson made her way forward to make a closing address to what had otherwise been a brilliant regatta for the class.

Forbes probed, parried and quoted from a leaked email from the Yachting NZ Olympic Committee, which got onto the internet some months ago and was seized upon by the international multihull community.

The fact that the recommendation was not accepted by the YNZ Board seemed to be lost on Forbes. As too was the fact that Yachting New Zealand is one of the few organisations with the guts to have said they intend to make a submission to ISAF requesting a review of the event selection for the 2012 Olympics.

For the Multihull to make it back into the 2012 Olympics, there has to be quite a few more Yachting New Zealand's prepared to make such a stand.

Richard's comment provoked an equally eloquent rebuttal from Darren Bundock, who has this to say:

There is no doubt that John's speech was a great surprise and I think totally unexpected by everyone in the room at the presentation and when he read the first line of the submission I instantly knew which MNA had made this submission and I cringed on where he was going with it. However, after reflecting on his speech over night there is no doubt that he was completely honest and right on the money.

There is no doubt that the Tornado sailors appreciate the recent turn around from Yachting New Zealand but Yachting New Zealand's submissions and their council member help contribute to the disastrous position that Olympic sailing is in right now. No question.

It needs to be made perfectly clear to all these National Member Associations worldwide what their actions are doing to the future of the sport and the lives of the Athletes with very little consequence on the MNA's, Yachting Association boards and council members.

The recently appointed ISAF Athletes Commission (the athletes' voice) has come out with 10 of the 11 Olympic classes represented stating that the decision taken in Estoril was a bad decision and needs to be overturned. This is what the athletes want. Remember us? The sailors.

A very interesting debate, which you can read in full on Sail-World. If you're a regular SailJuice reader you'll know that my sympathies lie in good part with the multihull sailors. But as Richard Gladwell points out, when an organisation such as YNZ has shown the balls to change its mind and throw its support behind the beleaguered Tornado class, it's time to say thank you, to forget the past, and to welcome any help you can get with open arms.

The lid on the Tornado's Olympic coffin hasn't creaked shut quite yet, but I'm not sure that John Forbes's speech has done much to secure the Tornado's safe return from its undeserved grave. -- Andy Rice, sailjuiceblog.com

They told the truth, only gave YNZ a bit of grief and still held the worlds there. That should be the benchmark what are the USA sailors doing because thats all that matters once USA with its 3 votes says yes to Exciting sailing, Cats are in. Are the US sailors going to fade away nicely or put on the gloves?

please explain this "recommendation was not accepted by the YNZ Board", In light of the fact their rep. voted with the recommendation.. Seems either they did accept the recommendation and are still hiding the act or their rep voted against the boards request.. Or an experienced rep was conned by US sailing..

Do any of the US Sailing sailing folks on this board have any more info on this?

Excerpt from Bob Merrick on SailJuice blog

First the Good News: Last weekend at the US Sailing Spring meeting, the US
Sailing Multihull Council (MHC) introduced the following motion to the US
Sailing House of Delegates to recommend to the Board of Directors that the
US Delegation to ISAF support one or more of the March 2008 Submissions
calling for a re-vote on Olympic Events for the 2012 Games in Great Britain.
The MHC contends that a re-vote on all ten events is fairer than the
Submissions that call for a limited run-off vote of a partial slate.

After considerable discussion, the motion was approved unanimously. What is
the House of Delegates? The US Sailing website describes it, in short, as an
organization intended to serve as an avenue and voice for member sailors.
The House membership consists of delegates from the fifteen councils within
US SAILING and the chairs of the five US SAILING Divisions. The House is
often referred to as the council of councils, with members of the US SAILING
Board of Directors often attending their meetings as observers in order to
hear the debate.

So that’s the good news. The “voice for member sailors” in the United States
unanimously voted in favor of a motion that “the US Delegation to ISAF
support one or more of the March 2008 Submissions calling for a re-vote on
Olympic Events for the 2012 Games.” Now for the bad news: The 15 member US
Sailing Board of Directors firmly rejected the motion put forward by the
House of Delegates. So much for listening to the “voice” of the sailors. --
http://sailjuiceblog.com/2008/03/18/us-sailing-rejects-a-re-vote

As I understand it, the motion was made in the House of Delegates, debated and approved.

Walter Chamberlain, Chairman of the House, presented it to the open Board of Directors on Sunday morning, and 'much discussion' ensued.

The conclusion was that US Sailing thought the ISAF vote was legitimate. They similarly reasoned was that if US Sailing instigated the ISAF and there was a change, the other dropped class would raise a similar stink. This is an understandable, though non-visionary position.

If, through the ISAF, or through other pressure, (i.e.IOC intervention), the equipmment issues were to be re-opened, US Sailing supports a re-visit of all 10 disciplines, and not just a run-off vote (i.e., between the multihulls & keelboats).

It is up to the ISAF to instigate a good faith revote, or the IOC to ask ISAF to revisit the issue in light of the irregularities. To what extent influential representation by US Sailing and other MNA's may have to influence this process (another re-vote) is not known. It looks though, like US Sailing does not want to be driving the matter onto the May ISAF agenda.

I say keep the polite letters going to the IOC. That may keep the pressure on ISAF to show themselves as out of touch, power broker politicians in front of the IOC. If they think about, and the IOC acknowledges there are serious doubts as to the credibility of the process, ISAF may recognize what credibility they stand to lose, and then re-open the matter appropriately.

It is rather striking how other MNAs think differently and find they need to take action. How long is the list of MNAs who wants to revisit the selection now, 15?
Not directed towards you Rex, just an observation from overseas.

No offense taken! I, like you and others, want to see the Estoril debacle correctly addressed. At this point, US Sailing wont be doing much to facilitate this correction. Let's continue to try and be an agent for appropriate process. In the meantime I will continue to communicate as clearly as possible any accurate info. BTW, What's quite interesting is how forum 'trolls' on the SA board baited and tried to torpedo reasonable discussion on the topic. The degree of resistance is quite astounding but probably means that the pressure has been effective. R

It's remarkable that anyone could make such an assertion. US Sailing's public comments about how they voted are demonstrably at odds with ISAF regulations.

JW, what are you hearing?

Nothin' but the rain. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Headed to Spring Fever, so I don't have much time to fill in the blanks - especially since this is a fast-moving target. Fat lady ain't sung yet and we're still in swinging. I've attached the actual motion to the House - I'd like to point out that we were trying to come from the angle that this isn't a "multihull v. keelboat" issue, but more and more an international perception issue over the influence the US Delegates may or may not have on the ISAF Council.

More soon.

I am sorry, I should probably know this answer with all of the post that have ensued. But why can't the Olympic committee just add another class? While I am sure there are some cost factors involved I can't imagine that it is so great that one class would break the bank.