Good news, but also a lot of bad news, for sailors who want to see a re-vote of the slate of 10 sailing Events being lined up for the Olympic Regatta in Weymouth 2012.
If you’ve been following this blog since last October, you’ll be familiar with the whole Estoril saga, where the Men’s Keelboat won a narrow victory over the Multihull, and the Women’s Match Racing just edged out the Women’s Skiff. (If you don’t know what I’m talking about, dig back through the SailJuice archives for October and November 2007.)
SailJuice was not a fan of either of these outcomes, and reported on the eleventh-hour change in voting procedure, a cunning move that was led by Charley Cook from US Sailing, whose agenda was to see the keelboats remain in the Games. (Fair play to you, by the way, Charley. I don’t agree with what you did, but you were there to do a job for your country.)
The Royal Yachting Association has since led a campaign to get the voting re-opened, and made a submission to ISAF to have a revote take place at the mid-year meeting. Last week the ISAF Executive Committee sat down in Switzerland to discuss what ‘urgent’ matters should be discussed at the mid-year meeting which takes place in Qingdao this May.
Most of the urgent matters were over relatively trivial issues, but the one that engaged them a bit more was the RYA’s submission. The Exec referred the matter to ISAF Constitution Committee (chaired by David Lees and vice-chaired by a certain Charley Cook) to get a definition of ‘urgent’. The Constitution Committee debated, did not come to a unanimous conclusion, but ultimately deemed the RYA’s submission as non-urgent.
When SailJuice spoke to Rod Carr at the end of last week – before he had had a chance to speak to ISAF – he was perplexed, to put it mildly. “We’re non-plussed by the decision not to consider these matters urgent. By November we believe it will be too late to change, so how could you consider it not urgent? I’m not a lawyer, this is just common sense.”
The reason for Rod being non-plussed was that he was under the impression that the International Olympic Committee was expecting ISAF to send in the final list of 2012 Event for IOC approval and rubber-stamping within the next few weeks. So for ISAF to pronounce this issue as non-urgent and shoving the submission back to November would mean the 10 Events were already set in stone. It was a two-fingered salute by ISAF to the RYA, and anyone else who felt short-changed by the voting in Estoril.
So you can understand why Rod was a little vexed by this state of affairs.
Things improved the following week however, when Rod had a chance to speak to Jerome Pels, the newly installed ISAF Secretary General. Apparently there is still room and time for discussion after all, as Rod explained: “Everyone was assuming that both the details of Events and Equipment had to be submitted to the IOC by this year. ISAF has clarified this with the IOC and apparently this is not the case.”
So, it is still possible for the Events slate to be debated and even revoted at this November’s AGM.
A sigh of relief from Rod Carr then? Er, no, not really. “We think it [the vote last November] is a bad decision and that the proposal to reconsider these matters should still be considered urgent.”
Rod’s concern is that by the next AGM, any momentum for turning over the Estoril decision will be long gone. “By this November, many people will have kicked this issue into the long grass. They will have got over their shock and anger that they had when the decision was first announced, and increasingly people will say, ‘Oh well, never mind, let’s get on with what we’ve got.’”
To give you an example of what will happen before then, Rod believes that the RYA will have been forced to close down any funding for its younger sailors on the Olympic Development Programme. “We can’t justify paying out money for sailors on the off-chance that we might get a change of Olympic Events,” says Rod.
The RYA has stuck its neck out on this issue, but not before doing a lot of consulting with other national sailing authorities behind the scenes, to gauge the mood. Sufficiently buoyed by the offers of support, the RYA fired off its salvo against this decision at the end of last year. Yachting Australia has been another vocal opponent to the Estoril decision, and to a lesser extent the French federation, the FFV (although they seem to want to keep the multihull AND the keelboat, without seeming to offer much solution to the 11-into-10-doesn’t-go problem).
But Rod is wondering where the rest of the rebel uprising has gone. “We’ve done our bit, where are the rest? They’re saying things in private, and being very supportive behind the scenes. But talk is cheap. We’ve had our say, the Australians, the French and a few others have had their say about things. Now, if other people want something to change, then they need to speak out and make their case to ISAF.”
With November, rather than May, now being the last opportunity to debate the Olympic slate, ISAF is open to submissions until 1 August. But Rod says that is too late. He wants to see other nations nail their colours to the mast now.
“We’ve got a stretching target to get two-thirds – that’s 26 people - of the delegates to vote, to change last November’s decisions. The Austrians, Danes, UK, Australia, France, New Zealand are all on the record as wanting a vote.” Now it’s time for others to step up, he says.
Rod wants some of the smaller nations to follow their lead. “Let’s say you were one of the smaller nations, and you’re thinking, ‘do I need to put in a submission?’. You’re worried about the slate as it stands, so you say to yourself, ‘One of the big nations will put in a submission, and I’ll vote for that.’”
That won’t be good enough, says Rod. “You could say the Executive are well within their rights to leave things as they are. If only four or five nations put in a submission, it’s easy for them to tell themselves that ISAF represents more than a hundred nations, so there’s no big furore here.”
Indeed, when I spoke to Jerome Pels about this issue a couple of days ago, he made that very point, that from the ISAF perspective they see a lot of complaint at grass roots level but not much complaint from national authorities other than the RYA and Yachting Australia.
There is more to this, and I’ll come back to you with more detail from my conversation with Jerome in the next few days, but that should be enough for you to chew on for the time being.
A few months have passed since we discussed this issue. But it seems like a good time to reassess things again, particularly as the Tornado Worlds are going on in New Zealand right now. What’s your view? Do you think the RYA should quit yapping and let bygones be bygones? Or should Rod and his band of rebels continue to battle all the way through to this November?
-- Have You Seen This? --
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Worthy]
#133787 02/28/0806:18 PM02/28/0806:18 PM
Nothing too encouraging there. It would be one thing for the ISAF to admit they might have made a bad decision, but another for them to admit that they broke their own rules. I've seen no evidence that they give a toss about either.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Worthy]
#133788 02/29/0808:15 AM02/29/0808:15 AM
The angers there Worthy but its pretty predictable what will happen. The Tornado worlds should not be in NZ at the moment it should have been moved to a cat friendly country that has quote [young and fit sailors]. The Tornado organisation has let down its own class by not sending a strong message. There would have been enormous press coverage if the Worlds were moved that would have been to Cat sailors benefit. I know they've changed their tune but the sailing board there are tossers. And don't start me on the American Sailing organisation <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />
Jeff Southall Current boats Nacra 5.8 1703 Animal Scanning Services Nacra 5.8 1667 Ram Raider Nacra 18 Square Arrow 1576
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: JeffS]
#133789 02/29/0805:18 PM02/29/0805:18 PM
Instead of looking at what boat should be dropped from the Olympics, why not look at it as far as what disciplins should be in the Olympics. May be we need to start with a clean sheet of paper.
Personaly I would like to see
Male Dinghy Female Dinghy
Male Multi Female Multi
Male Sail Board Female Sail Board
Male Keel Boat Female Keel Boat.
Then you can look at either Match Racing, Teams Racing, Long Distance or an Exhibition Class.
Once disiplins are decided, hold an evaluation event to decide classes.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: ]
#133793 03/01/0806:26 AM03/01/0806:26 AM
Because they ended up seriously embarrassed when the rationale behind their vote became public.
The rational behind the Irish vote was very simple. "What Olympic Classes do our sailors sail in ?" "OK, We'll vote for those classes" <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />
Dermot Catapult 265
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Dermot]
#133794 03/01/0809:44 PM03/01/0809:44 PM
I can follow that logic Dermott and thats fair enough for Ireland but NZ as a nation was settled by people arriving on catamarans and has heaps of people sailing cats. America has heaps of people sailing cats with some of the biggest manufacturers of cats in the world and have won numerous medals, I also noticed the American Tornado team came 8th despite a DNF that would have been a huge relief to the American Sailing organisations. Imagine if they had won! regards
Jeff Southall Current boats Nacra 5.8 1703 Animal Scanning Services Nacra 5.8 1667 Ram Raider Nacra 18 Square Arrow 1576
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: JeffS]
#133795 03/02/0810:17 AM03/02/0810:17 AM
It was morbidly hilarious. I wish I kept a copy of the response. Their committee made mention of the multi-hull favoring younger and more fit sailors and therefore not suited to their medal attempts(or something quite similar to that effect). Unbelievable. (To think, youth and fitness as a part of the Olympics...) That guy was around lead too long.
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133797 03/02/0809:23 PM03/02/0809:23 PM
Thanks all, I did find the reasons NZ voted against the Multihull. Looks like the old guard are firmly in charge in NZ. Sailing is a strange sport, it has made so much progress in last 100 years but many are still obsessed with with using lead, if we can go for another 20 years I hope high performance sailors can take the reins of local sailing authorities and make some serious changes. I just hope those in charge now dont wreck our sport completely in the mean time.
Imagine if Formula one cars raced with solid rubber tires because thats the first tires that cars used? Wouldn't be very interesting would it? Like watching keelboat racing <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Darryn Mozzy 1782
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Worthy]
#133800 03/03/0804:23 AM03/03/0804:23 AM
This sort of bull is why I'm opposed to ISAF being involved in any of my classes..
Yes the Tornado worlds should have been moved.. But the powers that be knew the cat sailors will forget and fall back into being nice submissive lambs.. And we did
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Stewart]
#133801 03/03/0804:45 AM03/03/0804:45 AM
YNZ screwed up as with many other NAs. They have however stood up and said "hey we [email]F@#$%ed[/email] up, we voted in the best interest of NZs medal prospects and not in the best interest of sailing" and are now doing their best to rectify what they have done by writing a letter to ISAF requesting a revote, joining up with the UK and Australia to have it overturned. This shows true character from them. If other NAs such as US Sailing did likewise, then we will be well back on the road to being and Olympic discipline.
If we continue to criticize what they did in the past, then we may loose their support at a time we need it most. Their board is made up of humans. Humans make mistakes. Courageous humans confront their mistakes and try to reverse them.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Stewart]
#133802 03/03/0804:50 AM03/03/0804:50 AM
What would moving the worlds have accomplished? I think it would just have made trouble for those planning to compete there? I dont percieve ISAF as this huge evil monolith anymore. ISAF Council messed up with the selection for the games, but there is more to ISAF than just the council. I wonder how many full time employees ISAF have, and what they are doing. I think most of what we think of as ISAF is acutally volunteers?
That appears to be an honest assessment of what is happening and the chances on the Olympic decision being overturned are 4 fifths of F all. If the American Yachting organisations said they were going to vote for Tornado's would you believe them?
Jeff Southall Current boats Nacra 5.8 1703 Animal Scanning Services Nacra 5.8 1667 Ram Raider Nacra 18 Square Arrow 1576
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Stewart]
#133804 03/03/0812:29 PM03/03/0812:29 PM
Some folks rally to a certain ISAF executive committee members as a 'great backroom diplomat'. The actions on this matter suggest that their cheerleading confuses the 'diplomats' with the ‘operators’. (A disease in the world these days.)
As for the future, the ISAF, RYC and related world organizations need to recognize that certain boats, are a bit more exciting to watch and sail, and are a better determinant of skill and athleticism (than say, a keel boat perking along at 4 knts). It would be wise for the International organizing bodies to consider that ‘OlympicYachting’ is more important than ‘boat traditions’ and ‘medal hopes’, and that youth inclusion and athleticism is much more important value than ballast and ol’ buddies. Preferably the Executive equipment committees will act expediently, scuttling antiquated boats and focus on making the sport more interesting, simple and engaging to spectators prior to 2012. It might be useful for the IOC to consider organizing an external non-partisan group, with some binding/voting authority, to issue binding directives, specify timelines and milestones, and drive what expectations are for the event in 2012, so that the diplomats don’t mire the process in comittees and agendas. By co-opting the process by special committee, the IOC would be recognizing; 1) that the current nomination process is seriously broken (other descriptions come to mind) or is being run by fiat, and 2) give weight to the likelihood of abandonment of Olympic yachting in future Olympiads. If they leave it to these guys again, it will undoubtedly turn into another voting fiasco.
Water has a tendency to find its own level. The ISAF’s actions, be they through incompetence or driven by agendas, may ultimately kill Olympic yachting altogether. In the end, the danger is that the IOC resorts to using the trump card of ‘too boring’ or ‘too eclectic’ (which it is not!!) as an expedient to end a mess that has not been adequately managed. If so, the ISAF and related international bodies will lament, (but probably not recognize their role in making the sport into something better). Should that happen, multi sailors may have little need for the ISAF. As for me, I am watching, and writing letters.
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133805 03/03/0812:35 PM03/03/0812:35 PM
Foiling moths, lasers, high perf. mono for men and women and multis. Thats my opinion. Unfortunately, in my perspective, the selection process is bogged down in politics and considerations on what each and every one think is best for the country/sport/economy/environment/terrorism etc etc. Would be so much easier if they let me decide instead <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Rolf_Nilsen]
#133806 03/03/0812:43 PM03/03/0812:43 PM
That's it Rolf, only Foiling Moths for both Men and Women, raced in the same fleet, but one of each (M+F) for each country. Then C cats for two up racing, mixed crews allowed. Mixed Kites and Mixed windsurfers. Keel boats should have been eliminated at the turn of the century, at least the very old, slow ones they use for the Olympics. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Blade F16 #777
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Timbo]
#133808 03/03/0801:21 PM03/03/0801:21 PM
I dont get it Timbo, why dont you and I run the world? We could really have got something done <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Rolf_Nilsen]
#133809 03/03/0805:17 PM03/03/0805:17 PM
If anybody are following the blogs of Andy Rice and Magnus Wheatley, it seems like the compadres in ISAF Council are not immune to criticism. Perhaps the message is seeping trough and into the trenches cast at ISAF Council. They do seem a bit entrenched.
The latest scuttlebutt is that after asked for a revote, based on an 'urgent' need to put this on the March ISAF agenda, the executive committee asked for a definition of 'urgent'. It was finally determined that the matter was not 'urgent' enough for the March agenda. Therefore, they seem to want to push off the whole mess until their November meeting, when, they feel the sailing committee will have forgotten, or that time will not allow for a change of heart. To this, I submitted the following retort, to another forum, entrenched in the mono community: Dear Editor, Attached is a definition, as well as an interpretation of the word "Urgent" for the Executive Committee of the ISAF 's perusal: "Urgent" Adjective S: (adj) pressing, urgent (compelling immediate action) "too pressing to permit of longer delay"; "the urgent words `Hurry! Hurry!'"; "bridges in urgent need of repair" *
In C. Cook's recent Scuttlebutt reply, he states that;…
"The Constitution Committee was asked to interpret the word “urgent” as used in the ISAF Regulations' and that… 'We simply interpreted the word 'urgent'."
In terms of usage the ISAF, the usage of "urgent" one presumes the Executive Committee contributes to, and interprets your constitution, in English. Similarly, one presumes the the Constitution Committee is composed of able-minded, English speaking participants, posessing a reasonable capacity for understanding the language that is used for communication in both Great Britain and the United States. However, in an effort to help your committee out, included is a definition of 'urgent' as well as usage in this context.
Should the matter the of antics surrounding the ISAF vote on equipment be shelved until November, such a decision impacts the Olympic training programs and the youth teams in a way that is 'pressing'. Funding, momentum for training would probably fall apart for these teams, and therefore, the decision is 'urgent' in the context of time and money. Hence, the obvious usage of the word "urgent" fits the definition of "too pressing to permit of longer delay" ; to avert the untoward event the pressing action is required at an earlier (May) meeting (as in the urgent words `Hurry!, ISAF, Hurry!').
It would be wise for the International organizing bodies to consider that ‘Olympic Yachting’, youth inclusion and athleticism are more important values than saving face in light of a terrible miscarriage of the EC's prior decision-making process in Estoril. Preferably, the Executive Committees will act expediently, appropriately and focus on making the sport more interesting, simple and engaging to spectators prior to 2012, rather than allow the wheels of time churn a bungled Estoril decision into a matter of record. If this happens, the sailing community, the ISAF and related international bodies may very well be lamenting the Executive Committee and the International Representatives 'historic 2007 role in getting the yachting event removed from future Olympics'.
To that end, in asking for the definition of 'urgent', and post-poning your revote until November 2008, and, for the deceptive expedient of using language and committee rules to subvert due process and healthy dialogue, there is another word to propose putting in front of the Executive Committee for interpretation:
Well .. YNZ were caught fondling themselves.. The shame of being found out to be major fondlers forced them to send out a half hearted "its not our fault letter". They would have had this "letter" as a fall back position knowing, the letter has about as much good as pissing on a bushfire.. They would have calculated that many would be gullable to believe in its effectiveness and so let them off the hook.. Just like you, and the ITA, just did..
But you know what, they, along with others like "US sailing" are at fault. Their vote was thought out and ratified well before the vote.. So don't kid yourself it was a simple "mistake" .. It was a well thought out researched strategy to gain personally/nationally. They knew the consequences and zone they represented.. Australia and New Zealand represent not just the country but all of Oceania.
Fortunately for YNZ the issue is now dead.. The chances of getting cats back into 2012 is over as US sailing will see its dead.. Maybe in 2020 they will be restated. But don't hold your breath.. So what to do.. Take a leaf out of the United States rule book on diplomacy and use "shock and awe" tactics..
I would suggest the "International" classes strip their "titles" from all NAs that voted against the cats.. Strip ISAF of veto of the ability to control cat "International" status.. But these things wont happen.. Sure guys will work to reinstate and guide the powers.. But I have zero faith in the process...
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133813 03/05/0804:19 AM03/05/0804:19 AM
I was just billed by US Sailing to join again for the coming year. Is there a person at US Sailing other than Charlie Cook to whom I can address my response letter? viz: Not only am I not renewing my membership, I will never again contribute a thin dime to US Sailing. My many years of representing multihull sailing, teaching, while encouraging others to participate in US Sailing events are, sadly, at an end.
Dacarls: A-class USA 196, USA 21, H18, H16 "Nothing that's any good works by itself. You got to make the damn thing work"- Thomas Edison
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: dacarls]
#133815 03/06/0812:39 AM03/06/0812:39 AM
No matter how noble and high the ground, people of this ilk don't waste a moment recapitualting their position, despite what about the sport and what it needs for youth development.They won't read it if you write it. That said, resolute stubborness is an epidemic these days; even when it is obviously wrong, people count on 'forgive and forget'. My recommendation is people as outraged as you seem to be should write a letter to the IOC instead, letting them know how disappointed you are in US Sailing and the hijacked ISAF process. I wrote one prior to Estoril, when I saw the beginning maneuvering by US Sailing and the RYC which strongly suggested to me that they wanted to dump the cats. We should make certain that the IOC executive body is aware of the nonsense and posturing going on with the ISAF. An organizing body should be a forum, not a 'Star Chamber'.
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133816 03/06/0801:05 AM03/06/0801:05 AM
G'day Rex who did you write the letter to? and do you have a list of people at the IOC that you could post on here for us to contact in a nice way? regards
Jeff Southall Current boats Nacra 5.8 1703 Animal Scanning Services Nacra 5.8 1667 Ram Raider Nacra 18 Square Arrow 1576
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: JeffS]
#133818 03/06/0808:09 AM03/06/0808:09 AM
Here you go JeffS PRESIDENT Jacques Rogge ............................. Belgium
VICE PRESIDENT(S)
Gunilla Lindberg ............................. Sweden Lambis V. Nikolaou ............................. Greece Chiharu Igaya ............................. Japan Thomas Bach ............................. Germany
MEMBER(S)
Gerhard Heiberg
............................. Norway Denis Oswald
............................. Switzerland Mario Vázquez Raña
**Remember!! The IOC are are friends, the ISAF is the recommending body (the unfriendlies) that are responsible for steering the agenda. The decision is not final until the IOC endorsement.
Please be nice to the IOC.
R
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133820 03/06/0808:21 AM03/06/0808:21 AM
A specific, actionable strategy, with timelines and decision scenarios would be useful for some comments. The ISAF have proven their tactical ability in steering this away from us. What is the plan of the MH community representatives?
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: dacarls]
#133821 03/06/0808:51 AM03/06/0808:51 AM
I was just billed by US Sailing to join again for the coming year. Is there a person at US Sailing other than Charlie Cook to whom I can address my response letter? viz: Not only am I not renewing my membership, I will never again contribute a thin dime to US Sailing. My many years of representing multihull sailing, teaching, while encouraging others to participate in US Sailing events are, sadly, at an end.
I understand where you are coming from on that, Dave. In Catamaran Sailor magazine I used to encourage people to join US Sailing, because I thought it was the right thing to do -- to support the national governing body of our sport.
Besides our personal membership, we also send the payments for the memberships of the Wave Class Association and NAMSA. (At least I think all of those are paid up. And if they are not for this year, I don't feel bad about it, under the circumstances. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />.)
A lot of other catamaran associations pay their dues to US Sailing, as well, I'm sure. Fat lot of good it did as far as influence. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> Maybe we need to give MORE money to US Sailing. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133822 03/06/0809:35 AM03/06/0809:35 AM
john, While I appreciate the efforts your attempting.. May I ask is the C.Cook who help decide that the issue wasn't "urgent" the same C. Cook who engineered the aberrant voting which forced the decision to eliminate cats? If so what progress has been made? Apart from C. Cook has again made the decision harder to redo.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Stewart]
#133823 03/06/0810:14 AM03/06/0810:14 AM
Same person, ISAF Exec Comittee Delegate Charley Cook. See www.Sailingscuttlebutt.com for link to the ISAF definition and explanation of 'urgent'. This whole thing is a railroad job from the beginning in August 2007 to the tabling of the 'urgent' re-vote question.
R
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133824 03/06/0810:22 AM03/06/0810:22 AM
Same person, ISAF Exec Comittee Delegate Charley Cook. See www.Sailingscuttlebutt.com for link to the ISAF definition and explanation of 'urgent'.
THE ISAF POSITION ON 2012 OLYMPIC EVENTS The minutes of the ISAF Executive Committee meeting of February 15-17, 2008 have been published on the ISAF website, with discussions including debate on the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition, reports from the ISAF Commissions, Youth Olympics, Advertising Code, ISAF World Cup, track and trace technology, etc. Regarding the Olympic Events, the ISAF Executive Committee noted letters received from three ISAF MNAs regarding the selection of the events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition. Whilst not formal submissions, the letters suggested that ISAF could reconsider the decision on the events at the forthcoming 2008 ISAF Mid-Year Meeting through the submission process.
The ISAF Regulations govern submissions which may be considered at the Mid-Year Meeting and state that only “urgent” submissions can be put forward and considered. The ISAF Executive Committee has the sole responsibility to determine whether a submission is “urgent” or otherwise. The Executive Committee has decided that submissions for re-addressing the decisions on events for 2012 in the mid-year are not urgent and should be dealt with in November 2008.
The Executive Committee recognizes that some ISAF MNAs do not agree with the Council decision taken in November 2007 on the ten events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition. This position, which has been formally notified to ISAF by a few ISAF MNAs, should not enable the valid Council decision to be reviewed at the 2008 Mid-Year Meeting. The decision on the equipment to be used for each of the ten events will be made at the 2008 November Conference. At the upcoming 2008 ISAF Mid-Year Meeting, the ISAF Council will make a list of the equipment it considers may possibly be appropriate for selection at the 2008 November Conference. -- Complete report and minutes: http://www.sailing.org/22374.php?PHPSESSID=2bcbbb511ae5bc195e7b87284b3c963e
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133825 03/06/0811:07 AM03/06/0811:07 AM
Am I reading this right - they are saying they can revisit the event selection in November, yet in the meantime they're going to make decisions about the equipment at the mid-year meeting? Yet the equipment decision (i.e. which specific classes) is completely dependent on the event selection.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: ]
#133826 03/06/0811:20 AM03/06/0811:20 AM
That would mean that any "unorthodox" classes like the Bladerider for singlehander and 29XX for women doublehander would have to be decided in November. Who is deciding, ISAF Council again, or someone more in touch?
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133829 03/06/0811:46 AM03/06/0811:46 AM
A legitimate request - some of ths has been confidential information as strategies were developed, but much of it is out in the open now.
Currently, as the March 15th deadline looms, several multihull platforms are being submitted as equipment for selection. The range of performance and cost is broad and meets any criteria that ISAF may finally settle upon. At the same time, multiple submissions from multiple MNAs have been authored for the mid-year meeting that directly challenge the matter of "urgency," require the application of rules associated with appealing the November vote on events, and specifically address the change in voting methods introduced by the US delegation. This effort is being coordinated on an international scale to provide coherence and consistency of message. All of this is supported by providing a well-qualified, articulate, unbiased and informed representative that will be present at ISAF meetings.
Chances of overturning the Estoril vote had been declining, but due to the efforts of sevenal key people around the world, renewed interest by the public from exposure in blogs, newsletters and magazines, and strangely enough by the wording in ISAF's own meeting minutes and regulations, I think that the tide is once again turning.
John Williams
- The harder you practice, the luckier you get - Gary Player, pro golfer
After watching Lionel Messi play, I realize I need to sail harder.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133830 03/06/0811:51 AM03/06/0811:51 AM
A specific, actionable strategy, with timelines and decision scenarios would be useful for some comments. The ISAF have proven their tactical ability in steering this away from us. What is the plan of the MH community representatives?
John Williams
- The harder you practice, the luckier you get - Gary Player, pro golfer
After watching Lionel Messi play, I realize I need to sail harder.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133832 03/06/0812:09 PM03/06/0812:09 PM
Sorry, it is all too complicated for me. Just somebody please tell me exactly what I can do, and how. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Mary]
#133833 03/06/0812:18 PM03/06/0812:18 PM
Let's see... first you could start some sort of newsletter tailored for multihull sailors of all sorts. Oh, you did that? Ok. Well, maybe you could help run some regattas - pick a class you like and put on some events. What? You already do that, too? Oh. Well, if you really want to help out, why not set up some sort of internet-based forum so that sailors from all over the world can communicate intantly with one another and... huh? Oh. Heh heh... of course. Well then - five stars for you.
John Williams
- The harder you practice, the luckier you get - Gary Player, pro golfer
After watching Lionel Messi play, I realize I need to sail harder.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133834 03/06/0812:21 PM03/06/0812:21 PM
PRESIDENT Jacques Rogge............................. Belgium
VICE PRESIDENT(S)
Gunilla Lindberg............................. Sweden Lambis V. Nikolaou............................. Greece Chiharu Igaya............................. Japan Thomas Bach............................. Germany
MEMBER(S)
Gerhard Heiberg............................. Norway Denis Oswald............................. Switzerland Mario Vázquez Raña............................. Mexico Ottavio Cinquanta............................. Italy Sergey Bubka............................. Ukraine Zaiqing Yu............................. People's Republic of China Richard L. Carrión............................. Puerto Rico Ser Miang Ng............................. Singapore Mario Pescante............................. Italia Sam Ramsamy............................. South Africa
ADDRESS
Executive Board Château de Vidy 1007 Lausanne Switzerland
This is the IOC, the guys with the real power over the games. A polite letter saying that you will miss the multihulls (and female high-performance dinghy) in the games can not hurt. Or what John? BTW: Mr. Heiberg from Norway is both approachable and smart. Offending him would not be a good move, but showing a groundswell of interest would raise some questions.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Rolf_Nilsen]
#133836 03/06/0812:35 PM03/06/0812:35 PM
I know that was posted. But it doesn't give me any e-mail addresses for them. So how am I supposed to send them letters? Get real here. We need a way to contact them. And it is NOT realistic to expect people to mail them something overseas to that Executive Board address in Switzerland.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Mary]
#133837 03/06/0812:41 PM03/06/0812:41 PM
Just somebody please tell me exactly what I can do, and how. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />
Mary, The best thing that you and Rick and everyone else with an interest is keep the topic on the board hot, urge fellow sailors to lobby the IOC to keep the pressure on the ISAF. It is pretty clear that the ISAF are not going to consider the MH community voice significant. I hope that with some effective lobbying on our part, the IOC can see through this and re-state their prior expectations for Olympic yachting to be exciting. Lest the ISAF EC look incredibly foolish before the IOC, they can be expected to take a strategy of burying their lousy Estoril decision in a procedural technicality (definition of 'urgent-honestly!). By keeping the topic hot on your boards here at catsailor.com, and by all of us lobbying the IOC executive board (Note to all!! Be Polite to the IOC!!) the pressure will remain on the ISAF MNA's and EC members to address the issue in an appropriate forum rather than allow a dismissal through a deceptive expedient(the rather incredible request of defintion of the word 'Urgent') by the ISAF Exec Cmte. The seem to be counting on the 'cure' needed to get them out of the mess will be time ('time will heal the MH communities wounds').
By digging in, ISAF EC have begun to look less like emissaries for the sport of yachting and more like politicians. It is worth letting the IOC know that the ISAF got rid of one of the most exciting boats in the sport of yachting. The ISAF now counts on this issue to die down in the MH community. If that happens, it quietly lets them off the hook for their messy, poorly planned, poorly executed decision process shown in Estoril. R
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133840 03/06/0812:53 PM03/06/0812:53 PM
I dont think the IOC want emails. A real letter means a lot more.
No. 1, I don't think people these days are going to go to the trouble of sending a letter by snailmail, and it is expensive sending it from other places around the world.
No. 2, If you send a snailmail, how would we know that it is getting passed on to the person(s) we want to read it? Obviously, snailmail is going to be filtered by the Executive Secretary. Maybe if they gave their actual addresses for receiving real mail, that would be different.
But we really need e-mail addresses if they REALLY want to hear what sailors are saying. They DO have e-mail in Europe, don't they? <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />
For the US Sailing people, all you have to do is click on their names, and you automatically can send them an e-mail. That's GOOD! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Mary]
#133842 03/06/0801:03 PM03/06/0801:03 PM
Mary, you're a dear and I'll never take away the stars I gave you. But you asked a question and got an answer. Your response seems to be, and I'm paraphrasing, that sending a letter is too much trouble, too expensive and probably won't do any good. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />
John Williams
- The harder you practice, the luckier you get - Gary Player, pro golfer
After watching Lionel Messi play, I realize I need to sail harder.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Mary]
#133843 03/06/0801:04 PM03/06/0801:04 PM
I am certain they have email adresses, but they dont make them public probably becouse they know they will be swamped with issues like ours. National sailing MNAs are usually reachable by email, but the IOC have choosen not to be accessible by email. Certainly the secretaries will deal with regular mail, but if they get real letters they know people are really serious about it. There is a certain logic behind the reasoning, whether it is smart/good or not. I think we will have to play by their rules if we are to influence them directly.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133844 03/06/0801:11 PM03/06/0801:11 PM
Mary, you're a dear and I'll never take away the stars I gave you. But you asked a question and got an answer. Your response seems to be, and I'm paraphrasing, that sending a letter is too much trouble, too expensive and probably won't do any good. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />
Yes, that's EXACTLY what I am saying. If you want a lot of people to respond about an issue, you have to make it easy for them and give them a way to do it directly to a person who has some control or influence over the issue.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Mary]
#133845 03/06/0801:26 PM03/06/0801:26 PM
I understand what you mean. However, to say that the last e-mail campaign to IOC on this matter was not well-recieved is understating the point. Rolf's right - they don't publish e-mail contact info for a reason. I suggest that if writing a letter is not something people are willing to do, then we have a pretty good approximation of how much this issue really means to them.
John Williams
- The harder you practice, the luckier you get - Gary Player, pro golfer
After watching Lionel Messi play, I realize I need to sail harder.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Mary]
#133846 03/06/0801:26 PM03/06/0801:26 PM
I understand what you mean. However, to say that the last e-mail campaign to IOC on this matter was not well-recieved is understating the point. Rolf's right - they don't publish e-mail contact info for a reason. I suggest that if writing a letter is not something people are willing to do, then we have a pretty good approximation of how much this issue really means to them.
You're saying there WAS an e-mail campaign to IOC? So what is that e-mail address?
AND they don't publish their e-mail addresses because they don't want to hear what people are saying? Then why do they hold office in that organization?
As far as showing how much we care, I don't send snailmail letters any more even to my closest friends and relatives. Even if somebody is born or somebody dies.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Mary]
#133848 03/06/0801:45 PM03/06/0801:45 PM
Mary, I am not trying to provoke you or be otherwise nasty and I agree that not being reachable by modern communication is a problem for everybody. Just to make that clear. I dont think the IOC see it as their responsibility to hear what people think. The following is pasted from their FAQ
Quote
What is the role of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in the organisation of the Olympic Games?
The organisation of the Games consists of a partnership between the IOC and the Organising Committee for the Olympic Games (OCOG). The Games are the exclusive property of the IOC, which has the last word on any question related to them. The IOC plays a supervisory and support role; in other words, it controls the organisation of the Games, ensures they run successfully, and checks that the principles and rules of the Olympic Charter are observed.
On this issue, my understanding is that the IOC does not want to hear directly from anyone other than the ISAF and its representitives. It feels that the ISAF represents sailing and therefore our aurguement is with ISAF and not with the IOC. I know the boarders have set up there own organization, but I do not know how they fit in with the IOC. I am hoping that one of the reasons for the formation of the IMC is to get a stronger presence and coordinated vioce worldwide and be able to approach the IOC that way.
Tom Siders A-Cat USA-79 Tornado US775
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133850 03/06/0802:34 PM03/06/0802:34 PM
Thanks Rex I'll send a polite factual snailmail to them all it will be interesting to see if I get a reply, it might even come by e-mail <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> regards
Jeff Southall Current boats Nacra 5.8 1703 Animal Scanning Services Nacra 5.8 1667 Ram Raider Nacra 18 Square Arrow 1576
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Mary]
#133851 03/06/0806:24 PM03/06/0806:24 PM
As far as showing how much we care, I don't send snailmail letters any more even to my closest friends and relatives. Even if somebody is born or somebody dies.
Yea, you're right - somebody born can't read and somebody.....
Dermot Catapult 265
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133852 03/06/0808:10 PM03/06/0808:10 PM
I understand what you mean. However, to say that the last e-mail campaign to IOC on this matter was not well-recieved is understating the point. Rolf's right - they don't publish e-mail contact info for a reason. I suggest that if writing a letter is not something people are willing to do, then we have a pretty good approximation of how much this issue really means to them.
It might also validate that they are out of touch with the outside world.
A possible e-solution is to write the email, then use your FAX function and fax directly from your computer.
Hobie Tiger 2003
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Don_Atchley]
#133853 03/07/0808:18 AM03/07/0808:18 AM
For those of you who are not from the UK, Australia and France (who's MNAs have already written to ISAF) could you please push your MNA to write to ISAF against the vote asap.
I realise that for the US this may not be as easy as it sounds.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Worthy]
#133859 03/07/0812:22 PM03/07/0812:22 PM
The US Multihull Council is working on this for next week's meeting in Newport; however, additional letters from individual sailors to the Board of Directors don't hurt. Just please remember to be respectful of these volunteers who truly believe they are doing what is best for the US.
John Williams
- The harder you practice, the luckier you get - Gary Player, pro golfer
After watching Lionel Messi play, I realize I need to sail harder.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Worthy]
#133860 03/07/0812:26 PM03/07/0812:26 PM
For those of you who are not from the UK, Australia and France (who's MNAs have already written to ISAF) could you please push your MNA to write to ISAF against the vote asap.
I realise that for the US this may not be as easy as it sounds.
Okay, so we should not write to the IOC (which I think is obvious), because they expect to get their input on sailing from ISAF. And we should not write to ISAF (which I think is obvious), because they expect to get input from the National Authorities.
SO, it sounds like we should be writing to our US Sailing people -- and they DO have e-mail addresses -- AND we should be writing to John Williams because he can pass our messages along to the International Multihull Council, which is going to be our lobbying group with ISAF.
Is that right, John? I just want to know where to send messages that are going to count for something. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133861 03/07/0812:29 PM03/07/0812:29 PM
Your ISAF Executive Committee to the IOC: Who is who? Who is the Tornado sailor?
Left to Right: (unknown) David KELLETT (AUS)- Keelboat sailor Göran PETERSSON (SWE) President - lawyer, E-mail: goran.petersson@vinge.se (that's his work e-mail) David IRISH (USA)- Keelboat sailor, Michigan - owns Irish Boat Works in Charlevoix Fiona BARRON (GBR)- Europe Dinghy Teresa LARA (VEN)- president of the Venezuelan Sailing Assoc. Teo Ping LOW (SIN)- president of Singapore Sailing Federation, Email: teo-ping.low@singaporesailing.org.sg George ANDREADIS (GRE)- president of the Greek Olympians Association, Farr 40 sailor (unknown) Not shown - Nucci Novi CEPPELLINI (ITA) - died of cancer 2/15/08 - Obituary
This took less than 15 minutes on Google. Why am I not surprised that the vast majority of these people are well-heeled keelboat sailors?
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133862 03/07/0812:35 PM03/07/0812:35 PM
The US Multihull Council is working on this for next week's meeting in Newport; however, additional letters from individual sailors to the Board of Directors don't hurt. Just please remember to be respectful of these volunteers who truly believe they are doing what is best for the US.
Sorry, John, we crossed posts there. So you think that we should be sending e-mails to the US Sailing board of directors between now and next week when? By this weekend?
And are you going to that meeting? Long way across the country for you! I don't know how you volunteers do it. But, thank you all. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: mbounds]
#133863 03/07/0812:36 PM03/07/0812:36 PM
Why am I not surprised that the vast majority of these people are well-heeled keelboat sailors?
Because, Matt - like me you understand that the vast majority of sailing in the world is done by well-heeled keelboat sailors. Accepting that we are a minority discipline within sailing and acting like we have a place at the table aren't mutually exclusive positions, right folks? <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
John Williams
- The harder you practice, the luckier you get - Gary Player, pro golfer
After watching Lionel Messi play, I realize I need to sail harder.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133864 03/07/0812:47 PM03/07/0812:47 PM
Accepting that we are a minority discipline within sailing and acting like we have a place at the table aren't mutually exclusive positions, right folks?
Right! It has certainly worked well for women. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Mary]
#133865 03/07/0801:24 PM03/07/0801:24 PM
Not 'urgent'... The ISAF Executive Committee noted letters received from three ISAF MNAs regarding the selection of the events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition. Whilst not formal submissions, the letters suggested that ISAF could reconsider the decision on the events at the forthcoming 2008 ISAF Mid-Year Meeting through the submission process.
The ISAF Regulations govern submissions which may be considered at the Mid-Year Meeting and state that only "urgent" submissions can be put forward and considered. The ISAF Executive Committee has the sole responsibility to determine whether a submission is "urgent" or otherwise.
The Executive Committee has decided that submissions for re-addressing the decisions on events for 2012 in the mid-year are not urgent and should be dealt with in November 2008.
The Executive Committee recognizes that some ISAF MNAs do not agree with the Council decision taken in November 2007 on the ten events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition. This position, which has been formally notified to ISAF by a few ISAF MNAs, should not enable the valid Council decision to be reviewed at the 2008 Mid-Year Meeting.
The decision on the equipment to be used for each of the ten events will be made at the 2008 November Conference. At the upcoming 2008 ISAF Mid-Year Meeting, the ISAF Council will make a list of the equipment it considers may possibly be appropriate for selection at the 2008 November Conference. ISAF has invited all ISAF Classes and MNAs to put forward submissions on equipment for the 2008 Mid-Year Meeting, which must be received by 15 March. The list Council makes at the 2008 Mid-Year Meeting shall include all equipment which has been the subject of a valid submission.
The Executive Committee has approved that 'urgent' submissions will be considered at the 2008 Mid-Year meeting dealing with the process of selecting equipment for the Women's Keelboat (match racing) event at the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition. Firstly, to consider whether the equipment selected should have achieved ISAF Class status before the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition. The second, to allow ISAF to defer a decision on the equipment for the women's match racing event until a date later than November 2008, in order that ISAF can select the most appropriate equipment for this new event and ensure that the timing of announcing the decision will be equitable for ISAF MNAs. This is in line with the current practice of match racing events.
Tom Siders A-Cat USA-79 Tornado US775
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: windswept]
#133866 03/07/0803:44 PM03/07/0803:44 PM
Thank you for signing the IOC petition asking that multihulls be included in the Sailing Regatta for the 2012 Olympics to be held in the UK. To date more than 5,700 petitioners including ISAF Sailors of the Year and Olympic medallists have signed what is probably the largest ever grass roots expression of concern at the management of our sport.
Goran Petersson, ISAF President,’s statement after that November decision was that the selection of Events demonstrated the modern nature and “the wide range and diversity of sailing”. Excluding a large part of the sport makes this patently untrue.
The multihull class was voted out at a meeting of the ISAF Council in November last year. As organisers of the petition, we have been waiting to see if its Executive Committee would respond by taking the initiative in reconsidering the selection of Olympic Events.
However, now that the minutes of ISAF’s February Executive Meeting have been published, not only does it appear that they have decided not to take the initiative, but it also seems that they may reject submissions to re-open the debate at the current mid year meeting, as not urgent, or at the annual meeting in November, since they see the matter as closed.
This is in spite of a right of appeal specifically and exclusively for this matter in Regulation 16.1.3 (a). The Executive received letters of concern about the selection of Events from several Member National Authorities, but decided these were not urgent, even before receiving formal submissions.
Furthermore in those Minutes it appears that the Executive will nevertheless be asking Council to treat as urgent a matter of retrospectively extending the deadline for Equipment submissions in the Women’s Match Racing Event, even though Regulation 16.1.2 states that no submission for Equipment shall be made after 15th March.
It seems thus the decision-making process is being applied unequally to the disadvantage of one sizeable part of the sailing community, while exceptions are made in favour of another.
We have prepared a detailed Report on the subject to help people understand better how such a widely unpopular decision was made in the first place. ISAF was offered an opportunity to discuss it before publication, but declined. You can download this Report at http://www.asnr29.dsl.pipex.com/ISAF_Events_Report.pdf
As the initiative has now passed from the Executive to Member National Authorities, and there are deadlines of March 13th for Events and March 15th for Equipment, our MNA, the Royal Yachting Association, has asked us to encourage supporters to lobby their own MNA urgently.
Please email the relevant people at your MNA and your ISAF Councillor with your views. There is a menu of sample submissions attached, so you can cut and paste whatever you find appropriate.
This is how changes are made at ISAF and it is how effective lobbying by supporters of Women’s Match Racing persuaded a record 11 countries to make submissions in their favour, including many of them strong multihull countries and many smaller countries, who are not directly represented on Council. If they can do it, so should we because our research shows that multihulls represent between 10 and 30% of all racing sailboats, depending on what measure is used.
Before the November ISAF meeting the multihull community was unaware what was at stake or what to do to about it. Now that we know, we need to gather whatever submissions we can, however short the notice.
Please contact the people you know in your MNA to make the multihull case in general and ask them specifically to make submissions, especially given the constitutional issues involved. Australia, Denmark, France and the UK have already done so in the last few days.
Please do it urgently.
Thank You
Nick Dewhirst Chairman United Kingdom Catamaran Racing Association
The US Multihull Council is working on this for next week's meeting in Newport; however, additional letters from individual sailors to the Board of Directors don't hurt.
Jake, I repectfully disagree on lobbying the ISAF directors. The ISAF body ruefully ignores the MH community and I doubt very much they are going to change. To believe so plays into their agenda. As proof, I submit my history of correspondence with the ISAF, going back to October, 2007. The first part is my letter to the ISAF. I will then attempt to provide their response in a separate post.
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133872 03/08/0812:20 AM03/08/0812:20 AM
The selection of the 10 events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition is going to be a difficult but interesting discussion within ISAF. ISAF is a democratic organisation and ISAF Committees, Member National Authorities and classes will have a chance to fully debate the issue at the ISAF Conference in November, before a vote is taken. All parties involved
Kind regards
Yours sincerely
Jerome Pels
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133873 03/08/0812:22 AM03/08/0812:22 AM
My original letter. For some reason it did not post:
From: Rex Denton Sent: 01 October 2007 22:23 To: ISAF Secretariat Cc: [email]jake@teamseacats.com;[/email] olympics@ussailing.org Subject: Exclusion of the Tornado by US Sailing and RYA
To:
Mr. Göran PETERSSON, President and Mr. Arve SUNDHEIM, Secretary ISAF:
I recently learned of the RYA and US Sailing proposals that exclude the catamaran from consideration in the 2012 Olympics. I believe this is an absurd proposal that does not reflect worldwide interest in the catamaran boat class. First, about me- I am nothing more than a novice sailing skipper, with no agenda, or professional affiliation to boat manufacturers, or any commercial boating interest that would bias my perspective. I am only a beach catamaran owner who has only begun racing competitively (with my son) on a local level. (Frankly, we are not very good, but we are learning and having great fun doing so.)
Despite my novice status in racing events, I have watched the Tornado class (Olympic and otherwise), events and other catamaran events for many years, with great enthusiasm. The Tornado has been a cornerstone of Olympic sailing events for a very long time. The catamaran remains as one of the most exciting classes of World event sailing. With the F18 ‘box category’ class ascending in popularity worldwide, there is a thriving International community of sailors dedicated to perpetuating the catamaran boat class and the sport. Arguably, for us, from the standpoint of spectacle, catamarans and skiffs remain the more interesting boats to watch in Olympic yachting events, with races of both shorter duration and involving a greater mix of athleticism and sailing know-how than in most other classes of boating. In spite of the advantages, the RYA and US Sailing have chosen to act unilaterally, with no additional input, to abandon International catamaran fleets in favor of (with no international catamaran fleet input), two separate and distinct dinghy events, thereby excluding the catamaran from their recommendation for the 2012 Olympics.
While US Sailing explains that they do not endorse any event and are acting in the interest of seeing ‘the US win medals’ such an agenda is not in the interest of the wider sailing community, either in the US or abroad. Rather, this position should be discounted as ‘agenda oriented’ and in place to stack stronger US medal events in the Olympics. US Sailing continues that ... [‘our submission was silent on what we would like the other two events to be]... and [‘our submission did not call for the elimination of any current Olympic event]. Irrefutably, despite their explanation, the US sailing position ignores the catamaran class, thereby having potentially the same consequence as specifically not recommending catamarans for the 2012 Olympics. (See attachment 20070322_USSAILINGResponse_2012.) It is, therefore, disingenuous of the RYA and US Sailing to advance an agenda that only supports specific classes, for unknown reasons, with little input from the catamaran class, (and or windsurfing communities, for that matter).
The basis of this position is unclear but perhaps the RYA and US Sailing either 1) have the more familiarity with dinghies, or, 2) lean toward classes that are so popular that they cannot, or will not bother to advocate other classes, or 3) have favorites based on performance and popularity within regional clubs that have many dinghy owners as members. In any case, such skewed perspectives occur at the expense of the catamaran class, resulting in a formal lobby that, in spite of their claim, neither represents nor furthers the growing popularity of the sailing classes such as catamarans or wind boards. As one who participates in catamaran events I am left wondering how objective such these organizations can remain as acting advocates for the catamaran class (and for International sailing, in general).
Such awkward representation reflects an unreasonable and skewed extension of influence to the level of the ISAF and IOC. Limited and agenda driven positions, in my opinion, should not carry sway or represent the true spirit of the Olympics, where diversity and athleticism on the world stage should facilitate and advance the popularity of sport.
As such, I urge the IOC to discount the advice of both the RYA and US sailing's agenda for exclusion of the multi-hull class and request that the submission put forth by the RYA and US Sailing be withdrawn before ISAF convenes in November. Their positions should be replaced by alternative submissions supporting youth training with catamarans (and wind boards, for that matter) in future Olympics (2012 and beyond). I recommend the IOC to appropriately discount US Sailing’s position on the appropriate classes of boat as parochial, uninformed and exclusive.
It is my hope that the ISAF and IOC engage in a wider, more objective forum of international dialogue, including those within the catamaran and other sailing classes (outside US Sailing and RYA) before the formal IOC positions on the 2012 boat class decisions coalesce. Hopefully, US catamaran sailors can also work with US Sailing and the RYA to portray and promote the vibrant, popular and competitive qualities we see in regional catamaran sailing events.
Respectfully,
R. Rex Denton, Ph. D.
129 Hunter’s Trail
Madison , CT
Catamaran owner, (and pretty lousy cat racing skipper)
The following is my testy reply to ISAF after the railroad job:
Gentleman:
Your boat selection and process for inclusion in the 2012 Olympics was disappointing to myself and all multihull sailors with whom I am affiliated. As much as I would like to think that your decision was fair and representative, it is difficult to avoid placing blame upon the ISAF for either gross incompetancy or using a terribly flawed process for arrive at such important decisions.
US Sailing appears to have made or participated in a tactical vote, opting for a keelboat to be selected over a multihull because the Star fleet is best represented in the US fleets. Unfortunately for catamaran sailors, who have less affiliation with such boat clubs (we compete on beaches, generally), our apparant lack of representation by ISAF (palpable at Alter Cup events) keeps our interests sequestesed from the process of boat selection. US Sailing, feeling pressure to rely on winning medals to ensure ongoing funding seems to have chosen the Star rather than the Tornado even after the US won a silver in the Tornado and no medals for the Star in Athens. Your unconscounable decision is a disservice to the sport of sailing, and are an example of how the evolution of the sport is weighted in favor of tradition and wealthy yacht club members, and against innovation and sportsmanship. The IOC should appraise whether or not your decision was fair, judicious and in the best interest of the future of yachting.
The ISAF should rather looking to the future of the sport (not the past) when making decisions for Olympic classes, and looking to include the world of sportsmen rather than "clubby interests" avoid when ISAF Council sits down to vote.
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133875 03/08/0812:29 AM03/08/0812:29 AM
I have forwarded the letter from the UKCRA to my MNA, since they originally voted to keep the multihull, I hope they will take action and support the motion to re-instate the multihull. Even in keelboat sailor`s minds in SA, this has not been a good thing for sailing in general.
ISAF Council made a poor decision, but now it is the ISAF Executive committe who refuses to play the ball. I am getting in contact with my MNA, who have made their pro-multi position known with ISAF.
Satire is beginning to emerge.. Here is one opinion on the ISAF Execute committee:
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Rolf_Nilsen]
#133878 03/11/0810:33 AM03/11/0810:33 AM
I think that this is a valid point that Paul Henderson makes.
Letters To The Editor editor@scuttlebutteurope.com Letters are limited to 350 words. No personal attacks are permitted. We do require your name but your email address will not be published without your permission.
* From Paul Henderson: ISAF and Tornado: Let me first state my bias: I like Cats as they are a unique disciplne and they must be sailed as Kinetics are of minimal advantage.
Having said that I fully understand the militancy of the Tornado class but their attacks on the ISAF Executive and especially the President Goran Petersson are unwarranted.
The voting held in November 2007 by the 39 Council members was open and transparent with how each delegated voted published and they are the ones who are responsible.
The ISAF President must support positively the results no matter what his personal position maybe and he has. With regard to reopening the issue at the mid-year meeting, this is not the forum so to do as it is not an urgent decision at this time and the mid-Year meeting is mainly for financial subjects and not major policy discussions. The AGM in November is the proper and Constitutional time to address the classes for 2012. The Executive is right.
Many times the November meeting has reversed decisions previously made after due diligence especially listening to the sailing community and that is when the real indepth decisions will be made. November 2008 is when the final and binding decision on the 2012 events will be held.
The Tornado has a very good case to remain Olympic and they should make their case in a positive manner forgetting the personal attacks.
The solution should be to positively lobby IOC President Rogge (Belgium) and his IOC sailing colleagues who are still IOC Members like Peter Tallberg (Finland), Ng Ser Miang (Singapore), Fernando Lima Bello (Portugal), Prince Albert (Monaco), Barbara Kendall (New Zealand) to delay the deletion of the 11th Event until 2016 as the reason for doing so is now not relevant with the deletion of Basball and Softball. This coupled with the fact that the 2012 Games will be in London, the home of the now #1 sailing nation, makes this request sensible. It is a positive solution to a very disruptive problem. I personally support the other RYA positions also.
Tom Siders A-Cat USA-79 Tornado US775
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: windswept]
#133879 03/13/0807:12 AM03/13/0807:12 AM
Despite what many are claiming now, it is apparently not just a small group of multihull sailors who think the black day in Estoril need to be corrected.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Rolf_Nilsen]
#133880 03/13/0807:52 AM03/13/0807:52 AM
Full story from Scuttlebut Europe. I am glad to see some prominent individuals and countries speaking out about the voting proceedure. This may finally cause Paul Henderson to take a break from his rhetoric and holier than though attitudes about "there was no wrong doing" with the voting proceedures. Aussies and Danes Send Letters... * Yachting Australia have released the submission sent to the International sailing Federation (ISAF) supporting the re-opening of the November 2007 decision on the Events chosen for the 2012 Olympic Games.
The announcement by Yachting Australia follows a similar course to that adopted by the Royal Yachting Association.
There is now the situation were the two most successful nations at the 2007 Olympics in Qingdao are now urging ISAF to reconsider the Event selection for the 2012 Olympic Regatta. Between them Australia and Great Britain won Gold medals in seven of the 11 events contested in Qingdao in the Olympic format regatta (only one entry per nation permitted).
To date, ISAF has been batting away criticism of its handling of the Events affair, however with the closing date of 15 March looming for submissions. other major yachting nations are believed to be joining the fray for a re-opening either at the May Mid-Year Meeting or the November Annual meeting. -- Richard Gladwell in Sail-world.com, www.sail-world.com/indexs.cfm?nid=42564
Yachting Australia' proposal:
That the decision recorded at item 13(d), Selection of Events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition, of the Minutes of the ISAF Council Meeting held on 8/9 November 2008 in Estoril, Portugal, based on a motion from the floor by Charley Cook (USA), be reconsidered by a meeting of the ISAF Council at the earliest available opportunity.
If, in reconsidering this motion, the ISAF Council decides that a revote is appropriate, there should be either a run off vote between: a) Multihull (Open) and the Keelboat (Men) b) Two Person Dinghy High Performance (Women) and Keelboat Match (Women) or the list of Events for the 2012 Olympic Regatta, as decided in Estoril in November 2007, should be set aside and a new vote taken, using the voting process as recommended by the Events Committee without the change that resulted from the motion made by Charley Cook.
* The Danish Sailing Association has made two submissions:
That the decision on selection of Women's Events for the 2012 Olympic Regatta be reconsidered in accordance with ISAF regulation 16.1.1(b), and that a run-off vote be held between "2 person dinghy (high performance)" and "Keelboat (match Racing)" at the earliest available opportunity.
and
That the decision on the selecction of Men / Open Events for the 2012 Olympic Regatta be reconsidered in accordance with 16.1.1(b), and that a run-off vote be held between "Keelboat" and "Multi-hull" at the earliest available opportunity.
Submissions in full: scuttlebutteurope.com/pdf/DEN1.pdf scuttlebutteurope.com/pdf/DEN2.pdf
The Danes also focus on the process of the voting in their letter to the ISAF:
In November 2007 the voting procedure was changed in the last minute to a "4 out of 6" process. There was no suggestion or reasoning with regard to the proposal from Charley Cook, or from any other Council member, that the motion would change the fundamental principles concerning the voting procedure. Until that moment most of the Council Members was of the understanding that Council should use the same procedure as for the Events Committee, where key fundamental principle (sic) was that no Event should be eliminated until it had failed to receive 50% of the valid vote cast in the first "slate: ballot of any subsequent run-off ballot.
Their complete letter at scuttlebutteurope.com/pdf/DENletter.pdf
Tom Siders A-Cat USA-79 Tornado US775
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: windswept]
#133881 03/13/0808:04 AM03/13/0808:04 AM
I too am deeply concerned about the Olympic issue and am passionate about multihull sailing. But like Mary, I don't write letters to my folks via snailmail, much less to the IOC.
So I went to US SAILING Board of Directors and found all of the directors with their email contacts. I then crafted the following letter...
Dear Mr. Stump --
I am writing to request reconsideration of US SAILING's vote to exclude a multihull class from the 2012 Olympic games. As a long-standing member of US SAILING, and someone who sails/races both keelboats and multihulls, I respectfully ask that you and your/our organization do everything possible to get ISAF and the IOC to reconsider their decision and to reopen the discussion of equipment/classes to be used at the 2012 Olympics so as to include multihull sailing.
Multihull sailing represents a significant percentage of sailors. To exclude multis from the Olympics is to disenfranchise a significant percentage of sailors. In addition, multihull racing is one of the most exciting classes. The speed these boats go provides incredible excitement for the viewing public.
At a time when sailing is being viewed as too boring for TV coverage, it is imperative that we introduce new concepts to "liven up the action". The inclusion of a Gold Medal round on the last day with double points is an excellent start. Keeping the fast-paced multihulls is another important element.
I recognize there are large costs associated with supporting sailing at the Olympic games, and that difficult decisions need to be made. I simply ask you to work to save multihulls because I believe they will ultimately save sailing in the Olympics.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Of course, I substituted each "Dear ---" to personalize it. I copied and pasted the text of the letter into the 15 emails. I had to type a subject line in each message -- I used "Multihulls in the Olympics". I then sent all 15 messages. Total time spent was about 10 min. Now THAT I can do!
How about YOU????
My letter isn't the best. But if you don't want to write your own, then borrow mine. The link to the email addresses is right in this message. You have everything you need to take some action NOW! So quit your whining and start sending emails!!!
Time Warp Racing Hobie 14, 16, & 17, Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 45.2
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: peter_nelson]
#133883 03/13/0811:52 AM03/13/0811:52 AM
Thanks Peter - and to everyone else who is still focused on this effort.
We had a good discussion on the current state of affairs on the MHC call yesterday. Of particular note, the following countries and classes have made submissions to ISAF on this issue, either on equipment or on re-opening the vote;
Great Britain - 2012 Host Country New Zealand Australia Denmark France Russia The IHCA NACRA AHPC (Capricorn) International F18 Class
There will be a motion to the US SAILING House of Delegates on Saturday from the MHC on this issue as well.
Most interestingly to all - we have had very productive discussions with the Olympic Sailing Committee and members of the Board of Directors (including President Capron) over the last couple of weeks, which intensified in the last few days. I think we're in a whole new place as a result. You're justified if you view this with skepticism, but I'm literally holding my breath as the Board meets tonight and the House meets on Saturday. The next few days will be critical from a US perspective, but the small avalanche of submissions to ISAF this last week cannot been seen as anything other than a very positive thing for multihull sailing worldwide.
John Williams
- The harder you practice, the luckier you get - Gary Player, pro golfer
After watching Lionel Messi play, I realize I need to sail harder.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133884 03/13/0812:44 PM03/13/0812:44 PM
Update on an email to US SAILING Board of Directors...
4 hours after sending the 15 directors my email, I received 2 responses (Allsopp & Becker) thanking me for the "well written note" (Becker) and promising to look into it further (Allsopp).
Chip John's email address is no longer good and the letter should be sent instead to info@teamvanguard.com
Time Warp Racing Hobie 14, 16, & 17, Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 45.2
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: peter_nelson]
#133886 03/13/0803:27 PM03/13/0803:27 PM
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.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: peter_nelson]
#133887 03/13/0808:43 PM03/13/0808:43 PM
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.
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133889 03/13/0809:41 PM03/13/0809:41 PM
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.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Wouter]
#133890 03/13/0810:21 PM03/13/0810:21 PM
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'.
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: peter_nelson]
#133891 03/13/0810:35 PM03/13/0810:35 PM
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.
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Rolf_Nilsen]
#133892 03/14/0802:41 AM03/14/0802:41 AM
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
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133896 03/16/0810:50 AM03/16/0810:50 AM
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
Tom Siders A-Cat USA-79 Tornado US775
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: windswept]
#133897 03/17/0801:50 AM03/17/0801:50 AM
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?
Jeff Southall Current boats Nacra 5.8 1703 Animal Scanning Services Nacra 5.8 1667 Ram Raider Nacra 18 Square Arrow 1576
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: windswept]
#133898 03/17/0805:29 AM03/17/0805:29 AM
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..
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Stewart]
#133899 03/19/0801:31 PM03/19/0801:31 PM
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
F18 USA 1273 Andrews 77 (SOLD) Melges 32 (SOLD) Formula18 Olympic 49er (FOR SALE) Always outnumbered - Never outgunned....
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: USA1273]
#133900 03/19/0802:21 PM03/19/0802:21 PM
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.
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133901 03/19/0802:32 PM03/19/0802:32 PM
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.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Rolf_Nilsen]
#133902 03/19/0802:57 PM03/19/0802:57 PM
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
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133903 03/19/0803:15 PM03/19/0803:15 PM
The conclusion was that US Sailing thought the ISAF vote was legitimate.
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?
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: ]
#133904 03/19/0803:23 PM03/19/0803:23 PM
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.
John Williams
- The harder you practice, the luckier you get - Gary Player, pro golfer
After watching Lionel Messi play, I realize I need to sail harder.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133905 03/19/0808:28 PM03/19/0808:28 PM
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.
Collin Casey Infusion Platform + C2 rig and rags = one fast cookie
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: JACKFLASH]
#133906 03/20/0808:38 AM03/20/0808:38 AM
The IOC allowed the addition of the Star class for the 2008 games. The class was removed for the China games and I believe that they petitioned directly to the IOC for them to add 1 additional spot. I believe that you can find more on this issue somewhere online, it is pretty well documented. ISAF was supposed to have the number of events reduced to 10 for 2008, but after a large contigent of Star sailors and supporters directly petitioned, the IOC bent for these games. I do not believe that they will bend again, which probably led to the last minute change in proceedures by the US which put multi's vs not keelboats, but against the "Star Class". The Star class is strong, organized, fully supported at a world-wide level and attracts somed of the more prominent sailors to the class.
Having a run off between multi's and keelboats would probably end similarly to November's vote. To re-vote the entire slate of events. I am of the position that having dinghies representing 6 of 10 Olympic classes is where the trouble actually lies. I also feel that this could have been answered with 5 men's and 5 women's classes of which one for each gender is a double-handed multihull. With the AC now being battled on the water in 90' multihulls, maybe someone from that group will speak out. Seeing as how so far Glen Ashby and Charlie Ogletree have been spotted in Valencia this week, maybe both of them will raise the point and try to recruit some support.
Tom Siders A-Cat USA-79 Tornado US775
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: JACKFLASH]
#133907 03/20/0810:28 AM03/20/0810:28 AM
Letters To The Editor editor@scuttlebutteurope.com Letters are limited to 350 words. No personal attacks are permitted. We do require your name but your email address will not be published without your permission.
* From Andy Rice, SailJuiceBlog.com: In response to John Forbes's letter to Scuttlebutt Europe #1465, it's not clear to me that John has drawn a distinction between the comments I made and the comments made by Richard Gladwell of Sail World NZ, whom I quoted in my SailJuice article. I encourage him to read the original article at sailjuiceblog.com/2008/03/03/biting-the-hand/ , so he understands exactly who said what, and where I'm coming from.
John might be surprised to find that I share the same views as he does about the travesty of the multihull being ejected from the Olympics. If he wants to mention my name to either Darren Bundock or Carolijn Brouwer, the new President of the International Tornado Association, he will find that I have been one of the most vocal and consistent critics of the decisions made in Estoril last November, and that I have been campaigning hard to get these decisions reconsidered.
Indeed, the irony of John reading out that leaked internal memo from Yachting New Zealand is that it was SailJuice who leaked it into the public domain in the first place. When I published this confidential email on 30 November 2007, it was political dynamite. You can read the original article here: sailjuiceblog.com/
Who knows? Perhaps the publication of that memo was part of what convinced YNZ to change its stance so dramatically. But in the context of this political issue, 30 November is a long time ago.
Even though John and I want the same thing - the reinstatement of the multihull - this is where we differ. A lot of water had passed under the bridge by the time John read out that YNZ document in early March. If YNZ had not admitted the error of its original vote in Estoril, then I would have strongly supported John's decision to read from the memo.
But when a former enemy (if that's not too strong a word) switches to your side, it doesn't seem to make much political sense to keep on whacking them about the head with their past misdemeanours. Better to thank them for the change of heart, and then work together to get the change you're looking for. The fact that YNZ has made a submission in support of the multihull is one of the strongest cards in the multihull lobby's hand.
Meanwhile, John will be encouraged to hear that things have moved on a good deal further since the Tornado Worlds. In the past week it appears that ISAF has received a high number of submissions from national authorities (including YNZ) on getting the Olympic Events for 2012 reconsidered. So for those of us who want to see the multihull reinstated, things are looking a little brighter than they have done for some time.
* From Richard Gladwell, sail-world.com: I have just read John Forbes comments in Scuttlebutt-Europe.
He puts a very nice spin on what he would like to have reported.
Forbes hasn't responded directly to myself or Andy, however I do have an audio recording of his speech, which is not as he would like to have it remembered/reported.
Unfortunately I don't have the Booing or Ooohing recorded (as this incident came 15 minutes after Forbes' speech and dessert had been served). However it did happen, Forbes would have had to possess very poor hearing to miss it. The YNZ President had to be persuaded not to walk out of the function, and several YNZ Directors would have followed her - or beaten her to it.
The first part of his speech was fine about the Tornado class having an excellent "product", however then second was well wide of the mark. At present the class needs all the friends it can get, not be slinging off at those who are prepared to stick their head above the ISAF parapet to support the Multihull Event in 2012.
Tom Siders A-Cat USA-79 Tornado US775
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: windswept]
#133908 03/27/0806:55 PM03/27/0806:55 PM
"...Council will also be given the opportunity to address the selection of events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition. By the close of the submission deadline for the 2008 ISAF Mid-Year Meeting, submissions had been lodged by 15 ISAF Member National Authorities and two ISAF Class Associations regarding the events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition. In accordance with ISAF Regulation 1.6(b), the Executive Committee has considered all these submissions and maintains its position from February 2008 that any submissions on the events for 2012 should be considered at the 2008 Annual Conference in November.
However, recognizing the level of concerns over the decision as per the submissions received, the Executive Committee feels it would be prudent for the ISAF Council to have the opportunity in May 2008 to affirm or otherwise its decision taken in November 2007 on the events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition. Therefore, the Executive Committee has decided to put forward Urgent Submission M06-08, which invites Council to reaffirm or otherwise their decision on the events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition made in November 2007. The Executive Committee intent in making this submission is to bring to a close the current speculation challenging the Council decision.
In respect of the equipment for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition, Council will make a list of the equipment it considers may possibly be appropriate for selection at the 2008 Annual Conference. This list will include all equipment which has been the subject of a valid submission and by the deadline 61 separate equipment submissions had been received."
Obviously they want to deal with all the submissions at once by asking the Council to affirm its decision of Nov. 2007.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: ceitzi]
#133910 04/03/0805:38 AM04/03/0805:38 AM
I'd be interested to know from those who have sailed both Tornado and F18 competitively (e.g. you Stephen) how they view Tornado and F18 comparatively as platforms for elite competition. Any pros/cons either way from a sailors point of view?
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: ]
#133913 04/03/0809:56 AM04/03/0809:56 AM
Before thinking along those lines, which is tempting to do at this point, you have to consider how the voting will go. Assume there is a majority to re-open the issue, and then imagine that the Men's Events are unchanged but they vote to re-open discussion on the Women's Events. Will the Tornado v. F18 v. Hobie 16 as "better boat" be part of the discussion under that scenario?
John Williams
- The harder you practice, the luckier you get - Gary Player, pro golfer
After watching Lionel Messi play, I realize I need to sail harder.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133914 04/03/0811:27 AM04/03/0811:27 AM
Has US Sailing even asked the question of the rank and file. I know they want a skiff disipline because they think they have a couple of rock start helms.. but that is more in line with their short term, win a medal NOW philsophy.
At the ISAF level where the MNA's will reconsider the women's report...... the evidence seems to be very clear..
NO! (It does not appear that there is much debate on this point among the women based on their report to ISAF)
The professional sailors who are women and involved in ISAF really WANT a match race disipline. They are perfectly happy to trade a skiff and multihull and geneder equity for the opportunity to have the face time, exposure and $$$$ and race proffesionaly in the match race world.
So my question is.... IS this truly a reflection of what rank and file women want to see in the sport.
IS there ANY grass roots support for match racing AT ALL?
Is there any grass roots support for women's multihull racing AT All?
Straight answers to these questions would be critical parts of the puzzle.
As usual, you're not wrong in your rationale. But in the real-world scenarios we're facing, you have to start from the premise that decision making at the ISAF level is not connected to "grass roots" or "rank and file." Letter writing, petitions and the formation of the IMC are steps toward addressing that fundamental issue. You're jumping too far ahead, and my post above was merely intended to forestall the comparisons between the performance of the Tornado and an F18 - a fun discussion that has no bearing whatsoever with the current situation. Similarly, as you say, there is little connection with what will happen over the next few weeks and what the "rank and file" want. We're learning how to navigate treacherous waters.
John Williams
- The harder you practice, the luckier you get - Gary Player, pro golfer
After watching Lionel Messi play, I realize I need to sail harder.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133916 04/03/0812:20 PM04/03/0812:20 PM
I understand you desire to stall the useless F18 or Tornado debate.
However, I don't see how you can ignore finding out what do the women want? While your tactics will change as you press the argument... At some level... you can't be simply blowing smoke up people's @#$@.
Is it really TRUE that the women don't give a damn about the high performance niche of the sport?
From David Brookes. Executive Director, International Hobie Class Association: I would like to raise some of the comments by Henry L. Menin (in SBUTT 2566). He says that “To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a women's 2 person HP dinghy regatta (again, excluding the 470)…”
If we can accept Wikipedia definition of a dinghy: “A dinghy is a often utility boat carried by a larger boat, the term can also refer to small racing yachts or recreational open sailing boats. Utility dinghies are usually rowboats or have an outboard motor but they could also be rigged for sailing. They are used for off-ship excursions from larger boats, outside of docking at suitably-sized ports or marinas. A small vehicle towed behind a motorhome is colloquially referred to as a dinghy.”
The definition doesn’t say how many hulls a dinghy has. So if we can accept that a dinghy may have more than one hull, then I can enlighten his knowledge. The Hobie 16 Class has been running separate Women’s World Championships for over 10 years. ISAF has used the Hobie 16 at their ISAF World Sailing Games going back to the IYRU 1994 World Sailing Championships and always had a separate Women’s event.
So as to enlighten some of my colleagues in ISAF, yes there is a Class organising women’s 2 person dinghy racing, and yes, there is a Class promoting and assisting women’s 2 person dinghy racing. Sometimes it is too easy to forget there is a big world out there that has more than one hull.
Yeah I saw that and didn't think it was very enlightening. Do we really need to rely on defining a multihull as a dinghy in order to advocate for multihull sailing. I would hope not.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133919 04/03/0805:03 PM04/03/0805:03 PM
Just to be clear, my question was not aimed particularly at the issue of relative performance between F18 and Tornado. Rather, from an elite sailor's point of view, does either one have any attributes that make it a better test of sailing skill at that level than the other? I asked because of the fact that some organizations are proposing the F18, and so I'm just curious about whether the competitors would care. Maybe not. I've never sailed a Tornado and only crewed on an F18, so I'm just curious. But as you say, no need to have a debate at this point.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: ]
#133920 04/03/0805:28 PM04/03/0805:28 PM
If one F18 design was chosen for an Olympic slot over any of the other designs, there is a very good chance that it would destroy the F18 class as a whole.
For the F-18 to fill the Olympic Role it would have to do one of two things. 1) become a strictly controled one-design development class. 2) Have one of the current F-18's selected as the new one design Olympic multihull class. Choose the Hobie Tiger, Nacra Infusion, Capricorn, Taipan 18, Bim X4 or some other active F-18 that has a strong class association and the strength and willingness to support an Olympic effort. The Hobie Tiger probably comes the closest along with maybe Nacra to being able to meet those needs. In doing so, I believe that ncik is correct, that it would undermine the F-18 class as a whole. It probably would not destroy the F-18 class, but it would cause strife within the class as well as put a great deal of pressure upon the chosen class. This might also drive a wedge between the chosen class and the rest of the F-18 class. Lasers have done well since its selection as an Olympic class, but it is a tightly controled one design class, not a development or one-design development class. Whereas there is a great deal of inconsistency between boats, blades, boards, sails and masts, a laser is a laser.
Tom Siders A-Cat USA-79 Tornado US775
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: John Williams]
#133923 04/03/0809:49 PM04/03/0809:49 PM
It is a fun debate to have. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Poll on Olympic events over at the staid, more mono prevalent Sailingscuttlebutt web page. If you are aware of the Olympic equipment event selections, go and vote! Don't rant, be reasonable, and give them your opinion on why the Multi should be in! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> R
Nacra F18 #856
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: rexdenton]
#133924 04/04/0805:51 AM04/04/0805:51 AM
Im not sure it would undermine the F18 class. What it could do is make the class that is chosen NOT the choice of F18 sailors. Eg over the last 10 years or so we have seen the Inter 18 develop into the Nacra 18 and now the Infusion. With the boat becoming Olympic that development would stop. On the flip side of this the Tiger has basically not changed...but if it were not allowed to by being constrained to being one design would it still be competitive in an F18 fleet in say 5 years time. However IMHO the Tornado at the moment fits the bill...now if it could be made cheaper more countries would race it. I honestly feel that the perceived expence of a Tornado is what puts many countries off camapigning them.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: stuartoffer]
#133925 04/04/0806:52 AM04/04/0806:52 AM
Correct, any F18 picked out for Olympic 1 design today will be useless in the F18 arena in by the end of the olympic cycle, leaving it as the class of choice for prospective olympians only - much like the Tornado is now!
Paul
teamvmg.weebly.com
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: TEAMVMG]
#133926 04/04/0807:03 AM04/04/0807:03 AM
Im not sure it would undermine the F18 class. What it could do is make the class that is chosen NOT the choice of F18 sailors. Eg over the last 10 years or so we have seen the Inter 18 develop into the Nacra 18 and now the Infusion. With the boat becoming Olympic that development would stop. On the flip side of this the Tiger has basically not changed...but if it were not allowed to by being constrained to being one design would it still be competitive in an F18 fleet in say 5 years time. However IMHO the Tornado at the moment fits the bill...now if it could be made cheaper more countries would race it. I honestly feel that the perceived expence of a Tornado is what puts many countries off camapigning them.
But WHY? Why couldn't F18, as it stands today, become an Olympic class? The racing is very very close as it is ... isn't that the point?
Jake Kohl
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Jake]
#133928 04/04/0808:50 AM04/04/0808:50 AM
Letters To The Editor editor@scuttlebutteurope.com Letters are limited to 350 words. No personal attacks are permitted. We do require your name but your email address will not be published without your permission. * From Nino Shmueli: Mr. H. L Menin mention in his letter that "... To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a women's 2 person HP dinghy regatta (again, excluding the 470) other than the couple of times that the 29er was substituted for the 470 for the girls in the ISAF Youth Worlds (and in each case there was a drop in participation)......". Few clarifications: 1. The boat that ISAF used for two person dingy at the past years was the 420 both for Boys and Girls and not the 470. 2. I agree with Mr. Menin comment "...(and in each case there was a drop in participation)......". find numbers of participation (boats and countries) during the past years.
* From Simon Morgan: In view of the storm that's about to break out again over the selection of events for 2012 may I offer you the first signs of the bad weather approaching. Henry Menin's excellent support for the cause of womens match racing should be praised. At least, unlike the ISAF executive it seems, he is prepared to entertain a debate, and although I am still going to oppose his position, he makes his points clearly and well. But lets look at the facts. Scuttlebutt Europe reports today on the Womens World Match Racing Championships where there are 14, yes that's only 14, skippers, from a massive 9, yes that's only 9, nations. Now I am sorry but if that's an event worthy of being in the Olympics then how in God's name can anyone at ISAF justify the disenfranchisement of the entire multihull community. Conspiracy theory anyone?
Tom Siders A-Cat USA-79 Tornado US775
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: windswept]
#133930 04/04/0809:57 AM04/04/0809:57 AM
RYA applauds decision The RYA release a statement following ISAF's decision to re-visit the 2012 Olympic sailing events The Royal Yachting Association (RYA) has today welcomed the International Sailing Federation’s move to reconsider the slate of sailing events for the 2012 Olympic Games (see moore about this announcement here).
A controversial decision by ISAF Council during its annual conference in November 2007 led to the decision not to include a modern high performance dinghy for women, the expulsion of the multihull event and the introduction of a match racing format for the women’s keelboat event.
The RYA lobbied ISAF and fellow Member National Authorities, believing that the decisions taken were not in the best interests of the sport of sailing throughout the world, and requested that ISAF reviewed its decision on three grounds:
-That the current list of events will not maximise media interest. -That the decisions are likely to attract fewer nations and young sailors into the sport of sailing -That an amendment to the previously agreed voting procedure was hasty, and the process ultimately used for selecting events was flawed
ISAF has agreed to re-open the discussion surrounding the sailing events for 2012 at its mid-year conference at Qingdao, China, in May.
RYA Chief Executive Rod Carr said: “We welcome the opportunity ISAF have presented to us to have a full and frank debate on these issues at the mid-year meetings.
“We believe the original decisions at the November conference were made in haste, and with many delegates not having a clear understanding of the issues involved and the process concerned.
“We hope that the meetings next month will pave the way for an inclusive and modern slate of events which will showcase our sport in the best possible light in 2012.”
From The Daily Sail.
Tom Siders A-Cat USA-79 Tornado US775
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Jake]
#133931 04/04/0810:23 AM04/04/0810:23 AM
Im not sure it would undermine the F18 class. What it could do is make the class that is chosen NOT the choice of F18 sailors. Eg over the last 10 years or so we have seen the Inter 18 develop into the Nacra 18 and now the Infusion. With the boat becoming Olympic that development would stop. On the flip side of this the Tiger has basically not changed...but if it were not allowed to by being constrained to being one design would it still be competitive in an F18 fleet in say 5 years time. However IMHO the Tornado at the moment fits the bill...now if it could be made cheaper more countries would race it. I honestly feel that the perceived expence of a Tornado is what puts many countries off camapigning them.
But WHY? Why couldn't F18, as it stands today, become an Olympic class? The racing is very very close as it is ... isn't that the point?
But that is the point it would as they are TODAY...the class chosen would have to stagnate...unless they left it open...but as Wouter says this NOT what the powers in ISAF want. They want an off the shelf boat eg Laser
I am NOT disputing the racing is close...the racing is close in the Tornado fleet too. However what is looked at IMHO is the perceived cost of a Tornado over an F18. I say perceived cost because once again IMHO the relative costs of a FULL olympic campaign in a Tornado and F18 are very similar...although I conceed the initial cost of starting a campaign is less.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: stuartoffer]
#133932 04/04/0809:16 PM04/04/0809:16 PM
The cost of campaigning is the real expense of the Olypmic program. Yes an F-18 is less than a Tornado, but when you get beyond the platform, the other expenses are not much different. Campaigning though accounts for 80-90% of the overall Olympic costs. As far as boats, the IOC and ISAF want one design boats so that the focus in upon the individuals and decided by the sailor not the boat. Simply put, sailors, not boats should decide medals.
Tom Siders A-Cat USA-79 Tornado US775
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: windswept]
#133933 04/04/0809:51 PM04/04/0809:51 PM
The cost of campaigning is the real expense of the Olypmic program. Yes an F-18 is less than a Tornado, but when you get beyond the platform, the other expenses are not much different. Campaigning though accounts for 80-90% of the overall Olympic costs.
Once again, those percentages apply for the US and eastern Europe, but not necessarily for the rest of the world.
The typical Brazilian olympic T campaign spends more on boats and equipment than on travel expenses.
Until the last games, when they brought two gold medals home, sailors barely had money to participate in the minimum of events needed to classify the country in a given class for the games. I am sure the situation is about the same in most poor and developing countries.
The situation is changing slowly for Torben, Scheidt and a couple of other names, but even Scheidt can not travel as much as he would need and trains mostly in Brazil, due to money constraints.
Different tax environments, distances, costs of living and access to funding dramatically change those porcentages.
Luiz
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Wouter]
#133934 04/05/0806:14 AM04/05/0806:14 AM
Once again, those percentages apply for the US and eastern Europe, but not necessarily for the rest of the world.
The typical Brazilian olympic T campaign spends more on boats and equipment than on travel expenses.
Until the last games, when they brought two gold medals home, sailors barely had money to participate in the minimum of events needed to classify the country in a given class for the games. I am sure the situation is about the same in most poor and developing countries.
The situation is changing slowly for Torben, Scheidt and a couple of other names, but even Scheidt can not travel as much as he would need and trains mostly in Brazil, due to money constraints.
Different tax environments, distances, costs of living and access to funding dramatically change those porcentages.
Interesting...
Would that be the case for other classes in those countries too, or just the tornado?
Once again, those percentages apply for the US and eastern Europe, but not necessarily for the rest of the world.
The typical Brazilian olympic T campaign spends more on boats and equipment than on travel expenses.
Until the last games, when they brought two gold medals home, sailors barely had money to participate in the minimum of events needed to classify the country in a given class for the games. I am sure the situation is about the same in most poor and developing countries.
The situation is changing slowly for Torben, Scheidt and a couple of other names, but even Scheidt can not travel as much as he would need and trains mostly in Brazil, due to money constraints.
Different tax environments, distances, costs of living and access to funding dramatically change those porcentages.
Interesting...
Would that be the case for other classes in those countries too, or just the tornado?
Luiz,
Does Brazil levy massive import duties on Luxury items such as boats?
Why not just pick a class F-18 for example. then each country chooses their representitave. Then when the sailors arrive at the olympics they are given a new boat to compete on. What are we talking about, 20 boats Each team gets their own sails to maintain and tune. The boats are rotated every day. Could there be a better way? you can set your spreder and rake in the morning put your sails on and your on equal ground. The boats would be supploed by the builders. Im sure if you went to hobie or nacra they would jump at the chance to have olympic boats. After the racing they can be sold as olympic special edition boats with new sails. F-18 manufacturers change every event so no one designer gets eliminated or benifits from the campain. Kind of like how the alter cup is run. 2012 tigers 2016 infusions 2020 capricorns ect.
Would that be a viable proposal?
Richard Vilvens Brand Ambassador PSA Capricorn USA R.Vilvens@yahoo.com Fairfield, Ca F-18 5150
Sounds ok to me. And I think it would be to the advantage of the F18 as a class, without the downside that Stuart talked about of freezing development of any particular design.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: F-18 5150]
#133939 04/08/0805:35 PM04/08/0805:35 PM
Top teams will still need boats to train/compete in prior to the games. Still need to get new boats every few years to stay at the top of the heap. Still need to travel to major events (globally). Still need to train 200+ days per year thus lose employment incomes etc etc etc. These are the real costs of running a campaign, not the cost of the boats.
Manufacturer supplied boat events can also create a flood of lower cost boats on the market after event...meaning if you are trying to sell your own boat you've now got to lower your asking price even further. Great for buyers, but tough for current (and future) re-sellers.
Quote
Why not just pick a class F-18 for example. then each country chooses their representitave. Then when the sailors arrive at the olympics they are given a new boat to compete on. What are we talking about, 20 boats Each team gets their own sails to maintain and tune. The boats are rotated every day. Could there be a better way? you can set your spreder and rake in the morning put your sails on and your on equal ground. The boats would be supploed by the builders. Im sure if you went to hobie or nacra they would jump at the chance to have olympic boats. After the racing they can be sold as olympic special edition boats with new sails. F-18 manufacturers change every event so no one designer gets eliminated or benifits from the campain. Kind of like how the alter cup is run. 2012 tigers 2016 infusions 2020 capricorns ect.
Would that be a viable proposal?
Mike Dobbs Tornado CAN 99 "Full Tilt"
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: F-18 5150]
#133940 04/08/0806:13 PM04/08/0806:13 PM
Countries still have to qualify for hte Olympics which means participation in international competitions, unless ofcourse you allow a representative from every country in the world to compete in every sailing event at the Olympics...let's not go there.
Once again, those percentages apply for the US and eastern Europe, but not necessarily for the rest of the world.
The typical Brazilian olympic T campaign spends more on boats and equipment than on travel expenses.
Until the last games, when they brought two gold medals home, sailors barely had money to participate in the minimum of events needed to classify the country in a given class for the games. I am sure the situation is about the same in most poor and developing countries.
The situation is changing slowly for Torben, Scheidt and a couple of other names, but even Scheidt can not travel as much as he would need and trains mostly in Brazil, due to money constraints.
Different tax environments, distances, costs of living and access to funding dramatically change those porcentages.
Interesting...
Would that be the case for other classes in those countries too, or just the tornado?
I guess so. In the Brazilian case, only Finn hulls are being manufactured in a very small scale.
Luiz
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: scooby_simon]
#133942 04/08/0810:46 PM04/08/0810:46 PM
Does Brazil levy massive import duties on Luxury items such as boats?
The total duties are around 85% of the FOB price plus freight. An Olympic boat in Brazil costs twice what it costs in the country of origin.
Some boats/equipments have representatives who make a profit, so make it three times for a 50% markup. Windsurfers are one case. All Harken, Lewmar and Ronstan hardware, lines, sails, sailcloth, etc. are tripled.
To make things worse, Holt bought the local manufacturer Nautos and the Holt-Nautos hardware (the same stuff with new logo) is priced exactly the same as imported hardware. They tripled the prices overnight.
Take care,
Luiz
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Tornado]
#133943 04/09/0812:49 AM04/09/0812:49 AM
As have been said many times before, the kind of resources and money olympians would bring into the F18 class would probably be detremential for the class. Do they/you really want such a change? In my opinion it would be far better for the F18 class to let the Tornado stay the olympic catamaran. That was probably why the F18 class was represented and worked with the Tornado class in Estoril when the events was selected.
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Rolf_Nilsen]
#133946 04/09/0808:46 AM04/09/0808:46 AM
As have been said many times before, the kind of resources and money olympians would bring into the F18 class would probably be detremential for the class. Do they/you really want such a change? In my opinion it would be far better for the F18 class to let the Tornado stay the olympic catamaran. That was probably why the F18 class was represented and worked with the Tornado class in Estoril when the events was selected.
I keep hearing this argument but I disagree - most of those Olympians are ALREADY sailing in F18 and are getting paid to do so by the factories and/or major sponsors. Perhaps having an Olympic twist added would apply a few more resources to the sail development and the like but I really don't see how that would have some huge impact on the class.
However, losing control of or making wide sweeping changes in the rules would be detrimental but I'm not sure that's what we're talking about here.
Jake Kohl
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: H17cat]
#133947 04/09/0809:04 AM04/09/0809:04 AM
I think though that is some of the argument the classes WOULD loose the ability to make the those changes, although the tornado has gone through some quite radical changes over the last 8 years.
As for sail development Im not sure there would be that much that we would see and the worry for the F18 classes is that I think that development would stop. As a manufacturer apying someone like Bundy to steer a hobie would Nacra want him to spend a year on their boat developing sails for a rival manufacturer...besides this would not be what ISAF want for the Olympics they appear to want blanket one design with little or no development.
I personally was looking at the whole picture rules and development when I made my comments.
I do like the idea of rotation of the classes but having seen the recent drop in market value of F18s by the actions of one person selling his boat for below market value I would worry about the effect that 20 or so boats appearing on the market place would have...
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: Jake]
#133951 04/09/0811:08 AM04/09/0811:08 AM
From The Daily Sail: Rules and regs We take a look at the ongoing situation with the Olympic multihull and women's skiff Last week ISAF announced they would be re-visiting two contentious decisions made back in November last year at their Annual conference. With the IOC reducing athlete participation across the board at the Olympic Games, sailing was forced to remove one event from the Olympic line-up for 2012. Due to this the ISAF Council were charged with making the decision of what event would be removed as well as which events would take place at the Games in London. The ISAF Council, at that stage, made two major decisions: Firstly to remove the Double Handed Multihull event from the Olympics, secondly, to switch the Women’s Three Person Keelboat event to Women’s Match Racing event in favour of the Women’s Two Person High Performance Dinghy event (Women’s Skiff). Immediately after this decision was made by the Council there was a great deal of public outcry, predominantly by the multihull community. Almost instantly after the meeting details emerged of a last minute change to the voting procedure. Essentially this change was from a situation where the ISAF Council voted for which events they want to see in the Olympics to voting for which events they would like to see OUT of the Olympics. At first glance this may not seem like a radical departure but in fact it made a significant difference to the way in which the votes were cast, making the whole procedure more tactical. If you consider someone who was going to vote for all classes except the Laser, for example, a change to voting for which class to remove makes this a wasted vote as the Laser is (almost) definitely in. Instead of wasting their vote this voter then is forced to decide on a class they want to remove other than the Laser.
Before getting into the immediate issues we do still have to look at one more debate that has been taking place over recent months and that is what is deemed to qualify as urgent and what is not. The RYA stuck their head above the parapet in early December 2007, officially calling for an ISAF re-vote. A letter was sent to ISAF from the RYA in addition to being copied to every voting MNA (Member National Authority) in the World. The letter called for a re-evaluation of the 2012 Olympic events to be voted on at the ISAF’s mid-year meeting this year. The Australians and the French both followed suit and sent similar requests to ISAF. However, ISAF made the announcement that these submissions were not deemed as ‘urgent’ and therefore would not be discussed in May in compliance with regulation 1.6(b) of the ISAF regulations:
1.6 Subject to the provisions of Regulations 2.3, submissions or proposals shall be received at the ISAF Secretariat in respect of:
(b) the Mid-Year meeting or other meetings, not less than eight weeks before the meeting at which it is considered. Only urgent submissions may be considered at a Mid-Year meeting. The Executive Committee shall determine whether a submission is urgent. (The provisions of this section do not apply to submissions or proposals brought forward under Regulation 1.8 and 16.1.2);
In essence then ISAF were holding off debating the issue until November 2008. However, as Rod Carr explained to TheDailySail at the time of the RYA’s submission: “As it says in the letter, we need the ISAF to defer telling the IOC what the events are,” he explained. “The IOC should be informed by March and we are saying, write to them and say ‘we request permission to defer announcing our events.’ I can’t believe, this far out from the [2012] Olympics that is something the IOC would refuse.”
It later came to light that this decision had been deferred by ISAF until later this year. As we are now aware, the ISAF are now discussing the issue of a re-vote at the mid-year meeting in May. So have the MNA (Member National Authority) and Class Association suggestions now been deemed ‘urgent’? The answer is they have not. Instead the ISAF Executive Committee have submitted their own submission - urgent submission M06-08 below:
Proposal: That Council reaffirm their decision on the 2012 Olympic Events made in November 2007 by a simple majority vote.
Upon reaffirmation, the matter will be concluded and all submissions made whether accepted as urgent or not urgent, will be considered to have been dealt with. Should Council vote not to reaffirm the decision, two separate votes will then follow:
1. Should the selected events for the Men be changed – A majority of two thirds will be required to effect any change as per Regulation 16.1.3 (a).
2. Should the selected events for the Women be changed – A majority of two thirds will be required to effect any change as per Regulation 16.1.3 (a). In case one or both of the votes under 1 and 2 above achieve the required majority, the ‘new’ decisions on the list of events for the 2012 Olympic Events shall be made in November 2008 and submissions on the events can be made in accordance with Regulation 1.
Current Position: See above.
Reason: Due to the degree of correspondence since the Council decision in November 2007 plus the submissions lodged by 15 MNA and 2 Class Associations, the Executive submit that Council be requested to reaffirm their decision on the events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition made in November 2007. This will then bring to a close any concerns over the Council decision.
In case one or both of the votes under 1 and 2 above achieve the required majority, submissions on the events can be made in accordance with Regulation 1. This would include the submissions made for the Mid-Year Meeting which were deemed not urgent, which will become ordinary submissions received before the 1 August submission deadline.
Here we can clearly see the wording from ISAF stating that this vote is to ‘reaffirm’ their November vote. This wording shows a pressure from the Executive Committee onto the ISAF Council to uphold the position voted on in November last year. It has also been pointed out that instead of discussing each or any of the 17 submissions made to ISAF by 15 MNAs and two class associations, ISAF are ignoring much of the pressure applied and having a small vote that will overrun all of the other submissions.
However, much of this is speculative and it is a simple case of wording for the most part. Even the fact that the 17 submissions are not being taken into account by ISAF and only one single submission about a reaffirmation is being debated, seems like the best move in terms of efficiency.
Another major worry that brought to our attention by some members of the multihull community is the wording of both the urgent submission by ISAF and their Regulations. In urgent submission M06-08 it states that:
1. Should the selected events for the Men be changed – A majority of two thirds will be required to effect any change as per Regulation 16.1.3 (a). 2. Should the selected events for the Women be changed – A majority of two thirds will be required to effect any change as per Regulation 16.1.3 (a).
Here is regulation 16.1.3(a):
16.1.3 Except as provided in Regulation 16.1.4: (a) Decisions made by Council under 16.1.1 (b) may only be overturned with a vote in favour of two thirds of all Council members entitled to vote.
‘Entitled to vote’ is the key here as, in effect, it means any Council member not attending the meeting (to be held in Qingdao) or abstaining from voting effectively becomes a vote against both the multihull and the women’s skiff. This does start to make the voting procedure look like an increasingly uphill struggle. However, a quick review of the minutes from the last two mid-year meetings shows only one voting member of the ISAF Council sent apologies for not attending, so in effect this is a moot point.
Essentially then the difficulty now for the multihull and women’s skiff community is that ISAF are, at this stage of the procedure, doing everything right. There have been no official complaints about the manner in which the vote was made in November last year. The RYA, for example, were very clear on this point and Rod Carr confirmed their position. “The first thing that I want to point out is that [the vote] was a legitimately, legally made decision,” he explained in December. “We are not challenging the legality of it. We are challenging the rightness of it.” Given this the ISAF are right to make it an uphill struggle. They must have a vote to reaffirm their decision and there must then be an overwhelming (two thirds) majority for the decision to be changed or else we will go through exactly the same problems every year we have to change Olympic classes.
The difficulty for us here is we would like to see a women’s skiff in the Games and the multihull returned. However, in ISAF’s eyes, and legally, the decision has already been made. The debate at the mid-year meeting could well change things but as in most walks of life once the decision has been made and the ball is rolling it is very, very difficult to stop it.
From Scuttlebut Europe: two Views on the current situation.
The Olympic Classes - Paul Henderson Olympic Classes: Having been involved in the selection of the Olympic Classes for 30 years at ISAF it is interesting to see that nothing has changed. Personal bias always prevails. If the vote goes your way the ISAF Council is brilliant. If your personal or those of your country's medal chances are not served the ISAF Council are dysfunctional. Here goes on my bias. Deja Vu!
Overview: TV and Media: No matter what sailing does we will never get much live Olympic TV. The feed is there but the individual country broadcasters usually do not pick it up as Athletics, Football, Basketball etc fills their broadcasts. Sailing gets very high niche market internet hits especially live mark-by-mark roundings. The print media loves heroes and human interest stories. The equipment is secondary. The many daily E-Mail newsletters have added another dimension to sailing journalism.
Heroes: In both Sydney and Athens the international print media followed the Star #1 as that was were the heroes were: Grael, Cayard, MacDonald, Loofs, Rohart, Percy, Bromby etc. Whether a boat goes 18 kts or 10 kts is unimportant. Sailors do! The heroes from the Boards usual evolve into Tornado sailors. The Laser and Finn heroes move up into the Keelboats Men or Women. The IOC wants the heroes and the best which is why Baseball was dropped because the Major League players are not at the Olympics.
Elite: The Olympics are for the best and should not become a Junior Regatta. The IOC has addressed this issue by initiating a Youth Olympics and those who want to promote youth sailing should focus on that regatta in Singapore.
High-Performance: All Olympic Classes are high-performance. No one has ever been able to define that term. This is especially true with the sailors as they must perform at the highest possible level in all events. Call them Cats or Skiffs but do not insult other classes by tagging them low performance in comparison. Paul Elvstrom once said: "It is harder to build a class then design a new one". The Star, Laser, Tornado and Finn have proven this.
Classes: Keelboats must be kept both for Men and Women. It also provides the infrastructure for the Paralympics. Yesterday I was in Miami and there were over 100 Star boats at their WC. I thought it was a Laser Regatta.
Women must have a keelboat class. I prefer Fleet as that is inclusive but Match is acceptable also. Fleet or Match is format not the event and keeping the Keelboat is the key.
The singlehanders are the essence of the Olympics and the now 5 should be kept.
Boards have diminished greatly in acceptance over the last two decades but should remain. Laser is unchallenged. The Laser Radial has been a great success and the number of nations at their Worlds was the best ever for women. The Finn is essential as it provides a singlehander for larger men.
That leaves 3 Events of 10. If ISAF is held to 10 then my bias really comes out. I like Cats and Skiffs because they must be sailed not Air-Rowed around the course with Kinetics.
The problem then arises is what to do with the 470? Fortunately I am no longer on that hot seat. 470 is excellent women's boat and the 29er should be first put into the new Youth Olympics. It is sad that the IOC is holding Sailing to an agreement made to reduce from 11 as the reasons originally invoked 4 years ago are no longer valid.
Hopefully someone with influence will get to Jacques Rogge to delay the erosion till 2016. If that could happen ISAF should then keep both Men and Women 470 hosted for 2012 in the #1 sailing nation today.
Sailing would then have relative peace for at least another 4 years.
More To This Than Meets The Eye? - Andy Rice Not everyone has welcomed ISAF's new submission with open arms. The UK Catamaran Racing Association's Simon Morgan sent SailJuice this response to the submission, and Simon questions some of the language used by ISAF in this new document.
Here is Simon's interpretation of things:
This is a welcome move in the right direction by ISAF, but it may sadly turn into a public relations disaster, the more closely it is publicly examined, because the leadership's proposal is legally imprecise and open to suspicion of bias, to which its Members have now become highly sensitised.
Firstly, ISAF Members (MNA's) should be congratulated for responding to the public concerns of the sailing community. It is impressive not only how widespread but also how comprehensive are their initiatives in seeking a better solution. They include submissions from 15 countries and 2 international classes on the selection of Events. Should a majority of Council vote in favour of change, but fail to reach the additional two-thirds hurdle that the leadership seeks to impose, (perhaps unnecessary at this juncture) they also include a further dozen submissions for multihull equipment to be considered alongside monohull equipment for the currently approved Events.
Strategically, there are also proposals to ask IOC for an 11th Event and to set up a new Multihull Committee, like Windsurfing. These are from nations rich and poor, large and small and all around the world.
They all should be thanked, especially those who have had to back on their original decision for doing the decent thing in saying, sorry we simply did not think about the multihull community because you were politically unorganised. Having read your lengthy report and listened to the enormous body of public opinion against the Estoril Events decision, we see that you are a significant part of the sport we all love and have organised yourself and we want to find a place for you somewhere in our "big church".
But has ISAF leadership got that message?
Remember the November Council Meeting where Charley Cook "proposed that the voting process could be simplified...by making a slight modification".
Remember Arve Sundheim's letter to Members in November which excused the failure to advise Councillors of the 2002 IOC document on guidelines for Olympic Events entitled "Recommendations" on the basis that this was not "a policy of the IOC to recommend that if any events are to be removed from the Olympic Programme for sailing that it could be keelboat"
Remember the Minutes of the February Executive Meeting that responded to the host nation's concerns by describing the choice of Events as "closed", but now "recognizing the level of concerns over the decision as per the submissions received" the selection of Events is no longer closed.
If the leadership were genuinely open-minded why propose that Council "reaffirm" rather than "review" and why continue "upon reaffirmation", rather than "if reaffirmed", when such alternative neutral language is available? The accompanying press release continues in similar manner "The Executive Committee intent in making this submission is to bring to a close the current speculation challenging the Council decision".
The proposal is even more grudging in that the Executive oddly asks Councillors to reaffirm rather than reject their decision. This raises questions about impartiality. -- More on sailjuiceblog.com/2008/04/07/more-to-this-than-meets-the-eye/
Tom Siders A-Cat USA-79 Tornado US775
Re: Update on boats for 2012 Olympics
[Re: windswept]
#133954 04/12/0809:03 AM04/12/0809:03 AM
![[Linked Image]](http://www.isaf.org/images/news/07_Executive_November_360.jpg)
Who is who? Who is the Tornado sailor?
![[Linked Image]](http://www.catsailor.com/bb_files/136992-ISAFbandits.jpg)
