2012 Olympic Games Equipment issue...

Hi Folks -

By now, some of you may have heard that the US SAILING Board of Directors approved an Olympic Sailing Committee submission to ISAF that did not include the Tornado as one of the proposed classes for the 2012 Olympic Games. I spent yesterday getting familiar with the process and the politics involved in the long road to select equipment for a Games. This is very early in the process, and the submission made only eight recommendations (six dinghies and two keelboats) with the expectation that an additional two classes would be selected by the Council. Despite this, the exclusion of a multihull from the list is at least troubling...

Before anyone takes aim at the Board of Directors, keep in mind that the Board depends upon the Olympic Sailing Committee to look into these matters and make recommendations that are well thought out and reasoned. Their approval of the OSC's submission was simply a point of order. It is generally well understood, however, that if US SAILING's rep stands up in the Event Committee meeting in Paris this May and the Tornado is not on the list of recommended equipment for the 2012 Games, then multihulls are in serious jeopardy.

The situation is developing quickly since this issue became public yesterday. At a minimum, our current course of action is to stand before the Board this week in Newport and move that the submission be amended to include a multihull class in the recommended equipment. How the Board and the OSC handles this motion will be very telling. In the days leading up to that moment, the alarm bells are ringing and we are talking with those we feel are in a position to both understand the seriousness of the situation and are in a position to vote in favor of the motion. I'll have more info for you soon.

John Williams
Multihull Council Chair
US SAILING

John,

do you have any links to the proposal?
Will other countries (MNAs) be able to influence the process, or is it the OSC that make the proposal and the MNAs just accept/reject it?

Thanks for the heads up.

Hi Rolf -

Each of the MNAs bring their own recommendations to the Events Committee in May - this is the text of the US SAILING submission:



I, along with others, suspect that there are similar discussions of dropping the Tornado among the European MNAs. Forewarned is forearmed.

John

Do I understand this choice properly.

the USA is choosing a skiff for women over the Tornado which is open?

For chris sakes... their is NO grass roots support for skiff sailing in the USA... much less for women's skiff sailors.

Meanwhile.. the women's Hobie 16's have had great turnouts for years and years not to mention numerous regattas around the country for standard racing.

is this just sexist politics?? The usual monohull discrimination towards cats??

Skiffs are SO EXCITING that after 10 years they have managed a small foothold on the west coast. Probably a dozen events a year (as best I remember)! Wow...

Where the hell are our fearless Olympic sailing muckety mucks?
Gary Bodie ???
Dean Brenner ???

Oh .... I know... They are out looking for a midget or a kid to pair with Johnny to win the China games!!!

The proper choice would be to make the Tornado for Men, and choose a mulithull for women... (hobie 16 with spin or pick your favorite F16 builder)

This is just so tiresome... at the end of the day... the IOC should just save their money and drop the sport from the games... we would be better off in the sailing community!

My gut tells me that money and proffesional sailing is wrapped up in this fiasco..

The word Corinthian and the philosophy of competition that goes with it should return....

Our sport is best when its not professional, or depending on the "on the water judging" which is needed to catch the cheaters... (see Paige Riley debacle at the OCR)... Let the pros go join the cup teams or the around the world floating billboards...

We currently run our events as Catagory C so that If somebody got sponsorhip... they would not have to pull the junk off their sails and boats... Maybe we should go back to the way it was!

Strike a blow for tradition!

I dont see why we have to have separate classes for women, especially in skiffs and multihulls where they can both compete against each other on an equal basis. Thats one of the great pluses of our sport - one that you would think that ISAF would promote!

As John stated, this development is troubling. It confirms that US Sailing is still not in touch with mainstream sailing in this country. It's hard to comprehend why this will not or has not changed. It looks like the boardsailing community is being treated the same and these sailors are certainly the most athletic of all the Olympic classes.

There is still an ignorance or lack of acceptance within the traditional yacht club infrastructure in this country in regards to how multihull sailing continues to evolve and get better while remaining very popular with a large group of sailors in this country. The boats and equipment have improved so much and this development has attracted many dinghy and keelboat sailors over to the "dark side" (myself included).

At my yacht club, I have started racing my Corsair trimaran in club PHRF races. We are the only multihull and we've had no problem blending in with the fleet on the starting line. Even though we finish far ahead of the lead mines, I still get comments after races about how we "don't go downwind" (because we jibe downwind and sail hotter angles) or don't go upwind well (even though we always sail within 5 degrees of the highest pointing lead mine). It's like they are in denial and just can't accept what their eyes see.

I believe that type of attitude is pervasive in the upper leadership of US Sailing. They continue to make decisions that seem to defy logic.

Bob Hodges
A-Class USA 230

I see lets forget about the mono minded portion of the sailing world, they will never learn.

Last summer the crew I was part of sailed a cruising multihull (in a 24 hours race with 500 boats competing) to a first place in our small class but ALSO to something like 3rd overall on handicap over ALL classes. As it was a very large cruising multihull with a jacuzi on board with did so with a rather modest amount of sailed miles. When it was our turn to pick up our price a guy right behind said relatively loudly "and that is why you shouldn't get one of those floats".

Later in the day we saw him reinstall the toilet, the sink, the **** apparatus and a whole lot of other stuff he took out to gain speed for the race. We were sailing with 500 liters of water in out tank and 650 liters of diesel oil and duting the night we had all kinds of warm snacks to keep us warm and comfi. This monohull guy, despite leaning all night long on his trimmed down hot rod still lost from us while we were sailing a bloody caravan in 5 knots of wind from our deck chairs. Yeah that is one more reason why not to get a catamaran alright !

They will never learn.

With respect to skiffs. Yes they are spectacular, but they are also bloody hard to handle. Small wonder why it is not taking off in the wider world. Skiff sailing is just one big promo adventure. Does anyone else notice that all the footage of skiffs is 95 % under spinnaker ? That is because they are bloody slow ( = boring) upwind. Especially in the ludicrous light wind venues that the summer games always seem to select. Watching skiffies do their thing in 4 knots of wind is pretty close to watching a DVD course and ballet (balancing on their toes). No planing in those conditions !

And yes I feel windsurfing has got dealt a bad hand again as well. Have these guys sail in some decent breeze and you'll get a spectacle.

Maybe this is one of those times were cat sailing and surfer just need to break loose and do their own thing. I for one do not really see the olympics as sustaining much of the catsailing scene we have now.

Wouter

As I write this I can see that there are 100 people online at this forum. If a write-in campaign would have any influence, a unified effort by the readers of this forum could produce the kind of massive email onslaught that often cause politicos to sit up and listen.

John, do you have any idea who we could target to voice an organized email plea for retention of an Olympic multihull?

Bob:

Do you sail a 28R or the new 750 Sprint. Mike and I are looking at one in 2009. I FINALLY got out of Ocean Corp school and off to work.

Doug

Ahhemmm.....focus please....the topic.

Guys:

Sorry. So no multihulls at 2012? I thought the Tornado's were a lock after all these years. What happened? Anything we can do? Maybe a petition?

Doug

Hi David -

That tack is being discussed a great deal - anyone is free to contact the Olympic Sailing Committee and voice their concerns. You can find the Committee listed at http://ussailing.org/olympics/committee.asp - Dean Brenner is the Chair and it was his ExCom that made the submission. I have contacted Dean and so have other members of the Multihull Council ExCom. Some of us feel that an organized write-in campaign would be the next step if our motion to the BOD this week fails.

John,

Some of the strong points for the Tornado:

1. Probably the most "bang for the buck" of all the Olympic classes in terms of reliability, longevity, and performance.

2. Truly a boat that can be sailed with a mixed team, witness the success of Carolyn Brouwer (sp?) in both the Tornado and F-18.

3. A European Tornado championship typically attracts at least 80-100 boats.

4. Sailors can compete in the class into middle age, no age bias towards younger sailors.

I know the demographic of multihull sailors is significant. I'd like to see US Sailing justify their selection when confronted with actual numbers.

Plain ignorance and/or arrogance laid bare.

Bob

P.S. - Doug Snell, I bought a Corsair Sprint 750, lovely boat to sail. Speed with comfort!

Bob:

Yea Bob Curry was fast on Great Bay Race. Maybe we will see you on circuit then? KO Sailing had one for $66,000 with sails. Maybe we can find a used one by then?

Back to subject:

We need to do whatever it takes to keep them. Count me in on email attack. Just let me know.

Doug

(FYI half of this is in humor)

This Olympic Selection looks like what I have seen 3 or 4 times in the last 12 years. The issue is not monohull vs multihull, the issue is rich countries and the rest of the world. It kinda goes like this:


Olympic Committee: Sailing requires an expensive facility and nobody watches it on TV. We have a marketing report that says people might watch skiffs.

Rich Countries: Sailing is Olympic tradition and a lot of our citizens participate.

Poor countries: I am not sure we have even seen half the boats you are talking about. We have nobody that can compete and we can't afford to send anyone anyway. We want all sailing events to be simple one design and we want the boats to be supplied. That way we can send at least one person.

South America: Keel Boats!, Keel Boats! (They have World Champions)

Compromise: A core of simple supplied boast plus specialties.

The Tornado is a specialty boat. We can get the Tornado continued but we will have to fight. Write your representative and let them know how you feel. This especially true outside of the the US and Europe. Your representative may not have a position and they have an equal voice in this matter.

I wonder if the reason is that with the top two US Tornado teams near retirement they might figure there is not another team close enough to take the reigns and have a chance to even qualify the country for 2012 - let alone chance at a medal. That would be typical.

I agree that we should all voice our disapproval.

Carl

Yes... your summary of the process is spot on...

What is obnoxious here is the poor judgment and subsequent action of the USA Sailing national authority....

They are supposed to represent OUR INTEREST!.. The Olympic portion (Bremer and Bodie) are supposed to win medals.

So... as Bob H, notes...

They want our money to create and run the programs we use... So... they MUST explain to us why they won't support catamaran sailing at the highest levels of the sport.

They must explain why they think that skiff sailing for women has strong support in the USA....

Since I believe they are smoking some real [censored]... These answers will sound like real BS!

Mark


ps.. Oli, that would be a rational reason for this decision. You give them TOO MUCH CREDIT!. ... Do you see any women Skiff teams out there tearing it up??? How about any depth in the 49ner class either. I think CLUELESS is the best explanation!

Hehe - I don't know what I was thinking, you're absolutely right. Time and time again these guys defy all logic.

Right now, I still sail Tornados, not for competition, but for enjoyment. They are a great boat to sail. With that stated, I also believe that it should remain the Olympic Class multihull for at least the next two quadreniums. Are there other cats to be considered, probably, but the Tornado still fits the profile better then any other right now.

The real question though seems to be, should there be an Olympic Multihull Class? The answer is definately yes and we need to speak up clearly about this issue directly to the OSC. I have already written all of the committee members. I hope that everyone else who is concerned does as well.

The Multihull Council spent a good deal of time this morning debating this issue in the US Sailing House of Delegates, where the Multihull Council is represented, and later to the Board of Directors. (We also spent hours talking with US Olympic Sailing Committee members during the weekend but more on that later.)

The Board of Directors is ultimately responsible for making all submissions to ISAF.

The House of Delegates is a constituent based body that basically makes recommendations to the Board.

Our Action Request to the Board was asking them to charge our ISAF delegation to support a Multihull at the 2012 Olympic Games. We had hoped that it would get passed to the Board with a recommendation from the House of Delegates. We did not have enough support in the House to get this favorable recommendation but it was close enough to take a real counting of the votes and we were able to spend a good deal of time making our points during debate.

During the Board of Directors meeting we brought up the same Action Request. The Board opened debate on the topic and we spent a good deal of time in debate again. I think we made our points well but the motion did not pass in the Board and so nothing has changed.

During debate the Board expressed very clearly and in no uncertain terms that they were voting for the disciplines in which they thought the US had the best medal chances in 2012. The Board expressed that US Sailing does and will continue to support both Multihull sailing and Board sailing but that this submission to ISAF would not change.

There are more detail but that is the basics of the story.
More later.

Thanks for the report. How sad..

Does this mean that the final suggestion for 2012 from the US will be:

Single - Handed Dinghy - Men
Single - Handed Dinghy - Women
Skiff - Men
Skiff - Women
Double - Handed Dinghy - Men
Double - Handed Dinghy - Women
Keelboat - Men
Keelboat - Women *

* match racing or fleet racing


And there is no changing this?

So now I guess the question is: Will multihull sailing and board sailing continue to support US Sailing?

That's a good point Mary. I wonder how many of us cat racers are even members of US Sailing? I have been a memeber since about 1979 but I would bet that most cat racers are NOT US Sailing members where as just about ALL mono racers ARE memebers (I was racing dinghys when I first became a member, because the yacht clubs will nearly require you to be a memeber, most of their dinghy sailors are). So, I would suspect that we don't have a whole lot of political pull at the board level of US Sailing. They obviously want to funnel all their limited funds into clases where they think they have the best chances of getting a medal. I can't blame them for that. Maybe if our US Sailing organization was funded by our government like so many other countries are, we would be doing much better at the Olympics in terms of medal production. The funny thing is, I think our Olympic Cat sailors did better than most of our mono sailors at the last Olympics!

I have no fear that France and the rest of Europe will trump the US and keep the Tornado in the Olympics, they live for fast cats!

Bob...
Since this is about Bodie's assesment of the talent pool in Tornado's... Boards, Women' and Men's Skiffs...

Did they talk about the pool of women on olympic campaigns?

How about the total pool of skiff sailors in the country?

I guess I am asking if this decision was based on fantasy, wishful thinking or politics... or do they have real facts ( eg names and assesments of potential Olympic sailors).

The fact of the matter is... US Sailing has never believed that medal talent could come up through the beach cat community. Robbie Daniel is the current exception. Johnny Lovel and Lars Guck were great college sailors who paid for their own development to get into the Tornado elite. So... what is the difference in 2007. They have to build a program to train skiff girls from scratch.. The skiff men pool is equally small and lean.... What is their reason for not training talent for catamarans. The jump from college 420's to skiffs or cats is equally demanding.

They ALWAYS seem to pick their pony early and then start tilting the game in that persons favor. Is their an element of ... none of the catamaran sailors will play our game... so. a pox on them?

The Brits and Europe are not likely to dump the Tornado in 2012 so... the 64,000 question is... WILL THEY PUT RESOURCES INTO DEVELOPING THE Catamaran TALENT POOL... or does this ISAF decision mean... we surrender in the cat and board area... no matter what?

How much of this decision is based on ...the notion.. crap... we have no training programs whatsoever... BUT... women's skiffs are brand new... we have a shotin the first cycle... after that... the other nations will kick our butt in the development game?

Is the olympic game so proffesional now that we just can't afford a developoment program... So we need to pick our 1 or at most 2 horses early and push them... the trials are just an exhibition sailing exercise. The rank and file cat sailors are not even close to this game and so our complaints about this are naieve.

Before, I asserted that their reasons would be laughable... While we might disagree with the final decision of US Sailing.... Did their points have merit and US Sailing and ourselves disagre on how to evaluate the facts?

I guess the notion that a strong grass roots sailing program through out the country will strenghen our Olympic efforts is completly wrong.

I believe the changes that US Sailing put in place would make it easier to understand the budget. How much of the general membership dues are devoted to Olympic sailing. Dean Brenner has supposedly done a good job fundraising... Is the Olympic portion approaching self sufficiency?

Do we have a beef about how the budget is being spent?

Thanks again for taking the time and money to go make the case. Sounds a bit like you were talking to the hand... It must have been frustrating.

Thanks again
Mark

We traditionally are strong in women's events and especially new women's events. If there was a possibility of a women's catamaran that would change the dynamics considerably for the USOSC.



There is no denying that it is very strong.



The decision is strongly based on the politics of trying to have an influence on the ISAF process and manipulate the events in the direction of US strengths. I think they have the facts correct at this point in time. My major disagreement with this is on the principal. I think that the Olympics should look like sailing with all the major disciplines represented.



We need to see talent come out of the catamaran community more often. Everyone pays for their own campaigns through their own fundraising. This is the same in every class. the USOSC doesn't really build "programs". They take proven talent and try to give it a final push over the top. If there is going to be a program WE need to build it and we are starting 100 years behind keel boats and about 75 behind dinghys.



I don't think so.



I do think that Europe will not let the multihull go away but it's scary to think that any MNA is considering it.
I think US Sailing has surrendered in terms of the board sailing. Not quite as much in catamarans. If there is going to be a development of young elite catamaran sailors it's going to be up to us. That's the way it is across all the classes. For example CISA does a fantastic job training elite dingy sailors (probably the best), but that is not a USOSC program.
BTW: US Sailings position on multihulls changes significantly if there is a possibility that the class would change to something other than the Tornado. A new class means a fresh start in terms of the talent pool and the USOSC thinks they will have a chance at that game. Don't shoot the messenger.



See previous comments about the training program. I think the USOSC feeling is that the US will do well in events with new equipment and in women's classes.



The Star and the Tornado are particularly professional, making it very hard to break into the top of the fleet, not to mention that those fleets are the smallest at the Olympics so it's very hard for even the best sailors to get there at all. We have a strong base of professional keelboat sailors to draw from in the Star. Not so much in the Tornado.



Personally I disagree on the principal.



Grass roots is great for long term and catamaran sailing in general. In this instance the only plan of attack would be to start at the top with a few elite kids that can hanndle the long hard road and expand down into grass roots programs. It's a bit opposite of what you need to do in order to just increase participation.






Absolutely ZERO dollars from the membership go into the Olympic program. It's completely independent. Dean has made big strides on the fundraising side but it's a long road.



Remember that Lovell is an accountant and he is on the US Sailing Audit committee. The US won a medal in the Tornado last time around. That means they get more money from the USOC. New guys and girls with no big results get nothing across the board. Dean is working hard on the fundraising aspect but it's a long hard road.

Larry Ellison, Roy Disney, Mr. Kahn, Steve Fosset, and hundreds of other Billionairs here in the states, each one pursuing his own sailboat racing dream, and rightfully so, but how much money do each of them contribute towards the Olympic Saililng programs, or any US Sailing junior beginner program? How many little boats have they bought for inner city youth to learn to sail?

Personally, I have always been a bit upset by the amount of money US Sailing spends on things like the Olympics, vs. developing some real grass roots programs to bring sailing to more kids in middle schools and high schools all over the country. 99% of the dues paying members of US Sailing will never even see an Olympic regatta, let alone race in one, and most of the members have no desire -what so ever- to race in the Olympics, especially in those 40+ year old boats (470, Star)

Don't get me wrong, I think the Olympics are a great way for each country to measure it's best against the rest of the world, but that's all it is, and only once every 4 years, so why should US Sailing be so involved with any of it, when most of the members have no time or desire to compete in that way. I think all the US Olympic funding should be funded by private donations from some of our Super Sized Corporations, starting with Exxon! What did they make last year, only about $40 BILLION, I think they could write that check. Microsoft should pony up some dough too. Between just the two of them, money should not be an issue for our Olympic Atheletes here in the richest nation on earth. You should hunt down McDonalds and Coca Cola, the two biggest contributers to childhood obesity, and tell them to write the check to support some of the kids that DON'T spend all day on the couch watching the tube, sucking down fries and a Coke. That would help their image quite a bit.

Frankly I'm embarassed that our Olympic team has to beg for money at all. Other counties fund their teams off their national tax systems, we could always do that. Do we not have a "National Endowment for the Arts"?? that our tax dollars pay for? And what about that "bridge to nowhere" in Alaska? We will spend more tax money on that then the entire Olympic budget, summer and winter, for the next 4 years!

It is. See above.

So you are saying US Sailing spends NO DUES money for the Olympic sailing? What are my dues being spent on? A little rule book once every 3 years??

That is correct. NO DUES money for Olympic sailing.

What IS your money spent on? That's the subject for another thread.

Thank you Bob

I will eat my words asserting their decision was laughable. (would have been much easier to throw more rocks... IMO they have had a track record of failure)

I completly agree with you that the fundamental diagreement is philosophical.

So... US Sailing Olympic is essentially that final push.
This makes the decsion to reduce the size of the US SAiling team make sense.

The bottom line is... IF we as the cat racing community believe that it is important to have Olympic status and success for our type of sailing .. we will have to build the program some how.. some where.

We, the cat sailors need to boot strap a development program through our sailing clubs.

Sailors coming out of top college programs will be on their own when they jump into racing cats until they get to the elite level.

We need an immediate solution to train a few elite up and coming young sailors and hope they find funding to keep at it when they time out of any program we come up with.

Wow...

We have so much else to do... Is an Olympic slot that important to our long term health as fleets to warrant the effort?

All you guys are volunteers, right? So, where's the money going? Opti's?

I travel for a living. I have always bid to layover near water. San Diego, LA, Seattle, Boston, Providence, Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, Palm Beach, Sarasota, Ft. Myers, Chicago. I have yet to find a US Sailing location that will rent me a boat on a walk up basis. They are usually very snotty, busy babysitting the Opti kids, and they will laugh at you if you ask to rent a boat.

But in England, I can walk up to any Royal Yachting Academy club, show my RYA card and rent a boat for an afternoon, for about $30, with a wet suit thrown in free. I can even enter a race if they are on for that day. And when I get back, there will be beer, on location, on draft. I wish US Sailing was funded and run like the RYA! Is it any wonder the Brits kick our butt in most sailing events? They are half the size of Texas and I think California has a larger GDP!

But here in the states, I can only rent from a motel, if I can find one with boats, and it's only crappy, run down, overpriced equipment. How many hundreds of thousands of miles of coastline, ocean and lake, do we have here in the US? Why are there no US Sailing programs that are nation wide, open to walk up adults, get a card, show it and rent at all US Sailing locations? I can walk into any Harley Davidson shop and rent a $20,000 bike with only my driver's license, but I've been to many US Sailing sites, looked at their boats, tried to weasel my way onto one, and even with my membership card, they won't let me touch one until I get a week of instruction by Their Instructor, (who is away this week), take a test, (again)etc. Why is that? They are much better at turning people away than welcoming them to sailing.

Some thoughts:

1) If it can be demonstrated that the US has more chances of medals in those 6 classes, I'd say the Board is honestly doing what it is supposed to do: giving their vote to the classes that bring more medals.

2) Other countries (France, Austria, Spain, Argentina, etc.) that see good good chances for a medal in the Tornado will certainly vote for the "double handed multihull open".

3) I don't see the ISAF dropping the Tornado so easily. It would be quite difficult to defend this cause. Remember that the B Class was created by the ISAF itself, and the Tornado is a B Class designed specifically for the Olympics.

4) I think the lack of US support for the multihull will actually motivate some countries to follow the (expected) French and British vote for the Tornado.

5) The US vote is only one vote. Remember that the Tornado is a British design and that the French recommendations for changes in the T were almost exactly those enforced by ISAF a few years ago. If both England and France vote for the T, most European countries will follow.

5) Even if the existing "double handed multihull open" class is dropped, the Tornado may still be the equipment of choice for a "double handed dinghy" class. It is not simple or easy, but it is possible. And would "save face" for the ISAF.

All the best,

It sounds to me as if you need an organisation to promote sailing...but don't you already have one? <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

From the discussion on this forum topic only, it appears as though the organisation that represents sailing in the US is not representing the majority of sailors in the US.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

What is the ratio of cat, dinghy etc. types of sailing participation?

As far as I know there are strong Tornado fleets in England and Germany while Spain and France seem to have good olympic Tornado programs. Australia should be a strong supporter, but you never know.. Who comes behind Bundy/Ashby and Hagara/Steinacher from Austria? These few countries are not exactly a majority within ISAF, even if they are big (on an european scale). Loosing US support for the multihull class can not be good. Will be exiting to watch what happens!

I dont think the financing of olympic sailors differ much from the US model over here. Athletes get a small bonus from our olympic national comitte for top ten finishes in europeans/worlds. Top athletes can also apply for grants from diverse funds, but sailing assocs. seldom finance athletes fully. The assoc. often try to help athletes find corperate sponsors, but the athletes have to do the basic work. The brits have a very good solution, but I dont know others who do the same.

Why I think this proposal is a bad idea.

1) The Olympic regatta should represent all of the of the worlds most widely practiced event types. Keelboats, Dinghys, Multihulls and Boards are the four largest and most fundamental event types in the world of sailing.

2) US Sailings responsibility to it's member athletes should take priority over it's perceived medal chances.

3) The stated reasons supporting this proposal are either false, contradictory or could be said of any event type.

"Skiffs are exciting and generate media interest and buzz."
This is a contradictory statement in a proposal that excludes multihulls.

"This slate of Events will appeal to a wide range of athletes."
This is FALSE. This slate of events appeals to a more narrow range of athletes by excluding multihulls.

"This slate of Events is representative of the sport as it is practiced around the World. As a result, it is likely that this slate will increase the number of countries competing in the Olympic Regatta."
This statement is also FALSE. In fact the US Sailing President would not even stand behind it when questioned at the Board of Directors Meeting.

4) The Olympics presently has ten medals for the 2012 Games. An unbalanced event list with six dinghy classes does not present a strong case to the IOC for the number of medals to be maintained at ten.

Somehow, I do think the US Sailing vote was intentional to vote out the multihull class. Is it time we as a community diverge away from US Sailing and simply use ISAF as our rules and portsmouth rating sailing rules(Texel system)? Take away from them the Alter Cup? Besides providing us a $2.00 course sticker, what do they really do for us again?

Bob

Bob, when you say "us," do you mean "us" as sailors in general or "us" as multihull sailors? And either way or both ways, as rhodysail said, somebody should start a new thread about it.

I agree with Bob on this one. I can't say that I've ever benefitted by US Sailing in regards to catsailing, save maybe regatta insurance for organizers. I got a nice course sticker, of course, but Jake and Robi can make those (for a lot cheaper as well). If catsailing is going to grow in this nation, it is not going to be with the help of US Sailing.
I'd be more than willing to pay my dues to a US Catsailing or the like...

"us" as in multihull sailors, whether it be by 2 or 3 hulls!!

"Rhody" Thank you for taking the time and effort to represent us at the US SAILING meeting. I agree with your comments on this post. As a past Olympic Medalist, you have first hand knowledge of what it takes to train and compete in the Olympics.

As to what US SAILING can do for us, it is really up to us to volunteer and take part. The US SAILING Multihull Council and Committee meetings are open to all sailors. Come to the meetings, speak up, and be part of the process. When US SAILING dropped the "Fast and Fun" program, we were very disapointed, but were able to build our own program locally to carry on this free outreach sailing program. The US Youth Multihull Championship is a good example of what US SAILING is doing for youth development. This year, the openings were filled long before the event. In past years if was difficult to find Youth to enter. Three of the twenty teams are in the final training at Sail Sand Point, in Seattle.

"Timbo" next time you have a layover in Seattle, give me a call, or send me a PM. At Sail Sand Point, we are not a "boat rental" but have many volunteers that keep our cats in the Access/Storage area that would be glad to get you out on Lake Washington.

Caleb Tarleton

Somehow, I think the following has some connection with the long-range program of the US Sailing's Olympic Sailing Committee.



When the announcement was first made about this new Elite Youth Development Program, Dean Brenner, chairman of the US Sailing OSC said, "We strive to support our athletes who will compete in the Olympic Games, not only in 2008, but also in 2012, 2016 and beyond. We are focusing on elite youth development, and initially on singlehanded classes. Over time, our intention is to broaden this program to include other Olympic classes."

Sounds like a great program, and I guess we can only hope that it might someday include multihulls.

Actually, it is going to take more than "hope." It is going to take a lot of effort on the part of the multihull community to create an "Olympic path" that will be recognized by US Sailing, since it obviously is not happening through the yacht clubs.

Paid for by Vanguard

You are right. Thanks for saying it.

However, we would probably not complain if Hobie and/or Performance were paying for training programs for catamaran sailors.

Follow the money.
-Deep Throat

Thanks for the invitation Caleb. I now fly international only, so I won't be laying over in Seattle any more. It was one of my favorites though, I loved to walk down to Lake Washington and look at sail boats and sea planes all day!

I have been very fortunate being able to sail at most of my international layovers, always with someone I met through this forum, so I would like to thank Mary and Rick, because without them keeping the whole thing alive, it would be a very sad state of affairs for cat sailing here in the states!

I've been lucky to sail with Dermot and Stephen in Dublin, Wouter in Holland, Andi in Switzerland, and Erez and Izzy in Tel Aviv. All of these guys have been fantastic hosts and very generous with their time and boats.

I would highly recommend that if you are traveling out of the states, (or even in the states) you mention it on this forum. If there is a cat sailor near your destination he can get you pointed in the right direction to find some good cat sailing.

What has amazed me the most in my travels is that in all these international locations they have BETTER cat racing organization than we have here. They have clubs that are happy to include cats rather than treating them like second class citezens, or banning them all together, like most clubs do here.

Sailling in general is much more accepted as a passtime in most other countries. I have long wondered why that is. My personal theory is that a lot of it has to do with our cheap gas (50% of what the rest of the world pays) so our recreational boaters are much more likely to buy a power boat or jet ski.

The other reason I think sailing is more popular in other countries; sailing takes a whole lot more work, thought and intelligence to master, than a jet ski. As many of you with children in public school here in the states know, the US has fallen to about #17 in the world ranking for education, science and math especialy are getting very poor marks. And our kids have access to at least 120 chanels of TV, so every day after school, they can plop down on the couch and watch 5-6 different cartoon channels, rather than go out doors and break a sweat.

So I think the two things together have led to sailing becoming a small niche sport for most Americans, no close clubs, no access, few programs to get them started, etc., where as most other countries see it as a great way for kids to learn about science, weather, water, nature, with no money spent on gas!

If you ever pick up a "Yachts and Yachting" magazine, (the Brit's version of Sailing World, published every two weeks, and it always has a few pages devoted to cats) you will see quickly how much more effort they put into sailing.

As for insurance, NAMSA offered the same benefits. No one ever took advantage of it, but it was there.

I do get a pretty rule book every year from US Sailing.
Rick

Does NAMSA still offer regatta insurance?? somehow, I hadn't even thought of NAMSA for this purpose.

Rick, I think we only get that pretty rule book once every 3 years, right? And don't forget the little quarterly Junior Sailing 6 page magazine.

But this whole "paid for by Vanguard" thing brings up another issue. Why doesn't Hobie and Perf. Cats do more in the way of advertising/funding/sponsoring some kind of youth -learn to sail- type programs like Vanguard does with their Opti's, Lasers and 420's? I know the standard (lame) answer is "There is no money in it so they won't do it..." but to me that is a "Chicken or the Egg" type argument. To create some demand for their products, they are going to have to provide some way for the kids to get on board a cat, at the entry level, just like the Opti. Then once they have learned the basics, they can progress to a youth cat, then an F18.

Seems pretty simple but that will require getting the stodgey old Yacht Clubs to buy some Waves, or Nacra 450's, get some cat instructors, get some youth cats and some F18's, just like they do with their dinghy programs right now. If you don't put the product out there, nobody will want to buy it, how could they if they have never been exposed to it in the first place?

And where is US Sailing in all this? They write the rules and train instructors but then don't offer any physical locations to rent or sail. You must first join the club at some location and then -maybe- you can use one of the club boats, but only if you are enrolled in their lesson program.

I would like to see a nation wide, open to public (no yacht club membership required), sailing program where on any given weekend, a mom, dad and family can show up, get a boat, get an instructor if they need one, and get out on the water, without all the time, money and snooty b.s. involved with joining a "yacht club".

You can do this today with a jet ski, a power boat, even an airplane if you have the qualifications, but not a small sailboat. And the manufacturers wonder why they aren't selling more boats??

Timbo, you have described our program in Seattle, www.sailsandpoint.org.
Caleb

Caleb, I just looked at your web site, that looks like exactly what I'm talking about! Now my question is, why do we not have clubs like this nation wide? I wish I had known about this when I was spending a lot of time in Seattle, riding the bus up to Dusty Strings and the Red Door pub! Boston has a similar comunity sailing center that I have been able to rent from, but most big cities don't, unfortunately. In England, they have RYA centers like this all over the place. I used to walk from Brighton to Hove to rent there and race with them. Great fun. But when I have gone to the US Sailing centers in Martin County (Stuart, Florida) and Sarasota, and Miami, they just look at you like you have two heads if you ask to rent a boat!

It would be nice if US Sailing were to offer a certification program where you take a test, writen and on the water, in one hour or so, then give you a certification card which would allow you to rent at any US Sailing facility nation wide, if they have boats available.

Here's an idea, if you enroll in a US Sailing course they give you the first year of membership free, with half price rentals for the first year.

Tim, the Boston Sailing Center was one of the models our Founder, Jonathan Edwards had in mind when he established Sail Sand Point. More is in the website about the History. Since joining the Board at SSP in 2000, it has been a slow but steady program to add Multihulls, first in storage, and now directly in the programs.

The US SAILING Training Center is an idea we have tried to promote at US SAILING. So far it has not gained traction. We do offer all levels US SAILING instruction training here. Our Executive Director is the Regional Director for Training. All of our classes are based on US SAILING programs, with Level 1 Instructors. Example, Chris Fuller,and Callie Wade, one of our teams that will be at the US Youth Mulithull Championship in CA later this month are both Level 1 Instructors.

I agree, US SAILING needs to support and promote Community Sailing Programs. There is a Community Sailing Council and Multihull Council in US SAILING they just do not get enough support. More people need to step forward and volunteer to take part in their meetings and programs. I have been attending their meetings for six years, and serve on the Multihull Council. All sailors are welcome to attend.

Caleb

All it takes is people with the idea and people to volunteer. It won't happen by just wishing it to be so. This is not a criticism or a critique - just pointing out something that is so often overlooked.

OK, Since I'm a US Sailing member now and for nearly 30 years, and I used to instruct way back when, I offer to certify any cat sailor who comes to Sebring, for free! I will even give you a Certification card and everything. Now take that card to any US Sailing center and see what it gets you.

They already HAVE the boats, they HAVE the instructors, but they don't want you there, unless you are going to sign up for a week of lessons or more. But if you can find a motel with sailboats, you can be on the water in 15 minutes, with no instruction at all.

Or you can go to the Sand Point sailing center, or the Boston community sailing center, and not be a member of anything, and pay no dues to US Sailing, take a quick test to prove you know what you are doing and they will gladly rent you a boat. It's not rocket surgery. How do they expect to grow the sport when they tell people who already know how to sail, No, we don't rent by the day. The biggest road block to sailing is access. US Sailing has the access. How about they put some people out on all those boats sitting there collecting bird poop?

If a single cent of my dues money is being spent to support the many US Sailing Centers, why can't I rent their boats?

To get back on topic, shouldn't US Sailing support all forms of sailing in which it has members who pay dues? That would include board sailors as well as cat sailors.

Has everyone officially registered their complaint at this site: http://www.usmultihull.org/

Yes I did.

Doug Snell

I think that this one statement about states it all. We will only support those disciplines in which we can medal and nothing else. I know that the point of going to the games is to win events and medals. I think that this view is very shortsighted and lacking of any true integrety. Do we look at all of the disciplines in the Olympics and only show support for those in which we can medal and reccommend the removal of all those in which we find it difficult to compete in? As far as sailing medals, last time I looked the US consistently medals in the Tornado class. Not always gold, but medals nonetheless.

I do not know John Lovell but do know Lars, not well, but through the A-Class. It seems to me from our conversations that he walked away from the Olympics due to the extreme cost of campaigning. I know that there were some personal considerations involved as well, but cost still was an overiding factor. Watching Lars race at the A-Class mid-winters and pre-worlds was nothing short of amazing. It is difficult to understand the whole allocation of grants to sailors. It seems that we will only support one at a time, especially in the Tornado class and then it is at a bare minimum only. There is a great interview with John and Charlie on the Tornado website tornado.org from around the time of the worlds as well as one with Darren & Glenn. Both these interviews spell out quite a bit of the difficulties involved with campaining a boat at the Olympic level, especially in dealing with the overwhelming financial and fundraising issues. If there were greater availability to grants, sponsership and other sources to defer the costs, you might have a Lars Guck and others competing at the Olympic level instead of having a one boat show of it. How do classes such as the Star class have 4-6 truly competitive boats for the trials and the Tornado class has only one, possibly two contenders? Support and development needs to begin earlier then it now does and funding needs to be looked at in a different manner than it currently is. Whether funding is setup through US Sailing, OSC, boat sponsership and other means does not matter right now because it just does not work. I do not have an answer to this issue, but know that it needs addressing.

Timbo,

As you are familar with equestrian events, am I correct in assuming that equestrian and sailing are some of the few Olympic events that the competitor uses their own equipment. If so does, the equestrian community have similar issues with their organizing body?

Jack

I'm not sure how they do the Olypic level Equestian events, I know it takes boat loads of money to compete in the Equestrian events though. They do use their own horses, and they have to fly them there, vet check them, board them, etc. If you think boats are expensive, try horses!

Most of the Olympic level riders are independantly wealthy or from a family of great wealth, and most are in their mid 30's-50's, as it takes a lifetime to aquire the skill (and money and horse) to compete at that level. In that regard it is a lot like sailboat racing, except the boat isn't going to kick you in the head and kill you...

I don't know how they pick which of the many different Equestrian events they are going to use in the Olympics. I think they do Dressage, Stadium jumping and open course jumping, but I'm not sure.

My kids are nowhere near that level and on my limited income, they never will be! But they do like to watch it on TV. I've told them if they want to ride in the Olympics, they really need to mary well.

Quoted from ISAF's Strategic Plan dated November 2005:

"Olympic equipment will be selected to be accessible, popular, respected, affordable and
to offer maximum value on investment."

My daughter also rides horses (the boat never gets ready, etc.)

I think we can should not compare those situations. Choosing the type of equestrian event is equivalent to choose fleet racing, match racing, course types and the like. We are talking about changing boat types. They never change the type of equipment in the equestrian events - it is always a horse!

I wonder if the US equestrian authority will ever suggest to ride donkeys, camels or zebras... <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Bobsled is another sport that comes to mind that competitors use their own equipment.

Other forms of equipment: Skis, skates, Hockey sticks, ..

Luis You obviously haven't heard about our Zebra program.

The USA has cloned zebra's that can jump 3 meters! (Inspired by the movie Stripes no less). These animals are propriatary and cannot be exported to countries like Brazil because of your ban on our GM grains!

Not really. Obviously the zebra's stripes are also genetically modified: red and blue...

Brazil only has GM "burros" (donkeys). They don't compete 'cause they're all in politics. ("burro" stands for both "donkey" and "stupid").

Luiz

PS - Are you sure about this ban on US GM grains in Brazil? I know for sure that there is none in Paraguay. Monsanto sells truckloads of GM seeds both in Brazil and in Paraguay.

Correct. But it is cheaper and easier to obtain Olympic level equipment for those sports. A competitive horse suitable for the Olympics would certainly cost more than USD 150.000. A Star is worth less, but is still very expensive. How much is a bobsled worth? Forget about the hockey stick...

The other factor is: what is the edge you get from the equipment? According to the expert from the Chilean Olympic team the horse weights about 60% and the rider about 40%. I guess in sailing the boat weights about 40% and skill 60%. What are the figures in those other sports?

I think at Olympic level sailing, the boat is worth 0% compared to all the other boats, which all have to be measured and weighed in, and the sails, so the boats are all very nearly the same. So the value of the boat (relative to all the other boats) should be 0, or equal.

The Horses on the other hand, being live animals, cannot possibly be made all the same, and THAT is why a good horse can make an average rider look very good, and that's why the horse will cost at least $150,000.

I think it was Paul Cayard who after he last campaigned a Star for the Olympics, then said it cost him at least $100,000, and that was just the money to go to regattas, not the cost of the boat, which I hear for a new Star is about $40,000. That makes a $25,000 Tornado look cheap!

Absolutely. Thanks for correcting my reasoning.

Still, when ISAF changes the equipment Olympic hopefuls change one class for another, which is very expensive, both in terms of money and in terms of trainment time.

I guess no sport changes the equipment so frequently. On the other hand, in no other sport the equipment has evolved so fast - besides the GM zebras, of course!

The fast evolution of equipment is one of the reasons why ISAF periodically introduces changes, usually adding fast, modern classes to the games, but not always. Under the rationale of favoring fast, modern classes, exclusion of the Tornado is unliquely.

Consider, though, that the current trend in ISAF is to favor TV friendly, popular, visually atractive and faster equipment. The T is the fastest equipment, but it is not exactly popular. It equals the other classes in the remaining criteria.

Thinking ahead, it would be a good idea for any catamaran sailors in the Arizona area to be at the US Sailing AGM in October. This issue of Olympic equipment gets decided at ISAF in November and we could be going through this same deal all over again.

Site of the Annual Meeting
October 24th-28th, 2007
Embassy Suites, Phoenix - Scottsdale
4415 East Paradise Village Parkway S.
Phoenix, AZ 85032

http://www.ussailing.org/events/meet07fall/fall2007.htm

It's a side issue in many ways, but the claim that multihulls represent "25% of racing worldwide" seems utterly wrong. As far as I can figure from National titles attendance in three of the major sailing nations (including strong cat countries) cats make up about 5-10% of boats attending Nationals.

Add in all the big boats that race competitively (PHRF, IRC, Key West, Bermuda, Fastnet, Spi Ouest) and multi sailiing starts to look pretty small. That doesn't mean the T should get dumped from the Games, but it does seem that it can't claim that it HAS to be there if the Games are to be representative of the sport.

Just let me say again, the T should be in the Games, but to support the T's claim by saying there's more cat sailors than there seems to be, may not work that well.

I don't think 25 percent is a credible figure, but it is very hard to get good numbers because you never know whether people are talking about numbers of boats actively racing or boats sailing or boats manufactured.

Even Sailing World Magazine's periodic surveys are very unreliable, because they ask classes to report how many class members they have. Some classes report exactly that, but some report how many boats have been manufactured. So the findings are very skewed, both for monohulls and multihulls.

I remember one such survey several years ago when the Hobie Class reported its current membership at about 12,000. I knew this was wrong, because at that time the NAHCA membership was closer to 1,200. The only thing I could figure was that they submitted what they claimed as the last known circulation of the Hobie Hotline.

It did make the multihulls look good, though, because we got a big slice of the graphic pie that Sailing World included with their survey results. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Based on the number of ISAF classes it breaks down like this.
Dinghys: 46.9%
Keelboats: 29.7%
Catamarans: 14.1%
Boards: 9.4%

Intersting, Rhody, but of course the number of craft built in each ISAF class varies enormously and the big numbers belong to the boards and the dinghies.

It looks like all the International cat classes combined sell about 800 boats each year. The F18 is the top seller and claims 300 boats built each year for the last five years.

In comparison, both the Opti (4040 yr/18,713 last 5) and Laser (3,151 and 15,048) outnumber the F18 construction 10 to 1. Even the "boring old" Int 420 alone sells 435 boats per year (and that's not counting the Club 420).

In the boards, the RSX, FW, Techno and Raceboard each claim 1,556-1,000 boards each year. There's many more Funboards built and many are used for competition, but no numbers are given.

Of course, in terms of boats built the yacht classes drop well back (some International classes haven't built a single boat some years). Then again, they have 2-10 crew and tend to last a long while.

When just one dinghy class (Lasers*) outsells all the International cat classes COMBINED by a factor of 4 to 1, and the LEAST popular board easily outsells the MOST popular cat**, the claim that "25% of all competition is in multis" looks a bit odd. It's only a minor point, but on the first page of this thread there's several allegations that the "mono establishment" suffers from ignorance and arrogance - maybe it's not all on one side. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />


* Leaving the Opti out of the discussion.

** "popular" as in fastest-selling

PS Mary good point about class membership being an unreliable figure. One class manufacturer claims 360 members, but only 5 boats turned up to the nationals the last 2 years. That means their claim of 360 members backfires and they have to take the "world's most apathetic class" award <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

That sounds more realistic. But what are those percentage figures based on? What do they relate to:

Memberships in the class associations of ISAF boats?
Known numbers of active racers?
Numbers of boats manufactured to date in those classes?

Mary,

I like to put it this way: excluding multihulls from the Olympics would be like excluding the fastest formulae from car races. Who would exclude Formula One or Formula Indy from a hipotetic Olympic Car Competition? The numbers favour Golfs, Beetles, whatever, but are numbers a valid criteria for Olympic equipment?

Numbers are being considered only because sailing needs more media atention and ISAF wants to be "politically correct".

What boats are our F1 or Indy equivalent?
IACC, ORMA Open 60 tris, VOR 70, Open 60 monos, Megayachts?

The reason why criterias are never clear in the choice of equipment is that a lot (most?) high quality/professional racing in sailing is way too expensive to enter the Olympic games. The current sailing equipment are mere substitutes. Some are cool, some are fast, some are popular, but none is equivalent to a "F1" or "Indy".

I say: take all classes out and race only ORMA open 60 tris in the Olympics.

I only wish it were that logical.

I'm referring to ISAF. The MNAs like US sailing can use whatever criteria they want, although they usually follow ISAF's policy trend - at least when they want their proposals/submissions aproved.