Tornado ruled out by ISAF

Sadly there will not be any cat at the 2012 Olympic Games!

http://www.sailing.org/21257.php?PHPSESSID=e6cf5e7f6953efa9cbce5e99d282ab98

I was just about to post the same thing.

Outragous IMO.

Ref: http://tornado.org/html/news_article.asp?ArticleID=272

Seems like GBR and RYA(?) did an multihull effort after all. Any way to find out who voted and where their votes went?

I know nothing about windsurfing, but it seems odd that there would be mens and womans windsurfing, but no multihulls. Could have at least had one open class in each.

The "open multihull" (Tornado) lost to the men keelboats (Star) by two votes in the ISAF Council meeting.
The results of the ballot were the following:

Men's event (first six selected)
One person dinghy – Men (36 votes)
Windsurfer – Men (35 votes)
Two person dinghy – Men (34 votes)
Two person dinghy high performance – Men (34 votes)
One person dinghy heavy – Men (33 votes)
Keelboat – Men (23 votes)
Multihull – Men or Open (21 votes)

Women's events (first four selected)
One person dinghy – Women (35 votes)
Windsurfer – Women (34 votes)
Two person dinghy – Women (31 votes)
Keelboat match racing – Women (21 votes)
Two person dinghy high performance – Women (20 votes)
Multihull – Women (3 votes)

Screw the Olympics! Let's continue without them.

The A cats seem to be doing quite well on their on.

Of course catsailing will continue, but our flagship just went under. With it went lots of media coverage and money. We no longer have an olympic class to push development and we are no longer represented in the "olympic classes" regattas.

What media coverage?? Again, the A cats are doing just fine without the Olympics.

Maybe this is a good opportunity to push a multihull class in the summer X-Games! I bet a lot more kids would watch that than the Olympics.

Flying a hull under spinnaker has to get someone's attention! Do it BK! Who would you contact?

Ugh...

You realize that most of the top competitors developed their game chasing that Olympic Carrot.

The A Class is the WORST example of what No Olympics will mean.

I agree in full with you.
The decision is detrimental to all catamaran classes, even if some are likely to suffer more the others.
The most damaged is for sure the Tornado class:
the production of new Tornados is very likely to stop abruptly.
It is worth to be noted that ISAF President is the Swedish Goran Petersson and the only Tornado builder is the Swedish Marstrom AB.
I believe that this morning Goran Marstrom, presently in Islamorada for the A cat Worlds, is not very happy with the other Goran.
The quotations of used Tornado are likely to drop abruptly as well.
Another class to be hit by the decision is the Formula 18 class, which will lose the young crews aspiring to the Olympic Games.

I want to take this opportunity to urge all of you in your respective areas to try to include one major "monohull" regatta in your area schedule for 2008. We sometimes do one where we share a course in Columbia and wrapped it up last weekend. Yes, the racing and waiting and traffic is a PIA, but the comments and inquiries we got from the Opti sailors to the Melges 17 sailors, to the Jboats, et all was like they have never realized that catamarans (F18's N20, etc) were high-tech machines. I'm pushing to get us to go to two events. This can help us gain exposure, acceptance, and potentially recruit new blood.

All,

please go to Y+Y and vote in this poll:

http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3570

Well, we didn't REALLY believe that the situation was hopeful, right ?

I believed we had a chance to continue the Tornado but never never a big chance.

The mono world never really wanted any other design next to their collection of dinghies.

The fact that certain National organisations were "forgetting" about the Tornado in their ballots was the warning signal that something serious was going on.

So now this fight have resulted in a loss we, as cat sailors, are free to decide what to do next.

This seems like a good time to revisit the discussion about building our own power structure and getting a serious youth track going.

Wouter

Mark! Are you on crac?

"You realize that most of the top competitors developed their game chasing that Olympic Carrot."

Nonsense! Olympians have always been an elite group, hence, few in number.

Not so fast Pete,

All the big names in catsailing are pretty much Tornado sailors who can justify their full time involvement with cat sailing through their Olympic campaigns.

For example Glenn Ashby sails Tigers for a living in addition to having a sailmakers shop. He sails the A-cat because that gives him the most pleasure (and to promo his own Geltech boat) not because there is some A-cat builder paying for his expenses as Hobie is doing for his F18 campaign.

Lets face it, winning the A-cat worlds doesn't bring in a load of cash. It is a honour thing that is funded by other activities.

The true reason for their sailing is the Olympic slot.

Now, cat sailing will indeed survive, but things will change.

Wouter

Hmm, think we were just insulted... <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

But seriously, I agree with Jake. The Opti's sailed off the beach with us and we had several kids come over and ask lots of questions both days. "What is it?", "Is it fast?" "Is it safer?" "Where is the centerboard?" Since these kids are already into sailing, this was a great intro to cats for them. Maybe next time we should have some test rides and show them the thrill of speed! I will gladly volunteer since we have the forward tramp.

Ok! Point taken.

Quietly and calmly:

big names - there can't be many or they wouldn't be considered "big".

A-cat worlds doesn't bring in a load of cash. - THANK GOD! Most of the hundred are doing it because they want too. As such they represent a client base to sell to!

I just sailed (notice I didn't use the word "compete") in the Area D Qualifier. By any estimation, I got my butt handed to me. I don't care. It was a pleasure to be around top-notch sailors. If the Area D was pre-Olympic, I wouldn't have been allowed on the course.

"Now, cat sailing will indeed survive, but things will change."

We need to make a special effort to expand the Alter Cup format to include the Tornados. And make it a World-wide event. If we do that, the change will be much better.

Pete,

we (catsailors) just lost our R&D department, all executive accounts and the whole PR budget to put it into business terms.
Olympic sailing get coverage in media, and the Tornado enjoy some part of it. You might not believe it, but there really is some. We loose that from 2008, after what probably will not be a good event for the Tornado.

(Olympic )Sailing as a whole just lost one of it's most interesting classes. That is really ironic becouse ISAF have been warned by the IOC that sailing has to become more "media friendly". Matchracing might be a step in the right direction, but removing multihulls is a giant leap in the wrong direction.

We just sold our Tornado, but it will be very interesting to watch the Tornado class after 2008. It can either fizzle and die, or start doing stuff for regular sailors not just the olympians.

Mark,

I'm curious what you mean by the A class being the worst example of what no olympics mean. Please elaborate.

I think the best case scenario would be the T class ending up like the A class. Worst case is extinction and a rise to the F18 class. Maybe this will open the door for a new 20 foot class to emerge (perhaps Volvo will want to kick start things a bit). Certainly will be an strange future ahead...

T

Did you really just do that? <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Oh, Hey Mark. Yeah, I know I owe you a tele call.

I think you guys are overreacting. Of the 100 Acat sailors in Fl, how many are contendor for Olympic medals? Charlie? Glenn and Mitch? Goran Marstrom is probably pissed, but he'll keep building stuff for the aerospace industry and making Acats, he's not going out of business.

The biggest R&D we've seen this year was from the CClass with foiling wing cats and Ben building a wing for his Acat.

Yes, I agree it sucks, but its not the end of the world as we know it. The sky isnt falling and catsailing isnt going disappear.

Bill

I think you see the R&D thing from the wrong angle Bill. The Tornado class has been the R&D department for catsailing for everyday use. The C class has become so specialized that it's like comparing NASA to what GM has got going. The C class do fantastic stuff, and Ben might have taken a step towards bringing the technology into everyday use, but I still think the development done in the Tornado class has been more important.

This is not the end of catsailing for sure, but it is changing as we dont have olympic status anymore. A lot of money came trough the olympic status.

I disagree that the R&D is going away. I do agree that we've lost a prestigious position in the sailing community.

F18s, Acats, F16...all these open classes continue to see a pretty dramatic amount of development. I do believe that many F18 developments found their way into the Tornado class.

this makes interesting reading.

Who is Charlie Cook ?

The fate of the Tornado Class.... Doomed in North America

In North America, they have only held three regattas a year for the past several years.

the Miami OCR's.... the North Americans, the week before the OCR's and one other event, The US Nationals, usually in the Fall. (Cork has been dead for years)

So.... No Olympics... means. no invite to the OCRs... which means the RC and venue for the North Americans is also gone.

There is no club in the USA that has more then a single active Tornado in residence so... You have no club organization to step up and run OD events to keep the class alive. Not to mention the distances, time and cost in going to a 6 boat regatta.

As a two man cat... the Tornado has no equal... it's not even close! The refinements in the boat allow the crew teamwork and techinical skill to determine the outcome. Nothing will ever come close again without the stamp of the 5 ring circus. Sigh.... <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

So... who exactly is the NATA class president who will be making these future events happen. He /She will be sainted if they can pull this one out of the grave. But with at most 15 to 20 boats in North America and 6 to 10 competitors.... You are hard pressed to see how you could keep a viable racing schedule going. Especially when the young teams, (Merick, Wierda, Jason) just had the carrot removed from the game and the senior teams are approaching retirment, (Lovel, Daniel, Chu).

As a beach boat.... You have think twice as well... Righting a Tornado without assistance is not trivial. 50% of the time... you might need a tow boat... The Tornado will join the other members of the dead boat society.

I think the nail is in the coffin... the OD Tornado activity is over after China!

F18 developments???

Yeah... Like which one? ... I can't think of a single developement. I think the Tornado class has developed and led EVERY improvement you see in the production spin boats. You have 50 teams all trying to come up with a better way of doing it... AND... they are working 24/7 at it... What company would not go to school on the Tornado fleet. Hell... they just buy the talent.

The A class rules allows hull and mast and sail changes... but the hard wing sail may obsolete the entire fleet unless rule changes are put in.

In fact the F18 wants to LIMIT development. ... the F18 mantra is to also a SMALL amount of developement to keep more boats in the game.

Yeah, I hear you Rolf, and you have a point... My spin on my HT is based on the Tornado spin shape, and other classes (F16, F18) probably have seen the same influence on sails from the Tornado.

But on the other hand, my Acat sail maker and my Acat mast maker dont have any involvement in T's and the guy who designed my hulls doesnt either.

At to take that point a bit farther, nobody adopted the Marstrom carbon snuffer tubes that the T guys use. Johnstone put one on his HT and one other guy bought one but thats it. No F16's or F18's use any of the snails or Carbon tube snuffers.

So how much more sail R&D could we expect out of the T's?

The T's still used centerboards, so they didnt offer any impact on gybing boards, Tfoil rudders or other foil ideas that might translate.

Did the Velocitek, or the new single strand kevlar rigging come from the T's? Other classes has carbon masts before the T's.

Except for the snuffer tubes, all good examples. You could also have mentioned the square tops, which I think were developed out of class (remember the Tornado Sport effort Mitch and Herbie put together?). However I still think we loose big time on not having the olympians develop stuff for us. There will still be development, as both you and Jake have pointed out, but I think we will not see the same investment of time and money.


Mark, I also think the Tornado is dead as a dodo for the next years in the US and other places. My hope is that the class rules now will evolve a bit and we will see the class going in a different direction. You know what I am talking about..

From Scuttlebutt 11/05/2005, an editorial by Charley. My attention was arowsed by the first line of the second paragraph, and the very last sentence.

GUEST EDITORIAL -- Charlie Cook
The Olympic format agreed upon last week was the result of a careful
balancing of the interests of all stakeholders: sailors, sponsors, media
and event organizers. Olympic aspirants spend years and countless sums
training for and competing in the Olympics. They put their lives on hold.
They want to compete in a fair event, with the best sailors winning the
Gold. They don't want a format that amounts to nothing more than a lottery.
Corporate sponsorship has become the lifeblood of Olympic campaigns. Media
exposure is the currency of those sponsors. The more live TV coverage and
other opportunities for exposure the better - for all sailors.

Literally billions of dollars are paid to the IOC for the right to cover
the Olympics. The IOC have made clear that sports must adapt to this
reality or be eliminated from the Olympics. This is an issue at all levels
of the sport. Try explaining to an Editor who sends a reporter and
photographer to an event why the winner isn't event sailing on the last
day. The organizers of Grade 1 and World and Continental Championships of
Olympic classes are also stakeholders. Whatever format was decided upon for
the Olympics is likely to trickle down to other events. Clubs want a format
that's inclusive, and easily managed.

Some of the more radical proposals included an elimination series leading
to a three race winner-takes-all final series for four boats. That would
certainly have made for interesting live TV coverage on the final day of
each event. But, especially given conditions expected in Qingdao, it would
have reduced the competition to a lottery. In the end, the sport would have
been changed, in many ways for the worse.

The format settled upon represented a compromise in the best sense of the
word. The new format addresses the interests of all stakeholders. The
potential for a lottery is greatly reduced; the best sailors will win the
medals. A larger number of sailors will gain exposure through live TV
coverage. The final race will be meaningful and interesting to the media.
Finally, this is a format that organizers of Grade 1 events and class
championships can implement.

Early returns have been overwhelmingly positive. The IOC are reported to be
pleased with the format. The mainstream media think it's a good approach.
Most importantly, it didn't "change the game" for the most important
stakeholder - sailors around the World. -- Charley Cook, ISAF Council
Member (Group P - USA and CAN)

Tornado News
Complete News Listings and Archives

ISAF Delares Itself To Be Monohulls Only - No Multihulls in 2012
internet - Friday, November 09, 2007
By mpg

The ISAF Council meeting began with a discussion of the recommended Events Committee slate which included Multihull Open (Event). However, it did not include a Keelboat event for either Men or Women.
Primarily because of this, the Events Committee slate of events narrowly missed receiving a majority: the vote was 16 In Favor, 19 Against, 1 Abstain

The Council then started over again, and voted for 6 Events for Men/Open & 4 Events for Women.
6 & 4 passed easily: the vote was 29 In Favor, 7 Against, 0 Abstain

The Council then voted on the Events that they wanted. Both Keelboats were voted in. The Multihull and one of the 2 person Womens dinghies were voted out.

Notes on the Council Discussion: Chris Atkins (GBR) was very strongly in favor of the Events Committee slate (which included a Multihull(Open) Event
Eric Tulla (PUR) was strongly in favor of the lasers, simple dinghies, and multihulls that are widely used by youth in his region.

Charlie Cook (USA) was strongly in favor of the Keelboats and a proponent of dropping the multihull.
John Cribbin (IRL) was strongly in favor of the Keelboats and strongly opposed to any 'Open' event.

Theresa Lara (VEN) strong support for Chris Atkins’ position
Spain, France, & Russia also supported multihulls. France and Russia voted against the Events Committee slate because they wanted keelboats to be added.

So plaese don't blame the RYA, they may not have helped!!!, BUT on this one Im afraid the problem may lie closer to your home than mine. Im afraid the expression a leopard never changes its spots comes to mind!!!!!!!

Maybe the USA should look who represents them at ISAF?

Well..
Since ISAF has made this decision.. Then Cat classes do not need to hold to ISAF protocols.. Start a ICAF..
The new ICAF can declare its own membership and rules..

Decide which classes are International National and state events..

I can't help but think too much emphasis is being placed on the Olympics.
If it is believed that the loss of catamarans in the Olympics will greatly hurt the sport, then it must be believed that the Olympics greatly helped the sport, since something cannot greatly hurt if it didn't greatly help. But look at how cat sailing has diminished since the late 80's early 90's...all during which catamarans were represented. How much could it have possibly helped? How many cat sailors have you known that got into the sport because of the Olympics, or truly sail only because of their aspirations to make it there?

I also have trouble believing the loss of the Tornado will cause a decrease in the loss of R&D. It's reasonable to say that Tornados led the way in many developments, but problematic to say that without them we would not be where we are today. Correlation does not imply causation.

I do want to say though that I feel for all you Tornado sailors out there. You guys got screwed. Some people obviously had their head up their @$& when voting.

by the way, ICAF...would be sick.(FTW)

I totally AGREE. No reason to continue to send our money to ISAF. Their 'world sailing' events are crap anyway. Totally not organized for the sailors.

We need to organize similar to what the kayakers did and form our own international class that will represent us. Through proper lobbying we could even get our class back into the olympics in the future.

Mark,

Tornado class has limited development FOREVER! Open your eyes dude. Who had square top sails first? It wasn't the tornado. Carbon masts? not the tornado. Spinnakers? not the tornado. Snuffers? not the tornado. Gybing Daggerboards? definitely not the tornado...as a matter of fact, those boards are REALLY old school.

The tornado class has gone a long way with sail development and I think they have been cause for a good bit of refinement in spinnaker shape - but new sail shapes are coming out monthly on F18s and lately there is a big initiative for refinement of F18 foils. New light-weight (and low cost) aluminum wing masts are now available that rival carbon...many changes...many developments.

Don't mis-interpret me here - I love the tornado and hate the fact that it's now omitted from the olympics in '12. I've got some harsh words I would like to toss at our buddy "Charlie" too. But to say that catamaran development is dead now that 12 active boats in the US don't have a golden nugget is not being clear headed.

The F18 class was practically on its own with respect to developping the asymmetric spinnaker on cats for the first few years. The Tornado's were rather late to that game.

Wouter

Yes, lets diss ISAF and reclaim the name "World Championships" without paying protection money to ISAF !

I'm all for it.

Like Janet Jackson sang a while ago :"What have you done for me lately ?"

Wouter

Thats a tought. How many catamaran sailors compete in monohulls as well?

On the bright side maybe those T's will go down in price and I will be able to get one to compliment the F18HT.

Jon

Now that the decision is made, Andy "multikiller" Rice have something positive to say about the Tornado: http://sailjuiceblog.com/2007/11/09/retrograde/
Andy is quite a piece of work.

No doubt the price of tornados will go down. Fortunately we sold ours last month. Question is wether any new ones will be buildt (and sold).

If someone really want to do something, write the IOC a letter and let them know that ISAF is making a mistake. Tell them that the multihull is one of the things able to catch on with viewers:

International Olympic Committee
Château de Vidy
1007 Lausanne
Switzerland

How about another perspective on this thing. It may actually be a good thing because as we know the cost of Tornados is high which means ONLY the Olympic teams can afford it. (ok and a handful of others as well)

However, this opens the door to re-introducing a catamaran class at a future time based on a much less expensive boat, say Nacra20. (no F18 since choosing one of the existing F18 boats would favour one manufacturer and hurt the class).

You all do realise that now that the ISAF has dropped ALL/ANY multi hull from the Olympics, they (the ISAF) have at one stroke of the pen, removed every disincentive to ANY/ALL multihull class(s) from organising and calling their event “NATIONALS” and “WORLDS”?
The threat from the ISAF that any sailer who competed in a class event that called there events “”world titles/championships” without the approval of the ISAF could/would be ”blacklisted” and unable to compete in future ISAF sanctioned events (primarily the Olympics) does not carry any weight now? So what if you compete in a non sanctioned “world catamaran championship” event now? What will the ISAF do? Ban you from sailing in the Olympics on a Laser when you sail nothing but cats? BIG DEAL. I say stuff the ISAF; I like the idea of the ICAF (or anything similar that is totally independent of the ISAF).
Personally I feel that, indirectly they have done us (cat sailers) a big favour! They have now come out of the closet (so to speak) concerning their (mono mentality) dislike of multihulls, and actually, “put in writing” just how they do think of multihulls – they want our revenue, they want to control us, but they don’t want us to be seen or heard – It’s taken THEM over forty years to actually come out and say just how they feel about us, and now there can be no doubt as to just how much they DON”T like multihulls.
Well stuff them! We now have the opportunity to “do our own thing” so lets not let this golden opportunity slip through OUR fingers – lets be pro active, not reactive – WE WILL SURVIVE, in spite of any and all anti multihull sentiments

Maybe cat was eliminated from the event because Tornado was the wrong boat. Widely available, useable platform makes more sense, works for the Laser.

Darryn
1782

I feel like this is the beginning of a revolution in catamaran sailing. It's exciting

Wow!
Does no one else get sick of the size the Olympics have grown to?

Tornaoes don't get that much sponsorship do they? I thought it more like the F18s and As??
Imagine As not being in the Olympics?????
Fastest one man, one sail multi is not but the Laser is....

It is a simple matter. Public will keep going to these biggish cats that are sailing the new races like Volvo 40. Sponsership will follow that more and more.

No one here turns a head when a Laser or such leaves the beach but they all check out a cat....they are way sexier.

Keep sailing, keep going faster than they do. Anyone can be in the Olympics these days...I think they are considdering darts as a demonstration sport.........throwing pins at a wall.

Catamaran sailors are outsiders, non-compliant and the sort of individuals who create the new. Man-up, let them away...then we don't have to abey all of the daft s**t they come up with anyway....Means the end of the T though.

Race and beat them on a daily basis....Nothing hurts like being a bunch of slow-moes.

Hey Dave

how many times have you driven to Florida for a National type event? It's not the boat... its the time and money to get there, race, train, afford coaching. etc etc.

Darrel
yes... but ISAF through your MNA... eg US Sailing can also sanction the Yacht Club that lets you... the banned racer compete at their event.
Now this may be a toothless threat... but some clubs would take a hard look at it and say... Not worth the hassle!
Also... the mono's own the most essential thing we need... WATER ACCESS.... those clubs will be our only access to the water in a few years..... either we join them, run them and take stewardship of them... or we melt away.

IMO,
The opportunity does exist for a savy sports marketing guy to make something useful happen though.

Perhaps, Herbie Derkson may have the means to pull a pro 20 foot circuit together.... Certainly... the EU has a strong 28 footer circuit, plus the decision 40 footer PLUS the Ishares extreme 40 circuit. Certainly... the aussie skiffs haven't needed the 5 ring circus to capture peoples imagination and marketing $$$.

Maybe the Olympic circuit will prove ... one circuit too many. The Olympic Ol Farts certainly haven't done a great job of marketing the sport now have they.

Heck... one of my local budies had stickers made up for his idea... NASCAT.... just keep turning left! He has had a plan for quite some time now... (its strictly a USA kind of thing though)

For sure.. Lots of people have had a lot of dreams torched by the powers that be. Had the Star class gone down ... an equal number of dreams would be crushed.

It certainly ushers in a new day... (NOW, I only wish we could be debating the old... Hobie 16 sloop versus... the Tornado with spin choice of equipement)

The future of the catamaran sport will be determined by our success in creating a development program for youth... Developing strong sailing clubs for the rank and file and creating and marketing an elite level of the sport which puts the benchmark out there for all to aspire to.

Mark

This is a damm shame. We have just lost our pinnacle - the almost unobtainable goal that many sailors dream about but few attain. Imagine if the soccer world cup was eliminated and the highest honour was to play in the local league. Olympics may not be attainable for most cat sailors but you certainly can cheer and support your country representatives, and feel pride when they do well. Not any more after China. I know how much it has meant to Glen Ashby to achieve the goal of representing his country in the upcoming olympics. He had a dream as a kid, a passion as an emerging champion and an obsession over the last three years to get there. He has won multiple genuine world championships in three of the top four cat classes (A's, F18's & Tornado) and they won't mean as much as if he were to win Olympic Gold. Sailing means little to most people in the world - an Olympic Gold is universally recognised as a symbol of ultimate achievement.
Anyway, as others have said, let's get on with running rings around the mono-slugs on the course!
BTW I first saw a flat top sail being used in the Australian A Class Nationals in 1988 at Lake Cootharaba Queensland. Barry Marmion used it after being involved in building C Class cat's in Victoria in the eighties. He said he got the idea after watching sailboard sails with big roaches and soft mast tips bending off in gusts and really accelerating. He thought more sail area up high would blade off in gusts but be available for lift in between gusts. We were all using flat tops by the next season.
Bugger the Olympics - I've gotta go sailing.

John Dowling
Geltek Flyer 11 AUS 917
Stingray 589

My dreams crushed in one fell swoop <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Time to pick ourselves up an move on, maybe this is a time to reflect on maybe the T was just the wrong cat, very very few girls in an open class is a clue. Maybe we should be looking at a class of cat that girls can take on the boys without growing a man arms, Imagine for a moment if the ( I don't believe I'm saying this ) F16 was taken to the level of refinement as the T. The Tornado is a beast of a boat, it's a maneater in a blow and the F18 is not far behind it, it's a weight thing (boat) you have two people trying to control 160kg and 180 kg boats. Drop the weight with a modern F class and allow the girls take on the boys, maybe take the idea of the F classes make a Olympic class, just my two cents.

I think having any F-class or any member of a current F-class in the games would be a bad idea. With all the resources olympians would put into making this boat or class faster, cost would skyrocket and probably kill off the class. This have been pointed out several times in this thread already. A strict one-design is the only choice possible, and if picked from an existing F-class it would very probably kill of that class. I abhor the idea of an F-16 in the games.
A female can sail a Tornado quite easily, she just need someone fit to run the sheets. I have even sailed a nationals on the T with my sister as crew pulling all strings. Going to the starting line was the first time she ever sailed anything. Was great fun and we did not do too bad. Just had to help her a bit with sheeting in the spi in marginal sub-trapeze conditions. The T is in my opinion a nice boat to sail mixed, the only thing we found bothersome was pulling the boat up the ramp after sailing.
Girls taking on the boys? What F-class have the right competitive weight range for that?

After digesting yesterdays "landmark" event, I think we should use this as an opportunity. I dont think we should go our own ways and ignore ISAF or even provoking "them" just to call an even a worlds. I think the only way to improve the situatiuon is to get involved in clubs, regions, national assocs. and finally ISAF. I know it's a bit different in the US, but looking at my own club and country I think this is the best way of improving the situation. If I really want to, I am pretty certain I can rise in the hierarchy quite fast as volunters are far between. Something to consider.

Fanning the fire a bit. Attached is a photo of the actual ballot which was used as an illustration on the ISAF website today.


As we can see, the multihull started out with an handicap. Knowing a bit about how meetings and votes works, having an extra vote if the multihull was selected and needing footnotes to explain is not good.

I still hold to what I said above tough. Smarter to work to change things from the inside than going on alone.

Prress release un UKCRA

News Release 10 November 2007

ISAF RULES CATAMARANS OUT OF OLYMPICS


Yesterday, the ISAF Council voted against any Multihull Event for the 2012 Olympic Games to be held in Britain. It decided that in future the only sailing boats to be raced should have one hull.

In doing so, it voted against the fastest boat at the Games, the only Event Open to both Men and Women, a permanent fixture for three decades, the recommendation of its own Events Committee, the strong endorsement of the host nation, and a sport invented in Britain.

The international catamaran community is shocked at the ISAF decision. “The bottom line right now is that Multihull sailing has no seat at the ISAF table. And, ISAF has voted that it is a monohull organization” according to Mike Grandfield (US), Chairman of the International Tornado Association, the Olympic Multihull.

“This is has nothing to do with objective assessment of Olympic selection criteria, but everything to do with sailing politics” says Nick Dewhirst, Chairman of UKCRA, the UK Catamaran Racing Association.

That is backed by David Brookes (AUS), the ISAF Representative for Hobie Cats: “It is disappointing as we did have the votes until the US Delegation did a “deal” with the 470 Class at the expense of the multihulls.”

While ISAF Chairman, Goran Petersson’s (SWE) statement says “The ten events chosen for the London Games provide a perfect showcase of the wide range and diversity of sailing”, Dewhirst believes this is patently not so.

He says that you can sail in the Games standing up, with a lump of metal to slow you down, in something slow or unpopular and with one, two or three men in a boat, but you can’t do what the sailing public wants, which is to sail the fastest and most exciting kind of boat with a member of the opposite sex, because it has two hulls. You can’t race in either the third most popular boat in the world (Hobie Cat) or the fastest one (Tornado), so if the Sailing Regatta is not about diversity, popularity or excitement, what does ISAF think it is about?

The International Olympic Committee has already sent ISAF a warning that sailing is at risk by cutting back the number of its Events. This decision increases the likelihood that the whole Sailing Regatta could be thrown out of the Games entirely, as some nations see it as white, rich and exclusive.

- ends -

Note to editors:
See also www.imsaf.org, www.isaf.org, and www.rya.org.uk
Media contacts:
Public Relations: Chris Laming on +44 (0) 7711 118196
Chairman: Nick Dewhirst on +44 (0) 1227 282625

Did I miss this? Is this true? What was the deal?

And who are these guys? http://www.imsaf.org/

Am I the only person who has never heard of them?

ISAF at it's best

http://rule69blog.com/

Rolf, I do think the Olympic situation should force us to re-evaluate the state of the sport (of catamaran sailing) and the best ways to nurture its future development. And I applaud your eagerness to get involved. Personally though, at the moment I am struggling to convince myself that activism within the monohull sailing world is going to be the best use of our energy.

It seems unlikely to me that a catamaran is going to be put back into the Olympics anytime soon regardless of how much effort is put into that objective, so I don't see that as a rationale for getting involved in the broader world of sailing administration. And if our goal is to grow sport, I'm not seeing a lot that the mono world is likely to do to help us. I'm not suggesting disconnecting from that world, but if we're looking for the best ways to use our time and energy to promote cat sailing, my feeling is that it's going to involve doing so directly, and doing it ourselves.

Just got this e-mail:

Dear sailor

I attach a copy of UKCRA's recent press release regarding ISAF's recent decision removing the multihull from the Olympics. The press release can also be found at www.asnr29.dsl.pipex.com/UKCRA_Press_Release_20071110.doc

UKCRA have also set up a new petition, this one being aimed at the IOC. If you disagree with ISAF's recent decision then please sign the petition which can be found at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/multihullinolympics/index.html

Please send the press release and petition address to all sailors and any media contact you may have.

Regards

Jon Worthington

Mark,

I am thinking "infiltration" of the current power structures becouse thats the fastest way to gain influence. Building something new will be expensive, hard and take much time. Getting into the current structure is relatively easy (lack of volunteers) and there is money, resources and power available for grabs. If "we" dont get involved and strike out on our own lots of doors can be closed even down to the club level. At least this is my current thinking with my experience from Europe and Scandinavia.


I hope Ian Walker is right, and the ISAF council rethinks, but I dont think it is likely. Nice blog btw.

from Ian Walker's blog:



Classic stuff !

The only experience/exposure to ISAF I have is through this website and no one ever seemed to like them anyway. Soooo . . . let them rot in hell. Sounds like a bunch of jackasses anyway.
Only problem is everyone realizing that and dumping the whole sport.

I have actively supported the Tornado class for years from behind the scenes. I no longer race Tornados, but A's instead. This arguement needs to about catamarans in the Olympics right now versus which is the most suitable class to represent this discipline in the games. Right now at the 2007 Ronstan A-Cat Worlds there are 6 former and 2-3 present Tornado Class Olympians or medalists competing. You have former Olympians and world champions from other classes also racing there. The reaction from those attendees at the 2007 Ronstan A-Cat Worlds has ranged from utter dis-belief, shock and dumb-foundedness through to outright anger that this happened. There are some in attendance that are also fine or at least ambivelant to this. So be it, if you feel strongly about this issue, then speak up and get involved with the fight and help campaign to reverse this decision. I am a member of USsailing, ISAF, USACA, ITA and UKCRA for the simple reason of either giving support or wanting to have a voice. Since the decision came down, I have written and sent almost 30 letters out, letters not emails, to every individual that I feel is either responsible in some way for how the voting went or has the ability to impact this decision. I have also read the UKCRA letter and want to know much more about the US delegation and the 470 class. Is this real or is it hearsay? I do not want to begin throwing darts at targets that are wrong, but I do want to know if there were underhanded politics at play here. I want the TRUTH about what happened here and after the ISAF recommendation that listed 5 men's events, 4 Women's events and finally multihull as the open class. I re-post below the ISAF Events Committee reccomendations.

THE OLYMPIC BOAT DEBATE AT THE ISAF
The events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition are the main focus of the day at the ISAF Annual Conference as the Event Committee meet in Estoril, Portugal.

The ISAF Events Committee is tasked with recommending to the ISAF Council the events to be used for the Olympic Sailing Competition. The events are selected five years ahead of the Olympic Games, so at this Annual Conference the decision is for the ten events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition. The ISAF Council will make the final decision on the ten events in their meeting from 8-10 November - the Events Committee are affectively the experts and their recommendation will help inform the Councils decision.

[quote] The ISAF Council, at the 2007 ISAF Mid-Year Meetings, had decided on a split of six male/open events and four female events, and drawn up a list from which the ten events could be selected Like the Womens Sailing Committee yesterday, the Events Committee broke the decision on the ten events down into several stages. First up was the decision on the discipline of the womens keelboat event (if selected): match or fleet racing. The Events Committee mirrored the decision of the Womens Sailing Committee and decided on match racing.

The voting process went through several rounds. First of all the multihull option was rejected from the womens slate. Next up the keelboat (match
racing) missed out. In the mens events, the voting process ended with a choice between the two person dinghy and the keelboat to fill the sixth event slot. The two person dinghy won the day, making the Events Committee recommendation to Council for the following events:

Windsurfer - men
One person dinghy - men
One person dinghy heavy - men
Two person dinghy high performance - men
Two person dinghy - men
Multihull - open
Windsurfer - women
One person dinghy - women
Two person dinghy - women
Two person dinghy high performance - women

The Events Committee will now pass their recommendation on to the ISAF Council, who will decide the events for the 2012 Olympic Sailing Competition in their meeting from 8-10 November[quote]

What angers me the most about this are two things. First are the back-room dealings and collusions that seem to have been perpertrated by our own US delegation and that is un-forgivable. Second is simply that fact that there are 6 dinghy events in the games. Count them 6!!! What is that all about? Please someone, tell me that this makes any sense, help me to understand why this is good for sailing in general, youth development or the proper representation of the sport. I am at the point that my anger at the organizing bodies is so great on this issue that I might begin sending out letters that actually show my anger.

I keep reading statements posted in many different places basically stating so what, who cares or what is the big deal. I think on a thread on Yachts and Yachting somebody posted a reverse look at the classes with every class being a multihull.
Like:
Men's Multihull-Single
Men's Multihull-Two Handed
Men's Multihull-Single-Heavy Weight
Men's Multihull-Two Handed High Performance
Men's Sailboard
Men's Keelboat or Double-handed Dinghy
Women's Multihull-Single
Women's Multihul-Two Handed
Womeen's Multihull-Match Racing
Women's Sailboard, Keelboat or Double-handed Dinghy


This might look great to all of us who have or once had Olympic asperations. Imagine, 6 classes that could possibly get you there! But it is just as wrong as the decision that took place yesterday. We do need an Olympic berth, not for catamarans to thrive, grow and prosper, but to give our youth a chance to believe that they have what it takes to compete and win at that level. Let them have a place to dream about an Olympic future. This is not for everyone, but it should not be closed to this segment of the sailing community. Sailboards were not on either the US or UK initial proposals, but there was great support for both classes and great for them. It is time again to continue this fight or campaign. John William's email reply is basically that maybe it is time to look to 2016 with a laser like focus. I am not ready to give up on 2012 and believe that if we loose representation there, it will be much more difficult, if not impossible to be re-instated 4 years down the road. rmemember that Stars were removed from these games and petitioned their way back in and will now be represented in London 2012 as well. Please do not give up! Please join the fight. Thank You!

The RYA has published how they voted on their website (see below). I wonder if US Sailing will have the balls to do the same.

-----------------------------------------------------

Olympic matters
This year the main issue facing the ISAF Council was the elimination of one Olympic Event, as the International Olympic Committee had ruled that the sport could only award 10 Medals, instead of the current 11, at the 2012 Games.

In respect of the Olympic Equipment selection, the RYA supported eight Events, as outlined in its submission 103-07, and in respect of the two in which the RYA was silent, RYA expressed preference to retain at least one of the Men’s “heavyweight” Events. Essentially, the RYA was seeking to broaden the appeal of the sport through the introduction of an appealing modern dinghy to attract more female sailors, while retaining the spread of Events to reflect the wider sport.

The RYA was influential in discussions and supported the Events Committee recommendation (the expert committee who recommends Events and Equipment to ISAF Council) which included the eight Events in the original RYA submission as well as the Multihull and Men’s One-Person Heavyweight Dinghy Event.

However, in a one-off ballot, ISAF Council voted to eliminate the Multihull and to change the Women’s keelboat from Fleet to Match Racing.

The RYA cast its votes as follows (RYA votes in CAPS):

Men (6 from 7 Events to be selected)

Women (4 from 6 Events to be selected)

WINDSURFER (selected)

WINDSURFER (selected)

ONE PERSON DINGHY (selected)

ONE PERSON DINGHY (selected)

TWO PERSON DINGHY (selected)

TWO PERSON DINGHY (selected)

TWO PERSON HIGH PERFORMANCE DINGHY (selected)

TWO PERSON DINGHY HIGH PERFORMANCE

MULTIHULL

Multihull

Keelboat (selected)

Keelboat Match Racing (selected)

ONE PERSON DINGHY HEAVY (selected)

The RYA believes that the recommendations of the Events Committee would have moved the sport forwards, and enabled more nations and sailors to take part in Olympic sailing. RYA is disappointed by this decision by the ISAF Council.

Now the focus will move onto the decisions at next year’s ISAF Conference in November, which will determine the Equipment to be used in each of the Events at the 2012 Games.

http://www.rya.org.uk/NewsAndEvents/newsroom/news/isafcouncil07_olympicevents.htm

I would really like to see the full image of this ballot. Hard to make out exactly what the stipulation is if a multihull is choosen with regards to the women's event.

The email address for Goran Petersson of the ISAF is mailto:goran.petersson@vinge.se

IF you contact him please don't make it abusive.

News Release 10 November 2007

ISAF RULES CATAMARANS OUT OF OLYMPICS


Yesterday, the ISAF Council voted against any Multihull Event for the 2012 Olympic Games to be held in Britain. It decided that in future the only sailing boats to be raced should have one hull.

In doing so, it voted against the fastest boat at the Games, the only Event Open to both Men and Women, a permanent fixture for three decades, the recommendation of its own Events Committee, the strong endorsement of the host nation, and a sport invented in Britain.

The international catamaran community is shocked at the ISAF decision. “The bottom line right now is that Multihull sailing has no seat at the ISAF table. And, ISAF has voted that it is a monohull organization” according to Mike Grandfield (US), Chairman of the International Tornado Association, the Olympic Multihull.

“This is has nothing to do with objective assessment of Olympic selection criteria, but everything to do with sailing politics” says Nick Dewhirst, Chairman of UKCRA, the UK Catamaran Racing Association.

That is backed by David Brookes (AUS), the ISAF Representative for Hobie Cats: “It is disappointing as we did have the votes until the US Delegation did a “deal” with the 470 Class at the expense of the multihulls.”

While ISAF Chairman, Goran Petersson’s (SWE) statement says “The ten events chosen for the London Games provide a perfect showcase of the wide range and diversity of sailing”, Dewhirst believes this is patently not so.

He says that you can sail in the Games standing up, with a lump of metal to slow you down, in something slow or unpopular and with one, two or three men in a boat, but you can’t do what the sailing public wants, which is to sail the fastest and most exciting kind of boat with a member of the opposite sex, because it has two hulls. You can’t race in either the third most popular boat in the world (Hobie Cat) or the fastest one (Tornado), so if the Sailing Regatta is not about diversity, popularity or excitement, what does ISAF think it is about?

The International Olympic Committee has already sent ISAF a warning that sailing is at risk by cutting back the number of its Events. This decision increases the likelihood that the whole Sailing Regatta could be thrown out of the Games entirely, as some nations see it as white, rich and exclusive.

- ends -

Note to editors:
See also www.imsaf.org, www.isaf.org, and www.rya.org.uk
Media contacts:
Public Relations: Chris Laming on +44 (0) 7711 118196
Chairman: Nick Dewhirst on +44 (0) 1227 282625


http://www.asnr29.dsl.pipex.com/UKCRA_Pres...se_20071110.doc

think again.. the laser is a SMOD ..
it caters for a small group of sized sailors..

The T was originally chosen because any home builder could turn one out.. It was stitch and glue ply..

not true.. you can go build a T.. they were originally stitch and glue ply boats..

Ok so no one wants to make their own.. Don't blame the makers or cost.. that is a furfy.. Im sure there are guys on this lsit who given time and desire could turn out a T.. Now go build a class legal laser.. See what happens ..


N20s arent spread widely enough to be a selectable class..

Yeah but ALL this bickering as to what class should be there is immaterial IF we cannot get a multihull back in the games. Once that is done THEN lets argue what class!!!!!

THEY DON'T WANT YOU!!!! To make them change their minds, you must get what they want. Recognition translates to dollars, that's what this is all about. Change the game. Make them want you.

See my other post.

Jake,

sorry but that small crop is all I could find. It is just of historical interest by now anyway.

Here are the members of the ISAF Council:
http://sailing.org/555.php

The council consist of an executive committee formed by the president and seven vice presidents (I have no clue as to how they are elected). Then there are 28 representatives of MNAs (national assocs) formed of groups of countries. Scandinavia, group G, had two representatives, one from Denmark and one from Sweden. Now, where do we find the minutes and the tally of which votes went where. Perhaps some of you guys in the US can contact your representatives and check out what the 470 deal was about?
This sure has turned into a PR nightmare for ISAF.

On the ISAF Selection...


* The RYA Statement:

(Editor: Kudos to the RYA for publicly stating their votes. I'd like to see other prominent MNAs follow suit.)

This year the main issue facing the ISAF Council was the elimination of one Olympic Event, as the International Olympic Committee had ruled that the sport could only award 10 Medals, instead of the current 11, at the 2012 Games.

In respect of the Olympic Equipment selection, the RYA supported eight Events, as outlined in its submission 103-07, and in respect of the two in which the RYA was silent, RYA expressed preference to retain at least one of the Men's "heavyweight" Events. Essentially, the RYA was seeking to broaden the appeal of the sport through the introduction of an appealing modern dinghy to attract more female sailors, while retaining the spread of Events to reflect the wider sport.

The RYA was influential in discussions and supported the Events Committee recommendation (the expert committee who recommends Events and Equipment to ISAF Council) which included the eight Events in the original RYA submission as well as the Multihull and Men's One-Person Heavyweight Dinghy Event.

However, in a one-off ballot, ISAF Council voted to eliminate the Multihull and to change the Women's keelboat from Fleet to Match Racing.

The RYA cast its votes as follows (RYA votes in CAPS):

Men (6 from 7 Events to be selected)
WINDSURFER (selected)
ONE PERSON DINGHY (selected)
TWO PERSON DINGHY (selected)
TWO PERSON DINGHY HIGH PERFORMANCE (selected)
MULTIHULL
Keelboat (selected)
ONE PERSON DINGHY HEAVY (selected)

Women (4 from 6 Events to be selected)
WINDSURFER (selected)
ONE PERSON DINGHY (selected)
TWO PERSON DINGHY (selected)
TWO PERSON DINGHY HIGH PERFORMANCE
Multihull
Keelboat Match Racing (selected)

The RYA believes that the recommendations of the Events Committee would have moved the sport forwards, and enabled more nations and sailors to take part in Olympic sailing. RYA is disappointed by this decision by the ISAF Council.

Now the focus will move onto the decisions at next year's ISAF Conference in November, which will determine the Equipment to be used in each of the Events at the 2012 Games.

* Richard Gladwell in Sail-World New Zealand:
At its meeting, the Events Committee recommended the dropping of all keelboat events - a decision which never really had the wings to fly past Council.

The process followed by the ISAF Council is that the Events Committee's recommendation is moved as an events package, and if not accepted then each of the Council members put forward their slate of 10 events (according to the gender ratio of six mens events and four female events). Such a process is governed by self-interest, and lobbying, rather than strategic direction.

On this basis, the two keelboats were restored but with the women's keelboat changing to a match racing event. To create the space for these two events, the High Performance Womens doublehander and the Multihull were dropped.

Both were in the telegenic category - meaning events/classes that added spectacle and media appeal and come across well on television - rights from which contribute the majority of ISAF's income. It has been no secret that sailing has been under pressure to significantly improve its TV and media performance by the IOC and their media rights advisers.

From this perspective the Events Committee had made a call in the right direction, and the Council decision is a huge step backwards for the sport at Olympic level.

The major failing of the selected events card is the retention of two doublehanded classes in the mens competition. The physical differences required of sailors to compete in either are not that significant, and there should only be one men's double handed dinghy event.

This move, along with the reinstatement of the multihull, would then give a ten event card which reflected the classic, the spectacular and the athletic, as well as providing the required geographic spread through the Laser and Laser Radial, and windsurfing events. The classic boats such as the Star and Finn would be retained, and the re-introduction of matchracing would be watched with interest. The addition of the multihull would round out the sailing spectrum - meaning that all major disciplines of the general sport were represented at Olympic level.

If the current slate of events remains, the Olympic side of the sport will be seen, from a media perspective, to have taken a big step backwards - and one from which it will find it difficult to recover. The risk of yachting being dropped as an Olympic sport has probably increased significantly. -- More on www.sail-world.com

Voting Results

Excellent! I am not going to ask how you got your hands on that, but it's excellent!

Very interesting tally for the multihull event. US Sailing was backing two multihull events but the final tally show all three votes going elsewhere than the multihull. Looks like US Sailing need to spare the carrot and swing the whip over their representatives. GBR and the RYA seems to be at odds with themself with one vote for the multihull and two zeros. Very interesting to see which countries wanted multis.

Well, it looks like our US representatives were singlehandedly responsible for this debacle: 0 out of 3 possible votes!

It would be interesting to know how they justify this stance when the US Sailing submission to the ISAF advocated both mens' and womens' multihull events, according to the recent report that Rick posted from the Multihull Council meeting.

That report also indicated that 305 US Sailing members competed in the 2007 Alter Cup qualifiers. Personally I can't see any reason to retain my membership. It would probably be viewed as a small gesture I guess, but if 305 members resigned en masse it would at least indicate what the cat community thinks about this.

I did just that yesterday and also stepped off the MHC. I've heard about as much lip service as I can stand.

There is much more going on here. Resigning is premature. Registering a complaint isn't.

I would like an explanation.

Lets talk a bit about the cost of the Tornado. There have been arguments from the mono group that the Tornado is an expensive class and used that as an excuse to get rid of multihulls.

It's a big differance building a boat for professional sailors or building a boat for amateurs. Compare with tools for example, there are cheap tools and there are expensive tools. Most professional that work with tools on a daily basis buy expensive tools if they can make a choice. If you force them to buy a cheap one design tool designed for amateurs they will run into trouble. The tool must be replaced by a new tool frequently to keep performance and reliability up, and you must select a good tool when you buy a new one due to manufacturing tolerances. Finally the old tools will have very low value since it has been worn out by a professionals.

The Tornado is an expensive "tool" built for professional sailors and it lasts for years in that use. You can't compare that with a boat designed for amateurs.

/hakan

If folks generally go that route, I think it would be important to create a US national catamaran championship along the lines of the Alter Cup, but outside the auspices of US Sailing.

Why abandon US Sailing? Are we planning on writing a new rule book as well?

A short story. I spent this day as the lone multi-huller at our new OD sailing center doing end of the year work. These guys have raced OD for upwards of 30 years (Thistle, Flying Scot, Laser, Finn, and the dreaded 470 <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" /> ) I figured I'd get looks and sneers as soon as I pulled in the lot. No one said a word all morning so I brought up the vote at lunch break with the 15 other mono-hullers. Not a one was aware of the pending vote or possible elimination of the Tornado. The resounding condolence was that not racing an Olymipic class was a blessing and why many had abandoned the 470 class years ago.

I think that the Laser is a good case in point. It is a specific and tightly controlled one-design class. Throughout an Olympic campaign you will go through 2 hull, many different masts, sails, rudders and daggerboards either trying to find the best equipment available or because your boat has taken enough of a beating that it is no longer as stiff as you need it to be. Somewhere earlier on another thread about this topic, I went over a Laser selecting event that happened in Boston, actually just north east of Boston, where over 100 hulls, masts, booms, sails, rudder blades and daggerboards were present. For the next 12-24 hours they were sorted through to find the best of each. You were looking at sail shape, hull stiffness and fairing, etc... This is a ritual and a time consuming process. On Tornados we purchased either a Marstom, reg White, Sailcraft of Canada or Lindsay. Maybe we raced home-built boats, Holton or Gougoen. There were competent Australian builders (Boyer for one) and so-on. We faired our own hulls or had someone fair them and went out racing. These boats changed over time and Marstrom became the builder of choice with 90%+ of the market. They are race ready, last 8-12 years competively and until now held their market value. We keep hearing about the cost of a Tornado compared to other Olympic classes, but not even a Star has the racing life of a Tornado. A laser campaign will probably run $20,000 for the campaign, while a Tornado may run in excess of $40,000. A Star is in the $60,000 range. These are for the platforms, rigging, sdails and so-on. But lets also remember that the vehicle on which to compete is the smallest portion of the Olympic campaign budget. I was talking to a couple of Olympic sailors who put the overall cost of a campaign for 2004-2008 upwards of $400,000. So that puts the boat at 10% of the overall budget.

Unfortunately, because ISAF Regulation 19 applies to the H-16 North Americans (participants in a North Americans of an ISAF International Class must be members of their MNA), that means you won't be eligible to sail in the 16 NA's in Clear Lake, Iowa next year.

You might want to reconsider that, Bob.

You can bet your butt that I'm going to corner David Sprague at the ODSS next weekend and inquire why he voted against the multihull.

BTW, I'm planning to wear black all next weekend at the ODSS in protest.

good luck with that

A few thoughts:

FIRST
This development (no multihulls in the Olympics) can be seen as a direct consequence of the inexistence of a suitable “entry cat” competing in the same market niche of the Optimist. I believe that an "entry cat program" is the most important action for the middle and long term development of multihulls.


SECOND
ISAF chose the equipment BUT the classes haven't been chosen yet AND "dinghy" does not necessarily mean monohull.

It is possible to lobby immediately for the A Class (or another single-handed dinghy cat) to replace the Finn, Laser and/or Laser radial - and for the Tornado (or another double-handed dinghy cat) to replace the 470, 49er or women' 470.

If I had to choose one move only, I'd go for the A Class instead of the Finn or Laser. After the tests in Quiberon a few years ago, the A Class refused an invitation to be the Olympic "high performance dinghy".

This would be a short term move with fair possibilities of success.


THIRD
IF the Tornado class is to die due to the loss of Olympic status, it will open space to develop a new B Class, replacing the old one, which was killed by the Tornado (a B Class cat) selection for the games.
It will be quite interesting to see a 20ft X 10ft development class following the A Class rules or (even better) the C Class rules.


FOURTH
I am not sure if excluding the multihull event from the games is such a big loss in terms of visibility. The giant multihulls and the new ORMA 70 one design will remain more visible and attractive for the media.


FIFTH
Time changes things. "If you seat long enough by the river, you will see your enemy's body pass" (Chinese proverb).


Just my 2 cents...

Some need bigger rivers than others.
Slightly off topic but, someone lately told me that you atrract more flies with sugar, but have you ever noticed the abundance of flies around a body?

"You can bet your butt that I'm going to corner David Sprague at the ODSS next weekend and inquire why he voted against the multihull"

I think I will have a little chat with David also.

A T isn't the most expensive class around. I suspect the T would pale when it comes to a star or whatever keel class they are using.... Remember a T can still be built by anyone with the skills.. Unlike the 470,49er,laser..

Saying that, the cost of an Olympic campaign towers over the costs of the platform.. So cost is a furfy..

When we met at the US SAILING AGM in Phoenix last month and represented you, the Multihull Sailors, the Multihull Council was pleased to report, as noted in another post, the USA Olympic Sailing Committee submitted to the ISAF the recommendation for the 2012 Olympics to include two multihull classes.

The three USA ISAF members decided to go against the recommendations of US SAILING and voted to eliminate the multihull class in the 2012 Olympics.

You may wish to share your feelings with the three USA ISAF Delegates:
David Irish daveirish@irishboatshop.com
Charley Cook chascook@comcast.net
Cory Sertl corysertl@rochester.rr.com

Be polite, but let them know what you think of their decision.

Caleb Tarleton, Multihull Council

Why ? When my great-great grandfather was hauling fish out of the sea some 200 years ago on a sailing fishing vessel near Iceland he used the same internationally accepted "right of way" rules as we do now.

ISAF is just an organisation that "claims" ownership of these rules.

Besides one of the most simple things to do is right up these rules there is not to much there and frankly speaking they could use someone looking them over for clearity and unambiqious wordings.

Wouter

perhaps a the H16 sailors can stand up and disregard ISAF Regulation 19. By amending their invitation to race.

If a few international cat classes protest this way ISAF will have to take notice.. Get the heads of the international cat associations on a phone conference and discuss a new cat body..

ISAF in general is against FORMULA based classes. It doesn't understand them and I religiously believes that strict One-Design, or rather Single-Manufacturer-One-Design, is the best form of sailboat racing.

Therefor any A-class, B-class or Formula 18 class are out of the question. They already had trouble accepting the "OD status but not SMOD" status of the Tornado where everybody could use different masts and sails.

Additionally a dinghy is most definately regarded as a Monohull by the whigs mostly because they don't consider Multihulls as real boats to begin with.

I wonder, is the ORMA 60 class a ISAF recognised class ?

But they certainly make no hassle about that, I guess because the French ORMA organisation is to powerful to pick a fight with. We need something like that for small catamaran racing.

Wouter

We are already working on covering that angle !

As you know.


Wouter

Caleb, can you clarify the relationship between the ISAF delegates and US Sailing. Who are the delegates appointed by, if not US Sailing, and if they are appointed by US Sailing what kind of authority do they have to disregard US Sailing's recommendation?

Yes, but internal marketing is necessary to obtain momentum and I think the timing is good.

dont know .. I do notice NZ also voted against the T...

Im sure you have good reason. Id like also to hear what JW finds out about what happened with the US delegates before making any decision about US Sailing membership.

As far as the argument that we as a sailing community should get more involved with US Sailing and work to have more of a voice... with enough volunteers, I would bet we could start from scratch, reproduce the majority of the benefits we receive from US Sailing, and then be in a much better position to control our own destiny long term.

I think this would have to be a decision from our current multihull council members, but Id be the first to step on board to help.

Viva Revolution! Catsailors have always been a different bunch!

Brian,

that might work in the US where most of you dont have your boats at clubs. In Europe the norm is to have your boat at a club, which is affiliated with the national assoc. like US Sailing which again is an ISAF member. At least here i Norway I would have all kinds of trouble starting a club not affiliated to the national sports organizations which again would tell me that the club would have to be organized under our national sailing assoc. which is affiliated with ISAF.. Without it, no insurance, no money, no support from the local goverment.. How do you break this loop? ISAF is everywhere, which would be good if the organziation worked as it is supposed to.

BTW: You do not need to be a US Sailing member to compete in a North American Championship. It's enough to be a member of an "affiliated organization" (i.e. your class association).

Technically true, however the NOR's for the last two 16 NA's have required MNA membership. Not that we've enforced it.

Surprise surprise the Tornado is out of the Olympics. Heck you all shoot yourself in the foot all the time. You do not like the h16 but it’s still the strongest multihull class (no matter what you say). Instead of embracing it as a good thing you all push it away. Did you all even check out the recent h16 worlds? I watch this forum and read the bickering that goes on and so I am not surprised when the ISAF or the other organizations are not for multihulls. You guys are your worst enemies. And by the way we do not need any more new multihull designs we need to support what we have like in the monohull classes.

It’s simple:

SUPPORT the Hobie 16 (youth and adults)
SUPPORT the A-Cats
& Grow the Formula 18 (not HT) class.

I might add the Wave is a great boat for newbie sailing programs!

Guys this is the future of sailing or can be so embrace it or continue to watch multihull sailing decline and be pushed out!

I know I will be nailed via my comments, which pretty much makes my case about being your own worst enemies! I just think we need to unite!

Just read a comment somewhere (I think it was in
Sailing World) by Stuart Walker that all the old monohull O.D are thriving i.e. Lightnings,Snipes,Stars... where as the new designs have a limited and fleeting following.I think you will see and are seeing the same trend in multihulls.

Let's not forget that US Sailing was first to propose no multihull in 2012. It was only after the uproar that was changed, but they fully knew that even their own delegates would not be voting for it. Hell, they even threw in two multihull classes in the proposal. Why not. Make it look like we are doing something fully knowing that their delegates will not be voting for them.

I wish more people in the US would have had the opportunity to sail the Tornado and see first hand how badly US Sailing treats them. You have no idea the crap they go thru even during an event like the OCR.

Here is a good example from this summer... US Sailing had a container coming back from Europe half empty. A US Tornado team campaigning there training for the trials asked if they could send their boat back in that container. The response was a flat NO. US Sailing would rather send the container half empty than allow a multihull team to use it.

I blame US Sailing and I for one am done sending my money there to support their stupid laser program. Their assigned multihull coach by his own admission said that he knows absolutely nothing about multis. Nor has he any interest in learning them.

US Sailing and ISAF can just ki$$ my a$$.

Let's get organized so we can just having some control over the promotion and funding of our sport. We have some very talented multihull sailors who are not getting any support from our 'national organization'. It's time we divert those funds to our own sailors.

Way to go Bob! I'm right behind you.

Matt, Who the hell cares about ISAF regulation anything at this point. We have NO reason to be involved with ISAF any longer.

It would be really stupid to not allow people to compete at the NAs for that reason. This is the time to make a statement.

We are no longer part of ISAF and it's time for IHCA to step away. I for one would support that. Hell, I'll even get a H16 again and go to IOWA or wherever they are next year.

So you are advocating turning me away from the Tiger NAs as well because I'm no longer a member of US Sailing?

I think we need to boycott the Alter Cup as well. We should hold another non US Sailing sanctioned National Multihull championship on the F18 Capricorn next year.

Just sent an email to membership@ussailing.org to cancel.

I think boycotting the Alter Cup would actually benefit the anticatamaran faction.

It isn't my ox being gored so I don't have the same emotional response. I will, however, join you in expressing my displeasure.

The underhanded manner in which the matter has been handled is clearly bad policy.

We can still hold an Alter Cup with the sailors who have qualified but not do it under US Sailing. This would be an excellent opportunity to support a new US Multihull association (or NAMSA maybe?) to get it off the ground.

Are you sure? I suspect there are proprietary rights involved*. Just a guess.

Clearly multihulls need better representation.

* If I were running the Hobie Company, I would be very interested in gaining control of the name "Alter Cup" and making it a Hobie only event.

"We are no longer part of ISAF and it's time for IHCA to step away. I for one would support that. Hell, I'll even get a H16 again and go to IOWA or wherever they are next year"

Great, Clear Lake Iowa,Divsion 7 putting it on .Hope to see you there(Multihulls will be included at this event).

Its a sad days for Hitech sailing and a kick in the teeth for multihull sailing. I agree with Rohans sentiments here:
http://www.rohanveal.com/

Daniel

Hey! - don't shoot the messenger! I'm just quoting the regs. I didn't make them up and I have no control over Hobie Cat's (both Europe and USA) involvement with ISAF.

... which I've also pointed out to the locals at crew.org.nz.

Ollie, all,
I too will have to re-think my US Sailing membership including my volunteer position on the P/N committee. The sticker on my car and boat just don't mean anything to me anymore so I'm scraping them off tonight. Going to start out the week "US Sailing Free". And I'm all for a p/n rating system like the ones used in Europe as they take all the guess work out of it. The time is NOW to move away from US Sailing and the ISAF.

Count me in to help with the new association,
Bob Curry

So in your world I should just get therapy for my need to sail a single-handed spinnaker cat?

Interesting to see what happens to SCHRS !

We are affilliated with the ISAF and it is their rating system for Cats !

Give that man a chocolate fish!

Sign me up!

Incredible how we all feel the same, no matter if you are Darren Bundock or a club sailor. We don´t belong to ISAF anymore.

IMSA is on its way promoted by UKCRA
http://www.imsaf.org/

Petition
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/multihullinolympics/index.html

Darren Bundock words:
http://sailjuiceblog.com/


So long ISAF! as Darren says, who cares about ISAF "... we have the ULTIMATE boat"

Here is a reply back from one of our Canadian Reps David Sprague

"Thanks Mike for the note.

I am sorry that I was not able to vote for the Mens Multihull but I took my instructions from the CYA on positioning. They were clear in their instructions that the CYA position was to support the Keel boat first before the Multi and because the way the voting was going I had to vote for the Keelboat and not for the Multihull. A vote for the Multihull would have helped eliminate the the Keelboat based on the way the voting was going. In the voting, as I am sure you must have by seen now, it was really a fight between the Keel and Multi. If you wanted one the other should not get your vote.

In the Women's events I am sorry to say the Multihull really had no chance and a vote for it would have wasted Canada's vote (multihull got 3 votes, the lowest one to get a spot got 21 votes with the other one eliminated when they only got 20 votes). The battle there was between the High Performance 2 person dinghy and the Match Race, again there I had a difficult position, as did Fiona, because we had to vote for one or the other but not both. (There we/Canada lost the High Performance by 2 votes of 35).

I know that it was a disappointment for you and others including Oskar. I recognize the value that Multihulls have (I was the Canadian RO at Kingston for the Hobie - 29'r course at the Youth Worlds and a Race Official for the Qingdao Tornado Medal race in August). I am quite concerned that the ISAF have not seen the value of the very high performance boats like Multihulls and the 2 person Women's dinghy but that is another battle.

Feel free to call me when I am back late this week and I would be pleased to talk to you about ISAF and how the decisions are made. I know losing Olympic status is hard to accept but for some classes/disciplines it is a blessing. Not for all but sometimes it helps a discipline. Time will tell here.

Mike thanks for the note and I hope to talk to you later this week."

Matt, If all these regs are so damned important why does HCANA freely hand out championship trophies to non-members? It's only $25, but it's the principle of the thing. It doesn't send a good message to the general population of the class. hijack off

Rolf,

That is not the situation we have here in NL.

The official Royal Dutch Watersport Assocation (KNWV) argued that sailing fragile catamarans on the North sea was insane and wouldn't have anything to do with it. So cat sailors formed a rival organisation together with 2 other brances of sport that used the north sea. The organisation is called the NFB (Dutch surf sports association) and it pretty much became the association for cat sailors.

I think as good as all 40 beach clubs are members of the NFB and I think only 1 or 2 cat clubs are members of the official Dutch Watersport Association. The KNWV has been trying to muscle in for years now only recently have been succesful to some extend by forcing every catsailor who wants to do the Round Texel to own (= pay for) a certified KNWV racing license. Did went down too well and it is still not sure whether they are going to win this.

The cat clubs still aren't considering becoming members of the rival KNWV and none are willing to enforce the "KNWV racing license". At least we have a good chance of starring this KNWV plan down as we have our own organisation unifying us. I think every nation should have such a organisation empowering the cat sailors as only then you can stand up to these tactics and have a chance at winning. I'm very thankful that we have one here in NL

Wouter

It gives me no pleasure to say this to you Simon, as I know you've put alot of work into it, but there is always the Texel handicap.

But, we can also just take the mathematical models of SCHRS, modify a few factors by a negligiable 0.1% and republish it under a different name. Will be very hard for ISAF to claim proporty rights to the new handicap system.

Wouter

I am not talking about the costs for an olympic campaign.. I am talking about the cost of a Tornado for the average club racer..Why buy a Tornado when there is no fleet and the N20 is the 20 foot boat of choice? (for a 1 design 20 footer) Why have a boat in the Olympics that almost nobody at the grass roots level is sailing?

oh PLEASE. the 16 is not the future of cat sailing, it is the past and it has a lot of momentum to carry it forward, but that is all.

For years I have been pushing folks in our club to join organizations such as US Sailing. "Why?" They have asked, and I have pointed out that they manage the Portsmouth ratings, and that if more multi sailors joined they would eventually see our worth.

This whole affair, however, has done it for me. There is no other way to interpret their actions at the ISAF council than to believe that after proposing no multi classes and catching a whole lot of flack that their subsequent proposal of two multi classes was nothing more than a cynical move to shut us up and stop the emails. Their votes are proof of this. They got what they originally wanted but can point to their proposal as "proof" they care. All I can say to that is %$*& off.

I'll probably drop my membership, and I will no longer try to get people to join. However, I won't be peeling off my US Sailing stickers. A lack of stickers on cars won't show how we feel. Instead, I will get some thin red tape and make the international "No" symbol around it. I will display that right next to my WRCRA decal.

I propose that everybody else do the same. Whether you stay a member or not, display your distaste by modifying your US Sailing sticker. Have it right next to your multi club decal. I think it would also be great to create a t-shirt sized logo that folks can print out and iron to a t-shirt. Wear it to every sailing event.

Olympic sailing has just become far less interesting. Now, there is even less reason to watch, and less reason to be involved with US Sailing.

I have devoted over 50 years of my life to catamaran sailing as well as towards the recognition of catamarans as legitimate racing sailing craft.
I have sat on YA committees at most levels and I have been elected to the position of vice commodore and commodore at different yacht clubs. I have served on protest committees too many to count, so I have gained a little experience of the ways in which ideas and bias interact with the decisions that are made behind closed doors of the yachting hierarchy.
When I first started sailing cats we couldn’t gain membership to any yacht club. As catamaran sailers, we couldn’t compete on any course set by any club. For many years we took the vitriolic abuse by virtually 100% of the “established” mono hull sailing community and slowly grew our numbers to the stage that it was better for the finances and club numbers to allow the cat sailers to become “legitimate” members of clubs than it was to turn them away. The abuse and undisguised antagonism both in the club rooms and on the water still persisted and still does persist today, albeit to a much lesser degree and more veiled today than in times past, but it is still there. Scratch the surface of many mono sailers and you can still find an anti, even hateful multi hull sentiment. While actively involved on various YA committees, whenever the opportunity arose, I always tried to promote the cause of multi hulls. This was usually disappointing and, even when a slight victory was achieved, all benefits obtained for multihulls were always greatly compromised and placed a distant third or fourth to similar benefits accorded to any mono hull class. When, after many years, it became painfully obvious that no matter how much work that I and many other multihull sailers did from WITHIN the sailing administration, there was never going to be the justice due to us, the recognition that we deserved, or even the financial benefits pro rata relative to the income that we supplied to the YA. If and when we put forward proposals for any benefit for multihulls on the same basis that were already “automatically” accepted as “rights” by mono classes (particularly for funding and youth training) that to any reasonable person were undeniable, all we would get in reply was grudging admission of our “proposals” then when put to the vote have every mono class represented vote overwhelmingly against. To cut a long story short, from personal experience I can say unequivocally that for multihulls to achieve equal rights from working within the established yachting administrations is a delusional dream. The only way for multi’s to achieve anything in sailing is to do it by ourselves for ourselves without the dead weight of the YA hanging from our necks like the mill stone that they are as far as multihulls are concerned. They want our money, they want to control us, and they want us to shut up, and hopefully not be seen or heard. The ISAF treat us like a corrupt politician treats his electorate. They promise us the world to get our vote and money but after they have their perceived power, treat us with total disdain or completely ignore us and then have the unmitigated gall to tell us (over a sumptuous dinner paid for by us) that “we may not like what they have done, BUT it has been done solely in OUR best interests” Does any one really believe that?
They want our money, THEY DON’T WANT US. We can never get the results due to us from working WITHIN the system, we are just too out numbered by self interests that are NOT multi hull interests, so why are we there? Why keep trying to bang our heads against the proverbial brick wall? Just how long does it take for us too see just how the land lays? It has been this way for over half a century, what makes any of you think that there is going to be a “C” changes over the next half century?
In the words spoken in a great Australian movie “Tell em their dreaming’”

And some other points of sail:

http://www.sail-world.com/australia/The-Death-Of-ISAF-and-the-Olympics?/39015

>Personally I have nothing against the Finn or the Laser, but what annoys me is that there are two boats extremely similar, so similar that a skipper can easily jump between boats and do well in both. <

http://www.sail-world.com/australia/Double-Silver-medalist-against-Olympic-events-card/39000

>Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. 24 hours ago I thought the ISAF Events Committee had sobered up from their night on the tiles by deciding to axe the 2 keelboat classes - at last they have seen some sense.

Get rid of the 2 most expensive boats to campaign that hardly anybody sails - obvious! They have now perfected a U turn faster than any modern political party. If ISAF cannot see that high performance dinghies are the way of the future and that the obvious way to increase female participation in the Olympics (and the sport) was the women’s high performance dinghy then there is little hope. <

http://www.sail-world.com/australia/ISAF---Not-Fit-For-Purpose/38974

With Qingdao looking to be a foggy, drifting washout, the 2012 events at Weymouth have a chance to restore some sanity to sailing as an Olympic event. By their inbred and blinkered decisions in Portugal last week, the ISAF Council showed themselves to be Not Fit For Purpose.

Interesting.. here no lightings, no snipes no stars handfull of etchells or solings.. I14s, javelins, Cherubs thrive however..
In cats.. Ts still have a fleet.. not sure about H16s.. Growing is F16 and As..

There seems to be some confusion that this was about the Tornado. This vote had NOTHING to do with Tornado and/or any of it's costs associated with it. This wsa a vote against an open multihull class. Next vote would have had to do with equipment.

In fact, the Star is by far the most expensive boat in the Olympics. You can fit 10 Ts in a container and what - two of the 6 knot beasts.

This was an anti multihull vote advocated by US Sailing from the get go. What makes it worse is their smoke and mirrors proposal of two multhull classes fully knowing that their delegates were not going to vote for them.

Whether you like the T or not (personally I20 doesn't come even close buy anyway) this has a huge effect on all catamaran sailing everywhere. The level of competition in the Ts is unrivaled by any other class and those sailors raise the level of competition in other classes like the F18s and A cats.

I would love to hear PUs take on this and whether this would be a good time for IHCA to separate from ISAF. Hobie has a chance here to step up and take the lead.

I guess that depends on the locality.. Local club here has a fleet of Ts sailing weekly no N20s...
Fact there is a mold for a T hanging in a local shed.. Before your say the mold isn't quick.. Boats from that have won heat in world championships.. just a few thoughts..

Wouter,

that is simply appalling! Sailing cats is dangerous in the North sea, while sailing a Laser or a Yngling is safe enough? What a great logic.. Now I understand why the dutch representative voted as he did. Good that you have been able to set up your own structure under those incredible conditions! Many have expressed concern that clubs will be closed to multihulls now that we are out of the olympics..

There has been quite some talk about setting up "our own" organization from Bundy, Veal, Darryl and others. Who is going to have at it, do an analysis, set up the structure and get into it if it is worthwhile? I dont think that is the way to go, but if it is to be tried "someone" better get started.

from the ISAF website, a few "Objektives"

To promote the sport of sailing in all its branches regardless of race, religion, gender or political affiliation

To examine, study, investigate, consider and report on all matters affecting the sport of sailing and any persons interested therein or associated therewith and to collect, analyse and distribute information, statistics, opinions and reports thereon

To represent and protect the interests of any member of the Federation

These fellows could make a hot air ballon lift off without gas.

I must say that if Hobie did that then they would actually proof to be the catamaran scene leaders that they always claim to be. This could well be the deciding move on their part.

Hell, we could even tell Hobie to be with us or against us !

Wouter

The Dutch problems originated some 30-35 years ago. Of course since then the KNWV has learned that they made a serious mistake back then and try to regain some portion of the action. That was a different time back then and volunteer work was still highly regarded, much more then now. However I'm sure we can do it again. Afterall with guys like Darren Bundock and Rohan Veal pushing in that direction I feel we have a great shot at this. Make these guys ambassadors and find a few volunteers (others call then "tools") to organise the new structure on the background. I'm convinced it can be done.

I'm also convinced that if we take up Rohan Veal on his idea to combined the Moth/Bladerider class with the racing cats and in a true high performance class that we will succeed internationally and probably even be able to extend this organisation later to include womens HP skiff and mens HP skiffs.

A while back an idea was floated in NL to combined the formula classes (+A's)into one single cirquit, combine all our resources and volunteer man power. I feel this is the time to make that happen. Again with ambassadors like Bundock and Veal, we got a great shot !

Lets do it !

Wouter

And another thing.

"Amateurs" like Rocklegde Engineering are now producing better quality video reports of catamaran racing then the professionals. Surely we can expand this and usage of the internet to televise our sport !

Guys, the more I think about it, the more I feel this is an excellent time to make the jump. We got all we need to make this work. We don't need ISAF or mainstream centralized TV anymore. The internet and our common sense are enough now.

Also take a look at Aestela's tacticat, completely developped outside of ISAF and hugely popular. Even attracting sponsorship money right now.

Wouter

I noticed on the ISAF website that "Hobie Cat Europe is the latest sponsor to partner with ISAF in the Connect to Sailing programme". Perhaps we should all suggest to Hobie Cat Europe, Hobie Cat USA, and all other multi-hull manufacturers that since the ISAF doesn't wish to support the multi-hull segment of sailing that perhaps the multi-hull segment should no longer support the ISAF.

From today's The Dailysail

Women and cats get poor deal ISAF make the 'wrong' decision again

On Wednesday last week, things were looking good at the ISAF Annual Conference in Estoril, Portugal. The Events Committee had met and made their recommendations to the ISAF Council as to which events they thought should be included in the 2012 Olympic Games. Essentially they voted in favour of removing the two keelboat classes and adding a high performance double handed dinghy for women. Although by no means a radical step it seemed as though ISAF were finally looking to the future and taking the appropriate steps to keep sailing in the Olympics.
It was, then, with a heavy heart we reported on Friday, 9 November, the ISAF Council had chosen to ignore totally these recommendations. Instead they opted to keep the two keelboat events in – changing the women’s keelboat event from fleet racing to match racing – at the expense of the multihull and women’s high performance double hander. At best this can be seen as a conservative move, at worst a huge step backwards and the beginning of the end of sailing’s inclusion in the Olympic Games.

The first question that must be asked is exactly what is the point of the Events Committee and others existing? This group the ISAF itself claims to comprise experts, who were flown into Estoril and put up there in hotels. These experts were then asked to discuss the situation, share their informed views and to make their recommendations to the ISAF Council – who are not stated as experts in the ISAF press releases unlike the Events Committee. But then the expert recommendations are totally ignored. If this is the way ISAF are going to make major decisions, why bother having expert advisers at all? Why not just sit a group of aged blazers in a room and ask them to make all the decisions based on what they think is right, irrespective of the views of the rest of the international sailing community – for judging by Friday’s decision this seems to have been the case with the entourage of committees flown in to make the Council’s decision appear fair and even handed.

One of the best things we felt ISAF had done in recent years was to introduce two separate guidelines for a class to be included in the Olympics. Essentially these set out that events should either increase nation participation (cheap and accessible classes) or increase media interest (fast and exciting to watch). Although no one would question the strength of the Star as the men’s doublehanded keelboat it is difficult to see how it, or many other two person keelboats, would fit in with the above criteria.


Above: One of the contenders for the women's double handed high performance dinghy.

Perhaps you could argue that match racing for the women will be exciting, but when you consider it is at the expense of a high performance women’s dinghy it is clear which should have won. The removal of the multihull seems nothing short of idiotic. Here is an area of the sport that is arguably growing quicker than almost anything else - look at the F18s or even the more exotic A Class Worlds being held at the moment. It is fast, competitive and exciting to watch, but has now been removed.

It comes as a shock to be writing this article as we felt sure we would instead be contemplating which skiff would be best for the women’s high performance slot. As it turns out we are far from alone as the sailing world is in uproar about ISAF’s decision. A quick glance around other websites, blogs and forums and we struggle to find anyone who thought this to be a remotely positive move.

However, it is not just the writing community who are struggling to see the sense in this move. Cat sailing legend, Mitch Booth spoke to us from the A-Cat World Championships in Florida about the decision. “It has nothing to do with what is good or bad or right or wrong, it is just the politicians and their decisions,” he said. “That is why I have completely lost faith with the ISAF process and their management of the sport. I was heavily involved as a sailing advisor for the multihull re-evaluations about six or seven years ago. I have seen the sport from the administration view, from inside ISAF, and I have lost faith completely with their whole structure, hence why I do not go to the ISAF meetings anymore.”

Surely when an administration for a sport is getting this kind of reaction from their top sportsmen something has gone drastically wrong. Booth is not alone in his view. Many other sailors we have spoken to expressed their anger at the lack of vision shown by ISAF.

It is perhaps not surprising that the cat sailing community is currently the most angered by the events selection. “When you look at the council they are all older people and as a rule have all sailed Stars at some point,” commented GBR Olympic Tornado representative, Will Howden. “They don’t really want to break with tradition and I think that is a shame as it could well be the death of the sport.”


So what result is this likely to have on the catamaran community? Here is where debate begins to go in different directions, some saying it will not effect the community in any way, while others believe the loss of faith could be devastating. Howden believes the multihull fraternity will probably remain reasonably unaffected by the choice saying that only a handful of Olympic sailors are in the F18 class regularly so numbers should stay high. He does wonder, though, whether this might be the effective death of the Tornado. “When you look at most of the non-Olympians who have Tornados a lot of the reason they have them is because they want to go and race them internationally. That is probably not going to be all that popular now, certainly for the next few years,” he comments.

Others have a slightly different view. In his excellent blog (here) Rohan Veal wonders whether the lack of faith in ISAF will see the multihull community pulling away and setting up their own administration. This is certainly a possibility if ill feeling remains at this level as one has to ask exactly what is cat sailing getting from ISAF now it is out of the Olympics? This would be a dangerous thing to happen as suddenly there would be a clear route for any factions irritated by ISAF to splinter away causing the whole federation to fall apart.

Although the multihull’s exclusion from the Games is a shock what is perhaps worse is the severe blow that had been dealt to female sailing at this meeting. With equality between female and male events supposedly being important at the Olympics, why have we not seen a vote to overthrow the mid year meeting’s decision to have six male events and four female events? Surely five events each is the obvious way to go if increased female participation is a serious goal. “As I understood it, [ISAF] wanted to get as near as possible to a 50/50 split,” comments two time Olympic Gold medallist, Shirley Robertson. “To make a decision to have two men’s doubles and two men’s singles is not really progressing the sport in any way.”

Certainly if giving the women less events than the men was going to irritate them then so too was the exclusion of a women’s high performance double hander. We simply cannot understand this when clearly it would have been such a good thing for the sport. We were trying to think of a fair and balanced view to put across regarding this decision but the only reason we can see for such a choice is a general feeling within the ISAF Council that women are not up to sailing such a class. Perhaps it could be argued that getting a new class into the games is too difficult, although it really shouldn’t be.

The choice of swapping women’s fleet racing for match racing is, simply, ludicrous. Even women’s fleet racing in keelboats has had small numbers in the Olympics and on the international circuit, but female match racers represent an even smaller subset of this. Certainly if you are one of them life must be looking pretty good at the moment.

But numbers are not the only problem. “To think that they have gone back to match racing is crazy,” exclaims Robertson. “We have already seen match racing is very difficult to work for women, not just in terms of the Olympics where you can sort of see it working, but in terms of the whole circuit, it does not really fit in. We saw that it did not work for the men in Sydney. It was supposed to bring the media in and it did not. The final in 2000 was the most boring thing that I have seen on TV and that is not just my view, it is shared by a lot of people.”



Some might say that match racing will be good for the sport as it can reduce costs dramatically with boats being supplied for events, but Robertson maintains this is simply not the case. “It would be interesting to know how [ISAF] see it working. Are they going to select a boat or are they to be supplied? If the reason is to lower price then I do not think that they have really thought it through. If you are going to be match racing in different boats then you end up buying two of each for training. Then the rich countries just get better and better because they can buy more and more boats,” she points out.

This is not the only problem either. Robertson adds that with fleet racing in theory anyone can give it a go, but with match racing it is much more difficult as entry to regattas often involves invitations based on each individual sailor’s ISAF ranking.

Robertson also says that although the Yngling was a bit of a funny looking boat and was, to some extent brought to the Olympics out of blind panic - due to match racing being rejected the last time around and no other women’s keelboats existing in any sort of numbers at the time – it was still a good and technical class to sail. At least the Yngling had some sailors in it and many countries had spent money building up technical data and doing research and development. To swap this for match racing and effectively start again with a very similar discipline just feels like a badly judged short term solution. “I think you are making a decision about something that is not just six years in advance but much more. You can’t keep changing classes every four years. It is actually a long term decision that needs to be made and that has not happened,” Robertson concludes.

So once again ISAF have made all the right noises in the build up to Olympic event selection and once again they have managed to totally mess it up when it comes to crunch time. Still, perhaps all is not lost as two time Olympian, Simon Hiscocks, optimistically wrote in our feedback article (here) “There is hope....... the Laser could be the one person dinghy heavy, the Moth the one person dinghy, the 49er men and woman the two person dinghy…” Given the recent decisions ISAF have made, we are not holding our breath.

While PU certainly has his opinions on this (I spent an hour on the phone with him Saturday), he is not involved with the IHCA anymore. David Brookes is the paid IHCA Executive Director who was at the ISAF Meeting. David was the one quoted saying that the USA delgates had made a deal with the 470 class.

It's unlikely that Hobie USA will get involved too much. After all, they are a kayak company that makes recreational catamarans - and a few Hobie 16's.

HCE is a different matter. Only John Dinsdale can say how they will respond.

I would like to know the following:

1, Why was the usual voting system changed - It is usally a vote on all options. Option with lowest number of votes gets dropped, re-vote on remaining options; repeat until results fit the imposed boat limits?

2, Who prompted this change?

3, Why was this change proposed ?

4, How can this be done (one assumes in some sort of seedy back room deal)?

This is an outrageous decision that has disgusted myself and many Multihull sailors around the World. Think of all the young multihull sailors who aspire to represent their country at a Games. They now must turn to monohulls or sailboards to fulfil their dreams......... Or even another sport all together. Ridiculous decision that cut out a very large portion of the sailing fraternity with one foolish decision.
Is it really beneficial to our sport to ignore a large group of sailors in favour of adding more of the same style disciplines in the Games?
1 man dinghy
1 woman dinghy
2 man dinghy
2 woman dinghy
Mens keelboat
Womens Keelboat
Mens Sailboard
Womens Sailboard
Mens Multihull
Womens Multihull
These are the disciplines we should have and should not be open to voting upon. Once set, then the equipment should be voted upon by only those who represent the SAILORS best interests. Only other option would be to not split the dinghy disciplines into 1 up and 2 up but have a mens dinghy and womens dinghy to replace the 4 x dinghy disciplines.

bump

Obviously, this is an emotional topic for all of us here. However, lots of people have worked hard for lots of years to gain acceptance for cats in the bigger sailing world, and especially in recent years, I've seen progress even at the local levels, in terms of acceptance of cats at traditionally mono clubs.

Everyone has their opinion, but I personally don't see how abandoning all these years of effort to avenge this decision is going to help us in the big picture.

If anything, I think we need to do the opposite: get more involved and get ourselves into a position of power within USSA.

I can't say that I don't care about having a cat in the Olympics, because I do think that is ultimately very important, especially to establish a serious youth cat program.

However, I do feel strongly that we have bigger fish to fry. When I go to mono events and discuss the recent 60-provided boat Hobie 16 Worlds, that gets some attention. Sadly, everyone looks shocked that we exist at that level. This is the sort of thing that needs to be fixed. Going away is not going to help that.

Mike

I'm glad to hear sentiments like this expressed. The Multihull Council is currently working hard to get to the truth of the matter and come to an understanding of really where we stand. If we walk away from USSA, we leave a lot behind - the Alter Cup, the Stevens Trophy, some influential positions within the organization, and about $100,000.

Some serious discussion in the coming weeks is needed - hard decisions have to be made. Plans are moving forward - contact your Area Rep if you want your voice heard.

John Williams
MHC Chair

I think we have to stay connected to the mono world on some level - maintain club memberships where that is relevant, maintain fleet involvement in USPN etc, but I don't see the evidence that that is going to be influential in any significant way in the sport achieving the stature it deserves or make up for the potential loss of elite competition. The only hope I see is for us to also organize separately outside the ISAF/MNA structure with the aim of driving the growth of the sport at both the grass roots and elite levels, in conjunction with like-minded organizations in other countries (maybe under the auspices of the IMSAF, if anyone can figure out what that is). So I'm not advocating a hard either/or strategy, but a hopefully pragmatic both/and view, with the balance of activism effort from cat sailors swinging heavily towards taking care of our own business.

If Bundy is serious and can get a few other heavyweights to endorse, I'd be right behind it. In the US, NAMSA could be a vehicle, but as far as I can tell it is just a shell at the moment.

I have a "please explain" email in to every member of the US Sailing Board of Directors. I'm willing to wait for some response (have so far heard from the Treasurer), but tentatively my feeling is that I will probably cancel my membership.

Mark -

I've gotten the explanation straight from the top. I will not defend it because the strategy they used is based on the premise that the USA has a better hope of a 2012 medal in the keelboat event than the multihull. The other five men's events were foregone conclusions - that placed the keelboat and multihull at odds for the sixth and final spot. The US delegation was instructed to get the keelboat - they executed as they are expected to, through lobbying, discussion and a bloc vote. Multihulls lost out because A) the assertion that US keelboats are better positioned to medal than multihulls went unchallenged, and B) we were vastly outnumbered by sailors from other classes (like the Finn and the Star) who understand the importance of showing up.

What has happened is unfair - no bones about it. One approach to preventing this from happening again is to continue to "infiltrate." Another approach is to stand up and walk out. To put this in Sun Tzu terms, if you cannnot understand the people that made the decision, you will never be able to effect a change and your cause will not prevail.

For my part, I feel we need to redouble efforts and build on recent gains - there can be two multihull sailors on the Board of Directors in a year. There can be a multihull sailor appointed to the ISAF Delegation for the next Quad. This is not pie-in-the-sky. We are positioned to make it happen if we decide that is the direction we want to go. Does this exclude the possibility of a new international multihull organization? Of course not. The people volunteering on the MHC are multihull sailors who are involved with USSA, not vice versa. We lost this time because we weren't part of the team formulating the game plan. If we want to be, then we can make it happen. If collectively we don't see any value in that, then there are a lot of other options for us out there.

John, I understand what you say and that you are just a messenger. Do you know why US Sailing made the submission for two multihulls when they were ultimately planning for the keelboats. I just can not get this to fit together in my head.

It's time to get a dose of reality, folks. What John said is right. Stop whining about the decision and move on.

Now is not the time to pick up your ball and go home. Now is the time to show some dignity and tact - and to put faces on the multihull community with US Sailing, CYA and ISAF.

I'm still going to wear black this weekend at the One-Design Sailing Symposium, but I'm not going to wear my emotions on my sleeve, nor will I be an butt to the people there who were in Portugal (David Sprague & Jim Capron).

You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar.

Let the infiltration begin!

Hey John,

Can you elaborate alittle more on what the benefits are that we get from US Sailing. You mentioned a couple above, but I'd like to hear alittle more detail. I'm not trying to be snide and poke a hole in US Sailing, but I'd like to know more definitively what the benefits are. I haven't renewed my US sailing membership in years and would like to hear what the motivation is to do so. I certainly appreciate all the effort put forth by you and the rest of the council. I just wish I could hear more positives.

I agree wholeheartedly that we need to infiltrate the existing clubs... We all need to be ambassadors for catsailing. I think one of the main problems is that catsailors tend to fly under the radar (although windsurfers are even worse, so I'm not sure how they got an Olympic slot). We need to be a bit less independant and make a few compromises to fit into the infrastructure that comprises sailing. Beach access is not going to get any better so we need to get a foot hold now.

The other five events where NOT a forgone conclusion. I know that’s the party line but its complete BS. The US long ago decided that they needed a plan to defend the keelboats and they needed a fall guy. They could have chosen the Finn or the 470 but they chose the Tornado. That was a conscious decision made long ago. This entire thing was orchestrated by your MNA (us sailing) from start to finish. The alteration of the ISAF submission was meant to shut us up. They never intended that it would actually affect their strategy. Go ahead and infiltrate but don’t think you are going to get some stogy old keel boaters like Jim Capron to change their minds and don’t expect that they will play fair.

If they are telling you the truth, then if US teams top the F14, F16, F18, Tornado, and A class circuit in mens and womens then we will have 10 multihull events in 2016. I think that is what I saw a bull drop in a paddock. Its astonishing that any country has the right to drop or include events due to its percieved ability to dominate them. I'm going to lobby the rival TV station to show repeats of Hogans Hero's and Rat patrol, whilst the olmpic broadcast is on so that I have something exciting to watch <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />.
regards

http://www.sailingworld.com/olympic-raci...2-21017601.html

You can work within US Sailing as much as you want but as long as Gary Bowdie and Dean Brenner have the control or any type of say over the multihull side there will BE NO CHANGE. When they're gone and someone who has atleast heard of catamarans is in charge we might have a chance. Gary has admitted that he knows absolutely nothing about cats nor does he have any interest in learning. And he is only what - our head coach?

Umm, didn't the US get a silver medal in the Tornado last time, and no medal in the Star class?

What makes them think that the Tornado is the event that the US is least likely to medal in?

That's really strange, since I used to race against Gary - in Hobie 16's. He owned a lime green one. Did you hear that directly from him?

Hi Rolf -

The assertion is that the US Delegation would have voted the exact contents of the submittal (which included two multihulls and two keelboats) if the final slate had the same events. Most in the multihull community knew at the outset that it was unlikely in the extreme that this approach of a men's and women's event would fly. I cannot say with certainty that this was a "poison pill" emplaced to assure failure and to "shut us up." I can say for sure that it was not a good idea - could we not have anticipated that even the Women's Sailing Committee would not support a women's multihull event? I have made the case up-chain (with unrelated examples) that decisions are being made about the future of multihulls without input from people familiar with the multihull community.

Since the slate before the Council did not mirror the submittal, and the Committee's recommendation was voted out, there was a previously-formulated playbook that was used by our Delegation. The plays in that book were built on the predicted chances for medals in each event. The folks that built that playbook ranked cats below keelboats. In their book, there were five of the seven events that were assured acceptance no matter how the US voted - look at the results and you see five events with tallies in the mid-30s. That left two events vulnerable (they tallied low-20s). One had to win and one had to lose - one outcome was favored over the other by the US. The operatives went to work. This is how it works for any country - the US did not invent political maneuvering.

I believe that the US Delegates would have voted the exact events on the submittal if the slate had mirrored it - they could do no other. I also believe the US submittal had a snowball's chance of becoming the slate of events. Once keelboats were on the chopping block (thanks to a forward-thinking Events Committee), all the work we'd done went in the trash can.

Anyone know where I could find pictures of these three to use in an article about this double-cross?


I'm one of the more polite guys you'll meet, but I'm not sure politeness is called for in this case.

Rolf, I think John has it just about right.

This is a game about medals…. How many can you win??? The game started a while ago. The Brits and the USA felt that they did not have good prospects. So… their game plan had them dropping the multihull from the games with only 8 recommended classes. OUR petition drive etc etc spoke about things like fairness, representation, opportunity, gender equity…. Once the [censored] hit the fan… they modified their public stance, to appease us.

S0, The two catamaran plan was nice, gender fair, good for the sport overall, etc etc… BUT when other factions started playing a different game… just as the USA predicted… They went back to their strategy for medals… how many can we win.

IMO,
This game was lost when the women decided that they MUST HAVE a match race (assuming keel boat at all costs) Why…. I think they see a pro gravy train that follows from racing a keelboat. It’s a formula that can generate a marketable personality.

The women’s group voted DOWN the women Multihull first… Then the HP dinghy was sacrificed… all for the Match Race discipline. They also voted to not push for gender equity… and the women were happy to take 4/10 events so long as they had the freaking match race discipline. Once that was a done deal… it became Star versus Multihull… given all the other factions .

So, Mike Grandfield versus the Star contingent. Remember… the STAR has experience with getting tossed out before. They understood the game AND they had a lot of money and clout ready to rock and roll. Just look at how they spin the class./ for the PR campaign… Oh… XXX learned the ropes in the VERY DIFFICULT STAR BOAT. XXX has said the STAR are the most competitive fleet they have ever sailed … Blah Blah Blah..

Once it came down to keel versus multi… we were doomed… Brenner is the chief USA fund rasiser…A former STAR campaigner etc etc.. He can raise money from the rich guys who build gran prix yachts .. this gives him control of the cash..… marketing cat sailors… not so much… AND Lovell and Daniel are likely to retire… the USA B fleet is YEARS from competing without a big investment in training.…. The decision was straitforward.

I think we should hope that justice is served and they made the women match race Hobie 16’s with spins…. Those old girls will really get a thrill out of trapezing and match racing while wearing a wet suit.. Tight fitting Pink Neoprene wet suits will show off their figures… don’t you think? They should be psched about the marketing potential!?

JW, thanks for the update.

What really bothers me is that younger sailors like Mike Easton, Tripp Burd, Sarah Newberry as well as others have lost their Olympic multihull goal.

I dont think its whining, I think US Sailing and ISAF WANT us to keep working within the sytem. F- them.

Im cancelling my membership tomorrow. Seeing these kids get a shot at the Olympics is exponentially more important than the Alter Cup or any other benefit from US Monohull Sailiing.

I'll join US Sailing again when I can vote JW onto the Board.

Yes I did.

That and once Bowdie is gone then I'll join.

Didn't Sun Tzu also write somewhere to never fight your battles by following the enemies playbook.

And maybe some understand "the people that made the decision" far to well. Multihulls aren't "it" and never will be in their eyes.

Without an independent multihull powerbase they can afford to ignore us and play us at will. Change is only affected when one party has the ability to put the hurt on to another.

Infiltration sounds nice but I feel the Multihull Council is actually their tool to co-opt and control us. Afterall, infiltration works both ways. In colonial times, the powers would award some minor privilegdes to local chiefs as to have them eventually work against their own kind and interests. It was always done to advance the interests of the colonizer and never to allow the subjected any meaningful input.

So the question at time may well be about who is benefitting most from this relationship. Us or them ?

Lets face it guys, Mono's could only have lost 1 event out of 7, while the cats lost the only event they had. With the US votes the cat would have stayed in. Apparently, cats were not valuable enough to even consider dropping 14% of the mono scene.

They felt that bringing in the Keel boat was so important that they weren't willing to sacrifice a single mono class ! Dropping a multihull is a different matter of course, who cares about those. Ohh the natives might go restless, well, we'll drop some more glass Alter Cup beeds in some poor sob hands and he'll argue the mono's case for us. Hell, put some more firewater in his X-mas package to be sure.

This is not in any way personally directed to you John. You mean well and are a hero to the sport of catamaran sailing. But if I were a Machiavellian Monohull Prince then I too would play the game as described above. I've seen it happen before and it works.

Wouter

Wouter, you're not the first to suggest that I and the rest of the many volunteers on the Council (and those putting on our ladder events and two championships) are dupes, pawns and the instruments of the devil. After you get done insulting my intelligence, you say it isn't personal and say I'm a victim of a modern-day sailing Machiavelli - in over my head... that about get it? meh.

This is precisely what I'm talking about - you can't believe it happened the way I described so there must be some conspiracy. Sorry bud. Simple case of some good ol' fashioned prejudice in a couple of key places. I am working toward an understanding of the problem so that I may defeat it. Defeating it may mean walking around the mountain rather than over it.

Old saying I heard;

"Keep your friends close and your enemies closer".

Infiltrate US Sailing, ISAF, and start up a multihull organization.

Wouter, our multimedia group is now called Rockledge Productions.

And we do work fast....

Adventure Online TV Presents:
"No Olympics For You"
Now playing at:
www.AdventureOnline.TV

One doesn't need to be a fool to be duped tends to help if your not!!..... In over your head no.. In without the total facts before the event.. Yes..

What the decision means is funds internationally that go to the Olympic training schemes will now bypass Cats.. Not "Tornados".. Cats full stop..

Superb, BK. Expert commentary, a beautiful day and a spinny reach. And here I sit on the phone. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

The way I see it it that we can make something good happen if we bring Rohan Veal, Darren Bundock and Mitch Booth together with people like you Brian and Rocklegde Productions. The first are excellent ambassadors to our cause and Rockledge Production has matured the video-ing and internet based televising to a point that it is generally accessible to all.

If we can get the important classes "online" then we can make the launch of our "high performance" organisation a success. Organise a combined event or two and show-case the results on the internet.

Also get a high performance women skiff going and if we are smart we get the blowkarts to join forces with us as well.

I truly believe that at this time with the available technology and "amateur" skill we can make it happen. Look at Aestela and Tacticat; internet is an enabler, lets use it. Of course ISAF and the local sailing associations at this point is helping us too, by making dumb descisions and pissing off some other classes like the womens skiff as well.

I mean at a certain point you have to make the call to start a "Boston Tea party", I'm sure that at that time there were voices calling "to work from the inside" as well. The people doing so weren't evil but they were wrong as the path to a better future lay elsewhere.

And indeed Brian you guys work fast !

Wouter

What do we stand to gain, and what do we loose in such an arrangement. Who has the time and knowlegde to do an analysis.

Maybe at this point I should clarify that I don't mean to cut all links to US sailing in favour of forming a seperate organisation.

I think the best approach is too do both. Keeping guys like John working from the inside while seriously forming an alternative organisation. Actually, forming a rival organisation will in the end empower guys like John more. Initially he may take alot of heat from the guys higher up, but eventually it will make him more powerful as he will be their only tool to limit the fall-out and if he is smart he will use that leverage to negociate more benefits out of US sailing.

Of course that new independent organisation will need to be maintained or otherwise the whigs will just forget about the deals made as soon as they have succesfully killed the forming of their rival.

That is the way it works in politics guys. It is neither good or evil, but simply the ways things are.

So it is always a two path approach where the one reinforces the other. Currently we have no other and the results are showing that.

Wouter

A 1yr. membership in US Sailing costs $60 and they vote to drop your favorite class from the Olympics.

Meanwhile, $20 gets you both a subscription to Catamaran Sailor Magazine and a 1 year membership in NAMSA. (North American Multihull Sailing Asscociation.) There's your other organization.

Click on "Main Index" above, scroll down the list about 14 forums, click on the North American Multihull Sailing Assn. forum. It's been there quite a while. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

Thanks John. That's consistent with what I've heard also, admittedly from not quite the top, but close to it.

I've had a number of lengthy email exchanges with Leslie Keller (whose willingness to discuss the issue I greatly appreciate) and I got a little more information that I find quite revealing. As you point out, the delegates knew going in that they had to secure the keelboat, but the reason is apparently slightly more complex than just the belief that keelboats are better positioned to win a medal. What I have been told very explicitly is that the Olympic Sailing Committee believed that keelboat sailors would be able to generate more donations than the multihull sailors and that those extra funds would allow the team to be better prepared for the Games and therefore have a better chance of winning a medal. And this in turn would ultimately mean more money from the USOC.

I can think of a number of good reasons why the actions of US Sailing's delegates were wrong. But this one I find astounding because it shows just how much of a disadvantage the multihull had before the process ever started. It had far less to do with how competitive a multihull team may be against the best in the world than we might have imagined. It actually depends on being able to dominate keelboats in fund-raising. And I don't understand how that could ever happen without multihull sailing being more or less a dominant faction in the greater sailing world - which is never going to happen.

If this is the way things are, it casts in a slightly different light the debate over infiltration vs separation. It seems that by US Sailing's own admission, on the Olympic issue at least, the odds are stacked so heavily against us that we would need to virtually take over the sport in order to get fair treatment.

Mark.

If you leave USSailing, the Alter Cup will become a Hobie property and a "Hobie only" event. Trust me on this <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />!

We've lost the Olympics. If we lose Alter Cup what do we have left?

Unless an alternative US Multihull Championship is organized. BTW I have not yet decided to leave - though it's still a serious option.

You don't need to call it the Alter Cup. You can do what ever you want and call it the US National Cat. Championships or something.

BTW, it seems to me that US Sailing have cast the integrity of the whole ISAF Olympic process into doubt. ISAF Regulation 16.1.5 states that the events selected -

(i) Must allow athletes around the world, male, female and of different size and weight, to participate;
(ii) Must achieve the current IOC objective of the minimum level of participation for women;
(iii) Must give the best sailors in each country the opportunity to participate in readily accessible equipment;
(iv) Must combine both traditional and modern events and classes, to reflect, display and promote competitive sailing.
(v) Must meet the IOC’s criteria for participation in the Olympic Programme.

The responsibility of the Council is to uphold their own regulations. The regional delegates are precisely the people who hold this responsibility. Yet by US Sailing's own admission they have applied a completely different set of criteria to the way they participated in this decision and in the process have completely subverted ISAFs own regulations - since the world's top catamaran sailors will now not have an opportunity to participate in the Games. I think the IOC would be pretty interested in that information.

"or something" is the problem. Getting catamaran sailors to agree on anything is like. . .herding cats! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> And, btw, if you leave USS what handicapping system will you use? We need some answers before we do anything.

In the meantime, the manufacturer most be wondering whether to go forward with the expense of getting 10 Capricorns to GYC.

As a group we need to continue support of the Alter Cup, at least thru '08. Then we can do something "en masse".

The Portsmouth numbers are pretty much garbage and we have all seen that. We could use what the rest of the world uses, or the Texel numbers, anything else would be a step up from the handicap numbers we have here.

I still find it hard to believe that after we sent about 700 emails to US Sailing, back when we were fist made aware they were not going to support a Multihull in the Olympics, that they would go right ahead and vote against it, with all our input to the contrary. Yet they voted for TWO Men's one-up Dinghys!

They say it's all about Medal production, well, how many medals have the US Sailors gathered in those two events in the past 30 years?? I can think of lots of other classes where the US has not had a medal in quite a while, but the Tornado Sailors have been producing for medals for years. What a slap in the face to them.

I didnt have time to go through 30 years of history, but at Athens 2004 the US got 1 gold for the 470 men, and 1 silver for the Tornado.
http://www.olympic.org/uk/games/past/table_uk.asp?OLGT=1&OLGY=2004

The search form below allows you to search for all medals: http://www.olympic.org/uk/athletes/results/search_r_uk.asp

My prediction..
Anger will die down.. The momentum will be lost as it looks like happening already..
ISAF will shrug it off and continue without regard.. US Sailing will do the same..

Timbo, aren't the PNs assigned by the MHC (which would be us)? Can't we lobby for ourselves to use the Texel, etc. instead of PNs? This of course, assumes PNs really are not as good as Texel, as you say. I have no idea, I race SMOD specifically to avoid that problem. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Bob got a silver in 470 in Sydney. Hey Bob, nothing against JW, but why can't we vote YOU onto the board? You're an Olympic medalist and chair of the HCA!!! Best case would be to have BOTH of you on the board!

Mike

The mountain will be there for a long time, so we should start analysing possible actions for the short, medium and long terms instead of fighting each other. I suggest the following:


SHORT TERM

The equipment is already known but the classes are yet to be chosen. "Dinghy" does not necessarily mean monohull.

It is possible to lobby for the A Class (or another single-handed dinghy cat) to replace the Finn, Laser and/or Laser radial - and for the Tornado (or another double-handed dinghy cat) to replace the 470, 49er and/or women's 470.

It is definitely not an easy task, but I guess it's the best we can do for a start - besides crying as loud as possible.


MEDIUM TERM

This development (no multihulls in the Olympics) is a consequence of the inexistence of a suitable “entry cat” competing in the same market niche of the Optimist.

An "entry cat program" is the most important action for the medium and long term development of multihulls. The F12 forum in this very site has been working on it for some time now, and most of the work is ready. Lets make it happen.


LONG TERM

In the long term we'll all be dead (ultimately <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />), but in the meantime, I agree with Mr. Williams: work within the sailing organizations to better influence the sport's politics.


I guess we can all contribute with smart strategic ideas for the future, so please bring them to discussion. No terrorism, please...


Lastly, take a look at this:
"It is irrelevant to discuss Olympic equipment - anything goes, provided everyone else is sailing the same bath tub".

I want a better answer than:
"From my point of view, everyone else is sailing multihulls. Aren't we 'someone'?."

Luiz

I still like my suggestion... Hobie 16 with spin for the women's match racing competition....

I still like the idea of pink wetsuits contrasting with the cold waters of the North Sea!

There is a lot going on in the background.

Let's think about how to overturn this decision. When the Star's got voted out a few years ago they lobbied hard. They got an extra event(number 11) added on just for them. Let's think about how we could do the same thing. How we can lobby to tack on the extra event like the Star's did. Possibly how we could go back and change the decision.

What I don't understand is why the US didn't swing one vote from each delegate away from the (forgone conclusion) single handed mono classes. If it's all about winning the classes important to them they could have done this and insured a win. Fact is the powers that be don't want multihulls in the Olympics. I guarentee if they had ten more mono classes to vote on they would vote them all ahead of a multi.

The only chance we have is to lobby to get an extra event added on is my guess. We have to fix this now or suffer the consequences of a loss of membership in US Sailing from the multihull community.

Mike Hill

So you guys are still deciding whether to stay with US Sailing? I left US Sailing last year for many reasons, and heck they are not just biased against multihulls. I joined the ASA which is much more multihull friendly and I continue to support the NAHCA. The Tornado being cut from the Olympics is no surprise, now I am waiting for sailing in general to be cut from the Olympics, which mark my words it WILL happen it’s just a matter of time. Without the most exciting class in the Olympics (the Tornado) the fate of sailing in the Olympics is set (out of there). ISAF, etc. may have their satisfaction now but it will be short lived, they shot themselves in the foot and they are just not feeling the affects yet.

I am sorry to say I never watched sailing in the Olympics anyways as most of the time they never show it but with short clips.

I am re-certifying as an instructor in the ASA, I just took my first re-cert course in Oct. in Oakland and will take 3 more in March.

Bye bye US Sailing and ISAF! Hello ASA!

You do know that all three US delegates voted against the multihulls right?

John,

I am a little at a loss here considering the medal winners from Athens as well. John & Charlie take silver on tornado and Paul & Kevin take gold on the men's 470. What are the prospects for 2008? I definately disagree with how the voting went, but also realize that there needs to be more active participation from multihull sailors in this process. With that said, how often do you want to deal with getting slapped around and pushed off race courses? I do a great deal of lake sailing and there are only a couple of events a year for multihulls because neither the monohull sailors or the RC wants to have them on the starting line. Yes, get involved, but sometimes the back room deals that get struck are more than a little frrustrating.

WOW! Such urgency. Why now? Where were you when your area Alter Cup Qualifiers were in town. If your area rep could have reported good numbers, it would have spoken volumes.
I hate to be the realist here, but we kind of shot ourselves in the foot by being arrogant.

Please do not forget that we may also work with the IOC to get that decision changed.
Please use the opportunity to sign the petition of the UKCRA, if you have not yet done so.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/multihullinolympics/index.html

Ceitzi

I'm interested to hear from MHC with an official position. JW is working his butt off at the moment and when our guys behind the scenes come to a consensus then we'll have something to work with.

"Infiltrating" is so incredibly easy and everybody should be doing it at their club. When a bunch of us cat sailors joined our local club we had 2 of us on the board within a year. One of us is Vice Commodore, a flag officer.

All you have to do is show up, get to know the folks in the club (don't be cliqueish), put the effort in (volunteer, volunteer, volunteer) and be a little bit of a politician. Don't shoot from the lip, pick your battles, be helpful, fair, and gently nudge things in the direction you want them to go.

Our fellow club members love us cat sailors. The club is functioning better as a result of our efforts. We are reliable and they know we can and will come through in a pinch. We race on their monoslugs with them for PHRF races or run their race course. We help tune their boats and sail trim by sailing with them. They appreciate it.

Yeah, they always think of us as the multihull sailors, but it's not a dirty word any more. And you'd be surprised how reasonable most of the mono guys are. They are some great friends. Once they trust us/you it's easy to get things done. Build the love and the trust.

If your club has open board meetings attend them and just sit and listen. Be consistent and show up every month and just take things in. You'll learn how things work at your club. You'll learn the personalities. Volunteer to chair a committee, be the point person for an event, just get out there and make yourself useful. Then, next elections, volunteer for a position on your board or as an officer.

All you have to do is make an investment (time and effort) in order to reap the rewards. Try it, you'll like it!

It's simple people. We need to make ourselves more visible instead of hiding away on backwaters doing our own thing.

Sailboat racing generally is an untapped resource for corporate exposure.

The continuation of sailing as an Olympic event is highly dependent on it being made a suitable spectator sport and a vehicle for advertising.
Unlike most sports, [Football, Baseball Cricket etc.,] not only are there shirts for advertising, we have a very large canvas billboard in the sail.

Presently, sailing is not popular with the general public. It's lack of appeal is mainly due to it being conducted in a geographic location which is not spectator friendly. This means that television coverage is absolutely critical to the success of sailboat racing as a spectator sport, probably more so than for any other sport, yet TV coverage of sailing is possibly the poorest of any sport.
To encourage the general public to adopt sailboat racing as a spectator sport, good television coverage is necessary, but although sailing is a difficult sport to televise, there has been very little development in method and technology.
TV coverage of the sailing is mostly done by 'general' sports produces, directors and commentators' who often know very little if anything about sailing. This generally results in an inferior product which, although of some interest to sailors, has little appeal or entertainment value for the general public. Put simply, there are not many if any directors and/or commentators who can produce a product to give an accurate, comprehensible and interesting account of a sailboat race for Mr. Joe average. This means that although a sail is a great canvas for advertising, sponsors are not keen to put money into sailing in general because the sport lacks exposure.

We desperately need good, well trained directors and commentators as well as some specific development in image capturing technology for the sport. With so many Television broadcasters worldwide, it should be a gold mine.

We now have the opportunity to develop catamaran sailing as a great sport for spectators and sponsors and a very lucrative investment opportunity for entrepreneurs.
What we have to do is develop a way to televise it, then produce it sensibly, with good direction, and commentary [NOT the Rob Mundle method], in a way which is palatable to the general public.
We could lead the way here and then the IOC and the ISAF would beg us to let them use us. Difficult but not impossible.

http://www.hospiceregattas.org/ Sanctioned by US Sailing.

I'll be attending the local event in Naples, Florida Feb. 2, '08. Beach cats will be using the same course as the "sport boats". We will have our own start assuming there are 5 boats.

Also, I am trying to start an event at my home club, GYC. http://www.gulfportyachtclub.com/

Your actions are a little bit overlooked by most of us here, Pete. But you are doing great grassroots work by showcase cats at events like the Hospice regatta. I just want to show my appreciation of that.

Great multiprone approach.

Wouter

Thanks Wouter. How 'bout some NL events? <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Most open regatta's that have mono already have a catamaran segment overhere. Example, North Sea Regatta, Round Ijsselmeer, Round Fluessen, the "24-hour race". Catsailing is also extremely visible here with over 40 cat clubs on basically a 300 km coastline. One every 7 km (5 miles). And the largest cat club (300 - 400 boats) being located on the lake were most dinghies are. And of course the Round Texel each year with a 15-30 minutes coverage on national TV.

It is hard to envision doing more then that.

That is also the reason why the voting of the Benelux (Dutch) representative was such a surprise.

Wouter

How the Au situation is..
everyone joind a club to sail.. part of the fees go to the state yachting association.. then a fee is levied by YA on the state body. $15 or so for every registered sailor at a club.. They get a silver card..
YA pays ISAF $25,000 as a membership fee..
The reason I obtained from YA was because ISAF was the only association IOC would speak with when it comes to sailing..

For what its worth..

Wouter

Perhaps you guys have grown tired of the ex pat Mitch Booth machine.

If he hasn't gotten the medal for you by now.. ... time to try another class and another stud sailor for a medal.

Hey all,

sadly we could (a little bit) expect the dutch representative to vote for classes he's professionally involved in (dinghies: Volvo Talent Plan).

But lets face the real problem, IOC and ISAF are mainly looking for boatclasses that are available to the general public (and thus tv), and that are particularly available to the young sailor.

If a young student has to choose between a $5.000 dinghy and a $40.000 Tornado to get involoved in racing, the choice is easily made. And how many people do sail a Tornado for fun? What's the percentage of Tornado boats compared to all multihulls ?

I think we have been sleeping too long.
Let's put our efforts in designing a new, relatively low cost multihull class and line up for the 2016 Olympics.

Cheers
Maarten
F18 - Hobie Tiger & 30 year old Reg White Tornado

Martenn.. your argument is a big red herring.

This vote was for the disipline...

The next round could have chosen ANY multihull in the world.

The cost of the Tornado is a red herring... the culture of the elite Tornado class... red herring.. the political skill of the ITA president... red herring. the noise made by the US and UK rank and file which was objectionable to some... red herring.

I would believe.. the dutch guy voted for his personal fav classes..

I would also believe he voted for classes that you had a shot at a medal... That is what the US did... the powers that be ALSO thought they got more money out of star and monohull sailors then out of cat sailors. (a fact that I am certain is true)

With dinghy in the Olympics costs $5.000 or less ?

Do you realize that the 49er actually costs more then a F18's ?

Why are they in and multis out ?

Wouter

>If a young student has to choose between a $5.000 dinghy and a $40.000 Tornado to get involoved in racing, the choice is easily made. And how many people do sail a Tornado for fun? What's the percentage of Tornado boats compared to all multihulls ?<

The keelboat, the "Star" costs more than a Tornado. What's the percentage in Stars?

How many women in the USA actively "match race" a keel boat?

It seems redundant to have a Laser and Finn in the Olympics.
I'm sure Robert Schiedt could win in both. (8 time Laser World Champion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Scheidt)
Ben Ainslie could not beat Schiedt in Laser Class so went over to Finn, and became WC.

Clearly, ISAF has no vision of the future of performance sailing.

Everybody is talking about multi's. In the Olympics we are talking about the Tornado. There's heck of a difference between a F18 and a Tornado.
So if you're talking and hoping for (as I do) replacing the Tornado with a cheaper, much more accessible multihull then you have to realize that such a replacement takes time. What's the alternative for the Tornado, what are the conditions the IOC/ISAF will use is case of such a replacement?

Regards

Maarten

So why would a F18 or even Hobie 16 be cheaper to run in a Olympic campaign than a Tornado??

NONE. Because ISAF has ruled out the ENTIRE MULTIHULL CLASS.

Unfortunately too many clubs have more Stars than Tornados. The Iate Clube do Rio de Janeiro (largest in Brazil) has from 20 to 30 Stars (I never stopped to count) raced on a regular basis - but only two Tornados and two 49ers - that are raced two or three times a year.

At least two US women match racing teams competed in Brazil last week. Those are the best ranked, but I am sure there are others among ocean racers.

I couldn't agree more with your words about the Laser and Finn. Ainslie can't win Scheidt, so he went to the Finn. But Ainslie is a UK national and "UK rules..." - so the Finn HAS to stay. And since his 'enemy' left the Laser, it can stay too. Now that Scheidt is sailing Stars, Brazilians were afraid it would be excluded... so they'd accept any deal to keep it - more or less the same situation as the Canadians.

The 470, Finn and Laser are all outdated and about everybody (but those few sailing current Olympic "equipment") is unhappy with the situation. As I see it, today there are only two equipments in the Olympics: monohulls and windsurfers.

"Equipment" by definition shoud not specify crew gender, crew weight, race format or subdivisions within a given equipment. "Equipments" are kites, windsurfers, monohulls, multihulls and foilers. Everything else are class specifications and should come with the class choice. There's a better text about this point in Rohan Veal's website - and I like the logic of this argument.

I guess those who voted the multihulls out will become more and more uncomfortable now that criticism comes from about everywhere. Has anyone heard any reasonable defense to ISAF's action?

Still, it is time to stop complaining/discussing and start coming up with new ideas for the short, medium and long term actions. Anyone?

As is usual with multihull sailors, lots of huff and puff and no action. This discussion has run out of steam with no serious interest in resolution submissions. Just a lot of winging and wining and no action. It's the reason we mostly are ignored and rightly so IMHO. Except for a very small minority, ALL we are interested in is turning up to a regatta to race, drink some pi$$, and bugger off home. Most regatta entrants here in Oz show little gratitude for the time and effort put in by the VOLUNTEER organisers, and most don't even bother to stay for the presentation. As the prizes are being given out, the speeches by the prize winners are drowned out by the last of the boats leaving to go home. It makes me sick.
Our club is the same, arrive, sail, pack up and pi$$ off! My wife and I stay to watch the sun go down with a glass of Chard and some prawns, but mostly we are sitting there on our own.

We have TWO ONLY dedicated cat clubs here in the whole of OZ. With the thousands of K's of beautiful lakes and coastline we have, there is just TWO cat clubs! And they struggle even though one is in Sydney, the largest city in Oz. Clubs have closed all over the place due to a lack of support. Recreation in Oz is like a dirty word. Most lakes and waterways generally are unused for recreation. There's no support for any attempt to get youth involved in cat sailing here. I've tried and been completely and totally ignored. Everyone is driven by materialism and personal gain, community is almost defunct. All very sad but true.

Good luck trying to get cat sailors interested/involved in anything other than a quick race on Saydy afternoon and a tinny.

The ISAF Olympic decision is a problem because it removes the structure for THE elite level of catamaran sailing (Tornado Olympic Sailing). Every other organizational aspect of sailing is the same today as yesterday. Same volunteers, same initiatives being worked on etc etc. So, a deep breath is needed... because the job is ONLY to replace the elite level of catamaran racing.

Certainly, F18's, A class, and Hobie 16 class world events are important but a quick look at the standings lets you know how important having that ELITE level of competition operating above these three excellent catamaran classes actually is. The elite sailors drive our particular favorite class's level of competition. Those are the names that we recognize and relish the opportunity to measure ourselves against.! What other sport gets you on the field with the best of the world!

It seems to me, that we should take this opportunity to create a NEW Structure for THE ELITE level of the sport of catamaran racing... We should not want to elevate the F18 to replace the Tornado because the slow thinkers of ISAF would have no more skill at running this level then they have with the T class.

Trashing the existing organizations is shortsighted. Our efforts should be directed to creating a new structure for the elite level of catamaran racing. Previously, these efforts were limited because the ISAF Olympic level trumped every initiative. ISAF gave up on one of their ONLY visually exciting assets. We need to take this opportunity, develop a consensus world wide and go for it!

I know the US sailors will scream... but consider Mike Worrel and the Worrell 1000 race... I would bet that more US sailors knew about that race then could tell you about the Olympic team and how they did every four years. (Of course the caution is to make sure that we build a legitimate organization to make this elite level happen with integrity and excellence as it’s benchmarks.

Pipe down Mate!
While beach catamarans are more popular as leisure/fun sailboats compared to trailererable and affordable monos, the guys that sail at the Olympic level multihull are just as serious as the mono sailors. Yes, it is a smaller group of sailors but why eliminate them from competing? Is it pure politics? What is the motivation to drop cats from the program? The dinghys don't provide any more action than cats do.
I think it is just the elitest attitude of the mono sailors in charge that is "back door politicing" to have their way.

I have seen dinghy sailing on T.V. I would rather watch fishing.
My .02 cents

Berny,

there is plenty happening in the background as we speak to sort the issue.

So stay tuned for developments and be ready to do what you can when the time comes.

We need to have a unified and strong showing when we go to ISAF with our concerns.

This is the real issue at stake here. Furthermore there is a great deal of truth to it.

Totally agree here. Well said.

While you may not see or hear about much happening today or the next few days, rest assured, there is a lot happening. The vocalized emotions are subsiding a little but there is a lot of energy being directed to fix this thing across the world right now - it's just barely below the surface for the time being.

Hold on.. lets not use that broad a brush.. Its not just cats that have declined.. I recall mirror trainers having A,B,C & D division racing on a Saturday!! With fleets of 30+ in each division.. Try and find a fleet of 6 and your pushing it today!!..

Clubs that are only cats? Did you count the Cat club at woodman point Western Australia? It hosted a world T title back in the 90s.. However Nedlands YC, Shelly YC, Maylands YC, Whitfords, mullaloo YC, And most regional YCs in WA have at least one cat racing to my knowledge.. Including the Cruising YC at Rockingham!!

The big IRC clubs have only cruising cats and tris no racing.. These are however the bulk of the cash in racing in WA... They are the ones with the royal warrants.. Have the cash from pen fees.. 500 pens at $3000+ a year soon adds up.. Then add the bar contribution which is set as well..

As for the Sydney scene.. I recall in the 70s sailing at a club on sydney harbour.. 3000 members 300 involved or related to sailing (dad/mum/uncle of a junior sailor counts!).. Rest involved in the drinks and pokies.. So nothing has changed..

Today kids have other unfortunately "sicker" distractions..

BTW Nedlands YC is still IMHO one of the great sailing venues.. It has enough grassed area to rig a world T championship and a world A title at the same time.... Would be brilliant for a F16 Title!!

While ever we continue to put our fate in the hands of mono sailors, we can expect nothing short of what we are experiencing. And given my comments/feelings above, [a result of many, many years involvement in cat racing] I have little confidence in anything changing anytime in the near future, however, nothing would make me happier than to be proved wrong! But, you'd need to have experienced the apathy, even worse, the absolute complete disregard, the resentment and even disdain shown to anyone who doesn't sail/campaign/design and/or build cats of 16ft LOA or bigger in Australia and in I'm guessing, most of the rest of the world too it seems.

I remember the first time I turned up with a 14ft boat to an open cat regatta. When I requested help to lift my boat off the trailer the guy said, "got any spare gloves?", the inference being that he really didn't want to touch something so un-cool as my 14ft thing. That says it all really. Daryl is experiencing exactly the same indignation with his AO 14, and to add insult to injury, there's now talk of designing and building yet another entry level cat for Australia. Thousands of dollars and time spent/wasted trying to do something constructive at entry level for catamarans. It beggars belief that people could be so unsupportive, so un-cooperative so completely dismissive and short sighted.

And you want to know why things are so bad?

Monohulls will kick our ar$e all day and night and it's no wonder the way we behave. While we completely ignore our juniors, they have massive campaigns to introduce youth sailors to their boats. We have almost zilch and anything we do have is treated as I have already outlined above.

You still want to know why the $hit has hit the fan, really????

Yes I'm passionate, who wouldn't be?

P.S. Now that most all of the big cats have spinnakers, our biggest cat regatta has decided to run only windward / leeward courses which means smaller, kiteless cats are even more disadvantaged than they would otherwise be. And the grapevine suggests they will again withdraw their support for that regatta.

http://www.rohanveal.com/

haha, another argument well put. If sailing is being pressured by IOC because it is boring, why aren't other events being culled? Hello, synchronised swimming!!!

BTW, Leslie has pointed out to me that I may have unwittingly left out a piece of information some may consider important here. Donations and sponsorships along with monies from the USOC are the only sources of funding that the Olympic team receives. So the decision to favor the multihulls on the basis that they are more likely to attract donations should be seen in that light.

That said, I don't believe this provides any justification whatsoever for disenfranchising an entire discipline, nor for the lack of transparency in the process.

Someone saw the decline in cat sailing coming YEARS ago:

Although I agree with a lot of this, I'm not so sure that replacing elite racing is the only thing that needs to get done. Yes, "every other organizational aspect of sailing is the same today as yesterday". But it's not as if the non-elite sector of the sport was in great shape yesterday. US Sailing, Yachting NZ and others arguably made their decisions because of a perceived lack of coordination, promotion and visibility of multihull sailing as a whole.

I am also still troubled about being a personal member of an organization led by people who have shown themselves to be unwilling to represent the interests of multihull sailors fairly (I'm not at all meaning to tar the MHC with that brush btw). And I'm not talking about "trashing the existing organizations", but still think there is a case for shifting the balance of influence away from MNAs towards a multihull-specific organization.

US Windsurfing might be a good model. Like the MHC it's also a council of US Sailing, but as far as I can tell is an independent organization responsible to its own due-paying membership. I would be much happier supporting an organization like that than US Sailing directly.

Hey, you got it wrong with the F14 concept, hence you failed. You misread the market, thinking that a great design would pull through on its own merits and now you know that that is only halve the picture.

The other project is totally different, although some volunteers in that project are determined to copy the F14 "success". If indeed that project follows the same path then I'm convinced we'll fail as well there.

Wouter

That happened here quite a while ago, for all Hobie classes. It started at the continental level, but I honestly can't remember the last regatta (at any level) that I attended where there was a reaching leg used.

The rationale is that having the reaching leg takes away one side of the course, making that leg "follow the leader." There are plenty of people who think that reaching can be tactical, and if nothing else, FUN! But, it hasn't come up at any meetings that I'm aware of to "force" RCs to reinstate these courses.

Mike

Just got off the phone with the monohull faction of OUR new sailing center getting a recap of last nights meeting I was unable to attend. Fence is up on the mast-up lot, storage shed is built, light poles and electric service to be finished within a week or so.

Now for the good stuff on next years agenda. We discussed the placement of the beach and how critical it is to the attraction of beach cats. AND, we discussed the seperate junior beach where instruction can take place undisturbed and out of traffic. Added benefit of this seperate beach was somewhere for Momma to call home. If Momma "wants" to come, the kids will be there as Youth promotion is so VITAL to ultimate success. Otherwise we're just a bunch of guys trying to steal away for a few hours with the boys each weekend. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

If you or I can't appreciate each others boats for what their purposes are?...I think that's called prejudice, it's a very detrimental thing. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Our club racing is interesting in that regard. We usually do 2-3 races on Sundays: The first race is windward/leeward, subsequent races are a mix of triangles on odd laps and windward/leeward on even laps.

That's a nice mix IMHO. I like reaching, it is fun...

However it makes for some interesting moments when you haven't read the sailing instruction at all. Especially since other boats on the water don't sail the same course at all <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />. Lasers do a smaller triangle, the fast asymmetrics do windward/leeward only and the others do triangle/sausage. I've messed up a couple of times before reading the SI and figuring out [censored] was going on.

Wouter I think your trying to get 7yr to 14 yr old kids on an international race circuit like F14. What were trying to do is bring kids through the ranks on cats, any cat will do then as they get more skillfull shape them into F14 etc. Your the one that wants to get 7yr olds on 7m square sails with collabsible masts and keep them on the same sail rig untill they get a bigger boat at age 15.
regards

Jeff,

Your description of the situation and my comments is wrong and really I don't have time to set the record straight with everybody that hasn't really tried to understand what is going on.

If you do indeed want to get better acquinted with the F12 project that here is a good place to start reading:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~whijink/F12/

Additionally, there is no F14 class. There are just three F14 prototypes in existance and the class is as dead as a dodo at this time. One of the F14 moulds was even offered to the scrapheap. The other boats are basically modified Hobie 14's and there isn't much momentum there either.

Wouter

"No F14 class"? of course there's an F14 class. There's been a shirtload of time, effort and money spent on developing the F14 class and we have two very very good boats currently completed and on the water and competing very successfully. Darryl has made a concerted effort to generate interest with his wonderful videos.
What you mean is that there's no momentum in the F14 classes either new or modified. And why do you think that is the case Wouter??? Could it be that there's no support for anyone who attempts to implement a program for youth sailing because no one cares enough to do what needs to be done, including you. What makes you think that doing something which is, not only totally un-supportive but contrary to all existing efforts, will be successful in attracting any involvement?? As I see it, you're just causing further fragmentation of an already tragically fragmented situation which is further proof that cat people are not interested in the common cause, just self promotion.

If you wish to gain support for your enterprise, please explain to us how introducing yet another 12/14ft catamaran onto an already saturated and depressed market is going to help matters??? We can't even get sufficient support within our own ranks to keep existing designs viable. Forgetting my considerable efforts over the last eight years with the 430, Darryl Barrett has produced a really a great cat. It has the potential to do anything you want it to do in introducing youth to cat sailing but you choose not to give any credence or support to his efforts. No, on the contrary, your grand plan is to further confound existing efforts by introducing yet another class.

Please tell me you're joking........!

I think it's wrong to imagine that there has to be one grand plan that everyone has to coalesce around. The problem with that - which Wouter alluded to, is that you just can't always predict how the market is going to respond to what you think is a slam dunk. Trial and error is ultimately a necessary part of the process. Some will be right and others wrong, and in varying degrees. If people do agree on a strategy that's great, but it doesn't mean that they're going to be right either. A box rule of some kind is a compromise of sorts - at least gets people who may not have completely the same ideas to agree to share the same basic parameters. But regardless of whether people take that approach or not, you've got to give people the freedom to try what they think the market will respond to and then everyone gets to learn from the outcomes. The fact that there are people trying to do good things for youth sailing is something we should celebrate, not bicker about.

Okay, I take that back. The F14 is a class and some F14's are sailing well in regatta's.

For the remainder, I don't have to explain myself to you. Afterall nearly all other youth cats, like the Hobie Dragoon and Arrow, were around when you guys gave the F14 a try and as such the exact same reasoning about splittering and fragmentation could be held about you guys. We never asked you to explain yourself in this regard so why should it be asked of me ?

You guys had several years now to make F14 work and I fail to see how an accelleration in the F12 development now can have negatively influenced the F14 developments so far (what ever they may be).

Fair winds to you.

Wouter

All I'm saying is that the problems we face in cat sailing aren't due to a lack of availability of designs [quite the contrary IMHO] but more, a severe lack of consensus within our ranks. We are significantly fragmented and disorganised. We don't have a 'grand plan'. We don't have a plan full stop! We are not only unsupportive and dismissive of efforts within our discipline to move forward, we seem to even actively campaign against each other.

Wouter, by all means go ahead and do the F12 [not that you need my permission God forbid] but I just wonder why you think an F12 will be any more successful than the F14 effort. Maybe Europe will be more accommodating, I hope so.

After the sham I've experienced here I guess I'm bitter and should just shut up and go fishing but you know, sadly, I just can't help myself <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

I didn’t really want to get into this, and it is all a total hijack of this thread, but I feel a little explanation needs to be forthcoming.
1. The F14 concept is not dead, it may be a little sluggish in realisation, but it is definitely not dead.
2. From the excess of 2000 DVD’s that I have sent out worldwide over the past 2 plus years, I have received nothing but very positive response regarding the existing F14 cats and the concept as a whole.
3. To my knowledge there are several projects currently in hand from enthusiastic sailers from various countries who are either in the process of or intend starting in the near future, constructing new 14’ cats to the F14 box rule formula, or are converting existing 14’ cats to fit within that formula.
4. Unlike the start of the F16, which already had a “base” of existing cats spread around the world which could either be readily converted to F16, or already did conform to the F16 dimensions and in so doing these cats created a substantial number already available and sailing to be incorporated under the umbrella of F16, the F14 was/is a concept that has had to start from a place where there wasn’t ANY existing 14’ cats that were similar enough and/or performance orientated enough to just be converted to F14
5. That lack of “convertible” 14’ cats meant that the F14 has had to start from scratch, and as every one knows, that means that it takes time and perseverance to follow such a project through to fruitiion. The last thing it needs is for some one with absolutely no connection to, or real interest in F14’s to shoot off at the mouth and say things like “The F14 is dead”.
6. As far as a “junior” cat is concerned, it is my belief that our current F14 in a slightly different configuration would make a perfect “trainer” for juniors. Firstly we could/would make it in “normal” glass with aluminium beams and a shorter mast with a smaller sail area, but still bring it in at under 90kgs (all up sailing weight), dramatically reducing the overall cost (possibly as low as $6000 or less) this would also have the benefits of lightweight for younger crews to handle on and off the water. The F14 is a very easy and responsive cat to sail as well as to right when ditched and I would estimate that a sailer weighing as little as 40 to 50 Kgs would have little difficulty in righting it single handed. The F14 is very buoyant and would have no problem with a crew of two juniors sailing competitively. Delete the spinnaker if so desired and sail cat rigged one up or with a crew for juniors or we could fit a small jib for two up junior sailing (we did this years ago with the Sundance 4.3)
I will just reiterate that the F14 is not dead it is just going through its embryonic stage – it may take another year, it may take another 5 years but I think that it will make it.

Back on track, this just from Yachting Australia

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Berny,

I don't really mind when someone blows off steams and gives me verbal beating on the forum. I just hit back and that is it. I won't loose any sleep over it.

I think you are indeed right about lack of real organisation among catsailors and the classes. No argument there. I'm so sure if we are actively campaigning against eachother, if anything that is accidental when it happens.

I believe the F12 will be more succesful then the F14 IF the F12 project is succesful at staying with the design goals as stated in Januari 2007. If we try to make it a wide open formula class then I'm convinced it will fail to. Basically what we need is a small inexpensive and easily build/rigged craft like the laser dinghy that is part of a OD class structure (NOT SMOD) where less important parts can be changed at will. The F14 class was indeed a formula class with wide open class rules and it was neither inexpensive enough nor easily build. The F12 has a whole game plan next to the design itself (in promo, production and reinvestments into the class). The F14 in all honesty didn't. Actually several design choices are made to improve aspects of the class that are not directly related to performance or the design itself. The choice for the slightly less performaning unstayed rig with a mast made from standardized alu tubing is a direct results of the decision to lower production costs and improve availability in much poorer area's of the world. The beams are actually the same section as the bottom of the mast. And there are several other points like this as well. As such it is fundamentally different from the F14 and most other 12 to 14 foot cats out there like the Hobie Wave. Basically, the F12 (as designed by my right now) can be complete build using standardized parts there are no catamaran specific basic parts used like extruded mastsections.

As a result my design can now be made for less then 2500 Euro's when commercially buying your mast, sail and rudders. When you make these then less then 1500 can be achieved. The design goal was less then 3000 Euro's. When sourcing components locally in say the US it is now possible to build for less then 3000 USD.

As such this design is significantly cheaper to build then as good as all other sail boats out there except the Optimist. It will however out perform nearly all of these with the exception of the Hobie 14 and F14. So the F12 is much simpler to build, very inexpensive and still acceptably performant. As such it is totally different from the F14, which is not easy to build (carbon mast and beams, spinnaker), nor inexpensive (9000 USD) but much more performant. The F12 is also rigged muhc quicker.

I feel that the F12 as described about strikes a much better balance between performance and associated costs. I also believe that the F14 is far more aimed at a different market segment.


Now can we get back to the Tornado being kicked from the Olympics ?

Wouter

It's all related and quite relevent to the discussion Wouter.

Anyone else getting unsolicited bulk email on the ISAF/Tornado topic? I've gotten one from Simon Morgan and one from Mark Hansen forwarding a message from John Williams.

I wonder where they got my email address from. I'm not annoyed by it, just surprised at the lengths some folks are going to.

The one I sent Mark wasn't really intended to be forwarded - it was an update to the MHC ExCom on status and planning.

I got the "Simon Morgan" note this morning, too. I had assumed it was sent via the MHC website where my e-mail is listed.

I am getting John's which I want to recieve, but none of the other's.

I got none but would like both <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Some relevant stuff
http://sailjuiceblog.com/2007/11/16/australia-calls-for-a-multihull-re-vote/
http://rule69blog.com/archive/2007/november/955/

The comments at the end here are quite good. Especially the procedure changes stuff
http://sailjuiceblog.com/2007/11/11/bundys-blast-at-isaf/

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Yachting Australia

"However much we might disagree, if we felt the decision had been properly considered and made with those around the table fully understanding the implications, we would accept it. Obviously we don't consider that this is the case.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

Thats all well and good but what is the point of catamaran sailors continuing to support organisations with no teeth. If the Australian delegate had voted against cats I would have cancelled the 5 Yachting Australia memberships I pay for each year straight away, as it would show that they have no influence in my chosen direction. We all know whats going to happen the American delegates for 2016 will say aw sorry we were confused, trust us next time keep paying your membership and we'll see what we can do. If every cat sailor from a country that rejected cats cancelled their membership to that country's organisation that would make people notice. Hang onto that anger and that post from Rick with the smiley face ( <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />US wants 2 cats in 2012 Olympics) needs to be permanently at the top of the posts.

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

Smoke and morrors comes to mind.

The old 'pea and thimble trick'.

The link on 'rule69' site has been disabled!!!!

Indeed <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Which means that "somebody" noticed and "somebody else" went to the trouble of making threats to the guys setting up the domain and redirecting it. I think the message is coming trough..

For those who did not get to enjoy the joke, the link http://fatoldmeninmonohulls.com/ pointed to ISAFs website.

That link doesn't work now either.

It was interesting reading Carol Cronins entry on SailJuice on the women's match racing event.

The basic gist of the story is that they now need to build a viable Olympic event.

But surely ISAF should only be selecting events that are already viable??? Am I wrong?

Incase my entry gets moderated out of there, here it is...



By: Nick Billett on November 18, 2007
at 2:08 am

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

Why is an event that needs to build momentum being selected for an Olympic spot? Surely if the event has been selected for the Olympics it already has significant infrastructure and support world wide to earn the Olympic spot. I thought that was part of the ISAF charter for selecting Olympic events.

Maybe we should try for the Special Olympics. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Hmmm, interesting idea. And the Paralympics, too. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

No you got that all wrong, The only use THAT argument to exclude a class they want to exclude like the multihulls. The 49-er was not really a viable international class at the time when they got added to the Olympics remember.

All sailboats are equal in ISAF's opinion, but some sailboats are more equal then others.

Wouter

Adversity or Opportunity ?

We just saw the A Cat-World with 100 sailors participating.
A Tornado is/was basicaly a B-Cat.
Tornado International Association could morph into a B-Cat Association, customizing existing rules to include other 20's and trigger research from boat designers and builders.
The challenge will be to favor affordable solutions without pledging innovation.
With today IT possibility, I feel confident it is possible to develop cooperative project via Internet to achieve the best trade-off between cost and performance.
It is also possible to imagine "Spare-parts Bank" involving
standard carbon cross-beam, rudder, centerboard,boom, mast....
If so, innovation can be very cheap as it will be possible to focuse on hull & sail design only.

Cheers

EK

I'm currently doing my second Internet based Catamaran design/class project; first the F16 class and now the F12 youth cat.

These IT based initiatives come with their own share of problems and obstacles. You can well compare them to any town meetings were each and any local is attending. It is very difficult to maintain focus and mould something constructive from a very chaotic environment. But having said that, it can be done. The proof is in the fact that it has been done already with regard to another class.

Wouter

I dont think the ITA will ever go for something like that. Reading the charter of the ITA, protecting the one design status and the olympic spot are on the top of the list for the ITA. A new organization would have to be set up to get a B-class started again. I am all for some development in 20 footers again, but no at the cost of multihulls in the games. It looks to me like momentum and anger is fading, even if some say there are things going on behind the scenes. I think it's too late for a big change now, the initial anger has passed.

It looks like the petition to the IOC will top 4000 signatures, that's about it.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/multihullinolympics/index.html


BTW: The ITA charter is not available on the ITA website anymore? Wonder why it has been removed? Last time I checked, it was there, and there have been no ballots in the meantime.
http://tornado.org/uploads/documents/International%20Tornado%20Class%20Constitution.pdf

A little disappointed no one reacted to this. Any thoughts? Particularly interested in hearing from John W. and area reps.

If an open class is the answer, it is misguided thinking that simply taking ideas from an open forum is sufficient. "I'm currently doing my" does not lead to confidence in contributing. Your formal claim of ownership in letter form on your site reinforces your intentions. You should look toward the open source software licenses for guidance on developing a community based, community owned endeavor. Your current attempts are really no different than any of the traditional manufactures with their class associations.

On a related note... do you know about the existing Newcat F12 catamaran? Newcat F12 reference

The Tornado is one of the B Class Catamarans that were at the 1967 Olympic Trials to choose an Olympic multihull platform. The were quite a few others there, some still existing classes today such as the Dart.

This is from Scuttlebutt Europe!

Editorials - The Olympics


Most editorials this week focused on the ISAF's decision vis a vis the events for the 2012 Olympics. I'd like to have struck a balance, but frankly it was impossible to find anyone who thought the final vote result was anything but a disaster.

Most notable are those from the current crop of Olympic sailors:

* In a letter to Magnus Wheatley's Rule69blog.com, Ian Walker, one of Britain's greatest sailors:

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. 24 hours ago I thought the ISAF Events Committee had sobered up from their night on the tiles by deciding to axe the 2 keelboat classes - at last they have seen some sense. Get rid of the 2 most expensive boats to campaign that hardly anybody sails - obvious!

They have now perfected a U turn faster than any modern political party. If ISAF cannot see that high performance dinghies are the way of the future and that the obvious way to increase female participation in the Olympics (and the sport) was the women's high performance dinghy then there is little hope.

How can you possibly justify ruling out a women's high performance dinghy in favour of women's match racing? How many countries have a women's match racer? Is this the future of our sport? Compared to high performance sailing, match racing is dull and the technicalities are understood by few - there is no obvious feeder (except maybe university team racing) and the bigger countries will simply 'out coach' the smaller nations to victory. If match racing is so good why has it already been kicked out of the Olympics for the men? If it is so good then surely have it for men and women! I suspect it is simply a convenient way of getting the number of female competitors up with only 1 medal allocated.

The saddest thing in all this is that Weymouth is a fantastic venue for high performance sailing and there will be lots of female 29er youth sailors who will not be able to move up to the Olympic classes. I wonder how many young sailors were asked for their opinions by ISAF? Whilst nobody will shed a tear for the Yngling which should clearly have never been an Olympic Class, what about the Tornados? Surely it offers more of a spectacle than Finn sailing? Surely it is more appealing than Star sailing? I have sailed Stars in the Olympics and even I think they should not be in the Games. As you rightly point out there is light at the end of the tunnel as ISAF Council will probably make another U turn and change this decision when they next meet, which kind of begs the question why have the committees in the first place. I'm with you - let's bin the committees and have a dictatorship. The question is 'who would make the best dictator?'

* In TheDailySail.com, comments from Shirley Robertson and Simon Hiscocks: Shirley Robertson: Some might say that match racing will be good for the sport as it can reduce costs dramatically with boats being supplied for events, but Robertson maintains this is simply not the case. "It would be interesting to know how see it working. Are they going to select a boat or are they to be supplied? If the reason is to lower price then I do not think that they have really thought it through. If you are going to be match racing in different boats then you end up buying two of each for training. Then the rich countries just get better and better because they can buy more and more boats," she points out.

This is not the only problem either. Robertson adds that with fleet racing in theory anyone can give it a go, but with match racing it is much more difficult as entry to regattas often involves invitations based on each individual sailor's ISAF ranking.

Simon Hiscocks: Haha the ISAF cannot get themselves out of their comfortable little place and move the sport on. They are still clearly stuck in their choice of disciplines with relation to the actual classes used. What clear thinking person could justify a single handed boat for the men as well as a single handed boat for the men , when the women get only one choice of single handed or double handed boat to sail.

They hark on about the need to improve the sports' image to raise the media profile etc and then fail to deliver when it really matters...

I argue that the one person dingy serves the same sailing community as the heavy, particularly as the keel boat also fits into the heavy category. Look at, currently, the class in question, either you get lighter and sail a Laser or sail a Star, simple. It doesn't serve a particular sector of the sailing community. Nor is it representative of the sport - the Laser is the worlds most popular sail boat, nearly all other single handers are a slightly smaller or larger derivative of this, (go on Phantom and OK sailors get your arms in the air) so the Laser represents this sector of the sport. -- lots more from both sailors at www.thedailysail.com

* Olympic multihull sailor Darren Bundock: What can I say? I am shocked, disappointed and totally confused. I have lost all faith in the ISAF and especially the council decision-making process. Sailing has taken a massive backwards step not only eliminating the multihull but not implementing the women's high performance skiff or the women's multihull. Just keeping the doublehanded dinghy and not moving with the times.

Our sport had the chance to take a massive jump in London 2012 (finally an Olympics possibly with wind) but our sport has been destroyed by a council made up of inactive unyouthful ex-sailors living in the past.

The multihull has been discriminated against, it was the easy option. Despite multihulls making up for 25% of the sailing fraternity we have very little representation on the ISAF council. They are all elderly keelboat sailors. I'm surprised the multihull got so close to defeating the keelboats. I am at fault in not believing ISAF would discriminate against a whole diverse discipline in the Olympics. -- Boating OZ, www.boatingoz.com.au/?page=24014

Yachting Australia statement
Concern raised by authority's CEO Phil Jones over 2012 events
Yachting Australia has expressed both disappointment and concern over the decision taken last week by the ISAF Council to drop the Multihull from the list of events for the 2012 London Olympic Games. Yachting Australia delegates supported the retention of the multihull event throughout the ISAF Annual Meetings which took place in Estoril, Portugal from 3-11 November.
ISAF was challenged with reducing the number of Olympic events from 11 in 2008 to 10 for 2012 in Weymouth. "To not include the multihull in 2012 is to disenfranchise a large part of the sport of sailing," says Phil Jones, CEO of Yachting Australia and member of the ISAF Events Committee, which recommended that the multihull should be retained. "The speed and excitement of catamarans is a real draw to young people. They are the speed machines of sailboat racing. Whilst there is only a limited number of countries involved in the Tornado Olympic Class, multihull sailing is an attractive and truly global part of the sport."

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

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

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

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

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

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

So, really.....

Why not go for the 'X' games? More popular for youth, fast, exciting, world class athletes. Great venues.

I say bail on the 5 rings, go for the X.

This is the Olympic Report on its reccomendations made to the ISAF prior to Beijing-
OLYMPIC PROGRAMME COMMISSION
REVIEW OF THE OLYMPIC PROGRAMME
AND THE
RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE PROGRAMME OF THE
GAMES OF THE XXIX OLYMPIAD, BEIJING 2008\

3.1.4 Recommendations on the events/athlete quotas of sports currently in the
Olympic Programme
While noting that a full review of the event programme and athlete quotas for the Games of
the XXIX Olympiad would be conducted following the decisions on sports and disciplines,
the Commission developed certain recommendations on the events or athletes quotas in
the following sports on the programme of the Games of the XXIX Olympiad:
Sailing (ISAF) – Reduction in athlete quota and number of events
In comparison with other individual sports, the Commission noted the high quota and
number of events in sailing, in comparison to the low broadcast and spectator appeal. In
addition, the cost and complexity of the operations of the sailing competition were
discussed, with the resulting challenges for general practice and development of the sport.
The Commission therefore recommends the reduction of the athlete quota and number of
events in the sport of sailing for the Programme of the Games of the XXIX Olympiad.
It was noted that the Keelboat class are very expensive boats and demand costly
infrastructure for Olympic competition, and for general practice and development in
comparison to other classes. Therefore, if the Executive Board recommends the reduction
in the number of athletes and events, the Commission believes these reductions could be
made through the exclusion of keelboat sailing events from the Programme of the Games
of the XXIX Olympiad, which would also reduce the construction and operational costs and
complexity.

I'm proposing an OD class setup not a SMOD setup. I will control the rights to the class and design in order to have sufficient control later on when the class growths. But as it is an OD with area's left unregulated anyone can commericialize their own endeavours. Adn if anybody REALLY disagrees with this then they are welcome to replace me, as I have offered many times. I appears however that I'm the only one willing to put in the required effort. And I'm not going to do all that work without coming away with something.

Wouter

Laste news from the Hobie representative at the Estoril scandal: http://sailjuiceblog.com/2007/11/18/hobies-man-wants-a-mid-year-rethink/


I must say, Andy Rice came across as very biased against multihulls when I started reading his blogs on the olympic classes. He for sure is living high on the subject now. I wonder wether I was mistaken or if he is just living high on his own media event.

Theres heaps of people putting in effort on Youth cats at the moment. The F12 concept for me is already smothered with **??//. Ive got 4 kids and parents lined up so far to build boats together and plan to modify the plan we choose to suit our location. Fortunately the kids are too young to care about Olympics yet but if the anger is sustained internationaly they might have something to shoot for when they get older. This Olympic decision has got me so angry that if I had the cats now I would never let my kids in a dinghy again.

What can I say, apparently this is the way people cooperate in a project. Doesn't mean we won't shake hands and be together proud of the final result at a later stage.

From my perspective I feel there will be an F12 design and it will be a proper design at that. I also believe that anybody can do with the design what they want if it is for their own use. By the class building should focus on a single design that has a serious chance of being accepted by a large group of people internationally. Otherwise there is no point in the F12 project, the project (among other things) aims at unifying all these efforts.

Wouter

****

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

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

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

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

Wankers

We want exciting boats to watch

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

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

____________________________________________________

From: André Raoult

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

____________________________________________________

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

Hey thanks for that Darryl. I've posted the link to that over on crew.org.nz.

One question: can someone confirm if the vote of a council member is personal or not? If not, is it in representation of his country, his area or his position in ISAF's organization structure (VP, etc.)?

The equipment range should be wider:[color:"red"] Kite, Board, Monohull, Multihull and Foiler.[/color]

Could also read: "detached line controlled sail" equipment, "hand stayed sail" equipment, "single flotation volume" equipment, "multiple flotation volume" equipment and "dynamically supported weight" equipment.

Note that [color:"red"]crew number, gender, weight, ballast, "Dinghy", "keelboat" and "High Performance"[/u] are not "equipment" [/color]. Those are specifications that replace "monohull" equipment in order to manipulate the final results.

Likewise, we could specify "catamaran", "trimaran" and "Formula" instead of "multihull" in order to have more multihull classes included, without ever mentioning "multihull".

Also, boards could specify "slalom windsurfer", "wave ridding widsurfer" and "formal racing windsurfer" without ever mentioning "board".

A typical example is the use of "singlehaded heavyweight dinghy" instead of "monohull" in order to force the selection of the Finn class. Could just as well be "with a name that starts with FI and ends with NN".

The three US Delegates voted as they were directed - there were no "loose cannons." I expect that other countries' delegates did the same. There are coordinated international efforts to see some votes changed should the YA strategy of calling for a re-vote or a run-off prove successful. If you live in GBR or NZL or BRA or CAN, you should be working toward finding out why your Delegates voted as they did, and determining what it would take for them to rank the open multihull event above the men's keelboat event. In some cases, it is merely subjective on their part and quite easily reversed.

If the Council has a re-vote or if they have a run-off vote between open multihull and men's keelboat, we only need to pick up a couple of votes. Work on your MNAs - no name calling, threats or bluster.

Well my NMA knows ISAF screwed up. We have just de-listed funding for all ISAF sanctioned events..
However non-ISAF events will still be funded..

Interference with a non-Sanctioned event by ISAF will find the event unfunded..

Stewart, can you clarify - when you say "we" de-listed funding, who do you mean? YA? Or your local club?... Not sure I'm understanding.

Stewart how are you taking action that doesn't affect the Australian delegates standing, I'd love to know what we can do at a local level
regards

The VP's are free agents, they are not accountable to anyone; the letters after their names indicates where they live, not what country association they report to.




John,

not sure what you mean regarding GBR.

The SOLE GBR "rep" was Chris and he voted for the Catamaran.

The other 2 persons, one is the offshore rep (and so hardly surprising he voted for leadmines), also not under the "whip" of the RYA; The other, Fiona (The VP with GBR after her name) is a free agent as so may vote in any way she sees fit.

Hey Scoob -

I understand the relationship those Delegates have (or don't have) with RYA, but I assume that those folks are in Great Britain and will at least listen to other GBR sailors. I'm finding friendly ears in the US and making a reasoned case for reconsideration in the event YA's procedural challenge is successful. I know how the RYA voted, but it appears there are two other GBR votes to consider. They may or may not be willing to take discussion on the issue.

Indeed, understand that.

4112 sigs so far here: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/multihullinolympics/index.html

how long to 5K ?

John,

I happen to know well the only Brazilian who voted there, but in my opinion this doesn't help much. Maybe the data and reasoning will be of help:

He personally funded or participated in the funding of the most successfull Brazilian Olympic sailing campaigns, bringing more Olympic medals to the country than any other sport (yes, of ALL olympic sports!). Among others, he funded Lars Grael's Tornado campaigns that culminated with a bronze medal when Randy Smith won silver.

The fact that only two persons have represent Brazil in ISAF almost forever is recognized as one of the reasons why Sailing is more succesfull than any other Olympic sport in Brazil.

The two representatives and their group (the Iate Clube do Rio de Janeiro sailing department and part of the council, essentially) are stronger than the Brazilian Sailing Federation (FBVM), that is more government related than sailing related. The FBVM manages government money to sailing and boating, which is not really relevant. Anyway, his vote is representive of this group's opinion and, since a consensus is rare, the two ISAF "life representatives" opinion weight a lot.

I know that the person who voted (and his group) have nothing against multihulls, so pressing him is worse than useless, especially from abroad (remember I am not in Brazil now). He knows me since I was three years old and will not form his opinion based on what I say. What I can do is send information from important and reliable third parties - and that is what I am doing. But not in an obvious way:

I am sending everything to the greatest sailing reporter in the country. His note following the vote was pro-multihull and pro women's HP dinghy. He sails mostly Stars with the mentioed group and works as Lars Grael's press secretary (Lars is in politics since he lost his leg). This will work over the entire group and will carry more weight than a chat over the phone with me.

Another piece of information: the Tornado sailors in Brazil are leaving for the A Class because they feel the T is too expensive - and it certainly is for them due to 85% taxes/duties on anything imported. When people say "the Tornado is relatively inexpensive compared to campaign costs" they forget to consider each country's specifics. Those taxes/duties do not apply to campaign costs, obviously, so the cost of the boat is proportionally more important for the Brazilians.

Best regards,

Since the funds are being provided by a global group its not related to Australian delegates.. I expect the affiliated national corporations boards to receive the memo directing sponsorship protocols changes this week..

Better brains than mine should answer the second question.. But being visible at open race regattas is one I would encourage.

The companies I sit on, or have proxies on the boards are reasonable providers of sport event funding. Not as large as Reebock et al. But reasonable, since its not a core part of our marketing, and sits globally around the million dollar mark. Just part of our community service policy.

In the past we have sponsored events, classes and individuals..

where are the Brazilian "A"s being built?
Nothing stopping someone taking a mold from a fast boat and using that to build "T"s.
<img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

There is someone who was building T's in Brazil. Do not know how many he built though. I think only a couple. And that 85% tax and duties is not going to get changed anytime in the near future. The Brazilian A-Cat is the Samba Cat.

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


“Dear Andy

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards,

Carolijn”

Brenner was voting for the US on ISAF Council. Ref: http://sailmagazine.blogspot.com/2007/11/talkin-olympic-blues.html

Yep, That sounds like Dean.... Usually, he insists that you honor his request for all communication to be private.

He is a staunch defender of Gary Bodie, Multihull sailing coach, and the screw-up who attempts to override PU... the PRO's safety concern at the OCR's. The bozo who can't figure out that a mixed teams at the ISAF F18's will be DSQ's cause they are not both men! and so on and so on.

BUT.... US Sailing Olympic is not using the membership dues that we send in!!! I think this is a popular misconception. Brenner to his credit is out raising lots more money then previous administration

How US Sailing supports Multihull sailing is NOT dominated by this Olympic BS...

We should not throw the baby out with the bath water.

We must press the point that this decision is unfair, wrongheaded and short sighted.

NOR should we stop holding US Sailing's feet to the fire for continued support of all of the programs that we do use.
Junior ISAF championships... Alter cup. Rules, Appeals, judges, training, ratings and so on.

Finally, It's hard to argue the point that we, the catamaran community need to build a top to bottom training program. The mono's have a program through college which can lead a sailor to international competition. Catamarans have a far less coherent program. That is going to be our responsibility if we want a different result in 4 years.

I find it disappointing that he only tells part of the story here. What he omits is the reason they believe it affords the best medal chance - not because they think the US has a fundamentally more competitive position in keelboats, but rather because they think they can raise more donations for the team if they have a keelboat and since they are so dependent on these funds believe that this will be instrumental in ensuring that the team will be better prepared to win than with a multihull. It's a perfectly cogent argument. I just wish he would make it openly instead of feeding us only the part of the story that avoids the conclusion that the multihull community have been badly treated.

Editorials


The Olympic event selection by the ISAF Council and the America's Cup steelcage death match continue to dominate the editorials this week...

On the ISAF Olympic Selections:

* From Simon Morgan, Former Hobie 16 National Champion and ISAF Worlds competitor, Founder Wildwind Sailing Holidays, and co-incidentally son of Tony Morgan Silver Medallist 1964 Tokyo Olympics, two man Flying Dutchman class:

Since Scuttlebutt Europe's weekend edition much prompted at least some defence of ISAF's controversial decision, (Paul Henderson, Jack Dinelli et al) I would like to follow up their comments:

First of all I can have every sympathy with Mr Henderson's view that it is 'ridiculous to blame ISAF, which is only the structure wherein the votes are cast' - 'ISAF is only as good as the delegates nominated by their National Authorities.'

However, Mr Henderson also writes 'that the process is now open and how each delegate voted is public'. This would perhaps not appear to be the case when analysing the vote of the Council to reject the recommendations of its Executive Committee, when an electronic vote was made and no record of how members voted appears to have been recorded. And no one from ISAF has explained this decision. Why bother having an Events Committee then?

If I am not mistaken, the IOC themselves offer pretty specific guidelines as to how choose Olympic events and this seems largely to have been ignored.

''the following principles should be reflected in the general composition of the Olympic Programme"

"Similar events...should be avoided" - Why then vote for two types of double-handed dinghies for both men and women rather than a single type of Multihull for either men or women?

"Global public and media interest in a sport must be considered as key elements... for these are fundamental elements in the success of the Games" - Why then vote against Multihulls, which are certainly the fastest Event in the Sailing Regatta and in general opinion also the most exciting to watch?

"Weight category events should not be allowed, except for the combat sports and for weightlifting" - Since sailing falls into neither of these exceptions, why vote for an Event, specifically described as 1 Person Dinghy (Heavy)?

Specific guidance for ISAF is given in paragraph 3.1.4,
"In comparison with other individual sports, the Commission noted the high quota and number of events in sailing, in comparison to the low broadcast and spectator appeal" - Why then vote against Multihulls, whose size and speed makes them especially attractive for the new technology of on-board cameras first tried out for Multihull and High Performance Events at the Sydney Games?

"It was noted that the Keelboat class are very expensive boats and demand costly infrastructure for Olympic competition, and for general practice and development in comparison to other classes. Therefore, if the Executive Board recommends the reduction in the number of athletes and events, the Commission believes these reductions could be made through the exclusion of keelboat sailing events" Why then specifically disobey an unambiguous guideline and vote to exclude Multihulls instead?

It has also been mentioned (rumoured?) that a number of representatives on Council voted against the recommendations of their own National Authorities. IF even ONE of these had changed the votes then the voting would have been tied; with two.....a clear cut decision in favour with the multihull would have followed.

My real beef is not with the keelboat class per se, even though that appears to be the second least popular class amongst delegates. It is that is seems totally unreasonable to have two singlehander and two two man dinghies at the expense of the multihulls - and the fact that Ben Ainslie managed to jump from the Laser to the Finn and win Gold in both classes seems to be a very real argument against the necessity for such doubling up.

My real complaint has to be that somehow ISAF's Council members on this occasion, whatever their good intentions, have not represented in any real way the views of their constituents, the sailing public. Perhaps if one good thing will come out of this whole sorry saga it will be a top to toe re-examination of just how Council members are selected and how more true democracy can find its way into top level decision making.

One last point; as of 2030 GMT Tuesday 20th November some 4250 signatures have added their names to the petition to the IOC requesting the re-instatement of the multihull class. While Mr Henderson says that 'all hell breaks loose' every time there is a change of class I severely doubt that decisions by previous Councils have in fact found so much public disagreement.

Furthermore, to put those numbers in perspective (even though I have said that I am not specifically against the keelboat class) those 4250 signatures gathered in 10 days compare with one half of all the Sail numbers issued to the Star class since 1911. Yes folks, the Star was designed nearly 100 years ago ... and we are dropping the multithull! There really can be no wonder why there has been and will continue to be such a furore until this issue is settled in a more sensible fashion.

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

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

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

But most of all, I am disappointed about the Events selection procedure. The members of the Events Committee have been chosen by their MNAs because they are the so called experts in the issues/areas that involve Events, including Olympic Games and Olympic Event Selection. The normal procedure is that the voting on respective issues that involve Events is done on our Committee and we then put them forward as a recommendation to Council. Council usually accepts our recommendation.

This time however they just chucked it out the window and started all over again. So, what are we actually doing there as an Events Committee if our expertise is not being used anyway? This is really disappointing and to be honest I don't understand what ISAF is doing. It's frustrating being part of it, and having the feeling that you are completely useless. It's not about the sailors, it's about the blazers. So many people have told me already, don't try and understand, it's a waste of time. And I still keep thinking I can make a difference in there.

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

I have a very straightforward, simple and symmetric opinion of how easily we can have only ten events for sailing in the Olympics and still cover the whole range that our beautiful sport has to offer:

- Singlehanded Men/Women
- Doublehanded Men/Women (High Performance)
- Multihull Men/ Women
- Windsurfer Men/Women
- Keelboat Men/Women (matchracing)

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

Carolijn's full editorial on SailJuice.com:
sailjuiceblog.com/2007/11/23/catwoman-sharpens-her-claws/

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

/bump

What should be of more interest is what Yachting New Zealand have to say on the matter. Maybe one of our NZ colleagues could post a copy of the document and reasoning behind YNZs descision

I do have some documentation that originated from the YNZ Olympic Committee. It came to me by somewhat indeterminate means, so I'm seeking some clarification on whether it's ok for me to post it. It leaves me speechless with anger.

I have been trying to get someone in the NZ media to take an interest in the fact that YNZ (and others) have blatantly violated ISAF regulations in making this decision. I have emails in to both the country's leading yachting journalist and (arguably) the leading general sports journalist. Unfortunately the former is currently overseas and the latter is at the NZ Golf Open till next week.

Ok, here's the latest.

The document I had received was an email dated Nov. 23 from YNZ's Olympic Operations Manager, Leslie Engot, to the YNZ Olympic Committee requesting a meeting to discuss the Olympic event situation. It included an attachment that contained an analysis (I presume Leslie's analysis) of the relevant issues and a recommendation of YNZ's position.

The email was forwarded to me by another NZL sailor and apparently had been distributed fairly widely. Because it wasn't clear to me how it came into the hands of the person distributing it and because it contained comments that I think show YNZ in an extremely poor light, I decided as a matter of courtesy to email Leslie Engot and tell her I had this document, that there was strong interest in the multihull community in the information it contained and that I was planning to post it online. I asked her to get back to me if she saw any reason that it should not be made public.

A short while ago I received the following -


---
Dear Mark,

Thank you for your email.

The document circulated this week was a confidential document. It was intended to be confidential to Yachting New Zealand’s Olympic Committee. The distribution of this document may potentially harm the interests of YNZ. YNZ does not in any way sanction the distribution of this document and reserves any legal options it may have in this matter.

YNZ today issued a briefing to its database of members and I attach this release. This is available to you for further publication without our objection.

Regards,

Leslie
---


I think Leslie's comment that "this document may potentially harm the interests of YNZ" is consistent with my own reaction to it. I have no idea whether YNZ actually have any legal rights with respect to the document, but I am willing to respect the privacy of internal YNZ communications. However I reproduce for your information below the public YNZ briefing referenced in Leslie's email. I will also make my media contacts aware of YNZ's effort to suppress a more transparent account of their decision-making process.



YNZ Briefing, dated November 28:

---
Event Programme: Olympic Games London 2012
There has been some controversy around the world about ISAF’s selection of events for the 2012 Olympic Games. ISAF was required by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to reduce sailing events from 11 to 10 for the Olympic sailing regatta to be held in Weymouth, England. This decision was made this month by ISAF’s Council at its meeting in Estoril, Portugal.

The decision is a blend of policy and politics. ISAF’s Events Committee considered issues such as national participation, media appeal, and reducing costs. It therefore recommended dropping both the men’s and women’s keelboat events. The ISAF Council however did not adopt this recommendation and voted it appears along political lines. Strong class associations lobbied, and nations may have followed their individual interests rather than the general interest of the sport.

The review by ISAF of its Olympic events arises from ongoing work by the IOC and ISAF to address IOC’s requirement for a reduction in the number of events and the numbers of athletes. A report by the Olympic Programme Commission reported as follows with respect to the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games:

“In comparison with other individual sports, the Commission noted the high quota and number of events in sailing, in comparison to the low broadcast and spectator appeal. In addition, the cost and complexity of the operations of the sailing competition were discussed, with the resulting challenges for general practice and development of the sport.”

“The Commission therefore recommends the reduction of the athlete quota and number of events in the sport of sailing for the Programme of the Games of the XXIX Olympiad.”

“It was noted that the Keelboat class are very expensive boats and demand costly infrastructure for Olympic competition, and for general practice and development in comparison to other classes. Therefore, if the Executive Board recommends the reduction in the number of athletes and events, the Commission believes these reductions could be made through the exclusion of keelboat sailing events from the Programme of the Games of the XXIX Olympiad, which would also reduce the construction and operational costs and complexity.”

Earlier this year Yachting New Zealand’s Board asked its Olympic Committee to make recommendations with respect to 2012 events. The recommendation by the Olympic Committee was based exclusively on our ability to win medals in 2012. The Olympic Committee considered that New Zealand’s weakest events were likely to be the multihull and the skiff. It also considered that match racing instead of fleet racing would better suit our keelboat sailors in 2012.

The Board largely supported the Olympic Committee’s review, but ruled that the skiff rather than the multihull be dropped, while supporting women’s match racing.

At the ISAF Council meeting, the women’s events selected were in line with YNZ’s aim. With respect to the men’s events, area representatives were required to vote for 6 events – more or fewer would be deemed invalid. It was apparent in advance of the formal vote that five events were secure, and that the two insecure events were the keelboat and the multihull. Either of these would be eliminated. In order to retain the keelboat, our area representative did not support the multihull. It was clearly not in New Zealand’s interest in winning medals to lose the men’s keelboat, and that has been achieved. The multihull event has been part of New Zealand’s history of sailing success and it is disappointing to see it go from the Olympic Games.

The inherent risk to sailing’s continuing presence at the Olympic Games beyond 2012 is of course of concern, given the thinking of the IOC’s Olympic Programme Commission as reported above. This matter now needs to be seriously considered by all ISAF members beyond 2012. In the end, the appeal of our sport to international television audiences will have a very big impact on its future as part of the Olympic Games.

Des Brennan
Chief Executive
---

Having read the document that they are refering to also, and wishing to also respect the privacy of this document...all I can say that the official release above in reality does NOT show the exact reasoning of YNZs. If this document as I believe should be put in the public domain then Im afraid that YNZ would be shown in a VERY poor light.

Like Mark I am appalled at the approach of YNZ and what is said in this document.

I suppose like many other's out here, i would like to see the other document. I hope the legality of posting it can be cleared up soon, so that it can be shared with the world.

I suspect this is the document we have heard about: http://sailjuiceblog.com/2007/11/30/young-fit-sailors-in-the-olympics-whatever-next/

Yep that's it. So you can understand my "speechless with anger" comment.

Incidentally, yesterday I sent a response to Leslie Engot in which I asked the following -

---
I would be interested in understanding your thoughts on ISAF Regulation 16.1.5(a) and how you see the connection between this and Des Brennan's comment that "the recommendation by the Olympic Committee was based exclusively on our ability to win medals in 2012". Does YNZ believe that in focusing exclusively on New Zealand's medal prospects it has fully and faithfully discharged its responsibility as a Member National Authority to identify the events that satisfy the criteria prescribed in the ISAF regulation?

I'm especially interested in your view of multihull sailing as it relates to the criterion in 16.1.5(a)(iii). Do you believe that multihull sailing involves skills that are in any significant measure distinct from those involved in other types of sailing? Do you believe that the best multihull sailors in each country and across the world are in fact "the best" at something that is any different from other sailing disciplines? If so, how do you see 16.1.5(a)(iii) being satisfied in relation to these athletes? I would also be interested in your views on this as it applies to women's high performance dinghy sailing.
---

When we MNAs realise that the future of sailing in the olympics is more important than thier ability to win gold medals, without sailing in the olympics no golds to win....does lead me to ask if this is a good thing?

Or that there are two ways to win medals:

--Construct the events around your active programs

--Construct your active programs around the events

With the later, you get to do what's good for the sport AND win medals...but Star sailors would rather build the programs around the Star and see it be an event.

I haven't checked in for a few days, so sorry if this has been posted already - I haven't read everything tonight. It is from the UK website "The Daily Sail" - You will see that at least the Irish were honest <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

The Daily Sail

*A look at the Council
Why were ISAF able to make such a bad decision?*

Two and a half weeks ago we saw the ISAF, at their Annual Conference in
Estoril, make the huge decision not to include a women?s high
performance skiff in the 2012 Games, to swap women?s keelboat fleet
racing for match racing and to drop the multihull from competition.

Just how unpopular this proved to be quickly became evident with much of
the sailing community expressing its distaste and often anger at the
outcome. Perhaps now this feeling has begun to dissipate a little it is
worth taking some time to investigate just how an unpopular decision was
able to be made.

A key point in the process that riled many was that at the Conference
the ISAF Events Committee met the day before the ISAF Council were due
to make their decision and voted on a list of suggested events. The
Events Committee is made up of experts in Olympic sailing and classes
and with the brief that they had to drop two classes to be replaced by
one ? the women?s high performance skiff - they came up with a list many
were happy with. Effectively they chose to get rid of the two keelboat
classes. Their decision was then passed onto the ISAF Council who
appeared to completely ignore the expert advice, making up their own mind.

Before we further blast the ISAF for their decision it is worth taking a
moment to understand who exactly makes up the ISAF Council and who
therefore has a vote in the Olympic Events that are selected for the
Games. The Council itself is made up of one President, seven
Vice-Presidents, 28 MNA (Member National Authority) representatives, one
Offshore representative, one ISAF Classes Committee Representative and
one Women?s representative. Essentially, then, the biggest contributors
to the council are MNA reps. In theory, if you are a member of your
national sailing authority like the RYA, you should be able to have some
say about the direction of your MNA and so the way in which they vote.
But of course if this were actually the case, clearly we would not now
be in a situation with so many disgruntled sailors.

Recently several national authorities have issued statements citing
their views about the ISAF events selection. These shed much light on
one of the key issues involved, none more so than the recent Irish
Sailing Association statement, where they are very open about how they
went about their decision making process: /Although we have had some
Multihull Olympic campaigns in the past, Ireland has never succeeded in
qualifying for entry to the Olympic Games in this class. There are
currently no Irish sailors engaged in Multihull Olympic campaigns and no
junior or developmental programmes which would feed into future
campaigns, hence the decision for our vote in favour of the other men's
classes.

So in a nutshell; national authorities vote in a way that ensures
maximum potential Olympic success for their own nation. Why would they
do anything else?

With such a system in place, where the majority of the votes arguably
have the future of the sport on the Olympic stage as a secondary focus,
it is little surprise we get decisions that are far from representative
of the sailing community as a whole.

Another item that has come to the fore in the last couple of weeks is a
document called the ?Olympic Programme Commission Review of the Olympic
Programme and the Recommendations on the Programme of the Games of the
XXIX Olympiad, Beijing 2008.? In this article the International Olympic
Committee suggests, with regards to the reduction of sailing classes,
that: ?/the Commission believes these reductions could be made through
the exclusion of keelboat sailing events from the Programme of the Games
of the XXIX Olympiad, which would also reduce the construction and
operational costs and complexity/.? This is no hidden document and the
IOC discussed this with the ISAF back when the events where being
considered for the 2008 Olympics. We have to therefore assume one of two
things: either the ISAF Council did not know or somehow forgot about
this view from the IOC or, perhaps even worse, knew about it and chose
to totally ignore their suggestions.

Clearly one could argue that the IOC is not as informed as the ISAF
about sailing, but in honesty this is an irrelevance. If the IOC itself,
the overall architects of the Games, suggest the keelboat classes need
to be removed, then surely the ISAF can only realistically vote to keep
them in if they have some fantastic reason to do so. But given that the
Events Committee also chose to remove the keelboats from the Olympics,
it seems this fantastic reason does not exist.

When it comes to the future of sailing in the Olympics surely the best
thing that our sport can do is to please the IOC by taking on board
their suggestions and increasing the spectacle and media and public
appeal of our sport at this, one of it?s most public platforms.

If we consider it is of utmost importance to take heed of the IOC?s
comments ? particularly as the majority of the ISAF?s income is
generated by being an Olympic sport ? then ignoring their suggestions
seems very unwise course indeed. However, the next interesting point
within the same document is perhaps even more startling.

The inclusion of two men?s singlehanded dinghy events for the 2012
Games, has caused a bit of a stir among some sailors. This is something
that is theoretically new for the 2012 Olympics as, up until now, the
Finn has been categorised as an open single hander. This used to be the
role of the Laser, but with the introduction of the Radial as the
Women?s Singlehander this notion is become redundant. However, clearly
no women were reasonably going to stand a chance of being competitive in
the Finn so that event has been changed to the Men?s Heavy weight Single
Handed Dinghy, while the Laser remains as the men?s single handed dinghy.

Given this name change it is a worry to find contained within the
previously mentioned IOC document a statement which reads: ?/Weight
category events should not be allowed, except for the combat sports and
for weightlifting/.? Arguably then a heavy weight men?s event is again
totally ignoring an IOC edict - worrying indeed.

So what can done about these problems? Here it gets difficult. The list
of issues is large, but the key areas, we feel, are as follows: Firstly
the majority of the voting members of the ISAF Council, ie the MNAs,
clearly have their own vested interests in the survival of certain
classes, based primarily on the make-up and success of their own Olympic
sailing squads rather than the development of sailing in the Games for
the overall good of our sport. They should have a say, certainly, but
not the majority vote. Secondly the ISAF needs to be clearer about their
motives, particularly with respect to the IOC. They cannot vote to keep
classes that have been advised to be dropped by the IOC without a very
good reason. If there were and/or is such a good reason ? so far none
have come to light - this should be effectively communicated with the
sailing community and the press.

We would suggest the voting be broadened significantly to take in all
the current members of the ISAF Council but also all members of the ISAF
Athletes Commission (made up of current or recent Olympic Athletes) with
anyone currently campaigning for the Olympics unable to vote for their
own event or class. In addition to this we feel the Event Committee?s
findings should also count towards the voting process. Either the Events
Committee should be given significant voting poweror perhaps by them
being represented with ten votes for each class they choose. Of course
there are always going to be those with their own agenda but increasing
the number of votes should at least go some way to averaging this out.

Finally why not have a compulsory lecture for all of those voting, that
is open to the press and public, with information about what the IOC
have recently said, a debate about what is important for the future and
a presentation by each class association.

Dermot,

Thanks, I was just going to post that.

Makes you wonder if ISAF knows that sailing is gone as an Olympic sport after 2012....

If its the last stand for sailing.... you might as well look to the past...

Perhaps by 2012 sailing will be able to boast that our sport has the OLDEST Olympian's in the games.

We can get sponsorship from a drug company ... Can't you see Advil... or Flow max or Viagra logos on all of the sails!

Isn't VIAGRA a "performance enhancing drug" though??? (keep your hand on the tiller, - duh, which tiller?)

From Scuttlebutt Europe:

The Olympics

* As an National Authority employee and member of the ISAF Events Committee, I read with interest the article on the 2012 Olympic Events, reproduced from TheDailySail, and written apparently following an extensive analysis. Allow me to provide another perspective.


Like many other National Authorities, Yachting Australia receives funding from, and supports athletes with, money from the Government (and is very grateful for it!!). In Australia Summer Olympic Sports get the lions share of the funding - non-Olympic sports get very little by comparison. So, our support is very much tied to sailing remaining in the Olympic Games.

Now those that have read the IOC Program Commission Report from 2002 and don't think that the hard questions are being asked about the future of sailing need to read it again!! If you don't have time, just think back three years and consider how much coverage you saw of the sailing competition from Athens in 2004. If you put yourself in the position of those selling the rights, the question of what value sailing currently adds is not that difficult to answer.

There is evidence that ISAF has reacted to the challenge. The change in format and introduction of the medal race should serve to make the sport more attractive. The efforts to introduce the World Cup, if properly resourced, provide the opportunity for more regular coverage of Olympic sailing outside the Olympic Games.

From our perspective as a National Authority, all this is beneficial but choosing the right type of boats and competition disciplines for the Olympic Games is crucial. In fact, the continuation of a large part of what we do now appears to depend on it!!

Our approach in Estoril was simple - do whatever it takes to strengthen the position of sailing as an Olympic sport. Yachting Australia would rather loose Events in which we might consider we have better chances than loose the opportunity for the next generation of sailors to compete at the Olympic Games - and indeed for us to go on supporting them. -- Phil Jones, CEO, Yachting Australia

* Now, I can’t predict if you’ll cringe, laugh or cry when you read this. But here are the recommendations to Yachting New Zealand from its Olympic Committee.

Note in particular Point 3, which says: “NZL is currently suffering in expensive classes (Tornado & 49er) that are suited to younger (fit) sailors - so we should avoid these.”

Yes, after all, this is the Olympics. We can’t have young and fit sailors in the Games, can we!

I wonder, did Yachting New Zealand consult with any young Kiwi sailors before considering these recommendations? Also I’d suggest the YNZ offices shut down and everyone go on holiday for the week when the Tornado World Championships is going on, just down the road in Takapuna next March.

This leaked document is yet more evidence why some Member National Authorities (MNAs) cannot be trusted to do anything than vote for self-centred, short-term interests. If the MNA’s views are truly representative of what its sailors believe, then fair enough. But is that the case? I doubt it.

As for only having the top six or eight crews in match racing events at the Olympics, seriously, what would be the point? You could pretty much name those six or eight nations now. Either have a decent number of nations represented in the match racing (what about two-person keelboats by the way?) or don’t do match racing at all.

The last thing the Olympic Regatta needs is to be perceived as even more elitist and wealthy-nation oriented than it is already. -- Andy Rice in SailJuiceBlog.com

as a kiwi i did sadly note that nz had voted against the tornado

nz's recent gold sailing medals have been for board sailing but there was a tornado gold medal in 1984, (according to wiki)

so i do agree that letting selfish national associations vote sports in and out is short sighted for the olympics as a whole

i now think the biggest boost to getting cats back into the olympics will be if the next AC turns into a cat fight

and if this story is to be believed nz could well medal in the remaining tornado olympics and make their 2012 vote look stupid

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/CU0510/S00012.htm

ouch! that's a 2005 story....

over my head here

getting out now

What needs to be clearly understood is that this vote not only removed catamarans from the Olympics, it put sailing in the position of being comnpletely removed as well. This fight that we are in and are asking everyone's help with is now about keeping sailing itself in the Olympics. We are in this position because we have not stood up for ourselves, the MNA's have voted for very selfish reasons and the ISAF has accepted that vote. You had better believe that the IOC is now looking very closely at sailing and saying to itself, WOW, we told them the changes that needed to be made and what did they do? They ignored all of our findings and reccommendations, so they have not lived up to the responsibilities required of a sport to maintain Olympic Status. Gee, should we keep them here? or is it time to remove a very costly, non-telegenic sport from the games? If you look at the costs and infrastructure that is required, as well as how sailing defines the possible locations, it makes sense to drop us if we are not helping by providing exciting, television ready, accessable and vibrant sports. If I were the IOC, I would use this opportunity that the ISAF and voting MNA's have given for the complete removal of sailing from the games after 2012.

Quote.
{I now think the biggest boost to getting cats back into the Olympics will be if the next AC turns into a cat fight}
End quote.

Using the criteria logic of NZ it surprises me that they didn’t lobby and vote to have the Americas cup included as part of the Olympics, - NZ’s best chance to win a medal? – (Their arguments being - millions of sailors around the world sail these boats at clubs and regattas ever week, they are the pinnacle of sailing ability, an inexpensive class to get started in, at any venue you can see hundreds of these boats being raced every week, live video streaming into the homes of tens of thousand of viewers who are kept on the edge of their seats watching this fast, exciting racing (better than F1 in cars), all race results finalised on the water with never any protests or court action arguments, this class is just what the sport needs at Olympic level to increase TV rating much higher than any other sport and provide massive amounts of revenue into the IOC’s and ISAF’s coffers).
This is about as logical an argument/dream “for the betterment of the sport” of sailing at Olympic level, as the arguments that NZ (and others) used to vote in the ridiculous way that they did.

Does that maen they are young(fit) sailors? <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

If the IOC suspended all athletes from the countries that did not follow the IOC guidelines.. Should be enough to bring the ISAF and NMAs to rethink their involvement... <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I have to say that given my years of involvement in sailboat racing, management, development and promotion in Australia, I'm not in any way surprised by the current ISAF outcomes. It's been my experience that the main focus of ISAF, YA, YNSW seems always to be, and always has been, on offshore, bigboat racing, [where the big money is], with little if any interest in OTB club level racing [where there's not much money].
The exception being the introduction of measures to ensure the maximising of revenue input from these small sailing clubs. I've never seen, or been able to encourage any interest or input from YA/YNSW in small boat racing club activity. I've seen many, many small sailing clubs go to the wall without the slightest interest or concern from YNSW or YA and if it happens to be a cat club there is considerably less than no interest.
As I see it, it's an absolute scandal and for the life of me I can't see any reason whatsoever for continuing my YA. support funding. As a member, you are offered all these bogus entitlements which amount to 3/5ths of 5/8ths of nothing at all useful for the average w/end small boatclub jock and in reality, you don't even get an acknolegement of you having paid your fees. What a joke. And to add insult to injury, we no longer have guaranteed participation at the Olympics. To be treated with such utter contempt is outrageous.

I'd be happy to be proved ill-advised on this but both my head and my heart tell me otherwise.


Berny

Berny, I dont have the same perception, that ISAF and MNAs only think about big boats and offshore racing. Here in Norway it is the other way around, a very strong focus on the olympics, recruiting young racers and not much else. The offshore racers and bigboaters have the resources to fix things for themselves. It might look like the big boaters is the focus group due to media coverage (thats vere the money is), but our MNA dont invest much in them.
Our sailing federation also care about access and clubs. Just this fall the sailing federation supported a club with both resources and political pressure. Some developers wanted to fill the canal they used to access the fjord and build houses. So, there obviously are differences between nations. One of the advantages of being involved with a "small" sport is the ability to get involved at a pretty high level quite fast..


Andy Rice came with a new, interesting, piece on the topic today: http://sailjuiceblog.com/2007/12/02/just-five-to-get-a-revote/

Perhaps time to talk with your MNAs? If the general secretaries begin talking things can change..

Well said Berny. My sentiments exactly. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

Hobie Weighs in on Olympic Multihull Class Removal

Monday - December 3 2007 - 0915 PST - A spokesman from Hobiecat wrote this statement regarding the ISAF's decision to not include multihulls in the 2021 Olympic games:

In the past few weeks we have all had time to reflect on the International Sailing Federation decision to remove the multihull from the Olympics with the effects it has for multihulls and the Hobie Classes.

As the largest multihull class association in the world with our successful world championships, youth programs and sustained grow the International Hobie Class Association will continue to grow and give our members great sailing.

The International Hobie Class Association will work carefully with other multihull organizations to see if and how we can achieve the inclusion of the multihull discipline for the 2012 Olympics.

In the countries that did not support the multihull I would suggest a small working party to ask if you can meet with the National Authority and ask what the multihull must do to be more involved with the national authority. It is important that we work with the national authorities as these are the organizations that will vote at ISAF. For far too long all of the multihulls have worked outside their national authorities. Unfortunately this has now been to our detriment of our discipline. Because of our independence the national authorities do not know of all the work we do. It is important for them to understand how important we are to them.

If I can also suggest that you be professional in your approach and do not attack or be rude to the national authorities or individuals. We need their support and abuse will not help our cause.

We all must keep working ahead in a positive professional manner to get ISAF to review and reverse their decision. .

Posted on XS Racing today!

It's not clear what portion of Hobie Cat is the author.
the class association, HCA
Hobie Europe or
Hobie USA/Australia

IMO... Bravo... well said!

It's written in David Brookes' style. He's the Executive Director of the International Hobie Class Assn. and is on the ISAF Classes Committee.

Hi Matt, Thanks

Does that mean that the US HCA has chosen to make their position known to US Sailtng through the IHCA on this issue?

Or, will the US HCA formulate a position independently and contribute this to the Multihull Council and US Sailing in the future?

Thanks for the update.

Mark

confirmed, check your inbox for the IHCA December eblast from David Brookes sent this morning.

re: The HCA-NA's position - I haven't heard if there will be a formal position / statement made by the HCA-NA. The HCA-NA Chairman is (or was) the VC of the Multihull Council. You would have to ask him (Bob Merrick).

Would you like to expand on this?

I beleive that some of the MNAs and or their representatives have received quite agressive emails on the way that they voted, I beleive that this was in the initial period after the vote....but it is VERY good advice.

Support is growing with some MNAs for our cause and it would be a shame to loose that with an ill mannered email, letter or telephone call...even though it may be what you are thinking.......PLEASE think of the hard work that others are doing, and the hard work that you MAY undo

I agree, keep it calm, professional and to the point. Throwing out insults, insinuations and even worse, threats will only damage our position in this fight.

Petion is closing soon please sign if you haven't already

petition

RYA Document Attached

That is some real support from the RYA. They rise 1 notch in my esteem after that show of support and olympic vision.
It looks leal, so I'll forward a copy to the leader of the norwegian sailing assoc (in a polite way of course).

It's real alright Rolf. This is the result of some very hard work in the background by a group of us in the UK under the auspices of UKCRA led by Nick Dewhirst.

We had the statement yesterday but were asked not to reveal it ahead of publication.

Congratulations and thank you for the effort John! If you can, a short notice on who we should thank and how it was done would be good. Very inspirational.
I just forwarded the PDF to the Norwegian Sailing Federations general secretary with a short and polite note about what is happening. Group G (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Iceland and Estonia) voted for multis, but keeping the federation informed can not do damage?

Well done the RYA and all involved. Now we have to push our own National Associations and get them to see the light.

I don't think it will hurt keeping all the pro MNAs on side as the more that speak with one voice the louder it becomes and maybe those MNAs that voted against will listen.

This begins to open the door a little bit on the issue. You will find Yachting Australia in this fight as well. I think that it is important to note, that going forth this needs to be done without all of the angry words that some national members have been recieving. I am speaking of a certian amount of real nastiness that has been levied against some of them. This does not help our cause and only serves to hurt it in the long run. We need support, not enemies in this fight. Thanks!

Great! It is already in the right hands in Brazil.
Keep them coming.

Can Wouter tell us what is happening in Holland?

I just did the same in Austria. Hope it helps.

Copied from The Daily Sail:
RYA calls for ISAF re-vote
We speak to Rod Carr about the RYA's call for ISAF to re-open voting on the 2012 Olympic classes
Today the debate about the selection of events for the 2012 Olympic Games in London, made in Estoril last month (see here and here), has taken a new turn. As dissatisfaction spreads throughout the sailing world, the RYA has fired a significant warning shot across the bows of the ISAF. The RYA it should be remembered is not only one of the top Olympic nations when it comes to sailing but represents sailing in the country where the 2012 Games are to be hosted.
A letter was, today, sent to ISAF from the RYA in addition to being copied to every voting MNA (Member National Authority) in the World. The letter – attached below - calls for a re-evaluation of the 2012 Olympic events to be voted on in March next year at the ISAF’s mid-year meeting.

This is the first time we have seen any MNA stick their head above the parapet and actually call, officially for some action to be taken. The question now is; what has to be done for this to work?

Earlier this morning we spoke to RYA CEO, Rod Carr, who was very clear about their view on the vote in Estoril. “The first thing that I want to point out is that [the vote] was a legitimately, legally made decision. We are not challenging the legality of it. We are challenging the rightness of it,” he explained.

So how does this letter begin the process of getting ISAF to change their minds with regard to class selection? In essence, alone, it can do very little. For the ISAF to be able to review the situation officially two thirds of the voting ISAF Council members - 24 out of 36 - must agree to the proposition. But before we even get that far there is another hurdle to jump: “As it says in the letter, we need the ISAF to defer telling the IOC what the events are,” Carr explains. “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.”

So then if the ISAF do ask to defer their announcement to the IOC how on earth are the RYA going to be able to achieve the support of two thirds of a council who have already voted on the subject? “To get that motion on the table, we could propose it, but we believe it would be much better if the President of the Executive Committee realised there are lot of upset nations and said ‘right, we have an issue’ rather than letting each nation come in with their own admissions to support ours,” Carr comments. “That is what we would prefer, so that is why we have copied our letter to every MNA in the world, so they can easily show their support. My guess is that if that does not gender much of a response at all then the Committee will say, ‘well Britain feels quite strongly about it and the Australians do, but no-one else does.’ If all the people who have spoken to us to say they want it re-opened, which is about 20 countries before we sent the letter out, then there is lots of pressure.”

Clearly then if the RYA receive the backing of the 20 MNAs they have already spoken to, the job of getting 24 Council members to re-open the voting is almost there, with each MNA having a repreentative on on the ISAF Council, albeit a shared one with other MNAs.

Of course there is another way that the voting could be re-opened. The ISAF constitution has a clause in which if five National Authorities band together and call for an emergency meeting then it must take place. It seems this is another possibility for re-opening negotiations. “If you have five nations, you could call a special council meeting, but we are not looking to do that. I think if we do not get enough nations to persuade the President to re-open, then having five will probably not get us anywhere as we will still have to convince another 20 odd people not to get the same vote again. That is a bit of a hand-grenade option. As soon as you do that you risk not having a concession. We want to build a situation where reasonable MNAs and people of interest say ‘frankly we messed up here, we have a chance to put it right, let’s put it right,’” states Carr.

However, with the current climate as it is and much complaining about the voting process in Estoril, whereby all the votes were made at the same time as opposed to having an effective vote off between events, how can we ensure the same mistakes are not just made again? “Once they have decided to re-open the debate they will of course have to vote again and we hope they will not re-vote on the American slate principal, ie all at once,” explains Carr. “We hope there will be a vote-off, with the most popular classes like the Laser [men’s single handed dinghy] first and the most questionable classes such as the multihull in the latter stages. That is what we want and if it is re-opened we will stand by the outcome of that.”

We have seen in this voting process a number of national authorities making the poor decision to vote based on which event they are most likely to medal in. This voting without the good of the sport in mind is clearly not the way forward and no matter what happens this time round we still believe a reshuffle of how the ISAF Council is arranged is in order. Carr is more hopeful other nations will vote in the interests of the sport. “We hope that more nations will act like we did and the Australians and realise that if you vote purely on medal winning possibilities then you end up shooting yourself in the foot. Clearly it is no good having lots of good Olympic class sailors but no Olympics,” he exclaims.

Whatever happens it is encouraging to finally see one MNA backing the opinion of so much of the sailing public. However, this letter by itself, although a good start, is not yet enough. We must hope that we can sort out this mess, re-open the voting and ensure an exhilarating Olympics in London come 2012. We must also look at the way in which these decisions are made in our sport and start to consider some possible changes.

It's great that they are seeking a re-vote, though I still question the stated assumption that the original vote was legal. MNAs have publicly stated that they cast their vote based on criteria that are different from those required by the ISAF regulations. Effectively they (those MNAs) are publicly trumpeting their own lack of integrity! Surely they are at least bringing the sport into disrepute - itself an offense subject to individual sanctions under ISAF regulations.

What was new to me in the dailysail piece was that the voting procedure was altered after a motion from "the americans". Wonder if it was US Sailings representatives or another committee member and how calculated that motion was.

To follow up on what John has said, there are a number of people who have done a vast amount of work in the background. Skype has been melting, Mobile bills have been large, bosses (mine asked what was going on) have had to give a little slack at times and it looks like the efforts have been worth while. I also had a copy of the above last night and can too vouch for it's authenticty.

Most of what has been done will remain in the shadows, but those that have been involved know the time will hopefully have been well spent.

So, a large amount of activity at the level of MNA's acrross the world in getting the ISAF to reconsider.

Sadly, It would appear that the USA is bound and determined to have a keel boat in the olympics at all costs. So not much hope in persuading US Sailing to join the RYA in asking for a change. The risk of loosing a keel boat is too high for the USA.

It would seem that plan B is to break off and form a new international sanctioning body for multi's. How serious is the movement to create a new international organization that would replace ISAF for multihull sailing?

While you can come up with strong reasons for why this would be great.... the reality of creating a real organization and fighting ISAF for authority over multihull sailing will be daunting. Anybody know the players and their game plan for this initiative.

Not just at the level of MNA's; much lobbying of MNA's, persons at the ISAF, "interested parties"; persons forming parts of MNA's etc.

Lots of people around the world doing lots of things.

Second Rule of Diplomacy: In order to be able to ask for concessions and set conditions one must be engaged in the discussions. ie: if you take your football home you don't get to set the rules for the game. So do we really want to jump ship and form another organization, separating us from the majority of racing sailors???, and ... "Keep your friends close, put keep your enemies closer"; by staying involved don't we keep our "enemies" closer???

Some AUS sailors will be meeting at 7.00pm tonight to discuss the formation of the AMC (Australian Multihull Council) to unite and co-ordinate Multihull sailors as one, plus address the issue of Cats being dropped from the Olympics. The meeting will be addressed by Phil Jones, COE of Yachting Australia and Darren Bundock. The meeting will well represented by some of the best AUS and International Multihull sailors.

The only thing I'd say about pulling the pin on ISAF is that IF, and it's big 'if', cat sailors could get themselves sufficiently organised to develop cat racing competition into a marketable commodity, and done correctly it has extraordinary potential, IOC would fall over themselves to gain rights to a piece of the action. We are talking $$$$$$ and that after all, is the language of the IOC.
And the converse is also true in that if we remain a weekend 'turn up and sail and go home' organisation, we stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting anyone to listen to anything we say. It really is that simple IMO.

There are good precedents (at Olympic level) for sporting bodies dis-associating themselves from a “governing” body, which has been seen to be dis-advantaging the “break away” group.
IF a governing/controlling body was formed for and from multihull sailors, for the benefit of multihull sailing, and being a completely separate body from the ISAF, then that new body could negotiate directly with the IOC for inclusion into the Olympic games (and probably with more than the one only class of multihull as of now, as well). If this new organization were accepted as the one and only “legitimate” multihull governing body, representing all multihulls, then it would qualify for financial assistance from the IOC in the same way that the ISAF does now.
Multihulls, regardless of what many would say, ARE in an entirely different context from mono hulls, and as such, the only way for them to receive the suitable attention that they deserve is to be seen as, and be in actuality, SEPARATE (in their organization and control) from the ISAF and the monohull fraternity. That is not to say that we are not still “all sailors” what ever we sail, BUT the control and administration of each has to be separated to ensure the best for all.
As long as governance of multihulls falls under the predominantly mono hull mentality administration, we will always be “the poor relations” and treated accordingly. It will always be difficult to gain the recognition we deserve, as the only way we receive anything now is to go “cap in hand” and virtually “beg for our supper”. We have the right to stand on our own feet, face to face with all other sports as equals, and not as second-class citizens as we are considered to be, and treated as such, within the sailing fraternity in particular, and the overall sporting world in general.

The following is a letter from Rod Carr addressed to all those who wrote to him in person to complain:

Hello all,
You took the trouble to email me some weeks ago expressing your disquiet at the RYA position regarding catamarans, specifically the selection of a cat as an Olympic event.

We all know what happened at the ISAF conference.

This email and letter, which has been sent to every MNA in the world plus the ISAF council - is the main plank of the RYAs effort to get the November decision reviewed and hopefully overturned.

In order for this to happen we need to 75% of the ISAF Council to agree with us. We have been working hard behind the scenes to gather support form other MNAs.

To be honest I don't think individual protest will cary much weight with ISAF, however, if you can bring any pressure to bear on other MNAs using any international contacts you may have ...now is the time!

Regards,

Rod Carr.

Chief Executive, RYA.



75% is going to be tough so if you can influence your MNA, now is the time.

After Torben's gold in the last games and Scheidt's successfull campaign in the Star class, it is a political suicide to ask for a Brazilian vote against this class.

I believe a favorable vote to multihulls is possible due to the following reasons:

a) The country has virtually no chances in many other classes that never yielded a medal, while the Tornado brought two (gold and bronze).

b) The athletes who won medals in the Tornado directly influence the decision making process (Lars Grael is in politics)

b) There is no high performance dinghy loby, just some girls claiming that they could have a chance with match racing format.

Conclusion: it is possible to obtain a favorable vote from Brazil for a multihull class, but only if it does not interfere with keeping the Star class, so the voting methodology is critical.

To weigh in on the separation issue here. It is a very simple issue to debate; Are there enough multihull sailors around the world that are willing to get involved, stay involved and make this truly happen? If there are, then a separate organization is possible and the multihull world could benefit from it's existence. The question to date has been volunteers and support, without both there can be no International Multihull Council/Federation. I believe that that meeting in Australia last evening was to form a Multihull Council within YA, but I am waiting to hear from Phil Jones on the meeting.

This is very true. There is good precedent for this with other sports. It will always be an uphill battle if we stay with US Sailing and ISAF. US Sailing is a good example of an MNA run by people with little or no interest in our class. As long as people like Bowdie remain in power there we are directing our efforts (and funds) to support monohull sailing instead of our sport.

Well, since the IOC has engrained ISAF to deal with classes and equipment for the sport of sailing for the Olympics, it seems pretty obvious that completely divorcing from USSA and ISAF will lead to never, ever having a multihull in the Olympics again.

Personally, I think X-Games is the way to go anyway (rather than Olympics), it would be a better showcase to a target audience that we are really looking for (young, potentially active people).

This brings up other questions, like what would we call the sport if we separate from ISAF? Can we call it sailing, and hold Worlds, without being sued?

Mike

Oli

The MHC meeting was notable in that nobody stepped up and argued for separating from US Sailing. So the rank and file who do the organizational work to maintain the current catamaran program in the USA are not up for generating a new organization.

(It is also not true that we are PAYING with dues to just get screwed over here by Brenner, Bodie and US Sailing.)

My personal conclusion was... IF a new international organization for catamarans were to be created... It would be a top down kind of thing.... The elite international sailors will have to be the ones to get it organized, financed and going. If these sailors are able to persuade the sailors of the major classes to organize their international events independently, redirect the current financial sponsors from ISAF and support of the New Multi organization at the international level... Then you have something.

Operationally a new organization would essentially replace ISAF at the international level... At this point, the US sailors will have an option. The US sailors, clubs and volunteers of the MHC would then have to decide to follow the new lead of the International Multi organization or stay in the US Sailing system or find some intermediate.
So, Until this happens, the sense of the meeting was to work within the existing system and work to taking leadership positions within US Sailing and ISAF so that key future decisions are not influenced by Brenner and Bodie.

ISAF does not own the rights to the word "worlds". The leverage that they do use is that any sailor competing in a "worlds" that is not sanctioned by the ISAF will be banned from the ISAF. They can't sue you because you used the word "worlds" but they can kick you out of the organization.

I may be wrong but one example of separation of codes that has proven to be in the “best interests of all” as well as successful (particularly at Olympic level) that spring to mind is rowing and kayaking/canoeing?
Very similar to mono hull sailing and catamaran sailing? Both are obviously “sailing” But both are uniquely different from each other.

I am not convinced that the IOC would be exactly pleased with a split.

If the IOC accepted it, they would also be accepting an increase in cost, effort, infrastructure and number of venues associated to the original sport. How could that be possible when they already stated that their goal is the opposite with regards to sailing (and its branches)?

I don't think the IOC is eager to include new sport branches in the games. Almost any sport can split its branches, but they will be included in the games only if the IOC is convinced that it will yield profits. If this is not our case, we'd better stay with ISAF than alone.

Lastly, I noticed the mention to "monohull sailing" and "catamaran sailing". When you use "catamaran" instead of "multihull" you exclude trimarans, proas, etc., so you repeat the same conduct problem (biased focus) that we are fighting against. We have to be consistent with our reasoning.

Take care,
Luiz

How do we make Catamaran Sailing a legitimate sport, suitable for Olympic competition?
Bottom line; we need funding. Lots of funding and advertising revenue is undoubtedly the best way to obtain it.
Sailing is exciting, interesting, spectacular and healthy.
Sailing is good to watch if presented well.
Catamaran racing is very exciting, very interesting, very spectacular, very healthy, and very good to watch if presented well.
Sailing venues are very pleasant places to be. Sailing clubs occupy some of the best real-estate in the world.
What we have here is a very unique sport with enormous potential for development into a very marketable, and profitable enterprise.
Of all the sporting equipment, a sailboat probably has the largest and most suitable area for carrying advertising and a cat carries the biggest sail for it's length of all sailing boats.
To attract advertising revenue we need to;
get more people involved in sailing catamarans including sailors, spectators, and in particular, good sponsors. The more people we attract, and the more popular sailing becomes, the more marketable it will be.
develop sailing into a product which can be offered to the general public as a legitimate form of entertainment.
develop sailing into a suitable Telesport [television] Television is the single most important vehicle we have to promote sailing and raise revenues. Presently there are some initiatives being investigated and developed to make Catamaran racing, television friendly. These initiatives include developing sailing specific filming strategies and training sailing savvy directors, producers and commentators. Imagine presenting an NRL game on television but using directors, producers and commentators who know very little about Rugby League! This is happening with sailing. Even at Olympic level our best directors and commentators are seriously incompetent. It's no wonder the general public have no idea what's going on when they watch a sailboat race. We need to find the Ray Warrens, Frank Hydes and Phil Liggetts of sailing. These people are probably responsible, more than any for giving their prospective sports legendery status in the homes of the general public.
We need to attract/find good managers to make this happen. Sailors generally, and Catamaran sailors specifically, by their typical renegade nature don't often do well as managers, [turn up, race and go home] as is often evidenced by the lack of direction in many Cat clubs. It's possible that unpaid management of clubs has become a thing of the past. We need to be much more professional at club level and we should work toward employing managers IMO. The funding revenue is there if we could better organise ourselves and sell our product.
ATTRACTING GENERAL INTEREST
There are many initiatives which can be investigated and implemented to attract people to sailing. These include club training programs targeting the local area population with advertising. School sports activities can include a sailing option. We need to develop club training programs, specifically targeting youth. We need to work toward putting at least two training cats into every sailing club in Australia and encourage accredited coaches to help us. There are plenty of suitable, small, locally made catamarans available in Australia to support this endeavour. This will build the numbers of sailors and YA and YNSW should be vigorously active in fostering this activity particularly at club level
Further along the track we could organise and run an interclub round robin' style competition which might even develop into a league similar to football where sailing clubs enter teams which compete against each other on a regular basis at selected suitable venues, competitions like the NRL, NFL, Cricket Aust. etc. and Sydney Harbour and the Parramatta river are ideal locations for this as are the many lakes we have within close proximity to Sydney and it's environs.
ATTRACTING SPECTATORS.
Sailing clubs need to be aware that attracting spectators to their sport is critical to achieving their goals. Clubs can easily double or triple the involvement of people in sailing by providing facilities for spectators. Clubs should provide facilities such as decks, ferries, canteens, video coverage of racing etc. Sailboat racing needs to be held in areas which are spectator friendly where possible.
Where possible, video coverage should be provided for spectators in the clubs to give supporters an interest in events. Even better, a good, descriptive and sensible commentry could accompany the video coverage. [Is it any wonder spouses and other family members aren't interested when they aren't included, catered to or provided for].
ATTRACTING SPONSORS
Sponsors need exposure. To give sponsors exposure, sailing needs to be developed into a good spectator sport. The best exposure that can be offered to a sponsor is television coverage. Television coverage of sailing requires significant development in equipment, technology and production processes. This can be done but we need to get the interested parties involved. We desperately need some good promoters and managers.
With all the television channels now desperate for content, and considering the enormous value of our commodity, we should be a very wealthy enterprise.
In summary, there's plenty of potential to make sailing a very viable product similar to any other high profile spectator sport, we just need some direction and effort from as many good people as we can attract.
Now if we could pull this off, IOC would be kicking our door down to have us, and no more forlock tugging at ISAF.
Bern Leslie.

I think a split is a more radical and risky strategy than the circumstances require. However an international federation of national multihull organizations could easily exist in parallel with the rest of the sailing world.

Guys and Gals,

We can take action now, while the long term plans are developed. I'm now located in Perth, but still support my home cat sailors in Arizona, California and Nevada. Here are some items that worked for our fleets. These items were funded by sailors and crew.

* Advertise for crew in the local university classifieds (2 - 1 wk ads in AZ and CA yielded 6 new regular crew last year!)

* Create a season schedule and information for potential new crew and sailors. Distribute the brochure to local sailing retailers, sailing schools and at events

* Coordinate a shared campsite for crew (for travelling events). Make the site free to new crew. Help set up carpools and caravans

* Donate some time at a local sailing school with their open house or social sailing. Many of the crew that came from the schools would go back and promote our events.

Not only do we need to get people involved in cat sailing, but we need to get people that are potentially good future athletes. University age sailors like the weekend events and tend to be talented, easy-to-train athletes.

While I focussed on crew for Hobie 16s, I am now looking into getting skippers and the guys too big to be crew on a Hobie 16 more opportunities to start cat sailing.

BTW, I support the Western Aus Tornado Assoc and the local Nedlands YC Tornados. I've donated my time to organizing sponsors and photographers for their Nationals and States. Feel free to contact me if you have ideas or questions.

-Shauna McGee Kinney

Totally agree with you Mark.

Whilst I agree with the sentiments and have sympathy for the feelings...I too felt let down by ISAF...Now IS NOT the time the be shouting about rebellion.

We have the UKCRA affiliated to the RYA, and Aus has recently formed their own MHC recognised by their YA. So we need to work from within.

IMHO I can see no problem with forming an International Multihull Council, but in our haste lets not go independant.

Many in ISAF and MNAs are watching and reading these threads and will use these threads against us to try and show how rebellious and ungrateful we are.

Agree; we must work from within these organisations. Forming association(s) to promote and give Multi sailing a voice is an excellent idea, we already have (as Stu says) UKCRA, something forming in Aus, this should give us an informed / Balanced and carefully presented view. We need to preset ourselves as reasonable (but upset) people who want to work with the ISAF / IOC to correct the result of this (IMO) misguided vote to remove the Multi class from the Ollies.

Yes I agree, short term should try and work with the ISAF.

Long term, it would quite disappointing to spend all our capital to reestablish our relationship with the ISAF another four(4) years with the same result?
(then again, after the 2012 boring sailing Olympics may no longer exist?)

If this is really the case then why expect any worthwhile results from working within ?

Afterall then that is only their tool to preventing a succesful split off to happen that basically spells the end of ISAF.

Then they will mouth us with sweet promises till the window of opportunity for creating an alternative is over and then they can get back to giving us the boot !

And if anyone it thinking :"why would ISAF want to prevent a split off at all"

Once a viable alternative has been formed they will have lost their monopoly and with it the benefits that comes from forcing everybody and any financial revenue stream through their own organisation. They can also kiss their ownership of the "worlds" title good bye.

So I Rick wants to hold the Wave Worlds and ISAF gets down on it like a ton of breaks the rival organisation can ban any and all ISAF officials from ever racing any multihull or moth. In case you hadn't noticed, many big mono sailors also do stints on multis.

We do you think the EU community was formed ? Not because we agree with each one many points. It was because when the US placed import tarifs on EU steel, the EU could effectively ban US grain export to EU and force the US to reconsider its "interesting perception of free trade"

Without power you (we) are free to be ignored and hassled. With power they'll think twice.

I say, keep working from within but build up a far better powerstructure (negociation leverage) by having our own international organisation with the moths etc.

Currently we have a real shot at because guys like Bundock, Booth and Veal are all for it. With guys like that as ambassadors and promoters we have a REAL viable shot at it.

I for one will not trade that away for some local US sailing Multihull Council promise that things will be better next time.

Sorry Guys, US sailing screwed us over big time recently. Remember their support for no less then 2 multihulls ?

They can promise the world to us but I don't believe them.

The US-sailing multihulls council better bring back some real bacon, and soon, to proof their influence. I thinking about US sailing publically supporting the RYA public letter and proposal and ask for a re-vote.

If the MHC can not negociate this for us then they will have been played for fools by the mono and keel boat guys in US sailing, AGAIN. It will just be more useless promises like supporting 2 cats in the olympics that they are not willing to keep anyway.

We can excuse ourselves for falling for it the first time, but a second time ????

With respect to the Dutch representative voting against the multis, that story ain't over yet. Also we have a rival multihull organisation to the Dutch sailing federation and most cat sailor belong to that organisation. And I'm quite thankfull for that.

The way I see these rival organisations for multi like UKCRA and NBF are exactly the reason why some effective resistance could be organised on such short notice. Without UKCRA we won't even had a real shot at contesting the ISAF decision. Sure it was made in name of RYA but I'm sure that the polite but upset organising by UKCRA had a huge influence.

I only wish for this setup to be mirrored in other area's and linked up internationally.

Wouter

Wouter.

1. You've no idea what you're talking about - not about what is going on in the US, nor internationally.

2. You haven't a horse in this race. Stop saying "we" and "U.S." in the same sentence. You keep your house, we'll keep ours. Until there is some indication that you're on the volunteer list for your MNA, your insulting rhetoric = flatulence.

3. You continue to do disservice to those in the US that are doing real work on this issue by calling them fools. I've asked you already once politely to pipe down.

Why would a split spell the end for ISAF? If youd said if the IOC pulls sailing out of the Olympics then I might agree with you.

FYI UKCRA is not formed in the name of the RYA it is affiliated to the RYA which means the RYA recognises it as a proper INDEPENDANT body as it does class associations.

"I only wish for this setup to be mirrored in other area's and linked up internationally.".... about the only sentence worth reading in this ill informed posting of yours and echoes what I said..... BUT it is only from working from within the system and coming up with logical arguments that UKCRA have been able to work WITH the RYA to try and overturn the vote. TRUST me if we had gone in banging independance and shouting do you think that the RYA would have been so receptive? I'll answer that for you ......NO.

Im NOT saying we shouldn't set up an International Multihull council with each MNA having its own ...quite the opposite I think we should, it would give us a bigger voice, BUT independance at this stage would be a NO.

There is a great deal at stake here. we do not know for sure that 2012 is lost, but it probably could be at this point. I do not know what pressures will be placed on the US delegation to change or modify their voting, but rude, nasty and threatening comments only serve to instigate a deeper split between these factions. My concern is that this selection of events might push the IOC to push for the removal of sailing from the games after 2012. Now, one of the reasons that there is so much support for the keel boat class around the world is simply the number of high profile sailors that compete in that class. The Star class does draw some of the biggest names in sailing to compete and it is the view of many MNA's, ISAF officials and others in the industry that this drives greater exposure for the sport. Paul Cayard, Dennis Conner, John Bertrand, Colin Beashel, Buddy Melges, Lowell North to name a few. Is this the correct way to decide Olympic Classes? Some think it is. At the 2007 Ronstan A-Cat Worlds there were quite a few prominent sailors from many different classes, 505's, DN Iceboats, I-14's, Maxi-cats, V40's and about 10 other classes before getting into the many multihull classes represented. There were 16 Olympic medals and over 50 World, National or continental championships competing at the event. Bring that level of competitor over to a multihull Olympic class and maybe there would be greater support. Please do not interpret this the wrong way, the Tornado class has always attracted top level sailors including the likes of Paul Elvestrom. We need to generate excitement, enthusiasm, good will and public support. we need to play cleanly and develop strong relationships to help support this fight. Can we get beyond the anger, the name calling and begin a constructive effort to get this new vote to happen?

Tom its not just the U.S that needs convincing to vote for a multihull, (not necessarilly the Tornado), hopefully in May if not before. Each MNA should be persuaded by good constructive argument that a multihull is worth supporting.

The talk of independance does NOTHING for the multihulls case. I argue for examples of UKCRA to be set up in each MNA and form an IMHC, but for those bodies to work legitimatley and responsibly within the current setups. Logical constructive arguments enhance our cause negative talk of independance at this stage harms the cause.

Maybe I would have best phrased that as "... the end of ISAF as we know it."

ISAF, my dear friends is all about having control.

Currently they can force whatever they decide to do (example of this have been plenty recently) because they are the ONLY viable organisation for all kinds of sailing at this time.

They can FORCE classes to pay membership fees to ISAF because they WILL make your life miserable as soon as you grow to a level where you want to hold larger international events.

When you become a (forced) member of the ISAF organisation you sign away any media rights that you class me have. To the ISAF organisation of course. You also hand over effect control over your class rules to them. Everything must be approved by some ISAF committee and it must be done on their time line.

Basically they muscle themselves in on your revenue stream and class control structure. Of course they plegde to repay you by "bettering the sport of sailing" and if you are lucky they throw you a few crumbs once in a while. Lucky here probably means "being a monohull class" or having a few high placed sailors with blazers sailing you boat type. (That is partly a joke guys !)

What happens if a rival international organisation comes into existance as an alternative ?

They loose their control. Afterall how much control can the rowers excert over the canoe guys now ?

Who is to say that other classes like the moths and maybe high performance skiff for women find it more attractive to join the other organisation ?

If ISAF asks you 3000 bucks for just accepting your class membership application form (not garanteed to be approved mind you) what are your choiced now ? And what will your choice be when a rival organisation is around.

If IOC wants a more lean and exiting sailing venue at the Olympics and ISAF decided again to go for the star and match racing, then how with the IOC look upon a rival organisation who can throw out the boring events and replace them with Skiffs, Multies and Moths ?

Right now ISAF can pressure the IOC to go along as their is no alternative for IOC to turn too short of throwing out the sailing altogether. Again ISAF has a good measure of control because it is currently the only one. That is probably the reason why ISAF feels it can largely ignore the IOC recommendations. They are gambling on the fact that IOC will consider dropping sailing altogether as too extreme an option.

They can't make that gamble when IOC can shop elsewhere.

Without these control principles that come with being to only organisation on this level, ISAF will quickly be regarded for what it is : an inflexible bureacracy that costs more money then it is really worth.

With a viable alternative by its side it will either have to find a way to shape up or accept being marginalized.

Any organisation of this size and standing will find the second prospect appauling and the first prospect too daunting to consider without being absolutely being forced to do it. Either way they will determine that it is alot more attractive to prevent that whole situation altogether. One of the best way to do that is coopting.

You know the tricks. Offer a position as official to some person that would otherwise be capable of creating a rival organisation. Promise the others a committee or two and some future rewards after some more research, rapports, and a formal vote that they assure you is nothing to worry about etc.

Rest assured they will try hard to NOT shape-up ! And try very hard to prevent any serious challenge from developping.


And that is where I fundamentally disagree with anybody who wants to "work from within" while at the same time discouraging any serious efforts at forming an alternative.

Any skilled negociator would actually embrace such efforts ! Why, because they strenghen his negociating position. Because this time has both a wapon and a reward to extract concrete benefits from the other side (and delivery upon them). Because, he can't promise any returns on their desires unless he has some impressive results to take back to his party. And of course this negociator is always very sorry that his hands are tight in this way. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

That is eventually the way it always works. Irrespectibally of heaps of well meaning statements, visions, passions and "lets try to all get along" and other hollow trash.

Wouter

Indeed, and that was the way it was used in my statement.

The Dutch NFB is the same. It cooperates with the Dutch National Sailing Association, but it was formed independedly and remains so.

Wouter

Thats NOT what Im hearing Wouter....sailing being dropped is a distinct possibility

Ahhh, but that is only the way how one presents his or her intentions


We're not threatening anything, just evaluating the benefits of organising ourselves.

We're are not being ungrateful, oh no, we are just extending on their excellent support through other channels. Afterall, it is not fair to them that they have to carry the whole weight by themselves.

We are not being nasty or rude. To the contrary, in official documentation we are most definately requesting them politely to re-evaluated their stance for any unintentional oversights with respect to the IOC stated prefered policy.

A split ? Certainly not, we are quite happy here in our most succesful MHC committee. So much in fact that we need a larger support structure to lessen the burden on these committee members. We think it unfair to put the burnden of this larger organisation upon (insert name of local MNA) so we organise it ourselves. All towards maximizing the effectiveness of the MHC (= working from within), certainly you (insert name of local MNA) support this wholely ? (if opponent says no then he will have caused the split, so he won't say no, which in turn means he has just accepted the additional organisation even if he didn't want to do that.)

That is how you play power and influence games. And I dislike those games with a passion, even when I know how to do it.

Wouter

The US multihull world is too split to stand on its own.

Let's say you own a Nacra. Who's your friend: The local Yacht Club that lets you sail in their regattas, or the local Hobie Fleet that won't?

There's more US YC's that welcome Nacras than Hobie Fleets that won't.

I'm still trying to figure out what all the 3, 4 and 5 letter acronyms stand for.
I don't pretend to know much about all this.
What I think I do know is that taking your ball and going elsewhere doesn't work.
Eventually men have to sit around the table and work things out. We need strong men that command attention(not beg for it)around that table to get our views heard. This means to strengthen your argument and not raise your voice.
I'm behind what John, Tom and others are trying to do.
Cancelling your memberships to any sailing organization is just childish and probably plays right into the oppositions hands.

Pat

Apologies for the acronyms just assume that everyone knows what they stand for...hope this helps

ISAF-International Sailing Federation (don't ask I've never known what the A stands for!!!!!)
IOC-International Olympic Commission
MNA-Member National Authority
RYA-Royal Yachting association
MHC-MultiHull Council
UKCRA-United Kingdom Catamaaran Racing Association
YA-Yachting Australia
YNZ-Yachting New Zealand

The more reason to diversify our options.

Again assume that indeed IOC is looking to ditch sailing alltogether. It will be much more attactive to them to do that in steps then in one go. This is a situation where slick people make a large gains.

We can either hope that ISAF doesn't screw up or try to get an alternative of the ground that can be ready in time to offer IOC what they want.

IOC doesn't care much whether sailing is in or out, it is the costs that interests them and the status associated with the Olympics. Removing a whole branch of sport is good for costs but not good for status. Especially not an old event like sailing. Nobody cares about sailing, but everybody cares about a whole event being ditch, partly because that highlights their own possible vunerability.

What if a viable organisation can offer to do a more exiting version of sailing from a large empty grass field as facilities and for a 25% of the costs ? Basically have only 6 events ; laser, moth, higher performance 2-up skiff, multihulls, boards. All open class and Aussie 18 foot skiff style reporting. Pay those Spitfire and Rocklegde engineering camera men to do a week of Olympic filming with all expenses paid and some earnings.

When presented with the choice of risking all that opposition to removing sailing altogether or downsizing it while upgrading its attractiveness and significantly lower its costs, which will they choose ?

If ISAF is bound to screw this one up (and it looks very probable that way) then we better having something to jump in and limit the damage.

Ones we proof that the new concept works and that sailing can be exiting and telegenic then we can extend the number of classes again and grow the sport of Olympic sailing. Maybe even at a later stage get some match racing and keel boat sailing in when we are succesful in creating sufficient revenue ourselves by the new reporting.

I feel we can do it.


And if we IOC is not serious considering dropping sailing then nothing is lost by having more options. That will always come in handy at one point in the future.

Wouter

NFB = Nederlandse Federatie Brandingssporten

The Dutch Surf Sports Federation a direct rival to the KNWV (Royal Dutch Watersports Union) when it comes down to multihull sailing and Sport fishing on the sea.

Basically, the KNWV didn't feel that multihulls were real boats or save enough to be sailed and so these were less then enthousiastic about them back in the 70's. So the multihull sailors joined forces with another group of unrepresented sporters and formed the NFB. It is an independent organisation from the main sailing associated national organisation.

Since then the two organisations have increasingly worked together although some strain is still there. By far most Cat clubs are members of NFB and not of KNWV. The balance of power is keeping everybody straight.

This is one example of where "taking the ball and play somewhere else" was hugely succesful. Without it we wouldn't even have had a Dutch catamaran sailing scene of any significance.

Wouter

This is the type of problem that could possibly be reduced by an international multihull federation association and its multihull country federation.

There's something I would like to add to my "the split won't work" post:

While fighting within ISAF is the best (only) alternative on the short term, taking the oportunity to start multihull federations, etc. is an inteligent move.

- It puts more pressure on the short term issue (2012 equipment).
- It creates an alternative path for the future, in case ISAF keeps mutihulls out.
- It can be reverted very easily by making it part of ISAF organization, if and when desired.

In other words, although I don't believe a split with ISAF will put a multihull in the games (in the short and medium term), I support the creation of the association due to the implications.

It will probably work like spliting from a party to make a more radical one. Some of the proposals from the original party will start to look more acceptable in comparison with those of the new radical party.

If multi-hull sailing was to split from the ISAF, which racing rules would we use ?

I'm sure the ISAF won't be too happy about "us" using theirs, how about those that HAVE to work with the ISAF?

What about some of us who sail other classes?

What about those that WORK for the ISAF (And I do not mean me with SCHRS)

Froming a world-wide multi-hull association to lobby the ISAF on appropiate issues - yes, a good idea.


Split from the ISAF, not a good idea and such discussions make us look stupid. It is a non-starter.

I dont agree that going somewhere else won't work or that its childish, I think the same things could be said about staying with the current organization.

What makes US Sailing Multihull Council work is the MULTIHULL sailors within that group that volunteer their time. I am 100% confident that multihull sailors could generate all of the benefits we currently get from US Sailing AND be in a better position to focus on a multihull sailing in the future in a seperate organization.

I do however have a great amount of respect for JW and all of the other folks that volunteer on our behalf, and I will problably rejoin US Sailing if they think its worth supporting them.

What worries me is that a great deal of our (multihulls) progress within US Sailing has been a result of a lot of effort by a relatively small group of people. What happens as they move onto other things over time?

This is has always has been the biggest issue, Involvement. It takes people to instigate change or even just to keep it running the way that it is. The few who do have made a big difference, but more volunteers are needed.

I have to say at the outset that I am an advocate of multihulls governing themselves totally. That said I would like to give my reasons for this opinion.
For over 20 years I worked “WITHIN” the YA system for multihulls. I have been on many committees of yacht clubs, and state yachting bodies, as well as being vice commodore and commodore of more than one yacht club, so I have had “a little” first hand experience” of the workings of “the system” all the way from the bottom right up to the top. In all that time, no matter how hard and how diligently I, and many other “multihull” people worked from within the system, any and all proposals that we put forward, no matter how minor (or major), when it came to the crunch, were always voted down. We were continuously offered “carrots” to placate us if/when we showed signs of dissatisfaction with the treatment of multihulls (as well as being told repeated “don’t rock the boat, it will only work against you – sound familiar?), all of which, when it came time for action on those carrots, “things” had moved on and all promises vanished into obscurity. I fully understand people saying that “we have to work WITHIN the system”, and for many years I was a great advocate of that opinion, but after more than 20 years of “batting my head against a brick wall” with NOTHING actually changing (except the promises), I finally realised that, no matter who or what was “in there” working for multihull benefit, NOTHING would ever really change unless the system as a whole changed. Committees, councils, association, all have the same bad points when it comes to the final decisions made and that is that, it doesn’t matter who or what or how they are made up, there will always be “political” agendas, whereby the most powerful (by their numbers) and most influential, will always carry the day. The one thing that all the yachting authorities have in common is that non-multihull interests dominate them, and no matter how active multihull sailors are in placing THEIR members onto those bodies, they will NEVER gain the majority voting position. How can anyone with half an ounce of intelligence think for one minute that so many “pro mono hulled” thinking people are ever going to “look kindly” on the poor multihull sailor and vote them (the multihulls) any benefits at the reduction of their own personal interest area (mono)? Apart from all else human nature is against it as well as history, so what makes anyone think that ANYTHING will change?
All the time that I was actively involved with YA’s, one of the most fundamental areas that hurt so much was the allocation of funding for “junior” sailing. Every year funding became available from the national body for juniors, and in spite of several different multihull association having active junior training programs, and purchasing several junior catamarans (11’ Arrafura cadets”) for that purpose, ALL funding was allocated to monohull sailing, even to the extent of funding going in preference to an active multihull program, to a class of dingy where only three were available in the whole of the state, without any active class and with no junior training in that class, or any intention of starting any training.
Similar instances, (to many to detail), of funding going to low membership numbered mono hull classes to assist with the running of their national titles, while application from multihull classes with membership numbers in their hundreds for similar funding would go completely ignored and unanswered.
There are many similar examples of the same sort of treatment of multihulls that I have witnessed and I won’t bore you with a chronology, but I would make the point that in all this time, and with all the work that good, competent, active, people have attempted for the benefit of the multihull community NOTHING HAS CHANGED!!! It is still ALL going on as it always has and I for one can see no way for that to change while the mono hull interest parties dominate the administration of this sport (and US).

When the appointed authority doesn't represent the views of its members, there will always be talk of mutiny.

And there should be talk, because talk is the first step towards action, and without the threat of action, the authority will not be pressured to listen.

Everyone should do what they think is right, that way all bases are covered and all levels of the authority will feel some kind of pressure.

However, abuse should not be tolerated, it only leads to defensiveness from the authority.

Those are seconday issues to be solved in the medium term, if and when we get there.

In the short term, we are interested in the effects of a split from ISAF being seriously considered as a consequence of their bad decision. This development will certainly add weight to the request for a new vote.

"Hey guys, they are not only pissed of, they are considering living ISAF and making their own Federation. If things start going this way, each time a class is replaced we'll loose control over more people/classes. We don't want to weaken and shrink. Let's negotiate something so that we stop the trend before it develops, keep our numbers and retain control".

Makes sense to you?

OK, <'THE' CRA MEETING>

For a first attempt it went well.

To begin, a temporary committee of three conducted/chaired the meeting and until I get a copy of the minutes, names and finer details will have to wait although both Darren Bundock [Bundy] and John Goldsmith were at the table. Most of the 30 odd attendees were sailors from clubs, some involved at management level. Phil Jones and the Head of Training [don't know his name] represented YA.

There was a lot of discussion about a lot of issues although there were two main and differing agendas. They did overlap to an extent but the cross enthusiasm for each was more than a little unbalanced as I saw it.

On the one hand we had a lot of cat sailors, club managers etc., who's main focus and enthusiasm was for developing cat sailing/racing to a point where it becomes more popular, and more fun for us all with bigger fleets and better organised clubs and regattas, and to a lesser extent, making it less likely to be ignored by YNSW, YA, ISAF and the IOC, with the ISAF/IOC component a secondary issue. On the other hand there were those [YA reps and Olympic hopefulls] who's main focus was/is on having catamarans re-instated as an Olympic discipline. On this issue, the driver for YA and ISAF is that if cat sailing is not reinstated, sailing in general [monohulls] is in danger of being eliminated from The Games due to it not fully complying with IOC criteria, i.e., not well supported by a majority of Nations, not spectator or TV friendly, and not very exciting [Finn/Star/Laser etc.]

Interestingly, a poll taken during the meeting asking which boat out of the F18, H16 [no spi], A class, and Tornado would be preferred by those present as the Olympic cat revealed a preference for the F18 Tiger. Sadly, the F14 or F16 [my favourite] were not listed as an option.

Much of the discussion from the sailor's and club manager's group was about ways to improve numbers at the clubs and from that it was pretty much unanimous that clubs need to focus on youth training. Darren Bundock was very much behind this idea and keen to get involved, even to the point of jumping on a Maricat once a month and racing at selected clubs, wooo hoooo. There were plenty of different ideas on how to achieve this but the discussion was deferred for a later time when the council is fully formed and legitimate, and in a position to get some serious work done.

The most disappointing [but not unexpected] revelation was that, while YA needs us, [cat sailors] to be progressive and supportive of their endeavours to have the Tornado, or some other exciting catamaran reinstated and retained with IOC status, they really don't seem to want to have very much, if anything to do with helping us make it happen. I'm not even sure what it is they would like us to do other than maybe provide our vocal support for that endeavour. That part isn't clear, not to me anyway, but what was clear is; YA think CRA [potentially a National Body] should conduct all it's operations under the control of the state bodies, YNSW, YVIC, YSA. etc. Now as I see it, those bodies have no teeth whatsoever when it comes to negotiating with YA. These state representative bodies have no members as near as I can tell. With individual sailors now paying their fees directly to YA, they are in essence members of YA not YNSW etc. So, I'm very confused about the fact that YA want our help, and are prepared to help in an advisory capacity, but beyond that, they suggest any significant input/help we seek, in particular funding, must come from the State bodies.

Now given that we as cat sailors, until now have never been shown any interest from YA, and even less interest from YNSW et al, my question is; what's in it for us, the ordinary week end jocks? I can see how having a cat in the Olympics could be helpful in attracting young sailors who have an ambition to race for gold, and I don't in any way want to minimise the importance of that more than it is, but really, even though Darren and Glen are very nice blokes and I'm in absolute awe of their abilities as sailors and their Olympic successes, and I think we should continue to support their efforts in a reasonable manner, will it make any difference to the blokes at CRSC or Mannering Park, or Kurnell or Koonawarra Bay, or Great Lakes Sailing Club etc., or the Taipan Assn., if sailing is dropped altogether from the Olympics???? I don't think it'll matter diddly, but I could be wrong.

Na, we need to be shown more respect, we need to be treated with more dignity than to be told, "we need your help desperately" but, "sorry guys, there's no help available here, not from YA" [and this came from the head of YA training/coaching], and probably, if history is any judge, 'not from your State bodies either' he should have added.

So, what to do?

Personally I think we should get behind this new CRA venture 100%. We are going to need people to put their hand up for committee positions so there's a commitment to be made there. I'm not sure how that will happen amongst cat sailors. We're not too good at that but I think we really do need to build cat racing into a more credible and viable enterprise so that we are more professional and have some influence and some decent dollars to spend on ourselves etc., etc.,

Like it or not, the language in the world of viability and credibility is $$$$$. Then if YA, ISAF, IOC want a piece of our action, [or if coincidentally they benefit from our success] well and good, and if they don't, then maybe Darren and Glen will need to jump on a Star. ;^) .................Just Joking Bundy!

Bottom line is, I think we really need to do this for us!

Berny.

Going to Yachting South Australia for junior cat development would be a total joke I couldn't even get help of anykind for a junior program for 420's. If we split into little groups we may as well do what were doing now p??sing into the wind.

Let me be quite clear, the consensus was that this new body, CSA or CRA should work within the current establishment of YA, ISAF. There was no discussion or no intension to split. On the contrary, the general feeling was that we develop this association to strengthen our position within the existing framework.

Quote
Let me be quite clear, the consensus was that this new body, CSA or CRA should work within the current establishment of YA, ISAF. There was no discussion or no intension to split. On the contrary, the general feeling was that we develop this association to strengthen our position within the existing framework.
end quote

We did that years ago Berny, when things were becoming “lopsided” against the multihulls within the YA in the late 70’s, early 80’s. At the request of the YA, all the catamaran associations formed an overall combined association to work for multihulls – by multihull sailors -, and to report back monthly to the YA any decisions that we had come to in a democratic way. We were led to believe by the YA that we were an independent, decision making, full committee of the YA and as such our recommendations and decisions would not have to go to “the floor” of the general YA, but instead would go straight to the executive for consideration, In so doing we would bypass all the “hassle” of having to put up each and every point individually as a motion to the “floor” consisting of representatives from every yacht club and class association, which outnumbered the multihull reps at a ratio of about 10 to 1. This ratio obviously made it very difficult to have any motion of ours, not only voted on in our favour, but it also made it very difficult at times to even bring a motion to the vote. After this multihull committee had reported back to the YA for over a year with not one of it’s recommendations or decisions having been acted upon, the question was raised at the annual general meeting of the YA, why had the multihull committee not had any response from the YA concerning the work that it had carried out for a whole year. The answer that was given and minuted, was that we were not (as we were told) a “committee” of the YA BUT we were merely a sub committee of the keel boat association and that all our reports had been forwarded to them for consideration and had been acted on as they saw fit – in other words, they were thrown in the rubbish and not even minuted or kept–
This is the way of the empowered to the disenfranchised in all walks of life, tax them, then ignore them if possible, and if they make a nuisance of themselves, side track them until they “get the message” and just take what they are given without questions.

What I am saying is that everything that is being said NOW, both for and against, has all happened and been said before. This is a perfect case of “history repeating itself”! All the same ideas, both of “working within the system” and of “breaking away, have been all argued just as strongly before, not over Tornadoes being dropped from the Olympics, but over the same principles of inequality and favouritism within the governing authorities of sailing. The last time this mood prevailed within the multihull community, the route taken was one of a renewed vigour within the system to try to initiate “change” from within. It was considered that within 10 to 20 years from then multihulls would be far better integrated within the general sailing community and they would have a far more equitable input into decision making for sailing and a far better result for multihulls.
I have to say that IT DIDN’T HAPPEN THEN AND IT WON’T HAPPEN NOW!! Nothing will change while multihulls are “controlled” administratively by the YA’s and the ISAF. If there isn’t a clean break from the ISAF we will be having this same “generational” argument again in another 10 or 20 years.
“If history is forgotten then we are condemned to repeat the same mistakes over and over”.

In mulling all this over, I have to say that Darryl's posting just reinforces a gut feeling I have, and it keeps coming back to that definition of insanity - continually doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result.

I applaud the work of the MHC in US Sailing, and wish them success, and some day I may find the time to join in and help out (work and family commitments kept me from the call-in recently, unfortunately).

But, as I will probably keep my US Sailing membership (although I'm ambivalent about it), I know that my efforts to get other cat sailors to join will be even harder now. In the past the question was always "what does US Sailing do for us", and given what has gone on that question will be much harder to answer. If it cares, US Sailing needs to make a genuine gesture to help its cause. It needs to be real, and not some cynical placation thing like trumpeting support for two events and voting for none. If there is nothing, then most will take this as further proof of their intentions. In other words, the ball is just as much in their court as ours - we can be nice, play along, beg, plead, etc., but in the end if the other side is deaf to us it will come to nothing.

As for the rules - if multi-sailing were to split there is no reason not to continue using the same rules. They can't come out to our clubs and tell us to stop using them. There are many clubs that use them that have affiliation with US Sailing and ISAF. What you can't do is publish the same rules and claim you wrote them, that's all. In fact, it's the one uniting thing we have in common with other sailors, and us knowing them helps the respect game within the whole scene.

All this having been said, I'm not fan of kicking the keel boats out of the Olympics either, although I question a class that requires the foredeck crew to become obese for the purposes of hiking ballast - great example for sports. In many ways the Star is similar to the Tornado - it's an old design that has been kept alive by participation and updates to the rig and platform.

Like others, I believe the mix should include a women's high-performance dinghy, a keel boat, and a multi. Drop the Finn - it's the only class designated for a weight class. Maybe it's time to swap the Star for a more modern keel boat - maybe the i550 (a home buildable 18' sport boat) would fit the bill, and would be more exciting and accessible for sure. Perhaps arguing for a full slate that includes the monos will help our cause, to help it being seen as more than just the cat sailors whining. I don't know.

As much as I feel frustrated for the cause of multi sailing, I really feel frustrated for sailing overall, because I really think the current slate of events will do little to enhance the image of the sport overall. Even the windsurfers - with pumping allowed, light air races are just bizarre to watch, and although I appreciate the conditioning that must be done to do that, I think most people (including myself) when seeing it on TV for a whole regatta just think it's time switch channels. Don't know how to fix that, they should be a part of the game but it doesn't represent well in those cases.

Anyone else seen this?
http://www.internationalmultihull.org/
Has a new organization started up?

Firstly the preferred cat was a one design F18, not a Tiger. Considering the (VERY) large majority of the attendies were from the Pittwater Cat Club (Hobie Club) it was never going any other way. The Tiger would be a great choice for Hobiecat and would see their values jump quiet a bit while knocking the resale values of the other class and effectively hurting the F18 concept. This is not what the F18 class needs.

I am sure the Hobie guys would not be so keen on the idea if it was the Nacra Infusion that was selected.

Don't think Bundy was offering to do this. He suggested we should, however is a very unrealistic idea. Purchasing a second boat to sail once a month on.... Who has the time, the space to keep a second boat, a second boat/trailer to register, insure, maintain. It is not going to happen. Most off us don't have enough time / money to ballance racing our serious boat, travelling every month whilst balancing our sailing with our home life and careers.

That sugestion was knocked on the head very quickly.

As for Bundy, you rarely see im race in OZ on the F18 and not at all on the Tornado now days as he is too busy with his off shore campaign.

The one thing I was sick of hearing at the meeting was a lot of sailors turning to Phil Jones as asking how can the YA help us with a youth development program and how can we get funding for it.

We have a lot of smart cat sailors around and there is no reason why with a little effort, they can not get a well funded program off the ground themself at their clubs. Why would the YA want to help us if we do not want to help ourselves. If we made an effort, showed them we were very serious, then and only then should they even consider assisting us.

To tell you the truth, I was very embarrassed by some of the comments coming from some top sailors there. Many of these sailors will put their 2 cents worth in, but when it comes to crunch time, it would be up to the avaerage club sailor to put in the hard yards to get it off the ground and continuly support it whilst the 'good' sailors are off sailing for themselves, looking back at the club guys as second rate sailors.

Firstly it's great to see cat sailors getting all excited with enthusiastium. But I would like to see true facts when one puts a posting on open forums, it is also not the time to be critical of ideas or other class's, the vote was for one class design F18. The only mention of tiger was from Darren,as there is only two F18's at this stage that would qualify, the Tiger and the Infusion, and I think the tiger is the only one that is a legally registered ISAF boat!!! As to the comment regarding values of the boats, yes it probably would increase the value of the tigers if chosen, is this a bad thing I don;t think so as I believe the 2nd hand market is far too cheap. It would only be good for all F18 boats and sailors the added exposure, the credability and the increase in competition, I think you will find that majority of sailors will come to the F18 class not necessarily the tiger but to prove their worth as a possible olympic campaigner. Something that my good old mum used to keep reminding of, it is always a good idea to shoot for the stars but start at the clouds first.
Love always Mark

Geez, don't get too far ahead of yourselves, the Tornado has only just been dropped and you're already arguing over the next cat to get into the Olympics!? umm hello...

Then write a report yourself next time you arrogant butt.

It'll be great to have another major competition you cant come to if you havn't got a friggin hobie

Berny, tell us how you really feel. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

And don't forget that most of the Olympic classes only "survive" as dedicated Olympic classes. I think the laser is the only class that has a reasonable contingent of non-Olympic hopefulls. Maybe the 470 in Europe can be thought of similarly.

Why would any other class want to be Olympic? It has decimated participation in many classes, 49er, Tornado. Only Olympic hopefulls are tempted to these classes generally. The Etchells refuse to be Olympic despite being the most popular keel boat in the size range of the existing classes. This is because it would destroy their local club class racing.

There are fairly good T fleets in the UK. Not massive fleets, but they grew as a result of the new rig.

Scooby... how did that work..

You had a Hurricane fleet (which I understand is a Hobie 20 like boat with a main and jib) going strong. The F18 fleet was going well in the EU and the F20 fleet was collapsing. And then you had the Spitfire spin fleet start and grow as well.

What was the magic that let the Tornado revive.. other then being the best ride out there.

Sorry to Hijack... never understood how it happened.

According to a reliable source, the A Class also declined an invitation to become the Olympic single handed dinghy or something like that. I guess it was after the tests in Quiberon about five or six years ago.

All very interesting. I never raelly thought about anyone not wanting to be included in the olympics, [no capital intended]

The "Australis" A cat was once proposed as a Olympic boat.. The idea was rejected by the A cat association in the 60s or was it 70s..

The 49er was designed to be the Olympic boat from day 1. Just a good lobbying and marketing push saw it in.. I'm fairly certain the whole SMOD idea for Olympic classes was Bethwaites idea. As I recall the class wasn't that big when it was selected. It helped that "Monkey" Bethwaite set up a series of manufacturers to build a few hulls in various continents to ensure "International" compliance day one.

As I read the "International class rules" even the F16 would now qualify for official ISAF International status!! Apart from we are a strange bunch of owners and I suspect the class would reject the "honour"..

The A class saw inclusion into the Olympics as their death knell to the class numbers worldwide (and they were probably right).
This was primarily due to what happened at the time when the Tornado was chosen for the Olympics.
To make an important correction here, it wasn’t really the Tornado that was selected, but the selection had been made that a cat representing the “B” class of catamaran was to be included into the Olympics and the Tornado was the cat that was then selected from a series of “trials” between several types of “B” class cats.
At that time the “B” class was the most innovative, experimental and largest growing class of cat in the world and the variety and numbers of different cats being built within it’s “box rule” was impressive. After the Tornado gained inclusion into the Olympics, the “B” class simply died and the only example to be seen for decades has been the Tornado.
Many multihull people over the years have stated (perhaps cynically, perhaps not) both privately and publicly, that the only reason the “B” class was included in the Olympics was (mono hull bias) trying to “kill” the growing numbers of cats being put on the water, and looking at the numbers historically, this was the overall effect (whether intentional or not) until someone called Hobie came along and attracted an entirely untapped market – people who had never sailed before!

Mark

With the modern rig on the T it meant that there was a 'modern' assymetric boat for the 'fat boys' to sail, so that those people to large for the F18 could sail the T and be competitive. The Hurricane has now followed suite and has modernised its rig to include an assymetric, as the Hurricane SX and has also seen a resurgance in its popularity. The F20 never really caught on here in the UK although there are a few around.

Anyway back to thread...........

*nods*..
I am old enough to remember as a kid watching the B class take off.. Mantas, Tornados & Quest B2s all in one fleet.. Hell I even recall a fleet of Cs!!..
Interestingly while the T had been chosen here at least the QB2s were faster.. (the low aspect rig had attended the trials and well beaten on the day but the high aspect rig was far superior and the overall package was quicker here at least).. Also the T was a home build boat was favoured as I recall over the professionally built QuestB2.

After the choice the Mantas and Quests had their own fleet with the Ts wanted to sail alone in the "Olympic" fleet.. Eventually only new Ts were built.. The B Class died as old boats disappeared due to old skippers retiring or broke..

At least I guess the decision allows for a B class to revive.. With the updated rig should be interesting to see new versions of the Blade B2, Capricorn B2..
<img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I know the A-cat class specifically declined to be considered as an olympic class for this reason. ISAF and IOC see only OD classes as viable meaning that they have to pick on specific brand out of a formula class thus effecting a huge inbalance inside that class. The A's and I suspect the F18's much rather do without. Either the olympic class needs to be the full formula class or they need to choose the Tornado again. A hobie 16 without a spi is just not doing it televison wise.

Wouter

On legal terms the F16 class satisfied those requirements first in 2005. And we have indeed thanked for the honour thus far. When I was still chairman the main reasons for this was the application fee (quite steep) and the fact that the class rules had to be totally rewritten to be more reflective of an unreadable bureaucratic document were all rights for changing the class rules were signed over to some obscure ISAF committee. Yeah ! as if !

Wouter

Stewart and Darryl, thank you for the history lessons. I really enjoy posts looking back at the infancy of the beachcats. Would be great to see a photo of the winged tornado which broke during the trials.

To get back on topic. Building national multihull (or high-performance to include moths and perhaps skiffs if they want to) can not hurt. Starting an international assoc. can not hurt either. At least not until this effort eventually is succesful and a threat to ISAF. It is a very long way to go before we are there, if we ever get there. Until then, I can only cheer for John and the others working within the current structure. If the attemt at getting multihulls and a high-perf dinghy for females in the 2012 games doesn't work out, we (as in catsailors) really should work hard at developing and strengthening the teamwork and structures which have succeeded in influencing the RYA and YA. Perhaps the discussion should move on and begin finding ways of attracting and keeping catsailors organized/affiliated. What is the key and why have we not succeeded so far (Are NAMSA and UKCRA successes? Others)? Should we use "Remember Estoril" as a slogan. Doesn't quite have the same "schwung" as "Remember the Alamo"

This is my OPINION, not fact and from what I saw happening at the time.....

A few people left the Hurricane 5.9 fleet (The Hobie 20 carries a remarkable resemblance to the 5.9, some might say the Hobie is a close copy)
But at the same time, people where leaving the Dart 18 fleet (was by far the strongest cat fleet in the UK at the time) to go to F18 and I'd not be surprised if people were also looking at the T as the ultimate boat.

There are now people around the UK that just sail the T for fun - there really were not that many that sailed the old T for fun, just for the Ollies. There is now a proper fleet at Mennis Bay (Kent coast) - but not sure how many(maybe 10?), there are a few scattered around the rest of the UK (maybe 10?) and we even had 3 (I think) entered for the Grafham Cat open (Biggest in the UK with usually approx 200 boats) and in the past we only ever had 1 from Grafham enter. I'd say the T is doing quite well in the UK, and I'd like one at some point if my kids decide to sail with me.

Imagine the chagrine should the 2008 Deed of Gift America's Cup Challenge be decided on fast, big multihulls-a very likely possibility.

"Lovey, what's that fast, odd-looking boat in our water!? Be a dear and refresh my Oporto- I'll hail the commodore..."

I owned a 'B' class, a Cunningham Quest B class [no not QB2]. Fantastic boat. Had it for about four seasons, raced it only twice in all that time. Mainly used for taking ppl out sailing and scaring the pants off them. Worked well with the women. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I've never enjoyed sailing as much as I did when I owned that boat.

Still love it but that 'B' spoilt me really.

Guys, I think I'm very much over all this Olympic stuff. The more I look into it the more disillusioned I get with all the politics, all of the small print and backroom deals yadayada, it all looks like so much crap to me and as a cat sailor I really just want to sail and race a bit and have some fun and I'm able to do that without getting involved in all that highly elitist corporate bs. And I'm getting the feeling that a lot cat sailors you feel the same way so why are we stressing.
That's NOT cat sailing, and virtually has nothing to do with it IMO.

I've been looking into the YA and YNSW and it all looks to complicated for us to get any real benefit from any of it. Nobody from YA or YNSW really gives a flying fig about cats so Bolloks to it all I say.

Berny.

But who wants to watch 2 women go as slow as they can in a highly tactical race that looks stupid when you can watch two women scream around on a cat and who knows what they may loose in a pitchpole <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />. I still want the guys on the Tornado's to pitchpole but I dont want any wardrobe malfunctions. I'm not going to sit through the Olympic sailing telecast with only an occaisional shot of a 49er.
regards

There won't be a telecast. Even with Australia having a great shot (and eventually winning) in the 470 in Sydney, I saw no coverage until the last race. And then it was pretty weak coverage at best, I can't even remember them showing the start, just the last couple of legs.

It is up to the sponsors to kick up a fuss and either pull out all their financing or put in some serious dollars, both in support of sailing. It is their advertising, they need to make it work for them.

Potential sponsors should be looking at sailing as an opportunity to make money, it is an untapped and poorly run marketing machine at the moment, but with huge potential. The answer is greater visibility.

We faired better here then because I sat through a fair bit of slow crap to see some decent sailing last time, sailing was listed in our guide but not what type.
regards

A couple of times I seem to recall sailing was listed but turned the TV on to find something else was being shown instead. Hah, and it was usually late at night, so the replays were being bumped for something else!

http://scott.projectsomewhere.com/2007/11/12/commiserations/#comments

just another interesting commentary of the fiasco.

We need to develop sailing into a suitable Telesport [television]. Television is the single most important vehicle we have to promote sailing and raise revenues. Presently there are some initiatives being investigated and developed to make Catamaran racing, television friendly. These initiatives include developing sailing specific filming strategies and training sailing savvy directors, producers and commentators. Imagine presenting an NRL game on television but using directors, producers and commentators who know very little about Rugby League! This is happening with sailing. Even at Olympic level our best directors and commentators are seriously incompetent. It's no wonder you don't see sailing on TV because the general public have no idea what's going on when they watch a sailboat race on tele and so it's not popular.
We need to find the Ray Warrens, Frank Hydes and Phil Liggetts of sailing. These people are probably responsible, more than any for giving their prospective sports legendery status in the homes of the general public.

So true Berny! The AC in Auckland had some very good production. Even my wife who dont care for racing at all got caught up in it. But productions like that costs money and somehow the ball need to start rolling if it is to develop.

Bern,
As we have discussed what you're saying is so basic I can't understand while people are not all over it.
I think you're in possession of the solution. We just need to find the dollars to turn it into reality.
Regards,
Phill

I agree with you Berny,But sailing is only television worthy if there's action,thrills and spills.The joe average punter won't watch sailing unless it has the above,i know i work with a group of shift workers and they always tell me if they watch it and there's action BUT if there's no action they always comment on how boring it looks.So while ever that theory is around television coverage will be limited.Just ask people that have tried to organise television coverage of events.
And lets face facts that while ever there is money available for the winners of medals in olympics people will always stack the decks do deals or cheat (if they can get away with it)
The removal of the tornado's from the olympics hasn't changed my sailing from week to week as i know that my sailing ability wouldn't even fill the pinky finger on the top guys & gals
These are just my thoughts Richard

Media pressure is still on down under:

http://www.sail-world.com/australia/ISAF-hits-new-low-with-2012-Olympic-Events/39854
http://www.sail-world.com/australia/Multihulls-on-the-March/39875

The "ISAF Hits New Low" article is excellent - I would reccomend reading it all the way through twice, despite its length and poor title choice. Very good job of 'setting the scene,' explaining the lead-up and describing how the various MNAs balance considerations. Reasoned explanations for re-opening the vote like the one presented by Phil Jones are exactly what is needed to move forward. Threats of forming a new international body or lawsuits or petitions are far less effective - in fact, things like that damage our position terribly, especially when those threats are empty.

In the US the Multihull Council is working along these lines, although to say it is an uphill battle is to comically understate our situation. There is plenty of international support to keep the multihull event in the Games, but we are a vocal minority in this country with too few volunteers working at the national level. It isn't even about the sailors or our chances at medalling (again!) in my opinion. It is about perception - something far more difficult to sway. The two basic and unavoidable issues we face are that multihull sailors are a minority in the US, and that some members of the Board of USSA currently believe that the men's keelboats event must be preserved over the multihull event.

Counter arguements and positions against re-opening the vote are solidifying behind the scenes. Each point raised by RYA and YA is met with criticism and undermining interpretations of the 2002 and 2005 IOC documents - some ISAF officials are feeling very defensive because of the vitriolic responses they've received. We are, however, making progress.

Will there be a multihull event in 2012? I just can't say. What I can assert with more certainty is that things are different in the US today, will be very different in a year, and may be dramatically different in three years.

John Williams
US Multihull Council Chair

Phill, my post on that topic had too many words in it and nobody read it. They skip reading any post with more than five lines. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />
I mean, get serious, we're not that interested in actually doing anything. We're cat sailors remember.

And in any event we're not allowed out much anymore these days. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Hi, I know lots of you do not think that cats in or out will affect you, but is does and in a bigger way than you would think. With getting on TV we need to take one step at a time it will not happen over night, after running the 2007 f18 worlds which we got on Nat prime time morning show and state prime even shows, and with over 1 mil hits on the web site and this does not inclued sail.tv site or sail-world.com all up the exposure was above all expectation and we learnt ways of doing it better.
It can happen!!!!
Mark

To be honest "some ISAF officials" need a good bollocking..

The position taken by USSA and then adopted by ISAF stinks. Plain and simple. If IOC decides to reduce further the involvement of sailing in the Olympics. This will be laid completely at USSA's feet.

My very limited understanding of the situation has it that one very important element missing from multihull sailing on the US and ISAF scene is politicking. I heard there is one class -- I think the Star, but it may have been the Flying Dutchman or something else -- is renowned for their parties at the ISAF meetings. Now THAT is politicking!

When it gets to the point where people are talking about your parties, you know those boys are on to something! Multihullers need to work on many different fronts to get this cart turned around. But one front that is an absolute must, in my opinion, is working the halls at ISAF. Wining, dining, chatting it up, and wheeling and dealing. I believe that has so much bang for the buck.

I get the impression that the Tornado class/reps may have alienated themselves from 'the good ole boys' at ISAF. I might have that wrong. But if that is the case, then the Tornado class would do every multihuller a service by changing out the guard, and getting in some new blood that knows how to smile and schmooze!

We need to get some 'friends' at ISAF -- and lots of them!!

Nice idea, where's the money comming from?

It was the Finn parties that were really good....now they know how to party...sorry lobby <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Once again I agree with JW, reasoned arguments is the way forward. The petition does help so make sure you and your friends have signed it.

However I do feel that the T if it is chosen and does get back does not neccesarily have to look at changing the guard but maybe looking at the way it is perceived. The perception is that a T is expensive...ok it isn't cheap...but one of the ways possibly of reducing the cost perception is to introduce one design sails...(expect to be shot down in flames for saying this)

On an aside maybe we should also look at the way multihull racing is done at the Olympics.... to show that we are something different...maybe a multi staged long distance race? With some of the back drops of the UK sure to be a TV pleaser

But does USSA really want sailing in the Olympics?

Where do the Finn's and 470's and all the other classes get money from...sponsors that want to see that class in the Olympics.

It looks like the Tornado class took its collective eye off the ball and didn't believe a decision against them would be made, whereas every other class thought they might be the ones to go. Hence the final outcome...

The “ball” being ISAF incompetence. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

They are one-design already. You probably mean they should use cookie-cut sails.., one sail for all sailors, no matter what weight, ability, etc. But, that is NOT one-design.
Rick

That is correct Rick...that is what I meant

But I could hardly say that the sails are one-design at the moment with variations in cuts, cloths etc...ALL TOTALLY LEGAL, but one of the criticisms I have been hearing is that its too expensive to campaign a T due to the cost of developing sails...although being honest the top guys tend to all use the same spinnakers the Gran Segal Mkiv, but mains and jibs do vary as do cuts.

After you get the sails taken care of, then you can work on the masts.

I had a chance to listen to Johnny Lovell talk about their campaign (and others) last spring. The number of masts they were using and testing was mind-numbing! And these weren't cheap, Home Depot masts!!!