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”