I have had great success in raising sponsor dollars for this as of yet proposed class.
<br>
<br>What sponsors what to see is head to head spectacle, lots of thrills, lots of chills, a easy to understand format, and tons of participation.
<br>
<br> What they do not want to see is differences in sailplans(noticble ones), fractured direction (infighting), participant favored rules, and a small showing.
<br>
<br>We have been tasked to provide a venue and class where well known sailors from all types of boats can compete head to head at a high level of commonality. Also, we have mentioned a rules format where ANY sailor can compete with a basically "stock" boat.
<br>
<br>Trying to build rules around a "dream" boat at this time is not practicle, is counter productive to what is readily availible to the public, and creates a format where "one boat is the IT boat", reduces the number of sailors availible and undermines the intention of getting more boats on the water.
<br>
<br>Continuing to lower crew weights reduces the number of teams that can compete to just "smaller" people, alienates potential upper level monohull sailors and reduces the draw provided by broad spectrum competiton. One thing every one must remember is that these boats are a handful to control already, when we power them up it will be even more so, and to lower crew weights is insane to the point where insurance for any event will be cost prohibitive.
<br>
<br>I feel that the boat weights must stay (for now) in the 390-400 lbs range( due to what is readily available from the current manufactures -- or is easily corrected to by SLIGHTLY lower weight existing foriegn boats) and the crew weight minimum must go up to 350 (correctible to). Hell, if you can't correct to 350 after adding 45lbs then go eat a flippin meal!
<br>
<br>Two guys racing in gear at 160 each could correct to 350 with only 30 lbs of corrector weight. The average soling or star crew (180 lbs) would still give up 10 lbs after the correction. What more do you guys want? You slam the door shut on a great number of sailors when you start to force them to sail with "ultra light" crews. For example, I weigh in at 205 (today) and my wife( who has no business being on a super powered NAF20 boat, couldn't pull the spinnaker sheet if our childs live depended on it) weighs 117 (today). So where do you think its fair for us to give up 23lbs to an "olympic caliber" team (when racing at your proposed 300 lbs). Have you every thought this out?????? If you want to race in a growing enviorment, then you open things up where there is alleast the average american can compete. Everyone has to compromise small guys, big guys, catsailors, monohullers, sponsors, and the public.
<br>
<br>At the end of the day, as in anything it becomes a business decision. If it makes sense than sponsors will do it. A format that is percieved to be all inclusive goes to the target market of the sponsor and therefore it becomes easy to get their money. One off builders and people with thoughts of "dream" boats. Need to realize sponsors do not pay for your dreams, they pay to spread their name. The only way that SAILING can do that is to bring the maximum number of KNOWN sailors to an event in order to get public attention. The ability for any person to buy a "stock" boat and compete against the best sailors only makes the racing more "interesting" and makes for good special interest stories.
<br>
<br>Lets stay in the area of what is available and make rules where ALL SAILORS can race evenly. Changing sail formulas for weight is too complicated for the average person to understand, too difficult for an announcer to explain and is percieved as "fixing" by a sponsor. The KISS prinicple must apply here and all sides must compromise. Remember when you think of weight monohullers need weight on the rail therefore they are larger than your average catsailor. And lighter boats are not readily availible or currently racing in the US. The class needs to start with an infrastructure and build from there. You can always repaint the house after it is built.
<br>
<br>Sorry to seem so harsh but I know what sells and what stinks in the mind of a major corporation. Grassroots sells and small turn out stinks.
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

-Hi Steve -
<br> sent an e , but for discussion purposes ,-
<br>-Would like to withdraw the sail area to weight proposal from the discussion ,
<br> It is the best theoretical solution to include all existing ACTIVE RACING 20s in N A ,---BUT , if no one understands it or all feel it is too developemental and will not attract the vast majority of partisipants then we need to proceed differently .
<br>
<br>-We have a successful racing 20 spin class in N A , the Worrell 1000 is raced on these very successfully .We have a iFormula concept and basic rules outline being used successfully in Europe that we can adopt for use in N A to our existing conditions.
<br>
<br>-Believe it would be best to withdraw the total weight proposal you have put forth also and all agree to work based on the existing conditions of 20 class and basic revised iF 20 rules to build a successfull class .
<br>
<br>-Believe Hobie Europe and all other builders and manufacturers will make minor improvements to their 20s to meet the N A Formula 20 Class Assoc. rules if they are FAIR to all .
<br> There are a number of ways to achieve FAIR sailing , but again lets build on the existing success and conditions we have to work with.Lets agree on this basic direction and work out specifics of the iFrule , which can be greatly simplified and improved for use in N A .
<br>-
<br>
<br> Potential sponsors -
<br> As you know I raced in Prosail on H-21s in 88 , and also the Ultimate Yacht Race events ,{on N B C SPORTS } -IT WAS GREAT FUN ,---at first .We raced at fantasic very breezy locations around the country that year . -Out East in Mystic. Conn. , and again in New London ,--in Corpus Cristy Texas ,-on the Great Lakes in Michigan ,--one in San Francisco ,Calif. -one in Newport R I , -and in Miami, FLA.
<br> In Prosail gradually the sponsors demands took over , first they eliminated all the sailing rules except 4 , resulting in collisions , teams pushing off one another , dragging marks etc , {a real mess } then other sponsor demands on course setup {resulting in 40 H-21 s piling up on the first mark , {a reach } -things got progressively worse until very few wanted to race , and it shortly after died out due to that and other various reasons.
<br>
<br>-If we ,the N A Formula 20 Class are going to insure a successfull racing class that will attract and keep sponsors and racing sailors then lets built it on established recognized fair methodes that maintain the integrity of the sport and guarentee of fair sailing for all.
<br> These of course are always the potential danger of meeting sponsors special interests and demands.
<br>
<br>Again lets place or efforts on simplifying and improving the existing iF 20 RULES for use in N A , and build on UNDERSTOOD existing class and rules successes .
<br>-
<br> This is the best formula to attract the best sailors and sponsors and insure a fair excellent racing class over the long term.
<br>
<br>-Lets get this class rolling -
<br>
<br>-flexibally
<br> Carl Roberts <br><br>

Total crew and boat weight rule -problems -
<br>
<br>-If the total crew and boat weight rule were set at 760 as proposed -typ 350 min crew .
<br>
<br>-
<br>-I weigh 225 , I can find a 205 plus crew . total 430+
<br>-Under the proposed total weight rule I could have a 330 lb cat built or go get a CFR 20 ,
<br> -TEAM 430 LB can then have a larger sq top main built , proven faster in the A-Class in light wind conditions .
<br>
<br> All other cat designs , particularly existing cats like the H-20 would immediately become obsolete ,along with all the rest , and anyone that could not purchase a lightweight cat and find 400 plus LB crew .
<br> <br><br>

Carl,
<br>
<br>I see the problems. That is why I have bent to your side of the arguement regarding combined weight. ALthough I do think it is a neat concept. Sometimes not every concept is practicle.
<br>
<br>I use the word concept because iF20 is a concept, not reality.
<br>You make solid arguements about one design formats also. The only thing that is wrong with one design is the one source one manufacturer restraints and the politics that become intolerable.
<br>
<br>Americas cup is one design racing with multiple manufacturers and sources. It is the rules that make it what it is. As you have stated the devil is in the details to which I agree.
<br>
<br>My only arguments come to light when you shift the rules too far in one direction or the other. IE ultra light boats or crews and then allow more sail area (downwind) to off set this shift in thought processes. Can a lighter boat be built? YES! But, at what cost? If you start rules that include the majority of manufactured boats (weighing from 390-420 lbs) that have boats already sailing with existing support networks (dealers, suppliers, and fleets) THen you have a foundation to build from complete with a following. Will Hobie one design racing go away? NO. Do we want it to? NO. If we look at history. Performance cat has consistantly changed their boats and effectively killed tight racing that the Hobie crowd enjoys. Yet Hobie has so tightly controled their classes that it is prohibitive to new thoughts. So basically, you have two groups both getting smaller everyday. The techies and the traditionalists. What the NAF20 class should do is try and repair this fracture using both of these manufacturers existing designs and build a set of rules that makes it tolerable for new sailors (new, converts, and reinfrancised) to come and enjoy what is left while building a new house on existing foundations.
<br>
<br>When you look at formula racing you have to consider the other classes (F16, F18 and F20). Each class as a niche for a certain type of sailor. F20 should be the biggest baddest, fastest that EVERYONE can compete on. If your smaller and can't hang go sail the F18, if you can't hang there go sail F16. If you can't hang on those go RC! (just kidding). Trying to make the F20 class set for Husband/Wife teams is not logical. That is the target market of the F18 crowd. F20 should be the "fighter pilot" crowd --loud, proud, crazy and awesome to watch. You keep bringing up the Worrell -- the worrell is not set up for the average sailor and neither should F20. F20 should be the "winston cup" series of beach cat sailing. THe last stop inthe "cheap" world of sailing. $18k is cheap for a performance boat the next step is the $30K crowd of carbon sc22-27's.
<br>
<br>This last stop is our best marketing tool. Targeting the "crazy" crowd is our niche and to step up the rules is approporiate. One of the strongest draws to the Worrell is its danger, the fact that not everyone can run it or should and the fact that not everyone finishes. It is drama. In part so should the F20 class.
<br>
<br>F20 boats should draw people to them. Just like the first spinnaker boats use to do at cat regattas. Make people dream, wifes nervous and men slaivate. This drama is the draw of the Class not, the few light boats but the "hot rods" that everyone can afford. One you know and can sail but, just like a 60's muscle car will bite you if you don't respect it.
<br>
<br>Thats why I propose rules of
<br>boat weight minimum -- 390 (for now -- change them in a few years)
<br>Crew weight minimum -- 350 lbs
<br>max corrector weight (for boat or crew) 45 lbs
<br>Max sail area 550lbs (for all sailors)
<br>Open sail format (can buy mast/sails from any shop - that is a NAF20 approved shop)
<br>Sails must conform to basic measurements (TBD)
<br>Sailmakers must affix NAF20 sticker to sails and sign affidavit to their "legal" nature.
<br>Minimum of five boats manufactured for homoglation to make them class legal.
<br>Snuffer legal -- actually prefered
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

Carl,
<br>
<br>Please read that "you" in the last post was not directed at you the person. It was meant in the first person case of usage.
<br>
<br>Sorry if I offended.
<br>
<br>Respectfully,
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

-We are all here to sail ,-talk sailing , form a Formula 20 Class and have fun , -not offended by any , hope I have not offended any either.
<br>
<br> This sounds great , the direction is towards revising existing i F 20 Rules to meet conditions in N A .
<br> WE ARE GETTING CLOSE --Boat weight , close , defining sail area is needed , main spin jib etc. but open to approved sailmakers with their measurement label.-good ,
<br>
<br>-The only always controversial aspect of your list is min. weight .
<br> Setting a higher min. at 350 LB would have the benifit of not requireing spin and jib sail area compensations using various size progressions and allowing added corrector weights to meet a crew weight catagory to add the larger chute and jib as is the rule in the existing i formula rules in Europe.
<br>
<br>-We should simplify the rule when possible , maybe some others input on this difficult aspect , -
<br> Lets number the individual rules and proceed individually in a seperate post for each , and now that we have a general concensis on class direction ,lets post and discuss each part individually with more focus , --If this becomes too messy on this forum we can proceed with e-mail , but am looking to include as many as possible from each geographic location around the country , from which we can ask for volunteers and select a N A F-20 board of directors .
<br> Others added info is always appreciated.
<br>
<br> Will start a new post labeled #1-min.weight-
<br>
<br><br><br>

Carl
<br>
<br>Agreed lets take these down by the numbers.
<br>
<br>First is crew weight
<br>
<br>Second is Sail area limitations
<br>
<br>Third is Boat weight (as defined by existing manufacturers boats) minimum
<br>
<br>Fourth ??
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

Wouter<br><br>

Hi Carl
<br>I think you have a good idea to initiate seperate threads for each point. I suggest that you start each thread with a summary of the philosophy that is coalessing state the issue and List the accepted data for each of the 19 and 20 footers that are in play. I suggest that the Querbion data be used if possible. I think the goal should be to hammer out a consenus around the issue. not to write a rule quite yet.
<br>
<br>I agree with Wouter that beam should also be listed. It may turn out that wider is just so much faster that there is no way to keep it in the fold but I can still hope (grin) I think your summary will make sure every one is on the same page Or allow them to state an objection
<br>
<br> Take Care
<br>Mark<br><br>

I Think you are wrong.
<br>The largest form of sponsorship/advertising in the USA is done through stock car racing. No such thing as "YOU MUST ALL DRIVE THE SAME CAR". These cars are very different in many noticable aspects.
<br>Name any famous form of racing in the world wich is subjected to the strict rules you are proposing.
<br>
<br>F1 racing
<br>Paris - Dakar (for that matter any Rally racing)
<br>Indy 500
<br>Drag racing
<br>
<br>Tour De France
<br>
<br>Vende Globe
<br>America's Cup
<br>Little America's Cup
<br>12 Metre
<br>
<br>a little closer to home...
<br>A-class, iF18, iF20
<br>
<br>The list is endless.
<br>
<br>Carl,
<br>In 1988 it must have been exiting to race on the H21 circuit, but I was under the impression that this circuit was running on the back of the The Pro Sail F40 boats racing at the time. Talk about excitment, completely and very noticably different configurations of multihulls racing head to head... Catamrans , Trimarans, 60 foot masts 70 foot masts and even some neer 80 feet. The rules where simple
<br>max LOA, min BW and max SA. It worked.
<br>Again in 1988, another exciting sailing event ... The World 1000(not Worrel in 88/89) ... Simple rules with many different designs on the line. No beam restrictions, racks all over the place, what a wild race.
<br>
<br>Sponsors don't care where they advertise, just the "how many will see the banners" and "Is it the correct targeted age group for their merchandise".
<br>
<br>Unless the class is created as more of a developmental class or formula based, as a builder I wouldn't have as much interest in it.
<br>
<br><br><br>

Mark
<br>
<br>You asked for a list of sports with tight rules. The following sports/assoc. have tighter rules than what has been proposed.
<br>
<br>Nascar (Winston cup, Busch, and the Truck Series)
<br>Not to mention IROC (one design)
<br>Cart
<br>IRL
<br>GT
<br>GTA
<br>Formula 1
<br>Formula 3
<br>Formula FORD
<br>IHRA (pro gas, pro-modified, basically all BUT the local street stock class and those are just about as loose as we've proposed)
<br>IOPA (racing airplanes --by class)
<br>DRAG Boats
<br>OFFShore Race Boats (except unlimiteds -- which are similar in rules to proposed)
<br>AMerica's cup
<br>Open 60's
<br>French Racing TRi's (you tried to throw that one past but, have you ever read the rules for them? There are really tight!)
<br>
<br>DO I need to go on?? THere is an existing formula that works when it comes to "FORMULA-Type" racing. Why are catsailors so resistant to what works in every other motor/mechanical sport?
<br>
<br>The basic outline that is under proposal is starting to work. Will give everyone an even playing field. Will provide for some good rivalry. Pull at the heart strings of brand loyalty while using existing designs, networks, race teams, support groups, and only expand the base of sailors from which to draw from (by including a weight formula that encourages monohull sailors to come and play).
<br>
<br>Mark, I know that lighter boats can be built. But for right now that starts an arms race that would kill the class. The rules are formulated in a manner that if you can build a stronger, durable boat that is lighter than 390-400 lbs then you can add up to 45 lbs to make it legal. But just make sure that your crew weighs in at 350 because you used all the corrector weight on the boat! Be realistic. You have to start somewhere and this compromise is the best place so far. Unless you want to find two manufacturers that will build open formula boats then donate 30-40 boats each to become the basis of this class. The total dollars for that would total between $900,000 and $1.4 million (based ona manufaturers cost of 15K a boat which we all know can't be reached) And I don't know of any manufacturers in the world that could A. afford to do it, B. see any financial incentive to do it if they could afford it or C. have a reason to do it when they could built boats to compete in this formula and MAKE money.
<br>
<br>When you look at the numbers the worldwide number of 20 foot beach cats it is significantly less than the number of 2001 Ford F350 XLT 4X4 platnium series pick up truck (9,718). I just put these numbers up for us all to see how puny our beloved sport is. We need to work on the size of our sport not the size/weight of what boat could be built.
<br>
<br>Lets concentrate on this first and the second when it becomes relevant from business mans perspective.
<br>
<br>Thanks
<br>Steve
<br><br><br>

Steve,
<br>Just because there are many rules, does not make them tight.
<br>As far as the automotive racing seen goes, (unless more of a one design class) from what I see the rules don't limit the bore or the stroke or the number of pistons in what is very important : the engine and power. This is the same as saying use a higher aspect sailplan if you wish. The tight rules in your examples are more akine to min boat weight, max sail area (displacement of engine) and in some overall length and width limits ... Nothing different from what I am proposing.
<br>
<br>"Simple rules" or "Formula based" ... I consider both of these "tight" and both are developmental.
<br>
<br>As far as your 350 pound minimum crew weight it looks to me like you are the only one pushing for this. Don't talk about it as if it is a set rule. For crew that measures up to 300 pounds, you are asking them to carry an extra 50 pounds to make minimum. This is a very unsafe measure making the boat more difficult to right and more prone to turtle following a capsize. I don't know of any other 20 footer class that even comes close and I will never 'be for' anything that slows down a boat. The only viable solution here is a sail area to crew(+ boat) weight relation.
<br>
<br>I am not only trying to create/push F20 racing, I would like to improve the overall speed of the boat/class. If what you propose happens then you will never see qa H20 owner increase his minimum crew weight to 350(I think it is 295 for them ??) just to race in F20 and expect to be competitive.
<br>
<br>As Carl said: 'not offended and hope to not offend'
<br>
<br>nice and hot ... go F20
<br>Marc
<br>
<br><br><br>

Hi Marc
<br> Always good points , -
<br> Yes was there RACING in the 87 World {worrell } 1000 ALSO -there were 12 ft racks , --a supercat platform with a 40 ft wing mast ,--a planning type hull platform with wing mast , the new Hurrican ,-with adjustable side stays ,the first spin and hooters appeared ,-several others --what GREAT FUN .
<br>
<br>-I am also more interested in developement AND finding a way for the average guy without the big bucks to be able to purchase an older cat , add a chute , race with us and have fun . ---THIS is my vision for the N A Formula Class, which would eventually become 2,-- modified and developemental .
<br> If I found any good 20 platform available cheap ,like an old Tornado , N 6/0 -or any I would enjoy rebuilding it , adding a chute and having it available for others or junior sailors to race ,--I,ve already done this on a smaller scale for my young kids on the lake , we will have a S C 15 with a chute for around 600 dollars , {I had a used chute }
<br> Maybe even eventually sell it very inexpensively to any interested in racing , --this is how we really build the sport and class ,--direct involvement and promotion .
<br>
<br> Several have said take this one step at a time , while many others have said the numbers of interested sailors are not there for a developement /modified class approach ,and the only successfull option is the more defined iF-type approach used in Europe.
<br> How many would race or be encouraged to return to race with a developemental rule in place .??
<br>
<br> I don't really know -
<br> Carl<br><br>

Hi Mark S
<br>
<br> We have existing conditions attitudes , manufactures class differences , different existing 20 ft cats all over the weight and sail area scale to attempt to bring along.
<br>
<br> It is very difficult just to find basic direction much less to present concised fair accurate rules specifics and present proposed alternatives for discussion .
<br>
<br> You seem to have some background in this area and would make a better moderator and possibley be more objective ,-obviously all presently on the 20 forum are on various different topics and pages , -guess we have to be patient and hope good things evolve from it .
<br>
<br>-[currently not having much responce on the #1 min Weight rule post } --
<br>
<br> Please take a rules topic and present it for discussion if you like Mark ,--
<br> Also wish there were some good way to include 10 beam cats , --we went through the scenario and more extreme difficulties of it.--open to suggestions --
<br>
<br> All the best
<br>Carl
<br> <br><br>

MHB
<br>
<br>Yes, I know I am the only one pushing for a larger crew weight minimum. It is because I have been tasked to "sell" this to sponsors, monohull sailors, and the media/press.
<br>
<br>To be direct about this if a crew weighs in at 300 then they should go race formula 18. THere I have said it cut and flippin dry!! I am really at my wits end here guys! I have been very forth coming about what will work from the marketing end and what has been requested from the monohull end. One represents a couple of million dollars and the other about 15 crews (professional, semi-pro and olympic). I do not have not and will not pull things straight out of my back side to pound forward. I am a realist and a business man. Low crew weights drive alot of good sailors away, ultra light boat weights aren't pulled from existing manufactures stocks, and you ignore every existing infrastructure out there. You can not start a racing fleet like that.
<br>
<br>On weight, I know carl I need to do this on the other forum (sorry). Carl, what was the average crew weight of the last three worrell teams? Call Mike and get it if you don't know. I think both you and Marc need to look at that data.
<br>
<br>Right now I'm going to bed I have a headache and am irritable.
<br>
<br>Sorry if I sound like an assh##e But, I have been given my marching orders on what will sell and what won't and what is being proposed will not fly with the sponsors and a good segment of target sailors. You guys can decide, but right now you've tied my hands
<br>Steve<br><br>

-Hang in there Steve -
<br>
<br> An open 20 forum rules discussion is a slow sometimes painfull process , moreso than I imagined ,-people with many different perspectives and interests on racing are posting , but find this very educational and gives us a broader base of information and experiences and more valuable information to base good fair rules upon .
<br> lets be patient , I do not have all the answers , -
<br>
<br>-The F-18 new web site is up , mainly produced by several local guys in CRAM , though about 20 total ,very well respected accomplished sailors .
<br>-It appears to be more manufacturers oriented , though have not examined it in detail on rules structure yet.
<br>
<br>-For sponsors one thing we should be concerned with is performance in comparison with other classes , --In europe the F-18S are the most popular class . We are seeing performance predictions of these 18 and 16 ft cats having equal righting moment and much less weight ,--therefor potentially faster around the course than heavier 20s .
<br>
<br>-Matt S tested the new N Formula 18s here in MI , racing some open races with us . We had one distance race of 20 miles where Matt on the new F-18 along with 2 Tornados and several others started 5 Minutes ahead of us in the Inter 20 fleet , --about 35 cats total ,, also a huge mono fleet .
<br> Mark {maui mark } I-17 natl champ and I and a number of very accomplished I-20 SAILORS with CRAM sailed through the entire fleet except one Tornado ,{closed the gap }, but did not make up any time on Matt sailing the new N-F-18 -
<br>-This is a clear indication of speed potential of 18s , the 16 performance ratings indicate similar speeds ,
<br>
<br> What will sponsors think when they see lighterweight 18s and 16s sailing by at higher speeds than the much heavier 20s ,or winning races in open competition .
<br>
<br> Maybe we do need to allow 20s to become faster ,!!
<br>
<br> Carl<br><br>

Carl
<br>
<br>I understand that the F18 can be fast and do agree that the boats are heavy. However, cutting out the weight in the crew area draws the knife across the throat of bringing in more sailors. Remember that in NAF20 we are talking about more sail area which will offset the weight issues which I believe in your example would have the F18 losing ground to the NAF20's.
<br>
<br>I'll try and keep my shirt on but, don't even go about dropping crew weights I know that the monosailors will walk and with them so does the sponsor dollars.
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

Marc,
<br>
<br>I agree. NOBODY will be happy about adding weight to reach min, no matter what they weigh. The H20 class set theirs based on some safe number to right the boat. Even though it is 295, most of the sailors generaly agree that around 325 is optimum. Making some severly light team add tons of non-moveable weight does not make sailing fair and adds to the safety concerns of the event.
<br>
<br>If majsteve thinks that some high profile sponsored profesional class will be what revitalizes this sport, I think he's f----'d. Not that I would'nt love to watch it and if I had the time and money maybe try and compete in it, but:
<br>
<br>Without the numbers in participation, the sponsors and prime time viewing will not happen.
<br>Having an overpowered platform that only 2 fat guys can hold down will not attract the participation.
<br>The idea of a true arms race for the perfect boat is unfounded. No production manufacturer will put out a new model unless they feel that they can sell bunches of them. Designing a boat, plugs, and prototyping all are very expensive. A few 1 offs like the CFR20 will appear but look how successful that was (1 boat that got its butt kicked in wind over 5 knots)
<br>
<br>The weight issue keeps getting in the way of the big picture. There is a significant momentum hurdle that has to be overcome to get this idea off the ground. If you dont maximize the potential participation, no amount of glitz will make this idea roll.
<br>
<br>Matt<br><br>

Matt M
<br>
<br>Thanks for the vote of confidence. I can assure you that I am not in your words "F####d". But, I can tell you that your attitude is what is persuavily wrong with this sport. You like most others want to dig out your nitch and defend it until the last person stands. We have found out in history and right now in Afganistan that this mentality is wrong, abusive and will not work.
<br>
<br>I believe that open formats encourage new sailors from other boat types (read here every flippin other wind powered device on the planet) to come and participate. If sponsor dollars encourage people to come and try then great. If sponsor dollars come down in the form of CASH PAYMENTS for race winners. THen all the better. I have never heard anyone complain about the purity of the sport after someone hands them some money.
<br>
<br>We as cat sailors need to take a look around and figure out how to bring in some new blood. If it takes sponsors and a semi-pro event structure with media coverage than thats what we have to do. Do you think that Mike Worrell has problems getting TV because there are so few of us catsailors. WRONG!!!!!!! If you do believe that than your "F####D!!" yourself. He has a problem because the race is not seen as marketable because big sponsor dollars are not there and it is considered only "human interest". If a company dumped a few 100K into the Worrell then it would get some airplay. Facts are facts. You only have to look at Nascar's history to show its true. They raced for years and until the big boys came with their check books it was small time. Once the corporations got envolved the CEO's of the media companies got calls from their CEO buddies from the companies that sponsored and said "Hey, ED send one of your boys down to watch what these guys are doing down there in Daytona". ANd if you don't think that's what happened then, Virginia just go to bed because Santa will be here shortly. In business it is not what you know it who you know.
<br>
<br>My HTCW.
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

Steve,
<br>
<br>I think you are on the right track with all of the rules. Let me give you my experience with the weight issue. I raced the I20 in the Alter Cup last year against a lot of different sailors. I raced it a little heavy at about 375. Others raced anywhere from 325 to 400 (Barry). I saw one of the teams that tied for first place weigh in at more than me. I didn't feel like the weight was too big of an issue until you got around the 400 mark. So in my opinion you could leave the minimum weight at 325. There is a small set of conditions that this is a slight advantage but clearly this is not the deciding factor as proved out in the Alter Cup. It was not extreme at all during the Alter Cup. In fact we had some light air races. I do not believe the I20 needs any additional sail area in the slightest. It is an extremely powerful sailplan currently.
<br>
<br>Mike Hill
<br>H20 #791
<br><br><br>