Olympic Classes

Originally posted by turnturtle solos, finns, lasers and phantoms do not offer the same visual appeal to a none-sailing television viewer as something a little more high-tech in appearance- the MPS with its extreme looking racks, kites and wires masks a relatively stable, attainable boat below the surface.  This, IMHO, makes the MPS the top of long list I would pick in favour of the Finn for the category described. No one is saying appearences aren't deceptive; but fact is, MPS/49er/RS700 et al. offer better viewing potential on screen than a Finn.  If TV coverage is so important (which I believe it is for Olympics and any other global sporting event) then we should, as a sport, be putting forward a class which generates the appeal everyday consumers want and at the same point, event formats that can capitalise on a more thrilling viewing opportunity.

Non sailing viewers don't have any appreciation of racks, wires kites etc., also they don't have any appreciation of sail boats speeds.  They would find watching symetric spinaker boats easier to follow around an olympic course than they would an assymetirc gybing (even then, they would want to know why the spinakers aren't up all the time!).  The best boats for non sailing viewers to watch and understand are probably hiking, single sail, singlehanders, where they can seen the pain on the helms' faces, and equate that more effort means more speed.

Also, MeilP wrote-

I can't see a Manufacturer wanting to have it's brand spanking new class appropriated by the 5-ring circus, can you?

Do you remeber when the Laser 5000 came out it had little olympic ring type symbols on it?!

Stefan -

It'd do us all good to remember that ISAF selects the classes following criteria laid down by...ISAF. To ensure the criteria are fairly applied, the whole process is overseen by...ISAF.

The Star was dropped once, and for some Macchiavellian reason was re-instated. The interesting thing about that was that a certain Bavarian builder of Star-boats knew about the re-instatement almost before I knew about the dropping!

Neil

 

Turnturtle

I'm wondering why can't the Finn represent the future of singlehanded sailing. Is all singlehanded sailing going to be in skiffs in the future? Are hiking singlehanders really dying as a type?

I haven't seen any evidence of this in numbers on the water. Actually, people continue to buy more brand new hiking singlehanders than brand new singlehanded skiffs in the face of a lot of evangelism for the latter. Far, far, far more.

I think this is because there's nothing inherently superior about the skiff compared with the hiking boat. Quicker maybe, but I make the point again about the A Class and the foiling Moth being a lot quicker still.

In fact if you're looking to the future I think there's a good argument that the skiff approach is being shown up even now as a failed experiment in generating boatspeed, losing out to the cats and now the foilers.

And certainly the skiff type could never be classified as the easiest to sail, the most tactical, the most popular, or the cheapest. So where is it going to end up as a type? On that basis the MPS would run a high risk of ending up as an Olympic class that reflected a type of sailing no one did anymore. Like the Mistral sailboard.

By contrast hiking singlehanders will likely always be around as a major type, no matter what occurs at the cutting edge of the fast development classes.

On that basis I think the far better bet for the future is to stick with hiking boats for the Olympic singlehanders, because they test sailing skills that will always reflect those of a significant part of the sailing world.

And the Finn is always going to be the pre-eminent hiking singlehander because it adapts new technology within the one design framework.

Edited by 7250

Originally posted by Stefan Lloyd "Scope for development" but I suspect not a "development class". It is many years since there was an Olympic development class. The problem is the budget. I'd be amazed if the Moth was selected. And I believe that strictly speaking, the Canoe is a canoe, not a sailboat, which might make things ticklish for the ISAF.

Good point about the Canoe.  I also agree that "Scope for development" doesn't equal "development class" but a SMOD doesn't fit the criteria.  That only leaves the slightly looser one designs like the Finn and the Solo, but there aren't many of these with international status.

You have to wonder if the ISAF/IOC really know what they want. Or perhaps the criteria were cleverly worded so that the Finn was the only viable option.

Personally I think it seems a bit silly to have 2 singlehanded classes anyway. The same people are suited to both. 

Originally posted by Chew my RS The criteria for the 2008 open single hander includes 'scope for development'.  No SMOD can achieve this.

Exactly the point I was making. The "men's" and "women's" classes are intended to be "out of the box" equipment, while all the "open" classes are intended to allow for development. On that basis it's not possible to replace the Finn with the MPS.

On another note, there's very little point in discussing what could/couldn't be the next Olympic class because

A) If IOC/ISAF want a particular class, they will simply write the criteria to fit that class, or ignore the criteria as they did with the 49er

B) Most of the established "one design", as opposed to "development", classes would be pretty thoughtful as to whether they would want to be selected. I can't see a Manufacturer wanting to have it's brand spanking new class appropriated by the 5-ring circus, can you? In theory it couldn't happen, because there is a requirement for any Olympic class to be an International class first. That didn't stop ISAF from selecting the 49er though!

BTW, in case anyone thinks I'm bitter and twisted about the 49er, it's a great boat and Olympic sailing is better off for it's inclusion

Neil