The Olympic Curse
Printed From: Yachts and Yachting Online
Category: Dinghy classes
Forum Name: Dinghy development
Forum Discription: The latest moves in the dinghy market
URL: http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11599
Printed Date: 12 Jul 25 at 8:09am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: The Olympic Curse
Posted By: Brass
Subject: The Olympic Curse
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 1:20am
Discuss with reference to:
|
Replies:
Posted By: iiitick
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 5:22am
|
I'm not sure it exists really. Boats chosen for the Olympics are usually established classes and three events down the line they are twelve years older and getting tired.There is so much competition for Laser in the real world these days but the Olympics keep it in the public eye. Symmetric double handers seem in a decline anyway so why not keep the venerable 470. Do they even have a Nationals in GB? 49ers are healthy aren't they? The only Lasers at our club now are club boats. Everyone prefers Supernova, Phantom, Lightning and Byte. They are just better boats, nothing to do with Olympic curse. I never saw a Star....ever. Is there an alternative to a Finn? In private hands they are expensive to buy and maintain so not that popular. Is Tempest a cat? Know nothing about them. Of course the Europe was replaced with the Radial, stupid choice when the Byte C2 was available.
|
Posted By: GarethT
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 7:03am
|
At our club the laser fleet has gone crazy this year.
In a regular handicap fleet of 45 or so we get around 20 lasers. Men & women, young and old (1 youth, a handful of 20 and 30 something, masters and older), new boats & old boats. Everyone has someone to have a close battle with, and nobody really gives a toss about PY cos you just enjoy racing the other lasers. It's great. |
Posted By: GarethT
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 8:16am
| Plenty of Finns and Lasers (and Solos) at Fed Week, but no Bytes, Phantoms, Supernovas or Lightnings. |
Posted By: iiitick
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 8:24am
| Horses for courses I suppose but I can only re-act to the information I know. That is our own small club and the information on this site......we all know how accurate that is of course! |
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 11:28am
|
The Olympic curse was that a class would get shedloads of money spent on it, so a mast would set you back more than a whole different boat, have a bunch of pro sailors which no weekend warrior could hope to keep up with sailing it, and so people wouldn't sail it. Oddly, it really appears to be a myth. Far more likely is that the Olympic boats were already big classes elsewhere, and the UK had boats filling that niche already. The 470, huge in France and all over Europe, really, but up against the Fireball here. The Finn big in northern Europe - actually, never really a failure here, just a small market, and the classics are going strong. The Star - huge in the Americas. The Europe - a very complex one, that, I think, and certainly the development expense (and the "sailed by girls thing?) was a problem, but mostly once it ceased to be an Olympic class. The Tempest? Killed by the Star lobby? 420 never an Olympic class? Pretty big everywhere, and still is in less fashion conscious countries. Might be here, too. Not checked. As for the Laser, most owners appear not to care less whether it is in the Olympics. Is really only a sideshow for the class, as far as I can see, and maybe not one that either helps or hinders sales. ------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: iiitick
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 11:42am
|
I think that is what I was trying to say Rupert, 'sideshow for the class'. I think most classes have their ups and downs and most sailors have whims and preferences. What annoyed me is that when the Europe was scrapped it was replaced by an already aging design rather than an aging hull with a modern rig....you all know what I mean! The ****c2 could do with a bit of Olympic success even if a curse follows, just at the moment!
|
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 11:55am
|
The Radial as an Olympic class was totally logical, apart from maybe for the actual sailing part of things. I thought it the wrong choice at the time, but have come to see that maybe it was a good way of getting hundreds of bums on seats very quickly. Numbers in the Radial seem very strong, and not thought of as a "girl's boat"?
------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 12:27pm
| Another interesting question would be whether the enthusiasm with which classes pursue Olympic status is justified. Trouble is, of course, you never get to find out what would have happened... |
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 12:30pm
|
So, how would the Contender be as a class if all had gone to plan? That is probably the closest a boat has got to the Olympics without it happening, and without a preexisting class structure.
------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 12:39pm
Lets try and think of some leading contenders and near misses... 470/Fireball is an obvious one. 49er/Laser 5 Tonner/Boss/B14 49erFX/29erXX/RS800 Soling/Etchells what else? |
Posted By: iiitick
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 12:47pm
Exactly Rupert.......not thought of as a 'girls' boat. It may have been more tactful if you had said, 'ladies and light males boat'. Helms may be small but they pack a vicious scratch!!!
|
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 12:57pm
The Contender is in the situation the 49er would have been in if, after all the trials and viewpoints taken, they had turned around and stuck with the FD. In my view, it puts it closer than all the others you list - they were all near (or far) misses. However, what your list shows is that there is no simple answer - all those boats have fared differently both to each other and to the selected boats. ------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: jaydub
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 1:05pm
| Certainly hasn't harmed the Fireballs not being selected as an Olympic class. |
Posted By: gordon1277
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 1:24pm
|
Nobody has mentioned the FD good job the 505 missed it.
170 at the worlds in Kiel but UK fleet has shrunk so much. UK FD fleet never really got to sensible numbers in my time. ------------- Gordon Lossc |
Posted By: GarethT
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 1:26pm
|
Maybe it would never have got to the size it was in the UK without the Olympics! Who knows if all the FD sailors back in the day would've gone 505 if FD wasn't Olympic, or if the roles would've been reversed if the 505 was the Olympic boat.
|
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 1:49pm
|
The 505? As a rich gentleman's plaything, fortunes have been spent. Would those same rich gentlemen have been willing to spend as much money if they would then be beaten by sponsored young bucks on the hunt for Olympic glory? Maybe the FD would have been the boat of choice, then?
------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 3:14pm
Thanks Rupert. Looks like a good start. Sorry, I had it fixed in my mind that the 420 had a one or two rounds as the Womens dinghy. So, did the Europe and Tempest fit the Curse model? Successful class to start with, then propelled into arms race and hyper-competition freezing out the punters? Does that fit for the Europe? I don't think that applies to the Tempest: it was a very radical boat to start with, with, I suspect, quite a small fleet base (to say nothing of being very unlikely to have been seen anywhere in the third world) that got a brief place in the sun thanks to a desire to pitch something modern and radical up against the Star, and then faded back into well-deserved obscurity. Is it still true to say that there are huge fleets (or rather substantial club fleets) of 470 in Europe and UK?
|
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 3:16pm
Uh huhh?
|
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 3:27pm
AIUI from the History on the Contender website, the IYRU trials were for admission of a new solo boat as an ISAF International Class, not trials for an Olympics boat. Given that the ISAF trials criteria specifically ruled out the trapeze, surely the Contender was never going to knock off the Finn. To be honest, Contenders are far from accessible: I remember a lovely guy who had actually done a 505 worlds with Paul Elvstrom walking into the bar one day off a Contender: Good day? Yeah, Ok, thirty tacks, thirty pickles. At least a beginner can jump into a Finn and sail the damn thing without it necessarily falling over. I rather think the the Contenders have now settled down into a niche about equal to the International Canoe. Maybe for Olympic Curse purposes they could be compared with the Tempest. You guys would know better than I would, but of the face-offs JimC has listed, I would have thought the only serious trial was the Etchells v Soling (and, to be fair the Womens' Skiff trial). Did the Fireballs seriously come out against the 470? I can't believe that anyone would compare a B14 with a 49er. They are a Bethwaite generation apart (well, perhaps not Frank v Julian, but at least 10 years). Was the contest with the B14 really to replace the 470 with a modern high performance boat that wasn't quite a skiff?
|
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 3:30pm
You know, what would have happened say if the Boss had been selected rather than the 49er. Would it have been like the 505 and the Fireball - class very successful anyway - after all the 49er was already showing distinct signs that it was going to sell pre trials - or would it have been one of those classes that fades away never to be seen again? There's no way of knowing. That's what I mean by you never find out what would have happened. |
Posted By: gordon1277
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 3:32pm
|
Rupert
Is the 49er or Nacra 17 any cheaper and the new boats last a decent amount of time? We used to get the top guys come and sail anyway, I can remember Nigel Buckley winning the Nationals when he was 470 world champ and Ian Walker coming to a Nationals at Mounts Bay. A few 505 guys whent into the FD as well, John Loveday, to name but one. ------------- Gordon Lossc |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 3:50pm
I understand the point you were making. I was trying to point out that if you can't know what would happen if an unsuccessful aspiring class had made it, you can't very well say 'it hasn't done any harm'. I guess that the Olympic Curse proposition is that, for a class that deserves to be successful and popular, does being Olympically anointed harm or impede the class. I suppose there is a converse about a class that does not deserve to be successful, being promoted well beyond what it deserves by being an Olympic Class. Or, possibly classes that once were thoroughly popular and deserving being sustained long past their use-by date.
|
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 4:10pm
|
I like questions with no answers - we can delve back into history, form opinions, set the world of sailing to rights, all from our keyboards. Gordon, wasn't dissing the 505 or its cost - I'm sure the boats you mention cost just as much, and the dinghy world needs boats that normal (ie not sponsored) people are willing to actually spend money on. At National level, the Merlin Rocket is another to fill the niche. The fact that Olympians pop into the class for some fun shows that the skill levels are very high within the fleet (after all, many of the sailors are well known names in sailing round the world), but that is very different from the boat being on the world tour that the Olympic classes do, week in, week out. ------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: kneewrecker
Date Posted: 14 Aug 14 at 6:42pm
|
Jim you could look to the Olympic Singlehanded Skiff Project as a bit of an indicator, it might have had its heyday now (thanks to Mothing) but the MPS has served a good round of high performance singlehanded sailing for a good while now, and as prices drop, it certainly could have a solid 'second life' in the 2-4k price bracket. ------------- |
Posted By: Chris 249
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 7:02am
|
WARNING - LONG ANSWER  "The Olympic curse" refers to the belief that when a class is selected for the Games, the intensification of competition means that amateurs are no longer competitive, resulting in the death (or stunting) of local fleets. It may not be as significant in Europe as it is in places like North America or Australasia, and on the other hand, being an Olympic class will also keep small fleets going at national level. People such as Olympians, administrators and journos have been talking about the curse for a few decades. For example, the guy who finished third in the Laser worlds shortly before it was made Olympic dropped out soon after, because the competition increased to the stage where winning went from a part-time job to a full-time one. Is it a myth? Not (IMHO) if we look at major sailing countries outside of the Continent (where the Olympic classes receive a lot of support). It's hard to draw any lessons from Stars, Finns, Tempests and Europes because none of those former Olympic classes are very similar to non-Olympic classes. But some better- matched classes, where one went Olympic and one didn't, show the trend; Fireball v 470 - the 'Ball appears to have stronger local fleets in most major sailing countries outside of the Continent.* There's something like 170 470s on the German ranking list but as I understand it, each sailing club there is pressured to support at least one Olympic class. Etchells v Soling (when the Soling was Olympic) - the Etchells (and similar classes such as the Dyas, which was another unsuccessful competitor at the trials that saw the Soling chosen) appear to outnumber the Soling in most major sailing countries. FD v 505 - the 505 appears to outnumber the FD in most major sailing countries. Even when doublehanded performance dinghies were at their peak and the FD was the only 2-man dinghy in the Games, the FD was outnumbered about 6 to 1 by the 505. I think the 49er was chosen from a fleet that included the 14, FD, B14 and FD. The 49er is less popular in the UK than the 505, Int 14 and B14 and the newer 800. In Oz it's less popular than the 16,18,14,12,505 and B14. It certainly doesn't seem that the publicity, promotion and guaranteed fleet that Olympic selection guarantees has done the 49er too much good, in terms of generating the strong local fleets such a good boat deserves. Yep, with retrpspect some people may say that the non-Olympic classes are simply better boats, but that's very subjective. Re - "Boats chosen for the Olympics are usually established classes and three events down the line they are twelve years older and getting tired.There is so much competition for Laser in the real world these days but the Olympics keep it in the public eye." 1- the Optimist, Solo, Cadet etc are all older than any of the Olympic classes yet they remain highly popular. Similarly, in the USA the Thistle and Flying Scot are older than any of the Olympic classes yet they remain highly popular. There are similar classes in other countries, so it can't be the age of the classes. 2- In most of the "real world" there are few if any new similar classes that offer close competition to the Laser "these days" (Supernovas, Phantoms etc are pretty much restricted to the UK) so it can't be that. 3- Re "did the Fireballs seriously come out against the 470?" Yes. The Fireball v 470 were the two main classes considered at the IYRU's Class Policy Committee in May 1972 for the new Olympic spot which was to go to a 2-man boat that was smaller and cheaper than the FD. There were no actual trials because the IYRU had been burned by the ones they had run earlier. 4 - Re the Contender and the Olympics; the info I have (maybe 50 pages of photocopies and articles of the time, plus personal interviews with some of those involved) indicates that it WAS widely believed that the winner of the trials that chose the Contender would replace the Finn. By the way, the original specifications for the trials did not rule out the trapeze; it was generally considered too difficult for a singlehander. The "specifications" were deliberately left extremely vague early on, which was why the first trials included boats are varied as the Canoe, Trapez, Unit, OK and Moth. 5- Yes, the B14 competed in the same trials as the 49er and finished about 4th on the list of suitable classes, but was seen to be more fitted to the (then non existent) "women's skiff" category. 6- Yep, it's a complicated issue and there's no simple answer but IMHO, selection as an Olympic class is (all else being equal) going to seriously reduce a class' chance of getting serious numbers at local level. The rise of Masters sailing in Finns and Lasers is showing that there are ways around the problem, but the numbers of keen sailors in the "open" age bracket has dropped in those classes AFAIK.
|
Posted By: iiitick
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 7:28am
|
That is a very interesting appraisal of the situation World wide Chris but most of us resemble spotty teenagers locked in our late night bedrooms seeing the Universe through a screen. You evidently have more information at your fingertips. Please forgive us for our sometimes inaccurate adolescent comment. I have to leave you for 20 minutes now, I have to 'abuse' myself over that Merlin Rocket video.
|
Posted By: Dougaldog
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 9:39am
|
Chris 249, (and Jim C + others)
I've been busy researching and collecting data on the IYRU Trials for the 'new' single hander for a long time now. Next year Y&Y will be carrying a feature/s on the story behind the story - there was as much going on in the way of on shore politics as there was sailing afloat. But - for that first set of Trials, held at Weymouth, the use of the trapeze was indeed banned, though other forms of 'aids to sitting out' were allowed. Some of these were interesting, others simply scary (including one that involved an outrigger pole that you hung underneath from.... that didn't last for long!). Many people think of these Trials in terms of Trapez v Contender but the truth is that the two boats never met. Elvstrom turned up at the first set of trials with the Trapez and no one cared to tell him to go away, so he sailed but.... politics again. Meanwhile, in the southern hemisphere, Bob Miller was equally well outside of the rules, with his first boat (a hard chined brute of a boat called 'Millers Missile' sporting a full battened mainsail - which was also banned by the IYRU Trials criteria. There was a huge amount of innovation going on about then - everything from double luff sails, rotating masts, wishbone rigs..... But coming right back onto topic; Could the Contender have been not just an Olympic dinghy, but a good one? I think the answer has to be yes, for it ticked all the boxes that needed ticking BACK THEN. Would it still be the Olympic boat now? No - doubt that very much. Has being 'passed over' for the Olympics harmed the Contender? It is really impossible to answer that, all one can say is that the class has prospered and continues to do so, occupying the niche that seems to be ideal for the boat. In the end, this all boils down to your views on how good - or otherwise, sailing in the Olympics has been for the wider sport. There is a well supported argument that in the search for nationalistic glory, attention has been drawn away from the grassroots of the sport, with the consequences that we seem to be seeing. But that is a topic for another day and forum string! D ------------- Dougal H |
Posted By: winging it
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 10:01am
|
from what i recall the Europe was an active class in this country prior to Olympic selection, but not as popular as it was overseas. I think they would have 30 - 40 at a Nationals. Olympic selection brought in lots of females with structured coaching and a very dedicated approach as required for Olympic participation. So the chaps started to get beaten and moved on elsewhere. The class was then dropped from the Olympics and it foundered - over here. I think at Hunts we have more Europes than many clubs, but the problem is that without a uK builder, and imported boats being expensive, the class is not prospering as boats get older and decent ones hard to come by. Go overseas and the Europe still enjoys massive popularity as the boat of choice for the lightweight sailor, and rightly so. ------------- the same, but different... |
Posted By: Chris 249
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 12:28pm
I would love to get more info about the ban on the trap and full battens, Dougal. I have not spoken to anyone who was at the first trials so I'm going off things like David Thomas' description of the initial Unit design and several report of the first trials, which referred to Elvstrom's use of the trapeze but specifically stated that there were no restrictions on design features such as hiking devices. I can give you the references but I assume you have them. I have seen the home movie of the hard-chine Contender proto's first sail (by chance it was at the same time and place as an early sail of the Australis A Class) and spoken to both its trials skippers, but I've never heard than anything but a trap was proposed by BenBob. I never spoke to Ben about the Contender before his untimely death, but I do have one of his few written pieces and the transcript of a talk I was lucky enough to attend as a kid, where he briefly mentioned the Contender IIRC. I'll be fascinated to read your story and must buy the Contender book. I'm not sure about the politics behind the scenes; I'd think that given the history of the time (when Australia had only just got its own vote in the IYRU, among other things) the Contender's backers were fairly powerless. |
Posted By: Jack Sparrow
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 1:08pm
|
I don't really understand the why this topic gets discussed so relatively often.
The Olympic discipline is 'Sailing' the 'equipment' used for each variation is effectively 'arbitrary'. The equipment is a vehicle to achieve a gold medal. We don't discus the make of Pole used in the Pole Vault. Or the Bikes in the Road Race. Or make of boat in the Rowing. A chosen classes only function is to deliver a platform to produce a winner in a specific gender, weight, athletic function and or combination of these. The best sailing athletes from a given counties sailing system rise to the top and then train on whatever 'arbitrary' sailing platform is deemed appropriate to test these factors and be visual enough to entertain the public in doing so. In short it's the Sport you are winning a medal in, NOT best use of a certain brand of equipment. ------------- http://www.uk3-7class.org/index.html" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Class Website https://www.facebook.com/groups/1092602470772759/" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Building - Facebook Group |
Posted By: fish n ships
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 1:21pm
You say that but in that case why did Ben Ainslie drag Rita from a museum rather than use a brand new boat? |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 1:24pm
Actually Pole vaulters do http://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1FLDB_enAU564AU564&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=carbon%20v%20fibreglass%20poles%20pole%20vault" rel="nofollow - https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1FLDB_enAU564AU564&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=carbon%20v%20fibreglass%20poles%20pole%20vault As do rowers http://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1FLDB_enAU564AU564&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=different+makes+of+rowing+hull" rel="nofollow - https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1FLDB_enAU564AU564&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=different+makes+of+rowing+hull You'd better believe cyclists discuss different types of event (road, track, sprint, distance, TT, pursuit etc etc) each of which requires a different design of bike. We're discussing the topic because we are interested in significant factors that affect the welfare and popularity of various classes and the sport as a whole.
|
Posted By: Dougaldog
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 2:22pm
|
Chris,
It is quite a story - one that will make you smile and go GRRR in equal measures. For starters, the first set of Trials were very UK centric, but that is hardly a surprise given how the UK yachting press in effect were the event sponsors. The design criteria were interestingly contrived at, as one of the 'drivers' (for want of a better word) was a boat where you could not just do an Elvstrom and hike harder for longer and thus win. That is putting things in a very simplistic way, but pretty much sums up many of the discussions. Aids to sitting out were allowed, which resulted in some really novel solutions, but for this first set of Trials the trapeze was specifically banned. I have a lovely quote from an IYRU Council member who felt that sailing a boat, single handed, from the trapeze was a damn foolish thing to do; Racing it thus was just unseamanlike! It is an interesting intellectual exercise to look back to the mid 60s and see just how limited the single handed scene was back then. When you look at some of the entries, you have to be thankful to Elvstrom for turning up (even though his presence created a few issues) as it was his Trapez that proved that single handed trapezing could be a viable activity. So, when the second set of Trials were called, at La Baule, the rules had changed and the trapeze was in (though by now Elvstrom was out - this was the start of his 'bad times'). Some designs, such as Peter Milne, backed both horses by having 2 boats there, one with a sliding seat, the other with a trapeze. Some of the other designs were real design dead ends, others...well, it was early days so we will be generous. You had everything from a big 1960s international moth, to a boat that was not dissimilar to the Lark (but in a single handed format), a Fireball (again, single handed) but with a sliding seat and they are just some of the entries that looked like boats! As for Bob Miller, he built his first boat on craig Whitworths veranda. I've spoken at length to Craig and Carl Ryves, both of whom were incredibly generous with their time and their phone bills, as they often rang me up with yet more snippets that they had forgotten. But again, putting the whole topic back into context, Australia was a long way away in the mid 1960s - and not just in distance. Many things were being developed down there simply because the European sources were not on your doorstep (in Contender terms, I'm thinking of the early masts - from de-Havilland, that had been developed in the absence of the Proctors. Even when the trials were finally concluded at medemblik, the IYRU still managed to get things wrong and wrong again. I've a wonderful story about how Bob Miller was in the UK, when he met a few well known Uk sailors at waterloo station, where he 'let rip' with a succession of curses and swear words that nothing was happening! But - this is now a half century ago all bar a little bit - things are better now, (aren't they?) D PS - a great line of enquiry for you must be David Binks. he worked with jack knights, first on Cobber, then on Flying Fish! ------------- Dougal H |
Posted By: maxibuddah
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 2:24pm
|
why you see us discussing it is because there is such a difference in the equipment. Compare a Laser to a 49er, the only similarity is that they both float and have a sail, other than that they don't look the same. Even Joe Bloggs watching on his 800" LED TV with a large slice of pizza and a can of Special Brew can work it out. Can you tell the difference between a Gill Pacer FX and a Dima pole when watching it? Doubt it, neither can Joe Bloggs, its a stick as far he is concerned and they all look the same, apart from the colour ------------- Everything I say is my opinion, honest |
Posted By: Jack Sparrow
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 3:57pm
He felt that was the best equipment for the task. ------------- http://www.uk3-7class.org/index.html" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Class Website https://www.facebook.com/groups/1092602470772759/" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Building - Facebook Group |
Posted By: Jack Sparrow
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 4:02pm
But they are discussing what is best to achieve a medal for a given discipline. Not discussing it in the context of the popularity of the sport. That is a completely different and unrelated to Olympic equipment choice. ------------- http://www.uk3-7class.org/index.html" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Class Website https://www.facebook.com/groups/1092602470772759/" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Building - Facebook Group |
Posted By: Jack Sparrow
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 4:13pm
Yep. The craft are different and test different athletic prowess. As 100m does against Steeple Chase etc... The choice of equipment is still arbitrary within a given physical test for a given gender and body type. ------------- http://www.uk3-7class.org/index.html" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Class Website https://www.facebook.com/groups/1092602470772759/" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Building - Facebook Group |
Posted By: Presuming Ed
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 5:25pm
I don't see how you can separate out the use of equipment in an equipment sport. Tennis players choose their racquets according to how they play the game. Sailors choose classes according to their own strengths and weaknesses - 470 vs 49er, for example. Less common in bigger rowing boats, but in small boats - singles, doubles and pairs, there is much effort put into selecting the right equipment, that works with the way the oarsmen & women scull & row. In bigger boats, most just go for Empachers.   As as for the choice of Finn or Phantom, Laser or Solo, well, that's a choice made by ISAF using a framework and criteria that they decide. So not simply arbitrary. Otherwise we'd have been watching TOYs or SVODs or something like that in Weymouth.
|
Posted By: winging it
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 6:02pm
|
I think sailors decide whether or not they want to go Olympic, then choose the boat that best suits their body type, budget etc. ------------- the same, but different... |
Posted By: Jack Sparrow
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 7:02pm
OK arbitrary in the sense that the equipment used could be anyone of a type suitable for competing against others of a given size and gender singularly or as a team. ------------- http://www.uk3-7class.org/index.html" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Class Website https://www.facebook.com/groups/1092602470772759/" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Building - Facebook Group |
Posted By: Jack Sparrow
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 7:07pm
Or whoever is selecting them out of squads seeing there physic fitting the current Olympic equipment. With the sailors having already made there mind up (like you say) about the class of equipment that plays to there body type that allows them to follow a path that ultimately leads them to the Olympics. ------------- http://www.uk3-7class.org/index.html" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Class Website https://www.facebook.com/groups/1092602470772759/" rel="nofollow - Farr 3.7 Building - Facebook Group |
Posted By: Chris 249
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 10:14pm
It's a good point and very true in many ways, so I'm not disagreeing with you; merely looking at the same issue from another angle, or using it to discuss another question. We could say that sailing is in a different position to other sports because it has a very different type of organisation. To use the analogy of bikes in the road race; just about all bikes built and used for organised road racing down to lower club grades fit into the same single set of restrictive design regulations. Things like weight, size, design and speed don't vary anywhere near as much as they do in sailing. In contrast, there are 10 International classes that fit the Laser's "adult singlehanded dinghy" and there must be over 100 that race at national level, and their designs vary a hell of a lot more, ranging from about 28kg to about 130 (?), from 11' to 17', and in design from the foiling Moth to the mahogany 1913 vintage International 12 or the Finn. When one class has to be used to represent such a wide discipline as singlehanded dinghy sailing, it's arguably in a very unusual position and that has a lot of impacts on it, IMHO. For some strange reason the general subject of design regulation of sports equipment, and the effect on participation rates, has been almost ignored by commentators and the academics who fill journals and make careers out of writing and teaching about the administration, philosophy and sociology of sport, but sailing is a really interesting place to look at this stuff. |
Posted By: Chris 249
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 10:55pm
I'll have to get a copy of your article on those fascinating trials, but at the moment I can't find anything about traps being banned. I'm going off things like David Thomas' piece in Yachting World of November 1965 where he wrote that for the first trials at Weymouth, the IYRU Class Policy and Organisation Committee recommended to the selection committee that (among other things); "(iii) the boat should not be so extreme, particularly it (sic) that it must not have such a large sail area that it would give undue advantage to helmsmen of exceptional weight and size." and; "There will be no restrictions imposed on the sail area, size or design of the boats entered." The "there shall be no restrictions imposed on (the) design" seems pretty blunt. Was the "specific ban" of the trapeze in another document, or was it inferred from part (iii) of the recommendations, which said that boats should not be too extreme? My research on the ISAF trials centred on other areas and I've tried to cover a very wide range of space and time because I'm interested in wide trends and the inter-relationship of various national and international types and designs, as well as looking at many other classes in some detail, so I haven't done the sort of detailed interviews that you have carried out. When I was looking up stuff on the "Olympic curse" I did find a reference from the early '70s where ISAF's Vice President was saying that they did not want to organise sailing trials ever again, so it seems that they may have been burned too. As a general note, of course one man's "political decision" can be another man's "logical outcome", depending on the way the final choice went!  I have found a quote that brings the ISAF trials and the "Olympic curse" subject back together. When the new International singlehander was first mooted, David Thomas wrote that the Finn "lost any chance it might have had of becoming a 'popular' single-handed dinghy as soon as people began to discover the scope of what was intended to be the simplest and least complicated rig of all. (Elvstrom developed the rig and) set an Olympian standard that few could emulate...This, in a way, was the Finn's undoing. There is now room for an International class which is not quite so demanding and in which yachtsmen can race together on an international basis without being constantly observed for their Olympic potential." |
Posted By: iiitick
Date Posted: 15 Aug 14 at 11:17pm
| On the whole I do not disagree with the choice of Olympic boats except that....(and here I go again) the womens single hander is not suitable for the average fit young woman. The average athletic non Amazonian girl is too small for the Radial. I do not need to say what it ought to be..... |
Posted By: Dougaldog
Date Posted: 16 Aug 14 at 9:49am
|
Chris (249)
I'd say that you'd read between the lines with 20-20 vision! The original design criteria were very loose but were then changed to a somewhat more rigid box rule - they didn't want any narrow canoe shapes and for a time there was talk of a rise of floor measurement to avoid the more extreme hull forms. The sail area then ended up being fixed at 10m2 - an interesting point given that the IC was invited to Weymouth but only as a 'stalking horse' (a very well sailed Finn was there too). There was also (iir) a freeboard measurement that caught out the jack Knights/David Binks effort. Interestingly, the sail area and freeboard calculations caught out Bob Miller, as the first version of Contender (the La Baule variant) was lacking in both - Bob had to make changes for medemeblik! D ------------- Dougal H |
Posted By: rich96
Date Posted: 17 Aug 14 at 8:52am
|
24 Standard Lasers at their Nationals !
We used to have more than that for club races. |
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 17 Aug 14 at 11:42am
| Maybe we should talk about a youth curse rather than an Olympic curse? Has the phenomenal growth in youth sailing hidden a decline in adult sailing, and if an event gains a large percentage of youth sailors do adults stop going? |
Posted By: winging it
Date Posted: 17 Aug 14 at 4:00pm
|
There is no doubt that selection as a Pathway class drives away the adults. How often do you see adults racing toppers these days? ------------- the same, but different... |
Posted By: kneewrecker
Date Posted: 17 Aug 14 at 4:07pm
An excellent observation.... ------------- |
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 17 Aug 14 at 5:27pm
|
I used to race a Topper. Trouble is, you are there with a load of kids on the water, and all the people of your age on the shore looking at you like a bully because you are on the water with them. There were one or two parents who used to sail too - are there any now? Also, if you win, you are "beating kids", and if you lose, you are "beaten by kids". Can't win either way, really...
------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: Bootscooter
Date Posted: 17 Aug 14 at 5:42pm
|
I did a couple of Topper events when my kids were in them, and managed not to embarrass myself. Good fun racing and did me good as I had to be sailing at 100% all the time in order to keep the racing snakes behind me! Thing I was one of only 3 or 4 adults out there though. ------------- |
Posted By: iiitick
Date Posted: 17 Aug 14 at 5:45pm
|
Well today it was blowing old boots at our club. Gusty, shifty and cold. We had one Byte out practicing for the Nationals and four experience helms who forsook their usual mounts, Laser, Lightning, Phantom and Supernova, for club Toppers. I was on rescue to enjoy the fun! The lightning sailor (girl) did ok as did the Nova sailor but the Laser sailor struggled and the Phantom sailor failed miserably seeming to be a permanent sinking position. The Byte of course was awesome! So you see Rupert Toppers can be sailed by grown ups even if the boats did come back in bits!
|
Posted By: Times 10
Date Posted: 17 Aug 14 at 7:30pm
I sailed Toppers when my son was in them, it was fantastic racing against the kids. I figured whats worse standing with the parents or racing against some quality sailors? Not really a choice, so I enjoyed every bit of it. I don't think there has been another parent since who has finished in the top ten at the Nationals. And I did not have a days coaching.
|
Posted By: craiggo
Date Posted: 17 Aug 14 at 7:34pm
|
Due to the rather breezy conditions, I opted out of one of our clubs long distance races and instead headed up to Frampton On Severn SC with the daughter for a spot of Optimist sailing.
I spotted 4 toppers racing and not a yoof in any of them! |
Posted By: iiitick
Date Posted: 17 Aug 14 at 8:04pm
| Off topic...but you have to love Toppers. Our ancient club boats get crashed about, beached and abused but they keep coming back for more! What I did notice today was that they started the race with controls all nice and tight but as the race proceeded it all slacked off until they flapped round the course. Next race began with everything pulled on tight but same thing happened. |
Posted By: Chris 249
Date Posted: 17 Aug 14 at 10:19pm
|
The numbers do seem to show a decline in adult dinghy racing and a strong growth in kids sailing, at least at championship level. From personal experience. an influx of kids may drive adults out of a class, but it's also possible for significant numbers of mature adults to remain in classes where the majority are kids or young adults. Down here the Radial fleet at championships is, IIRC, about one third adults. The strength of Laser Masters is shown by the fact that at our last Nationals the 55-65 year Radial division alone had more entries than the UK big rig open Nationals! However, most years we have separate Open and Masters titles and very few adults normally do the Open championships as well as the Masters. Toppers do seem to be a great little boat. Is a shift away from adults in Toppers caused by an influx of kids, or the fact that adults are now normally bigger than they were when the Topper was new, and therefore few adults are small enough to sail them comfortably?
|
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 18 Aug 14 at 1:21am
|
The ‘Olympic Curse’ seems to mean that, as a result of
selection as an Olympic Class, a class’s long term development and growth is
significantly impeded, or that it’s decay is accelerated. Reasons for this may be: ·
Escalation of the level of competition in the
class so that ‘ordinary’ competitors believe that they cannot succeed in
competition against ‘full-time’, ‘professional’ or ‘sponsored’ competitors (who
don’t stay in the class permanently);
and ·
Escalation of technical sophistication and cost
of equipment, and rapid turnover of sails and equipment. The Olympics certainly didn’t do the Star and the Finn,
which lasted 70 and 50 years respectively as Olympic classes, any harm, but it’s
not necessary that the Olympic Curse apply to every Olympic class for it to
exist. The existence or efficacy of the Olympic Curse is usually
said to be demonstrated by comparing an Olympic class with highly similar
non-Olympic Class, particularly where there were trials for Olympic class
selection. Based on (somewhat sketchy) Australian National Championship
figures (Chris249 doubtless has better and broader figures): Finn (handful, <10) v
Contender (about 60) FD (handful, <10) v 505 (about
50) Soling (handful, <10) v Etchells
(30 to 50) 470 (<20) v Fireball (about 20
in Victoria alone) So you can at least conclude that in the medium to long
term, the Olympics has not helped a fair proportion of classes in comparison
with their near competitors. Proponents of the competing non-Olympic classes will probably say that it is all a result of their class being a better boat. Certainly the 505 and the Etchells guys will say that, but for opposite reasons: the 505 guys will tout the flexibility and development options of their class rule, while the Etchells will emphasise the benefits of very strict class rules. Probably the only purpose of contemplating the phenomenon of
the Olympic Curse, other than for students of black magic, is to try to
identify what factors might leave a class ‘exposed’ to the curse if the class
was pitching for Olympic selection, and what factors, more generally, will
affect the longevity, growth, development and decay of a class. Personally, I think the ‘Olympic Curse’ idea was a catchy
notion, cooked up by the 505 and Etchells folk. While it seems to have some empirical validity, who is to
say that classes which go downhill were either great in their day, but are now
past their use by date, or were doomed to fail in any case (Tempest). Fortunately, very few of us will ever be in a position to
influence a Class Association whether or not to pitch for Olympic selection. |
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 18 Aug 14 at 9:32am
|
Adults sailing Toppers at club level, or off the beach would appear to be a fairly common sight, as has been described here, especially when wanting some windy day fun. But as a championships boat? Not so much. As for the Olympics, the Firefly was an Olympic boat in 1948, and is still going strong today. Would it be if it had continued as the Olympic singlehander for another 3 games, say? Would it have withered as a 2 person boat, but never caught on in the real world as a singlehander? ------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: PeterV
Date Posted: 18 Aug 14 at 10:09am
|
I thought the olympic curse was a term used to cover two developments. Firstly, the pace of equipment development speeded up rapidly, causing problems for club sailors wanting some longevity from their kit. The second was that the level of competition increased such that the average club sailor stopped going to open events becaue he felt he didn't stand a chance against the 'professionals'. The first has been outdated by the Laser, because it's strict one design proinciple has meant that development has been very limited. Some Olympic classes like the Finn are now doing very well because the development is now reasonably mature so that a 15 year old boat is almost as fast as a new one, so competitive club sailing is again available. The second still exists to some extent but the separation of the squads now means that the domestic open circuit is now almost exclusively club sailors again. ------------- PeterV Finn K197, Finn GBR564, GK29 Warsash |
Posted By: MSCA
Date Posted: 18 Aug 14 at 10:37am
Thanks for giving the OSP now known as the Musto Skiff a mention. As regards to "it might have had its heyday" I'd just like to correct that as we are continuing to grow. In fact our most recent World Championships saw a record turn out of 105 boats and we have just held our UK Nationals with a good turn out of 58 boats so we are still on the up. The Musto Skiff offers high-performance sailing with a very low cost of ownership and provides sailors with identical equipment providing a level playing field with an easy to own package; combine that with a friendly and helpful atmosphere in the fleet and that is why we continue to grow. The class was born from a response to the ISAF brief in 2000 for a new single hander. The boat comprehensively "won" the trials but ISAF decided to stick with the existing equipment. Each year we survey the members about presenting the class for Olympic consideration and the level of support for this from the sailors has dropped each year to the present low of 22%. Clearly most owners prefer to stay away from the Olympic circus. You can read more about the history and the 2000 trials here: http://www.mustoskiff.com/sub-pages/history.htm" rel="nofollow - http://www.mustoskiff.com/sub-pages/history.htm and the report on the test event here: http://www.mustoskiff.com/downloads/voiles_et_voilers.pdf" rel="nofollow - http://www.mustoskiff.com/downloads/voiles_et_voilers.pdf Well worth a read and the table at the bottom is quite interesting. You will see things have moved on in 14 years and what once seemed difficult is now being achieved by weekend warriors every weekend around the world ... ------------- ------------------------------- Posted by a member of the MSCA www.mustoskiff.com |
Posted By: rhorn78
Date Posted: 18 Aug 14 at 9:32pm
|
IMO the Laser has suffered from the 'wannabe-Olympic' curse. I stopped going to the nationals/Q's about four years ago when it had become sufficiently apparent that they had turned into Radial events with a standard fleet start added on. You cant blame the UKLA, the Radials bring in the numbers and I have to say the events have always been very well organised, but when you drive half way across the country and spend £100 or more on entries/accom then find no-one is interested in talking to you (let alone socialising) after racing because you are over 21 and it is seen as a bit uncool, the appeal is lost.
|
Posted By: MSCA
Date Posted: 19 Aug 14 at 10:26am
I think that highlights the importance of the camaraderie within the fleet and the social aspect of an event. ------------- ------------------------------- Posted by a member of the MSCA www.mustoskiff.com |
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 19 Aug 14 at 10:33am
|
Maybe the standard fleet should be split off from the Radials. But the trouble then is that you lose female participants, which is also bad for turnouts.
One solution might be no under 18s or under 21s, but that's a *horrible* precedent and I hate the idea. Glad I'm not on the Laser CA. I imagine the reason why they don't seem to have done much to address the problem is that they can't think of a satisfactory way of doing it. Neither can I! Maybe they need to introduce, I dunno, a "trainee master" category to the master events so that its 25 and up? |