Jump to content

Which Class will replace the offshore double hander in Olympics


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 486
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Get sailing out of the olympics and nobody will notice.

Get sailing out of the Olympics and sailing will improve.

Diversification is the key. I recommend a 3 person Keel boat with a crew that reflects the ethnic religious and sexual diversity of our modern society. Each of the three crew must be from a different

Posted Images

I confess, I am at a loss to understand why Japan is overwhelmed. Japan has one of the most advanced health care systems in the world with more ventilator systems per capita than most.

They are experiencing their 4th wave but it is still lesser than the waves we experienced in the USA or Europe and the peak in Japan is lower than our current decline/trough.

Japan could simply require that all athletes, journalists and logistical support staff are vaccinated

 

But the Japanese population is very scared. Over 80% of the Japanese do not want the Olympics to happen .   Japan is an aged vulnerable demographic which has had a very low incidence of CV19 so far .   They read about the Indian variant etc. They are way behind with vaccines and simply want to keep people away from their country.    With this much public/political pressure....it is hard to see the Games happening.

That will be a huge financial cost ......IOC and several sports federations will take a hit.  I do not see the number of events going up.  More likely down and expensive sports to host like sailing might take the brunt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

I confess, I am at a loss to understand why Japan is overwhelmed. Japan has one of the most advanced health care systems in the world with more ventilator systems per capita than most.

They are experiencing their 4th wave but it is still lesser than the waves we experienced in the USA or Europe and the peak in Japan is lower than our current decline/trough.

Japan could simply require that all athletes, journalists and logistical support staff are vaccinated

You are applying your standards. Maybe their standards are higher/more stringent as a population. Just because their 4th wave is lower than that experienced elsewhere does not mean it is acceptable to them...

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Potter said:

You are applying your standards. Maybe their standards are higher/more stringent as a population. Just because their 4th wave is lower than that experienced elsewhere does not mean it is acceptable to them...

I accept that certainly.

I just question the suggestion that the healthcare system is overwhelmed. 

I very much admire their response to the pandemic with strict adherence to masks and social distancing which has kept numbers low.   However their approval and distribution of vaccine has been slow.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EYESAILOR said:

My understanding is that if Tokyo does not go ahead, it is simply cancelled.. 

 

I think that is Bruce's "If Tokyo is cancelled it will just be move to Paris" theory. Yeah, just in 2024 rather than 2021...

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jethrow said:

I think that is Bruce's "If Tokyo is cancelled it will just be move to Paris" theory. Yeah, just in 2024 rather than 2021...

If Bruce's theory is that the Tokyo 2020 events will replace the planned Paris 2024 events, I do not think Paris will agree to that. It is all rather contractual and Paris is well advanced on its  planning.

At least 2 of the new sports planned for 2024 were sponsored by Paris in their application.

If Bruce is saying Paris 2024 agenda will stay the same but the sports from 2020 that were axed for 2024 will be allowed to come back....its a nice thought but I dont think it will happen unless there are exceptional circumstances. Paris has agreed to house a certain number of athletes and provide a certain level of facilities and I doubt that anyone will offer to increase the budget. Sport in general will take a long time to recover from the budget impacts of Tokyo being cancelled. 

So, for example, Paris will not suddenly find room and board for another 76 athletes for weightlifting.

Nor will Paris find room for another 75 sailing athletes (25 Finn Sailors, 50 470 sailors) and 50 boats (25 Finns and 25 470s)

I hope that tOkyo goes ahead so that the Finn is allowed its last Olympics.

I think Bruce might suggest the remote possibility that if Tokyo is cancelled, the Finn could ask for a special exemption to be the 10th event replacing the mixed double offshore sailing but I doubt it. They could try and claim that the legendary class deserves a farewell appearance and the athletes that trained for 2020 deserve a chance to medal.  I think that is a tough ask with no precedent.  The Athletes have missed their once in lifetime opportunities with boycotts or war .  Its tough and the IOC wants to move forward with its agenda of younger sports and gender equality.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

I accept that certainly.

I just question the suggestion that the healthcare system is overwhelmed. 

I very much admire their response to the pandemic with strict adherence to masks and social distancing which has kept numbers low.   However their approval and distribution of vaccine has been slow.

The situation in Japan is unfortunately straightforward:

While Japan has a modern and generally efficient medical system, their facilities aren't setup for treating infectious disease and difficult to convert. Worse, there is a significant shortage of doctors and nurses. And still worse, Japan's population is aging and hospitals are already full of elderly patients with other issues.

Six people involved with the Olympic torch relay caught COVID, one in his 20s and another in his 30s.

https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/sports/olympics-six-tokyo-olympic-torch-staffers-diagnosed-with-covid-19-2021-05-02/

It is no surprise that 80% of Japan doesn't want to host the Olympics: https://globalnews.ca/news/7877102/tokyo-olympic-games-2021-opposition/

Taiwan and Singapore are both struggling to contain B.1.617.2, and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines may only be up to 75% effective against B.1.617.2: 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

75% effective vaccine is still powerful immunity provided a high enough proportion of the population are vaccinated.

Perhaps. But if you consider a population of 100 people vaccinated with Pfizer/BioNTech, you would expect 5 to succumb to one of the early COVID strains. 25 will succumb to B.1.617.2, which also has a longer incubation period and is thus harder to detect.

A vaccinated person is 5x more likely to catch B.1.617.2 than the earlier strains. With B.1.617.2 bouncing around a mixed population, an ideal environment is created for vaccine escape. The drop in effectiveness should be very concerning particularly given the very slow global vaccination roll out and the steady evolution of COVID over the last 18 months.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

I have not seen that proposal anywhere.   Do you have a link?

Sure, my understanding is that it was first proposed from memory back in 2018. One proposal I can quote reads:
"Czech federation proposes that if the Tokyo Games are postponed or cancelled, the programme scheduled for 2024 and 2028 should remain the same as the 2020 programme".

The submission can be found here: https://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/Submission03620-[26493].pdf

10 hours ago, IPLore said:

If Bruce's theory is that the Tokyo 2020 events will replace the planned Paris 2024 events, I do not think Paris will agree to that. It is all rather contractual and Paris is well advanced on its  planning.

Not my theory, it was a submission by at least one MNA. Pretty sure that this submission, and others similar to it, will be considered if Tokyo is cancelled. I think that they have a low probability of succeeding, hence my saying earlier that there is an outside chance.

9 hours ago, Board skiff said:

I doubt it.  

??? (Board stiff doubted I could provide a link, see link above)

Quote

The best thing to do is put Bruce on ignore before he accuses you of making racist remarks.

Board skiff is a bit fragile after I outed him for being a tiny bit racist. (Offended Board skiff? So sue me.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

75% effective vaccine is still powerful immunity provided a high enough proportion of the population are vaccinated.

Which is a pressing issue for Japan. Report from two days ago:

"Japan has administered at least 7,990,398 doses of COVID vaccines so far. Assuming every person needs 2 doses, that’s enough to have vaccinated about 3.2% of the country’s population."

There still is time, but frankly, not very many Japanese will have been vaccinated by the Olympics.

Again, from the same report:
"During the last week reported, Japan averaged about 275,597 doses administered each day. At that rate, it will take a further 92 days to administer enough doses for another 10% of the population."

I expect that 10% will be vaccinated in less than 92 days as efforts are stepped up, however overall it not looking good for Japan.

Also not looking good for the Olympics. The organising committee said in this report back in January: “we are not willing to see the Games without spectators”.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Sure, my understanding is that it was first proposed from memory back in 2018. One proposal I can quote reads:
"Czech federation proposes that if the Tokyo Games are postponed or cancelled, the programme scheduled for 2024 and 2028 should remain the same as the 2020 programme".

The submission can be found here: https://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/Submission03620-[26493].pdf

Not my theory, it was a submission by at least one MNA. Pretty sure that this submission, and others similar to it, will be considered if Tokyo is cancelled. I think that they have a low probability of succeeding, hence my saying earlier that there is an outside chance.

 

Thanks.....it appears someone did think of it as a suggestion

t looks more recent than 2018, I believe 18 September 2020 submission.  I dont have events committee minutes but Im guessing it was rejected, since it was not raised at the council meeting.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, EYESAILOR said:

Thanks.....it appears someone did think of it as a suggestion

t looks more recent than 2018, I believe 18 September 2020 submission.  I dont have events committee minutes but Im guessing it was rejected, since it was not raised at the council meeting.

Yes I think you are right with the date, I now remember - the proposal related to the programme adopted in 2018... (I knew it was something to do with 2018. My bad :) ).

Anyhow, I expect the submission will resurface if Tokyo is cancelled - and am aware of it being talked about (which is how I heard of it.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, IPLore said:

Nor will Paris find room for another 75 sailing athletes (25 Finn Sailors, 50 470 sailors) and 50 boats (25 Finns and 25 470s)

...and additional support people, from coaches to physiotherapists to chefs.

Paris does not carry the burden of additional sailors - as the 2024 Olympic sailing venue is Marseille.

I'm pretty sure that Marseille, a city of almost 1 million can find accommodation for an additional 200, no problem. (Heck, they may even like the extra business!)

According to locals, Marseille is expecting around 3000 visitors in 2024 for sailing. (They also host some of the football games).

"Olympic Games 2024 in Paris, Marseille also wins! | Marseille Provence Airport | Routesonline" https://www.routesonline.com/airports/2470/marseille-provence-airport/news/274097/olympic-games-2024-in-paris-marseille-also-wins/

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

...and additional support people, from coaches to physiotherapists to chefs.

Paris does not carry the burden of additional sailors - as the 2024 Olympic sailing venue is Marseille.

I'm pretty sure that Marseille, a city of almost 1 million can find accommodation for an additional 200, no problem. (Heck, they may even like the extra business!)

According to locals, Marseille is expecting around 3000 visitors in 2024 for sailing. (They also host some of the football games).

"Olympic Games 2024 in Paris, Marseille also wins! | Marseille Provence Airport | Routesonline" https://www.routesonline.com/airports/2470/marseille-provence-airport/news/274097/olympic-games-2024-in-paris-marseille-also-wins/

If Paris 2024 does not pay for the cost of the additional athletes then who does?

Are you suggesting that the Marseille tax  payers would pay ?   They are under no obligation to provide additional events for sailing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EYESAILOR said:

If Paris 2024 does not pay for the cost of the additional athletes then who does?

Are you suggesting that the Marseille tax  payers would pay ?   They are under no obligation to provide additional events for sailing.

The good people of Marseille should not pay.

Sailing is an affluent sport, in spite of World Sailing's current financial position. The cost of running a regatta is affordable. If cost was really an issue, then the sport itself can fundraise - and pay. Further, if the competitors needed to pay their own way, they would.

I struggle with the current model of funding. It is appropriate for spectator sports, less so for sailing and some other sports. The Olympics is equally a spectacle, and for participants.

The IOC is pandering towards TARPS, youth, and experimentation. In my view the Olympic Charter as it was originally intended, is good - with gender equity added.

With sailing, we are trying to put a square peg in a round hole.

The current model is a shadow of what it could be.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Jethrow said:

I'm sorry Bruce, you are truly living in a dream world....

You might be sorry, but I'm not.

I consider being able to conceive of possibility a tremendous thing.

So did Charles Pierre de Frédy.

I live in a world of possibility, when even the unlikely can be spoken about, with the hope of making improvements to things we care about.

It's sad when people are blinded by a broken status quo.

Thank you for your unintended compliment.

---

Does anyone think that the Finn class, given the opportunity, has the ability, motivation and finance to hold an Olympic-style regatta for 25 of the best Finn sailors? (Held in much the same way the Olympic racing is now).

There are other classes that would be good candidates too.

Such a regatta need not cost tax payers of the host venue anything.

Only small mindedness keeps Olympic sailing from achieving more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

The good people of Marseille should not pay.

Sailing is an affluent sport, in spite of World Sailing's current financial position. The cost of running a regatta is affordable. If cost was really an issue, then the sport itself can fundraise - and pay. Further, if the competitors needed to pay their own way, they would.

I struggle with the current model of funding. It is appropriate for spectator sports, less so for sailing and some other sports. The Olympics is equally a spectacle, and for participants.

The IOC is pandering towards TARPS, youth, and experimentation. In my view the Olympic Charter as it was originally intended, is good - with gender equity added.

With sailing, we are trying to put a square peg in a round hole.

The current model is a shadow of what it could be.

Hello Bruce,

 

Happy Weekend.

 

The Gold Cup is exactly what you describe.  Finn owners with the means and/or sponsors compete for a highly prestigious trophy that is widely respected the world over.

 

The Olympics will not adopt a "Pay for Entry" model.  The Olympic charter is not going to adopt a means-tested sport where there is a entry fee .  

The Olympics has a unique economic model which funds it mission. 

There are basically three economic models for sport:

(i) Self Funded Participant Sports  Either amateur sports where entrants pay for the sport  or where the sport is subsidized by rich owners .

(ii) Spectator Funded Professional Sports. 90% of professional sports.

(iii) The Olympic model where a mix of spectator sports subsidize participant sports.

If sports could approach the IOC and self fund their events, it would be a slippery slope which could easily descend to bidders offering the IOC a licensing fee to be able to award an Olympic medal for their event.   If the Finn sailors offer to pay for a Finn event , then what is to stop Polo or Poker offering the IOC $20 million fee to award an Olympic medal.  Its the wrong route to go. Sailing should not get more medals because  

3 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Sailing is an affluent sport

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Y

 

Does anyone think that the Finn class, given the opportunity, has the ability, motivation and finance to hold an Olympic-style regatta for 25 of the best Finn sailors? (Held in much the same way the Olympic racing is now).

There are other classes that would be good candidates too.

Such a regatta need not cost tax payers of the host venue anything.

 

Why would it be better than the Finn Gold Cup?

if an Olympic medal is a better "brand" than the Finn gold cup and the competitors prefer the opening ceremony and image etc......should they also pay a share of the general over head. Should all sports be allowed to pay for additional medals?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

The good people of Marseille should not pay.

Sailing is an affluent sport, in spite of World Sailing's current financial position. The cost of running a regatta is affordable. If cost was really an issue, then the sport itself can fundraise - and pay. Further, if the competitors needed to pay their own way, they would.

I struggle with the current model of funding. It is appropriate for spectator sports, less so for sailing and some other sports. The Olympics is equally a spectacle, and for participants.

The IOC is pandering towards TARPS, youth, and experimentation. In my view the Olympic Charter as it was originally intended, is good - with gender equity added.

With sailing, we are trying to put a square peg in a round hole.

The current model is a shadow of what it could be.

I tend to agree with other posters that the IOC will not open up medal events for sports that offer to pay their own costs. It would open up a potential can of worms for the Olympic ideal.  I suspect the entry fee would be enormous because the IOC could not allow any sponsors and the fees would have to cover Security, ceremonies, race committee and jury, launching and storage, equipment , limited TV coverage and video, accommodation and board....

It is easy to justify an additional 2 events to the Olympic slate.  However, sailing is a resource intensive Olympic event and I doubt we get more than the original 10.   Please consider how many hours of competition for one medal.     The finn requires 6 days of competition in the current format.....to determine one medal.   I doubt there are any other Olympic medals which require as much time and resource to determine the outcome.  Can you imagine ifan athletic judge had to be devoted to one event for 6 days?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol.  I have Bruce on ignore so haven’t seen his insane ramblings, but from the quote above is he suggesting Olympic competitors pay an entry fee?  That really opens it up to less wealthy sailors and nations doesn’t it?  Who’s the racist Bruce?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IPLore said:

Why would it be better than the Finn Gold Cup?

if an Olympic medal is a better "brand" than the Finn gold cup and the competitors prefer the opening ceremony and image etc......should they also pay a share of the general over head. Should all sports be allowed to pay for additional medals?

The Olympics is different to the Finn gold cup in a number of ways. They are not equivalent. The biggest is the legacy.

The current model does not serve sailing as well as it could in multiple ways, as already discussed.

If cost is a genuine reason for not delivering a better solution for Olympic Sailing, then funding alternatives should be considered. 

That they aren't highlights a political problem, less a funding one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

I tend to agree with other posters that the IOC will not open up medal events for sports that offer to pay their own costs. It would open up a potential can of worms for the Olympic ideal.  I suspect the entry fee would be enormous because the IOC could not allow any sponsors and the fees would have to cover Security, ceremonies, race committee and jury, launching and storage, equipment , limited TV coverage and video, accommodation and board....

It is easy to justify an additional 2 events to the Olympic slate.  However, sailing is a resource intensive Olympic event and I doubt we get more than the original 10.   Please consider how many hours of competition for one medal.     The finn requires 6 days of competition in the current format.....to determine one medal.   I doubt there are any other Olympic medals which require as much time and resource to determine the outcome.  Can you imagine ifan athletic judge had to be devoted to one event for 6 days?

I agree too, that fundamental shifts from the current model are extremely unlikely. 

Thank you for your thoughtful answer. What you list off Eyesailor are the components which are broken in the way they are being forced onto Olympic sailing.

Officials in sailing routinely spend six days on one event, and with larger fleets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Board skiff said:

Lol.  I have Bruce on ignore so haven’t seen his insane ramblings, but from the quote above is he suggesting Olympic competitors pay an entry fee?  That really opens it up to less wealthy sailors and nations doesn’t it?

On the path to the Olympics, sailors from all countries sail in qualifying events which require travel and entry fees. Once qualified, most MNAs have no problem supporting the cost of getting an athlete to the Olympics. 

The current model is already biased in favor of wealthy nations.

I'd like to see a fairer model, where ability not wealth determines whether or not competitors get to the start line of important events.

New Zealand and other nations have athletes who qualify for the Olympics, and are 'not selected' by the national Olympic committee, because they have a small chance of winning a medal. Dig deeper, and the primary reason for limiting athletes from realizing their dream of competing in the games is primarily cost. And the consequence is that non selection hurts the development of the sport.

1 hour ago, Board skiff said:

 Who’s the racist Bruce?

I don't see any racist comments here on this thread. But racism is a very serious subject. If you (or anyone) can genuinely explain how I have been racist, even a tiny bit, then I am very keen to hear so I can make improvements. I understand that I, like most, have the capability of making comments which are inadvertently racist.

Making a racist comment does inherently make a person racist. Such a view is myopic. If a person makes 99 anti-racist comments, and then one inadvertently racist comment, it does not make that person "a racist".

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

I suspect the entry fee would be enormous because the IOC could not allow any sponsors and the fees would have to cover Security, ceremonies, race committee and jury, launching and storage, equipment , limited TV coverage and video, accommodation and board....

I never suggested that competitors pay for the entire Olympic regatta. My intention was that competitors cover some of the cost. The phrase 'pay their own way' means that flights are paid for to get to the regatta, though let's say there is an entry fee of US$4000 which is means tested. If 50% have the fee waived, and the number of athletes is 500, then there is $2 million raised.

Some other funding schemes are already in place. For example, the controversial Olympic Equipment Fee Policy. There are other ways of raising funds, including opening up donations, through to unpopular levies.

Having no sponsors is one of differences to the games. In actual fact, the Olympics are indirectly funded by advertising, by selling the television rights. Because the selling of television rights is such a major part of funding, it has twisted the IOC towards having bias against sports like sailing, which is traditionally more of a participatory sport, than a spectator sport. The sport of sailing is not primarily a TV show, or a spectator sport. It is a participatory sport.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

The Olympics is different to the Finn gold cup in a number of ways. They are not equivalent. The biggest is the legacy.

The current model does not serve sailing as well as it could in multiple ways, as already discussed.

If cost is a genuine reason for not delivering a better solution for Olympic Sailing, then funding alternatives should be considered. 

That they aren't highlights a political problem, less a funding one.

I agree that the Finn Gold Cup is fundamentally different from the Olympics. I was pointing out that your suggestion as to how to change the Olympics would make the Olympics closer to the Gold Cup.

The Finn Gold cup is open to anyone who can afford the entry fee

The Olympics does not charge competitors and attendance is solely dependent on merit. First the nation has to qualify and then the MNA has to select its representative.

The Finn Gold Cup is funded by the competitors

The Olympics are funded by the IOC and the host authority (Paris 2024 in this case) who obtain their funding through sponsorship, TV rights, ticket sales and tourism revenues.

The Finn Gold Cup , the competitors will be training at their own expense in the future

The Olympic revenues are distributed to the MNAs to help them develop the sport and train competitors (with questionable success in sailing I acknowledge . Some sports do a better job. WS has handled finances terribly . My point is that IOC does distribute $12.5 million to sailing.....which is $1.25 million per discipline)

 

The other feature of the Finn Gold Cup is that the podium represents the 3 best Finn sailors on the planet at that moment in time. The olympics does not do this. The Gold medal represents the best Finn sailor on the planet but the podium represents the best nations and not the best sailor because the 2nd best Finn sailor on the planet when Ainslie won Gold in London was not at the Olympics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bruce Hudson said:

 

If cost is a genuine reason for not delivering a better solution for Olympic Sailing, then funding alternatives should be considered. 

That they aren't highlights a political problem, less a funding one.

I think cost is a genuine reason for limiting the number of events at the Olympics and its is frequently mentioned on the IOC website and in discussions between IOC and WS (refer to event submissions where WS discusses cost implications.

HOWEVER, you are right that there are other political objectives as well. I think that IOC is reasonably clear about what they are.  You have posted this link before and I think it is the handiest summary of the IOC political (in a good sense) objectives https://olympics.com/ioc/news/gender-equality-and-youth-at-the-heart-of-the-paris-2024-olympic-sports-programme  

1. IOC wants to see "reduced cost and complexity" of the Games.  

  • We talk a lot about cost but it is also the complexity. There can be too much of a good thing. The number of events has ballooned .  IOC want fewer better events....quality not quantity. 
  • Reducing cost is important because fewer and fewer cities are tendering to host the events and we do not want to see the Olympics end up rotating between the 3 or 4 wealthiest cities in the world.

2. IOC want to see a greater emphasis on sports that youth can engage in

3. IOC wants to achieve precise gender equality.

I think all 3 are worthy objectives.  I agree with Bruce that one questions the execution of those objectives , but they are worthy objectives.  I particularly question some of the decisions with regard to #2.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Off topic. I think the emphasis on sports that youth can engage in is a genuinely good goal.

The goal that a young person sees a sport on the Olympics and says "I would like to try that" is a worthy one. Creating a healthy and active appeal for youth is great.

They are going to get some right and make some mistakes.   I guess I see some mistakes recently but the direction is good.

Due to this thread I went online and watched the qualification rounds for the Olympic sport of climbing.  I used to climb many many years ago. I thought I would be horrified by sport climbing. But, to my surprise, I thought "That might look like fun for my son and his friends ...and if it got them to have a shot at a climbing wall...its not a bad thing to include in the Olympics"  It also looked difficult and competitive , and the best seemed like genuine athletes.    I also watched extreme canoeing and concluded it looked silly compared to the true sport of slalom canoeing.  Losing some weight lifting categories (middle light weight in between Middle weight and light weight). Im sorry, Im sure there is a worthy athlete who loses out but the Olympics will not miss it.

Breaking.....hmmm........I question that as an Olympic Sport. Parkour I think would be a bridge too far.

 

Within sailing I think that we, as a sport, have to be brutally honest with ourselves.

As you can tell from other posters on this thread, some think the sport would be better off without the Olympics.  I strongly disagree. I sense that you do as well.

Our sport has declined in popularity and participation.  That in itself is okay.....there are so many more choices....but the sport still has to promote sailing so that people at least try it and discover if it is for them

It would be fool hardy to ditch the Olympics which does two things for the sport. First it promotes the sport and gives us some heroes in the sport that market and promote the activity.  Second it gives a participation goal for the truly talented. 

That means we need two kinds of events at the sailing Olympics. Spectating Events which promote out sport. And Participating events which might be less spectating wow value but are essential to discover the best sailing athlete. Many events will combine both

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Wckoek said:

https://www.sailing.org/classesandequipment/offshore/paris2024_equipment.php

Speaking of double handed offshore, which one would be you guy's pick from the list?

 

Figaro 3- Oh yes definitely exciting.  But probably too expensive abd I think 2 people foiling for 48 hours might prove to be too hard to do

Dehler 30 OD - Too much of cruiser/racer
Django 8s  Great movie! There is a boat?
FarEast 28 R- OK choice

J88 Cruiser racer
J99 JPK 10 30 is better boat for racing
J105 OMG , absolutely not
JPK1030 In the running
L30It is clearly in the running because WS has used it for offshore world championship.
Sunfast 3300 Supposedly in the running and Jeaneau have pitched it
TEN2 Drawings look good.

What a shame this event is not happening

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IPLore said:

What a shame this event is not happening

The Django 8S is a revised Django 770 I think.

I am not familiar with L30, who is the manufacturer and if there is good numbers in the market?

FarEast is not the best choice, but the most realistic if it is happening due to cost and availability.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wckoek said:

https://www.sailing.org/classesandequipment/offshore/paris2024_equipment.php

Speaking of double handed offshore, which one would be you guy's pick from the list?

Dehler 30 OD
Django 8s
FarEast 28 R
Figaro 3
J88
J99
J105
JPK1030
L30
Sunfast 3300
TEN2

I'd be wanting to eliminate classes which are not already recognised by World Sailing as an international double handed offshore class. (If that doesn't exist, then it is appropriate for a newly created international discipline as a demonstration event). For the class, select the one which is currently has the greatest number of MNAs participating. That will maximize the number of participants, and significantly reduce the cost of development. Once selected, I'd like to see the class used for 20 years (5 games) before change is considered.

I am in favor of making what I see as significant improvements to the way classes are selected.

Sailing has matured. A slower selection policy will deliver greater stability. A new class should be selected as a minimum of six years out from a games, to give all MNAs a better chance to develop local fleets and sailors.

---

I'm only familiar with three names on the list, and then only vaguely. I have only owned a keelboat once (a flying 15, which I raced without distinction), and sailed on keelers capable of offshore racing a handful of times. My passion is with small one design dinghies and multihulls. That being said, I have lost count of medalists I have met. My Facebook account shows about 30 or so friends who have competed at the Olympics, and more who have raced at other levels.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IPLore said:

The Olympics does not charge competitors and attendance is solely dependent on merit. First the nation has to qualify and then the MNA has to select its representative.

Yes, that is true. Having said that, mounting a serious Olympic campaign is a serious financial undertaking. In the context of costs, the games is a minor end part to that campaign. 

Cost at the Olympics is being used to compromise the way Olympic sailing is held in undesirable ways. Olympic sailing is not a television show.

3 hours ago, IPLore said:

The Finn Gold Cup is funded by the competitors

Yes, additionally by sponsorship, MNAs, national Finn associations (who in some cases pay for their top sailors to attend), and fundraising attempts. The athlete's club is often involved, and the athlete's family and friends.

There is hidden funding, coaches are paid for, medical expenses, sports science from universities, employment contracts by friendly companies, and other government funded jobs.

And yes, I'm still talking about the Finn gold cup. Some of this funding will be reduced in the future when the Finn is no longer an Olympic class. (Unless a proverbial rabbit is pulled out of a hat.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2021 at 8:32 PM, Bruce Hudson said:

Top competitive sailing, 2021.

image.png.d011b67c95786b1dd072bcb23221b052.png

image.png.ae458f10431d87021506cd7c2bb202d9.png

image.png.18979861f3b9816607a65b56cd4f4e7a.png

image.png.5e7e3d9224602210fd28b85dcbb400b8.png

image.png.92d7c8fbde13a7b8c4d5c689a7817d9a.png

image.png.de3afb274a4b6b106ae0a0771fc453a5.png

image.png.9568f88347d606dd85e1057a78e8b272.png

image.png.b23acf40b27a0b06f5c38ccd0d333875.png

image.png.76dd9a337541f1d72257ef91a36a04b9.png

image.png.6114217a246ab92ca72f3a52bbe0ad7c.png

image.png.752059282b23472753dcd081c3990289.png

image.png.4838df3d3135dd5d019b3c3bb9ef7f01.png

image.png.63d69726b9f0f24d151eda03fd43ce29.png

...and many more.

(And I haven't touched on the many non international classes, and design rule classes like 18 ft skiffs, keelers etc.)

Note the absence of silly old farts.

The silliness is with dropping the Finn and women's 470 for Paris 2024 - and replacing it with a developing class. New emerging disciplines need to be added, like with cycling when they added BMX racing and mountain biking.

The Olympics is a celebration of the best of the best, not a place to help develop new disciplines - and when those new classes reach maturity - ADD them as new events - instead of causing harm to established classes.

When it is time to retire a class or event, replace it with the new class that is naturally taking its place. Women's 470 sailing is established and growing.

...though having raised the topic of old farts, there is a vibrant masters sailing scene.

 

Yes vibrant masters, but as much as the IOC likes to think its its the best of the best, which it is but for the spectator/TV dollar, the boat choice doesnt seem to be up to the sailors...

PS huge class and hence in the olympics doesnt seem to follow?
Who had/has Finns, Tornado's, Stars in their club?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:en the Finn is no longer an Olympic class. (Unless a proverbial rabbit is pulled out of a hat.)

The rabbit cannot be pulled from the hat, because reaching as far down as you can in the hat, the rabbit is gone.  He left a year ago, hopped off and went sailing 

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

The rabbit cannot be pulled from the hat, because reaching as far down as you can in the hat, the rabbit is gone.  He left a year ago, hopped off and went sailing 

You are absolutely sure that Tokyo will go ahead?

You are absolutely sure that there will be no changes to Paris if Tokyo is cancelled?

You are saying no chance, I am saying low chance...

...we are actually saying similar things, though mine is based on that I don't know with absolute certainty what the future holds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

You are absolutely sure that Tokyo will go ahead?

You are absolutely sure that there will be no changes to Paris if Tokyo is cancelled?

You are saying no chance, I am saying low chance...

...we are actually saying similar things, though mine is based on that I don't know with absolute certainty what the future holds.

I have no certainty that Tokyo will go ahead.  Theoretically, the decision rests  with the IOC. Their contract with the host specifies that the IOC retains the final call to cancel . However the reality is that the Japanese government can prevent the Olympics proceeding and governments are susceptible to the wishes of their voters. The Japanese populace is frightened that the Olympics could create a super spreader event and polls show 80%+ want to see the Olympics cancelled.   I score the chance of the Olympics being cancelled at least 65%.   I think the Olympics could be held safely but fear transcends logic.

I think Paris will be affected by the cancellation of Tokyo.  See below.  I dont know how the ramifications will affect sailing exactly. We are speculating

 

 

If Tokyo is cancelled:

  • Huge financial impact for IOC and the Sporting Federations
  • World Sailing has already borrowed against its Olympic dividend. WS would expect to receive between $12 and $13 million.   They view that as $3m a year over the 4 year cycle and accordingly costs exceed revenues by that amount (more recently).  IOC will have some insurance. I doubt that WS does.  WS is in debt and expenses exceed revenues . They will have to go into some kind of financial rescue/creditor protection and steep cost cutting. Many sports will be facing financial hardship.  Sport funding will be down in amateur sports.
  • Athletes who have spent  4+ years preparing for this event will face some tough and terrible choices. Many will not be able to stretch the 4-6 years of their life devoted to this goal into an 8-10 year commitment It will highlight the fragility of their goals and there will be a lot of retirement from the semi-amateur sports (eg sailing). Any who stay will rightly want certainty
  •  Paris will take on a new importance.   (i)  Paris has to become something hopeful to look forward to post-pandemic. The whole event will need to have a theme celebrating the return of the Olympics and sport (ii) It must be as financially successful as possible.to rebuilt the lost cycle.  

What does that mean for the classes due to leave the roster after 2020?  Dont know for sure. WS will be in immense difficulty. I try and imagine the discussions between a mortally wounded WS and the IOC.   I suspect the Paris slate of events remains the same as currently proposed with gender equality et..   I think WS has to secure that 10th slot asap before any cancellation decision is taken.  I suspect the 10th slot will be M/W kiteboarding.  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

I think Paris will be affected by the cancellation of Tokyo.  See below.  I dont know how the ramifications will affect sailing exactly. We are speculating.

Exactly, I completely agree.

6 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

Tokyo is cancelled:

  • Huge financial impact for IOC and the Sporting Federations
  • World Sailing has already borrowed against its Olympic dividend. WS would expect to receive between $12 and $13 million.   They view that as $3m a year over the 4 year cycle and accordingly costs exceed revenues by that amount (more recently).  IOC will have some insurance. I doubt that WS does.  WS is in debt and expenses exceed revenues . They will have to go into some kind of financial rescue/creditor protection and steep cost cutting. Many sports will be facing financial hardship.  Sport funding will be down in amateur sports.
  • Athletes who have spent  4+ years preparing for this event will face some tough and terrible choices. Many will not be able to stretch the 4-6 years of their life devoted to this goal into an 8-10 year commitment It will highlight the fragility of their goals and there will be a lot of retirement from the semi-amateur sports (eg sailing). Any who stay will rightly want certainty
  •  Paris will take on a new importance.   (i)  Paris has to become something hopeful to look forward to post-pandemic. The whole event will need to have a theme celebrating the return of the Olympics and sport (ii) It must be as financially successful as possible.to rebuilt the lost cycle.  

Add to that list that Japanese lives will be saved.

As dreadful as the thought is, 2024 might not be post-pandemic. 

The costs might seem big, but they will be absorbed. 

If the Tokyo games go ahead, the IOC may feel it needs to get involved with the vaccinations. It has already offered medical help.

---

The decision regarding Olympic sailing's tenth medal at Paris is independent, and makes the assumption it won't be affected by the potential cancellation of Tokyo.

---

Given the continued worsening of the pandemic in Japan, the Tokyo Olympics looks more likely to be cancelled than not in my view. Right now, the situation is far worse than when it was postponed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Richard Gladwell gives his opinion on this topic:

"Letter from the Antipodes: Youth sailors need to rethink options after World Sailing drops Finn" https://www.sail-world.com/news/237809/Letter-from-the-Antipodes-Rethinking-the-Options

(Scroll down to:

"To recap the Council of World Sailing will proffer a Mens and Womens Kiteboard event for Paris 2024. That puts and end to the proposed kiteboard relay event.

If Lausanne doesn't like that, World Sailing's Plan B is to split the Mixed 470 back into Mens and Womens events - as it has been since 1988..."

"...If the IOC, remains unimpressed with the Mixed Offshore event, and opts to run with World Sailing's latest preferences then 40% of the events will be on boards, not boats, 50% will be in foiling classes, and there will be no event in which males above 85kg can compete across the windrange.

The ramifications of that slate have been discussed endlessly outside the ambit of World Sailing, and most can see the holes in the changes."

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Exactly, I completely agree.

Add to that list that Japanese lives will be saved.

As dreadful as the thought is, 2024 might not be post-pandemic. 

The costs might seem big, but they will be absorbed. 

If the Tokyo games go ahead, the IOC may feel it needs to get involved with the vaccinations. It has already offered medical help.

---

The decision regarding Olympic sailing's tenth medal at Paris is independent, and makes the assumption it won't be affected by the potential cancellation of Tokyo.

---

Given the continued worsening of the pandemic in Japan, the Tokyo Olympics looks more likely to be cancelled than not in my view. Right now, the situation is far worse than when it was postponed.

It is all a bit depressing.

I am an optimist. I believe that 2024 will be post pandemic. It may not be post epidemic. I agree that covid will be around for a long time because eradication will require massive adoption of global vaccination. However I hope there will be countries where the danger level is brought down to sufficient levels where the human race can gather again and enjoy life and sports.

The biggest impact on Japan's covid risks will be the adoption of vaccines. They led the way with their initial response to covid with masks and social distancing but now lag with only 2-4 % of the population vaccinated.

In a population of 126 million where only 2-4% are vaccinated, the arrival of 10,000-20,000 athletes, coaches and officials who are 80% vaccinated and will be living in largely bubble conditions in the Olympic village, I do not believe will have an impact on Japan's infection rate.   Japan and IOC need to get a scientific input to their decision making and if the Olympics incentivizes them to get a move on and accelerate vaccination in Tokyo, then that would be a good thing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the IOC should offer 100% vaccinated athletes and officials, and adopt a zero tolerance approach to vaccination. No immunization= No competition.   It will be harsh on some anit-vaxxers but it may set a strong example for human kind around the planet watching the Olympics . It should also remove Japanese concern.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, IPLore said:

Perhaps the IOC should offer 100% vaccinated athletes and officials, and adopt a zero tolerance approach to vaccination. No immunization= No competition.   It will be harsh on some anit-vaxxers but it may set a strong example for human kind around the planet watching the Olympics . It should also remove Japanese concern.

It isn't as simple as that. Above I shares a link with a story about the world's largest supplier of vaccinations is no longer exporting. Vaccines are not available in a quite a few countries. Poorer countries are disproportionately affected.

Of course it isn't just athletes, it's the support staff.

---

Japan will be negatively affected. The games will mean greater activity, more interpersonal contact, which means greater spread of the virus. All going well, Japan may have 10% of its population vaccinated by the time the Olympics start, which of course, is not enough.

Literally, Japan is facing losing more lives if the games go ahead than if they don't.

---

Not all vaccines are equal, nor are the virus variants. Without 100% efficacy, and a population of thousands, you can expect infections, and it is possible that there will be illness and deaths among the Olympic athletes, support staff and volunteers.

---

There is a glimmer of hope. Active cases in Japan appears to have peaked within the last few days.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 U.S. has 10m current stockpile of AZ vaccine and that is subsequent to releasing 4m to Mexico and Canada ,  

We have committed to send 60 m doses of vaccine to India (not sure if m RNA vaccine or AZ)

We can spare 20,000 doses for Olympics.

We should not put the Japanese at risk but we should do everything in our power to help the IOC host a safe, fully vaccinated event that will be watched by billions of people around the world , sending a message that the full adoption of vaccimes can create a safe place.

Japan can make its own choices about how slow they roll out vaccines.......but the IOC and our athlete role models can send a message in support of immunization.   Do I feel strongly about vaccination ?  Yes, as you all know I was involved in the early helpless days of the pandemic and it frustrates the hell out of me that nations are not pedal to the metal on immunization.

Japan has only 2% of the population vaccinated vs close to 50% of the US. Shame on Japan!

Ironically, France, home of Paris 2024,  has an anti-vaxx culture and is also well behind with vaccination.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EYESAILOR said:

Ironically, France, home of Paris 2024,  has an anti-vaxx culture and is also well behind with vaccination.

That's all rather relative, and I leave it to the frogs here to comment, if they like.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Fiji Bitter said:

That's all rather relative, and I leave it to the frogs here to comment, if they like.

Here's what the French are saying. (There is less confidence than UK or Germany, but about the same as Italy. (Is in French). https://www.sciencespo.fr/cevipof/sites/sciencespo.fr.cevipof/files/Round 12 - Baromètre de la confiance en politique - vague12-1.pdf


From the Financial times in January

"This scepticism has affected the French fight against the virus. The nation was slow to start vaccinating but has now inoculated 93,000 people, according to health ministry figures released on Saturday. Health minister Olivier Véran has been accused of pandering to anti-vaxxers after saying the government needed to be “educational” in its approach.

But France’s hesitancy towards vaccines predates Covid-19. A 2019 Gallup poll conducted in 144 countries showed it was already home to some of the strongest anti-vaccine sentiment in the world. The pandemic has only reinforced this and enabled the nation’s online anti-vax communities to be more successful in wooing the “vaccine hesitant” than its health authorities."
https://www.ft.com/content/1157896c-8817-4d3c-a63c-e59f2752aaac

 

From the BBC in March 2021

"France is one of the most vaccine-sceptical countries in the world - fertile ground for hard-line anti-vaccine activists spreading online misinformation, writes the BBC's specialist disinformation reporter Marianna Spring."
https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-56526265

 

France is lagging behind Europe with vaccines

image.png.c67aca56bc6812a6dd4b6722fdb4c0e8.png

5 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

Ironically, France, home of Paris 2024,  has an anti-vaxx culture and is also well behind with vaccination.

In my view, a 100% accurate statement.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Fiji Bitter said:

That's all rather relative, and I leave it to the frogs here to comment, if they like.

 

7 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

In my view, a 100% accurate statement.

Sorry, you may be a toad, but you're not a frog.

And I can google all that info myself if I was really interested. 

Still like to hear from any real frogs, just briefly, as this is basically thread drift, and all relative anyway.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Fiji Bitter said:

Sorry, you may be a toad, but you're not a frog.

And I can google all that info myself if I was really interested. 

Still like to hear from any real frogs, just briefly, as this is basically thread drift, and all relative anyway.

My family is of French origin, settling in Akaroa. (Was actually two families I descend from who settled there) I was last in France in 2018 for a couple of months.

Don't think there are many French people here. (So we might just have to rely on French reports, as a French person would anyway!)

Besides, the French reports were created French people in France, agree with Eyesailor!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2021 at 9:52 AM, Sailabout said:

Who had/has Finns, Tornado's, Stars in their club?

I can think of at least two local UK clubs with active Finn fleets. Stars or Tornados, not such much.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

Ironically, France, home of Paris 2024,  has an anti-vaxx culture and is also well behind with vaccination.

Actually, after a slow start, they've been vaccinating fast for the last couple of months.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  

22 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

Actually, after a slow start, they've been vaccinating fast for the last couple of months.

You think? Two months ago, France, Canada and Germany were all close to 10%.

France is now lagging behind both. Italy has similar issues with misinformation.

image.thumb.png.289d8918eeb4e3aaa771b2837872e68f.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2021 at 9:59 PM, IPLore said:

Why would it be better than the Finn Gold Cup?

if an Olympic medal is a better "brand" than the Finn gold cup and the competitors prefer the opening ceremony and image etc......should they also pay a share of the general over head. Should all sports be allowed to pay for additional medals?

Aren't they doing so indirectly by helping to fund the Games through the sponsors and TV stations willingness to cough up? I mean breakdancing fer christ sake? Why else would the likes of the Men's 100m in athletics allow multiple competitors from one country when sailing is limited to one? Think about it. EG a USA 1,2,3 sells TV

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2021 at 2:01 PM, EYESAILOR said:

I have no certainty that Tokyo will go ahead.  Theoretically, the decision rests  with the IOC. Their contract with the host specifies that the IOC retains the final call to cancel . However the reality is that the Japanese government can prevent the Olympics proceeding and governments are susceptible to the wishes of their voters. The Japanese populace is frightened that the Olympics could create a super spreader event and polls show 80%+ want to see the Olympics cancelled.   I score the chance of the Olympics being cancelled at least 65%.   I think the Olympics could be held safely but fear transcends logic.

I think Paris will be affected by the cancellation of Tokyo.  See below.  I dont know how the ramifications will affect sailing exactly. We are speculating

 

 

If Tokyo is cancelled:

  • Huge financial impact for IOC and the Sporting Federations
  • World Sailing has already borrowed against its Olympic dividend. WS would expect to receive between $12 and $13 million.   They view that as $3m a year over the 4 year cycle and accordingly costs exceed revenues by that amount (more recently).  IOC will have some insurance. I doubt that WS does.  WS is in debt and expenses exceed revenues . They will have to go into some kind of financial rescue/creditor protection and steep cost cutting. Many sports will be facing financial hardship.  Sport funding will be down in amateur sports.
  • Athletes who have spent  4+ years preparing for this event will face some tough and terrible choices. Many will not be able to stretch the 4-6 years of their life devoted to this goal into an 8-10 year commitment It will highlight the fragility of their goals and there will be a lot of retirement from the semi-amateur sports (eg sailing). Any who stay will rightly want certainty
  •  Paris will take on a new importance.   (i)  Paris has to become something hopeful to look forward to post-pandemic. The whole event will need to have a theme celebrating the return of the Olympics and sport (ii) It must be as financially successful as possible.to rebuilt the lost cycle.  

What does that mean for the classes due to leave the roster after 2020?  Dont know for sure. WS will be in immense difficulty. I try and imagine the discussions between a mortally wounded WS and the IOC.   I suspect the Paris slate of events remains the same as currently proposed with gender equality et..   I think WS has to secure that 10th slot asap before any cancellation decision is taken.  I suspect the 10th slot will be M/W kiteboarding.  

 

 

I don't think that will happen, there is too much to lose by not having an olympics for 8 years.

In the world of diplomacy, I think the IOC is just forcing the issue of "do it in 2021 or we take it away from you". 

if it really doesn't happen in 2021, I think they will kick the can down the road each year. it might get to the point of Tokyo 2024 and paris 2028.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, shebeen said:

I don't think that will happen, there is too much to lose by not having an olympics for 8 years.

In the world of diplomacy, I think the IOC is just forcing the issue of "do it in 2021 or we take it away from you". 

if it really doesn't happen in 2021, I think they will kick the can down the road each year. it might get to the point of Tokyo 2024 and paris 2028.

 

 

I dont think IOC is threatening Tokyo Organizers.   The insurance for the event probably runs out after this schedule.

I personally think a postponement would be a good idea and it should never have been re-scheduled as early as July. All of the forecasts were that the vaccines would not be covering enough for the globe until late 2021. The problem I think is that they run into the winter Olympics in February 2022. But these are exceptional times. I dont think it matters if they are too close together. We are getting too close to the actual date to reschedule a second postponement.  The mood in March 2019 (which the IOC initially opposed) was for a postponement. The mood now is for cancellation.

I would favor postponement again vs cancellation.

The world is gradually getting a grip on covid...early days ...but US is showing that even the worst managed response gradually works as the vaccine is adopted. We were doen to 13,000 cases yesterday, the lowest since last June.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

My family is of French origin, settling in Akaroa. (Was actually two families I descend from who settled there) I was last in France in 2018 for a couple of months.

 

Well that qualifies you as an expert on the French healthcare system...:)

compared to me anyway!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is one nation that is alongside Japan, much further behind in vaccinations than France, lulled I suspect into a false sense of security by their stringent lock downs and isolation from the rest of the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IPLore said:

There is one nation that is alongside Japan, much further behind in vaccinations than France, lulled I suspect into a false sense of security by their stringent lock downs and isolation from the rest of the world.

Of course you are likely referring to New Zealand. The vaccine program is not relied on as a first line of defense, as we have a much touted zero community spread. Mongolia is doing better than NZ, in my view. (I worry with our borders being open to Australia, and new variants, and the virus continues to kill 13,000 plus per day).

The vaccine program started later than most, and targeted front line staff and high risk people first. The main rollout starts late June. That being said, I expect NZ to be one of the first 10 nations to achieve 80% of the population vaccinated, and be one of the only to achieve 90%.

We are only using the Pfizer vaccine, which is fully funded.

The reason is that misinformation seems to be weaker here in NZ than with other countries, and our level of trust with our elected officials is higher.

I get my first shot on Friday, as I am high risk with an autoimmune condition.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bruce Hudson said:

I get my first shot on Friday, as I am high risk with an autoimmune condition.

Hello Bruce......

Dont mean to get personal and mushy here. We have had our debates over the years......but....take care of yourself . Im very glad to hear you are getting closer to your vaccine.    Friday first shot.......then the next shot 2 weeks after that...and immune 2 weeks after that. Four weeks to safety. I'll be glad to hear when you have joined us on the safer shores of the immunized.

With that , back to our usual programming.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Of course you are likely referring to New Zealand. The vaccine program is not relied on as a first line of defense, as we have a much touted zero community spread. Mongolia is doing better than NZ, in my view. (I worry with our borders being open to Australia, and new variants, and the virus continues to kill 13,000 plus per day).

The vaccine program started later than most, and targeted front line staff and high risk people first. The main rollout starts late June. That being said, I expect NZ to be one of the first 10 nations to achieve 80% of the population vaccinated, and be one of the only to achieve 90%.

We are only using the Pfizer vaccine, which is fully funded.

The reason is that misinformation seems to be weaker here in NZ than with other countries, and our level of trust with our elected officials is higher.

I get my first shot on Friday, as I am high risk with an autoimmune condition.

I am well aware of NZ's success with stringent border control. Well Done.

However the downside to that is that it leaves y;all as very exposed population if CV19 sneaks in somehow through the walls you have put up.  As the rest of the developed/vaccinated world starts to open borders, travel and recommence hands on commerce again, NZL will have to be extra careful to remain stringent until you are sufficiently vaccinated.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in awe of NZ's Covid Tracer.

It is supremely ironic that Apple and Google (US companies) worked together to develop a system in the US that could have actively traced covid contacts with phone movements and preserved privacy......but they werent trusted so it was never turned on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, IPLore said:

I am well aware of NZ's success with stringent border control. Well Done.

However the downside to that is that it leaves y;all as very exposed population if CV19 sneaks in somehow through the walls you have put up.  As the rest of the developed/vaccinated world starts to open borders, travel and recommence hands on commerce again, NZL will have to be extra careful to remain stringent until you are sufficiently vaccinated.

You may not be aware that we have many small community outbreaks, and eliminated every single one so far. We have a constant stream of people arriving with the virus, and we isolate each (and contacts they may have had) until the threat passes. 

Yes, NZ has done well, and we are very much aware of the risks - we have many reports focussing on it, plus regular updates from those in leadership. We haven't got everything right, but when we get something wrong, it is usual to admit it, and make amends.

From the inside looking out, I am full of admiration of Mongolia, which in my view has been the best performing country by a wide margin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bruce Hudson said:

You may not be aware that we have many small community outbreaks, and eliminated every single one so far. We have a constant stream of people arriving with the virus, and we isolate each (and contacts they may have had) until the threat passes. 

Yes, NZ has done well, and we are very much aware of the risks - we have many reports focussing on it, plus regular updates from those in leadership. We haven't got everything right, but when we get something wrong, it is usual to admit it, and make amends.

From the inside looking out, I am full of admiration of Mongolia, which in my view has been the best performing country by a wide margin.

Mongolia numbers are probably less reliable than most.  But they did well at first and then had a large outbreak this winter which caused them to get anxious.  They have implemented a massive vaccine program compared to most less developed nations becaus e both Russia and China sent them vaccines, especially China . The long term outlook for Mongolia will depend on how effective the Chinese vaccine is....

Link to post
Share on other sites

New Zealand's priority now is to demonstrate that they can obtain and roll out vaccines in a prompt manner. NZ sense of community and responsibility to each other (as demonstrated by unified response to pandemic) will probably mean a very high take up .  If they can get vaccinated quickly, then they really will emerge from this as a case study in getting on top of the pandemic. 

The US did make one postive contribution to this mess, which is that our biotech/pharma companies made a very significant contribution to the fastest development of vaccines in history.  Obviously the research brilliance of companies like Biontech in Germany will go down in history for their contribution to mankind as well. But Moderna, Pfizer and JNJ really have done outstanding work thus far.  The question is whether we can continue to scale up to get the whole world simultaneously vaccinated and boosted in 2022 to eliminate a series of variants continuing to circle the globe. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IPLore said:

Mongolia numbers are probably less reliable than most.  But they did well at first and then had a large outbreak this winter which caused them to get anxious.  They have implemented a massive vaccine program compared to most less developed nations becaus e both Russia and China sent them vaccines, especially China . The long term outlook for Mongolia will depend on how effective the Chinese vaccine is....

I was out of date and failed to check. My bad. Mongolia's initial response was to heed WHO's warnings in a timely manner, one of the only countries to do so. I am sure that lives were saved.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2021 at 12:05 PM, EYESAILOR said:

I just question the suggestion that the healthcare system is overwhelmed. 

I'm not sure there are very many countries in the world which have health care systems with massive reserve capacity. In the UK, for instance, hospitals have just about coped with the levels of critical care Covid patients by cancelling swathes of non-emergency treatment and because many prospective patients don't want to go near a health facility unless its life threatening. On one definition you could say that's not actually overwhelmed, but nevertheless the normal health care for the population has been severely compromised. Its easy to understand that the Japanese don't want their regular health care to be further compromised by the Olympics.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/2/2021 at 1:36 AM, Wckoek said:

Is this still happening or confirmed cancelled?

Its neither confirmed nor cancelled at the moment. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

My money is that IOC will drop the offshore category and accept the alternative of M/W foiling kites.

Agreed that separate men's and women's foiling kites are the most likely, with strong arguments for the 470 being charged from mixed to separate men's and women's being the second most likely. 

The least likely is a continuation of the mixed offshore (with changes which make it more of and inshore 'offshore'.

Also possible but unlikely is no tenth medal. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI, the IOC Executive Board meets on June 8 ito confirm the sailing programme for the Paris Olympics.

There is an outside chance that any decision could be impacted on by Tokyo being cancelled - and as the pandemic has improved in Japan, it looks increasingly likely to go ahead.

Domestically opposition in Japan remains strong, with reports of 10,000 Japanese volunteers quitting.

"10,000 volunteers drop out; Tokyo Olympics open in 50 days" https://apnews.com/article/tokyo-health-coronavirus-pandemic-olympic-games-2020-tokyo-olympics-e7350e3562f420ef35f51b71b558aa8e

Globally, the number of recorded deaths is still stubbornly above 10,000, as reductions in India are made up for by increases in other regions (eg the Americas had 5 of the 6 worst number of deaths yesterday).

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

Agreed that separate men's and women's foiling kites are the most likely, with strong arguments for the 470 being charged from mixed to separate men's and women's being the second most likely. 

The least likely is a continuation of the mixed offshore (with changes which make it more of and inshore 'offshore'.

Also possible but unlikely is no tenth medal. 

 

Dont disagree with your probability assessment.

However I think it is a series of two binary decisions.

The first decision IOC has to make is

1)  Do we go ahead with the mixed 2 person endurance race offshore/inshore?   WS will strongly advocate going ahead with the event. It remains WS's preferred option.  The French hosts will almost certainly medal in this event. 

If they decide to keep the event that is it.  If they decide to nix it, then they go onto the second decision.

2) Do we replace the offshore event with M/W kites or M/W 420s?    

Here they almost certainly go with kites.

 

Yes there is the 3rd possibility : 3) Do we not allocate the 10th event and save money (possible if Tokyo Olympics cancelled but otherwise remote)

So I think the most likely decision path is Kites.  If IOC dont choose kites it will only be because WS and France persuaded them to stick with the offshore.  Does that make any sense?

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

Dont disagree with your probability assessment.

However I think it is a series of two binary decisions.

The first decision IOC has to make is

1)  Do we go ahead with the mixed 2 person endurance race offshore/inshore?   WS will strongly advocate going ahead with the event. It remains WS's preferred option.  The French hosts will almost certainly medal in this event. 

If they decide to keep the event that is it.  If they decide to nix it, then they go onto the second decision.

2) Do we replace the offshore event with M/W kites or M/W 420s?    

Here they almost certainly go with kites.

 

Yes there is the 3rd possibility : 3) Do we not allocate the 10th event and save money (possible if Tokyo Olympics cancelled but otherwise remote)

So I think the most likely decision path is Kites.  If IOC dont choose kites it will only be because WS and France persuaded them to stick with the offshore.  Does that make any sense?

Yes, your assessment entirely makes sense. It sounds exactly like how precious similar meetings have been run - steeped in binary logic yet at times devoid of common sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So... I smugly point to my earlier comments in this thread and say... "I told you so".... sorry Eyesailor, but you were way late on this call....now...if you're interested in where lympix sailing goes next...re-read my comments. 

I've just got an update from my mate that heads up Baseball here in Oz....hearing the reasons Oz has withdrawn from Japan... a very big issue if you follow baseball and understand the position Japan has globally in that sport..and another mate that heads up IOC in Oz and a chat about how regardless of what happens next, the Lympix is going to have a seriously major reconstuction after tokyo, and that it'll take 10 years to recover from this hit...and that there'll never be another lympix like we're used to...and that "spectacle" events don't require massive infrastructure, just televisual coverage and an engaged audience...so, if you're interested, reread my earlier stuff and you'll understand where "sailing" (foiling & kites) is headed on the lympix agenda....

Couta out.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Disappointed they couldn't make it work. Wonder if there's time to do it "properly" for LA2028, but then you'd need to kick out one of the incumbents.

As awesome as foiling is, it probably is practiced by a fraction of a percent of people who sail. Now 50% of the medals in Paris will be foiling.

 

 

55 minutes ago, Couta said:

So... I smugly point to my earlier comments in this thread and say... "I told you so".... sorry Eyesailor, but you were way late on this call....now...if you're interested in where lympix sailing goes next...re-read my comments. 

I've just got an update from my mate that heads up Baseball here in Oz....hearing the reasons Oz has withdrawn from Japan... a very big issue if you follow baseball and understand the position Japan has globally in that sport..and another mate that heads up IOC in Oz and a chat about how regardless of what happens next, the Lympix is going to have a seriously major reconstuction after tokyo, and that it'll take 10 years to recover from this hit...and that there'll never be another lympix like we're used to...and that "spectacle" events don't require massive infrastructure, just televisual coverage and an engaged audience...so, if you're interested, reread my earlier stuff and you'll understand where "sailing" (foiling & kites) is headed on the lympix agenda....

Couta out.

 

so if we were keeping points, you win? cool.

Link to post
Share on other sites