Class ONB |
committee |
class rules |
boardlist |
and more |

History |
Calendar |
Ranking |
Archive |
News |

FW GP Tour |
Reports |
& Results |

Articles |
Gallery |
Juniors |
& Youths |

Women |
Champions |
FWOD |
Closer looks |

Contact |

Home |
Back |

If you have some questions or any other cases you can e-mail us.






Why FOD is right for 2012



Dear Windsurfing Committee, Events Committee, MNA, Council member....

You have probably received, or seen, personal letters from my colleagues on the Formula One Design (FOD) Steering Committee- Bruno de Wannemaeker, Remi Vila, Allison Shreeve and Svein Rasmussen. Whilst i endorse everything they have said, and the details of the proposal, i think it appropriate to explain why i support this "evolution of olympic windsurfing".

Over 10 years ago, July 1998, the Chairman of the Windsurfing Committee submitted a report ( 2004 Windsurfing Equipment and Format) with 12 proposals, including:
- Modern and attractive for both the participant and the media.
- The format/equipment should be capable of being used in wind range of 6>35 knots.
- The format/equipment should reduce the need to pump.

And so - the search began!

Windsurfing stepped forward to meet the challenge.
Representatives from ISAF, Classes, Industry, and PWA(Professional Windsurfers Association) met in Zurich. It was resolved that -"the new IWA will endorse a change of the Olympic Format and Equipment according to Formula Windsurfing Class Rules..."
Recorder of the Minutes, Dieter Neupert( ISAF Constitution Committee)

It would be fair to say that this decision polarised opinion, and perhaps Bruce Kendall (august 2000) summed it up:
"I can appreciate the push by some for change to Formula- its fast, fun, and growing in popularity....Perhaps in time a one design formula style class will become the next olympic contender."

At the November 2000 Conference the committees voted:
Events Committee voted 10 to 9 in favour of MOD.
Sailing Committee (SC) delayed its decision – more information was required. Cliff Norbury (SC Chairman) stated that the Windsurfing Committee were biased due to their composition, there was no technical reason why Formula could not be approved as Olympic equipment..
Council voted 22 to 15 in favour of MOD men; and 24 to 13 MOD women.
The Formula advocates were philosophical in response, best summed up by Peter England (Formula Class Chairman)-
"..we have time to refine the bid and the equipment will have stabiliosed from its current period of rapid development."

The Windsurfing Committee voted 7 to 2 for MOD.
Clearly it was a controversial decision. The selection of MOD had repercusions right up to the Athens Olympics!
Here are some comments made at the time:

“It is about ensuring windsurfing remains Olympic beyond 2004 and 2008. And a board that performs well in a large variety of conditions..and suits as large variety of physiques as possible. If it is also reasonably priced (preferably one sail) and most important –of a One Design principle( everyone around the world has access to the same equipment) large numbers of participants are almost guaranteed”.
Rene Appel, HKG Coach. November 2001

“The vote between MOD and FW last November was very close .My guess is that if the vote was again today, with people having had more time to be better informed, FW would win.”

Cliff Norbury. November 2001
“How faithfully does Olympic Windsurfing reflect the real sport, as practiced by the vast majority of windsurfers –the ‘shortboarders’? ….it must be sailed on ‘funboards’ with planing hulls and no daggerboard.”
Windsurfing Canada. December 2001

There was even a big chance that MOD would be dumped by ISAF - Formula stood waiting in the wings.
“6 one design events (equipment supplied) – Men’s & Women’s board –Formula.”
“I want a restricted Formula Board for 2004. Yes 2004!”
Paul Henderson,Making Waves 88. March 2002

Rory Ramsen was of the opinion that "the IWA should speak as one voice on the issue of selection of windsurfing equipment for Olympics" We agreed then and, in fact, maintain that policy now.
In April 2002 the IWA published Route Map to the Selection of the 2008 Olympic Equipment.
" Paul Henderson has already stated that he believes that the class should be Formula Windsurfing, but the equipment should be One Design."

IWA commissioned a survey by Aristeia, and in March 2003 published an Executive Summary, including:
  • ISAF should select new windsurfing equipment for the 2008 Olympic regatta. This new equipment should have wider appeal, and mirror more closely the practice of the general windsurfing public.

  • The new equipment must be different from the existing one, by being either
    o An evolution of the current Olympic equipment that keeps the centre board principle, or
    o Something like the existing Formula format


Paul Henderson (June 2003) expresed frustration at the progress being made:
” ..I was a strong supporter of the Formula concept when it was presented first in Lisbon several years ago and wanted to have it for Athens 2004. My position has been very clear ..either do something dramatic to revitalize windsurfing or it will lose Olympic status.!”


ISAF joined the fray:
“ISAF wish to encourage all …to think ‘outside the box!, with the possibility that a new design could also lead to a new and improved format; that could include slalom and /or marathon racing..”
Making Waves 162. August 2003

A 2 part Trial was conducted -The Evaluation Panel Report, published October 2004, made recommendations. Many were not implemented. However, a new board, a prototype "hybrid" from Neil Pryde, was adopted.
It took a further 2 years to establish the class. Problems still exist - RSX has failed to live up to expectation. I would not want to apportion blame anywhere - least of all, to the Neil Pryde organisation- but that is the reality.


All the reasons why RSX is not the best choice for 2012 have been explored,explained and catalogued elsewhere in this debate. You can find all the info you need here:

http://www.formulawindsurfing.org/fwod.php

We have listened to all the arguments put forward for change; and after 10 years of development, testing and preparation have offered the sport, and ISAF, what they want.

Certainly the sailors, and the sport, deserve better.

I sign off with these words ringing in my ears from Paul Henderson, ( incidentally, not a person with whom i enjoyed a particularly amicable relationship ! ) -
“Windsurfing has imploded because it is no longer fun. Unlimited pumping has destroyed that”.

And, from our current President Goran Petersson, January 2007:

IOC influence- “It has changed a lot over the last 10 years…..all sports have to concentrate on the things the IOC want…specifically now the media issue is the most important one of all. Everything comes down to media which, in turn, comes down to money. We have to be realistic about that.”
Olympic sailing must be made as media-friendly as possible. The only other option is for sailing not to be part of the Olympics. Olympic effect- to develop sailing in countries that are not wealthy ..then you must be able to say ‘olympic’.

I have not always supported Formula for Olympics - the time was not right, it is now ! VOTE - FOD for 2012

very best regards,
Ceri Williams. IFCW Chairman.

FOD Steering Committee:
Bruno de Wannemaeker - IFCA & IWA(2008) President
http://www.formulawindsurfing.org/filez/news/080916/Brief_IFCA_FOD-Ceri.pdf
Remi Vila - FE President
http://www.star-board.com/2009/pages/news/news.php?readmore=438
Allison Shreeve - Olympic racer
http://www.formulawindsurfing.org/news.php?id=1415
Svein Rasmussen - CEO Starboard
http://www.formulawindsurfing.org/news.php?id=1463



3rd November '08




4th November 2008 (09:11:30) - Hans, wrote :
It sounds like there's still al lot of bitter anger over the past decade and some people are trying to make this a personal win, when it doesn't have to be the best for the sport of windsurfing.

I'm a One Design enthusiast, but the FWOD just isn't it.


4th November 2008 (20:03:22) - ceri (ceri at offshore-sports dot co dot uk), wrote :
you misinterpret my meaning.
certainly no bitterness on my part - but trying to set the record straight.
I do believe that RSX ( hybrid) is not good enough for Olympic Games.
FOD is an advancement - and nothing more than the ISAF have wanted for 10 years


7th November 2008 (08:38:55) - GRE-969 (frey at acci dot gr), wrote :
When is the day of voting ???


7th November 2008 (13:48:48) - ceri (ceri at offshore-sports dot co dot uk), wrote :
Windsurfing Committee discus on 9th; Equipment Committee on 11th; Events Committee on 12th; and the big one , Council , on 14th.


8th November 2008 (00:35:56) - Angel, wrote :
mucha suerte :)



10th November 2008 (09:50:23) - Anonym, wrote :
Nov 9 ISAF website:
In the Windsurfing Committee meeting, the London Olympic Games were once again a key focus. On the subject of equipment for the Men’s and Women’s Windsurfer events in 2012, the Committee’s recommendation was to select the RS:X equipment used for the first time at the Beijing Games. In making their decision, the Committee pointed to solid base the class has now established and its wide spread across nations.

Ceri- Can the FOD proposal pass without the support of the Windsurfing Committee???


10th November 2008 (20:12:55) - ceri (ceri at offshore-sports dot co dot uk), wrote :
yes - Council make the decisions ; other committees make recommendations. Council often overturn major recommendations eg Multihull (tornado) out against wishes of the powerful Events Committee


12th November 2008 (14:38:03) - Anonym, wrote :
any news?


12th November 2008 (15:44:43) - ceri (ceri at offshore-sports dot co dot uk), wrote :
yes - bad news ! Events and Equipment committees voted RSX


12th November 2008 (19:49:47) - anonym anymal, wrote :
so FOD class DURING FW events?


12th November 2008 (19:50:16) - anonym anymal, wrote :
so FOD class DURING FW events?




12th November 2008 (21:03:10) - Anonym, wrote :
I have the same question: What will happen to FOD now?



12th November 2008 (21:03:51) - Anonym, wrote :
FOD to save FW!! That's the way to go.


13th November 2008 (08:17:25) - GRE-969 (frey at acci dot gr), wrote :
after that desicion FOD has no future any more because no FW sailor would compromized with this equipment.
Instad of be sad we should see what new kind of offer we should make in '12 for '16. to not have again bad results.

gre - 969


13th November 2008 (10:26:48) - ceri (ceri at offshore-sports dot co dot uk), wrote :
i think it is too early to make a decision about FOD. Of course the equipment is "class legal" and can participate in any FW event or championship.



13th November 2008 (22:12:57) - Anonym, wrote :
Was the FOD board registered in the beginning of this year to be formula class legal?
If not- how is it able to race in the formula class?


13th November 2008 (23:06:49) - Anonym, wrote :
Friends,
Reading your discussion and even being contrary to FOD, I understand and respect that you are defending what you believe is the best for our sport.
Since the decision of the board tomorrow is really opposed to FOD, now is the time for you to create a strong class, alternative to the exorbitant costs of FW and in the next 4 years reinforce all the arguments that led you to the proposal of the FOD for 2012.
Our sport should leave strengthened, no matter if this or that class has the Olympic status, but as a whole should be more oriented to growth and improvement.
Regards



14th November 2008 (13:42:01) - maurison, wrote :
ISAF Council Set To Decide 2012 Olympic Sailing Equipment .. i hope they decide fod but i think rsx win..


14th November 2008 (16:28:06) - Anonym, wrote :
FoD board = starboard 162 , so should be class legal?



14th November 2008 (16:31:18) - Anonym, wrote :
any FOD boards for sail since FW guys wont sail them



14th November 2008 (16:31:30) - Koen, wrote :
A missed opportunity!
No big problem for FW but a mist opportunity for olympic windsurfing.
Maybe even better for FW, now no competition with FOD




14th November 2008 (16:45:19) - Anonym, wrote :
a miss for starboard you mean


14th November 2008 (16:46:59) - Anonym, wrote :
the whole campaign was full of lies lies ies the isaf is not that stupid



14th November 2008 (16:50:58) - Anonym, wrote :
if FOD got chosen it would have been the same people but different board those olympic sailors are pretty good they have been windsurfing for years the guys with big heads from FW would have got arse spanked and then worked out dicks arnt that big and gone back to FW which is a development Class


14th November 2008 (19:07:54) - Anonym, wrote :
Whew, thank goodness.
Now the proper solution can be given some effort. Simply lobby and educate to get the FW class recognized as a legitimate candidate for the next selection. Much easier than trying to sell vaporware which was invented to solve a problem that exists only because of an arbitrary interpretation of the selection requirement. Wasted energy, all around on this FOD idea. FW class strength can continue and as a natural flow, and the best course racing can make a rare exciting appearance at the sideshow of the Olympics, with its integrity preserved. The mere fact that FOD and FW were often interpreted as the same thing is a major reason why the FOD proposal appeared so full of holes. The FOD class, as practiced never existed. Neither did the RS-X and we all see how that turned out. If FW has Olympic intent, simply show the reality of the the class and the Olympics will invite FW to make an appearance. If not, it is not a party the FW class should want to go to anyway.


14th November 2008 (19:23:53) - ceri (ceri at offshore-sports dot co dot uk), wrote :
Right up to, and including, the Council decision, there was nothing to suggest that anything other than a one design piece of equipment would be selected for boards and single handed dinghy.
There were no lies in the FOD campaign.
We have time to reflecxt on the way forward.


15th November 2008 (02:52:39) - Anonym, wrote :
"there was nothing to suggest that anything other than a one design piece of equipment would be selected for boards and single handed dinghy."
But it does not have to be that way. Other classes are considered One Design even though they come from many manufacturers and have variations within that class.

Why not simply call the current FW class "FW One Design".
Then it could be a simple discussion over naming. It makes sense within the windsurfing context because freestyle and wave riding and speed have no measurement rule whereas FW is very tightly controlled and has resulted in no set of equipment being any better than the others. Then the decision is only a symantic one, hopefully common sense would prevail and the choice would be obvious. Solutions need to start with...
"Are we asking the right question or trying to solve the right problem?" That hasn't happened yet. There is no reason to dumb down FW to meet Olympic requirements, just prove to them there requirements are wrong through education. The FW class has more than enough evidence to prove it. If it falls on deaf ears what can you do. You can't blame an organization (Olympic) for a disease anymore than you could blame a child. You can however explain to them that this is your medicine, you can take it if you like and get well or continue to suffer while the other kids are outside playing and having fun



15th November 2008 (08:09:06) - Anonym, wrote :
even the name was wrong formula One Design come on guys wake up. you think any one can sail in olympics .the way your starboard staff were talking 1600000000000000000000 boards were sold .How many turned up for the world champs. No event got cancelled we will not mention that 4 races are needed for a series and with a fleet of 30 1 start short races it is easy to fit a championship in 7 Days shall we talk about korea ?


15th November 2008 (08:14:26) - Anonym, wrote :
what was the voting result again. that is a fact not fiction. please explain what a olympic sailor is no lies please, i dont think allison sailed in a olympics but it stated olympic sailor . no lies that is a fact




15th November 2008 (12:17:51) - Anonym, wrote :
please do not make formula an olympic class- it will kill the class


16th November 2008 (09:53:06) - Anonym, wrote :
ceri and others- maybe now that you've had some time to reflect on why the FOD failed to get selected, you can comment on the process and what better ways to replace the broken system we have now!



18th November 2008 (15:27:15) - Mathieu Colin de Verdiere, wrote :
Best is to keep away from Olympics. I am really not convinced and it generates good human values.






18th November 2008 (15:28:16) - Mathieu Colin de Verdiere, wrote :
I meant...
Best is to keep away from Olympics. I am really not convinced it generates good human values.



18th November 2008 (20:07:13) - Mistral, wrote :
back to the old traditional Mistral NOW! lol!


19th November 2008 (15:00:09) - anonyanimal, wrote :
FOD/FW Light and heavy



19th November 2008 (15:00:32) - anonymanimal, wrote :
FOD/FW Light and heavy





22nd November 2008 (20:24:59) - math cdv, wrote :
Me again... I did some thinking, and that is what came out.

Well the games dates from ancient greece and were brought back in 1896. At those times the geopolitics on the planet made it very much country dominated; (world wars, cold wars). Still there is a strong sense of nationalism going with the games now a days I feel, which made sense in the old days.
But now a days we have global economy, global warming with global ice melting and probably global sea rise,global financial crisis, global internet, global pretty much everywhere and of course global low cost airlines. Who cares about nationalism? A few. But there is the football and rugby world cup for that! Not dinghy sailing or windsurfing, isn't it? Even now a days the president of america as strong african roots. It is very much global.
May be we create an alternative to olympics games, something like Unviversal Games of Humanity. Something not for nation, politics, massive atletes funding, manufacturer dictatorship, elite, TV but just something for the human of this planet poor and rich developped and undevelloped equal at the start.

I felt this was a bigger aspect, but it just another point of view.

To conclude the proposed sports for the universal games of humanity are:

Beach volley and formula windsurfing. hahaaha