Published and Unpublished Letters

Scuttlebutt 2571 (the letter that started the thread)

* From Stevan Johnson: Please, can someone, provide a definitive defense of keeping the Finn, (a rarely sailed, slow, expensive, heavily weight reliant and long out-designed - I mean, really, a flat plate center board? - clunker) in the Olympics as opposed to the Tornado or a Women's skiff? I guess my bias is showing, but shouldn't the Olympics be about the future, not the past?

Scuttlebutt 2572

* From Jim Champ (re, letter in #2571 on why the Finn remains in the Olympics) What would make it difficult for me to chuck it out, if I had a say, is that according to Class Association official returns to ISAF, the old dinosaur is sailed in about 25% more countries than any multihull class and about 250% more countries than any Women's skiff class, and the IOC are criticizing sailing for not being inclusive across a range of countries. You wouldn't catch me sailing one, but that's not the point. It’s only rarely sailed if you don't compare it to any performance racing multihull class or any women's skiff.

* From Peter Harken: On why we keep the "flat plate old clunker" Finn in the Olympics, I’ll open a "Butt can of worms", and reply by saying that somehow the old clunker has graduated more of the very best coarse racing sailors of the modern era than any other one class. Guys like Paul Elvstrom and Russell Coutts are only two famous examples of many world renowned Finn graduates. The modern America’s Cup has more former Finnsters helming those babies than any other class graduates. Another Olympic "old clunker" - the Star - is right up there with the Finn in producing the best of the best. Those two old, old classes require a special physical and mental toughness that has endured through the years from the early 1900s to constantly producing most of the finest of all around coarse racing sailors on an ongoing basis. Of course, this is in the male department only, so excuse me please, ladies! I await the responses with helmet on head!

* From Andrew Troup, Christchurch, New Zealand: Stevan Johnson asks, in relation to the Finn, “Shouldn't the Olympics be about the future, not the past?” Ummmmm, let me see.... like throwing the discus, the javelin, running with torches, and so on? Seriously though, unless we're talking about a technology contest, like F1, where it should be the cars on the podium, I get a little tired by the repetition of variations on this mantra.

Usually asserted as though it were self-evident, it always boils down to "only the latest, greatest and fastest technology is valid", and is applied indiscriminately in competition of almost any sort. Anything incapable of reaching escape velocity from the earth's gravitational field can be trumped when this simplistic, facile, 'more is more' argument is wielded.

Scuttlebutt 2573

* From Glenn Selvin, President, U.S. Finn Association: (In response of Stevan Johnson's wondering about the Finn in #2571) Calling it a boat that is rarely used? I'm sorry, Stevan, but please check your facts. At the Master's North American's two weeks ago, we had 35 boats out racing. At the U.S. Olympic Trials last fall, we were, I believe, the largest class, with 44 boats out. On the club level, as well as on the Championship level, Finn sailing in North America is at an all time high. As for being expensive? Hmmm... let me do the math. Lasers are cheap, and are dumpster bound after just a few years of hard work. I've got a five year old Finn, and its still a stiff, and very bullet proof little boat in great shape. Oh, and a throw back to the past? See if you can find a Laser with a carbon fiber wing mast, or even a traveler for that matter. And when you're all done? Try sailing a Finn, and see if you can hang with the best!

Scuttlebutt 2574

* From Brian Raney: (regarding the Glenn Selvin’s comments in #2573) 1) Entry to the Laser US Olympic Trials was limited to 33 boats due to the equipment being provided (see point 3); 2) My six-year-old Laser isn't in the dumpster, and is as stiff as the day I bought it; 3) Like your carbon wing mast? It means you're not sailing true one-design. And true one-design allowed for the Lasers/ Radials to be provided equipment, not a mix and match of sails and spars and hulls.

I've got no beef with the Finn sailors I know, and think it's a fine boat. Been tempted to play in one at times. Please don't drag the Laser into your rant, though.

UNPUBLISHED LETTERS

* From Ian Lineberger: In response to Mr. Selvin's comments regarding the Finn versus the Laser. The Finn class did have the largest turn-out in the Olympic Trials. However the Laser was restricted in the amount of boats allowed unlike the Finn. Laser sailors have to qualify to sail instead of just showing up. Having coached the Finn Trials in Newport Beach last October, I could not help noticing that there were more than a few "tourist" sailors competing that were sometimes a leg behind the leaders. I also disagree with his assertion that the Laser is "dumpster bound" after a few years. My well used 1999 hull (167000) won the Miami Olympic Class Regatta in 2006 with UK sailor Paul Goodison at the helm. Not quite dumpster material yet. Personally I think the Finn is great boat and deserves to remain an Olympic Class.

* From Kevin Carey, San Diego, CA: My first reaction is to say that the author bashing the Finn has no concept of the Olympic ideal, the attributes of the Finn, or the skill and physical abilities need to compete at the International level. But that would not be fair. But neither is it fair to consider the catamaran and the heavy weight single-handed dinghy as mutually exclusive as entrants in the 2012 games.

I assure you that the editor will no doubt receive numerous letters extolling the virtues of the Finn. I would instantly concur. But rather, a quick review of the names of the sailing greats who have emerged from the Finn class demonstrates that no other Olympic class has such an extensive resume.

* From Scott Mason, US Finn Association Secretary: Mr. Johnson sends one more naive letter bashing the Finn, and by correlation exclusion of any class for larger sailors in the Games. Absent the heavyweight men's dinghy or a men's keelboat, there are no sailors larger than 80kg competing in the Games. This would exclude a large percentage of athletes from our sport. As to Finn-bashing, I challenge Mr. Johnson to propose equipment for these disciplines that provides more of a challenge to the athletes that the equipment currently being used in these disciplines. Anyone who bashes a Finn (which by the way has a larger US membership than any other current Olympic class save Laser, Radial or Star) ought to try sailing a Finn off wind in 20k+ conditions. I support multi-hulls (my son is the 2008 representative to ISAF Youth World's in multi-hull), but a misinformed and negative bash on Olympic classes that don't serve ones personal interests does nothing to help the sport. If you want to impact ISAF, try logical and persuasive arguments that benefit the sport.

* From Glenn Hansen, Hansen Rigging: Stevan Johnson asks why the Finn in the Olympics, and questions it's selection for a number of reasons (weight of the boat, cost, bla bla bla). Well, in response I must say the Finn belongs in the Olympics because the boat incorporates perfectly everything which is fine about sailing. Each mast is studied and refined and can be modified to fit the weight of the sailor and must still weigh in and balance within specs. Same with the sail and same with the hull. Look up Lamboley test and see what you find out. The centerboard, along with the mast butt and deck chocks, can all be moved to dial in the boat for different conditions. This fine tuning really makes a difference. The man who masters the Finn can master any boat anywhere using the same skills he has learned to make this boat go fast. Take a look sometime at who has taken the time to master this incredible boat: Russell Coutts, Dean Barker, Paul Elvstrom, Ben Ainslie, John Bertrand, Chris Law, Freddy Loof, Luca Devoti...the list is very, very long. If you were to ask any one of these individuals would they rather have spent their valuable time on a different platform, I am confident they would say no. The Finn is a real man's boat, and if we are to separate the men from the boys in the Olympics, then the Finn is the right tool to do so. Oh, I should mention that you probably should weigh in excess of 195 lbs before you try sailing one. Muscles help too.

* From Philip Toth: When reading Stevan Johnson's thoughts on the Finn (in #2571), the saying "empty heads have long tongues" comes to mind. One of the complaints is that it is rarely sailed...we had 40+ boats at the 2008 US Olympic trials, the most number of boats for any US trials class. Another complaint is that they are expensive. Finns are much cheaper than a 5o5, A-cat, and even a Star, and Finns only wear out one sail at a time. Also stated as a negative is that they are "heavily weight reliant". Not so again; look at any top finishers at a Finn regatta and you will see guys from all ages and weight ranges. If I am in Laser and heaven forbid a few pounds heavier than the svelte cockpit jockeys that sail Lasers, all I can do is hope that the wind increases, where as in a Finn, if I am on the light side (and the same is true for even the old fat boys...sorry guys), I can change my style (hiking/ trim) and not appreciably lose much if anything at all. I have had Bob Carlen, who at 175lbs soaking wet and at the graceful age of 72+/-, go past me on a beat to windward. Any boat that allows that sort of competition is ok by me (I’m 6'7" 220lbs). These boats require you to be athletic and physical regardless of age....and after all is that not what the Olympics is all about...ATHLETICISM...not technology as some would have it.

* From Ross Emmans : While this isn't a definitive defense of why the Finn should be the Olympic Heavy Mens Singlehanded selection, here are some points to consider: Firstly, why have a Lightweight & Heavyweight division of the single handed division of Olympic sailing? Many sports have weight categories to create a level playing field (boxing, weight lifting wrestling, etc.), and in the singlehanded sailing events where a crew and helm weight can't be adjusted between each other, these divisions are needed..........a muscular and fit 215 lb helm cannot be competitive in most conditions with a 180 lb one in the Laser. As a large percent of the population of the sailing world ( fit men) weigh in at over 200lbs, it seems justified in having this population represented in singlehanded Olympic sailing.

Why the Finn to represent this division? In my opinion, there is no other singlehanded dinghy which requires the combination of physical strength,fitness & agility, the technical expertise to set it up, and the tactical acumen to make it perform at it's optimum.To me, these are all the attributes that one could hope for in determining an Olympic champion in a sailing class, particularly in this division. It doesn't follow that every sailing category use all out 'rocket ships' of the latest design, as long as the boats are uniform and only require the afore mentioned skills of the sailor to best his/ her competitor.

Yes the Finn is slower than the skiff, and faster than the Laser, but if it were absolute speed that determined the suitability of an Olympic selection, we would have ONLY multihulls involved........singlehanded , doublehanded, and so on and that would not be representative of what's sailed competitively in the world today. By the way, I STRONGLY believe that multihulls should be included in the Olympics, not because they are fast and supposedly exciting to watch, but because they represent a large percentage of what's sailed in competition today. I think we are misguided in our overall pursuit of potential media(TV) excitement to be generated by sailing competition, which never gets much more than short 'soundbites', or human interest stories at the Olympic level............there's just too much more 'interesting', emotional and comprehendible stuff available.

Anyway, a group of 7 or 8 top Finn sailors, half a boat leg apart, converging on a leeward mark in 25 knots of wind turns my crank anytime, and I bet would non sailors too. By the same token, a skiff, Finn or multihull, will all seem pretty tame to those not keenly interested in sailing tactics in 5-7knots of wind. It is no fluke that older boats like the Finn have been selected over and over, as they possess the qualities that are demanded to determine the best sailors in their division, the stability of their class(you underestimate the strength of the Finn class, which is very popular in Europe), and the endorsement of world class sailors, like Elvstrom, Schumann, Bertand and Coutts, to name a few, who have helped shape the racing world.

An Olympic class requires time to develop into a reliable vehicle for testing sailor athletes consistently, and to become part of the infrastructure in developing these elite sailors. The danger in rushing into new Olympic selections based on perceived or unproven popularity, can result in a class that never develops beyond that Olympic quadrennial and worse still destroy a more suitable one in the process : in one design racing, numbers are very important. One other thing; the Finn is heavy at over 300 lbs, but it is this weight that allows builders to construct a competitive boat that lasts. It could be much lighter, but for the marginal increase in overall speed, the huge increase in cost and the decreased longevity to say nothing of making older boats (which are competitive) obsolete, it's hardly worth it. I suggest you try the Finn before labeling it a "clunker" ......... it will tax all your sailing/racing skills, reward you with a ride like no other boat can provide, and beat the cr** out of you if you don't pay attention in a blow.