Your feedback

The Grand Final and what needs to be done to make our sport more entertaining

If you would like to join in the debate email us your views here

From Nigel Wakefield, Lark National Champion writes:

Some interesting points in the previous articles. We all agree that the more media achieved, the better for the sport. A balance must be struck between making our sport accessible to media/cameras and compromising the quality of events. Few sailors would argue against setting marks closer to shores, camera boats and onboard cameras, if coverage and peripheral benefits increase significantly. However, I read with shock about the "Grand Final" experiment at Hyeres. This trully awful experiment is an example of trying to 'mediarise' sailing for the benefit of a few viewers at the expense of the sport.

Will the marathon format change? I propose that the race is split into two parts. All competitors run the first 26 miles, and the first three qualify for the final stage. For the final stage, the race is restarted the next day and is the last quarter of a mile, run as a sprint into the stadium and over the finish line. This way the media get a 'nice close race' without the boring bit at the start. This may sound laughable, but is akin to altering sailing events to a new format at the end to decide the medallists.

At some point the competitors and organisers have to recognise that sailing is not really a televisual sport for the masses, and jumping through hoops for TV companies is futile. A sailing regatta is a equivalent to a long distance running event over many days. Watching a boat eek out a one boat length lead to tack and cross another after five minutes is not riveting and never will be, and yet that is how events are won and lost. Boats often overtake by splitting and separating upwind and downwind, an overtake at a one mile separation isn't televisual. Because of the timescale of races and whole events, sailing championships scored conventionally will probably never get more than
the highlights broadcast. Additionally, sailing events are constrained by weather, which makes them harder to schedule. For these reasons, Ben Ainslie and Shirley Robertson don't share the same status as Dame Kelly Holmes.

I wholeheartedly agree with Will Howden. Come the last day of an event, the leader wants to take his hard earnt lead of a few points into the last races. Similarly, the guy in fifth will want to have a pop at winning, even if he has five points to make up. There also becomes a clear conflict of interest between competitors and organisers.

My concern is that the format of sailing events, that has developed and evolved over many years, will be compromised in a misguided attempt to attract media interest and the associated money. One of these 'circus' style event deciders will become standard and will then filter down from Olympic level to national level. At national level, where there is virtually no media interest and no umpires, such a format will be wholly unsuitable.

I've helped organise many fleet and team racing events. The primary objective has always been to provide an event such that the best team is given ample opportunity to win. This sounds obvious but can easily be overlooked. When the format of an event is being discussed, surely this should remain the primary objective, it will be a sad day when optimising media interest is more important than the best sailors winning.


Mike Arstall writes:

Media coverage of our sport is essential if we are to attract young talent and they are the lifeblood of sailing.

With so many different activities and sports competing for our attention it is vital to have a good profile. The old days of the enthusiastic amateur and the purist somewhat taciturn approach to publicity are gone for all sports and sailing needs to move with the times.

For many years I have bemoaned the poor coverage of sailing in the media, particularly on TV and especially in Britain where football rules supreme. I also find most printed media coverage boring, with too much attention to the results on a leg by leg basis, rather than trying to capture the atmosphere and excitement of the event .

Done properly sailing can be really exciting television if there is a good combination of on board and offboard images and an enthusiastic and knowledgeable commentator. I am reminded of the early BBC coverage of the Whitbread when Peter Blake and Grant Dalton where thrashing along in sight of each other after 6000+ miles of sailing - superb stuff, and now the likes of Volvo and Audi have really arranged some exciting visual events, not to mention the [Nokia] Oops Cup with its huge multihulls racing in confined waters with spectators all around - impressive.

Sailing can be very visually exciting but it takes more effort, however done properly it offers more opportunities for great visuals that capture the imagination than many other sports so could attract big sponsorship and advertising money. Big screen coverage at major events is brilliant and with a bit of editing it could be retained for later broadcast on the Webb or on TV which offers sponsors even better value.

We also need to get away from an exclusive big boat format, as otherwise it becomes a bit like F1 motor racing - boring for the most part and beyond the reach of the majority. Dinghies and small Cats are the ultimate thrill in a blow without spending a fortune and some of the images of the Skiff and Tornado racing are brilliant, even the humble Laser looks great when the racing is close in a blow, so why not some Web based movies to capture that and reach out to a wider audience ?

Any movie format created for the Webb could be picked up by TV companies or sold as DVD's - how about pay per view on Sky? There is no free lunch today but sailing doesn't need charity, it has the potential to reward sponsors and advertisers amply provided the sailors and organisers are prepared to embrace the technology available to capture just what it is that makes us so passionate about our sport and reach out to a larger audience.

In a nut shell we need to change the focus of sailing coverage from a small number of aficionados to the greater public and show them why it is such an exciting and challenging sport, only then will we attract the sponsors that are essential if we want the sport to grow.

Coverage must be stimulating and understandable to non sailors, with the emphasis on the excitement more than the technicalities. Enthusiasm, enthusiasm and more enthusiasm is what we need from commentators and camera crews alike, with of course a proper respect for the competitors, sponsors and organisers.

TV companies with their narrow blinkered view on what interests the public and advertisers are dinosaurs, apart from a few notable exceptions like Thalassa and occasional BBC coverage - Webb based media is the future and once we have created the momentum then the TV companies will follow on behind.


From Richard Gladwell...

I was a little appalled to see the Grand Final experiment at Hyeres and hopefully this will be 'deep-sixed' before too long. The report in TheDailySail said it all.

I understand the trial was repeated in Medemblik, but have seen little coverage.

I have read the San Diego Protocol paper from the Mid-Year Meeting, which I would commend all to read http://www.sailing.org/meetings/2005midyear/papers/EC_3.pdf it is not the ultimate solution, but is a big step along the right path.

There are a few points in the SD Protocol paper that I would like to comment on:

1. I think the media plan should be extended to other events and classes – eg the Int 14 worlds were held off Takapuna - they got some excellent footage and every race was replayed in the club after the event. It is not hard to get this material up onto the web via a webcast. We need to develop a broader front for the sport outside just the Olympics and AC.

2. I was recently involved in coverage of the major NZ rowing regatta (did the website content and shot images and did reports). They also ran a Superscreen ashore and had a webcast coming live off the water which was able to be viewed by anyone anywhere in the world on near TV quality pictures in full screen or smaller mode, plus a live commentary. You can see this at http://www.rowingnz.org.nz/regattas/mc05/maadi.php?sp=latest.txt and follow the links. I did some follow-up on the cost and logistics of this coverage it is relatively cheap, and certainly within the budget for any event. We need to get away from the view that TV is God and use the webcast and live commentary as well as other media. Certainly with this website it was obvious that the media were feeding from it looking for stories of local interest and we tried to facilitate this as much as we could, including free images of their local heroes. The coverage this event received was quite staggering, and it had been orientated to generate media interest without compromising the quality of the sport (in fact it was the most competitive Maadi ever, and I am sure will help reverse the appalling rower retention past the age of 16 that exists in the sport). The media coverage was also sufficient to be able to justify the sponsorship fee of over $100,000 per year - which is far and away the highest for any school sport in NZ. The webcast would run quite OK on broadband or dial-up which is a big advance.

3. When setting these plans in place we need to be very aware of how the package as a whole works and isn’t just angled for one particular media interest or aspect. As ISAF has the rights for all sailing this type of coverage would not be hard to implement and it definitely doesn’t compromise any other media activities – with rowing we also got free and pay TV coverage, plus live radio commentary plus a lot of print media coverage. Rowing is not a particularly high profile sport in NZ outside the Olympics, and didn’t have any “stars” at school level prior to this event, but it certainly does now. And that creates individual sponsorship and funding opportunities as these guys move onto the international circuit later this year.

4.As for “What does NOT work” (see the Protocol) - I think the Grand Final being trialled is a classic example. I can’t believe that any serious sailing journalist would advocate this type of event. What is exciting about three boats hammering away in a so-called final? Look at a Gold Fleet in a 49er Worlds - 20 boats - the best in the world - far more exciting to watch, and with plenty of action that can be beamed ashore. The other point is that it is not so much the audience ashore who are important, but the worldwide audience – who have to be able to watch the event either live, or in replay at a time convenient to them. The media get used to this type of coverage and it becomes a good newsource for those who cannot justify the cost of sending a journalist or engaging a stringer.

5. The points in the Protocol about most sailing events being media hostile are right – including officials and competitors. Rowing has a similar ambivalence/hostility, but the media just have to push in and it is over to the umpires to control the balance, without being overly conservative. With high powered lenses it is possible to get good shots without being that close, however you have to have a good platform to shoot from and be very aware of the light, and the interference on the sailors. The points later on in the Protocol about having good drivers are very pertinent. Another way of getting good still and video shots is to have a media boat parked in the course leg and the competitors sail around it – which is what we did without any issues in the 14’s. Again with proper positioning, there is minimum of interference.

6. The competition formats for sailing need to be aligned to some other sport formats. Rowing use a progression system of heats, repechage, semi-finals and finals which you can manipulate to create either A, B C and D finals, or just have an A Final only. The good part about this format is that it creates a number of “cuts” (like Golf) and a competitor must make the “cut” to get to the next level. Yes it is changing the game from the way it has been played - however the progression system is well understood by the non-sailing media, and there is some real drama as high profile competitors get close to, or don’t make 'the cut': Then you have you medal event on the last day or two and have the everyone competing in an A Final. Simple, eh?

7. The web does allow print media in particular to cover events very cheaply with high quality coverage. This extends to good photo libraries (free to use). For regatta websites, I would also look at doing a section for each country - for the competitor/manager/supporter/MNA to update and run during the event, asd well as the overall reports which are the current vogue. Certainly as far as the competitors are concerned they should write some comment on the regatta/race each night, or do some audio which can be listened/read by public and the media who can then create their own stories – audio, video and print. You still need the overall reports but the media country specific approach also needs to be seriously considered. With laptops and the internet, it is possible for people to do this from their hotel room or accommodation without needing a media room/centre. The coverage I did for the Maadi Cup was done from a dining hall 15kms away from the regatta site in the middle of a farm and with no cell-phone coverage- and using gear that I could fit into a back-pack. It was actually easier working in this type of environment than the some of the more salubrious, purpose built Media Centres. What is required, and this is where ISAF comes in again, is a common web template and sign-in system so that individual authors can promote material directly onto the website regardless of whether they are located - be it once a night, or every hour. We did the Maadi site using freeware – again it doesn’t have to be an expensive ponderous solution.

8. As for the on-board coverage I would emphasise audio as much as the video. On-board media worked well in the AC, but the weight of the gear is a big factor. In covering dinghy events I would rate more highly good on the water photos/video and an excellent audio commentary (at the PJ Montgomery level – who was used also in the rowing) who can tell people in words what is happening and make it exciting. Some commentators are very dreary and just because you have been a good sailor doesn’t make you a good commentator – you have to be able to tell it like it is and not worry about what your old sailing mates are going to say.

ISAF has to realise that it holds most of the cards and is in a unique position to make things happen - ISAF has to develop a model that is simple and goes from event to event without requiring massive resources and needs to work in conjunction with event organisers. The centre for the coverage has to be www.sailing.org as well as the event website (they can cross link OK, and with the rowing we had three sites doing coverage who all promoted each other). With the regatta coverage portal at ISAF you can generate sponsorship opportunities to pay the costs on a year in year out basis. The ISAF portal approach should be more attractive to sponsors, giving ongoing exposure, rather then just have the event only impact of a single event website.

Progress is being made, however there is a long way to go.

Good Sailing!

From Tornado sailor Will Howden:

I was one of the sailors to take part in this series, unfortunately not coming out on top of the results. Leigh [McMillan] and I were in third after the fleet racing until we went into the semi-finals, we lost a race and were eliminated.

The first thing to say is the sport is in need of making its self more media friendly, encouraging spectators and TV to become a part of sailing. As a professional sailor we need this not only to help attract personal and team sponsors but to improve the vision of the sport. I was a coach at the Olympics and was appalled at the way the media personnel were handled, and the quality of the racing for the Tornados was pathetic, we had 3-4 knots of wind from all directions, and were using the spinnaker on the supposed windward legs! We are in real danger that Beijing could be a complete flop. As a full time sailor I love the sport but watching it in its current form is boring, especially if there is no wind!! So we rally have two issues, the first is to have good wind, and then get the racing format correct!

My feeling is ISAF, sailors and the media together need to come up with a format for the racing, and we as an Olympic class need to attract a sponsor to help cover the cost of the filming, air time etc, I do accept that for the Tornado class this will be a lot easier than say a Laser of Finn due to the visual attractiveness of the class. The Tornado class has been talking for a long time to sell all the jibs to a class sponsor to help improve the budgets available for more media!

So something has to be done, but what? I have been involved with and series winner for the last two years of the Volvo Champions Race. This is a series in Germany with 12 top Tornado and 49er teams. The racing is close to the shore (we have had the windward mark 20 meters from the beach), and although the wind is shifty and variable the racing is good fun and generally with the series of 15 races each lasting 20 min you see the top teams winning again and again. This format of racing is not only good for the spectators but also the TV. At one event we have 2 hours of live TV on the Saturday and Sunday on a program equivalent to our Grandstand. They had 12 cameras around the course with one on top of a crane over the windward mark. We were lucky and had great wind, and the feedback was excellent! So it is possible but seems to be a chicken and egg situation with regards to the funding for the air time and attracting big class sponsors, we are lucky and should thank Volvo for supporting this racing in Germany!!

So this works well and could be something for the Olympics with a limited number of boats! Where in lies the problem, as for the Holland Regatta we had 50 Tornados and it would not be practical for this many entries. Once you have this many boats the course is so big we end up with huge separation at times 1.5 miles, 12-15 min beats and its not interesting to watch!

Therefore we need some form of elimination series to get down to the top boats, which is where the problem currently exists. Having been involved with the process and lost I am still a firm believer that something along these lines needs to be investigated but we are being used as lab rats, and for many of the Olympic sailors these regattas are our livelihood!

For the time being whilst experimenting with different ideas I think we finish the fleet racing as normal and these results go to our ISAF ranking points and federations for funding etc. This would eliminate a lot of the criticism we currently have, a lot of the comments were along the line "I've worked hard for 11 races and only 6 points off first with one race to sail, and now there is no way I can even get 3rd!"

We should then look at a separate series where there is some form of extra racing for the TV and spectators. We are all there to race and would not object (especially for TV and prize money) to doing 3/4 short 15 min races at the end of the day or end of the regatta. This sailing you can sell to a class sponsor, this sponsorship goes towards prize money, media costs and event organisation. So how about you take the top 6 boats from each day, they have three races and the winner from this mini series each day gets a bonus point. SPA always took the top boat from each day and that sailor went into a one design fleet race for prize money, it was for fun but was very entertaining! You do this for all the days and the final day the top 6 boats go into a final which is an elimination series, last man standing action. Where in the Holland regatta the boat with a bonus point lost the race, it lost one of its lives, this would be the same but the 2nd to last boat would be eliminated to keep things moving! This then helps with keeping to a schedule which is important for the TV, you then end up with a match race for the top position! Still very important is the wind, for the semi-final we had 25 knots gusting 30 and by all accounts it was spectacular to watch, the final there was 3-4 knots and very boring!

Once we have come up with a solution that we can all agree to this can then be implemented into the overall results! We have 3 years to get this right, just about every sailor has a view and and opinion as how to run the series, there will always be some criticism. As sailors the one thing that we should remember is that ISAF are likely to use a system like this for the Olympics so let's not be negative about it and find a format that we are all happy with, and then hope we get some wind!

If you would like to join in the debate email us your views here