From the Feedback - 11/1/01

We'll be publishing the choicest moments from the stuff you send us - but each contribution may or may not be subjected to a rigorous process of editing for language, taste and imparted wisdom. And of course, as they so famously say at the start of anything like this, the opinions expressed in From the Feedback do not necessarily reflect those of the management, staff or investors of madforsport.com. Instead, and much more importantly, they reflect your views.


From Jerry Wale - RS Association rules committee,
Have you tried the Powercleat? (And is it allowed on the RS400) The rules would allow it, if the new cleat is of a similar type and performs the same function as the cam cleat it would be replacing. There is no doubt it performs the same function, but of a "similar type" - there must be a doubt there. Thinking about it further it probably is not close enough to be of a similar type to be legal without rules committee approval. This is of course my own view and could be amended when I have referred the question to the rules committee.

From Bob Diefendorf,
What do you think of Tony Bullimore`s efforts? Your first paragraph explains why you have very little right to comment on Mr.Bullimore's efforts, especially in a forum that is supposed to be professionally written by experts. Mr. Bullimore undertook, and has succeeded in raising the funds, obtaining a boat, and starting The Race. That in and of itself is an accomplishment; one that you seem so easy to excuse and belittle with aplomb. His selection of a tried and proven design, one that has worked in the past, is sound reasoning. And one that may yet prove to be the winning choice. Especially when compared to the more radical, unproven designs that have/are running into fundamental problems.

As with all the other entrants in The Race, Mr. Bullimore has to deal with its problems, and also answer to his various backers, sponsors, and funding groups. In your myopic view, the entrants in the other races you mention appear not to have that problem. You might want to ask some of the entrants in those events who's paying their bills. Since you are acting as the voice of British sailing, if British sailors are so interested in The Race, and having an entrant, and how that entrant is received by the world, perhaps those British sailors, and especially you, should have put up an entry. Organized, funded, and built a proper British vessel; properly presented to the world as a British entry. Doing so would then let you show off British sailing. But you didn't.

Mr. Bullimore has come through with an entry, at the 11th hour, and is competing. He came forward, put his neck and money out, and is in The Race. With a proven boat, a proven design, and just might win it. I wonder what your attitude will be if Mr.Bullimore's efforts not only wind up surviving the coming months, but prevail.

This is one sailing race that has hit the popular press over here [USA] with more than a little bit of interest. Something that is usually reserved for the America's Cup. That, in and of itself, is one of the prime reasons for all of the entrants to start and stay in The Race.

It's carpe diem time. It's the first one. All future no-holds-barred races like this one will probably never gather as much general public interest and publicity as this one. The first is the first, and all involved will be remembered, talked about/written about. Those factors will establish firm foundations for any future campaigns. Like it or not, that's exactly why Mr. Bullimore had to start, one way or another.

From A W Banks
If you have an opinion, then why not voice it here? A lot has been written on madforsailing.com and elsewhere about the damage that Team Philips and Tony Bullimore's efforts may or may not have caused to the efforts of so-called 'professional' sailors seeking commercial sponsors for events such as the America's Cup. If you look at the last two really high profile Whitbread campaigns run by 'professional sailors' in Britain; Silk Cut and Rothmans, can we honestly say that they did better in presenting British sailing in a positive light?

Both these campaigns consumed vast amounts of money whilst failing to get the public behind them in the way Goss managed, and neither campaign delivered on results either. Too much has been made of the fact that Goss and Bullimore sit outside the sailing establishment, when the sailing establishment is quite capable of scaring off corporate sponsors without anyone's help.

From Tony Hammer,
Regarding Bullimore's participation in The Race. Mark Chisnell suggests that Bullimore should not have participated in The Race because she was unprepared and that it does not reflect favourably on Great Britain because he can only win by being the sole survivor of The Race. Has Chisnell forgotten about Robin Knox-Johnston's win aboard Suhali in the first solo circumnavigation race in 1968/69? I'm not sure if Chisnell is old enough to recall the event but I assure him that nobody at the time suggested that the fact that all the other boats were faster, detracted from what he had accomplished in any way at all: in fact to the contrary. Should it be any different in Bullimore's case? In my opinion, should he be the sole survivor, it represents an even greater achievement (busy booking holidays in Cape Town, Auckland and Rio to see all the other entrants putting in for repairs).