What (and whose) Dinghies Are Best For College Sailing? Re-posted

Editors Note: Sail1Design exists to serve the youth, high school, collegiate, and one-design sailing communities. The observations in this letter were received, and published, in the genuine interest of what is best for the sailors who compete. While those non-sailors who support sailing (administrators, board members, coaches, umpires, etc) are important, and do good work, by FAR the most important part of what we do are the things we do for the sailors themselves, especially young ones. Our organizations should seek, without fail, to make sure they exist for that purpose.
Sail1Design stands behind our op/ed piece published earlier. To get to the main points, a shorter version is hereby republished. 
We were, however, remiss in not allowing the ICSA a chance, before the fact, to take part in the conversation. We have added a question/answer section from Mitch Brindley, ICSA President. Sail1Design apologizes for that. As stated, again and again, our mission what’s best for youth and one-design sailors. We feel this is a worthy discussion. Our interview with Mitch is at the end of this piece.
Sailing evolves, like everything else. Over the years, the Intercollegiate Yacht Racing Association [ICYRA] (now, of course, known as the Intercollegiate Sailing Association [ICSA]) has stewarded college and institutional sailing, and made needed changes to stay up with, and improve the game. The National Semi-Finals/Finals format, the growth of team racing, match racing, season practice limits, etc. have all been just a few of the thoughtful changes made by a caring, dedicated, and volunteer organization.
In 2012, the ICSA  made a decision to standardize and simplify the equipment used at ICSA National Championships, awarding one supplier, LaserPerformance (formerly known as Vanguard) the sole and exclusive right, for 7 years (it has been reported) to supply dinghies (c420’s, z420’s, and cFJ’s) for the double-handed national championships. This agreement dovetailed with the launch of the LaserPerformance Z420; a higher performance, upgraded and modified design of the original c420 (manufacturer claims 50 lbs lighter and 40% stiffer than the standard scv420). Better boats, standardized; in theory, not a bad idea. Given recent events at the 2016 San Diego College Sailing Nationals (it has been widely reported that the FJ fleet there had significant problems and most boats were destroyed after the event) and others, however, should this agreement be reviewed, and again scrutinized?
Quite clearly this relationship is, and was, a sponsorship agreement, one designed to bring revenue to the ICSA. Sponsorship agreements are perfectly fine, quite common, and with high-profile college athletics, they can also be quite lucrative. The ICSA has every right to solicit and accept sponsorship dollars, for the better of the sport, and most importantly, for the sailors that compete. The ICSA has numerous sponsorship agreements that do just that. In theory, this agreement with LaserPerformance (LP) could have done the same thing, and in theory, it would be a win-win: ICSA gets needed revenue to manage, support, market, and administer college sailing, and LaserPerformance gets their boats at the highest profile institutional sailing events in the world, the college sailing semi-finals and nationals.
How could this go wrong? Critics argue the following (these are well documented):

•  Eliminating Venue Diversity. For one, critics immediately argued that by shutting out all other builders, schools without LP boats would, unfairly so, have no chance at hosting Nationals Semi-finals, or Finals. This is a well documented fact, please ask us for detail if you wish. What do you think?
• Less Competition = Less Quality At a Higher Price. Next, by eliminating all other builders from producing boats for the Nationals, one runs the risk of stifling competition, and removing incentive for other builders to supply and support the 420 and FJ. We asked Adam Smith. Competition is usually good for business, especially for the consumer, and tends to have the added benefit of holding costs down for the consumer. What do you think?
• Know Your Sport. Sailing is a unique sport, and one that thrives on diversity. Unlike basketball, our “playing fields” are just not alike. To explain, each venue is different, and each program has different needs, strengths, and abilities. Tech Dinghies, Larks, different versions of the FJ, Fireflies, Turbo 420’s, Z420’s etc. are chosen and used at venues, usually, for good reasons. Larks seem to fit the Mystic Lake very well, for example, just as 420’s are great for Brown, while Tech Dinghies, among other boats, make sense for MIT. Some schools benefit from square top mainsails, others not. This attention to environment should not be, in any way, discouraged by a sponsorship agreement. In that light, the mandated new 420, the “z420”, has not won universal approval as the ideal dinghy for all of college sailing, everywhere. What do you think?

Now, four years later, how has this agreement impacted college sailing? What happened at the San Diego Nationals?*  Please write in and tell us. We heard that most of the fleet was destroyed after the event.
Has the sponsorship been a success? In other words, and in the bottom line, in the four years of this agreement, what has been the return to shareholders (college sailors)?  What do you think?
This is also not a knock on LaserPerformance, out-of-hand. If they are clearly the best option for sailboats for college sailing, we need to know that, and we should support the agreement. It is entirely possible that the company is doing great things for college sailing, and that this is indeed, a win-win. We hope, however, that regardless, this fosters adult conversation and debate, and that, along with transparency and facts, we can do what’s best for our college sailors.
In Review, and Questions to Ask:

1. How much does the ICSA benefit financially from this agreement, and has that financial commitment been faithfully met? It would be important, in fact critical, to know how much the ICSA benefits from this agreement, and how faithfully that agreement has been met by the supplier (LP).
2. Is there a fee that a school can pay to host the nationals without LP Boats?
3. Is LaserPerformance able to provide quality, long-lasting, competitively priced boats that serve our sport and our sailors?
4. Is LaserPerformance able to support these boats with timely service, parts, and competitively priced replacement parts?
5. Is the experience at San Diego’s 2016 National Championship just a one-time problem?
6. What is the extent of the warranty work list on LP-supplied boats, and is it acceptable?
7. Is the z420 the answer?

We welcome your thoughts and comments, positive and critical. Please post below where it says “Join the Discussion”
*According to many sources at the event, most of the brand new Flying Junior sailboats provided for the 2016 Nationals are no longer in use, and may well have been destroyed. Were you there? How were the boats? What are the facts?
INTERVIEW WITH MITCH BRINDLEY
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to respond to your opinion piece concerning the LaserPerformance – ICSA Sponsorship.  I understand your desire to create conversation about college sailing and your efforts to support the sport.
The ICSA is very appreciative of the support all of our sponsors provide college sailors. There are many companies within the marine industry who want a piece of the college sailing market; the ICSA sponsors back that desire up with cash support for College Sailing. LaserPerformance, like our other sponsors, is committed to College Sailing. Generally, our championship title sponsorship agreements carry a category exclusivity and are multiyear agreements. College Sailing depends on the monetary support of sponsorship. It should be noted that ICSA sponsorship revenue has in large part paid for the development and maintenance of Techscore, benefiting all of ICSA and ISSA.
Mitch, thanks for taking the time to chat with us, especially considering the difficulty you had traveling to Cornell this past weekend (canceled flight…etc).
S1D: In our original op-ed piece, we asked what benefits the LP Agreement provides for college sailors. Could you list them, briefly. I think many are not aware, or may not appreciate the depth, and scope of this relationship.
Mitch Brindley: The LaserPerformance sponsorship agreement provides College Sailing with the following specific benefits:

1. A fleet of 18 complete and new Laser Standards and a fleet of 18 complete and new Laser Radials at no cost to the sailors.
2. A LaserPerformance staff member onsite during the Singlehanded Championships to support the fleet
3. Logistic support for the fleet of 36 lasers
4. Marketing, PR, and Social Media support for the Singlehanded Championships with a global reach.
5. Significant Annual cash sponsorship fee. Application of the sponsorship funds is at the sole discretion of the ICSA. ICSA uses these funds to provide direct support of the ICSA National Championships, as well as other expenses benefiting college sailing such as travel grants, Techscore development and maintenance, website development and maintenance, and other operational expenses.
6. New in 2016, a complete set of 18 branded team race mainsails and FJ jibs.
7. LP provides professional streaming video coverage with analysts and commentators for the Women’s and Team Race Championships.
8. Marketing, PR, and Social Media support for the spring championships.
9. Multiyear contract provides greater long-term financial security for College Sailing.
10. Agreement provides an opportunity for a host to use one fleet of non-LaserPerformance/Vanguard manufactured boats at the spring championships. This would change some of LP’s obligations to the ICSA, such as payment of fee and expense of media support.
11. ICSA’s relationship with LaserPerformance and their sponsorship of the Singlehanded Championships has been fundamental to ISSA’s singlehanded championships.

S1D: There may be some misconceptions about the degree to which the 2016 Nationals FJ fleet was problematic. Can you state with accuracy what some of these may have been?
Mitch Brindley: The variance in weights of the fleet of 2016 FJs used during the championships was less than 10 lbs. Outliers were excluded from the fleet.
It was discovered during the first day of the semifinals for the Sperry Women’s National Championship that some of the boats were taking on water in the tanks. The biggest source of the leaks was the cockpit plugs not properly installed through the rivets and insufficient sealant. There was some leaking through the spinnaker fittings that had been removed in San Diego to equalize the collegiate version boats and the junior racing versions. And some boats were leaking through the centerboard gasket assembly. It was my experience that some sailors and coaches were over estimating volume of water being drained. I heard sailors say, ‘We drained our boat for five minutes’, or “our tanks were full”.  That wasn’t the case; 5 minutes is a long time to press an FJ bow on a floating dock. I frequently timed how long a boat was drained, boats were rarely held for more than a minute. I also measured water that was drained from tanks and it never exceeded liter. A team did receive redress for water in the tanks.
S1D: While it is a fact that most of the 2016 Nationals FJ fleet was destroyed after the event, we would like to learn, and I think it’s valuable information for our community, what LP’s response was to this.
Mitch Brindley: I don’t think anyone was more upset and frustrated by the problems than the LaserPerformance representatives at the regatta and the SDYC event officials. Throughout the events, LaserPerformance worked to solve the problem; some boats were removed from the rotation, repaired and then returned. Some boats didn’t leak. In addition to LP’s Technical Engineer on site, 2 LP repair technicians from the UK were brought over to facilitate repairs, and stayed through-out the event. Four additional people from the LP manufacturing team were brought in to address the issues. In the end it is my understanding that LP wasn’t hasn’t happy with fleet as a representative product, so they chose to have the boats destroyed.
Since San Diego, LaserPerformance manufacturing has corrected the problem and made overall improvements to their FJ. Bill Crane, LaserPerformance Chairman of the Board, has been overseeing manufacturing and significant improvements to the gasket system. The cockpit stringers have been improved to allow for more complete and tighter fit of the hull and deck, eliminating weight from the bonding material. And it created a more completely supported cockpit sole. They built a clear FJ to study the construction techniques and bonding of the hull and deck, and hulls are inspected with electronic instrumentation.  Director of Institutional Programs, Adam Werblow was at the in China this summer and is very confident in the changes incorporated.
S1D: Can you discuss the new realities of Nationals hosting, from the Exec. Committees point of view? How has this changed over time, what do you now need from a host bid, and how in your view does the LP arrangement make this this challenge a more achievable responsibility?
Mitch Brindley: Over the last 8 – 10 years or so there have been some great changes and improvements in College Sailing, such as team uniforms, branded sails, live scoring with Techscore, championships with semifinals and resulting in the most competitive championship finals, combining semifinals and finals at one location, and 36-team women’s and coed Championships. There has also been an increase in competitive depth in college sailing over the last 20 years. There is no doubt that combining the semifinals and finals into one event has made for an incredibly deep, competitive, and fun championship. This desire for such a championship, with all the teams sailing their way into the finals resulted in the requirement of two fleets of 18 boats at one venue. It also created an event that is a beast to host.
Some of the expectations or needs for the championships from the host or venue are:

• Two 18 fleets of evenly matched collegiate dinghies
• Expert race management, judges, and umpires (including housing, meals, and travel expenses) all with extensive college sailing experience
• Good, reliable sailing conditions (157 races in the team race championship)
• Shore-side venue large enough for 350+ people daily
• Shore-side spectating
• Onsite vendor
• 10-15 appropriate sized powerboats for judges, umpires and media
• Sponsor fulfillment
• Media support and PR
• Sail storage and transport (4 sets of mainsails, 2 jibs)
• Available and affordable housing for teams and spectators
• Venue staff, team members or well trained and plentiful volunteers

Sponsorship revenue and entry fees are intended to cover much of the expenses of the championships.
S1D: Is there anything else you’d like to add?
Mitch Brindley: To clarify another item in your Op-Ed, move away from Chicago for 2017 had nothing to do with our current contract with LaserPerformance. University of Wisconsin found is necessary to withdraw their support for the 2017 Chicago Championships due to purchasing hindrances beyond their control with the WI state government. There planned purchase was held up by the Governor. And they didn’t think the purchase would be made in time for the championship. As a result ICSA and CYC no longer had the needed support and fleet to successfully host the championships in Chicago. CYC had one fleet of boats, junior racing version c420s. We no longer had 2 fleets of collegiate dinghies, nor did we have a collegiate host. The ICSA Championship Committee unanimously accepted a revised bid from College of Charleston (bid for 2018), and the ICSA Executive Committee and Board approved the Charleston 2017 bid.
(In our original piece we asked the question: why was the venue for the upcoming Nationals so recently changed from Chicago to Charleston. It has been reported to us that this had to do with fleet types.)