Gladwell's Line - Playing Russian Roulette over Olympic Pollution

by Richard Gladwell, Sail-World.com on 23 Aug 2015 With the 2016 Pre-Olympic Regatta completed, the International Sailing Federation and International Olympic Committee, along with the sailors and teams, have escaped relatively lightly from the pollution issues of Guanabara Bay.

Outwardly sailors and coaches are putting a very stoic face on the issue.

It is not part of the DNA of Olympic sailors or their handlers to step out of line about anything – for the simple reason that grants and other funding could be at risk. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you.

They're their own worst enemy, at times.

The casualty count for the Pre-Olympic Test Event was officially rather low - between two and four crews affected by illness. Not exceptional figures for a regatta of this size.

But that might not be the whole story.

One source at the regatta told Sail-World that in their estimation up to 40% of the sailors could be affected. Note that sailors do not have to stop sailing if they are feeling off colour with sickness – pollution related or not – but as with any top athletes, performance and decision making has to be affected.

Sail-World spoke via social media with several involved in the Rio Test Event. They were assured of anonymity and that Sail-World had no view either way on the matter.

Comments ranged from a claim that one crew member Dan Willcox was affected for four days by what Yachting New Zealand labeled a “gastro illness”. He was recommended by his team doctor not to sail on Day 5 of the regatta and the crew did not compete in three races as a result.

Others told Sail-World: “It is not ideal, but you have just got to get on with it and race. Take precautions as best you can.”

Another: “In the marina it is as high as 900 per 1000 pollution units and 3-400 in the harbour course areas. The medics say 300 will guarantee gastro it is with one teaspoon of water in the mouth. So in the marina basically a drop in the mouth and it’s all over. It’s really disgusting in the marina, and it stinks.”

“There’s a new sewer system opening in the next month or so, which will turn it off in the marina forever, but not in the other 17 around the harbour.”

Of course, Sailing does not find itself in this position through its own hand. We are where we are through the undertakings given by Brazilian politicians to progressively reduce the levels of pollution by dealing to the sources. That largely hasn't happened and the targets have shifted.

The just concluded Pre-Olympic Regatta last about a week. The full Olympic Regatta lasts for just over two weeks.

Apparently it has not seriously rained in Rio de Janeiro for a month – so the flushing of inlets into Guanabara Bay that would normally occur following heavy rain has not occurred. However during this regatta, there was overnight rain just once and as a result one inside course was closed for two days because of 'objects' in the water.

On the face of it regatta organisers would appear to have got away largely unscathed.

But continuing in the hope that the same will happen again in 12 months time is taking a big risk on several fronts for organisers, sailors and their national authorities.

Mainsteam media close to hand
Firstly the Sailing Olympics will be staged close to the main Olympic venue. That was deliberately done to showcase the sport. In ordinary circumstances that venue would give the Sailing Olympics media exposure like it has never had before.

But that proximity is a double-edged sword.

Unlike most Olympic Regattas, the main body of the Olympic media will be very close to the Sailing venue. At the first incident involving pollution, it won’t be a matter of having to take a two-hour-plus train trip from London to Weymouth, but more of a short cab-ride down town to the sailing venue, with a camera crew and shoot the story against the background of the now-notorious Guanabara Bay.

While ISAF/IOC officials can hiss at the sailing media when they are perceived as stepping out of line, they have absolutely no control over the mainstream media. Reaction from officials will only feed any media frenzy.

For a sport which goes to great lengths to portray itself as being environmentally responsible, putting on a brave face and getting on the business of exposing its rock-stars to the dangers of sailing in seriously polluted water could be hugely damaging for the sport in the longer term.

In polluted water that is marginally affecting sailors or rowers, often a few will be severely affected to the point where they can’t compete. At the next level, the effects become more widespread where significant numbers of crews are affected, and competition or training on the polluted water has to be stopped for several days or weeks.

While the mainstream media don’t understand a lot about sailing, they do know how to beat up a story on an everyday issue they do understand. Pollution – be it oil, water or whatever is a story line easily understood by the general media. Heard or seen a sailing story lately in the mainstream media about the Sailing Olympics that doesn't tag in a reference to the pollution issue at the venue? We haven't.

Add in the standard story lines of promised official action not being delivered. Advice being ignored. Plus those in charge of the event organisation being largely ineffectual in their efforts to deal with a known issue over a lengthy period, is another familiar story angle.

Throw in some very emotional athletes, coaches or supporters who have just seen their sailor’s Olympic dream disappear down the toilet – and you have the Perfect Storm.

Also in the era of social media it is very easy to make contact very easily. Sail-World spoke to three highly respected sources to get the above quotes within a 10 minute period. It's not hard.

The impunity from immunity
The line from many involved in the teams appears to be that carefully researched programs to build up the athlete's immunity to the pollution are the way to beat the issue. Couple that with medication and the view seems to be that the top sailing teams can cope with this issue.

Maybe they are right. But is this really the approach we want to take with the sport? That the solution to sailing on polluted water is to spend more time at the polluted venue so that your sailor’s immunity is enhanced?

And if that fails, then pump in the right medication and keep the sailors competing?

Is that really a responsible sports management response to the issue?

Or is it just another work-around by administrators who are too weak to stand up and make the right decisions before the point of no-return is reached? And those who don't want to lose face?

A report just published in the New Yorker says that sailors were encouraged to guzzle Coke as an antidote, if they has ingested Rio sea water. The report also says that teams are using their own tests of the water quality for competitive advantage.

That sets the scene for Rio 2016 to become a battle of the sailing team medicos. Inevitably, the teams from the developed sailing nations with better funding will prevail in this regard over the teams from the developing sailing nations which are being encouraged into the 2016 Olympics by the ISAF through a more egalitarian Olympic Qualification system.

A financial funding hit in 2020?
Many of the top sailing countries run, for want of a better term, state-funded sailing programs. The funded program is not just for sailing, but for all Olympic sports. Usually there is a standard formula applied for funding levels based on success and achievement.

The returns for the funding bodies are measured in Gold Silver and Bronze medals earned. It’s a business model based in the Return on Investment.

Those Olympic sports that show a better Return on Investment than others receive better funding than those that don’t. None have all the funding the sports want or say they ideally require.

Most major sailing nations who survive in this system have experienced a purple patch, where they have returned from an Olympic Sailing Regatta with less than the expected/semi-promised Medal count. Or worse no medals at all - they can expect some very serious consequences for the next Olympic cycle.

Almost invariably funding will be cut, and usually substantially for the next two years at least. You don't invest in under-achievers? There are no excuses. It's a hard, heartless funding-world.

For the national bodies, the consequences are quite severe – and a significant downsizing is the usual response. For the sailors and coaches, it is either the end, or time for a major change in sailing career.

Very simply, if you are a top sailor, have had substantial investment made in your program, appear to be hitting all the required performance standards in the run-up to the Olympics, then you are expected to Medal. And often this is the case.

But, of course, in the Rio Sailing Olympics, all this is hanging on whether at some time in the Olympic fortnight a sailor ingests a teaspoon full of polluted water. Will you get sick and miss your targets – or can your metabolism cope?

Who knows?

Most of the other 2016 Olympic sports are not water based and are not affected by pollution issues. So their athletes can expected to be judged on performance only – not what they have ingested, and their body's reaction to that.

For all sports, the 2020 Funding Pie will be determined largely on what has happened in Rio 2016. It’s a high-risk game for the sailors and coaches involved.

Blake's mantra

One of the world's most accomplished sailors, ISAF Sailor of the Year and leading environmentalist was killed by bandits in 2001 on Brazil's Amazon River during an environmental project.

It was Sir Peter Blake's mantra 'Good water, good life. Poor water, poor life. No water, no life' that was recited endlessly to young sailors and environmentalists, urging them to protect and look after the sailing environment.

His mantra seems to have a particularly hollow ring in the context of the Rio Sailing Olympics and attitudes of some of those involved in the competition and organisation. Little seems to have changed in Brazil, and indeed amongst world sailing authorities in the 15 years since Blake's death.

Sailing should always be positioned in the 'Good water, good life' environmental segment.

Any other place is completely unacceptable. To its shame those principles have been severely compromised by the pollution at the 2016 Olympic Sailing venue, when the sport is on centre stage for its young fans and the wider sporting public.

The waiting game
In 12 months time, we will know whether the pollution concerns have materialized about sailing on Guanabara Bay and exiting the polluted marina.

Maybe the whole deal will just have amounted to scaremongering, and everyone will be wondering what the fuss was all about.

On the other side, the image of the sport and outcomes from the regatta could be hanging on a shower of rain in Rio.

Contingency plans might be in place to shift the sailing to offshore courses, that doesn’t get around the risks of having to sail through polluted water to get to those courses.

Will Brazilian civic officials and politicians allow their hollow promises to be exposed in the mainstream media? Don’t think so. More likely the racing will just take place as planned, despite sabre-rattling from sailing administrators.

Those with longer memories than most will recall a not dissimilar situation in the 1968 Olympics in Acapulco, as reported in the sailing media from that regatta:

“Water or food from outside the hotel had to be treated with extreme caution, as the risk of getting Montezuma’s revenge was very high. Most of the boys had a touch of it, but if it can be nipped in the early stages, although unpleasant, it is not too bad. If you catch a bad dose, you are really in for the full treatment.”

Sound familiar?

For sure there was the algae problem at Qingdao ahead of and during the 2008 Olympics, which the Chinese mitigated by getting the local population down to the beaches for a massive clean-up along with the Army. They also marshaled a fleet of up to 1200 boats equipped with scoops to lift the floating green seaweed-like algae.

But there is one big difference between Qingdao and Rio de Janeiro – you could eat the algae. It tasted like watercress.

You can’t eat sewerage. There's no work-around for that.

For the latest on the Sailing Olympic Venue story, published by Associated Press, and repeated in many prominent mainstream media outlets throughout the world click here

And this story, just published in the New Yorker, painting a less rosy picture and echoing many of the above issues click here