If a certain material does not show up on the approved materials list, this does not mean that a material necessarily is more expensive than the ones listed. New building materials could provide better and cheaper boats in theory. The Shockwave instance is a great example where the rule did nothing to protect the class or racing integrity, but can be argued hurt the class. (at least hurt people who were involved in the class and adding to the class) These builders used a locally produced and supplied structurally equivalent material that happened to not be on the approved list. Meanwhile the core materials listed as approved by the class have gone through at least 5 process and material changes, so they other than the brand name barely represent a fixed reference point of equality.
Yeah that whole, the supplier was right down the road and it's cheaper so it's okay excuse 1 - is NOT the point and 2 - Why couldn't the builder have come to the class and petitioned for the material to be added? WHAT'S THE BIG FREAKING DEAL!? If the Shockwave would not have been holed at Worlds last year would the builder have come to the class...ever!? In fact PVC is stated as being cheaper and stiffer in comparison to the approved core materials, so again the builders that are playing by the rules are punished and those skirting the rules are rewarded (until they get busted). Still not happy with how that one played out.
Matt, you're a builder/supplier so naturally you will have a bias to a more relaxed rule environment. Which is another reason why I'm not totally comfortable with builders and sail makers on the F18 technical committee, it's a bit like having the foxes in the hen house.
"Do or do not. There is no try." - Yoda "Excuses are the tools of the weak and incompetent" - Two sista's I overheard in the hall "You don't have to be a brain surgeon to be a complete idiot, but it helps"
