Portsmouth can be transparent but as I mentioned earlier, the statistics that go into it are complicated. Heck, I probably have the document that explains the math but few of us would probably understand it (Jamie Diamond is probably one of them). I would venture a guess that the complexity of it, and not having the original people available, would be a hurdle if we had data to compile.

That said, I really appreciate the energy (and people) that made DPN. They were brilliant people who built a system that has the potential to be an exceptionally accurate handicapping system. I don't have a problem racing under the numbers as they stand today - I feel like they are fair and accurate. It also has the ability to adjust for different wind strengths that SCHRS does not - and Sam just stated how who wins under SCHRS depends on the conditions.

I made a MHC proposal in 2009 to use a marriage of the two systems - use a measurement based system (adopt from SCHRS) to establish provisional DPN number for a new type of boat until enough data is had to zero in on an accurate rating. We've been talking about this for a long time.

Handicap racing is what it is - and I don't expect it to be the ultimate test of my ability. However, for the reasons stated above, I prefer DPN if we can keep it actively adjusting.