Originally Posted by Will S
Mast area should be included and you appear to have identified three classes where it isn't. ... If materially wrong we will correct the figures.
William Sunnucks, SCHRS Technical Committee

Thanks, but please don't take my statement as an accusation - just confusion. It is entirely possible that the sources I used include mast area and I didn't realize it.

On another note, I performed the following thought experiment: I removed the 3.72 m2 jib and added a 17.5 m2 spinnaker. The rating changed from 1.050 to 1.108. That's right, I added nearly 14 square meters of sail and the boat got 5.5% SLOWER! I could cut 1.72 m2 off my jib (leaving a 2 m2 blade), add a 15.5 m2 spinnaker, and wind up with the same rating. Apparently SCHRS calculates that jib area is 9 times as valuable as spinnaker area. If that's true, why are boats bothering with spinnakers?

I noticed another oddity - when jib size gets too small (under 1.4 m2 in my experiments), the rating shows the boat getting faster. That's probably just a pathological case, since nobody would design such a jib, but it is still confusing.

Also, why does a low-aspect (height-to-width ratio less than 1.5 : 1) boom count as mainsail area, but a high-aspect boom (greater then 1.5 : 1 ratio) doesn't?

Yours in puzzlement,
Eric