Okay, let me rephrase that.
If the SCHRS committee had been approachable in anyway for the last one and halve years then the F16 boat would have been rated equal to the F18's, under SCHRS, ever since it conception. SCHRS kicked the carbon mast rule out which gave the F16 1 % rating number loss, but this would have been corrected by recognizing our larger mainsail area (voted in spring 2005) then SCHRS used thus far.
I'm fully EXPECTING the new SCHRS to rate the F16's and F18's equal again because this time they will recognise that our mainsail is larger then SCHRS has accepted up till now.
Indeed I can not proof any claims beyond although the claim that SCHRS would have given us a F18 rating for the past 5 years IF THEY HAD used the RIGHT specs IS very much true and verifiable.
Apart from that I think 1 % rating difference is pretty negligiable so indeed his whole discussion is pretty much blown out of proportions. This is not directed at you Scooby but at the other contributors
Wouter
There is still a problem with this. The F16 rule does not control the size / aspect ratio of the plates in any way (I'll agree there are "Sensible limits"), however, the fact that the class rules do not set a Maximum for the length / area etc then each boat
may rate differently; playing with the
current SCHRS calc sheet, you can get a DE (Board aspect ratio of 5) which brings the rating down to 1.01 (rounded from 1.007867073), by removing the plates totally you can get a rating of 1.05(rounded from 1.050398989) so you see, by playing around, the rated handicap can be between 1.01 (in fact almost 1) and just over 1.05 so 5% !
I would suggest that the F16 Class assoc. might consider changing the class rules to indicate max plate size / area / ratio; this would then mean that the SCHRS group could then plug all the MAX/MIN values into the formula (what ever it turns ouu to be and give a revised handicap) and give you the fastest the boat will rate (and the slowest).
Please also remember that we (The SCHRS group) are working to tight deadlines for the ISAF and so (as stated before) we are working on a couple of already identified areas that need resolving. More detailed work may have to wait for another meeting.
What is also needed to back up the F18 vs F16 equality discussion is some real world comparisons and results. It is OK to provide results from Club racing, but this can "bend" the results as we do not know the skills of the racers involved. Afterall, I am beating 2 Tornado's over the water at my club most of the time on my Inter 17, Are they the worlds best T sailors, no.....
We (SCHRS) are taking a whole collection of results from various events around the country to put in to the mix to assist us in prototyping the rule. 
