Originally Posted by
JeffYoung
No, I believe what I wrote. It's the very same argument we use to justify the process. Our system of power/weight classification has not produced overdogs, etc.
Same is true of the 1.3 in ITB. I don't like it, but I have to balance the hurt of trying to change it v. the hurt of not. I could conceivably spend a lot of political capital trying to get it changed, at the expense of a whole host of much bigger issues we are facing in IT land.
Look, I don't like and don't agree with the 1.3 default. But I don't see it as some sort of offense to humanity that you guys do. Part of that is, I admit, because I don't run in B or C.
Personally, I think some of the deducts and adders are far more problematic from a repeatability/fairness standpoint.
And I think there are ways to work around it to make sure it doesn't gum up the works.
I get -- trust me, I think Travis and I are two of the only guys left who have fully bought into this -- repeatability, objectivity, and transparency.
But you guys have to remember -- and I love all three of you -- that this a committee with folks with different viewpoints on things. We can't always get what we want all the time.
Here, to me, it's just not worth the fight it would take to fix this if it is as entrenched as I personally believe it is. If the issue comes up, I will explain why I think the 1.3 default is wrong, and I would vote against continuing to use it. But I'm not going to say the whole system is junk because of this one issue I disagree with.