Talk:Maxi yacht

Comments
Under the heading "Modern Maxis'and the subheading "New Rules" the bottom paragraph is one sentence:

"These relaxed rules should prove to keep the innovation and the excitement on the water; not in the court-room[6] - The new rules permit experimental technology such as rotating wing masts - more commonly found on highperformance catamarans - and the use of new, lighter materials, such as carbon fiber and epoxy resins (which actually date back to Condor of Bermuda and Kialoa days), and the introduction of water ballast (outside the Volvo Ocean Race's Whitbread 60 class, swing keels, and innovations such as asymmetric spinnakers - all developments which help the boats go faster on the water, rather than in the court-room as so often happens with America's Cup[7] syndicates[8]."

Wow.

So I am thinking that since the subsection itself doesn't really address the specific new rules until they are included in this multi-clausal monstrosity it deserves a reworking. It is certainly a relevant sentence, but it could just be more properly organized. I have come up with this:

"The new rules permit experimental technology such as rotating wing masts - which are most commonly found on high-performance catamarans - light weight materials such as carbon fiber and epoxy resins, along with more established technologies like water ballast, swing keels, and asymmetric spinnakers[6]. These relaxed restrictions in class design should prove to keep the innovation and the excitement on the water, rather than in the courtroom, which has been a major criticism of the America's Cup[7] syndicates[8] over the years."

Notice a few updates, mostly just the "(excluding the Volvo Ocean Race's Whitbread 60 class" clause because those boats are the old model and I just don't know if the new '70s include water ballast or not. I also removed the references to Condor of Bermuda and Kialoa simply because it gums up the sentance too much. The reference to the history of innovation within the class is sufficiently made throughout the article IMHO.

I hope that the author of this piece knows that I mean well and certainly not to offend. I have certainly laid some whoppers in the long sentence department, especially when are conveying a good deal of relevant info. I hope my edits meet with your approval and feel free to continue the process. Also, have I left the citations properly intact? Cheers and smooth sailing to all wiki-yachtsman.

List
for edit/proof • LH designates the length of hull as measured by IRC, excluding bowsprits