Peter Wiley wrote:

In article , MC
wrote:


DSK wrote:

MC wrote:


..... ignoring the data I posted which shows clearly that I won.


Oh, I'm sorry, did you post any data that even met the conditions of the
bet, much less won?

Here's what happened as I see it.

1- I offered a comment on a small boat that I like

2- You ridiculed the boat and my statement

3- I said "Name something better" and gave some pretty specific
conditions, including size of the boat

4- You offered info on 3 or 4 boats which were neither better in the
specific named characteristics, and were very much larger anyway

The one I selected wasn't and with that you lost the bet. Also since you
said "anything in a comparable size range" a design would also win me
the bet as it is included in "anything". I offered you that too.


5- when I said, "I've won" you retreated to insults and then silence.
Frankly I'm a little surprised you bring it up, considering that you've
made some ridiculous claims.


Like your saying a Bolger micro is seaworthy and has a 180 degree LPS?
Come on! You know that is potentially dangerous BS. I remind you that
seaworthy means capable of withstanding a _storm_ at sea.


Funny, I thought your definition of 'seaworthy' was a boat that had an
EPIRB, a liferaft and an HF radio or satellite phone. At least, you
give the impression of thinking they're more important than hull form.


You've confused me with someone else. Are you often so confused?

Cheers