I don't believe it is a "compromised" design. I think compromise is more accurate. I think these designs also reflect Nick's taste in boats. If your taste in boats is similar to his, then you have a winner. The designer can't design one style of boat to fit all paddlers...

Benefits of maneuverability over tracking are much greater control--when surfing chop or wind waves, you're much less likely to broach, since the boat isn't as likely to dig into the wave and spin you sideways. When playing in tidal rapids or currents, you need your paddle strokes to have great effect, and not have a "twitchy" hull pulling you every which way.

Learning to paddle in a straight line is not so much an "adjustment" as it is skills refinement. Using those same straight line paddle strokes will be just as efficient in a strong tracking boat as they are in a maneuverable boat--your properly balanced strokes are just more apparent in the looser boat.

If your gear load is causing your boat to weathercock, a strong tracking boat will be more difficult to bring back onto course (note that I am only talking about poorly trimmed boats--boats that weathercock too much with no gear load are a design flaw). A tiny bit of weathercocking is preferable to leecocking, but that's a whole other issue.

: It is important to realize the difference between a "compromise" in
: design and a "compromised" design. As I say I can't comment on
: this boat. Just comment to say that I understand how it is necessary to
: "adjust" my style to accommodate the design compromises made to
: achieve differing performance characteristics, but I would NOT like to
: "adjust" to design or construction "flaws". I am
: trying to learn more about "design" now so I can more understand
: the "difference".

: Joe