I just had a chance to finally watch the Krupinski vs FryrTuck (I can't believe you've been letting me get your name wrong all this time) duels. I need to issue a formal apology to Krupinski.
In the first duel you did fly to 11.5K but dropped back to 10.2K at dot range and at that point speeds were within 2 mph. Mistake corrected, no harm no foul.
In the second duel you climbed to 10.2K and at dot range had a 3 mph deficit. Again no foul.
In the third duel you climbed to 10.7K, dropped to 10.2K and had a 20 mph speed advantage at dot range. This fight may have been brought into question but you lost so again, no foul. Had you won this one it may have been an issue.
In the fourth duel you were again level at 10.2K and were carrying a 24mph speed advantage that I believe was gained through using WEP. There's no rule against the use of WEP on climb out or in transit to the merge. Also for some reason FryrTuck was only at 8.7K at dot range and, since the rules state that 10K is both a ceiling and a floor, if anything, he might have been called. It would be unlikely since he was giving up the E advantage but it may have actually worked in his favor as you lost again.
In the last duel you again used WEP to carry an E advantage into the fight. At dot range you had a 95 mph speed advantage. Once again FryrTuck was giving up the E advantage to start by entering dot range at only 7.3K This time, in 190's, the E advantage played heavily in your favor as might be expected but again, there's no rule against using WEP in transit. You entered dot range at 10.2K once again but were bouncing between 10.2K and 10.3K all the way to the fight. In that sense you were seriously flirting with being in bounds but other factors had more to do with the outcome of the fight than that.
So even though I think that at a consistant 10.2K merge you're flirting with the limits all in all there was no reason for me to post a warning to you. I rely on the information given to me to make those decisions because with the hours that I work, well, just now is the first chance I've had to see the films myself. I did however feel that
if the information being provided to me was correct that I had to issue the warning.
As to those who questioned why I did so publicly it was for two reasons; one to let everyone know that I do take the rules seriously and two, if there had been reason for a disqualification that all the cards would be on the table.
Again, my apologies to Krupinski. Well done sir.