Hey Decrepit,
I've implemented it they way you envisaged. Some sample data:
...........2SecPeak....5x10sec....1hr.......Alpha.........Nm.....Distance
Sailor A ....30.........27.........25.........20..........18.........50
Sailor B ....28.........26.........24.........20..........19.........60
Sailor C ....26.........25.........24.........20..........17.........70
Sailor D ....(Didn't sail)
Average......28.........26........24.3........20..........18.........60
So for that session, the numbers that count for the team are the ones in italics.
To start with, for each team I figure out their best average score for Peak, 5x10, 1hr etc.
Then I go through all the teams best scores for the current month, and rank them according to who's the quickest/went the furthest.
This gives me 6 tables, with a different team order in each table. So the Sandy Point team might be at the top of the 2SecPeak table, but the cockroaches might be at the top of the Distance table.
Once those 6 rank tables are figured out, then I just add up each teams rank and the team with the lowest score wins that month.
Does this make sense?
Yep, sounds like what I was thinking, each column in the table has a 16.666% weighting.
Don't see how anybody could say that's unfair.
But then maybe I'm biased, so might be an idea to get some comments before writing the program.