Respectfully Blaine - I thought it would make things LESS difficult for the masses if they didn't have to sort through and measure a bunch of line with a stated (legal) diameter, including the judges, officials and staff. I understand what you're saying. Though it also doesn't seem that difficult, nor that time consuming, for a "judge" to measure the line of those in the winner's circles, or measure that one line which just set a new record. It has to be done no matter what the "minimum" requirement is. If any caster wants to cheat, it ain't gettin' 'em anywhere. If they win or set a record, the line has to be measured at least once anyway. And the pre-set measurement on the judge's instrument could just as well be that margin which accounts for expected (and mostly predictable I would add) manufacturing tolerances, and also individual measuring differences. I think you would agree it's not that difficult, nor that critical, certainly no more time consuming, and would be a big help, and LESS time consuming if the masses didn't have to go thru the search/sort/purge exercise with different lines which are advertised and sold as "legal" for our purposes. Most reputable line manufacturers don't exceed certain tolerances. All I'm saying is, .28 line is .28 line, is .28 line, is .28 line. Pre-set that predictable tolerance level, say .2795 for example, in the rules and the instruments, and nothing changes in your process of measuring. It won't bring into the picture any line which is advertised at less than .28. And it's not as complicated as my post might make it sound.