I've been trying to hold myself back from posting in this thread, but I keep coming back to it so I'm just going to bite the bullet and say this.
I'm not coming at this from the point of view of a hunter, honestly I'm not. Those with long memories will know that at heart I am a champ.
OP. As it happens, I tend to agree with you. On the whole, champ sustained dps slightly edges hunter sustained dps. Slightly. Hunter burst dps is quite a bit higher only if you take into account improved focus, which is not really a good metric in my opinion. If you don't take into account improved focus, hunter burst slightly edges champ burst. Slightly. In all honesty, champ and hunter dps are fairly well balanced in my personal opinion.
Having said that, posts like yours make me cringe and want to smash my face into the wall.
The problem is you say you've conducted this experiment. Let's not even get into the details on why the experiment itself is deeply flawed, the main concern is where is the data? Where are screenshots of your setup/gear? Where are screenshots of your combat analysis? Information on your rotations? Anything? What about this hunter of yours? What about some information on his setup/rotations etc? Perhaps you're not as seasoned with him as you'd like, but other hunters could give you some well intended advice or suggest reasons why/how your parse could be sub-optimal.
If you're going to come out here and make mammoth posts with incendiary claims, then you should expect some critique.
To quote a hero of mine, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Now I think that you've provided less than nothing. What you have provided, or "claimed", does more harm than good to support your case. You've done about 5 runs so as to not be influenced by an outlier, and yet, provide only one of your results per set, the best one, which for all we know could indeed be an outlier. I mean really, come on. Even though 5 runs for 10s or 60s is really not enough to be conclusive about anything, you could have at least provided an average, or provided ALL 5 of the results for us to see the distribution.
(As a side note, in order to statistically diminish the effects of outlier data points, one INCREASES the size of the data set, not the opposite).
The second major problem is how you've effectively said that your hunter and your champ and incomparable, and yet you've compared them anyway. I mean this just wreaks of bad reasoning and almost immediately invalidates all of the claims that you've suggested that your findings support.
I could go on but I really think it's best I draw this to a close. I'm a scientist, above all things I value data and good analysis of data. Your post has none of this. It is the FOX news of science. It reminds me of another of those whines about "x" class does this better than me and it's not fair. Or, "y" class got picked for a run instead of me and it's not fair. Inelegant, childish.
For what it's worth, I agree that this isn't the best place for this thread.
Wulfhram (Hunter), Boborrin (Champ), Garrth (Captain) assorted others