it's not uncommon for a deck to spring out of shape differently than a hull when removing the two shells from the molds in strip or in the case of s&g where decks and hulls are glued seperately before being joined. A little prying and prodding bring it together with much less effort than what it takes to remove twist from a CLC hull with tensioned sheerclamps. Regarding "permanent internal stresses" my experience has been that a paneled deck will develop fewer stress cracks IN THE WOOD from heavy use than a bent deck where the permanent internal stresses in the deck do find a release when flexed in/out as may occur during a rescue where a kayak is flipped over on it's deck, on the foredeck of the rescuers boat or as might occur in an "all in" rescue whereby one kayak is dragged across the hull of the other. The paneled deck would develop a ding just as a chine on the hull will develop a ding,,but actual flexing of the wood that takes it in a direction OPPOSITE to it's orientation isn't exactly an indicator of strength. The curved deck is attractive but just as four panel hulls are an improvement over two panel tortured hulls the four panel decks are a structural AND ergonomic improvement over bent decks. My experience is based on a Ch18 with 6oz deck glass and a Coho with 4oz deck glass. The paneled deck with 4oz on the exterior will not flex as will the 6oz deck glassed on the exterior,,,that flexing allows microscopic cracks to develop un the underside of the deck and introduce water staining. That's why the Chesapeaks have 6oz glass in the cockpit whereas the older Cape Charles didn't have cockpit glass and the hull interior would develop water stains. These are little things that use or misuse can render moot but if one was looking for the optimum design the deck will be like the hull,,long panels to define a shape that configures the deck to accomodate the paddler and hull, as opposed to the paddler, hull and performance accomodating to the deck.