Is water ballast ineffective while it's below the water line .... ?? No~!
That's a fallacy. Try this test. Fill a bucket and slowly lower it into the water .... yes, it gets lighter as it drops lower, and heavier as you lift it clear.
Now carry that bucket into the cabin of any boat, and lower it to the cabin sole. Though it is dropping below the waterline, it doesn't get any lighter, does it?!
... Hmmmm!!
The answer is that the hull is a vessel, displacing that precise volume of water that offsets the weight of hull and contents. Your bucket of water is just more contents, in the atmosphere (not in the hydrosphere). The bucket of water weighs the same when contained within the hull because it is still in the atmosphere, along with everything else that you carry into that cabin. None weighs any different on land or within the hull. Same is true for the ballast tank that's molded into the Macgregor's hull ... it's contained within the greater vessel, the hull.
The Mac's tenderness to 15 degrees either side is simply a function of the hull form. Further, the ballast is held very closely to the roll center, while a large percentage of lead keel is held quite distant from the roll center.
This is both good and bad. The keelboat might carry more sail in a heavier wind, but the Mac can dump ballast, drop sails and motor home pushing three-quarters of ton less weight. It's also more economical to not push that ballast around, saying nothing of it's being lots quicker.
Pick yer poison~!
