Couple of quick points:

1. If the your finish product company wants you to wait on the chlorine find, and add, some polyquat ASAP: http://pool9.net/polyquat/ I'd recommend ordering a quart from Amazon, but then seeing if you can find some locally, sooner. You do NOT want your pool to turn green. Just save whatever polyquat you don't use -- it lasts indefinitely -- and use it to 'keep' your pool when you go on vacation.

2. Kent Williams' article on CYA frankly pi##'s me off. It's about time I wrote a rebuttal entitled something like "Kent William's Cyanuric Acid theories: merely ignorant or actually fraudulent?". His background is as an employee for Stranco, who made very expensive, very high-end commercial pool chemistry controllers. The problem is, these controllers work very badly on pools with CYA present. Many years ago, I talked with an Arizona parks and rec director who was FURIOUS at having bought a number of those units for $10,000's . . . only to discover that they wouldn't work on his outdoor stabilized pools.

The "Benefactor or Bomb" article reflects earlier efforts by Stranco to get rid of stabilizer in commercial pools, NOT because it was bad for those pools, but because it was bad for their product. By blaming CYA, they could deflect blame from their over-priced and under-functioning controllers.

The fact is, without CYA, it's almost impossible to keep commercial pools safe. With clear water under full sun most large modern pools, with side wall inlets, do not have adequate circulation to make sure the interior areas of the pools remain chlorinated when there's a heavy bather load. Ironically, many old pools built in the 60's and earlier, have floor inlets scattered around the pool that made it practical, if not very efficient, to keep unstabilized pools sanitary.

Anyhow, the "CYA, B or B" article is based on a misunderstanding of CYA chemistry -- but since the purpose of those theories was apparently to protect Stranco controller sales, why bother with getting the chemistry right?