So what if person A has a big hand and person B a small hand? Could this account for the fact that numbers are rounded to the whole hand because the length was never intended to be exactly something and 4 inches is just a close approximation? Thus 100 mm is just as legitimate an approximation as 4 inches and there is no reason that one can not say a hand is 10 cm.
When you come back, we will just measure you in metres and forget all about the hands. If someone mentions hands, we will laugh and say: "Stupid idiot, horses don't have hands, they have hooves". That might quiet anyone who wants to do it in FFU. Euric ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Wentworth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, 2004-06-06 08:50 Subject: [USMA:30054] Hands (Re: Horse racing) > Jason, I've never done it or seen it done, but I imagine that in Ye Olde > Days it was common to measure a horse's height by placing one hand next to a > front hoof, then "stacking" and counting the number of hand-spans from the > sole of the hoof to the withers (the base of the neck). In the absence of a > measuring stick, such "hand-stacking" would have provided a way to check a > seller's claim for the horse's height (not unlike pacing off a piece of > property in meters or yards). When I come back in my next life as a Shire > draft horse, I hope I'm measured in 100 mm hands and massed (weighed) in > kilograms. :-) -- J. Jason Wentworth > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jason Darfus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 10:29 PM > Subject: [USMA:30047] Horse racing > > > > Did anyone here in the U.S. (or elsewhere) watch the Belmont Stakes to see > if > > Smarty Jones could cinch the Triple Crown? I've never watched horse > racing > > before but I thought it would be interesting just this once. Anyway, I > found > > myself laughing out loud but at the same time wanting to yell at the > sports > > casters. Horse racing must be the last bastion of practice for 100% pure > > imperial measurement. So, the track is 6 furlongs and that horse is 17 > hands > > tall? Hmmm... come again? What the heck does that mean? Under what > > circumstances does one decide to measure using their hands instead of > their > > feet? They still gave the horse's weight in pounds so I'm surprised they > > didn't use stones. > > I'm sure it's just tradition that these measurements are still used but it > > just struck me as funny because I've never heard anyone describe something > > using 'hands' and 'furlongs'. > > > > jdd > > > >
