On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 02:37:49PM -0700, Scott Hudnall wrote: > It seems as if the last post on that thread was in late 2005. The > thread mentioned that it was a RUMOR - and I think it is probably > just that.
What were you reading? I don't think it's the same link I was and would be surprised if the propsal was from both 2005 and 2007. Direct link: http://mb.trackandfieldnews.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=25680&sid=53eba9d2b4939f2c1158f7c2d7a7a33c """ Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 12:22 pm """ The proposal they mention is: """ <<The measurement proposal Item 20 Replace Rule 6.1.16b through 16.1.16d as follows: b. Imperial is the preferred system of measurement. Distances will be recorded to the nearest lesser quarter-inch. c. Metric will not be displayed or announced at meets. d. World records, American records and NCAA records will be recorded in metric and imperial. However, the imperial measurement must be displayed and announced instead of or in addition to metric. Rationale: Metric has hampered the opportunity to properly communicate the sport of track and field to the media, spectators, parents and athletes. America has rejected the metric system. Metric may be a better, more specific way to measure, but it is not understood by most Americans. It does not work to indicate both forms of measurements. Metric is still being shown exclusively at meets on indicator boards, video boards, announced in papers without imperial interpretation. This has alienated the sport from American mainstream. A person trying to watch, understand or follow this sport should not require an interpreter or translation dictionary (Blue, Red, Green Book).>> """ > Measuring in metric, but converting to imperial for display is > unworkable, unless measurements are taken at multiple points along the > way, since the winner at 100 yds might not be the first to cross the > finish line at 100 m. Simple conversions only work when constant > velocity is assumed. This collegiate association only needs to study > freshman calculus to understand just how unworkable this > proposal/rumor really is. The only proposal I see is for 1,500m to 1,609m (1 mile). One of the posts mentions talking to the NCAA and the proposal being bandied around with the likely outcome being that everything will be done in metric so it's usable internationally but readings given in US customary just to make the folks who want to be different happy. Paul -- End dual-measurement, let's finish going metric! http://gometric.us/ http://www.metric.org/
