Sure but I don't think your going to get average joe golfer in America to stop using the term yards for a very long time. --
"Go for a Metric America" Howard Ressel Project Design Engineer, Region 4 (585) 272-3372 >>> On 10/13/2009 at 10:34 AM, in message <[email protected]>, "John M. Steele" <[email protected]> wrote: > Why? Golf seems like it would be one of the more trivial sports to > metricate. Just revise the units on course layouts. > > Courses are already laid out in metric in other countries. Americans who > play golf overseas are likely to play on metric courses and survive. Foreign > visitors who play here probably wonder about yards. I would think that golf > courses which attract foreign guests would at least benefit from being > "dual." > > --- On Tue, 10/13/09, Howard Ressel <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Howard Ressel <[email protected]> > Subject: [USMA:46012] Re: U.S. football--choose your battles > To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Gary Brown" <[email protected]>, "Lorelle Young" <[email protected]>, > "Don > Hillger" <[email protected]>, "Valerie Antoine" > <[email protected]> > Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 8:10 AM > > > Same would probably apply to golf. > -- > > "Go for a Metric America" > Howard Ressel > Project Design Engineer, Region 4 > (585) 272-3372 > > >>>> On 10/12/2009 at 12:43 PM, in message > <10d2273a03a24559af217eb7f6dd2...@benhur>, Paul Trusten > <[email protected]> > wrote: >> I will take John's statement an additional step, and say that, in my > opinion, >> discussing the metrication of U.S. football at any time during our quest for > >> metrication is the surest way to lose support for the metrication goal! U.S. > >> football is a way of life, and part of that way of life is marked out in 100 > >> very emotional yards. It serves no purpose to change those units, other than > >> to force standardization into a place that it doesn't need to go. To many > of >> us in the metrication community, it is a proper extension of measurement >> standards, but to the fans, it will be just plain hubris. It will cause more > >> resentment than it will standardization. Let's just get the nation to go >> metric in most other aspects of everyday life, and leave U.S. football > alone. >> If you were to look up the expression "choose your battles" in some >> idiomatic dictionary, you would find the issue of U.S. football metrication. >> >> Paul T. >> >> This subject keeps coming up, and >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: John M. Steele >> To: U.S. Metric Association >> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 9:39 AM >> Subject: [USMA:46002] American football fields (was FIFA ) >> >> >> Metricating American football should be WAY down the list of >> priorities. Trying to do it early will just make folks mad. Once the US is > >> nearly completely metricated, people will wonder about those yards and >> perhaps be willing to metricate football (its not like the rest of the world > >> loves it and is just dying for a metric version). >> >> However, a 90 m field and 9 m of forward progress probably make more > >> sense than blindly pretending yards are meters. The 90 m field fits > existing >> stadiums and represents less than 1.6% change in total length, and progress >> for a 1st down. I am not convinced that a small change of the magnitude >> invalidates all statistics, I think they could be "adjusted." Certainly > some >> other rules need to be revisited. I would number to the 40 m line, leaving > a >> 10 m zone between 40's (Canadian football has two 50 yard lines). The meter > >> line for kickoff (30 yard line) and taking possession (20 yard line) would >> have to be reconsidered, and the chainsmen would need a 9 m chain. Extra >> point attempts could be undertaken from the 2 m line. >> >> Pretending meters are yards is about a 9.4% change in total length, >> and progress for a first down. Besides not fitting most stadiums, I would >> argue that this would change the nature of the game and invalidate > statistics >> far more than a 1.6% change. >> >> FIFA rounded the rules of the game in an apparently intelligent way. > >> Important measurements were rounded to the nearest centimeter, and less >> important measurements were rounded further. I think a thoughtful approach >> would allow any game to be metricated, but not until the folks in charge of >> the rules or laws of the game are ready to undertake it. >> >> --- On Mon, 10/12/09, STANLEY DOORE <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> From: STANLEY DOORE <[email protected]> >> Subject: [USMA:46001] Re: FIFA Football Fields >> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> >> Cc: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> >> Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 8:35 AM >> >> >> >> Most comments here on conversion of American football to >> metric have addressed the problem from the rules and game playing > standpoint. >> However, only one addressed it to a new field length (90 m) standpoint. >> Changing field length to a full 100 m would require >> reconstruction of stadiums to provide space for a 100 m field. A 90 m field > >> would fit most current stadiums; however that would require changing rules >> and void all previous statistics. >> Leaving American football fields size as is (100 yards plus >> end zones) and current rules would have the nostalgic but practical > advantage >> for Fred Flintstone Units (FFU) in this case. >> Stan Doore >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: [email protected] >> To: U.S. Metric Association >> Cc: U.S. Metric Association >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 12:31 PM >> Subject: [USMA:45985] Re: FIFA Football Fields >> >> >> Metricating US football would weaken the offense, particularly >> the rush, and strengthen the defense - the offensive team would have to go >> about 10% farther to get first down. However, since teams have both an >> offense and defense, most would be equally affected. The likely result > would >> be somewhat lower scoring. >> >> Carleton >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Kimbrough Sherman" <[email protected]> >> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Friday, October 9, 2009 10:50:01 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada >> Eastern >> Subject: [USMA:45982] FIFA Football Fields >> >> >> I don't believe that the use of metric measures will at all >> alter U.S. Soccer, but, incidentally, the fixed measures of the field and >> goals Worldwide http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/lawsofthegame.html are in >> former hard English Yards (Penalty and goal areas) and feet (height of >> crossbar) and soft metric. The Penalty Area is specified at 16.5 Meters to >> accommodate the original dimension of 18 Yards. >> >> American Football, as Stanley Doore has mentioned does have a >> real problem with conversion. The concept of "first downs" would be altered > >> by a ten-Meters requirement, and if the fields were enlarged to 100 Meters, >> with two 10 Meter end zones, there are almost no stadium floors that would >> accommocate these fields (more than 11M longer). >> >> In my opinion, American Football should keep the "Yard" as its >> measure and children can be instructed that it is a football measure, and >> left to die a slow and painless death as people get tired of explaining it > in >> the far future. >> >> American Football is the only U.S. Sport I know that would >> suffer (statistically, and logistically) from SI adoption. >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On >> Behalf Of STANLEY DOORE [[email protected]] >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 5:49 AM >> To: U.S. Metric Association >> Subject: [USMA:45976] Re: Geelong wins national football >> championship >> >> >> Congratulations Pat. >> It is my understanding that soccer fields do not have a >> standard size. This makes it very easy to use metric dimensions entirely. >> Great! >> Not so with US football fields which have a standard size. >> Performance statistics are therefore based on the yard. Stadiums also are >> built with this in mind. >> Soccer fields could be standardized on rigid metric >> dimensions; however, wouldn't there be problems when trying to fit a >> standardized metric field size into various sized stadiums? >> Stan Doore >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Pat Naughtin >> To: U.S. Metric Association >> Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2009 4:33 AM >> Subject: [USMA:45897] Geelong wins national football >> championship >> >> >> Geelong wins national football championship >> >> >> So what, I hear you chorus. Who cares that Geelong has won the > >> title as the Australian Rules football championship? However, this bragging >> is not the purpose of this email. >> >> >> The ground that the football game is played on is slightly >> variable in size but it has all of its markings in metres. See >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_Australian_football This means that the > >> sports commentators have continuously available references that they use to >> describe each game. The metric influence is continuous, especially the two >> arcs marked 50 metres from each goal. This has had the effect of making the >> descriptions wholly metric. >> >> >> I doubt that the transition to metric in Australian Rules >> Football would have happened so quickly without the constant metric > reference >> lines on every ground built into the rules of the game itself. Perhaps there > >> are some thoughts here for other metrication transitions! >> >> >> The game, today went for 100 minutes, but if you would like to > >> get a flavor of the action there is a 10 minute sample at >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIOvSv9Q1Gk&feature=fvw Geelong are the only >> team to wear horizontal stripes of navy blue and white – watch for the Gary >> Ablett goal at 5:15. >> >> >> Cheers, >> Pat Naughtin >> Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can >> obtain from http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html >> PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, >> Geelong, Australia >> Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 >> >> >> Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, >> has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the >> modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now >> save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their >> businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, >> crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government > metrication >> leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the > Australian >> Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the >> UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication >> information, contact Pat at [email protected] or to get > the >> free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: >> http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe. >> >>
BEGIN:VCARD VERSION:2.1 X-GWTYPE:USER FN:Ressel, Howard TEL;WORK:585-272-3372 ORG:;403-Design EMAIL;WORK;PREF;NGW:[email protected] N:Ressel;Howard ADR;DOM;WORK;PARCEL;POSTAL:;403;1530 Jefferson Road;Rochester;;14623 LABEL;DOM;WORK;PARCEL;POSTAL;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:Ressel, Howard=0A= 403=0A= 1530 Jefferson Road=0A= Rochester 14623 END:VCARD
