Could have been a cycling race or an ultra-marathon
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Carleton MacDonald Sent: 06 May 2012 20:23 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:51630] RE: Track & Field Hides Who's on Second I was driving in D.C. yesterday and passed a marker on a pole on Massachusetts Ave NW that said "Mile 32". It couldn't have been for a marathon, unless they were actually marking off kilometers and mislabeled them "Miles". Carleton From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John M. Steele Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2012 06:36 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:51629] Track & Field Hides Who's on Second In previous track & field rants, I have mentioned that the conversion of metric results to feet and inches in javelin, discus and hammer throw hides the athlete's performance because multiple centimeter marks convert to the same inch mark. But I did not have a previous example of it really mattering. This article is mostly about other events. A little over half-way down, it has this clumsy paragraph about javelin: http://www.times-standard.com/sports/ci_20560862/humboldt-state-trackster-os hier-takes-two-titles-earns The Jacks' Matthew Horsfall engaged in a spirited competition with UC San Diego's Nick and Nash Howe in the javelin. Nick Howe, last year's national champion, claimed his fourth straight CCAA title with a throw of 219-10. Horfall's 199-1 was deemed equal in feet and inches to that of Howe's younger brother, Nash Howe, but using the metric system, the underclassman was awarded second place by a single centimeter. So who won second place, and who was third? Well, if you Google the real results instead of settling for media conversions: http://www.calstatela.edu/athletics/track/index.htm Nick Howe won with 67.00 m, Nash Howe second with 60.69 m, Horsfall third with 60.68 m. Would it have killed the reporter to just say that? Would it kill the public to see how the event is really measured?
