FLASH: Hardee score changes to 8465

[gh]

& they also are official timekeepers of the track cycling wc, which require 0.001s accuracy ( & presumably that means they have to have 0.0001s precision ? )

http://www.tissot.ch/?page_tissotsports/id_cycling

doesn't matter what level of precision or accuracy they can measure to if they screw it up after that!

[guru]

Helps to run your home track eh? :-)

A picture's a picture, home track or not. I would think you T&FN guys would want to take a look at it and give an objective opinion however.

In all honesty, our "objective opinion" probably not worth all that much. In the old days we used to have an Accutrac reade and regularly vet photos, but since the process got computerized--and is the norm--we have basiclaly quit worrying about it. There are people who do this kind of thing for a living, and their opinion is far more important than ours.

Care to reconsider that position?

[gh]

no---the Doha goof was clearly made by somebody who if he was doing that for a living, won't be any more!

[eldrick]

& they also are official timekeepers of the track cycling wc, which require 0.001s accuracy ( & presumably that means they have to have 0.0001s precision ? )

http://www.tissot.ch/?page_tissotsports/id_cycling

They need to have 0.001 timing discrimination because they have trials (and can have finals) that are time trials. However, note that they are all on the same track with the same camera and settings etc. (i.e., they do not use it primarily to decide who is faster across different tracks)

26'er

they do however list 500m & 1k records to 0.001s, & these are often set on different tracks, so uci do accept this level of accuracy under different settings

http://62.50.72.82/modello2.asp?1stLeve ... dnews=3455