Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

world-leading 217-2 for Brown Trafton

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by jjimbojames
    You do know that you putt the shot, not throw it, right - hence the name? :wink: The comment had nothing to do with golf!
    D'oh! You missed the joke. It's the Shot Put, not Putt. You don't putt a shot, you put it!

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by jeremyp
      Originally posted by tandfman
      She had seven meets at 63m or better even before Beijing last year.
      But I think all of them were in USA. All I am saying is that I would reserve my opinion about where she stands in the World when she has a solid European season under her belt.
      And how, exactly, would she go about doing that? There are lots of competitive opportunities for her in the US. How many of the top meets in Europe have a women's discus throw? Not very many. Last year, not a single major meet in Europe (GL or SGP) had the event. I don't know if it will be any different this year. It's hard to have a "solid European season" in an event that is largely ignored by the meets that routinely attract Olympic gold medalists in other events.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by gh
        from the story cited to begin with:

        << Though conditions were cool, the wind was mostly of the favorable variety for throwers, coming in from a quartering direction and serving to buffet the discs<<
        Is the writer telling us that they threw the discs and then served them for lunch?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by gh
          details:

          DT: 1. Brown Trafton (Nik) 217-2 (66.21) PR (WL, AL) (3, 6 A) (205-9, 217-2, 213-2, 201-1, 209-10, f) (62.72, 66.21, 64.99, 61.30, 64.00, f);
          2. Powell (Asics) 203-0 (61.87) (203-0, 201-5, 201-4, 199-3, 200-9, 191-5) (612.87, 61.41, 61.38, 650.73, 61.20, 58.34);
          3. Gleeson (PBay) 179-2 (54.62).
          I am confused by 217-2 being calculated as 66.21.
          217 X 12 + 2 X 2.54=66.19

          Where is my error? It drives me nuts.
          "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
          by Thomas Henry Huxley

          Comment


          • #20
            metric conversion tables for track & field include a probability factor, since, for example, a throw of 66.21 could be as long as 66.219, which changes what the English was..... it's not a direct conversion, it's "most likely" what the English distance was, since it's not measured directly.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Pego
              Where is my error? It drives me nuts.
              Your error is in not realizing that every conversion actually represents a range of possible values. Do the maths on 66.21 and you'll find that it's well short of 217-3 and would therefore have to be converted to 217-2. Unless you know what the actual metric measurement was, you don't know what the proper conversion to feet and inches would be because .19, .20, and .21 would all give you a conversion to 217-2. As gh points out, the most likely conversion in each of those cases would be 217-2.

              Comment


              • #22
                Do I understand correctly that the actual measurement was metric with conversion into imperial? That would make sense.
                "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
                by Thomas Henry Huxley

                Comment


                • #23
                  yes..... i apparently inadvertently confused things when I said the original mark was one of three things. At that point only the English conversion had been reported. Any of those three metrics are possible from the tables.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Thank you.
                    BTW, I just reviewed the latest e-tn. A German HT-er Litvinov is lited there. Any relation to Sergey?
                    "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
                    by Thomas Henry Huxley

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Most likely his son, Sergey Jr., though I didn't know he was German.

                      -edit: yep, same guy. lives and trains in Germany.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Half Miler
                        Most likely his son, Sergey Jr., though I didn't know he was German.

                        -edit: yep, same guy. lives and trains in Germany.
                        Thank you. It sounded like that.
                        "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
                        by Thomas Henry Huxley

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X