Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Google: Metric Conversions Made Easy

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    no xx feet xx inches.
    I guess the google techs are scientists They just don't appreciate the beauty of the beast.

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    I have re-evaluated the usefulness of the Google converter. Upon using it to convert from metric to real I found the fatal flaw - it does not convert to both feet and inches. It is either xx.xxxxxx feet or xxx.xxxxxx inches, no xx feet xx inches.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    I can understand the manual board issues. I guess with the electronic ones that millisecond is easy to miss

    Leave a comment:


  • lonewolf
    replied
    Most modern electronic board display metric then immediately convert and display Imperial. Just don't look away for very long.
    If performances are being displayed on a manual board it is difficult to show both metric and Imperial in the time between attempts and most US fans want to see Imperial.

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by polevaultpower
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Originally posted by polevaultpower
    Even easier, bookmark this page: http://www.usatf.org/statistics/calculators/
    Actually, not. Google is the default search engine on all of my browsers on all of my workstations and phone, so is always at my fingertips, and it is far more comprehensive than the USATF site. (Although I do have that bookmarked too.)
    But vertical jumps and horizontal jumps and short throws and long throws are all converted differently, so when accuracy matters, google is likely not your friend.
    I'm not a T&F official, just a metric idiot who needs an occasional assist. . .

    Leave a comment:


  • polevaultpower
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Originally posted by polevaultpower
    Even easier, bookmark this page: http://www.usatf.org/statistics/calculators/
    Actually, not. Google is the default search engine on all of my browsers on all of my workstations and phone, so is always at my fingertips, and it is far more comprehensive than the USATF site. (Although I do have that bookmarked too.)
    But vertical jumps and horizontal jumps and short throws and long throws are all converted differently, so when accuracy matters, google is likely not your friend.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    For the most part they keep field event marks secret period.
    Good point! But at least we know when it's a foul.

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    What I hate the most is that at the pit they are measuring in metric but they keep that a secret and instead do a conversion and only
    announce that one. Why the secrecy?
    For the most part they keep field event marks secret period.

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by polevaultpower
    Even easier, bookmark this page: http://www.usatf.org/statistics/calculators/
    Actually, not. Google is the default search engine on all of my browsers on all of my workstations and phone, so is always at my fingertips, and it is far more comprehensive than the USATF site. (Although I do have that bookmarked too.)

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    a week or two ago a couple of real-measurement-challenged friends of mine were at a track meet near LA when the announcer mentioned a 55 foot triple jump. These folks had no idea how far 55 feet was
    I'm guessing they were Brits? I too would have had no clue what 55 ft meant. From my perspective their question makes perfect sense.

    What I hate the most is that at the pit they are measuring in metric but they keep that a secret and instead do a conversion and only announce that one. Why the secrecy?

    Leave a comment:


  • polevaultpower
    replied
    Even easier, bookmark this page: http://www.usatf.org/statistics/calculators/

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Well, actually what they asked was 'How far is 55 feet?'. I pondered this rather cryptic question for a moment and replied 'Uh, 55 ft??' The she of the they replied 'F*ck you, a**hole', because being a fem-type she apparently was upset that I could not read her mind, from 500 miles away. The following exchange of messages got uglier and uglier, during which they never did articulate their original question nor get the actual answer they were looking for.
    Women! Ya can't live with 'em . . . and ya can't legally eviscerate 'em! :twisted:

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by Jack Slocombe
    Ur going the wrong way bubba. Wow, I just converted to metrics.....not!
    True. The 55 feet metric conversion example is stuck in my head because a week or two ago a couple of real-measurement-challenged friends of mine were at a track meet near LA when the announcer mentioned a 55 foot triple jump. These folks had no idea how far 55 feet was, so for some strange reason they sent me a text message asking for the conversion to metric.

    Well, actually what they asked was 'How far is 55 feet?'. I pondered this rather cryptic question for a moment and replied 'Uh, 55 ft??' The she of the they replied 'F*ck you, a**hole', because being a fem-type she apparently was upset that I could not read her mind, from 500 miles away. The following exchange of messages got uglier and uglier, during which they never did articulate their original question nor get the actual answer they were looking for.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    It does all sorts of conversion - currency, weights, etc. Also does math problems.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jack Slocombe
    replied
    Ur going the wrong way bubba. Wow, I just converted to metrics.....not!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X