Why do we keep posting only the metric for field events?

Most place in the world use metric. If it need to be changed, it should remove miles, foot etc

They just want to get rid of us older people so hardly anybody is left to watch track and field. It would be much easier to post both metric and imperial than make us all punch it into a calculator. 6.17 or 6.18 doesn't mean sh!t to me. Is that over 20 ft?

FengYun wrote:

Most place in the world use metric. If it need to be changed, it should remove miles, foot etc

The above is an old argument and not a good one. It's not hard to list both.

Over time it's more likely that people will catch on to both!

always teaching a lesson wrote:

They just want to get rid of us older people so hardly anybody is left to watch track and field. It would be much easier to post both metric and imperial than make us all punch it into a calculator. 6.17 or 6.18 doesn't mean sh!t to me. Is that over 20 ft?

It's also ruining the competitiveness of track & field. No one knows what a throw of 60 meters in the discus means. We know it's good, but we have nothing to compare it to, except the other throwers.

It's similar to Garo Yepremian, the Miami Dolphins placekicker saying, Yay, I kick a touchdown!

Who wants to read about track & field with a calculator in hand?

I've been complaining about this since they made the changes.

No one listens.

Do you think yards and feet are going to go away?

This has been my sport for more than 50 years.

Yet I don't know if a HJ of 1.8 is good or an LJ of 2.2 is bad.

Those marks mean nothing to me and I'm as avid a fan as

you will see in the World!

And you expect Joe Blow Public to catch on to our sport?

Not smart.

I've been angry about it since high school.

waltertompatton wrote:

This has been my sport for more than 50 years.

Yet I don't know if a HJ of 1.8 is good or an LJ of 2.2 is bad.

Those marks mean nothing to me and I'm as avid a fan as

you will see in the World!

And you expect Joe Blow Public to catch on to our sport?

Not smart.

I've been angry about it since high school.

If only the thing you were using to complain about metric marks was capable of converting them in less than 1 second by simply typing it into the top of your browser.

Jamin'sHSClassmate wrote:

waltertompatton wrote:

This has been my sport for more than 50 years.

Yet I don't know if a HJ of 1.8 is good or an LJ of 2.2 is bad.

Those marks mean nothing to me and I'm as avid a fan as

you will see in the World!

And you expect Joe Blow Public to catch on to our sport?

Not smart.

I've been angry about it since high school.

If only the thing you were using to complain about metric marks was capable of converting them in less than 1 second by simply typing it into the top of your browser.

walter is right. this is exactly the opposite of the attitude you need to have if you want to create interest in the sport. it is not difficult to do both. If you are an american website, magazine, or newspaper, use feet and inches.

always teaching a lesson wrote:

They just want to get rid of us older people so hardly anybody is left to watch track and field. It would be much easier to post both metric and imperial than make us all punch it into a calculator. 6.17 or 6.18 doesn't mean sh!t to me. Is that over 20 ft?

Kids don't know metric either. and we still use feet and inches in high school. only exception is pentathlon, so that the iaaf scoring tables can be used. and it drives everybody crazy. coaches and parents sit over by the jumps and throws with calculators and conversions charts instead of just coaching and watching.

waltertompatton wrote:

Most people still have metric minds.

I know this thread will only produce insults.

That is not why I posted it.

Wipeout all things which ruin our sport.

Have the GUTS to do the right thing.

Nobody is watching field events, so it doesn't matter what it's measured in.

Athletics is a metric sport. Get over yourselves USA and move into the 20th century. Then maybe you can catch up with the 21st when you're ready.

At an elite level all measurements and heights are set in metric. So when the hj bar goes up by 1cm it goes up by exactly 1cm, or 0.394 inches. That's 197/500ths of an inch. However you write that as an imperial fraction, it's wrong.

I am a huge track fan, watch meets on tv, and attend 10 or more meets per year at all levels.

I have no issue with moving to metric marks, but I believe there should have been a learning curve. If there had been a time span when both marks (imperial & metric) were listed, I would be converted to all metric by now. Instead, I ignore the field events listed in metric only and have basically lost interest in them. I pay little to no attention. The governing body has driven off at least one fan by a lazy move. I suppose their thinking was convert and fans will be forced to follow but they misdiagnosed the laziness of most fans. I did not think it would, but this includes me.

larkimm wrote:

Athletics is a metric sport. Get over yourselves USA and move into the 20th century. Then maybe you can catch up with the 21st when you're ready.

So, if all start lists and results were printed in Swahili only without conversion, you would be on board? That is what metric is like for most U.S. people. We would have adjusted if the imperial conversion was listed with the metric mark for at least a learning curve period, but it was not.

It's been metric since the 1970s. How long do you need to learn?

it's not even about learning. we are just not hard wired to care about metric numbers. the sport should do their numbers any way they want. but, if you are an american publication or broadcasting company, you should be showing the customary measurements alongside the metric measurements. It is just lazy not to. their job is to cater to the fans, not the other way around.

larkimm wrote:

It's been metric since the 1970s. How long do you need to learn?

Apparently more than 40 years!!!

They have been metric but have almost NEVER been listed in meet results simultaneously. Since the 70's they have listed metric OR imperial, but not both. There have been a few minor exceptions but very few. Why not list both for a period of time, maybe not 40 years, but how about 2?

no reason for an adjustment period. just list them both. it doesn't cheapen the sport. it doesn't cost any more money. what does it hurt to show both?

high school xc coach wrote:

no reason for an adjustment period. just list them both. it doesn't cheapen the sport. it doesn't cost any more money. what does it hurt to show both?

oh, I agree, but can live with an adjustment period if that is the best they can do. But they can't even find a way to do that.

If U.S. results are picked up by France, I assume they put the results in French or both English/French.

Why can't both metric and imperial marks be made available when in the U.S.? It alsmost feels like yet another unintended USATF attempt to kill the sport because they cannot think outside of their bubble.

Numbers obtain their meaning through usage and contexts. For field events, the significance is always understood in terms of what other athletes achieve (at all levels: the peers, local, national, world). Being able to relate them to length of a truck, height of a house or weight of bags of flour just doesn't mean anything. For running, measuring speed either in km/h or mph will raise most people eyebrows, regardless of metric or imperial, bacause pace is more meaningful, e.g., time per marathon distance. Sure it's easier to compare to, say, cycling speed. But that's meaningless comparison for most athletic purposes (except for those who work as (motor)cycle escorts for maraton races.)