3.1 to 2.0?

JRutledge · #1 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 23, 2007, 03:41pm

Boomer,

I do not think anyone said that 1.1 was exact. I think many said it was closer to 1.1 than .2 seconds.

Peace

socalreff · #2 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 23, 2007, 04:18pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Boomer,

I do not think anyone said that 1.1 was exact. I think many said it was closer to 1.1 than .2 seconds.

Peace

I timed it 3 times at normal speed an was at 1.0 seconds every time. Of course I had a big screen and they had a 12 inch one. Pretty good job in the circ.

BoomerSooner · #3 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 23, 2007, 06:35pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Boomer,

I do not think anyone said that 1.1 was exact. I think many said it was closer to 1.1 than .2 seconds.

Peace

I understand that, and the inexactness of the situation is why I originally had a problem with the stopwatch. After much thought and analysis, I came to the conclusion that definite knowledge need not be exact. I feel better about the stopwatch and for that matter using my count as definite knowledge.

JRutledge · #4 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 23, 2007, 06:51pm

Unless you have a rule in place to use some other device, a stop watch and a visual official's count are just going to have to do.

Peace