(This is posted on behalf of Don Schlesinger, who is having trouble posting
to the t-and-f list. You can reply to him directly at D [EMAIL PROTECTED])
If you're a horizontal-jumps enthusiast, as I am, you must share with me a
certain frustration when trying to read current-day performance boards, while
following a competition. Of course, I'm talking about the inability, under
the present configuration, of the boards to display the precise imperial
measurement of the jump, to the nearest quarter of an inch. (Yes, metric
lovers, I know you have no such problem!)
As you all know, standard boards have four panels to display first the two
digits for the feet and then, potentially, two more digits for the inches.
There are ten push-tabs for each integer, which permit the poster to select
the appropriate numbers. Thus, for 22 feet, 6 inches, the official selects
2-2-0-6 (or, alternatively, leaves the third column blank, with no digit
displayed, or posts 2-2-6--, leaving the fourth column blank), and for, say,
23 feet 11 inches, the judge posts 2-3-1-1. The problem? We aren't
permitted to know any fractions of an inch. There is no way to display , ,
or of an inch, under the present board configurations, and so, the
fractions are simply dropped. Worse still, from time to time, fractions such
as are actually erroneously rounded up, to the next-highest inch!
My suggestion is as innovative as it is simple to implement, and I'm
astounded that no company has seen fit to market such a product up until now.
Leave the first two columns alone. Add two extra tabs to the third column,
to provide for a single panel that will express not only the ten single
digits from 0 to 9, but also the numbers 10 and 11. For the fourth column,
remove the current ten available digits and replace them with the three
fractions, either in the aforementioned fractional form, or perhaps with
their decimal equivalents, .25, .50, and .75, which may be easier to read
from a distance.
If anything, the board might be even cheaper to manufacture, as the current
40 tabs would be replaced by five fewer, or 35 in all. I see no apparent
drawbacks, other than the obvious fact that the 10 and 11 panels, for
inches, would be slightly more crowded looking than their single-digit
counterparts. So what!
I urge some member of the group who works at a company that produces
performance boards to seriously consider my proposal. I'm certainly not
looking for any royalties or patenting fees. My payment would be in the
form of the enhanced enjoyment that tens of thousands of spectators,
athletes, and coaches would derive from being able to follow the jumps events
more carefully. I hope that someone will see fit to create such a prototype
board, and nothing would please me more than to see it replace the current
models as the new standard for performance boards, across the country. Don't
you all think it's about time?
Don Schlesinger
