Everyone, Call me crazy, but what the heck are people talking about with regard to an adjusted algorithm to take measurement factors into account? Every meet worldwide, with the exception of some non-championship, relatively unimportant, and certainly not reported to this list meets I've been to at the high school level, measures distances in metric units, rounded to the nearest 0.01m. These are the official distances, and that's what matters for determining who wins, and for record purposes. The only motivation for expressing such a distance in feet and inches is to relate the distances for those who don't have an intuitive feel for the metric, unless some old records measured in feet and inches still stand (do they?). If the official distance is in metric, then it's irrelevant what the official distance would have been, had it been measured in the imperial system. To this end, any "algorithm" capable of converting metric to feet and inches, and rounding to the nearest 1/4 inch, is entirely appropriate. Whether or not it matches T&FN's adjusted algorithm is irrelevant, because the distance was measured in meters. I have a very simple program on my calculator that does conversions for me when I'm at a meet, and otherwise I use a windows program that I wrote, available at: http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~riceroo/met-eng2.exe I'd be happy to share either. Shawn Sorenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
