RE: t-and-f: Origin of standard metric distances

[Mcewen, Brian T]

Darrell asked:

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I am beginning to wonder about this list and its powers of comprehension. :-)
None of the answers put forth have begun to address the question.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

English standard of macro measurement:    Mile

Metric standard of macro measurement:      Kilometer

 

Standard English racing distances:  Mile, 2-Mile, 3-Mile, 6-Mile         (Integers!)

 

Standard Metric racing distances:    3k, 5k, 10k                               (Integers again!)

 

The 440y/880y translated very seamlessly into metric distances on a 400m track ... the 400 and 800m.

 

The decision was made to race at a "semi-integral" distance of 1.5 kilometers instead of an even number laps (which would have resulted in a 1600m).

 

Why is this such a mystery?

 

After all, it was not too long ago that the US raced the 100y as the standard sprint distance ... would it have made sense to make the standard metric sprint a 91.42m dash?  Or even a 90m dash, just because that is the distance closest in meters to the 100y?

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 7:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: t-and-f: Origin of standard metric distances

I am beginning to wonder about this list and its powers of comprehension. :-)
None of the answers put forth have begun to address the question.
The mile is 4 laps, so is 1600, how did we get to 1500?  And I also believe a
mile is 1609 m, so where is the 1500 from.
The 2 mile is 8 laps, but we have 3000 as the regularly contested distance,
why?

Darrell
Faith is a road seldom traveled