But you have to remember that these are time conversions so they depend
on the time achieved, and do not depend directly on the distance. The 0.1,
0.3 and 0.7 seconds were accepted for the 200/220, 400/440 and 800/880 for
converting world top performances. But if you aim to cover all
performances, you should make your conversion depend on the time. If
someone runs 1:45 for 400 metres (under-5 or over-90?), the 0.7 would be
more relevant than the 0.3.
David Dallman
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Ed Grant wrote:
> Netters:
> First of all, my problem with receiving messages was my computer, which is
>somewhat temperamental, but behaved itself on a second try.
>
> On this question of South lakes vs. South Eugene, it is no contes,
>
> Needing to use conversion favtors to keep oprderly all-tiome lists in ny NJ
>publications, I have adpted 4.0 seconds as the conversion between a metric and
>"imperial" DMR for boys, 4.5 seconds for girls,
>
> This is, of course, purely arbitrary, but certainly in the ballpark
>
> For many years there were only three (four if you count the old 220/200 LHs)
>events where conversions were in general use. They were .1 for 200 to 220, .3 for 400
>to 440 and .7 for 800 to 880. The change to metricity in 1980 and the nightmarish
>decision toi run 1600 and 3200 races in US HSA races expanded the program, as it
>were. It also bnrought relays into the picture. No standard conversions were
>immdiately available, so statisticians had to develop their opwn---which vary very
>little.
> Ed Grant
>
David Dallman
CERN - SIS
