Dear All, Since sending my last message on this subject, I have researched some Australian pacing records, and calculated their average speeds in metres per minute and metres per second. I found the comparisons made interesting reading.
I suspect that if these metric figures were available between 1973 and 1986, then there would have been much less pressure in the trotting industry to revert to 'Mile Rates' for historical and contemporary comparisons. Records for Australian Pacers Time trials included Includes all records to 2003 Year Horse Mile rate Speed m/min Speed m/s 1867 SIR WILLIAM DON 2:25.0 666 m/min 11.1 m/s 1890 MYSTERY 2:30.0 644 m/min 10.7 m/s 1893 MYSTERY 2:29.5 646 m/min 10.8 m/s 1895 MYSTERY 2:25.0 666 m/min 11.1 m/s 1901 REX DERBY 2:16.0 710 m/min 11.8 m/s 1901 SILVER BOY 2:20.6 687 m/min 11.5 m/s 1901 SILVER BOY 2:23.4 673 m/min 11.2 m/s 1903 ALMONT 2:12.2 730 m/min 12.2 m/s 1903 SILVER BOY 2:17.2 704 m/min 11.7 m/s 1907 DAN PATCH 2:11.0 737 m/min 12.3 m/s 1908 DAN PATCH 2:10.0 743 m/min 12.4 m/s 1920 HAPPY VOYAGE 2:9.0 749 m/min 12.5 m/s 1923 KOLA GIRL 2:7.8 756 m/min 12.6 m/s 1931 WALLA WALLA 2:7.0 760 m/min 12.7 m/s 1932 WALLA WALLA 2:6.8 762 m/min 12.7 m/s 1933 WALLA WALLA 2:2.4 789 m/min 13.2 m/s 1933 WALLA WALLA 2:6.0 766 m/min 12.8 m/s 1940 LAWN DERBY 2:2.0 791 m/min 13.2 m/s 1951 SINGLE DIRECT 2:1.2 797 m/min 13.3 m/s 1952 AVIAN DERBY 2:0.0 805 m/min 13.4 m/s 1952 AVIAN DERBY 2:1.0 798 m/min 13.3 m/s 1954 RIBANDS 1:58.7 813 m/min 13.6 m/s 1968 HALWES 1:57.3 823 m/min 13.7 m/s 1968 HALWES 1:58.6 814 m/min 13.6 m/s 1971 MOUNT EDEN 1:56.7 827 m/min 13.8 m/s 1982 COPPER WAY 1:55.4 837 m/min 13.9 m/s 1982 POPULAR ALM 1:55.9 833 m/min 13.9 m/s 1983 POPULAR ALM 1:53.2 853 m/min 14.2 m/s 1983 CLASSIC GARRY 1:54.9 840 m/min 14.0 m/s 1988 ROWLEYALLA 1:52.6 858 m/min 14.3 m/s Cheers, Pat Naughtin LCAMS Geelong, Australia -- ------ Forwarded Message > From: Pat Naughtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 11:56:23 +1000 > To: David King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Euric Mighty Chimp > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [USMA:30254] Re: Harness racing in Australia > > on 2004-06-29 10.11, David King at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> And why choose to go back to the stone age and ditch km? >> >> David >> >> MightyChimp wrote: >> >>> Here is the page the statement was taken from: >>> >>> http://www.harness.org.au/ahrc/annual/public/records/aus_distt.htm >>> >>> But, I'm confused. If they reverted to miles, why are the distances >>> in the first two columns shown in metres? >>> >>> Euric > > Dear David, Euric, and All, > > What you are seeing here is an excellent example of two different approaches > to metrication, and both of them are happening inside a single individual's > head at the same time. One approach is technical and the other has to do with > changing mindsets and social attitudes. Let me explain. > > The trotting industry changed technically to metric in 1973. This was an easy > and successful change that went smoothly and is now probably irreversible. > However, this technical change did not recognise that closely related, and > perhaps more important, mindset and social changes were also necessary. > > The mindset change was about comparing performances between different > distances, and between present and past performances. Traditionally, although > it is hard to calculate with old measures, this was done using a concept > called 'mile rate' where the performance of each horse over each distance that > it trotted, was compared to a theoretical rate for one mile. > > The social change that was necessary involved what is 'right' and what is > 'wrong' in the language that it is acceptable to use in the member's stand at > the trotting track. Will you be socially ostracised if you use 'kilometre > rate' instead of 'mile rate'? This is a highly emotive social question that in > this case has been the dominant force in the non-metrication of the > expression, 'mile rate'. > > Interestingly, it was the technical metrication of the trotting industry that > made the 'mile rate' calculations easier to do and, it can be argued that > 'mile rates' became more popular after (technical) metrication, because they > are easier to calculate using race distances in metres, because these can now > be done on a decimal calculator. > > Sadly though, because the 'senior citizens' of the trotting industry have now > ensconced the words 'mile rate' into their 'official' jargon, a neophyte in > their industry might assume that the industry is yet to 'go metric' when in > fact all that is left of old measures is that one, single, expression, 'mile > rate'. Compare this with the optometry industry where they have been > measuring, in all countries, fully in metric measures, since the 1880s. > However, to hide the fact that when you sit in an optometrists chair and look > at jumbled letters � exactly 6 metres away � you then allow the optometrist to > tell you that you have 20/20 vision [20 feet/20 feet because 6 metres = 19 > feet 8 7/32 inches]. > > In any planning for metrication, it is the technical conversions that are > relatively easy; it is is the mindset and social issues that are harder and � > if you get them wrong � will reappear to haunt you for many generations into > the future. (In colloquial terms they will come back to bite you on the > buttock.) > > This example in the Australian trotting industry is just one interesting (but > obscure) example. Another is the decision of French plumbers to use a soft > conversion of the pouce to metric in the 1790s; they are still having trouble > with that � 200�yeas later, and it is far more widely spread than throughout > Europe. Yet another is the decisions of paper makers (in Canada and the USA) > to create their own standard paper sizes rather than use the international > A-series. We will all suffer from the financial and time dis-efficiencies of > these decisions for many many more generations. > > Thanks for alerting me to this issue. It is an interesting example of what can > go wrong in a metrication program. Take care! > > Cheers, > > Pat Naughtin LCAMS > Geelong, Australia > > Pat Naughtin is the editor of the free online newsletter, 'Metrication > matters'. You can subscribe by sending an email containing the words subscribe > Metrication matters to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- ------ End of Forwarded Message
