Thousandths of Seconds - Clubhouse

Welsh Alex

07/08/2009 at 11:19

I recently got a PB over 5k of 18:45. My time was actually (on my watch) 00:18:45:98. A fellow runner reckons I should round that up to 18:46, but I say no and have awarded myself a time of 18:45.

What would you do, do you round up or ignore the thousandths on your watch ?

p.s. the 'advice' came from a runner I beat

Wilkie

07/08/2009 at 11:21

LOL - I could have guessed where the advice came from!

I wouldn't round it up either.

What was the official time, though?

Little Nemo - waving, not drowning!

07/08/2009 at 11:23

Aren't those hundreths? I would round up...

Welsh Alex

07/08/2009 at 11:23

Official time was 18:47, but it was not a chip-timed race and I didn't start at the front.

Welsh Alex

07/08/2009 at 11:24

Yes, they are Nemo. Doh !

Nick L

07/08/2009 at 11:24

Official time....assuming there is one.

Oh and those are 1/100ths not 1/1000ths!

popsider

07/08/2009 at 11:31

Take 18.45 if you normally go by watch time rather than official time - don't round up - they don't do that in chip timing do they so why should you.

Not Greased Lightning (M.)

07/08/2009 at 11:34

Don't they only do 100ths in sprint races I wouldn't round up.

Seela

07/08/2009 at 12:16

In 0.98 of a second you would have been aproximately 4.5 metres behind someone who ran 18:45.00 dead, could you live with believing you would have caught them? Do the honourable thing and round up.

You were also 9cm short of recording 18:46. Did you take a short cut, not follow the racing line?

Helen Liz

07/08/2009 at 12:21

In rallying time taken is to the completed second (or, in WRC to the 1/10th), so is always rounded down. If it's good enough for them...

PloddingOn pirate

pirate

07/08/2009 at 12:32

Round up minutes and km's or miles

Welsh Alex

07/08/2009 at 13:06

i do usually use my watch time in non chipped races. Some races are not the best to the second in recording finish times. The guy behind me last week got the same official time despite i think being a sec or so behind.

Welsh Alex

07/08/2009 at 13:09

MF. After all the bad things i have done in my life i could indeed live with this

Shiny

07/08/2009 at 20:23

Surely the 9 in .98 is actually tenths of a second and I would round up anything over half a second personally. Does it really make that much difference? The only time I would care about that small a margin would be if it was one of the 'milestones' such as a 40min 10K or 1:30 half etc.

If you had eaten 98% of a banana would you still say you had a banana in your hand?

Lå®Ðä®§€

07/08/2009 at 21:27

Round it up, it will be easier to beat next time.

Welsh Alex

08/08/2009 at 09:05

Lol ! If I had only eaten 2% of a banana I could still say I had some banana !

Not a bad idea Lardarse, but I will have to go thru all my results now seeing if they should be rounded up

fat face

08/08/2009 at 15:03

I wish I had the problem of whether to round to to the nearest second. I'm so slow that if I rounded up the the nearest hour no one would bloody notice.

Welsh Alex

08/08/2009 at 16:42

lol ! There by the grace .... I had the same problem 10 years ago FF.

Womble

10/08/2009 at 12:25

Nearest hour??? Nearest day for some of us

- yesterday in my case! It was a course pb though, not all time. I'm not going to see those again. Except for distances I haven't done before, hehehehehe.

Peter Everitt

10/08/2009 at 22:21

It seems to me that some people have too much time on their hands. Spent more productively then you might have done an 18:44...