Really good timers would be consistent, both from race to race and with each other. And so with experienced timers, two people could time the same place, and get the same time, within a tenth of a second. And there was a rule in the book: if two timers timed the same place, the slower time counted. A tenth of a second was a good as humans could get. Even when electric watches came that timed to the hundredth of a second, we (by the book) always rounded up to the next slowest tenth. So a time in the 100 meters of 10.90 was 10.9, but 10.91 was 11.0. We recognized that no one was good enough to catch the exact hundredth. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Wiggle Room<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
(By the way, now with fully automatic timing the same rule applies, but to a different order of magnitude. The \u201cmachine\u201d normally places times to the hundredth of a second. 10.90 is 10.90, and 10.91 is slower. But, if two athletes run 10.90, the machine can go to the thousandth. 10.895 is faster than 10.897. But if two athletes run 10.895, then it\u2019s a tie. Even the fully automatic start and video cameras have limits.)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n In track time and measuring there is always a margin of error.\u00a0\u00a0Discus is measured to the lesser inch; shot, high jump, pole vault and long jump to the lesser quarter-inch.\u00a0\u00a0We recognize that there is a margin of error in measurement, just like we recognize there is one in timing.\u00a0\u00a0(With improvements in laser measuring, that may someday get “tighter”, like timing did. Tape measures are already being replaced by laser sights and reflecting pins).\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Ok, I\u2019ve beat the margin of error concept to death.\u00a0\u00a0But the same thing is true in lots of other forms of measuring, and it\u2019s easy to be fooled.\u00a0\u00a0So to quote the British Rockers The Who, we \u201cWon\u2019t get fooled again!!\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n NBC News announced the results of their newest poll Sunday. This new survey has Kamala Harris at 49%, and Donald Trump at 44%. Steve Kornacki, the NBC polling \u201cguru\u201d was almost giddy in describing it, showing the big shift from July. Those results had then-candidate Biden with 43% and Trump at 45%. But here\u2019s the problem, that damned margin of error thing. The mathematical margin of error in this poll is +\/- 3.1%. That means that Harris could be as low as 45.9%, and Trump could be as high as 47.1%. Or it means that Harris could be at 52.1%, and Trump 41.9%. Or anywhere in between. <\/p>\n\n\n\n And the July poll was the same way. So, given the margin of error, what does this poll really tell us? It\u2019s close. That\u2019s all. And perhaps, it looks like Harris is doing better than Biden, but it\u2019s all within the margin of error, so there\u2019s no sure thing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Listen, Americans all want a winner and a loser. It’s great to see the Bengals and the Chiefs, Burrow and Mahomes, battle it out on the football field. We marvel at the accuracy of their passing, and the agility of their runs. But, in the end, we really remember one thing. The Chiefs won the game (Dammit, wait until next time!!).<\/p>\n\n\n\n We want to evaluate polls like they were scores. So we ignore \u201cmargins of error\u201d and just say \u201cwe\u2019re winning\u201d or \u201cthey\u2019re losing\u201d. And, in the end polls might give us some sense of what\u2019s going on, but they are very, very, deceptive. We are fooled because we want a score. Don’t get fooled again!!<\/p>\n\n\n\nNBC Poll<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Pictures of Time<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/dahlman.online\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/photo-finish-pic-of-the-mens-100m-final-v0-drbw3vkidpgd1.png-1.webp?resize=840%2C471&ssl=1\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n