K6VVA wrote:
>Since the difference between 1st & 2nd place in many sporting events can
>boil down to a tad over a microsecond in time difference (OK, that's a bit
>of an exaggeration), why can't the logger programs at least output time
>data down to the second?
>
In those sporting events all participants go the same distance. So
perhaps it would be a helpful start to note our much varying "distances"
by simply adding the operation time to the results - and with all the
software gadgets available and discussed (scoreboards etc.) it seems to
be more a matter of will than skill (available down to bands and seconds
for example at http://www.rdxc.org/asp/pages/stat.asp?ID=0&YEAR=13 ).
Before talking about differences in seconds or milliseconds it would be
helpful to know about the differences hourwise. The nanoseconds may be
of interest for the very small group discussing the time benefit of
terminating a qso with the "cool EE" instead of TU etc. The hourwise
differences are of interest for the big number of also-runs who like to
compare their results with those going nearly the same distance. But of
course they/we are more important in rate-building than in
opinion-building.
Best 73 and thanks for spending 43:27,87 seconds for reading,
Chris
(www.dl8mbs.de)
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|