TooMuchSexy.blog

Why isn’t this a tie?

.01 seconds is not an accurate measure of time.

§

§

Comments

1. .01 seconds is not an accurate measure of time.

   Why not?

   — Arthur 

1. …because I don’t believe it can accurately be measured through under water footage.

   — Nate 

1. According to the blown up photo at the SI site you linked to, in this shot, Phelps is actually touching the pad while his opponent has not quite made contact yet.  Given this fact, I do wonder about the accuracy of the machines measuring 1/100th of a second under water.  I wondered at the time if the force of water pressure would be sufficient to trigger a “hit”.  It seems like that definitely could be the case.  From all appearances here, Phelps won by more than 1/100th of a second to be sure.

   — Stay At Home Dad 

1. I think the greater question is, why bother having people race in a pool at all? Having swam competitively my entire childhood, I can tell you that it is one of the least enjoyable sports there is. You’re cold, underwater, it’s hard to hear or see anything, and the entire activity seems pointless. Get me in a river where there is a current, rocks, possible underwater treasures, and wildlife. This is a real reason to be a fast swimmer. And without the stinky water, head cap, and exotic swim suits.

   — Matt at MMA Gym 

1. You can measure time accurately under water - Phelps
   Did win.

   — Menstruation while breastfeeding 

1. Good stuff.  Glad to know there are others debating

   — Samsung Phone 

1. I can’t believe in the technology that we have nowadays. Very amazing!!

   — Denver Colorado Realty 

1. The measuring technology is incredible .Phelps’s swimming skill is more than incredible!

   — denver kangs 

§