-
so the primary measure that those who devised the pool length were thinking about was clearly feet
No. My local pool is 33+1/3m long (as is the one I grew swimming in 30+ years ago). There's no metric equivalent of a 1/3m so that argument falls away. It's purely so that you swim a specific distance in a whole number of lengths. Most pools built nowadays are 25m, 33+1/3m or 50m for this very reason. Other lengths are generally due to space constraints.
The pool in question was obviously built when swim distances were based on yards.
Greenbank-
The pool in question was obviously built when swim distances were based on yards.
Ah, thanks, I just thought it would be easier for mental arithmetic to think in feet. Perhaps it's just that the thought of always having to swim lengths in multiples of 3 to get to a round figure worries me. :)
I have noted all the different lengths of London lidos before but wasn't sufficiently aware that there were 33 1/3 metre pools, too. I thought they'd all been built before the EU destroyed our native British culture with its (the EU's) dastardly metric system.
Oliver Schick
I find it persistently annoying that the [sup]o[/sup] isn't available on UK keyboards. As a symbol, º is called the 'masculine ordinal indicator' in LibreOffice, as I just discovered when I copied it across.
Good point about the measurement, but slightly more simply, 30.5 (strictly speaking 30.48m) is 100 feet. 1 yard is 3 feet, so the primary measure that those who devised the pool length were thinking about was clearly feet. Good to see that the pool is still flying the flag for metric martyrism. :)
Yes, that remark about the temperature mystified me, too. I can only imagine that he must mean the air temperature--29ºC as water temperature is *really* warm.