Not sure if this fits the OP’s definition, but here are some “funny numbers” I can think of.
“2x4” lumber is actually 1.5x3.5 inches. I heard that some old homes have lumber that is actually 2x4 inches. But today it is 1.5x3.5 inches.
TV screens are measured diagonally. Did a marketing executive come up with that?
Grade inflation. What used to be “C” work is now “B” work.
Yeah - I think that would be better. But, as I said upthread, the flight/distance on my new 60 degree lob wedge is vastly different from my old one. With my “shortest” wedge now flying further, I almost need to look for a 64 degree or higher wedge…. Focussing on my short game (which is where you best improve your score) I now carry FIVE freaking wedges. Which to my mind sounds insane.
Or, they could use a standard robotic swing, and have standards for how far a 5 iron is supposed to go.
I used to be awfully good at standardized tests. I don’t often feel a need to compare. But it is weid feeling I have no idea of comparing my ACT/LSAT scores to wat I’m seeing today. Sure seems like A LOT of folk attain awfully high - if not perfect - scores.
These are all pretty good examples.
WRT TVs, I see folk report “aspect ratios.” Not something I’ve ever internalized.
My wife teaches community college, and we discuss grades often. It seems odd that today, simply completing the assigned work satisfactorily merits an A. I’m not demanding a perfect curve, flunking a certain number of students. But ISTM that an A ought to signify something more than mere competent completion of the work.
Good one! As illustrated in this handy reference. The true giant 1.43:1 70mm IMAX compared to the regular “IMAX” now found all over:
Seeing a movie that fills that huge screen is truly a unique and memorable sight. The bottom one, noting really special at all.
One theory I’ve seen: the student mindset shifted from viewing grades as “additive” (start with 0, then add X points for each merit) to “subtractive” (start with 100, then deduct X points for each flaw).
That makes a lot of sense. Thx.
good one. We have “true” 2x4’s, and 2x8’s in our 1924 built home. They are noticeably more bulky in size than modern dimensional lumber
Toilet paper seems to be sold the same way. “24 mega rolls equivalent to 123 regular rolls”, where “regular roll” is a size that hasn’t actually been sold since 1985.
As do I. Interesting fact, an old style 2x4 has only 3% less wood in it than a new style 2x6.
Which frequently leads to misunderstandings and surprises among amateur home-improvement individuals, when they suddenly discover that a 2x4 isn’t.
My very old wooden fence had true 4x4 and 6x6 posts. Sadly, those old posts were set directly in the ground and a recent wind storm proved how many had rotted.
I never heard of anybody implying that their brighter lightbulbs suggested they were more well endowed.
I used to work with a guy who’d get agitated by the strangest things. One day he came into my office with two boxes of paper clips. One of them was tattered and a bit faded, while the other was obviously pretty new. He showed me the labels on the boxes which indicated they were the same size (same brand, IIRC), but the paper clips from the newer box were obviously made of a smaller gauge wire than the older box. Gerry ranted about that all morning.
Shrinkflation hits paper clips. Who knew?
With regard to the OP, I kinda feel like streaming services have drastically changed the meaning of “ad-free.”
Lamps/light fixtures still say recommended wattage on them.
I thought the numbers had to do with the angle, with higher numbers having a face angle that would send the ball on a higher trajectory. The actual horizontal distance from each club was just a side effect of impact force + angle (and spin + wind + etc.).
They do. Roughly. But there is no standardization that I am aware of. Drivers, for example - the 1 wood, can have something like from 8 to 14 degrees of loft. What Are the Degree Loft of Golf Clubs? – Stitch Golf This is just one of countless sources, but you can see there is some degree of overlap among the irons.
You generally want your irons to vary about 4 degrees from each other, which gives you pretty even “gaps” in terms of how far you hit them. With my old clubs, my 8 iron was 150 yards, and each iron up or down was 10 yards further or shorter.
If I’m in the fairway aiming at the green, the most important question is how far club will make the ball go. How high the shot goes is far less important - unless you need to hit over/under a tree or something. Also generally a shorter club, which flies higher, will spin more and stop more quickly. So you generally want to have an idea of how far the shot will carry, as well as total yards. But I don’t want to make this into a golf thread.
I‘m also pretty sure the ”stronger” lofts on new clubs are intended to counteract the improved perimeter weighting - which makes the club easier to hit and launches the ball higher. But this is getting way more technical than I can pretend to understand.
James Watt coined the word horsepower and set the original definition. So your comment has a pleasing symmetry.
Non-golfer here. How much range-accuracy do you need out of an iron? If it’s finer than ten yards can’t you hit the ball a smidge softer with the one that exceeds the target range?
Yeah. You can take a partial swing. Or choking up 1/2-1” down the shaft will take a couple of yards off. But that presumes that you have a solidly reproducible swing, before you can count on being adept at taking a little off it.
Many MANY mediocre to decent golfers lack a consistently reproducible swing. Take 10 full swings with your 8 iron. How consistent is your yardage? How wide is your dispersal? You want to be able to hit your full irons pretty straight, with a pretty consistent distance. That is tough enough to do before worrying about what happens if you try to hit it with a 90-95% swing.
Take a golfer who shoots in the mid to upper 80s. That’s probably the top 10-20% of recreational golfers. Put him in the middle of the fairway with his favorite short iron in his hands - say a sand wedge from 100 yards. I bet he would miss the entire green at least 2 shots out of 10. Put him at 95 and ask him to take a little off it, and his misses increase. Take a hack who shoots in the 90s or higher, and even if he has an idea of taking a partial swing, he never practices it, and is quite likely to muff it.
Different players take different approaches. But IMO the best situation is to KNOW how far you hit your clubs, and play off the tee so that you have REALLY CLOSE to that distance into the green. Let’s say I’m 250 yards out. Realistically, I’m not going to hit the green from that distance. So I can either hit it 200 yards - which leaves me a 50 yard partial shot. Or say I LOVE my wedge that I hit 100 yards. I hit a 150 yard shot leaving me my full 100 yard wedge. If you watch golf, you’ll hear them say a player is between clubs. If I’m 145 yards from the pin, and I know I hit 9 iron 140 and 8 iron 150, I have to decide whether I try to take a little bit off the 8 or try to really step on the 9. My decision will likely be influenced by whether there is a big sandtrap in front of the green, or a pond behind it.
Also, a lot of scoring - or avoiding the BIG score - is missing in the right place. Hitting the bailout areas. And avoiding the WORST leave. It might be better to miss short, if that leaves you a longer uphill putt. Instead of slightly long leaving a steep downhill putt. A 10’ straight putt might be easier than a 4’ downhill breaker.
I no longer play golf, but when I did, out of 10 full swings, I’d make decent contact 2 times, hit the big ball 4 or 5 times, whiff at least once, and slice the ball into the next time zone the rest of the time.