A. 1 one-thousand, 2 one-thousand, etc...
B. 1-Mississippi, 2-Mississippi, etc...
C. 1-Alligator, 2-Alligator, etc...
How To Do Everything podcast [ep 234; March 11, 2016] unscientifically tested the methods of how fast people counted seconds. Counting is a skill players (and observers) in a self-refereed sports must possess. Most of the counting participants on the podcast counted too slow with the word pausing.
It's generally accepted that ultimate players fast count their stalling. So, would requiring a word pause help with the a correctly interval-ed stall count?
By rule, the word "Stalling" should start or restart every stall count as a signal.
|via WFDF rules for ultimate|
|via USA Ultimate Rules 11th edition|
A solution might be to require the word "stalling" to be used in between each number in the marker's stall count.
So, this would truly be the ultimate science fair project, or just a fun experiment at an ultimate tournament.
- Can an ultimate player accurately count up to 10 seconds by 1-second intervals. Compare results of count before being active and after running, or being a marker.
- Can an ultimate player looking to throw a disc ably judge when a stall count is not at 1-second intervals?
- Compare the the standard counting up (1-10) with counting down (to 0) with accuracy with stall counts.