I don't believe that the race is truly about who is the fastest from point A to point B but rather, who gets to point B in the shortest amount of time from when the race starts.

Hmmm....OK. Makes sense.

That post was not intended as authority on the subject. It is just my interpretation of the race.

Sorry that I wasn't more clear on that.

Well, that is a valid interpretation indeed. I suppose if it was fastest from point A to point B they would give them a running start and start the clock when any portion of them went over the line.

Wooooo!

Heh. Noted.

This is what they do in some of the track cycling events. Two cyclists may be racing at the same time but they aren't actually racing head to head in a "first to cross a line way." Results are based on the time to cover a given distance after they've already come up to speed.

Then there's the auto racing method where technically not every covers the same distance (though the distance is minuscule in proportion to the hundreds of miles traveled) and it is first to cross a line after the race starts.

But simultaneous start from rest over a short distance is much more exciting from a spectator perspective because you can see who wins rather than relying on tallied results.

I think I've watched every match and this was was by far the most gut wrenching.

What a horrible misuse of the word "hacker." Using a search engine is not hacking.