Skip to content
  • Register
    • Viewing the message boards in:

    Do you round up or down?

    Posts: 1,893 Member
    edited December 2024 in Chit-Chat
    I'm 5' 4 1/2" and I always say it just like that. On here and my HRM it doesn't allow for half inches so my question is, do other people round up or down? I've always rounded down, but I'm thinking of changing it. It would be nice to be able to say I'm 5' 5" and not feel like a liar.

    Welcome!

    It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
    Sign In
    Register
    «1

    Replies

    • Posts: 3,306 Member
      Science rounds to nearest even number...
    • Posts: 38 Member
      In this case I'd keep rounding down so that you don't overestimate your calorie burn.
    • Posts: 4,741 Member
      You can call yourself 5'5" .. liar.
    • Posts: 6,833 Member
      Can't you change the settings to cm, which is a more accurate measurement?
    • Posts: 56 Member
      I'm the same height, I just say/use 5'5, it's easier and hasn't made a difference :smile:
    • Posts: 1,899 Member
      Who cares. It is so unimportant. Move on to more relevant matters.
    • Posts: 460 Member
      I'm about 5'9.5" but I've said 5'9" for years; being 69" tall just entertains me more.

      If you've always done it one way, I wouldn't change it.
    • Posts: 5
      In accounts if its anything .5 and over then you round up so I'd do the same :bigsmile:
    • Posts: 1,893 Member
      Who cares. It is so unimportant. Move on to more relevant matters.

      Can you please tell me what is more relevant that I should move on to? I didn't say it was a big deal. That's why I posted in "Chit-Chat, Fun and Games" not the "General Diet and Weight Loss" forum. But hey thanks for taking time out of your day to comment on such an unimportant question to tell me it's unimportant.
    • Posts: 1,893 Member
      I'm about 5'9.5" but I've said 5'9" for years; being 69" tall just entertains me more.

      If you've always done it one way, I wouldn't change it.

      Lol, I don't blame you.
    • Posts: 56 Member
      I round uo I am 5' 1/2" but for things like this I say 5'1". I base it on math/science rules that your round up if it's .5 or more
    • Posts: 37
      Who cares. It is so unimportant. Move on to more relevant matters.

      If you don't care then why bother posting on this topic. Rude!!!
    • Posts: 1,680 Member
      My doctor's office has always rounded my height UP, so that works for me.
    • Posts: 37
      In accounts if its anything .5 and over then you round up so I'd do the same :bigsmile:

      I agree with fitnessclare! :)
    • Posts: 137 Member
      Yes I'm 5'6 and 1/2 and I always round down! It's better to underestimate calorie burn rather than overestimate!
    • Posts: 734 Member
      Who cares. It is so unimportant. Move on to more relevant matters.

      Actually it can be, so I care! For example, 1/2 inch meant the difference between my BMI being healthy vs. overweight. If I just rounded down to 5' 7" like I usually do I wouldn't have received my healthy weight bonus ($$$) at work. So, it can be relevant :tongue:
    • Posts: 237 Member
      Yes I'm 5'6 and 1/2 and I always round down! It's better to underestimate calorie burn rather than overestimate!

      Agreed! I'm 5'3 1/2" and I round down to 5'3 here, but round up to 5'4 whenever anyone asks.
    • Posts: 1,548 Member
      In this case I'd keep rounding down so that you don't overestimate your calorie burn.

      This. Though I don't think a 1/2 inch would make much of a difference at all.

      I'm 5'10 and 3/4"....I always say that because I HATE being tall lol. I refuse to be 5' 11" :laugh:
    • Posts: 2,564 Member
      Round down or give exact measurement in metres.
    • Posts: 2,181 Member
      Just give your height in metric units. You are 1 m 64 cm. Own it.
    • Posts: 3,783 Member
      Science rounds to nearest even number...

      I think you mean "nearest WHOLE number".
    • Posts: 1,207 Member
      Science rounds to nearest even number...

      I am a scientist and I disagree. 4.5 rounds to 5 not 4.
    • Posts: 65
      iam 5.6 1/2ft but always say 5.7, but I think most guys would rnd up! lol
    • Posts: 1,899 Member
      show previous quotes

      Actually it can be, so I care! For example, 1/2 inch meant the difference between my BMI being healthy vs. overweight. If I just rounded down to 5' 7" like I usually do I wouldn't have received my healthy weight bonus ($$$) at work. So, it can be relevant :tongue:


      in that case it makes all the difference in the world. lol.....can i bum some money?
    • Posts: 954 Member
      5 ft 5 , cuz lets face it that makes you the bigger person :D lol
      calorie wise , we are looking at maybe , 10-15cal difference
    • Posts: 2,181 Member
      show previous quotes

      I am a scientist and I disagree. 4.5 rounds to 5 not 4.

      I couldn't even interpret the post you're quoting :) I think that person must mean "even = whole", and there is also ambiguity as to whether "rounds to" means "rounds up to" or "rounds down to". I've never seen any convention in science of rounding to an even number as opposed to odd--though who knows, maybe that happens. In typical scientific usage, .5 is rounded up, not down.
    • Posts: 65
      :laugh: could somebody plz tell me how u reply to another's post! iam have'in no luck! lol thanx
    • Posts: 1,207 Member
      show previous quotes

      I couldn't even interpret the post you're quoting :) I think that person must mean "even = whole", and there is also ambiguity as to whether "rounds to" means "rounds up to" or "rounds down to". I've never seen any convention in science of rounding to an even number as opposed to odd--though who knows, maybe that happens. In typical scientific usage, .5 is rounded up, not down.

      It actually may be some obscure convention. Where I work, all the older chemists (like didn't even have computers when they got their degrees old) have some odd conventions they adhere to that are completely different from what I was taught. I don't remember an "even" number convention being one of them, but that doesn't mean that some odd discipline doesn't use it. It's wrong to say that "science" does it though, as the wider scientific community would round .5 up.
    • Posts: 1,207 Member
      :laugh: could somebody plz tell me how u reply to another's post! iam have'in no luck! lol thanx

      Hit the quote button instead of reply.
    • Posts: 2,181 Member
      show previous quotes

      It actually may be some obscure convention. Where I work, all the older chemists (like didn't even have computers when they got their degrees old) have some odd conventions they adhere to that are completely different from what I was taught. I don't remember an "even" number convention being one of them, but that doesn't mean that some odd discipline doesn't use it. It's wrong to say that "science" does it though, as the wider scientific community would round .5 up.

      Totally agree. If there is such a convention, it is not in wide use. Normal refereed journals will have you round up from .5 if you are not reporting to, say, two decimal pts (which is more likely anyway).
    This discussion has been closed.

    Welcome!

    It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
    Sign In
    Register

    Quick Links

    Categories