Round the hand time UP to the next tenth, then add the factor: NFHS adds 0.24s at every distance; Athletic.net adds 0.24s under 300m, 0.14s from 300m to 800m, and nothing at 800m and above. A hand-timed 11.2 becomes an 11.44 FAT either way.
Turn a stopwatch time into its fully automatic equivalent, the way meet seeding does it, by both published conventions. Enter the hand time and the race distance, or flip the direction to go from FAT back to a hand time.
A hand-timed 100m of 11.42 converts to 11.74. T&F News / Athletic.net: 11.42 rounds up to 11.50, then 100m is 100m, which is under 300m, so add 0.24s. Enter your own mark above for yours.
Almost every US high school dual meet is still timed by hand, and almost every entry list, seeding system and college recruiting standard is written in FAT. That gap is why your 11.4 at a Tuesday dual and an 11.4 at a state qualifier are not the same result, and why a coach will ask which one you ran before they ask anything else.
A stopwatch starts when a human reacts to the gun and stops when a human sees the torso cross, and those two reactions do not cancel out, so a hand time reads fast. Both conventions below round the hand time up to the next tenth first, then add their factor. Leaving the rounding out is the most common way a converted time gets quoted wrong.
NFHS (US high school) adds +0.24s to every race whatever the distance.
T&F News / Athletic.net bands it by distance: +0.24s under 300m, +0.14s 300m to under 800m, nothing added 800m and above (rounding only, nothing added). The tool lets you pick, because they disagree and which one applies depends on who is seeding the meet.
This is a seeding convention, not physics. No governing body ratifies a record from a converted time, and a coach reading your profile can tell the difference. Convert to compare, then race on a real system before you quote it.
The direction switch on the tool also runs the conversion in reverse, FAT back to an approximate hand time, for comparing an old stopwatch PR against a modern fully automatic one. That direction is an estimate: the round-up a real conversion applies cannot be undone.
Source: NFHS "Converting Times: Manual to FAT", with the Track & Field News / Athletic.net distance bands, checked 2026-08-19. NFHS adds 0.24 at every distance. Athletic.net bands it by distance and adds nothing at 800m and above. Both round the hand time up to the next tenth first.
Both conventions round the hand time up to the next tenth first, then add the figure below. Skipping the round-up is the most common way these get quoted wrong.
| Convention | Race distance | Added to the rounded time |
|---|---|---|
| T&F News / Athletic.net | under 300m | +0.24s |
| T&F News / Athletic.net | 300m to under 800m | +0.14s |
| T&F News / Athletic.net | 800m and above (rounding only, nothing added) | nothing added |
| NFHS (US high school) | all distances | +0.24s |
The two disagree above 300m, and the gap is the whole reason a converted time can differ between two meet systems. Source: NFHS "Converting Times: Manual to FAT", with the Track & Field News / Athletic.net distance bands, checked 2026-08-19.
| Event | Hand time | NFHS FAT | Athletic.net FAT | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100m | 11.20 | 11.44 | 11.44 | agree |
| 200m | 22.80 | 23.04 | 23.04 | agree |
| 400m | 51.50 | 51.74 | 51.64 | differ by 0.10s |
| 800m | 2:05.00 | 2:05.24 | 2:05.00 | differ by 0.24s |
| 1500/1600m | 4:40.00 | 4:40.24 | 4:40.00 | differ by 0.24s |
Below 300m they are identical. From 300m to under 800m Athletic.net adds 0.14 where NFHS adds 0.24. At 800m and above Athletic.net adds nothing at all, so a distance runner's hand time converts a quarter of a second differently depending on which system the meet uses.
Converting is the easy half. The number only means something next to a standard, so this tool also places your converted mark against published NCAA Division I, II, III and NAIA recruiting ranges for your event and gender, and tells you which of them are realistic. No other converter does that, and it is the reason to run yours here.
A converted mark is for comparing, not for claiming. Once you know where it sits, the useful next step is putting the race itself on a profile so a coach can watch it rather than take your word for the number.
No. A stopwatch is started by a human reacting to the gun and stopped by a human seeing the finish, and those reactions do not cancel out, so a hand time reads fast. That is why a correction is added before the two can be compared. The background and the meet-day practice are in hand timing vs FAT explained.
It depends on who is seeding. NFHS adds 0.24 to every race whatever the distance. Athletic.net and Track & Field News band it by distance and add nothing at 800m and above. This tool does both, so you can see what each one gives you.
No. No governing body ratifies a record from a converted time, and it cannot be used as a qualifying mark where FAT is required. Convert to compare yourself against a standard, then race on a real timing system before you quote the number.
Yes, with the direction switch above, but it is an estimate: converting up to FAT rounds the hand time to the next tenth first, and that rounding cannot be undone. A FAT of 11.66 could have come from any stopwatch reading between 11.41 and 11.50.
No. If you have the FAT, use the FAT. It is the better number and the one a coach trusts; quoting a slower converted hand time only makes you look slower than you are.
All converters 路 Recruiting standards 路 Create a free profile