Reaction Time:

Frequently Asked Questions

Why won't my score show up?
At the moment, clicks under 100 milliseconds aren't counted for the leaderboard.

Why not?
Anything faster than 100 milliseconds is usually lucky click. As you can see on the stats page, everything from 0 to 130 milliseconds is about the same, and the actual bell curve seems to start at 130 milliseconds. I would be inclined to make the cutoff 130, but a few of the fastest players do seem to be getting legitimate results closer to 100. This way, the average people might rack up some lucky clicks, and the really good players can have their fastest clicks counted, and stay in the top ranks anyways.

Someone cheated!
I'm sorry, you'll need to rephrase that as a question.

Someone cheated?
At the moment, I'm manually deleting users who abuse the system. Just use the contact page to point it out to me.

What happened to the forums?
There wasn't much activity there, mostly just spam. It's been replaced by a comments system.

How do I get faster?
This is how.

Please log in to leave comments.

airadman 1 week 5 days ago

Hey thanks for this cool site :)
Sub 100 ms times are real and IMHO you should reconsider a blanket ban on them. I have strings of near 100ms times recorded and I am a shabby old fart.
The deviation-from-mean way is probably the best way to remove lucky hits. Maybe you could allow member/donors with some "track record" a little more leeway.

War Spigot 2 months 3 weeks ago

@jchizmar
on the stats graph for time waited before green light vs. reaction time, the average was 9 seconds faster for waiting 2500(ms I guess?) than waiting 5000. Thats seems like some kind of correlation to me.

jchizmar 2 months 3 weeks ago

Is there a correlation between delay time before box turns green and reaction time? It seems like after waiting too long a person's focus might be reduced.

War Spigot 2 months 3 weeks ago

I can get extremely low times when I'm predicting it (I have a good internal stopwatch to count to 5 with i guess(that could be another game)) I can get times below 50ms. I've gotten a 0ms before and also a 12 and some 20's and 30's. But when you do this, you get a lot of false starts. I think a good way to prevent prevention would be this:

For every false start, one time under 100ms would be take off.

This way, predictors like me wont be counted on the scoreboard, but really fast people will.

davidx 3 months 3 weeks ago

how about age as a variable

BludShoT 3 months 3 weeks ago

nice job bro

joshy 5 months 1 week ago

Have also donated 5 dollars, but are not getting access to the alltime or year-statistics. Have I payed for nothing??

Soliloquy 7 months 1 week ago

strange i donated 5 dollars but i'm still not a pro account, what happened?

johnintx 1 year 1 month ago

Finally had one click that was only 21 ms, but it was a fluke. I inadvertently clicked. Sure made for a fast 5 click time.

Fascion 1 year 1 month ago

Possible solution:
Allow sub-100ms scores in expert mode only and only if the user experiences no pre-mature clicks.

While I tend to agree with the whole "anything quicker than 100ms is inhuman," I think that if someone legitimately thinks they can do it, they should be able to do it with consistency... not blind luck or voodoo magic.

One lucky click sub-100ms is enough to drastically warp any score of only 5 attempts and that just shouldn't be acceptable.

Decadent 1 year 1 month ago

SystemAnonaly

It`s interesting your comments about the Visual RT time of elite athletes being in the 120-130ms range.

For the first few days of playing this benchmark I had very few legitimate reaction times below 120ms.

After playing this benchmark for several hours a day for the last week I can honestly say when I`m absolutely "in the zone" I can often achieve legitimate times around 105-110ms.
I havent been able to string togeather a sequence of 5 of these (

Decadent 1 year 1 month ago

WOW! Ive finally beaten 130ms !!!

Ive gone from around 155 to 130 in around 1 week.

If anyone is interested, I`m a fairly obsessive Call of Duty 4 player. My main computer is out of action due to a faulty PSU that is currently being RMA`d.
So, unable to play my games, I`ve been playing this benchmark for around 1 hour/day on my mothers VERY old computer to pass the time..
I wonder if my improvement will translate into my cod4 game ??? lol

Does anybody know the best ever time, I can only see back 1 month ?

jok 1 year 2 months ago

jok

EAGERTESTICAL 1 year 3 months ago

Yeah i'm with jake, bit pissed off that I have to wait till 100ms before I click, I can give you a doctor's certificate if you want to say it's a consistent thing..

JakeNewy 1 year 7 months ago

WHY CANT U MAKE UNDER 100 MILISECONDS COUNT

explosive diarrhea 1 year 9 months ago

176 ! i have the runs!!

dawciobiel 1 year 9 months ago

my fastest time is 84ms

blalone 1 year 10 months ago

I made a reaction time measurement where you would be prompted either a 1,2 or 3 and then had to type the appropriate key on the first try to stop the clock. The times were considerably slower, around 500 ms. This is more like a real life situation such as driving a car. I wanted to test the effects of alcohol on the reaction + computation time of the brain.

sirus09 2 years 1 month ago

Thanks for the cool info SystemicAnomaly

frankblank 2 years 1 month ago

65 yrs old, often abused body, 196.5, 4 thousanths of a second better than average, wowie, I'm gettin' drunk tomorrow night. Seriously, it seems clear you can get better with pratice, but I'm retiring at 4 ms better than average :).

SystemicAnomaly 2 years 1 month ago

Check out the international false start ruling for sprinters:

www.finishlynx.com/products/reactime/overview/body.htm#

SystemicAnomaly 2 years 1 month ago

The best batters in baseball and other elite athletes often possess a simple VISUAL RT of 150ms or better. The lowest legitimate visual RTs is considered to be in the 120 to 130ms range. This is considered the limit for electro-chemical nerve impulses to travel from the eye to the brain and from the brain to the fingers. This assumes a cognitive processing time of ZERO -- pure reflex, with no decision making processes involved.

Anything faster than this is considered LUCK or a psychic phenomenon. For this reason I believe that 120 (or 130) ms would be a more suitable cutoff than 100ms.

SystemicAnomaly 2 years 1 month ago

The "false start" cutoff for world-class sprinters is 100ms. If sprinters leave the starting block quicker than this, it is considered invalid. Note that sprinters are reacting to an AUDITORY cue rather than a VISUAL cue. Our simple AUDITORY RT is about 20-40ms faster than the simple VISUAL RT measured by the test on this web site. Elite sprinters are known to have an auditory RT as low as 110 to 120ms. It is exceptionally rare to have an auditory RT faster than this.

superman 2 years 2 months ago

below 100 shud be also counted man......

sirus09 2 years 2 months ago

I got a non-guess 89, I swear. Pure instinctual reaction... the cutoff is good at 100 though.

Impossible 2 years 2 months ago

I'm glad the cutoff is 100 ms, and not 130 ms. I've been getting several 12x times, and half a dozen non-lucky 11x times. I know I had 111 ms yesterday or whatever, and I think I can potentially do even better.

gorm 2 years 3 months ago

What is a very fast time for a 46 year-old fat slob who sits on the couch all day eating Cheese Its?

futsalbol 2 years 7 months ago

What is a very fast time for a 15 year-old male athlete?

hbw_knuckles 2 years 8 months ago

I got a 99 millisecond and was a fast reflex. BUt legitimate, I never did any faster legitimate than this 99 millisecond that was also my last click on my 155 average... and this never showed up to the leaderboards.

Pinky Dinky Dooo!!! 2 years 8 months ago

I love this game thingy its so fun!!! :)