In a laboratory setting, a Bassin Anticipation Timer is often used to examine variables that influence coincident timing. Yet uncertainty exists as to the influence of target light placement. Consequently, the purpose of this study was to examine the influence of two Bassin Timer stimulus presentation methods on coincident timing performance. Fifty right hand dominant participants performed two tasks. The first, a simple finger press task, required participants to depress a button, held in the dominant hand, in coincidence with a target stimulus. The second, a striking task, required subjects to perform a 60 cm horizontal arm motion to displace a wooden barrier which corresponded to the illumination of the target stimulus. Participants were randomly assigned to two groups distinguished by method of stimulus presentation. The stimulus presentation experienced by group 1, the terminating group, was such that the target light was the final light in the runway series. Group two, the continuing group, viewed a stimulus that continued beyond the target light. Twenty trials at each of three velocities, 4, 8 and 12 mph were randomly performed for each task. Task presentation was counterbalanced across subjects. Separate 2 x 2 x 3 ANOVA’s (group x task x velocity) with repeated measures on task and velocity were performed for response accuracy, bias and consistency (p <.05). No significant differences were revealed for group indicating that coincident timing performance was not dependent on the method of stimulus presentation. Significant differences were revealed for task for all measures with the finger press task demonstrating more accuracy and consistency than the striking task. Significant differences were also found for all variables for velocity. With respect to response bias, responses occurred early for the 4 mph stimulus and late for the 8 and 12 mph velocities. Response accuracy decreased as the stimulus velocity increased and responses to the 12 mph stimulus were less variable than those to the 8 mph velocity. A significant task x velocity interaction was also revealed for all measures. Response accuracy was significantly greater for the finger press task than the striking task for all velocities. Finger press responses were early at 8 mph versus striking responses which were late. The 12 mph responses for both skills were late yet the magnitude of the error was significantly less for the finger press task. Finally, the finger press task was more consistent at 4 mph than the striking task.Keyword(s): measurement/evaluation, performance, research