I am wondering a tiny bit if you are actually reading the posts. In response to being told the pool would not be measured every day, I said: "In light of this, how can times count for USMS?" I was told not to worry about FINA. And I wasn't; I was worried about USMS.
And, again, there was no exemption for Stanford. There were no bulkheads.
Should have come to the Albatross SCM meet yesterday! You can be assured that Jeff Roddin's meets will always comply with all USMS rules. :bow:
I do read the posts. I don't agree with your interpetation of what you wrote in the discussion forums of your conversation with the Canadians. But I am sure you did not write everything they told you and just summarized the conversation.
I have made inquiries with the Canadians who said they will get back to me, but Montreal is running the Canadian Olympic Trials, so they are busy right now.
I hope I did not offend your sensibilities with my comments. If I wrote something that you feel could be reasonably seen to be offensive, please point it out to me and I will refrain from future comments of that nature. The same goes for Jim. If I made either of you upset by unreasonable comments, I apologize. I know how serious both of you are about Masters Swimming.
That aside, you do understand my concerns with the current policy going foward? We should accept credible times swum in international meets where those times are swum in conformance with their standards and are reliable as was done in the past. We should not get into the busness of measuring foreign pools. If 5 different untrained people measure a pool they will come up with 5 different results. Any measuring device is only as accurate as the person using it. It must be calibrated frequently and can become innaccurate if dropped or if subjected to intereference. Those are just facts. You may dispute them but they are not offensive.
Just be patient the Canadians will get back to me and I will let you know what they say. :canada:
I am wondering a tiny bit if you are actually reading the posts. In response to being told the pool would not be measured every day, I said: "In light of this, how can times count for USMS?" I was told not to worry about FINA. And I wasn't; I was worried about USMS.
And, again, there was no exemption for Stanford. There were no bulkheads.
Should have come to the Albatross SCM meet yesterday! You can be assured that Jeff Roddin's meets will always comply with all USMS rules. :bow:
I do read the posts. I don't agree with your interpetation of what you wrote in the discussion forums of your conversation with the Canadians. But I am sure you did not write everything they told you and just summarized the conversation.
I have made inquiries with the Canadians who said they will get back to me, but Montreal is running the Canadian Olympic Trials, so they are busy right now.
I hope I did not offend your sensibilities with my comments. If I wrote something that you feel could be reasonably seen to be offensive, please point it out to me and I will refrain from future comments of that nature. The same goes for Jim. If I made either of you upset by unreasonable comments, I apologize. I know how serious both of you are about Masters Swimming.
That aside, you do understand my concerns with the current policy going foward? We should accept credible times swum in international meets where those times are swum in conformance with their standards and are reliable as was done in the past. We should not get into the busness of measuring foreign pools. If 5 different untrained people measure a pool they will come up with 5 different results. Any measuring device is only as accurate as the person using it. It must be calibrated frequently and can become innaccurate if dropped or if subjected to intereference. Those are just facts. You may dispute them but they are not offensive.
Just be patient the Canadians will get back to me and I will let you know what they say. :canada:
