Though this topic has received some attention in various threads over the years, it is the dead of winter, and I think that those of us in the Northeast, at least, could do with a little blood boiling to warm up the extremities!
To this end, I am wondering how many of my fellow swimmers have had swim times disallowed ex post facto in USMS sanctioned meets, and if so, for what reason?
As some of you who read my blog may recall, I have had a number of TT-worthy times disallowed for various reasons over the years, ranging from lack of timeliness in submitting the paperwork, to swimming a couple races in the "Open" category.
Recently, I have had my first and only All American swim retroactively yanked, some five weeks after the Top 10 list was officially published. Obviously, this is not as bad as those unfortunate souls who have had World Records declared ineligible for consideration.
Nevertheless, it does sting. I invite you to read the details of my De-All'ing (from my perspective) here: byjimthornton.com/.../
Note: I do not question the right of USMS to have rules more stringent than USA-S and FINA. What I do believe is unfair to us swimmers is when these rules apply to us but not to those in charge of making sure that all the i's are dotted and the t's crossed when they secure sanctions for meets and collect the meet fees. My own AA-rescinded swim was done at Michael Phelps's famous pool, the North Baltimore Aquatics Club, in a meet that had a USMS sanction number. Skip Thompson, who traveled from Michigan to swim in this meet, told me he asked about the pool measurement and was told that it was on file. There were no bulkheads involved. I did not make the mistake of swimming in an "open" event. I feel I did everything right this time!
I also feel that the USMS rule book is so dense and complex that it's hopeless for swimmers to know if they are complying. I feel like the mole in a game of bureaucratic whack-a-mole!
Anyhow, if you have your own examples of TT or All American or even World Record times that were rescinded after the fact, please use this thread to post them!
What I find most objectionable, is the ex post facto removal of an TT/AA time that was declared "official" after preliminary times were released and a correction period ensued. Jim did his due diligence and did his level best not to get his hopes up until the list was declared final. If a swim gets through the whole process without being flagged as having missing paperwork or whatnot, why is that the swimmer's fault? If the powers that be don't catch it during the fairly lengthy TT vetting process, it seems cruel to yank it later. Is this really necessary? And is this retroactive yanking of official times provided for in the rule book?
I have had quite a few times go missing over my 8 year masters career for various reasons. The worst was a referee sanctioned 50 fly time trial that was .02 off the WR. The sting was made worse when another masters swimmer in my age group was invited to do a sanctioned time trial to attempt a WR. The sting was taken off that when I went faster the following year. I've also had split requests go missing, though generally if they don't appear in the preliminary TT list, you can email and ask/beg the meet directors to submit them.
If electronic timing were required for every meet, there would be fewer local in season meets. Generally, people aren't tapered for these meets, so the benefit of manual timing may not be very important. And of course if you did taper for a meet like that, you risk getting the time thrown out for lack of measurement. And, honestly, a perhaps more important factor than manual timing is meets were there are very few officials and they can't possibly monitor every lane or see every infraction.
Does a pool to have to have a measurement on file for the meet to get a USMS sanction? I would assume no since bulkhead pools always have to be measured.
What I find most objectionable, is the ex post facto removal of an TT/AA time that was declared "official" after preliminary times were released and a correction period ensued. Jim did his due diligence and did his level best not to get his hopes up until the list was declared final. If a swim gets through the whole process without being flagged as having missing paperwork or whatnot, why is that the swimmer's fault? If the powers that be don't catch it during the fairly lengthy TT vetting process, it seems cruel to yank it later. Is this really necessary? And is this retroactive yanking of official times provided for in the rule book?
I have had quite a few times go missing over my 8 year masters career for various reasons. The worst was a referee sanctioned 50 fly time trial that was .02 off the WR. The sting was made worse when another masters swimmer in my age group was invited to do a sanctioned time trial to attempt a WR. The sting was taken off that when I went faster the following year. I've also had split requests go missing, though generally if they don't appear in the preliminary TT list, you can email and ask/beg the meet directors to submit them.
If electronic timing were required for every meet, there would be fewer local in season meets. Generally, people aren't tapered for these meets, so the benefit of manual timing may not be very important. And of course if you did taper for a meet like that, you risk getting the time thrown out for lack of measurement. And, honestly, a perhaps more important factor than manual timing is meets were there are very few officials and they can't possibly monitor every lane or see every infraction.
Does a pool to have to have a measurement on file for the meet to get a USMS sanction? I would assume no since bulkhead pools always have to be measured.
