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 My own AA-rescinded swim was done at Michael Phelps's famous pool, the North Baltimore Aquatics Club, in a meet that had a USMS sanction number.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Anyhow, if you have your own examples of TT or All American or even World Record times that were rescinded after the fact, please use this thread to post them!
Thanks for showing me my lane!
Event 10, 100 Meter Freestyle Heat 2 Results
Lane Name Sex/Age Club Seed Time Final Time
3 Thornton, James M60 1776 1:02.68 1:01.43
Armed with this new information, and the "longest of two" laser measurements of an empty, frigid, Michael Phelps' pool (I hope it's not an omen for the dear boy's future prospects!), as such were measured on December 7th, we can now say with some confidence that the Worst Case Scenario for my unintentional "cheating" swim was at most 3.46 inches short (Lane 3: 1.73 inches short x 2 for a full 100), and not the 10 inches short as previously stipulated in the Worst Case Scenario I wrote about in my blog.
Let us redo the math in light of this new information, shall we? (It has been an awfully long time since I have been called upon to do math more complicated than simple addition and subtraction, so please correct any errors here.)
100 LCM = 3937.01 inches.
Number of inches I actually swam (assuming the pool was not slightly longer when filled and warm) = 3937.01 - 3.46, or 3933.55.
Ratio: a time of 1:01.43 (61.43) is to 3933.55 inches as a time of X is to 3937.01
or: 61.43/3933.55 = X/3937.01
or: 61.43/3933.55 x 3937.01/1 = X
or: 61.484034, rounded off to 61.48, or 1:01.48.
Assuming that I did not absolutely lock up and fail to complete the final unswum 3.46 inches of a true 100 LCM (though anyone who has ever watched me race, as I am want to do, with my eyes mostly closed understands that I typically zig and zag and reflexively circle swim my way much further than any posted distance), the difference between my actual time and a 100 percent "pure" time would have been five-one hundredths of a second. Let me post, then, a mathematical revision with cheating corrected for:
Event 10, 100 Meter Freestyle Heat 2 Results REVISED FOR PURITY STANDARDS
Lane Name Sex/Age Club Seed Time Final Time
3 Thornton, James M60 1776 1:02.68 1:01.48
I hope I will get extra credit for showing my work here. This does give me hope that by some flukish miracle, the pool remeasured next summer and robustly swollen with gazillions of pounds of water, and the surrounding soil heated to the standard global warming misery of a Baltimore summer, might just conceivably prove that I did not cheat at all, or at the very least, less fragrantly than this new .05 second calculation would imply!
And on this note, and channeling my inner demented Humphrey Bogart Caine Mutiny-like personna, which, I fear, is intensifying the SSES Syndrome ("And I will show with precise mathematical certainty who stole the strawberries from the bridge!"), I shall say goodbye and await the insurance paperwork to enable my two-girl hot-oil therapeutic massage and drug therapy that appears to be the only hope for this de-frocked All American's restoration to normalcy!
Thanks for showing me my lane!
Event 10, 100 Meter Freestyle Heat 2 Results
Lane Name Sex/Age Club Seed Time Final Time
3 Thornton, James M60 1776 1:02.68 1:01.43
Armed with this new information, and the "longest of two" laser measurements of an empty, frigid, Michael Phelps' pool (I hope it's not an omen for the dear boy's future prospects!), as such were measured on December 7th, we can now say with some confidence that the Worst Case Scenario for my unintentional "cheating" swim was at most 3.46 inches short (Lane 3: 1.73 inches short x 2 for a full 100), and not the 10 inches short as previously stipulated in the Worst Case Scenario I wrote about in my blog.
Let us redo the math in light of this new information, shall we? (It has been an awfully long time since I have been called upon to do math more complicated than simple addition and subtraction, so please correct any errors here.)
100 LCM = 3937.01 inches.
Number of inches I actually swam (assuming the pool was not slightly longer when filled and warm) = 3937.01 - 3.46, or 3933.55.
Ratio: a time of 1:01.43 (61.43) is to 3933.55 inches as a time of X is to 3937.01
or: 61.43/3933.55 = X/3937.01
or: 61.43/3933.55 x 3937.01/1 = X
or: 61.484034, rounded off to 61.48, or 1:01.48.
Assuming that I did not absolutely lock up and fail to complete the final unswum 3.46 inches of a true 100 LCM (though anyone who has ever watched me race, as I am want to do, with my eyes mostly closed understands that I typically zig and zag and reflexively circle swim my way much further than any posted distance), the difference between my actual time and a 100 percent "pure" time would have been five-one hundredths of a second. Let me post, then, a mathematical revision with cheating corrected for:
Event 10, 100 Meter Freestyle Heat 2 Results REVISED FOR PURITY STANDARDS
Lane Name Sex/Age Club Seed Time Final Time
3 Thornton, James M60 1776 1:02.68 1:01.48
I hope I will get extra credit for showing my work here. This does give me hope that by some flukish miracle, the pool remeasured next summer and robustly swollen with gazillions of pounds of water, and the surrounding soil heated to the standard global warming misery of a Baltimore summer, might just conceivably prove that I did not cheat at all, or at the very least, less fragrantly than this new .05 second calculation would imply!
And on this note, and channeling my inner demented Humphrey Bogart Caine Mutiny-like personna, which, I fear, is intensifying the SSES Syndrome ("And I will show with precise mathematical certainty who stole the strawberries from the bridge!"), I shall say goodbye and await the insurance paperwork to enable my two-girl hot-oil therapeutic massage and drug therapy that appears to be the only hope for this de-frocked All American's restoration to normalcy!
