This thread is in response to Jim Thorton's thread about his AA time being disallowed.I think that if a swimmer swims in a USMS sanctioned meet and that the time gets to the "official" Top Ten list that it should count.Otherwise one could go back and check the length of ,say the Amarillo pool from the first Masters Nationals and if it was 1 cm short disallow the swims.There must be a statute of limitations and I think it should be when the official TT times are posted.
How is Jim being petty? Attention Jim Thornton, to paraphrase an 80's ceral commerical, "little mikey doesn't like it"
That's not as harsh as the person really deserved. Calling Jim "petty" for expressing his frustration over the TT process wasn't on topic either. Granted, I knew my post was off topic, but I was sticking up for a friend. The person that my post was directed toward is about as charming as roadkill.
Never said Jim needed help, just did it for a friend. To answer your question, I can go deeper into the weeds. The moderator's would yank the reponses off pretty quick though. Why? That's really not your concern.
Why all the hostility? Your panties are really in a twist, buttercup. Someone step on your happy meal? Couldn't be me, you don't even know me.
That's not as harsh as the person really deserved.
So you are prepared to go further into the weeds? Why?
Calling Jim "petty" for expressing his frustration over the TT process wasn't on topic either.
Seems that the petty reference was about Jim's denegration about his signature, also way off topic.
Granted, I knew my post was off topic, but I was sticking up for a friend. The person that my post was directed toward is about as charming as roadkill.
It doesn't look as if Jim really needs any help, he seems to respond pretty thoroughly.
So you are prepared to go further into the weeds? Why?
It doesn't look as if Jim really needs any help, he seems to respond pretty thoroughly.
Never said Jim needed help, just did it for a friend. To answer your question, I can go deeper into the weeds. The moderator's would yank the reponses off pretty quick though. Why? That's really not your concern.
How is Jim being petty? Attention Jim Thornton, to paraphrase an 80's ceral commerical, "little mikey doesn't like it"
I'm new here, but that seems kind of harsh. Also not anywhere near the topic.
On topic, could USMS leave the top ten listings after some amount of time, and just erase the official times if the pool is the wrong length (or whatever other parameter they use)? Top ten seems like just a vanity listing anyway.
I'm new here, but that seems kind of harsh. Also not anywhere near the topic.
That's not as harsh as the person really deserved. Calling Jim "petty" for expressing his frustration over the TT process wasn't on topic either. Granted, I knew my post was off topic, but I was sticking up for a friend. The person that my post was directed toward is about as charming as roadkill.
www.youtube.com/watch
I think this is a great sentiment. Honestly, I did not mean any offense; on the other hand, I will defend to the death Wookie's right to defend me to the death!
And on this note, can't we just all get along for the old people and the kids?
In my mind, I am the (good) people's (vanity) champion! That is more than enough for me, and much more than I deserve! Perhaps magic and reality are the same, after all.
Don't lose sight of the issue here, was Jim's time in fact the fastest 100 free time in his age group last year. In other words did Jim swim 100M (w/i) a reasonable margin of error, faster than any other US male 60-64. The answer is yes. Although the pool may have been 1 or 2 inches short Jim's time was over a second faster than the 2nd fastest time. So as a result of the unduly strict Top 10 pool measurement rules, a valid time (the fastest in the US) is being stricken.
This is an unfortunate and unintended result of a very badly thought out rule and a poorly considered approach to applying the rule. USMS says that they are aware of the problem and will try to fix it. But, that doesn't help Jim.
Chris, I don't agree with requiring measurements of pools for the Top 10, unless the circumstances warrant it. If Jim was swimming 1:05 and went 1:01 and other swimmers had significant drops in time then a measurement is necessary because the time might be the result of a short pool. But it doesn't make sense to measure pools and to repeatedly measure bulkheads. I am glad you changed the rule on foreign meets, but the bulkhead measurement rule needs to be re-evaluated and there should be some discretion. In Jim's case the length of the pool was not why he had the fastest time. He swam faster than anyone else. Also, I do not either believe or disbelieve NBAC. They might be wrong but I don't know all the facts. NBAC was not the only group that blew it w/ the pool. The swimmers were not negligent. Bottom line, a WR or AR from the meet should be stricken a Top 10 should not.
Why all the hostility? Your panties are really in a twist, buttercup. Someone step on your happy meal? Couldn't be me, you don't even know me.
Sweet cheeks, you must have forgotten all the spiteful comments that you directed at me. I haven't forgotten them.
