Major 1650 sandbagging by a forum member

Former Member
Former Member
Looks like it is to gain 20 minutes of rest before doing the 400 IM. What do you folks think? Fair play or not? I say anyone attempting the 1650 and 400 IM back to back deserves some slack.
Parents
  • And speaking of technicalities we are supposed to follow… I don’t see anywhere in our rules that allow a swimmer to enter “No Time” as a submitted Time (unlike USA Swimming where they have 102.2.8). Either I missed it or technically following our rules these should not be allowed either. If it's not explicitly banned or the rules are silent, you can just as easily argue that it is permissible. And defining a concept by reference to another definition isn't crystal clear either. If you want a rule that precludes sandbagging, just write one that explicitly bans the practice. If sandbagging is really tantamount to terrorism and infanticide, we should get right on it! Masters meets aren't just for swimmers; they are for angels whose pee is like nectar. :) I am going to take off my angel wings now to rest my shoulders for nationals.
Reply
  • And speaking of technicalities we are supposed to follow… I don’t see anywhere in our rules that allow a swimmer to enter “No Time” as a submitted Time (unlike USA Swimming where they have 102.2.8). Either I missed it or technically following our rules these should not be allowed either. If it's not explicitly banned or the rules are silent, you can just as easily argue that it is permissible. And defining a concept by reference to another definition isn't crystal clear either. If you want a rule that precludes sandbagging, just write one that explicitly bans the practice. If sandbagging is really tantamount to terrorism and infanticide, we should get right on it! Masters meets aren't just for swimmers; they are for angels whose pee is like nectar. :) I am going to take off my angel wings now to rest my shoulders for nationals.
Children
No Data