One of the very last posts of 2001 was from me on New Year's Eve. I don't remember whether the title was mine or the administrator who decided that it was a sub topic of something remotely connected with the subject that I was proposing. But, no matter.
Since the change of format this week to the new system, I don't know how to check it out or whether or not it makes any difference. However, after two weeks of no response of any kind and since it was my prerogative, being my birthday, the rare one that is divisable by both sevenses and elevenses, I went back to the subject to give it a boost, hoping that someone would give it some kind of notice. But, alas...
With Ground Hog's (or is it s'?) Day looming around the next corner I'm very much determined to thrust the subject forward a third time in the hope that it will get some serious attention. And it is about time whatever way you choose to take the title.
I don't remember everything I wrote the first two times but I'll simply make the proposal without any but the barest essential elaboration.
As soon as possible post all swimming times in seconds only!
Eliminate the use of minutes, or hours entirely. Having just yesterday having competed in the National Championship Event, The Hour Swim, (a Mail-in Event) I could consent to keeping the title. But for all listing and taking of times it would be 100% beneficial to use seconds only.
The only reason to oppose the notion that I can think of would be related to the existing hardware. But transpositions would be easily done until the mass of the hardware is ready to conform on its own. My guess being that the computer timing systems would need only a nudge to adapt.
Sprinters, of course, wouldn't understand what I'm talking about. But all swimmers who have a use for splits in their calculations run into stumbling blocks, not to mention common errors, that are bound to creep in whenever minutes become part of the results.
I have one other helpful suggestion to make on the subject, and because of the opportunity, why not... If Splits, for example, of a 200 or a 1500 were listed in reverse order, it would be infinitely easier and more instructive to see their value and significance.
Parents
Former Member
hey, matt and jim
thanx for paying attention. My subject is not really about converting anything. It is simply about adapting the simple answer to all our timing problems. If we were to adapt the "seconds only" system we would eliminate forever the various complications and their concomitant mistakes. As it is, all of our calculations are suspect when we try to discover what relevancy one time has to another.
As I mentioned before this applies to splits figuring at any stage or intention. How do I study splits? For simplicity's sake the 1650: I want to compare the times in the different segments of the swim, early laps, middle laps, and later, leading up to closing laps and the "sprint to the finish". I want to study them in relation not only to my times but to my peers, to my realistic asperations.
The record setters in my age group are out of sight, but I can aspire to match those of some great and glorious swimmers in the next group up, or the women in my own and younger age group.
They all differ in significant ways, ways that are on the public (but now obscure, and often incorrectly stated) record. The seconds only system would put and end to all the nonsensical need to recalculate.
When a sprinter swims a race he checks out his time against everyone's else and he sees what happened. When I swim a hundred, 200, 400, 800, 1500, 3K, 5K, etc. I have hours ahead of me trying to figure out what happened.
On the distance pool races I have to study what the timer has written and make corrections by interpolation to various mistakes that always happen before mailing in the results. There is always a reason for the mistakes, but they need to be found to be corrected. None of them would have happened if the system were seconds only. If it weren't for the electronic timing to keep some kind of control, it would be hopeless in many cases.
Enuf for now.
hey, matt and jim
thanx for paying attention. My subject is not really about converting anything. It is simply about adapting the simple answer to all our timing problems. If we were to adapt the "seconds only" system we would eliminate forever the various complications and their concomitant mistakes. As it is, all of our calculations are suspect when we try to discover what relevancy one time has to another.
As I mentioned before this applies to splits figuring at any stage or intention. How do I study splits? For simplicity's sake the 1650: I want to compare the times in the different segments of the swim, early laps, middle laps, and later, leading up to closing laps and the "sprint to the finish". I want to study them in relation not only to my times but to my peers, to my realistic asperations.
The record setters in my age group are out of sight, but I can aspire to match those of some great and glorious swimmers in the next group up, or the women in my own and younger age group.
They all differ in significant ways, ways that are on the public (but now obscure, and often incorrectly stated) record. The seconds only system would put and end to all the nonsensical need to recalculate.
When a sprinter swims a race he checks out his time against everyone's else and he sees what happened. When I swim a hundred, 200, 400, 800, 1500, 3K, 5K, etc. I have hours ahead of me trying to figure out what happened.
On the distance pool races I have to study what the timer has written and make corrections by interpolation to various mistakes that always happen before mailing in the results. There is always a reason for the mistakes, but they need to be found to be corrected. None of them would have happened if the system were seconds only. If it weren't for the electronic timing to keep some kind of control, it would be hopeless in many cases.
Enuf for now.
