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
thanx guys for giving the timing in seconds only your attention.
'Specially for being the serious proposal that it is. So far it seems to be pretty much ignored, or at least I haven't heard any one "second the motion".
On the other hand the negatives, of which there must be some, need to be put on the table so that they can be compared with the proposal. So far, I really appreciate the good humor with which the minor objections have been tendered.
I have a bunch of stuff to put out there to support the idea, but I don't want to take the extra time or effort if there is really something of substance that I haven't considered.
So far the objections mentioned seem to be minor and what I'm hoping for is for some expert to step in and say that the clocks already exist that know how to continue counting seconds without having to bother with minutes.
I'm not sure that volunteerism would be a problem or anything of the sort. And just think how great it would be to count yourselves as having been part of an eathshaking decision.
For instance it didn't just happen that the swimming events in my time as a masters swimmer (I used to blush when I said or wrote that I was a master) are what they are now. Added are the 50's of the three specialty strokes, the 1000 yard, and 800 meter free. As late as the sixties the 440 was changed to 500 for the NCAA, and the 220 to 200. It was done by vote and I knew of those who wanted the events be 250 and 400. (My list of my personal bests as a master shows a 400 freestyle of 6:11.004 in 1971 ).
But I digress. If there are objections to "seconds only", I want to see them.
thanx guys for giving the timing in seconds only your attention.
'Specially for being the serious proposal that it is. So far it seems to be pretty much ignored, or at least I haven't heard any one "second the motion".
On the other hand the negatives, of which there must be some, need to be put on the table so that they can be compared with the proposal. So far, I really appreciate the good humor with which the minor objections have been tendered.
I have a bunch of stuff to put out there to support the idea, but I don't want to take the extra time or effort if there is really something of substance that I haven't considered.
So far the objections mentioned seem to be minor and what I'm hoping for is for some expert to step in and say that the clocks already exist that know how to continue counting seconds without having to bother with minutes.
I'm not sure that volunteerism would be a problem or anything of the sort. And just think how great it would be to count yourselves as having been part of an eathshaking decision.
For instance it didn't just happen that the swimming events in my time as a masters swimmer (I used to blush when I said or wrote that I was a master) are what they are now. Added are the 50's of the three specialty strokes, the 1000 yard, and 800 meter free. As late as the sixties the 440 was changed to 500 for the NCAA, and the 220 to 200. It was done by vote and I knew of those who wanted the events be 250 and 400. (My list of my personal bests as a master shows a 400 freestyle of 6:11.004 in 1971 ).
But I digress. If there are objections to "seconds only", I want to see them.
