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
It never occurred to me that it might be assumed that I was complaining about the FINA aging-up system, which has the year of birth as the sole consideration. I can understand the fact of sincere opposition, but it's a reasonable simplification of record keeping.
My objection is merely to the awkwardness of counting what we all know to be true. i.e. We swim from age 25 in one age group until we become 30, at which time we swim in the group from 30 until we are 35, at which time...35-40, 40-45, 45-50, etc. It is so awkward to say anything else, that we never should have allowed it to happen, and we all know better! If we were counting fence posts we would not be marking or saying "19, 24, 25, 29,30,34,35,39,44,etc. Nobody counts this awkward way except masters swimmers.
I have lots of thoughts about time in many of its aspects, and I'm not going to bring them all up here, because most of them are not related to swimming, but rather, to music.
Seeding, heat assignments, etc. in a swim meet are concerns of us all and affect us in various ways, to the extent that we need to compromise from time to time in various ways. Whatever the way, we should know what the compromises are.
Like, deck seeding in Cleveland. How many of us were expecting to be swimming in our own age group for all events of 50, 100, and 200 meters? Was I glad? Yes. Was I surprised? Kinda.
Especially since I had slyly made the suggestion in a post in response to the announcement that the 6th event had been dropped from our particpation. The opportunity to respond that it would be so was not taken, or maybe, of course, my wording was too obscure. I have to keep reminding myself that other people can't really read my mind.
Enuf for now.
It never occurred to me that it might be assumed that I was complaining about the FINA aging-up system, which has the year of birth as the sole consideration. I can understand the fact of sincere opposition, but it's a reasonable simplification of record keeping.
My objection is merely to the awkwardness of counting what we all know to be true. i.e. We swim from age 25 in one age group until we become 30, at which time we swim in the group from 30 until we are 35, at which time...35-40, 40-45, 45-50, etc. It is so awkward to say anything else, that we never should have allowed it to happen, and we all know better! If we were counting fence posts we would not be marking or saying "19, 24, 25, 29,30,34,35,39,44,etc. Nobody counts this awkward way except masters swimmers.
I have lots of thoughts about time in many of its aspects, and I'm not going to bring them all up here, because most of them are not related to swimming, but rather, to music.
Seeding, heat assignments, etc. in a swim meet are concerns of us all and affect us in various ways, to the extent that we need to compromise from time to time in various ways. Whatever the way, we should know what the compromises are.
Like, deck seeding in Cleveland. How many of us were expecting to be swimming in our own age group for all events of 50, 100, and 200 meters? Was I glad? Yes. Was I surprised? Kinda.
Especially since I had slyly made the suggestion in a post in response to the announcement that the 6th event had been dropped from our particpation. The opportunity to respond that it would be so was not taken, or maybe, of course, my wording was too obscure. I have to keep reminding myself that other people can't really read my mind.
Enuf for now.
