Aside from the affected meet hosts, the real losers of this dilemma are the swimmers from the two affected SCM meets who stand to lose their placing in the USMS Top Ten. In short order, R&T will release the 2001 SCM Top Ten and we’ll discover who was denied placement on the list because their worthy performances were conducted in pools they believed were legitimate for sanctioned competition.
I do not yet know if I will be one of those people, but I expect to be. You might remember the story of my 1500m Freestyle that turned into the 1550m Freestyle (or rather the 1498.7m Freestyle that was the 1548.68m Freestyle) at the NWZ meet. My time was 19:04.76, a 50-second improvement from my previous lifetime best. (The 19:55 swim as well as a 20:05 swim both put me into the SCM Top Ten in those years)
Many folks in the discussion forums have sounded off about how important they view the Top-Ten rankings. I’ll simply say that in my case, if I had been told by the meet director before my 1500m Freestyle that the pool was less than 25m long, I probably would not have swam the event. There was no other swimmer in my age group at the NWZ meet. My “competition” was the other 30-34-year-olds nationwide.
The impending ruling by the EC could very likely demand that I and other swimmers at the affected SCM meets make a sacrifice for the betterment of USMS. Honestly, I do not know what greater good is supposed to result from locking out certain swimmers from the Top Ten. I do not even know if this sacrifice is even necessary.
The EC certainly is considering the relationship between USMS and its swimmers in making its judgment. It is inevitable that some swimmers will be affected negatively by whatever “final” decision the EC renders. My contention through all of this has been that (1) deserving swimmers ought to be appropriately recognized for there outstanding achievements, and (2) that if we must do harm to swimmers and strain the USMS-to-swimmer relationship, we affect the least amount of harm upon the least number of swimmers. I’m glad that we are soon to be bringing this matter to a close, but I do think that this decision does harm to more people than necessary, as well as to the wrong people.
If it turns out that the 10th place 30-34 swimmer went slower than 19:04.76, I will be happy to congratulate him publicly and acknowledge that he earned his position. If there is any kind of positive outcome from all of this that I can guarantee, this is it.
Parents
Former Member
From FINA web site at www.fina.org/facilityrules_2.html
FR 2.1 Length
FR 2.1.1 50.0 metres. When touch panels of Automatic Officiating Equipment are used on the starting end, or additionally on the turning end, the pool must be of such length that ensures the required distance of 50.0 metres between the two panels.
FR 2.1.2 25.0 metres. When touch panels of Automatic Officiating Equipment are used on the starting end, or additionally on the turning end, the pool must be of such length that ensures the required distance of 25.0 metres between the two panels.
FR 2.2 Dimensional Tolerances
FR 2.2.1 Against the nominal length of 50.0 metres, a tolerance of plus 0.03 metre in each lane minus 0.00 metre on both end walls at all points from 0.3 metre above to 0.8 metre below the surface of the water is allowed. These measurements should be certified by a surveyor or other qualified official, appointed or approved by the Member in the country in which the pool is situated. Tolerances cannot be exceeded when touch panels are installed.
FR 2.2.2 Against the nominal length of 25.0 metres, a tolerance of plus 0.03 metre in each lane minus 0.00 metre on both end walls at all points from 0.3 metre above to 0.8 metre below the surface of the water is allowed. These measurements should be certified by a surveyor or other qualified official, appointed or approved by the Member in the country, in which the pool is situated. Tolerances cannot be exceeded when touch panels are installed.
FR 2.9 Backstroke Turn Indicators - Flagged ropes suspended across the pool, minimum 1.8 metres and maximum 2.5 metres above the water surface, from fixed standards placed 5.0 metres from each end wall. Distinctive marks must be placed on both sides of the pool, and where possible on each lane rope, 15.0 metres from each end wall.
USMS rules 107.12.2 A, B, C are rather dumb in my breaststroker opinion. A states 5 meters from the end of the pool and like the Fina rule, 1.8 to 2.5 meters above the water.
B is dumb in that it requires backstrokers to use a different turn sighting post for yards and meters. It states 15 feet (4.75 meters) from the wall and 7 feet (2.13 meters) above the water. It would be common sense to adopt the FINA rule for all backstroke races including short course yards.
So it seems that the flag height at Pacific was probably not in violation of the rules. And Southwest Zone meet did not require T's at the pool botton.
So there really is not a lot of problems with the rules, we just need to apply the top 10 times for all courses to the rule requirements. Not being able to swim on my back, how about a rule chance for eliminating backstroke?
Wayne McCauleywww.breaststroke.info/SWIM.GIF
From FINA web site at www.fina.org/facilityrules_2.html
FR 2.1 Length
FR 2.1.1 50.0 metres. When touch panels of Automatic Officiating Equipment are used on the starting end, or additionally on the turning end, the pool must be of such length that ensures the required distance of 50.0 metres between the two panels.
FR 2.1.2 25.0 metres. When touch panels of Automatic Officiating Equipment are used on the starting end, or additionally on the turning end, the pool must be of such length that ensures the required distance of 25.0 metres between the two panels.
FR 2.2 Dimensional Tolerances
FR 2.2.1 Against the nominal length of 50.0 metres, a tolerance of plus 0.03 metre in each lane minus 0.00 metre on both end walls at all points from 0.3 metre above to 0.8 metre below the surface of the water is allowed. These measurements should be certified by a surveyor or other qualified official, appointed or approved by the Member in the country in which the pool is situated. Tolerances cannot be exceeded when touch panels are installed.
FR 2.2.2 Against the nominal length of 25.0 metres, a tolerance of plus 0.03 metre in each lane minus 0.00 metre on both end walls at all points from 0.3 metre above to 0.8 metre below the surface of the water is allowed. These measurements should be certified by a surveyor or other qualified official, appointed or approved by the Member in the country, in which the pool is situated. Tolerances cannot be exceeded when touch panels are installed.
FR 2.9 Backstroke Turn Indicators - Flagged ropes suspended across the pool, minimum 1.8 metres and maximum 2.5 metres above the water surface, from fixed standards placed 5.0 metres from each end wall. Distinctive marks must be placed on both sides of the pool, and where possible on each lane rope, 15.0 metres from each end wall.
USMS rules 107.12.2 A, B, C are rather dumb in my breaststroker opinion. A states 5 meters from the end of the pool and like the Fina rule, 1.8 to 2.5 meters above the water.
B is dumb in that it requires backstrokers to use a different turn sighting post for yards and meters. It states 15 feet (4.75 meters) from the wall and 7 feet (2.13 meters) above the water. It would be common sense to adopt the FINA rule for all backstroke races including short course yards.
So it seems that the flag height at Pacific was probably not in violation of the rules. And Southwest Zone meet did not require T's at the pool botton.
So there really is not a lot of problems with the rules, we just need to apply the top 10 times for all courses to the rule requirements. Not being able to swim on my back, how about a rule chance for eliminating backstroke?
Wayne McCauleywww.breaststroke.info/SWIM.GIF
