Olympian Masters ?

Speaking of lost/stolen medals… Was I the only one moved to tears when Adolph Kiefer,was presented with an exact duplicate of his 1936 gold medal, which was stolen at the games, 60 years ago. The presentation at this year’s USAS convention and his acceptance (and recognition of Masters) places him at the top of my list of Masters Olympians.

Thank you Rob for the offer. Once I had the little patches, I didn't keep that slip of paper that came with them. I have no recollection of the swim meets, the dates, the months, and I probably cant reconstruct them now; those were from 1992 forward. I just can't remember them. I think in the grand scope of things right now, it really doesn't matter. I'm kinda down on swimming right now. But your offer is very much appreciated. donna

my USMS Top Ten records, 7 of them, are missing. Only one is posted. Where did those go? Right here: www.usms.org/.../toptenind.php

I've never been so happy to see USMS Top 10 times.

You people are wonderful; I haven't been to that link yet, but someone else messaged me and told me 7 Top Ten Times were found starting in 1993. Now I know some of these are relays and some are swims and I'll check them out another day. I want to now give credit to USMS for finding my lost swims. I'll take any lost swims and keep them close to my heart. I have new faith in your record-keeping. Maybe they were there all along, just not on a website or something. The sun is starting to shine. donna

You people are wonderful; ...........................The sun is starting to shine. Donna I'm just going to add my :2cents: which I'm sure will be shared by an overwhelming majority of Forumites. Having known you -solely- through your postings and only since I joined USMS last April ('07), I have come to kinda' know the person between (or behind) the lines. I would accept any claim you (or people of similar character) care to make, as fact, in spite of the absence of documentary evidence. I don't even like the word "claim" in this context because it hints of "allegation" but I'm leaving it and re-phrasing my statement. I would accept any statement you (or people.......etc........) etc.....

Donna I'm just going to add my :2cents: which I'm sure will be shared by an overwhelming majority of Forumites. Having known you -solely- through your postings and only since I joined USMS last April ('07), I have come to kinda' know the person between (or behind) the lines. I would accept any claim you (or people of similar character) care to make, as fact, in spite of the absence of documentary evidence. I don't even like the word "claim" in this context because it hints of "allegation" but I'm leaving it and re-phrasing my statement. I would accept any statement you (or people.......etc........) etc..... Donna I am truly just an observer in this, but agree wholeheartedly with this comment. When I first joined this forum a year or so ago, I was honored that you responded to a couple of my posts. FWIW - My wife asked me a few months ago about some awards and patches I had received when I was on missile crew back in the early 70's. I looked all over, and found not a single piece of paper that documented my accomplishments. I wrote to some folks at the unit history office and the organization ... not a thing exists. Good thing I have my patches and a few pictures ... otherwise no one would believe me!! "Stuff" happens over time, eh? Oh yeah, I was a competitor in an Air Force competition called "Olympic Arena." Best wishes. Ken

So true lost items can destroy many of our keepsakes. In 1963 we had our basement full of our keepsakes and paperwork. We had a flood in our basement while on a 2 month trip. All of our pictures and things were destroyed including our wedding album. In 1973 we had a break in and every swimming medal and trophy along with our TV and sound system were stolen. Now can I prove that I won these races - no. Did I have the Ross trophy that I won - no. I had the Wrigley Gold Trophy it was gone also.

Unfortunately, that's where it ends. I searched all 12 magazine issues in 1967, and most of 1968, but there were no occurrences of that swimmer. FYI, in December of each year they published the Top 25 United States LC times for each event. In 1966 the top 25 LC times ranged as follows: Women, 100 Back: 1:08.6 to 1:13.7 Women, 200 Back: 2:29.3 to 2:40.5 Anna Lea I think I found some more significant information that could be helpful to resolve this. In the January 1968 issue of Swimming World magazine, on page 9 they had the National Qualifing times for the Women's National Championships. They had only SCY, but after this meet they were going to revise the times from results of the spring championships and convert them to LCM standards for the upcoming 1968 Olympic Trials. The qualifing time for the 100 Yard Back was a 1:04.5 and for the 200 Yard Back it was 2:20.6 In the May 1968 issue of Swimming World magazine, on page 32 they have the qualifing time standards for the Women's Long Course National meet in Lincoln, Nebraska and the Women's Olympic Trials in Los Angeles. These time standards must have been made in a sanctioned AAU long course meet or AAU sanctioned time trial. The qualifing time for the 100 meter Back was 1:13.0 and for the 200 Back was 2:38.4 It appears to me from the information and evidence that has been gathered in the last two days, that the qualifing time standards for either the Nationals or the Olympic Trials were never made. The 1:18.2 LCM time is a good 5 seconds from the standard. If you were to look at the Annual lists for 1966, 1967, and 1968 that time is even close to the Top 25 US times. Even if we take the reported 200 Back LCM time of 2:48 its still a good 10 seconds from the standard. With this information, I believe the swimmer never swam in the 1968 Olympic Trials and that is the reason why she does not show up in any of the 1968 Olympic Trials results from the 1969 Annual AAU Year Book for Swimming, Diving, and Water Polo and the September 1968 issue of Swimming World. In order to qualify for the 1968 Olympic Team, you must compete in the Olympic Trials and there were no exceptions. Every person on every Olympic Roster from the USOC, USOA, AAU, USA Swimming, Swimming World Magazine, and the ISHOF is consistent. There were 61 Swimmers named to the 1968 Olympic Team and they are listed by person by event in the September 1968 issue of Swimming World magazine. The 29 Women are on page 19 and the 32 men are on page 34. I compared all of the lists and they have the same people on them except that some list the Coaches and Administation people. The Chairman for the Men was William Lippman and the Chairman for the Women was Kenneth Treadway. There were 4 Olympic Coaches. Sherm Chavoor was the Head Coach for the Women and George Haines was the Head Coach of the Men. Frank Elm was the Assistant for Women and Don Grambril was the Assistant for the Men. The record keeping was excellent and far from pathetic and quite remarkable for all of the organizations. They even have an Allumni Association that will help people in situations like these so they will be included as Olympians. I have provided a link to this organization. I sure hope this gets to the root of truth for all of us and we can put this behind. www.usoc.org/olynewslettermayjune.pdf

I also don't believe the people researching this are trying to be malicious. They are just trying to corroborate the story you're telling them. That’s correct. it's unfortunate the data trail has led to some dead ends Uncanny, too. The unverified facts share one trait. They would all be considered defining moments and career milestones for any athlete. Ordinarily, that type of fact would be the least difficult to verify. When it’s unusually difficult to verify things that are typically very well documented, it raises questions. I really don't see this as a witch hunt. Same here. It might be more apt to call it a “clumsily handled, formerly private, request for verification of historical fact, turned public research project.” I'm sure if Bill or Gail could find the data they were looking for they'd have no problem crediting you with these achievements. Indubitably, and with genuine zeal.