Last year at about this time, I had a forum entry about USMS not accepting the times because of a supposed clerical error in the pool certification application. It was pointed out to me that it was a pool measurement error and not a clerical error that caused this. It frustrated me because I had swum 5 LMSC freestyle records and 6 top ten Zone records. I had done this under duress as I had a stent placed in a blocked artery not long after the meet.
Well, since that time, I have swum in two competitions, SCY and LCM. On both of these meets, I asked the individuals if the pool measurement were certified. The SCY was in a stationary bulkhead pool that received certification before the meet and the LCM in a movable bulkhead pool.
Everything went ok in the SCY but when I looked up my times in the Zone and USMS sites, they did not appear. Just this week, I found out it was another pool measurement issue and my, once again LMSC records and top tens have been wiped out.
I know the reasoning behind the exclusion of the times but +/- 1cm would not make a difference in where I or anybody in the meet would finally appear in any top 10 or record.
This is a stiff penalty to pay for people to pay for driving good distances to swim in meets, pay good money and spend all day Saturday and Sunday for what comes to be a glorified practice. If USMS is going to be draconian with its rules, they should, in this day of instant messaging, have a set up whereby the pool measurements could be verified and certified on the morning of the meet if it is being held in a movable bulkhead pool.
Thanks for letting me rant.
Bob Sigerson
Hi Bob,
Man oh man, I remember last year and I was the one who replied at that time as well. My partner, Mary Beth Windrath, is the person who reviews all the pool measurement forms that are submitted. She has the pool measurement forms and I looked at them. The prior-to-the-meet measurements, indeed, indicate at least one lane was short before the meet began.
Let me respond to a couple of things:
a) You are probably right that +/- 1 cm does not make a measurable difference in a 50. However, in any race longer than a 50, that 1 cm DOES make a measurable difference when timing to the 100th of a second.
b) The wording in the rule book is NOT very clear. You should read it to mean that the pool must be at least the minimum length when touchpads are in place. If the pool is measured before placing the touchpads, the meet personnel need to make sure the pool will be long enough after the 3/8" touchpad allowance is factored in. This means that a 50 meter pool, measured before 2 touchpads are in place, must measure at least 164' 1-1/4" (read that as 1 and 1 quarter inch). Some of the lanes in the pool in question measured 164' 5/8".
c) USMS is not draconian about the rules - they are the same as USA Swimming. The problem is that USMS has people in charge of measuring pools who either don't know how to measure or don't know what the measurements should be. The pools in question have measured short 3 of the past 4 years. Due to this issue, swimmers need to know what the pool should measure AND specifically ask the meet referee BEFORE THE MEET what the pool measurements are to ensure the times will be accepted. Yeah, I know, something wrong with this picture, but "what is wrong" is not the rules.
d) I have long advocated for a fudge factor when pools measure too short - especially after the session is complete.
e) The best answer for you and others may be to NOT compete in pools with movable bulkheads and/or in LMSCs with a questionable record of pools being too short. Again, does not seem right, but this boils down to qualified people to measure as well as understand the readings and know what needs to be done before the meet starts.
I know this does not change the results, but maybe explains things better as well as offering advice on how to ensure the future will be better.
Paul Windrath
Hi Bob,
Man oh man, I remember last year and I was the one who replied at that time as well. My partner, Mary Beth Windrath, is the person who reviews all the pool measurement forms that are submitted. She has the pool measurement forms and I looked at them. The prior-to-the-meet measurements, indeed, indicate at least one lane was short before the meet began.
Let me respond to a couple of things:
a) You are probably right that +/- 1 cm does not make a measurable difference in a 50. However, in any race longer than a 50, that 1 cm DOES make a measurable difference when timing to the 100th of a second.
b) The wording in the rule book is NOT very clear. You should read it to mean that the pool must be at least the minimum length when touchpads are in place. If the pool is measured before placing the touchpads, the meet personnel need to make sure the pool will be long enough after the 3/8" touchpad allowance is factored in. This means that a 50 meter pool, measured before 2 touchpads are in place, must measure at least 164' 1-1/4" (read that as 1 and 1 quarter inch). Some of the lanes in the pool in question measured 164' 5/8".
c) USMS is not draconian about the rules - they are the same as USA Swimming. The problem is that USMS has people in charge of measuring pools who either don't know how to measure or don't know what the measurements should be. The pools in question have measured short 3 of the past 4 years. Due to this issue, swimmers need to know what the pool should measure AND specifically ask the meet referee BEFORE THE MEET what the pool measurements are to ensure the times will be accepted. Yeah, I know, something wrong with this picture, but "what is wrong" is not the rules.
d) I have long advocated for a fudge factor when pools measure too short - especially after the session is complete.
e) The best answer for you and others may be to NOT compete in pools with movable bulkheads and/or in LMSCs with a questionable record of pools being too short. Again, does not seem right, but this boils down to qualified people to measure as well as understand the readings and know what needs to be done before the meet starts.
I know this does not change the results, but maybe explains things better as well as offering advice on how to ensure the future will be better.
Paul Windrath
