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
I was at the same LSU meet as Bob in which the times were invalidated, having traveled over 270 miles to compete. Like Bob, I was told that the course would be measured for certification. There is not much more that an individual swimmer can do. It is not feasible to boycott bulkhead pools or questionable LMSCs. If I chose to do that, I would almost never compete.
I'm in concurrance with Paul that USMS should employ a fudge factor. Calculate what the time would be if the pool was the correct length, add some extra time to that, and let the swim count. Not for world or national records, but for rankings and top ten. Even in a 1,500 meter race, we're probably not talking about more than a few seconds. That would be preferrable to putting in all of the training, executing on race day, and then having the swims totally wiped out.
I was at the same LSU meet as Bob in which the times were invalidated, having traveled over 270 miles to compete. Like Bob, I was told that the course would be measured for certification. There is not much more that an individual swimmer can do. It is not feasible to boycott bulkhead pools or questionable LMSCs. If I chose to do that, I would almost never compete.
I'm in concurrance with Paul that USMS should employ a fudge factor. Calculate what the time would be if the pool was the correct length, add some extra time to that, and let the swim count. Not for world or national records, but for rankings and top ten. Even in a 1,500 meter race, we're probably not talking about more than a few seconds. That would be preferrable to putting in all of the training, executing on race day, and then having the swims totally wiped out.
