FINA...in their grand wisdom, has decided NOT to make Libby Lenton's 52.99 as a world record. This has been reported the the Herald Sun out of Australia.
Once again, FINA shows that it is run by politicans, not swimmers or swimming fans.
So, Thank You FINA for once again screwing things up.
Taking this one extreme further and using this logic, if a USMS Masters swimmer broke a FINA World Record leading off a 400 Free Relay, and it doesn't matter if its a Women's, Men's, or Mixed, it would not count either because its a 400 distance. If the Relay was a 200 distance it would count because FINA spells this out in there Rules in MSW 4.2
I would have thought that kind of record would count, but with the Lenton precedent, you're right, it shouldn't. However, I do think there's a subtle distinction in the masters rule versus GR 9.6.1.2. MSW 4.2 basically says "these are the valid events for masters competition." GR 9.6.1.2 says "these are the events required at the Olympics and World Championships."
edit: after seeing Bill's post I'll add that I've been thinking about the drafting thing, too. Since Skip already mentioned masters rules, I'll bet there have been scads of masters world records set with the help of drafting (i.e., competitors of another sex or another age group in the adjacent lane). Does anyone question these? Now, I realize a masters world record, although a great achievement, isn't the same as a non-masters world record, but still...
I think the bottom line is the powers that be at FINA felt Lenton's swim was aided by having Phelps in the next lane. They couldn't really find anything to discredit the swim based on that fact alone, so they latched onto another rule that really doesn't hold water (:)).
Taking this one extreme further and using this logic, if a USMS Masters swimmer broke a FINA World Record leading off a 400 Free Relay, and it doesn't matter if its a Women's, Men's, or Mixed, it would not count either because its a 400 distance. If the Relay was a 200 distance it would count because FINA spells this out in there Rules in MSW 4.2
I would have thought that kind of record would count, but with the Lenton precedent, you're right, it shouldn't. However, I do think there's a subtle distinction in the masters rule versus GR 9.6.1.2. MSW 4.2 basically says "these are the valid events for masters competition." GR 9.6.1.2 says "these are the events required at the Olympics and World Championships."
edit: after seeing Bill's post I'll add that I've been thinking about the drafting thing, too. Since Skip already mentioned masters rules, I'll bet there have been scads of masters world records set with the help of drafting (i.e., competitors of another sex or another age group in the adjacent lane). Does anyone question these? Now, I realize a masters world record, although a great achievement, isn't the same as a non-masters world record, but still...
I think the bottom line is the powers that be at FINA felt Lenton's swim was aided by having Phelps in the next lane. They couldn't really find anything to discredit the swim based on that fact alone, so they latched onto another rule that really doesn't hold water (:)).
