Libby Lenton's 52.99

So Warren...then what is the verdict on Thorpe drafting off of PVH or anybody else for 3/4 of a race? By what you're saying....anybody drafting should not have a world record? It's a part of swimming....heck it's a part of racing.

What was Phelps time? You have to be very close to draft off anybody. If Phelps time was over 2 seconds ahead there would be no draft.

Here is the video of the race scaq.blogspot.com/.../Duel in the Pool

She had a very busy schedule at Worlds and was under a lot of pressure, I find nothing surprising about being able to do a better swim a couple days later with some rest and under less pressure. Your second sentence makes no sense to me, how many world record holders can you truly say would "have no trouble repeating the feat"? :confused: I won't be surprised if she repeats her time, but then again I won't be surprised if she doesn't. I hope she does. Yes Lindsay, as did most other swimmers who swam their better times at the Worlds meet and not at The Duel. From the comments of swimmers at the Duel, they were still tired from Worlds and just looking to make a good showing for the country...not to break any records. Maybe Lenton is the exception to the rule and she performs better a few days after a big meet than during the meet. As for record repeats, well the Texas Trio seem to have no trouble not only repeating their records but actually breaking them. Coughlin is another. Phelps goes without saying. I would go out on a limb to say that Lochte will likely be similar in this respect. I don't see where the confusion comes from here. Please clarify. Look, I don't know for certain whether Phelps' wake had anything to do with the record but I can say that were I in Lenton's shoes I would want that record on the books with no controversy attached. If she was granted this record it would have footnotes behind it in many minds. This thread is proof of such I think.

So Warren...then what is the verdict on Thorpe drafting off of PVH or anybody else for 3/4 of a race? By what you're saying....anybody drafting should not have a world record? It's a part of swimming....heck it's a part of racing. The difference is that in the example you give, the swimmers (PVH and Thorpe) are gunning for the same record. Phelps and Lenton were not swimming for the same individual record...one is male and one is female.

I have watched the video several times- I don't think she got a meaningful draft anyway; which by the way, is not a cause for disqualification, so I don't think it should be considered. Much as I have disagreed with FINA over the years, they have stated the ruling by which the swim was disallowed and as they are the arbitrating body, if they say 'cause the event was not one of the 'official' ones, then that's it. It would be interesting if they adopted our enlightened events of mixed relays (I bet it would be a hit on TV) whether they would adopt such a swim as a world record or find some other reason to disallow it.

Is there a rule that says women cannot swim in a men's race, FINA better get with the times and stop its discrimination. Somehow I don't think women would like that version of equality. However, women might like it, IF: Separate men's and women's rankings and World Records were still maintained, then women would love it. For the simple reason that all they really, really would have to do is try to make reasonably sure they're in a lane within sight (say, 25 or 35 metres) of a superior, strike that, make it FASTER, male swimmer, off of whom they could draft for 97.5783% of the race in order to conserve enough energy so as to be able to break, if not a World Record, then at least a National one (where sponsorship contracts would ostensibly be less than for a WR but still quite considerable).

The organizers should have let the coaches know that any world record attempt on the leadoff leg will not count. I don't know why they didn't anticipate someone trying this. World records have been broken in the Duel, it's a very fast pool and it was pretty close to worlds. If Phelps had broken the 100 free record, you can bet there would be LOTS of ranting in USA Swimming. Think of it this way: The FINA rules say that if the leadoff swimmer in the 400 medley, 400 free or 800 free relays breaks a world/meet/country record, yet the relay is disqualified, the leadoff swimmer's record stands. (SW 12.8) So, if Ryan Lochte broke Aaron's 100 back record in the prelim relay at worlds, the record would remain even thought the USA relay was disqualified, and therefore, invalid. Basically, FINA is saying Australia's team was invalid, AND Libby's swim did not count. If it were just a 100 free race between Phelps and Lenton, would the record have counted? Lots of "what ifs."

Originally Posted by dorothyrde forums.usms.org/.../viewpost.gif I am a little confused about the talk that the record did not count because of drafting. The report says the record did not account because the mixed relay was not an approved fINA event. Here's a summary: 1. BEFORE the ruling many speculated it wouldn't count due to Lenton swimming with Phelps in the next lane over (i.e., she got a benefit from drafting). 2. The actual statement by FINA did not mention drafting. It simply stated that the record wouldn't count due to GR 9.6.1.2 which simply states which event are contested at FINA World Championship event. 3. SW 12.1 lists the events for which world records are recognized. The 4x100 meter mixed free relay is not one of them. However, the 100 meter freestyle (obviously) is. You are both correct, of course. I believe that everyone -disappointed though they may have been at the official non-recognition (due to the existing rules)- was ready to accept the decision (based solely on the recognition of events) but happy for L.L. Then the talk started about drafting and unfair advantage. This is what started the back and forth discussions :argue: because, as many believe, it was not a valid (i.e., invalid, argumentative, irrelevant, speculative and ... Fort, where the Fort art thou' when we need your vocabulary?... argument (in this as in any other case where swimmers -US or not- had extremely good finishes and won in the last few meters without accusations of unfair advantages). H@ck! There recently was a race where Phelps won by less than 0.03 (I'll check the tapes later) just as the commentators were almost declaring him second, but the "always truthful" clock said that Phelps, somehow, found that extra millimiter in his flexible body to out-touch (Crocker? Lochte? Peirsol?). Methinks, we should have started a motion to have FINA have a (new and retroactive) rule that would bend some rules where such a feat would be recognized because, everything that Libby did was correct. (Maybe if only as a Wedding present?) :smooch:

Drafting a lane over? Are you kidding. These are non-turbulent lane lines. FINA needs to be able to protect the integrity of the records; measure the pool, the block height, check the timing system. But that is about it. This was a technicality, and a really lame one at that.