The FINA rules say no but not considering the rulebook, should Libby Lenton's 52.99 go in the record books. There has been alot of debate on this in the other thread. What do you think?
Parents
Former Member
But it already does. You can't remove it here. If something is ambiguous, you can take the generous interpretation or the ungenerous one. There is no objective interpretation. And maybe you can be sanguine about keeping other people out of the record books, but I'm not. Besides, some people think Popov's time trial WR shouldn't count. Should we take that out of the books, since there is controversy?
Lenton came in far enough behind Phelps that it is clear she was not drafting the whole time, and she may in fact have been harmed by the wake from the turn. I don't know and neither does anyone else. So why be a jerk?
As for baseball records, should records from earlier years when the number of games differed be on totally different books? What about records from segregated years, when they weren't really playing the "best" possible?Should hockey records start all over now that there are shootouts, and thus more "wins"? It isn't science and nothing is perfect, so "purist" is quite a misnomer.
If she benefitted from the draft for even 1/3 of the race then she had a benefit she would never have when swimming against other women.
As for Popov's record, don't FINA rules allow records from time trials? This issue really has nothing to do with drafting, that is just my personal opinion. Having said that, if FINA rules do not specify a mixed relay as being WR material then there is nothing more to discuss really.
When I said purist I meant free of performance enhancing drugs, ie the BALCO association. Your other comments are all good points, but shall we just throw up our hands and let anything go due to the events of the past? I say no.
Lastly, I don't think my opinion makes me a jerk but if it does I will wear the badge with pride.
But it already does. You can't remove it here. If something is ambiguous, you can take the generous interpretation or the ungenerous one. There is no objective interpretation. And maybe you can be sanguine about keeping other people out of the record books, but I'm not. Besides, some people think Popov's time trial WR shouldn't count. Should we take that out of the books, since there is controversy?
Lenton came in far enough behind Phelps that it is clear she was not drafting the whole time, and she may in fact have been harmed by the wake from the turn. I don't know and neither does anyone else. So why be a jerk?
As for baseball records, should records from earlier years when the number of games differed be on totally different books? What about records from segregated years, when they weren't really playing the "best" possible?Should hockey records start all over now that there are shootouts, and thus more "wins"? It isn't science and nothing is perfect, so "purist" is quite a misnomer.
If she benefitted from the draft for even 1/3 of the race then she had a benefit she would never have when swimming against other women.
As for Popov's record, don't FINA rules allow records from time trials? This issue really has nothing to do with drafting, that is just my personal opinion. Having said that, if FINA rules do not specify a mixed relay as being WR material then there is nothing more to discuss really.
When I said purist I meant free of performance enhancing drugs, ie the BALCO association. Your other comments are all good points, but shall we just throw up our hands and let anything go due to the events of the past? I say no.
Lastly, I don't think my opinion makes me a jerk but if it does I will wear the badge with pride.
