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?
Former Member
.... Especially as a woman accused (rightly or not) of drafting off of Phelps.
You (not you ensignada, so let me rephrase that):
One can only accuse someone of something illegal, or
not allowed.
As far as I know, drafting has yet to be outlawed.
(And if outlawed, the only way they can enforce it
is to have every swimmer swim all alone, since according
to the Laws of Physics, waves propagate (diminishing but propagate)
and if you take the calculation "ad infinitum", the wave created by somebody two lanes away from you is -I believe- equal to the square root
of the draft off the lane right next to you. So, theoretically
(on paper) lane 1 could feel the effect of the (draft) waves
from lane 8 (the difference would be measurable when they
have electronic timers capable of timing to the 1/1000000th
of a second).
Thus, I don't believe anyone was accusing her of drafting but explaining
why she did the time she did.
I think she's already demonstrated a boatload of class.
Amen to that!
There were still possible consequences for the remaining three swimmers on her team. If she went out too hard and died she may have taken her relay out of contention. The second swimmer on her team very well could have had a 6-7 second deficit to make up instead of about four seconds.
True, however given that this event will affect no rankings, since there is no mixed relay, the real gain was for Ms. Lenton to try her hand at a superior swim. I would suggest that, if the coaches were allowed to pick the order of the swimmers, the Oz coaches felt the same and were willing to risk it for the sake of her getting a superior time. National pride was on the line, but if you turn her loose in this way, you stand to gain both a world record AND a win. The other way, you probably only have a win to gain.
-LBJ
Dorothy the meet was sanctioned apparently. If it was not everyone who competed should be banned from swimming if FINA held to rules.
From what I understand from the first page of the other thread, the meet may have been sanctioned, but lead-off of a mixed relay is not an eligible event for a world record? I don't have a FINA rule book. I have a USA rule book, just got it in the mail last week, and there is a list of rules for what can be considered a record.
I am curious if they said before the swim that this could not count as a record, or was it all debated after the fact.
Remember a few years ago some Masters records were broke out East and then they found the pool was too short. Zip went those records.
I still feel if there was a rule in place that says the lead-off cannot be counted, than it should not count. If the rule is ambiguous, then someone better be looking at it and rewriting it and it should be clear to all swimmers BEFORE the swim that a world record is not at stake.
I just voted, you know what I think of FINA - Jerks - but my ballot is a secret.
Actually George, the secrecy (or not) of the ballo is decided
by the ballot-maker in this environmnet.
If you click on the number of votes for each choice,
you'll see the name who voted for each choice.
(So far it looks like 100% Canadians have been pro-Commonwealth.
Seemingly, unbeknownst to each other; vote-wise).
As I write this, 3 Yeas, 4 Nays.
Therefore, if at the end of the vote, the Yeas surge ahead,
it will be because we gained an unfair advantage by drafting
off the Nays who started off strong(er).
However, there were some interesting points about track and not running men and women together because of pacing and all that blah, blah, blah.
LMAO! Dorothy, that's so funny. 90% of this forum is "blah, blah, blah..."
Can anyone point to the rule that says this swim isn't valid?SW 12.1 and SW 12.8
According to my understanding of FINA’s interpretation in this instance, the 4 x 100 mixed medley relay is not a valid event for world records, therefore times achieved in this event, including lead-off splits are not counted towards world records. I would assume that the same ruling would hold true for a lead off 50 back in a 4 X 50 medley relay or a 50 free in the 4 X 50 free relay, since the 4 X 50 is not a world record event.
And because the rules do not explicitly allow or deny lead-off splits for ‘nonconforming events” it is customary for the governing body to interpret to rules.
But back to the question, Should 52.99 count as a world record? If the organization that “owns” world records and the rules that govern then says no , then no it shouldn’t count. Did she swim faster then the existing record, absolutely. She knows she did it, we know she did it, what difference does a piece of paper make? Except for the $20,000 bonus for breaking a world record (which I heard she was awarded).
Dorothy the meet was sanctioned apparently. If it was not everyone who competed should be banned from swimming if FINA held to rules.George, I assume the event was sanctioned, however to clear up what appears to be a misconception, FINA does not as a rule ban swimmers who compete in non-sanctioned events. In the USA a majority of USA Swimming and USMS members who compete in events have at one time or another participated in a non-sanctioned event (YMCA, Rec, Senior Games, AAU, …) and to my knowledge none have been baned for their participation. It may be different in Canada.
To all those on the nay side, why???
Fortress I always thought you would be on the swimmer's side. Not on the FINA side.
I'm on the swimmers side that goes a 53 low in the future that dosen't get to draft off of a man.
