New Starting Blocks?

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:22:02 GMT

What's with the swimmer who has no goggles on? Perhaps he felt guilty for cheating with those starting blocks so he was trying to level the playing field by limiting his own vision. that's funny we have a kid on my team who somehow has his cap cover his goggles every race. I swam without goggles since i was 3 so i can go all practice without if i need too. Unfortunately our pool is hyper-chlorinated and in the last 10 minutes of the 3 hour practice, i just swim, and flipturn when i cant hear the guy ahead of me kicking anymore... they found out and like to make me flip turn halfway in the pool when i forget my goggles.

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 16:56:36 GMT

Alright. I'm a little late to this thread, seeing as i just joined the forum and all, but i like these blocks from a safety standpoint more than speed. Has anyone ever done a track start on a block that didn't have the best traction and have their back foot slip??!? Well, I have and having my back foot drag across the block as I essentially fell in the pool before a 200 I.M. was brutal. I could get away with not kicking on the fly and back while my foot violated all kinds of sanitation rules with blood flowing out. But when I came to *** the tears started to flow, :cry: further compounding the agony of the event. They had to stop the meet for 15 minutes to get me bandaged up when I FINALLY finished. I think my time was slower than my in-practice interval for I.M.s.All the while my coaches laughing at me for finishing this mid-season meet. :rofl: So I approve of these blocks for that reason. :applaud:

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Kathy Casey — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 12:30:30 GMT

We just got the February issue of the "FINA Aquatics World" magazine. There is a full-page ad for that starting block on page 4. The last sentence of the text states, "The FINA homologation is in progress," meaning that approval or confirmation is in progress. Kathy Casey

RE: New Starting Blocks?

knelson — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 01:28:10 GMT

"The FINA homologation is in progress," Sounds like a euphemism for "the FINA palm greasing is in progress" to me! :)

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Redbird Alum — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:59:46 GMT

I wish fina rules would allow starting blocks or toes over the edge for backstroke starts or better yet, let us dive in forward then roll over underwater. Ande - I think, with time, these may happen. (Remember the period when backstrokers could stand up on the gutter and effectively dive backwards? I also remember breaking many a finger due to having to touch first, especially with the old slatted touchpads!)

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:53:19 GMT

John, my approach to the records issue would be to publish the records in a timeline format that shows when the records were set along with the changes in rules and facilities that occurred along the way. I suspect that the resistance to simple asterisks is that it has also been suggested that drug-tainted records get an asterisk. In the day of the web there is no impedance to providing a richer presentation of the records than a simple table.

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:37:00 GMT

SCYfreestyler..... I thought this was a swimming forum for discussions of items related to swimming..... not necessarily world events. Geek, You are missing the point and the direction of my disgust. I never said that we should punish the current swimmers. I disagree with the US swimming's approval of the extent of rule changes compared to their effects on record keeping the laset 15 years. One affects the other tremendously and in the last 15 years it appears there is little regard or respect for past performances when setting these rule changes other than to generate a degree of false improvement level in the sport. This is not to say that there are no advancements in the sport and that kids are not training their butts off.... they are !! (incidently, my 12 year old son is kickin' butt here in Colorado. Just went 5:00 for a 500) I certainly feel swimming has faster performances even if you net all these items out.... but not as by as much as you would like to think. I don't see any point in record keeping when the rules change so significantly. You say I want to penalize the new generation. Not at all. You, however, seem to want to penalize the former established performers. You say you respect the old guard, but you'd rather see a so called "improvement" in the sport negate what they have accomplished in the record books. Actually, I would fully support these type of rule and technology changes if we decided to get rid of American and World Record keeping altogether. But it's too misleading to compare performances now to then and wipe older respected names off the books year after year when the changes to the sport are merely to make it easier to go faster, not slower. Lindsay, Whats wrong with noting in the record books that post 1970s records are performed with goggles. Is that REALLY a punishment to the record holders in the 1970s? Geek thinks an asterisk is a punishment. John Smith

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:33:58 GMT

I'm not going to get too worked up over starting blocks, I just think that it would be nice if the discussion could move past the "any change is bad" versus "all change is good" stage to ask the question about what makes a change good or bad. Shark appears to think that any change that results in lowered times is good. If it were that simple we would allow fins, dolphin kicking and flip turns in breaststroke, etc. On the other end of the spectrum do we want to swim without goggles in order to have exact comparisons with swimmers from the early 1900s? What are the criteria that justify change? That seems to me to be the interesting question.

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:53:41 GMT

Geek, I could care less if the sport changes stroke rules for turns, underwater kicking, full body suit technology etc..... but when it comes to records, they are established to show accomplished feats given certain rules and standards. If you train harder, longer, smarter .... whatever.... and beat a record you certainly deserve the record. If you put on a full body suit, fail to touch the wall on a backstroke turn, swim underwater dolphin kick a quarter or more of your race, do a dolphin kick on your pull out and start the race with a leg up via the block itself ....... well..... it just gets to be a bit of a joke after a while. All this combined with the Roger Clemons/Marion Jones/Tour de France drug era in sports...... I suppose I'm supposed to think of this aspect as a positive change as well? You wonder why we are old and "crotchety"..... how can you stop from rolling your eyes about much of this crap. Now having said that..... are Micheal Phelps, Ian Crocker, Lochte, Coughlin etc... faster than most of the best swimmers in the last 25 years without all these changes..... absolutely. They are phenomenal in their respective events. We will never, however, know exactly how much better due to these rule changes. May I point out to you the superimposed video of Jim Mongtomery's WR 100m free with Vandenhoogenband's swim. The actual swimming portion of the race between the walls showed that Peter didn't beat Jim by that much. John Smith Yes, I do wonder that. Of course, I also wonder that given this level of outrage over sports related issues, how angry must you be over the seemingly endless list of messes our great country has found itself in. My point being, new starting blocks should really be the least of any Americans worries right now.

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:19:01 GMT

We will never, however, know exactly how much better due to these rule changes. Que the "beating a dead horse icon".

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:45:24 GMT

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:30:09 GMT

Let's not get carried away. I believe what I said was: If you can find a way to get faster withing the current rules, go for it. Although one should never underestimate FINA's ability to find inventive interpretations of their rules, the question can be paraphrased as "Should FINA change its rules to allow this new style of blocks?" And what principle should that decision be based on?

RE: New Starting Blocks?

aquageek — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:30:02 GMT

I think it is insulting to say the hard work and achievements of today's athletes is a joke, they can't help the times they are in. When I see a group of Olympic hopefuls at the pool at 6:30 am on Saturday morning, the first thing that comes to mind is hard work and dedication, not "they are only good because they have new technology." Of course, I also think they should swim from 5-6:30 am on Saturday mornings instead of the Masters so I could get more sleep. For those of us that shuttle kids endlessly around to practices and meets and see the incredible effort they put in, it's not so much of a joke. In an era when swimming is losing out to sports that are flashier, have more gizmos and cool stuff (and that is hugely relevant to kids), insisting on some antiquated set of rules and resistance to inevitable change will do nothing but put swimming further and further behind other more popular sports.

RE: New Starting Blocks?

The Fortress — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:48:00 GMT

Geek, I could care less if the sport changes stroke rules for turns, underwater kicking, full body suit technology etc..... but when it comes to records, they are established to show accomplished feats given certain rules and standards. If you train harder, longer, smarter .... whatever.... and beat a record you certainly deserve the record. If you put on a full body suit, fail to touch the wall on a backstroke turn, swim underwater dolphin kick a quarter or more of your race, do a dolphin kick on your pull out and start the race with a leg up via the block itself ....... well..... it just gets to be a bit of a joke after a while. All this combined with the Roger Clemons/Marion Jones/Tour de France drug era in sports...... I suppose I'm supposed to think of this aspect as a positive change as well? You wonder why we are old and "crotchety"..... how can you stop from rolling your eyes about much of this crap. Now having said that..... are Micheal Phelps, Ian Crocker, Lochte, Coughlin etc... faster than most of the best swimmers 25 years ago without all these changes..... absolutely. They are phenomenal in their respective events. We will never, however, know exactly how much better due to these rule changes. May I point out to you the superimposed video of Jim Mongtomery's WR 100m free with Vandenhoogenband's swim. The actual swimming portion of the race between the walls showed that Peter didn't beat Jim by that much. John Smith Except for the drugs, none of this offends me in the slightest. It's just innovation and change. Why is the old way better? You just hate dolphin kicking, John. I see you're not a baseball fan either. It's Clemens who is lying his ass off about steroid/HGH use.

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 07:59:59 GMT

track athletes get to use starting blocks why not swimmers I wish fina rules would allow starting blocks or toes over the edge for backstroke starts or better yet, let us dive in forward then roll over underwater. Ande, You have access to some of the world's best coaches and swimmers. I wonder what the Reese's would say about this thread. I would wager a bet, that they would side with the argument of faster times are good and change is a necessity, as long as it is within the rules. Good bye, this is giving me a headache.

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 07:38:09 GMT

Shark appears to think that any change that results in lowered times is good. Let's not get carried away. I believe what I said was: If you can find a way to get faster withing the current rules, go for it. Fin use and flip turns in breaststroke are clearly outside the rules. If they were approved to be included in swimming events, absolutely I would use them, because if I did not, I would be slower than my competition. Incidently, SDK was allowed to be unlimited until the committee put a 15 yard/meter limit on it. Way before that, breaststroke was allowed to be done completely underwater without breathing until the committee saw that it was dangerous. Within the rules, anything goes. My initial point was that if the blocks are APPROVED, hooray, faster times. If not, the point is mute. Within the rules, anything goes. "That's all I have to say about that." -Forrest Gump

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 07:14:05 GMT

track athletes get to use starting blocks why not swimmers track starting blocks have a much steeper slope than the back end of those omega blocks I learned an interesting fact about the starting blocks at UT blocks on the north end have 7 degree slope blocks on the end have a a 10 degree slope when the bulkheads are down they put the 7 degree blocks on them the bulkheads are built with a 3 degree slope so when you put the 7 degree blocks on the 3 degree bulkhead you have the effect of 10 degree blocks which is the current legal limit I wish fina rules would allow starting blocks or toes over the edge for backstroke starts or better yet, let us dive in forward then roll over underwater. :lmao: Interesting about the bulkhead/block angle combination.

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:27:14 GMT

The arbitrary establishiment of rules to make former record holders feel more important only cheapens both their records and those of current record holders. Creating multiple systems of records within a sport is a terrible idea and would be viewed with the same skepticism that the doping era has brought onto baseball which, oddly enough, you seek to emulate with your asterisk idea. Records are meant to be broken and every record holder knows that. If all it takes to forget a swimmer is to have their record broken, maybe they weren't such an asset to swimming in the first place. Good swimming by your son, btw. Cheers! :drink:

RE: New Starting Blocks?

ande — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:10:00 GMT

track athletes get to use starting blocks why not swimmers track starting blocks have a much steeper slope than the back end of those omega blocks I learned an interesting fact about the starting blocks at UT blocks on the north end have 7 degree slope blocks on the south end have a a 10 degree slope when the bulkheads are down they put the 7 degree blocks on them the bulkheads are built with a 3 degree slope so when you put the 7 degree blocks on the 3 degree bulkhead you have the effect of 10 degree blocks which is the current legal limit I wish fina rules would allow starting blocks or toes over the edge for backstroke starts or better yet, let us dive in forward then roll over underwater.

RE: New Starting Blocks?

aquageek — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 01:19:29 GMT

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:35:06 GMT

Shark, Your logic about rules is amusing. I suppose your one of those people who thinks Mark McGuire's use of Andro is justified since the "rules" didn't technically ban it at the time he was actually using it..... :-) Changing or finding loopholes in the rules to make the sport faster doesn't make the sport faster. Note..... pool technology has not advanced that much since the mid 1970s. The best pool features were adopted after the 1972 Munich facility (leave it to German engineering). The Texas Swimming center for example incoporated many of these basic design elements. Indy also has these design features..... over flow gutters, wider lanes, 8.5 foot depths, reduced current jets .... These pool design concepts have not changed in over 30 years. Also keep in mind that great swims can be achieved in average to poor facilities when the swimmer is way far out front of the pack in smooth water. e.g. Sippy Woodheads WR in the Woodlands, TX.... Jonty Skinner's 100M free WR. Clear smooth water in the end is basically just that..... clear smooth water. Looks like these blocks will make it into the sport sooner or later. Sideways foot pressure compared to the conventional two-foot up front start is superior for leverage and reaction time. I have no problem using new innovations, but don't put the new records down in the books without an asterisk next to them. That's just a lie and a disgrace to the former holder. John Smith

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:33:52 GMT

Change happens, sports evolve, it's a fact of sports. Pining for the days of yore is silly. I believe this was my initial point. And who are you calling old, snackshack? Put a lid on it, cupcake. (Mickey Rooney - Night at the Museum)

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:22:43 GMT

The Race Club have been using these blocks in the Keys... www.theraceclub.net/.../viewtopic.php

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Former Member — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 07:06:57 GMT

Shark, 1.Your logic about rules is amusing. I suppose your one of those people who thinks Mark McGuire's use of Andro is justified since the "rules" didn't technically ban it at the time he was actually using it..... :-) 2.Changing or finding loopholes in the rules to make the sport faster doesn't make the sport faster. 3.Note..... pool technology has not advanced that much since the mid 1970s. The best pool features were adopted after the 1972 Munich facility (leave it to German engineering). The Texas Swimming center for example incoporated many of these basic design elements. Indy also has these design features..... over flow gutters, wider lanes, 8.5 foot depths, reduced current jets .... These pool design concepts have not changed in over 30 years. Also keep in mind that great swims can be achieved in average to poor facilities when the swimmer is way far out front of the pack in smooth water. e.g. Sippy Woodheads WR in the Woodlands, TX.... Jonty Skinner's 100M free WR. Clear smooth water in the end is basically just that..... clear smooth water. 4.Looks like these blocks will make it into the sport sooner or later. Sideways foot pressure compared to the conventional two-foot up front start is superior for leverage and reaction time. I have no problem using new innovations, but don't put the new records down in the books without an asterisk next to them. That's just a lie and a disgrace to the former holder. John Smith 1. I am not well versed in the "Andro" controversy. The rules are in place to try to level the playing field. If you aren't going to accept the rules of anything, then why play the game. Finding a legal way around the rules is just smart. I'm sure their are plenty of attorneys out there that can second that. 2. How do you figure that finding a loophole isn't going to make you faster? Finding a loophole that you can use to make you faster is going to make you faster. Case in point: In the 70's, Ray Bussard developed the stand up backstroke start because the rules didn't say anything about the toes being completely under the water = faster times. He also read that in backstroke the clause of: "past vertical towards the ***" meant that you could go at least to vertical, which allowed for the initial role over backstroke turn that changed backstroke forever. Another: before it was banned, the running relay start of the late '80s (which was the beginning of the step in relay start.) I could go on, but time does not allow. 3. The argument that you present means that everyone that ever broke a record after 1970 should have an asterisk next to their name due to the new pool technology. 4. As I have mentioned before on this forum, I feel for all of the IM and Backstrokers who lost their records when the complete role over turn was accepted into the rules. The rules change. Read your rule book, find a loophole, get faster and make changes. Don't penalize someone because they are smarter and faster than the rest.

RE: New Starting Blocks?

Jim Clemmons — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 04:26:02 GMT

Originally Posted by jim clemmons: And "old" - what exactly is "old"? 41+ They're qualified. Me too, but I have better things to spend my time complaining about - I guess. Like I have to go to work practically every day - what's up with that?