I'm glad to see innovation. Track and Field has been using angled starting blocks for decades upon decades. It makes plenty of sense in swimming. Too bad our Summer League team will still be using "hand crafted" wood relics of the 70s until they rot.
I'm glad to see innovation. Track and Field has been using angled starting blocks for decades upon decades. It makes plenty of sense in swimming. Too bad our Summer League team will still be using "hand crafted" wood relics of the 70s until they rot.
I have fond memories of doing backstroke starts by holding the legs of someone standing on the deck...!
More seriously: if these are simple add-ons that can be used and removed from existing blocks, that is one thing. I think it more likely that it will involve replacement of the blocks.
Pool rentals are pretty high already -- driving up membership fees, reducing the choices for meet venues, etc -- and they will probably get a little higher because of this, so I hope we all feel the 0.1 sec is worth it because we won't have any choice in the matter. (This is different from technical suits -- I can always choose not to get/replace one.)
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
Is it not the same disgrace to punish a comtemporary athlete for using items that are legal and approved by the governing body by placing an asterisk next to their achievements? Why should current achievements be debased because you don't agree with the current training methods or equipment? Why are you arbitrarily punishing an athlete for the year they were born or the rules that govern their era?
You certainly must know that every era of elite athletes suffer through this same narrow minded thought process by those who don't want to see their era's records eclipsed.
I don't know a single person who knows a thing about sports that finds the significant achievements of say Babe Ruth, Jesse Owens, Joe DiMaggio, Bobby Jones, Joe Namath, Mark Sptiz, etc, to be any less notable because those achievements are no longer the records.
I believe in my lifetime we are currently seeing the deepest and most talented group of US swimmers ever and instead of recognizing their achievements and hard work you instead want to diminish their legitimate results by putting an asterisk next to their accomps.
I am ambivalent about the"new" blocks.They are clearly in violation of current rules,but they can just change the rules.The current technical suits are either placebos or in violation of the rules,but there is money to be made so the rules get overlooked.I think,practically,the flip turn on backstroke makes sense,but it really was unfair to the prior record holders and really isn't backstroke.Don't even get me started on the dolphin kick in breaststroke or you'll get a VERY long rant.:mad::mad:
Other than geochuck, are you guys all 90 and crotchety old men? Change happens, sports evolve, it's a fact of sports. Pining for the days of yore is silly. 50 years from now swimming will be vastly different and I promise you Smith will be wheeled into a meet raging about "the good ole days of the FS Pro."
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.
Good point.
Swimmers still have to swim the race themselves - the race isn't going to swim itself.
Other than geochuck, are you guys all 90 and crotchety old men?
I know some of them geek and they're not all 90, although some may look like they're approaching it. Crotchety is a different matter. And "old" - what exactly is "old"?
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?
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.
