Sandbaggers' Club

At last convention, USA Swimming amended USA-S 102.5.1 and 102.5.4 to delete the requirement that " best competitive times must be submitted" (R-6A) (they did however amend USA-S 207.10.4 to require the best competitive times for their national championship meets). I mention this, even though it doesn't apply to USMS rules (the USA Swimming amendment didn't affect USMS rules because there was no "best competitive time" requirement) because the rationale of the proposal is interesting: according to the news item, it allows coaches "to use strategy based on the performance level of each swimmer at the point of competition." Obviously a local host can mandate the best competitive time as the entry time. The roundabout point is that in some situations, there are good reasons for not using your best competitive time: *Situations where the the best competitive time within 1 year is not an appropriate estimate of ability (for example, you are injured, you are out of shape/, you have posted significant performance gains outside of competition). *To prevent an NT entry (generally NT entries should be reserved for situations where you have no idea of what your entry time should be) *Some other compelling reason (for example, you need to swim in the first heat because you must leave the meet as soon as possible!). *And perhaps some others I haven't identified In general though, sandbagging isn't a good idea: *It disrupts the seeding process, makes the timeline inaccurate and the meet run longer (there would be hell to pay in a USA Swimming LSC where the meet host gets fined for exceeding the four hour rule!) *It prevents fair and equitable competition, because now competitors are swimming against competitors who they are not peers with (for whatever reason, either more rest or clear water). Sorry, I find the idea of changing your entry time because you want more rest or because you want better pool conditions (or want to show off) among the most odious of actions. You are taking the process of seeding--intended to provide fair and equitable competition--and perverting it for your own purposes by overtly trying to gain a competitive advantage. Take the order of events you get and then put down a performance that will have people singing songs about your glorious destruction of the field when you trash 5 straight events. All of this being said, even I will not plainly report my best competition time. Take for instance the meet I was at today: Event Best Comp Time Best Comp Time Entry Time Rest Before Official Time (within 1 year) (recent years) (estimated) 1-1650 Free* NT 26:21.00 28:00.00 n/a 24:27.91 6-50 Free 29.79 28.31 29.79 n/a 28.34 14-100 Fly NT NT 1:20.00 23.25 min 1:15.79 20-200 Free 2:37.86 2:29.46 2:37.86 40.46 min 2:28.54 22-50 Back NT NT 35.00 7.75 min 36.57 *seeded fastest to slowest in seperate session It's clear that I didn't always enter my best competitive times. Did I break my own guidelines here? Or should I have adjusted my tmes further to better approximate the time I thought I would go? Patrick King

I think Ande mentioned elsewhere that his back entry time was a typo, or maybe I'm misremembering. I almost always enter the time I (realistically) want to beat. It may be my time from the same meet the previous year. Or it may be the best time of the season so far; it depends on the particular meet. (Of course, if I haven't swum the event in a while it would just be a best guess.) But doing this makes it easy on my memory: if I beat my entered time I'm happy with the swim. Or I should say "happier," since I'm happy to be swimming and competing in any event; consider the alternative! It is pretty comparable with the idea of entering the time you expect to swim. Why would one want to enter a time slower than s/he expects to swim? I can think of the following two reasons but I'm sure there are others: -- trying to create more recovery time if the next event is soon after; -- being afraid to "put it out there" and announce what you think you can do. It is a guard against being too disappointed in your race. ("Well, at least I beat my seed time!") The second reason maybe comes out a little more harshly than I intend it to be. But if you are someone who regularly does this then you might want to think about the reasons you do it. If it IS to guard against potential disappointment, then a little mental readjustment might help. Consider: equalling or bettering last years' swim times is a huge achievement. With the reality of aging, in the long term everyone will fail to do this more often than they succeed. So you should be happy if you are even close, and VERY happy if you succeed. And if you are way off, so what? You're still in there giving it your shot, the worst thing that can happen is that you are engaging in a healthy (and hopefully enjoyable) activity. Don't be afraid to set the bar a little high, just not unrealistically so, you don't want to be in a heat with people much faster than you. And resist the urge to play games with seeding; too often they backfire. You can't go wrong swimming in a heat of people of pretty comparable speed, I think. Just my :2cents:

I'm going to try a 100 fly next weekend. Should I enter my slow 400 IM split (THAT would be sandbagging), a guess based on workouts, or should I double my 200 IM split or just enter my 100 back time (the last two are close)? The only thing that seems clear is my guess will be wrong. So, you see: I am a sandbagger, and I think it's a great club. I would suggest in your situation to enter a time that is representative of what you think you will go, since you have no entry times. For most people, NT is not representative, and you and the meet timeline would be better off with some other estimate. Doubling the 200 IM split probably is hazardous because it's too aggressive. In the best case, you're going to be off by several seconds. If you are like a lot of people (including me!) and your fly times drop exponentially as distance increases, you'll really blow the seed time. I'd also pass on the 100 Back time. That leaves your 400 IM split or estimating from your workout. Using an initial distance from a longer race is an accepted practice of getting seed times (for example, seeding your 1000 with the 1000 split on your 1650). But as you mentioned, it may be too conservative. Depending on your practice habits, you could estimate from an in-practice time. You may want to give some mind whether these times are underestimates or overestimates (for example, for me, I generally don't come close to replicating meet times in practice). But whichever way you go is probably okay. Pick one of the numbers and write it down. Patrick King

It is pretty comparable with the idea of entering the time you expect to swim. Why would one want to enter a time slower than s/he expects to swim? I can think of the following two reasons but I'm sure there are others: -- trying to create more recovery time if the next event is soon after; -- being afraid to "put it out there" and announce what you think you can do. It is a guard against being too disappointed in your race. ("Well, at least I beat my seed time!") Consider: equalling or bettering last years' swim times is a huge achievement. With the reality of aging, in the long term everyone will fail to do this more often than they succeed. So you should be happy if you are even close, and VERY happy if you succeed. And if you are way off, so what? You're still in there giving it your shot, the worst thing that can happen is that you are engaging in a healthy (and hopefully enjoyable) activity. I know Ande's 50 back was a typo. Just busting his chops. I usually sandbag to create more recovery time. I'd actually prefer that big meets run more slowly, then recovery is built in. I should be in the NE LMSC! I generally don't enter at my masters PBs, especially at a non-championship meet where I'm not tapered. I agree with the advice on aging. I finished one race this summer, and thought, "I'll never go that fast again." Not being negative, I was just surprised by the time. I could care less generally whether I surpass my seed time or not. It's usually just a guesttimate. I generally compare my actual time to what I was doing at the same meet the prior year. Plus, probably just an odd coincidence, I always find myself filling out entry forms when my shoulder is acting up. Which leads me to my next club ...

At any nationals/worlds meets where I'm shaved and tapered I always enter my best time, in-season meets I usually know what times I'm around and enter those.

Here's another type - metric sandbagging. This occurs two ways: 1. When swimmers enter a meters meet with startlingly fast times - say 22-high in the 50 free and 50-low in the 100 free. 90% of the time these swimmers will (using the same example) then proceed to swim 26-low in the 50 and 57-something in the 100. Because their entry times were done in yards. (The other 10% of the time, enjoy it as a spectator because WOW that's some fast swimming!) 2. When swimmers enter a yards meet with meters times and then blow them away. This is indistinguishable from conventional sandbagging unless you happen to know where their entry times originated from.

Given that I'm still less than a year back in the pool (Sep 15). I just enter my best time in the event or convert from the same distance. That may or may not change once I stop PBing every swim. Those days are coming. Paul

Here's another type - metric sandbagging. I'd argue this is more stupidity than sandbagging :)

Now, Reverse Sandbagging, that is a really effective strategy. This February, I was watching the 100 back (LCM) and someone (a Masters Master) had entered a seed time of 40 seconds. He was, naturally, in Lane 4 of the last and fastest heat. (Somehow, no one really expected a WR). He had two "positives" going for him: a) he was drafting off six, count them six (lane 8 is for warm-ups/downs), faster swimmers, and b) if they were too far ahead of him for drafting off of, he had clear water almost 92% of the time.

Why would one want to enter a time slower than s/he expects to swim? I can think of the following two reasons but I'm sure there are others: Here are some that I've noticed (and one can tell from people's body language). To impress the (non-swimmers in) the gallery, girlfriend, friends. Most of these people just show up to cheer John or Mary and know next to nothing about Masters events. They maybe watch the Olympics and have an idea that in any race, the first to touch the wall is a Champion (or has won the heat and will advance to the next round). They are suitably impressed when a Michael Phelps touches the wall three body lengths before his nearest oppenent or when Grant Hackett -almost or often- overlaps his. Therefore John (or Mary) Sandbagger (age 30 and a bodybuilder) hopes to strongly impress Kate when he finishes a body length ahead of Gramps (80+). I love the look of dismay on his face when he realizes that Donald (25) is also a Sandbagger (and a faster swimmer) and that Oliver who is thrice his age and has not padded "his" times that much, is also faster. Are we having fun yet?