some very fast swimmers are going to swim in this meet as well as a few masters
Here's where you'll find Real Time Results
www.realtime.net/.../index.htm
attached is the preliminary psyche sheet
www.texasseniorcircuitswimming.org/2008meetschedule.htm
aggie site
www.aggieathletics.com/index2.php
O r d e r . . . o f . . . E v e n t s
Women's Events Men's Events
Friday, May 16
Prelims: 7am warm-up; 9am meet start Finals: 4:30pm warm-up; 6pm meet start
1 50m fly 2
3 200m back 4
5 100m free 6
7 200m *** 8
9 *400m free 10
11 400m free relay 12
Saturday, May 17
Prelims: 7am warm-up; 9am meet start Finals: 4:30pm warm-up; 6pm meet start
13 100m fly 14
15 100m *** 16
17 200m free 18
19 50m back 20
21 *400m IM 22
23 400m medley relay 24
Sunday, May 18
Prelims: 7am warm-up; 9am meet start Finals: 3:30pm warm-up; 5pm meet start
25 50m *** 26
27 200m fly 28
29 100m back 30
31 **800m free --
32 200m IM 33
-- 1500m free 34
35 50m free 36
There's no doubt though. The pool was 49.97 meters, not 50. I do understand what you're saying though, but I question where it stops. What if the next pool is 0.05m short? 0.10m? 0.25m? When do you say it's too much?
Why build pools to be 50m then if 49.97m is fine? The US can automatically take a 0.02 advantage on the rest of the world! :laugh2:
I understand what you are saying, but how often has this come up. Very very rare. Will you call my kids and explain to them that the cuts they made by a substantial margin will not count. they would have made them in a 50.1 meter pool. I agree with BlainesApprentice that their really is no harm in letting them take these times and swim in the meets they qualified for. That will not be a burden at all. We all showed up at this meet in good faith, went through the excitement of great swims only to have it ripped away by a "non swimmer" oriented decision. Sometimes judgement needs to be used and this is one such case. One outcome to prevent such an occurrence in the future is to require meets above a certain level to be certified in advance. Cost would be low. That would address your last point.
There's no doubt though. The pool was 49.97 meters, not 50. I do understand what you're saying though, but I question where it stops. What if the next pool is 0.05m short? 0.10m? 0.25m? When do you say it's too much?
Why build pools to be 50m then if 49.97m is fine? The US can automatically take a 0.02 advantage on the rest of the world! :laugh2:
I understand what you are saying, but how often has this come up. Very very rare. Will you call my kids and explain to them that the cuts they made by a substantial margin will not count. they would have made them in a 50.1 meter pool. I agree with BlainesApprentice that their really is no harm in letting them take these times and swim in the meets they qualified for. That will not be a burden at all. We all showed up at this meet in good faith, went through the excitement of great swims only to have it ripped away by a "non swimmer" oriented decision. Sometimes judgement needs to be used and this is one such case. One outcome to prevent such an occurrence in the future is to require meets above a certain level to be certified in advance. Cost would be low. That would address your last point.
