Split requests seem to be all the fashion lately. I know they're perfectly legal, though I haven't read the rule itself. I'm wondering about them though ... It seems oddly unfair, for example, that a person never (or rarely) swimming open 50s could hold world or national records or #1 rankings in those events. (I'm just saying it's odd, while recognizing it could be perfectly legal.) But, aside from that and further, what if someone really played the system. What if, for example, someone was after a 50 free record. They entered a meet in the 50, 100, 200, 400, 800 free and led off free relays and requested split requests in each event to try to set a record. Is this legitimate or legal? Would a meet director be bound to accept split requests for all these events? Is there a limit? Do meet directors have discretion to deny multiple split requests? I can see a situation where multiple attempts at a 50 might result in a better time ...
Fort,
What, in your mind is fair play, and what constitutes a pro-swimmer rule?
Personally, as I interpret these two terms, I think you have your sandbags in the wrong place, as I think this rule is incredibly pro-swimmer. It gives all swimmers absolutely every opportunity to achieve a record and/or top 10 time within the confines of the schedule of a meet.
Mostly everyone knows about it, a few meet entry forms have alluded to this rule, and in fact, some meet directors have gone so far as to include the split request forms in their meet program (you may see this again locally soon).
I see your point, Peg. It definitely creates opportunity. I was just suggesting that it might be "unfair" to those in your heat as much as sandbagging is deemed "unfair."
I'm not sure everyone knows about split requests though. You're a meet director -- you're an educated consumer. It had never occurred to me, for example, to do one until my last meet or so. And actually I never have submitted a split request. I think it would be a good idea to include a form in the meet entry packet. That would be pro-swimmer.
It does give a new meaning to picking events though. It multiplies the number of events and gives you a "two for the price of one" if you're so inclined. Theoretically, you could travel to or attend fewer meets and still have the same number of times.
Fort,
What, in your mind is fair play, and what constitutes a pro-swimmer rule?
Personally, as I interpret these two terms, I think you have your sandbags in the wrong place, as I think this rule is incredibly pro-swimmer. It gives all swimmers absolutely every opportunity to achieve a record and/or top 10 time within the confines of the schedule of a meet.
Mostly everyone knows about it, a few meet entry forms have alluded to this rule, and in fact, some meet directors have gone so far as to include the split request forms in their meet program (you may see this again locally soon).
I see your point, Peg. It definitely creates opportunity. I was just suggesting that it might be "unfair" to those in your heat as much as sandbagging is deemed "unfair."
I'm not sure everyone knows about split requests though. You're a meet director -- you're an educated consumer. It had never occurred to me, for example, to do one until my last meet or so. And actually I never have submitted a split request. I think it would be a good idea to include a form in the meet entry packet. That would be pro-swimmer.
It does give a new meaning to picking events though. It multiplies the number of events and gives you a "two for the price of one" if you're so inclined. Theoretically, you could travel to or attend fewer meets and still have the same number of times.
