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 ...
Now, see, this type of thinking gives me pause. I don't think only record breakers and TT types should be getting split requests. Everyone should feel free, as it's perfectly legal and they may just want to improve their time or may be going for a team record or something. But, I'm just not so sure it would occur to many swimmers. It's not THAT widespread a practice yet.
You are right in saying that anybody should be able to ask for a split. I was just trying to explain why it may perhaps be easier for me to take the position that splits should not be allowed. If I was fast enough to be breaking records, I'm not so sure I'd be quick to take the position I have.
look to the USMS rule book in
section 102.15 DISQUALIFICATIONS at
www.usms.org/.../part1.pdf
there's the rule:
102.15.14 A swimmer who misrepresents a seed time, causing a significant delay of the meet, may be disqualified at the discretion of the referee. The disqualified swimmer shall be removed from the lane as soon as practical.
The way I read this rule is:
If a SLOW swimmer enters a distance event with a fast time they could be charged with delay of meet.
BUT
If a fast swimmer enters an event with a SLOW time, then goes for a split, then swims down and comes in around the same time as those in his heat he would not be charged with delay of meet. so if you're going for a split,
figure out your swim down / legally complete the race pace and enter the event with that time.
I was just trying to explain why it may perhaps be easier for me to take the position that splits should not be allowed.
Damn lawyer! I can see how, at first blush, it would strike some as odd that a person could have WRs or #1 rankings or whatever in an event that they never actually swam that year.
Jim, if he doesn't finish, it doesn't count.
Jeff, in your hypothetical 1000 with Paul Smith, what would happen if he, in course of hell-bat-out-of swimming the first 100, he so exhausted himself that he was unable to continue on after setting the world record in his split?
If Paul does not finish the 1000, the event he entered, he would be disqualified from the 1000. But would his WR split still count?
If yes, then what is to keep people from swimming the split portion then just getting out prematurely?
The rules clearly state that the swimmer (or swimmers if a relay) must finish the entire prescribed race - 105.3.7 - D. If Paul got out, or had a Rutgers-esque situation (God forbid), then while we all know what he did in his split, he did not finish the race and is therefore DQ'd and his WR Split effort goes down the toilet.
This precice rule is keeping people from swimming 200 fly's for 50 times and then getting out of the water.
I thought 'freestyle' meant exactly that. In other words you are free to do any style you want. Front crawl is the fastest so everyone uses it, but they could equally choose to use any of the other three strokes should they want to. Am I wrong?:confused:
Right. You can do any stroke you want. But it only counts as freestyle. If you do a 400 IM during a 400 freestyle... the officials are only officiating against freestyle rules. They're not watching your 2-hand touch. They're not watching your over-rotation on backstroke turns, etc. They're just officiating freestyle rules.
(Note that in many meets, the officiating setup will actually change for freestyle events. Often, for example, during a 400 freestyle, you'd only have one official at each end, making sure each lane touches the wall. For a 400 IM, you'd need at least 2, and preferably at least 4, officials at each end of an 8-lane pool to properly officiate the strokes.)
-Rick
If no, I would advise against trying to set a world record in the 50 fly during the first 50 of a 200 fly.
Theoretically though, Jim, according to Wolf-Girl, you could just put your arms in a streamline position and kick the whole rest of the way.
The rules clearly state that the swimmer (or swimmers if a relay) must finish the entire prescribed race - 105.3.7 - D. If Paul got out, or had a Rutgers-esque situation (God forbid), then while we all know what he did in his split, he did not finish the race and is therefore DQ'd and his WR Split effort goes down the toilet.
This precice rule is keeping people from swimming 200 fly's for 50 times and then getting out of the water.
What's interesting is that USA Swimming and USMS rules differ on initial distances for relays. In USA Swimming, as long as the lead-off swimmer completes his/her leg legally without being disqualified, the time counts for an initial distance split. It's OK if the relay is DQed due to another swimmer infraction. In USMS, it is required that the entire relay complete the event without being disqualified.
-Rick
I don't think it unfair,rather it is a chance to mitigate the unfairness that the meet schedule sometimes causes.I do think it is only fair to enter the time you think you will actually do and to tell the rest of the heat of your intentions.If a freestyler was to enter all the events to get a 50 record I think they would be a very tired swimmer by the end of the meet(unless they were a real jerk and stopped after every failed attempt and got out after 50,they'd be DQd,but since they didn't get there time,so what.)
Even though claims have been made that the suits don't float, they are made out of some sort of closed cell material that is not of an entirely different species than neoprene. Having two of them on has to be somewhere along the calculus curve that leads incrementally in the direction of a true wetsuit.
You are perpetuating a misunderstanding of neoprene. Neoprene is just a form of synthetic rubber. Sometimes it is formed into a closed cell foam that creates insulation (and flotation). Hence use as wetsuits and coozies. Neoprene is used as a coating for inflatable boats to make the fabric air tight.
I think the Yamamoto (?) material used in the B70 is not a closed cell foam. I think it is simply a thin rubber-like coating over the spandex. The rubber-like material may have less friction in water than either spandex or human skin. And I think it traps tiny air bubbles in the spandex, causing a small but perceptible amount of flotation.
