USMS Rules question: Initial distance

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

mrubacky — Mon, 10 Jul 2017 02:14:24 GMT

Rick, I have a good example of this from a couple years ago. I swam the 1650 and 1000 in a meet. My 1650 was a great time and the split from the 1000 ended up being a second faster than the 1000 I swam later in the meet. So I put in the split request after my 1000 to try for top ten, unfortunately it ended up being 11th. Granted it did make your original suggestion but it does show that it's good to look at the splits. Although now any time I swim the 1650 or 1500 I put in a split request just in case. -Mark

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Kathy Casey — Thu, 06 Jul 2017 12:57:20 GMT

Then direct your specific question to: championship@usms.org. You will get a prompt reply.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Kathy Casey — Wed, 05 Jul 2017 11:38:58 GMT

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Gary P — Wed, 05 Jul 2017 05:48:22 GMT

In answer to this statement: "Official Times are not only used for TT and Records. For example, it's not explicitly stated, but my assumption is that your entry times for USMS Nationals are expected to be "official times", especially where it comes to events that you need to make the NQT (national qualifying time). What this means is that, technically, I could not enter USMS Nationals with my 500 split if I didn't request it in writing before the end of the meet I did the split at. Since it's not an "Official Time", it's not valid for any purposes, including USMS Nationals entry." Regarding assuming official times are expected to be your entry times for USMS Nationals, see the NQT Policy in Championship Committee Policies under Policies & Governance in the Guide to Operations on the Volunteers tab of the USMS website. Among several FAQs about NQTs is this information: 3. Where can I swim my times (e.g. does it have to be a USMS meet)? Can a USA-S meet, a nonsanctioned meet or a time from my coach during workout count as achieving the NQT? It does not have to be swum at a USMS sanctioned meet. It can be swum at a USA-S meet, a YMCA meet or during a time trial or in a workout with your coach. Kathy I'm of the opinion that split times are more reliable than the highlighted items above, and should be acceptable. Besides, the same document says: "Beyond the first three events,swimmers are on the honor system when they enter the meet. USMS is relying onswimmers to be confident that they can actually achieve the qualifying times." If your 500 split in a 1000 or 1650 meets the NQT standard, I think your honor is intact in using that split as your Nationals entry time, whether or not you actually went through the written request process to get it as an "official" split.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Doug Martin — Tue, 04 Jul 2017 09:14:46 GMT

There was a long discussion in this thread from 2010 about split requests. Despite some good ideas, I don't think the rules have changed, except that at some National meets splits are automatically considered for Top Ten and records. The suggestions by Chris S and others for online requests within a certain time period like 60 days seems eminently reasonable. Why not just ask your Top Ten recorder to consider your split in that way? Is there some reason such a procedure was considered by the Rules committee and rejected?

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

osterber — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:02:01 GMT

The thing is, the rule must be loosened at a national level to allow for LMSCs to have the ability to loosen the rules at the LMSC level. Right now, if one LMSC wants to make this looser, they are not allowed to do that. Not legally anyways. The point that I think people keep missing is that there are two separate things going on. One is the constitution of an "official time". The second is any rules, procedures, and policy around Top Ten and Records, etc. They do not have to be the same polices. In fact, they're not right now. Even if I do follow the rule on "Official Time", and make the request in writing before the end of the meet, that doesn't automatically make it a National Record. There is other paperwork that has to happen. If I don't submit that paperwork within a finite timeframe, the record doesn't count. So I may have set a national record a year ago in my lead-off 500 split on my 1000 free. The time is official. I made the request in writing before the end of the meet. But the paperwork wasn't processed in time. No record. But the time is still an "Official Time". Official Times are not only used for TT and Records. For example, it's not explicitly stated, but my assumption is that your entry times for USMS Nationals are expected to be "official times", especially where it comes to events that you need to make the NQT (national qualifying time). What this means is that, technically, I could not enter USMS Nationals with my 500 split if I didn't request it in writing before the end of the meet I did the split at. Since it's not an "Official Time", it's not valid for any purposes, including USMS Nationals entry. (I don't know if those entry times are validated against anything... they're probably not. But just because they may not be checked doesn't make it and less illegal by the rule book.) -Rick

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Chris Stevenson — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 03:33:48 GMT

The thing is, the rule must be loosened at a national level to allow for LMSCs to have the ability to loosen the rules at the LMSC level. Right now, if one LMSC wants to make this looser, they are not allowed to do that. Not legally anyways. Yes, that was part of the point of my comment that "perhaps it isn't appropriate to legislate it nation-wide." In some LMSCs, being "too loose" might pose too much of a burden on the TT Recorder, while in others it might be just fine. Hopefully at some point split requests can be done online, as Jim suggested earlier. The point that I think people keep missing is that there are two separate things going on. One is the constitution of an "official time". The second is any rules, procedures, and policy around Top Ten and Records, etc. They do not have to be the same polices. In fact, they're not right now. Even if I do follow the rule on "Official Time", and make the request in writing before the end of the meet, that doesn't automatically make it a National Record. There is other paperwork that has to happen. If I don't submit that paperwork within a finite timeframe, the record doesn't count. I'm not sure which "people" you refer to, but now you are talking about something substantially different from the "initial distance" (split requests) of the thread title. As you say, it is not sufficient that a time be "official" to count as a record: 105.3.8 states that the record application form must also be filled out. I think it is entirely appropriate that potential record-breaking swims be subjected to an elevated level of scrutiny and that they should be submitted in a timely fashion.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Chris Stevenson — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 04:13:21 GMT

No, thanks. Until, or if, the system is automated, I think they ought to submit them at the meet. Otherwise you are creating an unrealistic burden for the Top Ten recorders. I think that depends a lot on the LMSC. Some have meets every 1-2 weeks, while others only have 1-2 per season, and with little likelihood that a split will result in a national record. I am all for preventing unrealistic burdens on (usually volunteer) TT Recorders. But if that is the main purpose of the rule -- and it appears that it is a big reason, from Kathy's initial post -- then perhaps it isn't appropriate to legislate it nation-wide. We could allow the individual LMSCs decide on the policy appropriate to their situation.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Former Member — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 05:14:04 GMT

That would work for everything but Backstroke. Couldn't a swimmer just finish with a touch on their back instead of turning over for a flip.... I've never understood why people do this and I think they should not count split times as records... if you want to break the record in an event, just swim that event! Throwing everyone else off pace when you take your swim out at a pace faster than the race is a selfish thing to do. I'd be upset if I were eating somone's 100 freestyle wake the first 100 of my 200 free. :argue: I'm fine with people who want to do, lets say a 500 fly and enter a realistic time in the 500 freetyle event. just my 2 cents.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Chris Stevenson — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:38:54 GMT

Couldn't a swimmer just finish with a touch on their back instead of turning over for a flip.... Certainly, but a S&T judge needs to be on hand to verify that it was a legal finish (ie, hand touch while still on your back). That's why you have to request it ahead of time, you can't tell it was legal afterwards from the lack of a DQ.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Chris Stevenson — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 12:21:39 GMT

Again, to be clear... I am not trying to establish that top ten tabulators need to be expected to dig through initial splits by hand looking for all possible new records or top ten swims. From a rules perspective, I'm merely interested in making it possible so that, for example, a TT tabulator would be allowed to accept an "unrequested" split time as a TT time. Right now, it is against the rules to do so. I think submitting a split time for anything -- TT or record -- without the swimmer's request is not a good idea. If the deadline for split requests were extended to the end of the season, it should still satisfy you: after the meet is over, there is nothing to prevent the TT Recorder from informing the swimmer about some noteworthy split that catches his/her eye. Then the swimmer can decide what to do. But, generally speaking, I don't think the burden should be on the TT Recorder to check all splits for potential records or TT times. Why shouldn't the swimmer take some ownership of this process? I'm also working with the New England TT recorder, who is involved with the Records and Tabulation Committee to see if that committee has an interest/stake in this. I've already put this on the agenda for a future meeting. Talk to Laszlo and make sure he understands what you want so he can represent you.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Chris Stevenson — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:56:58 GMT

Through the end of the season is too long; if a record is involved it could be beyond the 60 day limit to submit. I forgot about that. Maybe 30 days? Education is fine, but sometimes people don't realize the significance of their split (eg for TT purposes, LMSC record, or simply as a PR) until they see the official meet results. Often the results posted at the meet itself do not include the splits, or may be posted after the person goes home.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Betsy — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:11:23 GMT

I agree that we definitely need a rule change or rule modification. I believe there has to be a time limit on requesting splits to be submitted. Through the end of the season is too long; if a record is involved it could be beyond the 60 day limit to submit. For the meet I run, I will try to educate the swimmers to make requests for splits before they leave the meet. At check-in (and throughout the meet) I will have a master list available for swimmers to fill if if they want a split submitted and individual forms to give to the referee before the event for those events where that is necessary. Of course, convention may produce a rule change that will make this easier and better.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Kathy Casey — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 01:33:34 GMT

Regarding Steven Stuart's "on-the-record example: I swam a 1500 SCM and knew I could get the 800 SCM state (LMSC) record with an initial split because it had apparently never been swum by someone from my state in my age group. Having never done such a thing before, I read the rules and tried to follow them. I approached the meet referee and tried to submit my split request in writing. He didn't want to take the form, saying that the split time would show up in the meet results anyway. I used the meet results to submit the split time to the LMSC records officer. This was apparently acceptable to everyone involved." As Rules Chair, that is not acceptable to me. Your written request for the split should have been accepted by the referee and your split time, assuming it was an automatic time, for the 800 should have been included in your LMSC's submission for USMS Top 10. Even if the referee was certified as an official by another governing body, that is not an excuse. We have written "Differences" documents for all the swimming governing bodies and, for USA Swimming, the Differences are published in both the USMS Rule Book and the USA Swimming Rule Book. MS2.6.4, page 120, of the USMS Rule Book explains written notice of splits to the referee as well as other USMS requirements that differ from USA Swimming rules. Kathy Casey, Chair USMS Rules Committee

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Former Member — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:47:18 GMT

It sounds like in the USMS world, the rule largely gets ignored anyways. (This is based on some emails I'm getting off-the-record.) Here's an on-the-record example: I swam a 1500 SCM and knew I could get the 800 SCM state (LMSC) record with an initial split because it had apparently never been swum by someone from my state in my age group. Having never done such a thing before, I read the rules and tried to follow them. I approached the meet referee and tried to submit my split request in writing. He didn't want to take the form, saying that the split time would show up in the meet results anyway. I used the meet results to submit the split time to the LMSC records officer. This was apparently acceptable to everyone involved. As Chris says, this is not a record that USMS tracks. It apparently was not an "official" time under USMS rules, and would not have counted for Top Ten (which was not a concern!). How could a LMSC have a rule to recognize times that USMS won't recognize as valid? I don't know whether my LMSC has an explicit rule or not, but apparently they are willing to accept times under standards different than USMS'. Not that this means it's not a good idea to lobby for a rule change at the USMS level. That sounds reasonable to me.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

knelson — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:41:18 GMT

There are still some people who don't like allowing splits for official times and would vote them out because it gives an unfair advantage to freestylers and backstrokers in the sprints due to relays. It certainly gives freestylers and backstrokers more opportunities, but I would argue it doesn't give them an unfair advantage in any way. I think if you swim a distance legally and it is timed in accordance with the rules then the time should count.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

jroddin — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:18:29 GMT

This serves to encourage a model where there is the real possibility of LMSC records in some events being faster than the USMS record in that event, only because of an administrative paperwork requirement. I think that's an absurd model to encourage. -Rick I respectfully disagree with this. Similarly, team records are not official in the eyes of USMS. My team used to hold an annual "Fun Meet" with other local teams. All swimmers were required to be USMS registered for insurance, but it was not a USMS sanctioned (or recognized) meet. That way we didn't have to have all the required officials, pool certs, etc. It was a Saturday evening where we swam some events and then had a social afterwards. The team agreed that times would be eligible for our own team records. So sure - it is entirely possible that somebody could do a time that was faster than the USMS record but it would only be a team record. What harm is done if the team is ok with this? I don't think that is an absurd model. Jeff

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Chris Stevenson — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:58:53 GMT

I think you are missing my point. I am not interested in forcing people's unrequested splits to be listed in the times database, top ten, etc. I am merely interested in allowing them to be if they want to. The current rule does not allow them to make this request. -Rick So, to be clear here: what you want is to change the rule to lengthen the time frame of the request: instead of by the end of the meet, the request can be made at any time. Or maybe within a year or by the end of the season (times shouldn't be retroactively added to Top Ten, IMO). Except for backstroke splits, or initial relay legs.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

osterber — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:47:21 GMT

Anyway, I can bring this up at a future Recs & Tabulation Committee meeting and see what happens. But if Rick wants to ensure that there is a proposal at the next Convention to change the existing rule -- or that such a proposal is crafted to his liking -- then he should submit one himself. I'm also working with the New England TT recorder, who is involved with the Records and Tabulation Committee to see if that committee has an interest/stake in this. And will chat more directly with Kathy about any ramifications. And will probably put together a formal proposal to go through my LMSC Chair. If there are others from other LMSCs that feel similarly to me, I imagine that something like this could be co-sponsored by multiple LMSCs. (But, most of this will need to take place in a few weeks.... after I get through our 1064-swimmer NE LMSC championships this week-end.) -Rick

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

osterber — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:44:39 GMT

Again, to be clear... I am not trying to establish that top ten tabulators need to be expected to dig through initial splits by hand looking for all possible new records or top ten swims. (I do think, though, as a logical next step... is that given this age of computers, we ought to have the automated tools available so that, for example, if a 1000 split on a 1650 is a new record at the LMSC or USMS level, our computer systems ought to be able to notice that without any extra work. I recognize that we may not be there yet, but I think that ought to be a goal. Frankly, most of the younger swimmers expect that the computers are keeping track of all of this, and are surprised that there is still so much human work behind the scenes.) From a rules perspective, I'm merely interested in making it possible so that, for example, a TT tabulator would be allowed to accept an "unrequested" split time as a TT time. Right now, it is against the rules to do so. -Rick

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

osterber — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:32:10 GMT

not everyone wants their splits to "count," so how do you deal with that? I think you are missing my point. I am not interested in forcing people's unrequested splits to be listed in the times database, top ten, etc. I am merely interested in allowing them to be if they want to. The current rule does not allow them to make this request. -Rick

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

Chris Stevenson — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:21:42 GMT

This serves to encourage a model where there is the real possibility of LMSC records in some events being faster than the USMS record in that event, only because of an administrative paperwork requirement. I think that's an absurd model to encourage. I disagree that it's an absurd model (or very likely that the LMSC record will be faster than the USMS record), but if you don't like it, don't do it. I'm just offering you a solution that works until there is a rule change, if it happens. You have to decide what serves your swimmers best. Most people who have the possibility of breaking a USMS or FINA record will follow the current rules, including administrivial ones. As a swimmer, I've never found split requests to be much of a hassle: it takes like 30 seconds. If it is important enough for me (as Top Ten Recorder) to go to the effort of getting the time to count, it should be worth 30 seconds of the swimmer's time. Personally, I think Jim's suggestion of an online request for your splits to "count" -- to appear in the meet results database (ie, in the Current Event Ranking) -- and be submitted for Top Ten is the way to go.

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

osterber — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:26:42 GMT

If your LMSC governing body is satisfied that an initial split is accurate and the swim was otherwise legit (ie, not illegal by the rules of competition), then they may decide that you are free to use it for your LMSC records. This serves to encourage a model where there is the real possibility of LMSC records in some events being faster than the USMS record in that event, only because of an administrative paperwork requirement. I think that's an absurd model to encourage. -Rick

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

osterber — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:22:24 GMT

What you can't do is use that (unrequested) split for a USMS or FINA Top Ten submission, or to apply for a USMS or FINA record. And that's the point. I think these splits should be eligible for USMS records and USMS top ten submissions. -Rick

RE: USMS Rules question: Initial distance

osterber — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:21:08 GMT

... a useful history ... Kathy - Thanks for the useful background for how we got to where we are today. There are still some people who don't like allowing splits for official times and would vote them out because it gives an unfair advantage to freestylers and backstrokers in the sprints due to relays. More reason to repeal this rule. In my scenario, repealing this rule makes it easier for distance swimmers to get recognition for their "accidental" initial distance splits that may be records or top-10. -Rick