Does anyone know the rationale behind USMS rule 103.13.1(B)(1)? Specifically, this says that in order for an initial distance split to count as an "official time" (and thus, eligible for records, top-ten, etc.), the swimmer must notify the meet referee in writing before the end of the meet.
Does anyone know why we insist on this level of administrivia? This means that, technically, even as a meet director... if I notice that someone's 1000 split on their 1650 would be a new record... it's not a new record unless I remind the swimmer him/herself to write down on a piece of paper "Please make my split time count", and hand it to the referee. Before they leave the pool at the end of the meet.
In USA Swimming, the paperwork isn't necessary. Your 1000 split counts, without any paperwork, as long as it's valid, you finished the event, etc., etc. But you don't need silly paperwork.
So why do we insist on this paperwork in USMS? This seems like something that is doing us all a massive disservice as I'm sure many many potential records and top ten performances are being missed. If you swim a 1650, and your initial 1000 was a certain time... then your initial 1000 was that time, regardless of any paperwork you submit by the end of the meet.
(This is separate from setting up an expectation that these splits will be automatically submitted. That's a separate issue. My only issue is that if the swimmer does not write something down on a post-it note, that the window of opportunity closes, and there is no way to un-close the window the way the rulebook is written.)
I suppose the solution is to amend the disclaimer/waiver language for our meet entries to include a sentence "I HEREBY REQUEST TO THE REFEREE THAT EVERY INITIAL DISTANCE OF EVERY EVENT THAT I SWIM BE CONSIDERED AS AN OFFICIAL TIME.", and then that part of the rule is satisfied. If the USMS Rules Committee insists, I can photocopy all of our entry forms, and hand them to the Referee before the end of the meet.
-Rick
Again, rule 103.13.1(B)(1) has nothing to do with backup timing, or any requirements for the timing accuracy. If you notify the referee after you swam, which rule 103.13.1(B)(1) requires, you still have no opportunity to affect what happens with backup timing.
If you think the rule doesn't sufficiently guarantee the accuracy of the swim, why are you pushing to have the swims counted? Do you want the rule eliminated or tightened?
The scenario I care about is this:
Swimmer goes to a meet, swims the 1650 free. Maybe sets a local record, maybe sets a national record. Whatever. There's no doubt about the validity of their 1650 finish time.
Swimmer gets home, after the meet is over, looks at the results, and realizes "Wow, my 1000 split was also a regional record!". However, it's now after the meet is over. Since the swimmer did not write down a trivial request on a post-it note and give it to the referee before leaving the pool, the window is forever closed, and this 1000 split can never be recognized as a record, since it cannot, by rule, be considered an "official time".
All I'm saying is that after-the-fact, we should be able to recognize that 1000 split as a fully official time. It satisfies every other requirement for "official time", except that the swimmer did not make a request to the referee in writing before the end of the meet.
If you are satisfied with the validity of split time, why can't your LSMC (or whatever "region" you are concerned about) simply make it a policy to accept split times for LMSC records?
As far as I can tell, LMSC records have no official status within USMS. They are no more "official" than club records or pool records. The USMS rule specifically mentions only Top Ten, USMS and FINA records, and I think you said that you are not concerned with those.
Why would you do a 1650 & go out so fast as to set a record at those ? ?
This typically happens if you cannot attend the meet on the day of the event you want. This actually happens quite often at USMS meets.
Even with automatic timing systems, the swimmers don't always get a clean touch so backup timing would need to be available if they want an official time on an initial distance split.
Our LSC's national times recorder ends up doing a workaround to get initial distances loaded into the USA Swimming database "SWIMS" as official times eligible for records/rankings. So to get the 50 split created on a 100 free event, a new 50 free event (event # suffixed with Z) is created in the MM database, the swimmer entered; and the 50 split time is manually entered as the final result with backup watches also entered as available.
In short, many Nationals are now doing "automatic split requests" for initial split distances. Meaning the swimmer doesn't have to specifically request the split times be submitted. Backstroke events still need to be submitted because the official needs to verify they had an official finish at the specified distance (even though it would be slower for most to flip and touch with their feet, the rule is what it is that you have to finish while on your back) and that is why backstroke requires the request in advance. For relay lead-offs, all split times will get submitted unless the second swimmer starts in the water - in those cases the officials will note the relay so that split time is not recorded.
The irony is when this subject was being discussed a couple years ago, one swimmer voiced displeasure with this because they didn't want their initial distance splits recorded in case they should show up for Top Ten because they would be "slow and embarrassing!"
I know your next question will be can this be done locally at the discretion of a meet director. After all, if it is done at Nationals there must be a provision for it to be legal, right? I don't know the answer but will find out. I believe it is a question for the Rules Committee. I think each Nationals' Meet Director makes the request in advance to Rules if they want to do this or not - so perhaps it would be the same procedure for a local meet director. But don't quote me on this yet - I'm still new in my position and don't know all of the procedures.
Jeff Roddin
USMS Championship Committee Chair
PS. Walt Reid, USMS Records Administrator, has automatically processed reports of all splits for seven championship meets:
1. FINA Worlds at Stanford (August, 2006),
2. SCY Nationals at Federal Way (May, 2007),
3. FINA Worlds at Perth (April, 2008),
4. SCY Nationals at Austin (May, 2008), and
5. LC Nationals at Mt. Hood (August, 2008).
6. SCY Nationals at Clovis, CA (May, 2009)
7. LC Nationals at Indianapolis, IN (August, 2009)
If you think the rule doesn't sufficiently guarantee the accuracy of the swim, why are you pushing to have the swims counted? Do you want the rule eliminated or tightened?
What I'm saying is that notifying the referee after your swim has taken place doesn't do anything to increase the accuracy of the swim. Therefore, the rule is frivolous.
Much of the rulebook regarding the accuracy of touchpad times, etc., largely depends on the judgement of the timing operator. As the timing operator at a number of masters meets, it would be trivial to fake out a finish time if I really wanted to.
I am not saying that I have any issue or concern with the accuracy of the split time. I'm saying that the requirement of administrative paperwork within a certain time window (i.e., before the meet finishes) is not useful.
If you are satisfied with the validity of split time, why can't your LSMC (or whatever "region" you are concerned about) simply make it a policy to accept split times for LMSC records?
Because then we would be in violation of USMS rules! We might as well institute a rule that says we will recognize LMSC records in the butterfly, even if you got DQed for a 1-hand touch. How could a LMSC have a rule to recognize times that USMS won't recognize as valid?
The USMS rule specifically mentions only Top Ten, USMS and FINA records, and I think you said that you are not concerned with those.
No. The USMS rule (go read it) is about "Official Time". That's what rule 103.13 in its entirety is about. It's about what it takes for a time to be "official" in the eyes of USMS. 103.13.1(B) covers the parameters for an initial distance split. 103.13.1(B)(1) says that, as one of many requirements, you must notify the referee in writing before the end of the meet.
Rule 103.13.3 (which, yes, is part of the 103.13 section) covers the specifics about what timing level (automatic, semi-automatic, etc.) is required for different kinds of records, etc. Note that it says that automatic timing (i.e., touchpads) are valid for initial splits for "all purposes". I.e., you can set a world record using a touchpad split time for an initial distance, as long as the other requirements are met.
(As a technical note -- note that if a touchpad misfires at the finish of a race, your correctly adjusted time still counts as an "automatic" time. This is clarified by 103.13.6. However, if the pad misfires on the touch for your initial distance, then my interpretation is that you'd drop down to stopwatch times, and it would not be an "automatic" time. I believe, though it's not specifically stated, that the requirement for an adjustment to "automatic" time requires that all lanes have the same backup timing configuration. I.e., you'd need to have stopwatches and buttons record times for every lane for that initial distance, because you need those stopwatch/button times from the other lanes in order to correct the malfunctioning lane. Yes, this is confusing.)
So again, the situation. You swim the 1500 LCM freestyle at a meet. You were out really quickly at the 800. You get home the day after the meet and realize that your 800 split is a new world record. Note that you do have several weeks (I forget how long) to file the appropriate paperwork for a new world record. However, you realize that you forgot to instruct the referee in writing before you left the meet that you wanted your 800 split to count. Since the meet is over, your opportunity is forever lost. You still have several weeks to file paperwork for the world record application, but you can't. Your time is invalid. We all know that your split was fine. We all know it should be a record. But you slipped up and forgot to file that little bit of administrivia, and that means no record.
-Rick
A possible justification is that if you submit your request before the end of the meet the referee can check the validity of the split with all the timing tapes, watch times, etc. easily available. I don't know how long all that stuff is kept for or who keeps it so perhaps it's not relevant, I'm just guessing.
Sure, it may make it easier. In that case, why not require that all initial splits be required to be requested before the swim?
But my counter-argument is -- if I'm a responsible meet director, and I keep all of this paperwork filed for a solid 12 months after the meet, shouldn't I be able to help establish that a record or top-10 time was established? Why limit my ability to do that?
-Rick
One other thing worth mentioning (or did I already?)... the USA Swimming rulebook has no such provision that requires the swimmer to request the initial split in writing to the referee before the end of the meet.
As far as I know, this has never been an issue in the USA Swimming world.
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.)
-Rick
I believe applications for World/National Records also need the backup times (electronic or stopwatch) as well. So initial splits wouldn't work for those either, right?
As Jeff said, you should ask the Rules Committee and see if there is something special that they have to do at nationals so that all initial splits count. I've seen many screwed-up splits in official meet results.
There is also more work involved in submitting all those splits as if they were individual swims; I'd be curious how Walt handles this across an entire meet (I'll ask him). What I do know is that the splits never appear in the "Current Event Rankings," they just show up in the Top Ten lists at the end of the season.
