The anti-sandbag law:
"if a swimmer enters an event with a time significantly slower or faster than that swimmer's recorded time in the past two years, the meet director may, after a discussion with the swimmer, change the seeded time to a realistic time" (104.5.5.A(10)).
Concerning my Auburn nationals entry, I confess, when faced with a 7 hour 2 stop flight and 3:45 nonstop at an earlier time, I did what any warm-blooded middle-aged American swimmer with low self-esteem would do--sandbag my entry so I could catch the earlier flight, thus diminishing the possible time spent sitting next to a 400 pound Alabama slammer with sleep apnea wearing nothing but overalls and body odor. Of course, I was caught in my bold fabrication and my time was "fixed."
USMS seems to have an identity problem. Are we hard core with rigid qualifying times? It would seem not as 2 of my not-so-speedy family members were allowed to swim four events last year in Puerto Rico. If we are not hard core, why does anybody care that I sandbag? More to the point, why can one person enter a crappy time and another cannot? Just wondering.:)
No, sorry, smoke for asthmatics is no small matter and it's not open to subjective belief. Driving 3mph over the speed limit on a largely deserted road is almost always safe -- as long as you're not texting away on the crackberry. Not similar effects at all IMO -- sandbagging is simply not akin to second hand smoke.
I chose 2nd-hand smoke partly because I knew it would be something you are strongly against. It is not too hard to find people who are pretty dismissive of the effects. Sound familiar?
In my professional life I have read quite a few epidemiological papers on the correlation of indoor and outdoor air quality and health effects -- including 2nd- and 3rd-hand smoke -- so I am certainly familiar with them. And despite your opinion, there is also a significant correlation with speed and traffic accidents, texting or no. +3mph absolutely increases risk, and some feel just as strongly about it as you do about smoke.
There are reasons sandbagging is against the rules. Just because one dismisses the effects as trivial doesn't mean the feeling is universal.
No, sorry, smoke for asthmatics is no small matter and it's not open to subjective belief. Driving 3mph over the speed limit on a largely deserted road is almost always safe -- as long as you're not texting away on the crackberry. Not similar effects at all IMO -- sandbagging is simply not akin to second hand smoke.
I chose 2nd-hand smoke partly because I knew it would be something you are strongly against. It is not too hard to find people who are pretty dismissive of the effects. Sound familiar?
In my professional life I have read quite a few epidemiological papers on the correlation of indoor and outdoor air quality and health effects -- including 2nd- and 3rd-hand smoke -- so I am certainly familiar with them. And despite your opinion, there is also a significant correlation with speed and traffic accidents, texting or no. +3mph absolutely increases risk, and some feel just as strongly about it as you do about smoke.
There are reasons sandbagging is against the rules. Just because one dismisses the effects as trivial doesn't mean the feeling is universal.
