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.:)
Parents
Former Member
C'mon q ...
the idiocy spawned by this thread has been fun and amusing and way better than re-hashing tech suits (which, of course, we all know were handed down directly from the Creator and were banned by an evil cabal of satanists), AND
this is a dumb rule that Kurt highlighted (I'm serious on this one).
I am pretty sure I am participating in the idiocy and a manner to perpetuate it, not to try to bring light to the truth of either side. My approach must be more stealthy than I thought if you are calling me out for taking it too seriously.
Serious: I disagree that the rule is dumb if it is used to help the swimmer when a obvious mistake was made or improve the meet timeline when it would otherwise be drastically affected. This is what I would guess the rule was intended to do. I have already stated that I don't believe meets with qualifying times would drastically be affected by random seeding, I agree Kurt was singled out because he is Kurt Dickson. That's what happens when you face is plastered all over a nationally distributed publication, you get special attention.
C'mon q ...
the idiocy spawned by this thread has been fun and amusing and way better than re-hashing tech suits (which, of course, we all know were handed down directly from the Creator and were banned by an evil cabal of satanists), AND
this is a dumb rule that Kurt highlighted (I'm serious on this one).
I am pretty sure I am participating in the idiocy and a manner to perpetuate it, not to try to bring light to the truth of either side. My approach must be more stealthy than I thought if you are calling me out for taking it too seriously.
Serious: I disagree that the rule is dumb if it is used to help the swimmer when a obvious mistake was made or improve the meet timeline when it would otherwise be drastically affected. This is what I would guess the rule was intended to do. I have already stated that I don't believe meets with qualifying times would drastically be affected by random seeding, I agree Kurt was singled out because he is Kurt Dickson. That's what happens when you face is plastered all over a nationally distributed publication, you get special attention.
