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.:)
Are you arguing that there's no valid rationale for separating men and women? You know I'm not the only woman complaining about women in end lanes in mixed gender meets.
I agree meets should be seeded split gender whenever possible. For the Albatross to not be mixed gender, we'd have to drop some events to meet the timeline (mixed gender seeding saves time). The alternative would be to cut longer events and shortchange the distance swimmers. Since distance swimmers are usually the minority while women make up ~50% of the participants, it is entirely possible we should investigate. Although I guess I first need a mathematician who can extract out the subset of female distance swimmers from my hypothesis...:D
I don't recall blowing anyone's doors off at the Albatross meet (or at any meet recently), though I certainly got my doors blown off at Zones when I entered a time that was too ambitious in my untapered state. And I recall being quite pleased with your reseeding the fast women so that we could actually swim against each other.
Are you kidding me? You blasted me up and down for unilaterally changing your seed times and sent daily emails questioning my authority to do so while asking me to change them back. I don't remember the specifics, but I thought you entered with 36 and 1:18 in the 50 and 100 back before I changed them (and you went 30+ and 1:09, I think). I guess I shouldn't complain because at the end of the day you were a satisfied customer so we both got we we wanted. But I do remember it being a meet director headache and if you simply entered with your anticipated times (like the rulebook states...) there would have been no issues.
Are you arguing that there's no valid rationale for separating men and women? You know I'm not the only woman complaining about women in end lanes in mixed gender meets.
I agree meets should be seeded split gender whenever possible. For the Albatross to not be mixed gender, we'd have to drop some events to meet the timeline (mixed gender seeding saves time). The alternative would be to cut longer events and shortchange the distance swimmers. Since distance swimmers are usually the minority while women make up ~50% of the participants, it is entirely possible we should investigate. Although I guess I first need a mathematician who can extract out the subset of female distance swimmers from my hypothesis...:D
I don't recall blowing anyone's doors off at the Albatross meet (or at any meet recently), though I certainly got my doors blown off at Zones when I entered a time that was too ambitious in my untapered state. And I recall being quite pleased with your reseeding the fast women so that we could actually swim against each other.
Are you kidding me? You blasted me up and down for unilaterally changing your seed times and sent daily emails questioning my authority to do so while asking me to change them back. I don't remember the specifics, but I thought you entered with 36 and 1:18 in the 50 and 100 back before I changed them (and you went 30+ and 1:09, I think). I guess I shouldn't complain because at the end of the day you were a satisfied customer so we both got we we wanted. But I do remember it being a meet director headache and if you simply entered with your anticipated times (like the rulebook states...) there would have been no issues.
