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.:)
Sorry, I do believe it was you who criticized a cancer survivor (Bobby Patten), who happened to have had a chunk of his shoulder taken out, for entering a slow time at nationals, dodging you in the process. I also remember a statement from you about probably the greatest distance swimmer in USMS (Jeff Erwin), always entering slow times. So, while the pounce may not be there, the (self) righteous indignation clearly is present...know thyself my brother.:)
Congratulations on your 25 years...do you get a pin or something?
Try again. Fortress asked for examples of when sandbagging could possibly affect me, and I gave those two. There was no judgment stated or implied, merely the observation that sandbagging can lead to less competition. I never said anything about 'dodging' in fact I specifically said otherwise so stop twisting my words. I kidded Bobby about it at the time, saying it would have been fun to race. I don't know Jeff well enough to kid him about this or anything else.
In the real world the people who care most about sandbagging as a general issue are meet directors. They want meets to run as efficiently as possible, and what's wrong with that? At nationals one is not allowed to enter NT, so an outrageous sandbag to swim with 80-year olds is just a way to try to circumvent the rules. You got caught and have whined ever since.
I don't know what you were expecting with this thread. I guess you are upset that not everyone agrees with you and so once a week you stir things up with snide remarks about the 'moral police'. Swim the 400 or don't, I doubt it is all that important to most readers of the forum.
Sorry, I do believe it was you who criticized a cancer survivor (Bobby Patten), who happened to have had a chunk of his shoulder taken out, for entering a slow time at nationals, dodging you in the process. I also remember a statement from you about probably the greatest distance swimmer in USMS (Jeff Erwin), always entering slow times. So, while the pounce may not be there, the (self) righteous indignation clearly is present...know thyself my brother.:)
Congratulations on your 25 years...do you get a pin or something?
Try again. Fortress asked for examples of when sandbagging could possibly affect me, and I gave those two. There was no judgment stated or implied, merely the observation that sandbagging can lead to less competition. I never said anything about 'dodging' in fact I specifically said otherwise so stop twisting my words. I kidded Bobby about it at the time, saying it would have been fun to race. I don't know Jeff well enough to kid him about this or anything else.
In the real world the people who care most about sandbagging as a general issue are meet directors. They want meets to run as efficiently as possible, and what's wrong with that? At nationals one is not allowed to enter NT, so an outrageous sandbag to swim with 80-year olds is just a way to try to circumvent the rules. You got caught and have whined ever since.
I don't know what you were expecting with this thread. I guess you are upset that not everyone agrees with you and so once a week you stir things up with snide remarks about the 'moral police'. Swim the 400 or don't, I doubt it is all that important to most readers of the forum.
