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.:)
Maybe I just don’t get it, but this seems like the most insidious type of “sandbagging” of all:
Get the meet director to change entries (and the rules governing seeding)
just so an individual swimmer can get a “better lane.”
Many of us, as have I, wanted better seeding in club-level meets,
so we could “do our best.” Even with the small-meet handicap,
many of us – I included – have done top ten times – and
set world records – under these circumstances.
I don’t think this is exclusively a “women’s issue-“
which might be why few other women have chimed in.
After all, everybody knew it was a mixed-gender seeding meet,
so no surprises there.
No, you clearly don't get it. Too busy tooting your own horn, I guess.
But I'll tell you what's really insidious and counter to the USMS mission -- your position that "all that matters is top ten" and your precious top ten streak. That's more tiresome than the morality police.
I can hardly believe this thread is still going on ... Like chowmi, I will be sandbagging all future sandbaggging threads.
Maybe I just don’t get it, but this seems like the most insidious type of “sandbagging” of all:
Get the meet director to change entries (and the rules governing seeding)
just so an individual swimmer can get a “better lane.”
Many of us, as have I, wanted better seeding in club-level meets,
so we could “do our best.” Even with the small-meet handicap,
many of us – I included – have done top ten times – and
set world records – under these circumstances.
I don’t think this is exclusively a “women’s issue-“
which might be why few other women have chimed in.
After all, everybody knew it was a mixed-gender seeding meet,
so no surprises there.
No, you clearly don't get it. Too busy tooting your own horn, I guess.
But I'll tell you what's really insidious and counter to the USMS mission -- your position that "all that matters is top ten" and your precious top ten streak. That's more tiresome than the morality police.
I can hardly believe this thread is still going on ... Like chowmi, I will be sandbagging all future sandbaggging threads.
