No sandbagging: It's the law

It is unwise to ever try to intervene in a knife fight, but here I go anyway. Why couldn't meets just use a database to discover a swimmer's best time over a previous period, say a year, and seed accordingly? More competitive heats and less waiting around: sounds good to me. My knifefight intervention wouldn't be complete without weighing in on the profound moral issues sandbagging raises for society, posterity, and our sacred honor. A zen koan shall serve. The other day on my way out of the swim complex I hung around to watch an h.s. water polo practice. The coach was earnestly teaching the team how to fake a suit snag, or other underwater foul, to sucker the refs. Pretty good acting jobs, gotta say, with groans, armflops, blah blah. Now as we know from watching the NBA, faking a foul isn't against the rules. But is it the way we wish to live? To teach h.s. kids to dupe the ref, sending your opponent to the alley while you score a goal? Sorry for the redirect/hijacking. Please resume the highly enjoyable knifefight.

One thing I should also point out. Yes, sandbagging is a pet peeve of mine. However, I understand that this is not always a scientific process. I know we have new swimmers. I know some people are tapering for the first time. I get it. We're adults. My only real expectation is that you think about your seed time, and make an honest effort at coming up with a seed time that accurately reflects how you expect to swim. Honest effort, people. That's all I want. This is a great post. So I couldn't let That Guy's efforts stand without an effort to try taking him down. Like him, I chose a taper meet (NE LMSC SCM champs last December) and a non-taper meet (the VMST David Gregg meet last February). I had those entry times and results readily available in my blog. For the taper meet, I averaged a 1.23% difference. Good for an A+ on Rick's scale but not good enough to take down that guy, darn him! (I was undone by a particularly stinky 50 fly, 0.7 sec off my seed time that was good for 2.79%, bloating my average.) For the non-taper meet, I averaged 1.33% difference, finally taking down that guy. That deserves the banana celebration: :banana:. I had the advantage, though, that I did the same exact events I had done a year ago; I simply entered the times from 2010 in the 2011 meet. What is interesting about this is that, at the time, I considered the 2010 meet a great in-season meet while at the 2011 meet I felt just awful. I was, for example, 4 secs slower (+3.4%) than my entry time in the 200 back and 8 sec slower (+3.0%) in the 400 IM. I wanted to try to calculate Mr. Patrick "entry times are completely inaccurate guesses" Brundage's latest meet but I couldn't tell his entry times from his blog. Based on my experience in calculating the David Gregg meet, I strongly suspect that -- despite his statements about how inaccurate his entry times are -- he would get at least an A- on Rick's scale. I have had quite a few students like this, complaining how little they know just before they bust the grading curve on a test. They are usually pre-med; maybe he missed his calling? :bolt:

OBI WAN HAS TAUGHT YOU WELL BUT YOU ARE NOT A JEDI YET *cough* *cough* ... where did that come from? Lightning shooting out of my hands and everything. Hopefully this is just a 24 hour virus and not a full-on dark side thing. :dunno: Anyway, when you register for meets through clubassistant.com, it suggests a time for you to enter with if it has one on file for you. It's easier to just click on the suggested time than it is to type one in, so I generally just click the link. :applaud: Ahhh, but I thought I was THE Jedi of Smilies! :agree: I see you changed your avatar tag line again. Hmmmm... I still like "That Guy is not Mark Gill despite the resemblance" the best! Thanks for your tip, by the way. :)

There was a time in Oregon swimming when the people who got closest to there seed times was reported in our newsletter.Since we are a competitive group I suspect that decreased sandbagging as most were striving to make that list,I know I was.

I don't think I've made myself clear enough here: I posit that "sandbagging" is neither immoral or unethical or unsportsmanlike (or un-anything-else-you-high-horses-think-is-good) for the very precise reason* that none of us, not a single darn one of us (no matter how "right" we think we are and how "wrong" we think others are) truly knows how their performance will pan out and therefore how close their entry time will be to their final time. I enter my meets as soon as I know I can go to the meet, often weeks in advance. Even though I try to enter likely times, life happens either before the meet or during the meet and my result differs what whatever projected reality I had used to create the entry time. Patrick, maybe others have said that all sandbagging is bad, but I know that I have not. As you said, life happens but my issue and this is the last time I will get in a discussion about accurate seed times, is INTENTIONAL misrepresentation of expected performance. I don't give a hoot about someone who swam a 56 last month, seeds 56 and swims a 58 due to injury, illness or otherwise poor performance. That happens. The only real issue (IMHO) is intentional misrepresentation of expected performance. Doing repeat 100s in 1:00 in practice and then seeding 1:00 is, in my opinion, intentionally misrepresenting expected performance. Also, for me, while it's an annoying practice at the local level, the meets are so small, the events have so few heats and range of times in each event are so great, that 'sandbagging' does not have a huge impact on the over all meet timeline (there are exceptions, mostly events that are already time constrained due to facility time), that I really don't care about it (except to tweak inviduals about it). But doing so at zone or national competitions is, again in my opinion which matters little unless I ever become a meet director of one of those events, unacceptable. In this competitions, one intentionally misrepresented seed time can skew the timeline of an entire event. Please also note, I am railing against the INTENTIONAL mis-representation of expected performance (and this is also for the 'dreamers' out there who seed times unrealistically faster than they can expect to go, seeding 1s faster in a 100 might be ok, seeding 4s faster is unrealistic). I understand no sleep, got sick, didn't hear the whistle to step up :D, torn suit, pulled muscle, gout flare, too much mexican the night before, too much alchohol, too little alcohol, etc. etc.. Your right to do what you want is perfectly acceptable as long as it does not negatively impact others. Slides soap box away. For those that are in favor of intentional misrepresentation of seed times, go run a meet where you have a set time to complete the meet and see the true affect of sandbagging. Or heck, watch the first several heats of any USA meet with all the NTs, THAT is what sandbagging does. But I put that one at the feet of USA swimming for requiring only provable times and establishing (but not really enforcing) stiff penalties for non-compliance.

So I couldn't let That Guy's efforts stand without an effort to try taking him down. Like him, I chose a taper meet (NE LMSC SCM champs last December) and a non-taper meet (the VMST David Gregg meet last February). I had those entry times and results readily available in my blog. For the taper meet, I averaged a 1.23% difference. Good for an A+ on Rick's scale but not good enough to take down that guy, darn him! (I was undone by a particularly stinky 50 fly, 0.7 sec off my seed time that was good for 2.79%, bloating my average.) For the non-taper meet, I averaged 1.33% difference, finally taking down that guy. That deserves the banana celebration: :banana:. I had the advantage, though, that I did the same exact events I had done a year ago; I simply entered the times from 2010 in the 2011 meet. Well done! You bring up a good point that an inconsequential difference in a 50 can be a large % difference. I didn't race any 50's in my two recent meets. My 100 SCM *** was 8.48% faster than my seed time. A big enough difference that even while I was realizing that I had just made a breakthrough in my breaststroke, I was also thinking that I must look like a real jerk. No fistpumps or anything like that, I just stared at the scoreboard and the unexpected number it was displaying.

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 Kurt, what was the event, and what was the time you originally entered with? -Rick

We need a torch and pitchfork smiley... ...is this thread over yet? I think the thread just started over again. Up next: second hand smoke! :applaud:

OK, after reading this thread, I am now not only paranoid; I'm obsessed (to the point of sending out a couple of PM's on the subject). :confused: How do I know what seed times to put down for Auburn (and whether I really qualify for a 4th event*), when physical issues make predicting my times nearly impossible? Not only is two months out a total guess; so is week-to-week and day-to-day! My body's hypersensitivity to heat (still undiagnosed) and cold (Raynaud's) make for very unpredictable performance predictions; especially since my reaction to heat often causes sleep problems. Except for Mesa, I never know what the pool/air conditions will be like for a meet. Will the air be very hot and humid? If I am stuck doing warm-ups or warm-downs in the kiddie pool or dive tank where the water is often above 85 degrees, will my body have a meltdown? My performance can even change drastically from day to day in the same meet, depending on the night I had in between, as a reaction to heat exposure. I scratched the 200 breaststroke on Sunday, at Mesa, because I knew if I attempted it, I would have been the first (and only) rescue! :afraid: *I qualified in the 50yd breaststroke, last September, so technically I can convert that time and qualify for Auburn. But, I have been anywhere from 2-3+ seconds off since! :badday: Thanks, in advance, for any polite feedback any of you can offer. Hopefully, by posting on this thread, your responses will provide guidance to other swimmers who may be feeling like they are in the same boat (uhhhh, POOL.).

We're adults. Honest effort, people. That's all I want.-Rick I wrote a long post last night about my view as a coach, a USMS participant, and as a competitive athlete. But in the end decided Rick captures it. I 100% support Fort's race efforts, her BLOG, and her posts here. I also support myself in my personal principle of not sandbagging. Even though I do often get burned by big huge sand-baggers... (sorry to "ATLANTIC" for swimming so slow in Mesa... I sincerely hope I did not displace you from a final heat but I had no idea, at the WAY too early entry deadline date, that I would suck so badly in AZ) It's true, I do try to visualize a world of sweet perfection... Where we all look out for each other. Especially within our sport of swimming. You should try it... feels good. Take a path that boosts the spirit of our athletes so they continue to love to swim. Talk to each other. Osterber says, "We're adults." So be an adult! Talk to SWIMMERS racing around you and let them know what you want. Draw them into the race! You can find a way in this great age of technology. If you're going for a record or a split request, let them know! It can be cool to be a part of that action. 99.9% of athletes don't read The USMS Forums & Blogs - or know the frustrations about SAND-BAGGING. Be adults and talk to each other. You might just find a way or convince another swimmer to stick around and swim along with you for life. Build the spirit of an athlete. Don't break it. They come to masters swimming - and racing for a million reasons. Find ANY SINGLE WAY to keep them swimming. And participating in events. Sometimes that means sand-bagging. Sometimes it means a good head to head race. Or leaving the meet early or getting some extra rest between events. I know it doesn't apply to all meets, but (IMHO) most 1-day meets I have experienced run way too fast. Even when we are way ahead of a projected timeline, the meet races on with little rest between events. How about taking time with an announcer who can help the crowd appreciate the action in the pool? The reason I go to swim meets is to swim, socialize and watch swimming. I know I'm a rare one, but I immensely dislike rushing meets to try to leave early. And yes - I always enter the max number of events in a meet. :) LOVE from Northern CAL.