Ok, so the more they email me, the more I get nervous about the water temp. Last year it was 69 which stung to get in, but it made for a nice swimming temp. By the end, though, my fingers and toes felt a little numb, but that could have been tired (??).
But this year, it could be up to 10 degrees colder?! What to do when the coolest water I can find here in Cincinnati is 80?
I said OW had to clean up its act, not USMS ...
Of course officials can't always notice something. I was referring to the case where there were no officials to police the mandatory buoys.
Don't worry, I didn't go past the 15 meter mark in any races at Nats. :) Chris' dubious DQ freaked me out enough to botch all my backstroke starts and not take full advantage of my SDK.
Perhaps everyone accepted the results because they didn't have the time or energy to analyze the results immediately post race. Brain function is not always at fully operable when you're exhausted.
If USMS is going to sponsor the National Championship, then it seems to me that they should be part of the "clean up" process.
As for having the time and energy to protest. Is a fraud not detected within 30 minutes, not a fraud?
When the results were announced, well after the 30 minute protest period had passed, the speaker (I presume Chris Sheean?) said that Andy was the "real deal" and that he had "won several significant OW swims outright" this summer. I still have no idea what races he was referring to.
He did mention two races. (note posted previously by knelson) A 15th place finish at Clovis 1 mile in 19:31 and 2:26 at Harbor Springs 10k do not seem commensurate with :56 for the 5k.
Regarding the 30 minute time limit. It's just not possible to review the data that quickly. I think this rule should be changed. A couple of days would seem reasonable.
As far as I can tell, no one has pointed to any other recorded swim to indicate that the winner did indeed complete the course in the time posted.
Let's put this in perspective.
Jim McConica swam a 1650 in 16:42 in 2001 as a M50-54 (USMS record)
Andy Seibt swam a 1650 in 18:05 in 2009 at the age of 51
Jim McConica holds the us postal 5k record for M50-54 at 1:00:53 (USMS Record)
Andy Seibt swam a OW 5k in 2009 at the age of 51 at BS swam 0:56:21
You have to be able to hold about a minute flat (yards) for a mile, if you're going to have a chance under an hour for 5K.
For those who think in relative terms. Jim swam 8% faster in the 1650, (both swimmers approx same age, in pool conditions) only to get beat by Andy 7% at 5k, where you would expect Jim to have had an advantage (assuming you agree that people will swim faster in the pool than in OW).
I said OW had to clean up its act, not USMS ...
Of course officials can't always notice something. I was referring to the case where there were no officials to police the mandatory buoys.
Don't worry, I didn't go past the 15 meter mark in any races at Nats. :) Chris' dubious DQ freaked me out enough to botch all my backstroke starts and not take full advantage of my SDK.
Perhaps everyone accepted the results because they didn't have the time or energy to analyze the results immediately post race. Brain function is not always at fully operable when you're exhausted.
If USMS is going to sponsor the National Championship, then it seems to me that they should be part of the "clean up" process.
As for having the time and energy to protest. Is a fraud not detected within 30 minutes, not a fraud?
When the results were announced, well after the 30 minute protest period had passed, the speaker (I presume Chris Sheean?) said that Andy was the "real deal" and that he had "won several significant OW swims outright" this summer. I still have no idea what races he was referring to.
He did mention two races. (note posted previously by knelson) A 15th place finish at Clovis 1 mile in 19:31 and 2:26 at Harbor Springs 10k do not seem commensurate with :56 for the 5k.
Regarding the 30 minute time limit. It's just not possible to review the data that quickly. I think this rule should be changed. A couple of days would seem reasonable.
As far as I can tell, no one has pointed to any other recorded swim to indicate that the winner did indeed complete the course in the time posted.
Let's put this in perspective.
Jim McConica swam a 1650 in 16:42 in 2001 as a M50-54 (USMS record)
Andy Seibt swam a 1650 in 18:05 in 2009 at the age of 51
Jim McConica holds the us postal 5k record for M50-54 at 1:00:53 (USMS Record)
Andy Seibt swam a OW 5k in 2009 at the age of 51 at BS swam 0:56:21
You have to be able to hold about a minute flat (yards) for a mile, if you're going to have a chance under an hour for 5K.
For those who think in relative terms. Jim swam 8% faster in the 1650, (both swimmers approx same age, in pool conditions) only to get beat by Andy 7% at 5k, where you would expect Jim to have had an advantage (assuming you agree that people will swim faster in the pool than in OW).
