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?
From what I heard, there were people in the water when the first wave went off that were assigned to later waves. But perhaps someone who was there could tell us how it went down.
The announcer told each wave when to enter the water, but what if someone was given the wrong color cap at registration? That could easily happen.
Greetings Big Shoulders enthusiasts. Race Director, Chris, here. In hopes of bringing some level of calm to this chat, I'm chiming in.
The Big Shoulders race committee has analyzed Andy Seibts' time in this year's race, and done all that we can to verify its accuracy. We have found no conclusive evidence to deem his time to be inaccurate or otherwise incorrect. The basis for our decision is as follows:
-His chip time confirms he started with the 3rd wave (white caps) at 8:10 and came in at 9:06 and change for a 56:21time.
-Several swimmers have confirmed that he started in the 3rd wave.
-Others from the race committee saw him finish and noted the clock showed 9:06.
-There is no evidence that Andy failed to round any of the 8' Orange Buoys that mark the corners of the course, or that Andy otherwise cheated.
-He swam the 1 mile in Clovis, CA and got 2d in his age group, despite a horrible swim.
-He won his age group at the USMS 10K in Harbor Springs despite going off course by 400 m.
-He trained in the pool this summer by going 5K with 1:10 repeats (confirmed by other swimmers).
-He swam in a Blue Seventy suit, which he said is a big advantage to "plus sized swimmers."
-He confirms he had the swim of his life, staying straight on course for the entire swim, and using every opportunity to "slingshot" draft off others as he rounded the course. (For those unfamiliar, the race is conducted on a 2.5K triangular course, and Andy went in the 3rd wave, allowing him to swim through the first two waves and draft off of other fast swimmers as he went by).
-This is the first year he's really targeted and trained for Big Shoulders. In the past, he's just kind of casually done it for fun.
-Those who know Andy and his swimming accomplishments can verify that he has destroyed records in age groups as he has aged up. While his time was a surprise for a 51 year old, the fact that Andy was in the mix with the lead pack should come as no surprise to those who are familiar with his accomplishments.
For these reasons, we have concluded that Andy's time is legitimate, and we are standing firm with our result showing Andy won the race. Congratulations to Andy on an amazing swim, and for striking a blow for aging athletes everywhere!
Thanks for your continued support of Big Shoulders.
Chris
We own a chip timing company. (we have done Boston/Chicago/lots of top marathons)
They should be able to go in the chip timer's system and see exactly when the chip entered the water and when it finished.(that's why you use chips)
I assume the reason we cross a mat before we enter the water is to make sure they know who went in what wave.
If anyone really doubts the results they should go to the chip timing company (whoever they were) and check the results. :bitching:
From what I heard, there were people in the water when the first wave went off that were assigned to later waves. But perhaps someone who was there could tell us how it went down.
It is NOT unsportsmanlike to challenge results that seem, well, unbelievable. I might agree with Kirk that perhaps this is not the proper venue but getting public opinion on the matter is interesting and valid.
Maybe in the future the 1st wave should be include any swimmer who has the potential ( pool or ow) to swim under 1:10 (or maybe 1:05).
This would give all fast swimmers the chance to race head-to-head. If passing slower swimmers is a problem it would affect all of them the same.
This would be easier to moniter and create a cool finish to watch.
I don't know....just a thought. :blah:
Maybe in the future the 1st wave should be include any swimmer who has the potential ( pool or ow) to swim under 1:10 (or maybe 1:05).
This would give all fast swimmers the chance to race head-to-head. If passing slower swimmers is a problem it would affect all of them the same.
This would be easier to moniter and create a cool finish to watch.
I don't know....just a thought. :blah:
This is a great idea. It seems to be common practice -- either enforced or by custom -- at a lot of the marathons my wife runs. I don't know why people shouldn't be "seeded" for an OW race that is a Nat'l championship by time.
This is a great idea. It seems to be common practice -- either enforced or by custom -- at a lot of the marathons my wife runs. I don't know why people shouldn't be "seeded" for an OW race that is a Nat'l championship by time.
Same reason they seed most events first by age group and only after that by time at pool Nationals. If I start with all the women my age, then I know who I have to beat to get that medal.
Some OW races (e.g., Big Shoulders) do it by age/sex groups, and others (e.g., Waikiki "Roughwater") do it by estimated time. I prefer estimated time myself because I'd rather swim among people my speed than pass and be passed, just as I prefer seeding regardless of age or sex at meets. But I can see why others might prefer dividing waves by age/sex rather than by time. It's probably a lot easier for the race organizers, too, seeing as how most people can report their age and sex accurately but might be a little less accurate on seed time.
Another possible explanation:
Even the race description discusses moving the course further to the East this year so that it was less easy to slingshot down the seawall. Given my really poor navigation for my last two races, I ended up much closer to the seawall than most other swimmers after turn 2 (of course, I was also almost swimming behind the lifeguard boats after turn 1). During that leg, I seemed to be passing a lot of swimmers when I was on the outside, and I'm not that fast. Perhaps a couple of folks used this strategy to their advantage (as opposed to my using it by default).
FTR, my time was 2 minutes faster than last year. I'd like to think it had to do with training, being 10 pounds lighter, and a better swimmer, but who knows. I was also over a minute slower than someone I had bested by a minute in a 2.4 mile swim not 3 weeks before.
Greetings to all and I'm happy to join you here on the USMS forum!
A little background:
I swam Big Shoulders this year for the first time after 10 years as a triathlete preceded by nearly 20 years of competitive swimming. It was actually through my experiences as a triathlete that sparked my interest in open water swimming. In the back of my mind, I have always had the goal of completing the English Channel swim. When I read the results online this past Sunday, I was in awe of Andy's performance and am inspired to continue in my open water quest. For USMS standards, I am still quite young and have many years to work on it!
Thus, I'm replying to the thread regarding the amazing swim from Andy Seibt this year.
At first, I did not question the results, but I think the issues concerning Andy's ability to complete this world-class feat are legitimate. I realize the official word from the race director has been posted, thus, I would like to hear from Andy himself. Specifically, what are his regimens regarding physical and mental training, nutrition (race morning, pre-race, and in general), and competition?
In regards to Eney Jones from Colorado, this amazing 48 year old woman has been leading the competition (young and old, male and female) in the water consistently for years. AND, I remember her blowing by me (the first white cap that I remember) right around the 2.5k mark. Yes, I seem to remember the first white cap passing me was a woman. Of course, I could have missed others, specifically Andy.
I simply do not see how it is possible for someone to swim 1500 meters in a long course pool in 19:03 (1:16.2 pace per 100m x 1500 meters) on June 27, 2009 then come back 10 weeks later and swim 1:07 pace per 100 meters for the entire duration of 5000 meters in open water. The conditions were very good, I agree, but not perfect.
I did a negative split and know that swimmers can get sronger/faster as the distance increase. However, Andy's paces and races from the past do not indicate he is capable of this time. So please, pass on the information and share your secret.:bump:
Of all the factors that Andy had to overcome, what really strikes me as incredible is the fact that he left in the 3rd wave! I've done numerous open water swims and I found it next to impossible to weave through earlier waves as it's so difficult to keep a straight course when going around people, slingshot effect or not.
I went in the second wave and I passed lots of swimmers from near the first triangular buoy on. There were a couple times when I thought I might get boxed in, but luckily that never happened. I don't, however, think I really got a draft advantage from anyone I passed. For the most part the swimmers I passed were going much slower than I was and I went right by them.
So, no, I don't think going in a later wave was a huge disadvantage.
