Split Requests

[The Fortress]

Split requests seem to be all the fashion lately. I know they're perfectly legal, though I haven't read the rule itself. I'm wondering about them though ... It seems oddly unfair, for example, that a person never (or rarely) swimming open 50s could hold world or national records or #1 rankings in those events. (I'm just saying it's odd, while recognizing it could be perfectly legal.) But, aside from that and further, what if someone really played the system. What if, for example, someone was after a 50 free record. They entered a meet in the 50, 100, 200, 400, 800 free and led off free relays and requested split requests in each event to try to set a record. Is this legitimate or legal? Would a meet director be bound to accept split requests for all these events? Is there a limit? Do meet directors have discretion to deny multiple split requests? I can see a situation where multiple attempts at a 50 might result in a better time ...

[Blackbeard's Peg]

According to 105.3.7, yes, someone can conceivably get a split from all those races (and relays) to count towards a WR as long as they abide by the procedures set forth in that section of the rules.

In reality, it wouldn't quite happen the way you describe it. The swimmer will get all their backup timers for all their races and fill out their times on that lane's timer card. But at the end of the meet, they get to come up to the meet director and say "hey, dude meet director, i got 50 splits in all my free events, but can you please submit the one from my [event]?" Unless the meet director is an ahole (or the swimmer is), it'll get submitted.

FYI - USMS Rulebook (http://http://www.usms.org/rules/) area of the USMS site

[The Fortress]

According to 105.3.7, yes, someone can conceivably get a split from all those races (and relays) to count towards a WR as long as they abide by the procedures set forth in that section of the rules.

Well, I think this rule sucks then, violates the spirit of fair play, and should be re-written to prohibit such conduct. Let's be pro-swimmer in the interpretation of rules, but this seems extreme and more toward the "playing" and cheating end of things.

What will we have next? People swimming in 4-5 B70s even though the rule says "swimsuit"?

[knelson]

People swimming in 4-5 B70s even though the rule says "swimsuit"?

People are doing this already. I heard quite a college teams had their swimmers don two suits. I also heard none of these times will be allowed, though.

As far as swimming multiple events and requesting splits in all of them I don't really see the problem. If someone has to swim the same event 20 times, but finally sets a WR or something in the 20th swim it seems just as valid to me as if they did it the first time.

[dolf]

Its totally legal. I believe it's good practise to let the officials know if you're trying for a record.

Here in the UK, a guy swimming in the Nationals in October got a WR on his 100m free (50.08). The next day he swam the 200 free and obviously went for the record again on the first 100. He swam 49.97 - which is now classed as the new WR. He finished the race in 2.29.00 in last place!:D

[Rykno]

our meet directors must be very nice in sweden. we don't have to request lead off time splits for relays to count, they automatically get counted in our time database.

at my last meet I swam 50/100/200 breast, 100/200/400 IM , 200 back and 400 free. I was suppose to swim the 1500 but was not 100% so scratched. either way, since I didn't qualify for the 200free but was going to be on our relay I requested the lead off just so I could know myself what I could swim. to my surprise when I looked on line my time was registered.

then I checked back to the begining of the year and my 50 back in the relay was also registered. it was only .02s faster than my individual time, but still faster :-)

[The Fortress]

People are doing this already. I heard quite a college teams had their swimmers don two suits. I also heard none of these times will be allowed, though.

As far as swimming multiple events and requesting splits in all of them I don't really see the problem. If someone has to swim the same event 20 times, but finally sets a WR or something in the 20th swim it seems just as valid to me as if they did it the first time.

Yeah, I get that it's legal. I'm just not crazy about it. But I guess it's a way to work the order of events if you don't like it, without being called a dirty sandbagger. Although it seems just as "selfish" to the people in your heat, perhaps, as some say sandbaggers are ... Plus, it seems to disadvantage flyers and breaststrokers somewhat. Freestylers can just get more splits in more events.

The multi-B70 time won't count, Kirk, even though technically it's still legal?

[Blackbeard's Peg]

Well, I think this rule sucks then, violates the spirit of fair play, and should be re-written to prohibit such conduct. Let's be pro-swimmer in the interpretation of rules, but this seems extreme and more toward the "playing" and cheating end of things.

What will we have next? People swimming in 4-5 B70s even though the rule says "swimsuit"?

Fort,
What, in your mind is fair play, and what constitutes a pro-swimmer rule?

Personally, as I interpret these two terms, I think you have your sandbags in the wrong place, as I think this rule is incredibly pro-swimmer. It gives all swimmers absolutely every opportunity to achieve a record and/or top 10 time within the confines of the schedule of a meet.

Mostly everyone knows about it, a few meet entry forms have alluded to this rule, and in fact, some meet directors have gone so far as to include the split request forms in their meet program (you may see this again locally soon).

[The Fortress]

Fort,
What, in your mind is fair play, and what constitutes a pro-swimmer rule?

Personally, as I interpret these two terms, I think you have your sandbags in the wrong place, as I think this rule is incredibly pro-swimmer. It gives all swimmers absolutely every opportunity to achieve a record and/or top 10 time within the confines of the schedule of a meet.

Mostly everyone knows about it, a few meet entry forms have alluded to this rule, and in fact, some meet directors have gone so far as to include the split request forms in their meet program (you may see this again locally soon).

I see your point, Peg. It definitely creates opportunity. I was just suggesting that it might be "unfair" to those in your heat as much as sandbagging is deemed "unfair."

I'm not sure everyone knows about split requests though. You're a meet director -- you're an educated consumer. It had never occurred to me, for example, to do one until my last meet or so. And actually I never have submitted a split request. I think it would be a good idea to include a form in the meet entry packet. That would be pro-swimmer.

It does give a new meaning to picking events though. It multiplies the number of events and gives you a "two for the price of one" if you're so inclined. Theoretically, you could travel to or attend fewer meets and still have the same number of times.

[Chris Stevenson]

People are doing this already. I heard quite a college teams had their swimmers don two suits. I also heard none of these times will be allowed, though.

If it is legal at the time of the swim, how can it be disallowed later? Did the officials make note of who swam with multiple suits? How would they even have known?

I bet that multiple suits will be disallowed in the future, sure, but I don't see what they can do about it retroactively.

[Blackbeard's Peg]

Freestylers can just get more splits in more events.
As for freestylers getting more splits, yes, sigh, freestylers have more opportunities. But it is just like percentage-based tax cuts - if you earn $100k, yes, your 1% tax cut is going to be greater in $ that someone who is getting a 1% tax cut on their $40k. There are more freestyle events, so more opportunities. But if USMS added 400s of the strokes and an 800 IM, I'm not entirely confident that the same people swimming these will be going after any 50 fly records.

I see your point, Peg. I was just suggesting that it might be "unfair" to those in your heat as much as sandbagging is deemed "unfair."

I really don't think it is unfair if all of you have access to the same thing.

In this case, it is good practice to notify your neighbors of your intentions. People like to race their neighbors. Especially in a distance event (let's say the 1000 free), if your neighbor is going after the first 200 and sprinting his arse off, you'll die like a pig if you try to keep up with them on the first part of your race when you've got 80% of your race to go with no gas in the tank.

Plus, there are further benefits to those swimming the prescribed race. Hypothetical example - Paul Smith's 1000 at nationals, with me in the lane next to him (I didn't swim that event). Paul goes out like a bat out of hell in the first 100, gets his :46.whatever national record, the loafs it home the rest of the way. I swim my swim and finish 3 seconds ahead of him. "oh, well he didn't even try for 90% of the race" say the naysayers. my response: "yes, but the clock does not lie - my time is faster. I beat Paul Smith." :banana: (For the record, my 1000 from zones three weeks prior was 5 and change seconds faster than Paul's nationals time, but I am fully aware that I'd get lapped in a head to head 1000).

[The Fortress]

yes, sigh, freestylers have more opportunities.

chuckle ...

[elise526]

I am curious to know if USATF (track and field) allows this type of thing. Is somebody allowed to use a 400 or 800 split on the 1500? This summer, a non-swimmer type made the argument that swimmers have more opportunities for medals. Does swimming allow for more opportunites to set records than any other sport?

I will never be in the position to ask for a split as I am simply not a fast enough swimmer to be setting any records. Perhaps it is easier for me to take the position that other than leading off relay events and the actual event, splits should not allowed to be used for records. Fort makes a good argument that using longer events to get a record is akin to sandbagging.

If somebody wants to get a record and doesn't get it on the actual event or a lead-off on the relay, then he/she just needs to do a time-trial.

[knelson]

If it is legal at the time of the swim, how can it be disallowed later? Did the officials make note of who swam with multiple suits? How would they even have known?

I don't really know. I admit it seems dubious, but that's what I heard. The reason given was the rules talk about "A swimsuit," thus wearing more than one is illegal. However, I'm sure there have been many cases of teams wearing drag suits for meets they knew they'd win and I'm sure no one ever thought to DQ them for wearing more than one suit.

[pwolf66]

I was responding to a post that apparently disappeared.

[The Fortress]

I will never be in the position to ask for a split as I am simply not a fast enough swimmer to be setting any records.

Now, see, this type of thinking gives me pause. I don't think only record breakers and TT types should be getting split requests. Everyone should feel free, as it's perfectly legal and they may just want to improve their time or may be going for a team record or something. But, I'm just not so sure it would occur to many swimmers. It's not THAT widespread a practice yet.

[Leonard Jansen]

I am curious to know if USATF (track and field) allows this type of thing. Is somebody allowed to use a 400 or 800 split on the 1500?

Yes. HOWEVER, in order for it to be accepted, it would have to have all the official timing protocalls in place at the intermediate marks. So, for example, you would need to have FAT (fully automatic timing) and not manual timing, etc. It would also be made quite clear to all competitors what was happening before the race.

That said, it is rare to do this in the running events. There have been instances where people have used, say, a mile run to get a 1500 meter record, but fewer cases where it is done for other distances for record purposes.

In racewalking it is VERY common to use a longer race to go for a fast time at a shorter distance, usually for purposes of qualifying for another competition, like the Olympic Trials. It is also common in racewalking to extend a race distance to allow someone to qualify for something. This is mostly due to a scarcity of races with the correct level of judging and/or competitors. However, racewalk timing is generally accepted as being like road racing timing, so you don't need the fancy automatic timing unless it's a world record attempt.

Edited: I forgot to add that the running/walking race management can, at their discretion, decline to do this.

-LBJ

[Syd]

Except that the event is 'freestyle' so it would not count for anything other than freestlye no matter what stroke you swam. Someone swimming a record 400 IM in a 400 Free event will not get official credit as the event was a Freestyle event.

The only way to get a 50 Fly split recognized is for it to be swam during a Fly only event (or during the Fly leg of an IM).


I thought 'freestyle' meant exactly that. In other words you are free to do any style you want. Front crawl is the fastest so everyone uses it, but they could equally choose to use any of the other three strokes should they want to. Am I wrong?:confused:

[elise526]

Yes. HOWEVER, in order for it to be accepted, it would have to have all the official timing protocalls in place at the intermediate marks. So, for example, you would need to have FAT (fully automatic timing) and not manual timing, etc. It would also be made quite clear to all competitors what was happening before the race.

That said, it is rare to do this in the running events. There have been instances where people have used, say, a mile run to get a 1500 meter record, but fewer cases where it is done for other distances for record purposes.

In racewalking it is VERY common to use a longer race to go for a fast time at a shorter distance, usually for purposes of qualifying for another competition, like the Olympic Trials. It is also common in racewalking to extend a race distance to allow someone to qualify for something. This is mostly due to a scarcity of races with the correct level of judging and/or competitors. However, racewalk timing is generally accepted as being like road racing timing, so you don't need the fancy automatic timing unless it's a world record attempt.

Edited: I forgot to add that the running/walking race management can, at their discretion, decline to do this.

-LBJ

Thanks for the info! I was curious. I really like the fact that it is made clear to all competitors before the race that a split request has been made. This is pro-athlete and fair. This type of thing needs to be done in swimming.

[jim thornton]

Jeff, in your hypothetical 1000 with Paul Smith, what would happen if he, in course of hell-bat-out-of swimming the first 100, he so exhausted himself that he was unable to continue on after setting the world record in his split?

If Paul does not finish the 1000, the event he entered, he would be disqualified from the 1000. But would his WR split still count?

If yes, then what is to keep people from swimming the split portion then just getting out prematurely?

If no, I would advise Leslie against trying to set a world record in the 50 fly during the first 50 of a 200 fly.

Actually, something almost like this scenario almost happened at Rutgers LCM Nationals 6 years ago. Todd Spieker was trying to set NR records for both the 800 and the 1500 frees. He went out really fast and just missed the 800 record by something like .01 seconds. He then continued onwards, tripping his heart into A-fib near the conclusion of the 1500. He very nearly did not finish. He was on a stretcher being cared for by paramedics for 45 minutes after the race concluded. (Note: some of the exact details here may be a little off, but the gist of it is basically correct.)

As far as the double suit business goes, especially with B70s, that really seems like cheating to me. Even though claims have been made that the suits don't float, they are made out of some sort of closed cell material that is not of an entirely different species than neoprene. Having two of them on has to be somewhere along the calculus curve that leads incrementally in the direction of a true wetsuit.

I thus humby offer this question:

How many B70s must be piled one on top of the other before you have a functional wet suit?

One way to answer this may be to ask yourself how many B70s would the average surfer need to wear before he or she would go surfing in New Jersey this time of the year?

I daresay 2 might be enough, but 3 or 4 almost certainly would!

[elise526]

Now, see, this type of thinking gives me pause. I don't think only record breakers and TT types should be getting split requests. Everyone should feel free, as it's perfectly legal and they may just want to improve their time or may be going for a team record or something. But, I'm just not so sure it would occur to many swimmers. It's not THAT widespread a practice yet.

You are right in saying that anybody should be able to ask for a split. I was just trying to explain why it may perhaps be easier for me to take the position that splits should not be allowed. If I was fast enough to be breaking records, I'm not so sure I'd be quick to take the position I have.

[ande]

look to the USMS rule book in

section 102.15 DISQUALIFICATIONS at
http://www.usms.org/rules/part1.pdf

there's the rule:
102.15.14 A swimmer who misrepresents a seed time, causing a significant delay of the meet, may be disqualified at the discretion of the referee. The disqualified swimmer shall be removed from the lane as soon as practical.

The way I read this rule is:
If a SLOW swimmer enters a distance event with a fast time they could be charged with delay of meet.
BUT
If a fast swimmer enters an event with a SLOW time, then goes for a split, then swims down and comes in around the same time as those in his heat he would not be charged with delay of meet. so if you're going for a split,
figure out your swim down / legally complete the race pace and enter the event with that time.

[The Fortress]

I was just trying to explain why it may perhaps be easier for me to take the position that splits should not be allowed.

Damn lawyer! I can see how, at first blush, it would strike some as odd that a person could have WRs or #1 rankings or whatever in an event that they never actually swam that year.

Jim, if he doesn't finish, it doesn't count.

[Blackbeard's Peg]

Jeff, in your hypothetical 1000 with Paul Smith, what would happen if he, in course of hell-bat-out-of swimming the first 100, he so exhausted himself that he was unable to continue on after setting the world record in his split?

If Paul does not finish the 1000, the event he entered, he would be disqualified from the 1000. But would his WR split still count?

If yes, then what is to keep people from swimming the split portion then just getting out prematurely?

The rules clearly state that the swimmer (or swimmers if a relay) must finish the entire prescribed race - 105.3.7 - D. If Paul got out, or had a Rutgers-esque situation (God forbid), then while we all know what he did in his split, he did not finish the race and is therefore DQ'd and his WR Split effort goes down the toilet.

This precice rule is keeping people from swimming 200 fly's for 50 times and then getting out of the water.

[osterber]

I thought 'freestyle' meant exactly that. In other words you are free to do any style you want. Front crawl is the fastest so everyone uses it, but they could equally choose to use any of the other three strokes should they want to. Am I wrong?:confused:

Right. You can do any stroke you want. But it only counts as freestyle. If you do a 400 IM during a 400 freestyle... the officials are only officiating against freestyle rules. They're not watching your 2-hand touch. They're not watching your over-rotation on backstroke turns, etc. They're just officiating freestyle rules.

(Note that in many meets, the officiating setup will actually change for freestyle events. Often, for example, during a 400 freestyle, you'd only have one official at each end, making sure each lane touches the wall. For a 400 IM, you'd need at least 2, and preferably at least 4, officials at each end of an 8-lane pool to properly officiate the strokes.)

-Rick

[The Fortress]

If no, I would advise against trying to set a world record in the 50 fly during the first 50 of a 200 fly.

Theoretically though, Jim, according to Wolf-Girl, you could just put your arms in a streamline position and kick the whole rest of the way.

[jim thornton]

Or, with the right current, dead man float your way to the natural and arguably deserved conclusion...

[osterber]

The rules clearly state that the swimmer (or swimmers if a relay) must finish the entire prescribed race - 105.3.7 - D. If Paul got out, or had a Rutgers-esque situation (God forbid), then while we all know what he did in his split, he did not finish the race and is therefore DQ'd and his WR Split effort goes down the toilet.

This precice rule is keeping people from swimming 200 fly's for 50 times and then getting out of the water.

What's interesting is that USA Swimming and USMS rules differ on initial distances for relays. In USA Swimming, as long as the lead-off swimmer completes his/her leg legally without being disqualified, the time counts for an initial distance split. It's OK if the relay is DQed due to another swimmer infraction. In USMS, it is required that the entire relay complete the event without being disqualified.

-Rick

[SwimsWithAFist]

What's interesting is that USA Swimming and USMS rules differ on initial distances for relays. In USA Swimming, as long as the lead-off swimmer completes his/her leg legally without being disqualified, the time counts for an initial distance split. It's OK if the relay is DQed due to another swimmer infraction. In USMS, it is required that the entire relay complete the event without being disqualified.

If USMS didn't have that rule, then I absolutely guarantee that there would be a bunch of fake relays entered at big meets like nationals. Enter a relay, but only show up with one swimmer going for an initial split. When no one dives in for legs 2-4, the relay is DQ'd, but the split time stands. This is a good USMS rule.

[ScarletSwimmer]

I say "Two Suits, Two Asteriks".

[knelson]

a person could have WRs or #1 rankings or whatever in an event that they never actually swam that year.

See, that's a sprinter's mentality. To me, if I swim a 1650 I maintain that I am swimming a 50 and a 100, and a 200, etc. By swimming the event called "50 freestyle" you guys are just neglecting an opportunity to swim multiple events all in one fell swoop!

[osterber]

If USMS didn't have that rule, then I absolutely guarantee that there would be a bunch of fake relays entered at big meets like nationals. Enter a relay, but only show up with one swimmer going for an initial split. When no one dives in for legs 2-4, the relay is DQ'd, but the split time stands. This is a good USMS rule.

If I were the ref in that situation... I'd DQ the one swimmer on the grounds of unsportsmanlike conduct. :-)

-Rick

[The Fortress]

See, that's a sprinter's mentality. To me, if I swim a 1650 I maintain that I am swimming a 50 and a 100, and a 200, etc. By swimming the event called "50 freestyle" you guys are just neglecting an opportunity to swim multiple events all in one fell swoop!

What?! If you are swimming a 1650, you are NOT swimming a 50. You are merely traveling very slowly and breathing a lot.

I'll have to neglect fewer "opportunities" in the future. I may look at meet entry forms differently from now on. (Oh, yes, the 100 back and 50 fly are back to back again -- just like they are at NEs this weekend --no problem, I'll swim the 200 back. Unless that's right next to the 100 fly. Must be time to charge Chris for a fly-back rant.)

[Paul Smith]

As for freestylers getting more splits, yes, sigh, freestylers have more opportunities. But it is just like percentage-based tax cuts - if you earn $100k, yes, your 1% tax cut is going to be greater in $ that someone who is getting a 1% tax cut on their $40k. There are more freestyle events, so more opportunities. But if USMS added 400s of the strokes and an 800 IM, I'm not entirely confident that the same people swimming these will be going after any 50 fly records.



I really don't think it is unfair if all of you have access to the same thing.

In this case, it is good practice to notify your neighbors of your intentions. People like to race their neighbors. Especially in a distance event (let's say the 1000 free), if your neighbor is going after the first 200 and sprinting his arse off, you'll die like a pig if you try to keep up with them on the first part of your race when you've got 80% of your race to go with no gas in the tank.

Plus, there are further benefits to those swimming the prescribed race. Hypothetical example - Paul Smith's 1000 at nationals, with me in the lane next to him (I didn't swim that event). Paul goes out like a bat out of hell in the first 100, gets his :46.whatever national record, the loafs it home the rest of the way. I swim my swim and finish 3 seconds ahead of him. "oh, well he didn't even try for 90% of the race" say the naysayers. my response: "yes, but the clock does not lie - my time is faster. I beat Paul Smith." :banana: (For the record, my 1000 from zones three weeks prior was 5 and change seconds faster than Paul's nationals time, but I am fully aware that I'd get lapped in a head to head 1000).

I make it a practice to always tell the starter and the swimmers in my heet if I'm going for a split time and it has always been annunced to the field prior to stepping onto the blocks.

Peg...don't I owe you a beer for your beating my time?

[BillS]

What about the clear water issue in all of this? Is it fair to the guy or gal who fought his or her way to the front of a pack of 8 churning, thrashing sprinters to a record 50 time while split guy or gal has nice un-churned, un-thrashed water to play with? Isn't sandbagging to get clear water frowned upon? Why then is it sanctioned, or at least ignored, with recognized splits?

[hofffam]

Even though claims have been made that the suits don't float, they are made out of some sort of closed cell material that is not of an entirely different species than neoprene. Having two of them on has to be somewhere along the calculus curve that leads incrementally in the direction of a true wetsuit.



You are perpetuating a misunderstanding of neoprene. Neoprene is just a form of synthetic rubber. Sometimes it is formed into a closed cell foam that creates insulation (and flotation). Hence use as wetsuits and coozies. Neoprene is used as a coating for inflatable boats to make the fabric air tight.

I think the Yamamoto (?) material used in the B70 is not a closed cell foam. I think it is simply a thin rubber-like coating over the spandex. The rubber-like material may have less friction in water than either spandex or human skin. And I think it traps tiny air bubbles in the spandex, causing a small but perceptible amount of flotation.

[pakman044]

One of the interesting things is that the USMS relay initial split rule is in tension with the FINA rule. Compare:

FINA SW 11.5 In the case of a relay disqualification, legal splits up to the time of the disqualification shall be recorded in the official results.

with

USMS 103.13.1 An official time shall be achieved in a USMS-sanctioned competition or -recognized event in accordance with all applicable rules. It may be achieved in:

C A relay leadoff leg provided the swimmers complete the event without being disqualified.

Even though you might not agree per se with the split rules, I don't see how you would get around them. FINA dictates the procedure for the world records and world Top 10's, and it would be somewhat silly to create a national procedure that is completely contrary to that (oh wait, that darn yards thing....).

I like having the opportunity to get an initial split for my own purposes because sometimes, for whatever reason, you don't always get a chance to swim a particular event. For example, I was at a meet in April doing the 1650, so I asked for the 1000 split too.

Sure there may be inequities in the competition with initial splits, but what stops someone from setting up a time trial, or sanctioned intrasquad meet, or something like that where the deck is loaded in their favor?

Patrick King

[3strokes]

Enter a relay, but only show up with one swimmer going for an initial split. When no one dives in for legs 2-4, the relay is DQ'd, but the split time stands. This is a good USMS rule.

Something almost similar happened to me.
In Ottawa there's only one LCM meet per year, in February, and I always (last six years since I restarted swimming anyway) enter the 50 free.

I swim unattached I (in 25m pools). Therefore the one annual LCM meet I do is the only time I can get "timed".

From year to next year it's difficult to tell if I swim all out will be faster or if I swim long.

Therefore it was manna from Heaven for me to discover the rule that allows relay teams in meets where the swimmers do not belong to the same club and their entry and time would be for "exhibition" purposes only and no records would count.

So this year 2008, I suggested this event to the organizers. They thought it was a good idea and scheduled it.

I swam my own 50free and then a few events later, it's time for the "exhibition" relay. I show up at the start and number three does not; numbers 2 and 4 are ready at the other end. The starter calls the race and, unbeknownst to me, the official at the other end suggested to swimmer 2 to do a 100 so that swimmer 4 would have a chance to swim.

a) our relay was DQ'ed, naturally, and
b) in trying to find number 3, I forgot to ask the timers to PLEASE, time MY split, jut for my info, PLEASE.

[Allen Stark]

I don't think it unfair,rather it is a chance to mitigate the unfairness that the meet schedule sometimes causes.I do think it is only fair to enter the time you think you will actually do and to tell the rest of the heat of your intentions.If a freestyler was to enter all the events to get a 50 record I think they would be a very tired swimmer by the end of the meet(unless they were a real jerk and stopped after every failed attempt and got out after 50,they'd be DQd,but since they didn't get there time,so what.)

[The Fortress]

I don't think it unfair,rather it is a chance to mitigate the unfairness that the meet schedule sometimes causes.I do think it is only fair to enter the time you think you will actually do and to tell the rest of the heat of your intentions.If a freestyler was to enter all the events to get a 50 record I think they would be a very tired swimmer by the end of the meet(unless they were a real jerk and stopped after every failed attempt and got out after 50,they'd be DQd,but since they didn't get there time,so what.)

Ah, yes, that pesky order of events business that I am so reknowned for now ... In fact, I was just looking at the meet entry form for Auburn and thinking the 200 back might have me written all over it ...

Is a time trial always loaded in one's favor, Pakman? Surely it must depend on the swimmer. I have heard complaints about lack of "optimal competitive racing conditons" or lack of "crowd energy ... And in a longer time trial or split request, you are surely racing only yourself. If Osterber and others are right, it's better to race others.

[elise526]

I make it a practice to always tell the starter and the swimmers in my heet if I'm going for a split time and it has always been annunced to the field prior to stepping onto the blocks.

Peg...don't I owe you a beer for your beating my time?

Paul, you are among the honorable. I like your example.

[The Fortress]

Paul, you are among the honorable. I like your example.

Paul is God in this very limited way. ;) However, I have never actually heard an announcement of a split request in a meet. Ever. And I see split requests appear in the event rankings from meets I've competed in. Nor have I actually heard anyone tell their neighbors that they are sandbagging or getting a split request. Although I believe that Muppet would do that, as he's a straight up cool dude.

[chowmi]

If I do the 2009 check off challenge, can I just swim the

1650
IM's
200's of stroke

and get my splits to count?

[Glider]

Awesome:bliss:If I do the 2009 check off challenge, can I just swim the

1650
IM's
200's of stroke

and get my splits to count?

[psyncw]

I have on occasion heard an official announce that someone is going for a split rather than the full swim, but not very often. I think alot of the split requests come from lead off's on relays or the first 50 of a 100 swim, or the first 100 of a 200 swim. It doesn't seem necessary to tell other relays you are going for a relay split time. Nor would I find it necessary to tell others in my heat that I had asked for my first 50 of a 100 to count unless i planned on not going for the 100 time as well. So don't assume that those who requested split requests you see in the meet results were sandbagging or disrupting the competition in any way.

[That Guy]

What about the clear water issue in all of this? Is it fair to the guy or gal who fought his or her way to the front of a pack of 8 churning, thrashing sprinters to a record 50 time while split guy or gal has nice un-churned, un-thrashed water to play with? Isn't sandbagging to get clear water frowned upon? Why then is it sanctioned, or at least ignored, with recognized splits?

Not an issue. Remember that swimmers trying to make cuts (particularly in USS and college) will do time trials after meets or even meets composed entirely of time trials. In college, on three separate occasions, I swam 200 fly time trials alone to make cuts. Another time I did a 1000 free time trial alone, and was so bored that I missed the cut I was trying to make.

Edit: Now that I think about it, I also did several other time trial swims just to see how fast I could go in some of my "off" events.

[BillS]

Not an issue. Remember that swimmers trying to make cuts (particularly in USS and college) will do time trials after meets or even meets composed entirely of time trials. In college, on three separate occasions, I swam 200 fly time trials alone to make cuts. Another time I did a 1000 free time trial alone, and was so bored that I missed the cut I was trying to make.

Edit: Now that I think about it, I also did several other time trial swims just to see how fast I could go in some of my "off" events.

At least in my mind, there's a difference between looking for a cut and setting a world record. Wasn't there some controversy a while back about a 50 free record being set in a trial? Maybe Hall, Jr was involved, I can't recall right now? Something about an empty lane between 2 very fast guys?

[imspoiled]

However, I have never actually heard an announcement of a split request in a meet. Ever. And I see split requests appear in the event rankings from meets I've competed in. Nor have I actually heard anyone tell their neighbors that they are sandbagging or getting a split request.

This did happen at LCM nationals. KPN was in the fastest womens heat of the 1500 free. Her intention was to get a 400 or 800 split (can't remember which). She let the people in the lanes around her know what she was doing and it was announced by the starter prior to the swim.

[stillwater]

If you are polite and notify everyone in the field what your goal is, I am not as annoyed.

There should be an annoucement on the PA before the event begins. This announcement should include what the swimmers is going for and the ramifications of failure and success. Failing to accomplish the goal should be a bevy of brews for those in the heat. Accomplishing stated goal should be a bevy of brews for those in the heat.

The swimmer should also finish the event close to his/her seed time.

[Blackbeard's Peg]

However, I have never actually heard an announcement of a split request in a meet. Ever...
I think we can all go on about times when we heard someone announce it, or when we did it ourselves...
Fort, since most of the (Masters) meets you attend are multi-day meets that usually separate out distance events to a separate day (or session), as a wimpy sprinter :cane:, you're just never around to hear it.