Finnish national DNF record broken in television

[Chrillepille]

Killer dives, congratulations to both of you!

On the topic of rules when there is a step in the wall, how should you judge if the competitor touches above the step with the hand, but pushes off from the wall below the step? Should the penalty be the same as for pushing from the bottom? Maybe this is very irrelevant, but if it gives you a 1-2-meter advantage in a dive, maybe it should be regulated.

 

[rxcnc2]

@picasso: Envy is not the reason why I commented on the steps. It seems many are confused about this, including a judge apparently...

@pehtran: 10 meters? for this?? it seems quite strange

@chrillepille: Good question. I think there is no deduction... but it would be good
to hear an authoritative judge's opinion.

The subtle point is that all of this happens underwater, and in most cases it is not
recorded by cameras (at least there is no requirement for u/w cameras in the rules).
Of course 1 meter less is not a lot... or 2 in extreme cases.

 

[osusim]

On the topic of rules when there is a step in the wall, how should you judge if the competitor touches above the step with the hand, but pushes off from the wall below the step?

so far this is clear and correct behavior.

 

[MikkoP]

Big thanks to everybody! :thankyou

To Tony: My dive time was exactly 3 mins, so about 29 seconds per 25 m.

I think it's a good thing to have this discussion about turns below steps. The new official AIDA rules are on their way and national AIDAs were allowed to comment them and suggest changes. I brought this issue up in national AIDA, but I think I was a bit late since the AIDA board is apparently already holding a vote of these suggested changes. So probably this rule won't be added to the new regulations yet, but hopefully it will be some day.

 

[B-J]

On the topic of rules when there is a step in the wall, how should you judge if the competitor touches above the step with the hand, but pushes off from the wall below the step?

so far this is clear and correct behavior

I`m not sure if I agree with Osusim. When you`re aproaching the wall you don`t benefit from the step, but when you push off from the wall you benefit from the step.
If you do it the other way around: touching below when you aproach, turning, putting you`re feet above the step and pushing off that would be ok.

Osusim: Let`s say you went to a weird pool that had a 50cm step. Do you think it would be ok to push off from below the step and only do 24m laps even if you touch above the step?

BTW. When there`s a deduction of 20cm for one turn, that`s because the step is 10cm, and you save 10 cm when you approach the wall and 10cm when you push off from it.

 

[picasso]

@picasso: Envy is not the reason why I commented on the steps. It seems many are confused about this, including a judge apparently...

@pehtran: 10 meters? for this?? it seems quite strange

Guys I agree that this topic should be clear in AIDA rules. Judges are comfused about that and I also experienced -10 meteres for this. But after protest it was improved to 0,5 meters. It happend last June on Czech National Comp. Not to me but one of my coleagues.

 

[Billextreme]

1 lap = 24.80m = 24m = 1 meter less
2 laps = 49.60m = 49m= 1 meter less
3 laps = 74.4 = 74m= 1 meter less
4 laps = 99.2 = 99m = 1 meter less
5 laps = 124.0 = 124m = 1 meter less
6 laps = 148.8 = 148 = 2 meter less
7 laps = 173.6 = 173 = 2 meter less
and so forth.

This how it works if the athlete stop at a wall. Simple thing to check if you have an active judge.

But the athlete could also in a easy way just make sure to touch the wall, with any part of the body, where the pool is the exact meters, 25 or 50.

/B

 

[B-J]

Bill: Do you mean that if you touch above the step with your hand you can push off from below the step and still get 25m?

 

[trux]

Bill: Do you mean that if you touch above the step with your hand you can push off from below the step and still get 25m?

Yes, it seems to be what Bill means. But on the other hand if the step is not considered to be the wall (which it apparently is not considered to be, otherwise touching it would be sufficient), then pushing off it should be actually considered violation of the rule 5.17, because we are not allowed using any propulsion assistance other than the wall. However, it looks like it is no being interpreted so, and I would tell that a clarification in the rules is needed to avoid ambiguity in the interpretation by individual judges.

5.17

[FONT=Verdana,Verdana][FONT=Verdana,Verdana]Any propulsion assistance other than swimming movements is forbidden (except in case of thrusting against the side of the wall during turns). [/FONT][/FONT]

And then, there is the entirely different question, how to measure the distance if there is a negative "step" on one side, making the pool longer. BTW, the claim somewhere above that the 20 cm negative step is there to compensate the 10 cm step on the other side twice is pure nonsense, of course - if you count the 10 cm twice (there and back), then you have to count it twice on the other side as well. So if there is a step 10 cm on one side and -20 cm on the other side, then the distance is 25.10 m (assuming the wall-to-wall distance is exactly 25 m), which at ten lengths would give the distance of 251 m, but below ten laps, the achieved distances would be identical to a 25 m pool.

All in all, I have the feeling there is too much space for speculations, for personal interpretations by judges, and for often quite important errors of measuring, and it would be nice if it were better addressed in the new rules.

 

[Billextreme]

Bill: Do you mean that if you touch above the step with your hand you can push off from below the step and still get 25m?

Yes, this is correct.
A person with very long arms could touch and then turn even further away from the wall and still get the full length of the pool.

...and I'm not sure we need more text about turns in the regulations.

/B

 

[Kimmo]

Hmmm...what about a sentence that the turns has to be done (touch) at the same distance/point where the pool measurements has been done? I guess (regarding these comments) that this is not a best practice at the moment and many athletes and judges has a different kind of opinions about this. Just a thought

- kimmo

 

[trux]

Yes, this is correct.
A person with very long arms could touch and then turn even further away from the wall and still get the full length of the pool.

OK, so from this argument it is clear that the step is not considered to be the wall. How comes then that you are allowed using it as propulsion support? That violates the paragraph 5.17 and does not make much sense to me. Or is the the paragraph 5.17 abandoned in the new rules, and propulsion support (and grabbing) is not penalized anymore?

...and I'm not sure we need more text about turns in the regulations.

Apparently yes if even the President of AIDA is not able to interpret the rules consistently, or explain them logically. The step is either part of the wall, and then touching it should be sufficient, or it is not part of the wall, and then using it as propulsion support is prohibited. But if neither AIDA judges, nor the President are able to interpret the rules consistently, the rules need to be either clarified, or an interpreting document with examples and instructions for judges, and for competitors needs to be published.

 

[Kimmo]

But if neither AIDA judges, nor the President are able to interpret the rules consistently, the rules need to be either clarified, or an interpreting document with examples and instructions for judges, and for competitors needs to be published.

Any suggestions how to write that sentence short and simply way?

- kimmo

 

[trux]

Any suggestions how to write that sentence short and simply way?

Yes, perhaps I ought to split it in two:

If neither AIDA judges, nor the President are able to interpret the rules consistently, then the rules need to be clarified. Or an interpreting document with examples and instructions (for judges and for competitors) needs to be published.

 

[Will]

Truxes argument is logically sound: the step is either part of the wall (and therefore used to measure the pool) or not part of the wall (and therefore not permissible for propulsion).
To extrapolate, if an AIDA judge were to permit one step for propulsion then they must permit two, or even a whole series of steps along the length of the pool that can be used to propel for the entire lap...

I would have thought the ruling is easy - if an athlete is penalised for pushing off the bottom at the end of the swim then why is he not given the same penalty for pushing off an incline on the bottom during the swim?

 

[Billextreme]

This little 'step' is found in very many swimming pools, not all, but many. In some places the step is between 7 and 10 cm and in some up to 12-15cm.

As long this step is on the wall and not the bottom, the step is a part of the wall, and permitted to use as any other part of the wall. BUT the athlete have to touch the wall where the pool is the exact meters, 25 or 50.

AND again, if the athlete have very long arms he can touch the wall even further from and still get a full length. This even if the rest of the body is 20, 30 or more cm from the wall. Remember that the 'touch' have to be done with a part of the body.

/B

 

[trux]

OK, so let's assume, the step is one meter thick on each side of the pool - if it is considered part of the wall as you tell, and the athlete can use it as propulsion support, then it would give considerable advantage over other pools where there is a smaller step or no step at all.

But of course, if the step is just 20 cm on each side, it already makes a difference of 2 m on 5 laps, so at the distance of 250 m (10 laps), the difference makes 4 m! Do you really find it fair? And what would prevent someone who wants to beat a record, adding a huge artificial "step" on each side of the pool that he can then use as a propulsion support? In your current rules interpretation it is permitted.

 

[Billextreme]

Dear Trux,

One meter steps?

Well, I have only competed in swimming since 1977, and in freediving since 1997, but I have never seen any steps wider than 12-15 cm. Not in any of the 40 countries I've been to. (in the competition lanes, that is) And when your talking about a huge artificial "step", I asume your talking about adding a thing in the water just by the wall, maybe 50cm, 60cm wide or something, right?

This will of course not be ok, not by any AIDA Judges in the world. (cheating is what it will go under)

Then it would be really interesting to see that turn, I guess only a man from Cirque du Soleil could make that turn look cool, but cool is not the same as effective, is it?

I do get your point, even if the step is only 10 cm, it become 1 meter after ten turns. BUT this far AIDA have no problem with this, as long we have the same rules for everyone. Then it's up to each athlete to choose a competition that has a pool that suits him best.

/B

 

[trux]

Bill,

I agree that from purely practical and pragmatical point of view you are perfectly right, and that in most cases the advantage of the narrow step is relatively negligible. I also see that the athlete has the choice of the best suiting pool if he/she wants to create a new record. And I agree that turning under the step (while touching above) is probably the only practical way - forcing competitors to turn above the step may simply not be possible in many pools.

That's not the question though. What is scary, is the ambiguity and the incertitude in the rules that allows for personal interpretation by judges and by competitors. In the same paragraph, you tell that there is no need for any change in the rules, while in one sentence you tell that the competitor has to touch the wall, not the step (because the step is not part of the wall), and in the next sentence you tell the step is the part of the wall, because it can be used as propulsion support. This is purely individual and clearly illogical interpretation of the rules, hence my comment that it would be nice if it were better and more clearly addressed in the new rules, not allowing any space for speculations, manipulations, or abuse.

EDIT: personally I am rather for simplifying the rules than making them more complicated, hence I think the best solution (and not only because of this issue) would be dropping the pargraph 5.17 entirely, allowing so "grabbing" and propulsion support, while avoiding the apparent ambiguity of the rules.

 

[Billextreme]

Hi again,

Of some reason you read things i never said

YOU say:
while in one sentence you tell that the competitor has to touch the wall, not the step (because the step is not part of the wall),

The step on the wall is a part of the wall, and the Athlete can freely use that step if he like to, but the judge will deduct the width of the step for every turn done in that way. (this is if he don't, at the same turn, touch the wall where it is the full meters of the pool)

/B