Recurring MIAA Time Trials Debate

Forums Conferences Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association Recurring MIAA Time Trials Debate

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 54 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #12212
      Stevo
      Member

      I can’t believe i am about to bring this up again but it’s getting ridiculous.

      Would we all be talking about calvin time trialing if they would have made the meet? All of the teams have tried Time trials, K, Calvin, & Hope, individuals and relays, and the only team that has actually had a successful one is Hope.

      I just hope that the precious K medley gets disqualified in finals of league meet and has to time trial to make it to NCAA’s.

      The fact of the matter is Time Trials are part of the rules, i’m not an advocate for Time Trial but i sure am sick of guys talking about hopes 200 FR.

    • #33744
      maverick1
      Member

      in 2001 and 2002 i believe K used a TT to get the 200 free relay to nationals….and it worked!

      stevo, the only problem with your hating on th 200 medley is that it most likely already made the meet with their emu time. so even though you do wish a bad race upont them, they’re a good pick to make the meet.

      i hope that hope does time trial the 200 free relay to make the meet and then doesn’t make championship finals…..again….proving that when the time came to reproduce the time trial results they couldn’t and really didn’t belong at nats (according the the qualification rules as of now, i’m a firm believer that inviting more relays to make places 10-16 more legit would be a good move)……now the 400 free relay, that’s really where hope shines at nationals and it is going to be their best relay again. so why not let the 400 free relay squad just go to nats and give ‘er a go in the 200 free relay instead of a questionable time trial….again.

    • #33745
      Stevo
      Member

      so why not let the 400 free relay squad just go to nats and give ‘er a go in the 200 free relay instead of a questionable time trial….again

      So whether it’s on a time trial or the 400 FR it’s going to be the same guys, what does it matter? The reason for time trialing the 200 FR is because it’s the shortest relay, on the first day of the meet. Hypothetically something goes wrong with the 400 FR, they get DQ’ed or the time probably won’t go. Do you turn around and swim another 400 FR 15 minutes later? I don’t think you would have much luck with that, so why not time trial the 200 FR to make sure you have a time that will get an invite. It’s not just the time trial 200 FR that haven’t shown up at nationals, every single year i was on the 200 FR at league meet and nationals our MIAA time was faster, time trial or not. So i guess we didn’t show up any year….but being 1:23 at MIAA is better than never being 1:23 right?

    • #33746
      Stevo
      Member

      touche…on the 01 and 02 TT for K

      2001 NCAA Championship: 200 Free Relay Invite time 1:24.79 (i don’t have any record of K’s actual time in their TT)

      Kalamazoo’s Finals time 1:24.82

      So K must have been faster in the time trial than they were at nationals

      2002 NCAA Championship: 200 Free Relay

      Kalamazoo’s Finals Time 1:24.52

      Time Trial Time: 1:24.17 – Which also stands are your school record

      SO before you tell me about not living up to the time from MIAA’s or TT’s neither did K.

    • #33747
      facenorth
      Member

      It would be tough for me not to say anything on this thread so I will just give in to the temptation.

      Last year Kurt Blohm was not on the 200 Free Relay at MIAA’s. It was thought that having him sit that relay would give the team a better chance at an overall team championship. I think few can argue that logic. As a result of sitting the MIAA recordholder in the 50 Free out of the 200 Free Relay, the relay did not qualify for Nationals. So the relay was time trialed with the best four people on it. It qualified. If Kurt had been on the 200 Free Relay in the event itself, I don’t think Hope would’ve Time Trialed the relay last year and we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Even if you just leadoff Blohm with his time from finals in place of VanderBroek’s leadoff time last year, instantly the relay is about a quarter second under last year’s invite time. Last year the time trial allowed Hope not have to make a distinction between trying to qualify that relay for Nationals and not putting themselves in the best position to win a championship. Thanks to the rules, it was ok to TT a relay that the MIAA MVP did not swim on.

      If you want to go back to the regular TT arguement, feel free to reference MIAAs in ’04 and ’05.

      And yes, I do believe K Time Trialed relays that qualified. On a different but somewhat related note, it may have been 2000, I could be mistaken but I believe that Brian Ross was swimming exhibition for K and having a great meet. Since he was an exhibition swimmer that year he could not particpate on relays in the morning or at night. K was given the same opportunity to put their best 4 guys on the relay in order to try and qualify. To me, that is a like comparison and that is where last year differs from ’04 and ’05.

    • #33748
      BillyBaroo
      Member

      Here is my bias opinion. I think the MIAA should let teams time trial anything they want. If it sends the kids to NATS, more power to them. The MIAA should be well represented at the National level.

      My top 5 races:

      200 MED: I think K has to break the record, but who knows if everyone will be on track to break the record

      200 IM: It will be a tough race in the morning to see who gets into the pivitol scoring spots

      400 IM: I can’t wait to see Phil swim his best in his best event

      100 bk: I think ellis is going to have a fast time and he should swim the 200 bk too

      400 FR: I always loved to watch this race go down, people are spent from the meet and it is all about guts and nuts, who has it

      I also think the 800 medley relay should be instated as a event, it is a personal bias but back in ’02 Hope would have been a 7:32.9 with open times

    • #33749
      stiles
      Member

      In regards to the TT thread, I think it is a great thing. I am Billy Baroo in saying that the more MIAA people there, the better. It is great exposure to the conference and shows that we are competitive on a national level. Not to mention I took a great deal of satisfaction in cheering for Justin Fenwick the year he time trialed the 1 breast. Granted, he didn’t make the cut, but still he had a legit chance at making a B cut. Also, I took a great deal of satisfaction in watching Calvin TT the 2 free and watching SixBags go so early he could have made it under the swimmer infront of them thsu DQing the relay. That was a different satisfaction however.

    • #33750
      silentp
      Member

      I think whether or not you think the TT’s are good or bad depends on whether or not you believe Hope has false started on a relay exchange for each relay for the past 3-4 years. If you believe no, then you’d be for them because people going faster and making it to the meet is a good thing, but if you believe yes, then no one likes a cheater so you’re against them. It’s simple.

      As for the 400 FR, i didn’t choose this relay because i don’t think it will be close. There is a chance that the race for 2nd is a battle, but that’s probably unlikely also. This race will also not decide the conference champion. Olivet will know they have that title shortly after the 200 breast.

      @BillyBaroo wrote:

      100 bk: I think ellis is going to have a fast time and he should swim the 200 bk too

      What are you thinking for a time? I’d love to see him break 50, but was dissappointed in his 51-low at EMU. It’s only EMU, but still. I’d love to hear predictions on his time or anyone else’s (in any of the other events).

    • #33751
      Aflac
      Member

      False started, harsh. Cheaters, more harsh. Here we go again, the world against Hope in the 200 Free Relay. There isn’t any doubt that Hope was deserving of the spot they earned last year. With the group they had, they were one of the teams that deserved to be there. A good point was made earlier with Blohm not being on the relay to begin with. Is it fair to have to choose who sits what relay and not allow a team to field their best possible national team?

      Did KZoo cheat when they qualified relays a few years ago? What is the difference?

      If Bagnall wasn’t called a few years ago and Hope was would we really be having this conversation?

      Should we bring the officials in and let Jack Bauer interrogate them as to why they did not DQ Hope?

      What gives?

      Ellis meet record 50.02

    • #33752

      How many times do we have to say that it is only a DQ if it gets called. If not, it was a legal start! I was also at the meet where Luke jumped and that must have been what he was thinking when he plowed off the block a yard to early. Anyway, I don’t wnat to get caught up in this because we are having some great convo about best races:

      Olivet could have some legit free relays…no one is talking about that.
      Powers-21.6 open at hope meet
      Voss- 21.7 last dual meet
      Fetters- 21.5
      Key/???- 21.5
      1:26.3 with pretty much in season times

      They will, of course, be faster at leagues. Could this compete?

    • #33753
      maverick1
      Member

      stevo-my stupid computer will not connect to d3swimming.com so sorry it took a while to correct this. the two time trials from K that i was referencing were from the 2001-2002 season and the 2002-2003 season (i wrote that in 2001 and in 2002 they time trialed and i agree that i put that incorrectly).

      At the 2002 miaa meet, the time trial 200 free relay went 1:24.17 and in prelims at nationals went 1:24.22. at the 2003 miaa meet, i don’t remember what the team went in the time trial, but it doesn’t matter because in the end A Duda chose not to go to nationals and therefore that relay didn’t go.

      Also, i looked through some results and saw that in the past 4 years, hope has finaled in the 200 free relay twice and consoled twice. at the 2004 national meet in st. louis, hope was seeded 2nd going into the meet behind tcnj, both teams failed to final. in 2006 hope rocked the time trial and was seeded very high (i cannot remember where) with a 1:22.47 and failed to final again. My point; maybe when hope rocks the time trial at miaas, they set themselves up for a less than impressive swim at nationals.

    • #33754
      Stevo
      Member

      they set themselves up for a less than impressive swim at nationals

      Now you could bring in the re-taper argument if you wanted. We can all agree that it takes all four swimmers to have a great relay so let’s break down Hope’s 200 FR at MIAA (TT) and Nationals

      League meet TT:
      CVB- 21.4
      Holton- 20.6
      Jeff V.- 20.4
      Kurt- 19.9

      Total: 122.4 (i know it doesn’t exactly line up but i can’t find the time trial results)

      Nationals:
      Kurt- 20.96
      CVB- 20.89
      Holton- 21.61
      Jeff V.- 20.38

      Total: 1:23.84

      The idea was to have Kurt lead off to get some open water, so you lose the 19. split, CVB was about right with a relay start, Holton was a second slower, and Jeff V. was about the same. Was it a dissapointing swim probably, but it’s not like they layed an egg. It was Holtons first trip to the big show, and they switched the order. My point is, it’s not about the time trial. Everyone has to be on track (especially in a 200 FR) for the time to line up.

      Maverick what are you going to say when K has an unbelievable swim at MIAA in the 200 MR, breaks the MIAA record and is one of the higher seeds at nationals. Then one of the three freshman has a mediocre swim at nationals and you don’t make finals. Then will you change your tone, or then will you resort to saying,”well atleast it wasn’t a time trial”

    • #33755

      Stevo, if you use the open water theory, K’s medley might as well be a time trial with the lead they will have.

    • #33756
      DonCheadle
      Member

      Hope should not be cristicized for taking advantage of the rules. But I really don’t think that time trials should count. We have hashed over this many times but what I maintain is that a time trial, particularily in a short relay, is not the same “event” as a standard race.

      In 1999 Kzoo time trialed a 200 medley relay that got Marcus Boos to Nationals. Marcus actually ended up dropping time and scoring in the 100 breast. This race was right before that sprinter from Hope tt’d a 21.03 in the 50 when he had never gone under 21.3 (before or after).

    • #33757
      SixBags
      Member

      Concerning stiles post.
      My jump couldn’t have been as bad as Hope’s. It’s easy for an official to DQ the second attempt at a TT after everyone is the crowd saw Hope leave early. Their time at Nationals was probably the biggest indicator that they jumped at conference.
      Second, glad I had the opportunity to TT, I also take a satisfaction seeing stiles on the deck watching.

    • #33758
      facenorth
      Member

      Cheadle wrote:

      This race was right before that sprinter from Hope tt’d a 21.03 in the 50 when he had never gone under 21.3 (before or after).

      I believe you’re referring to Josh Ficke, Seabass. From what I have heard, a lot of people were left scratching their heads after that TT.

      I’m sure he false started his open 50 though, probably took off when the official said ‘take your mark’ and they neglected to call it.

    • #33759
      stiles
      Member

      TT’s are a completely different than the standard “event”. TO go out there not in the middle of a big heat or with the competition around you, is says a lot about the swimmers. It is much easier to do on a short relay like that. I think that Whitbeck and Jansen TT the 2 fly when MIAA was at EGR and that is completely different (I am sure they will attest) than TTing a sprint relay.

      Since we are TT’s and best events, can we predict any TT’s that we will see at the league meet? ANy sprint relays or aggregate 800 free rel times?

      ALso, SixBags, you made a stupid mistake and I am raking you over the coles. THis is similar to the way others rake Hope’s relay for “jumping”. I enjoyed watching the relay a great deal especially since it was a no go.

    • #33760
      T-Bone
      Member

      Human error by an official not calling a disqualification is part of the sport, whether it be in a race or a TT. If the NCAA or other swimming authorities wanted to eliminate it, they would just go to a replay judging system or use those electronic pads on the blocks that sense when the swimmer is off the block. Until that day, everyone will have to accept that it is just a part of the sport.

    • #33761
      Stevo
      Member

      Concerning stiles post.
      My jump couldn’t have been as bad as Hope’s. It’s easy for an official to DQ the second attempt at a TT after everyone is the crowd saw Hope leave early. Their time at Nationals was probably the biggest indicator that they jumped at conference.
      Second, glad I had the opportunity to TT, I also take a satisfaction seeing stiles on the deck watching.

      Where do i begin with this post. First of all don’t blame your misfortune on another relay. You sound like a little girl. It doesn’t matter what the crowd saw, it’s the official like it or not. Our time at nationals was great, it’s fun to represent your school and conference on the national level.

      The last sentence is pretty harsh, stiles must have really got under your skin for you to attack his swimming ability. To correct you Rob Knecht at league meet in 2005 swam a time trialed 100 freestyle, so he did get an opportunity to time trial. I bet you feel really good about yourself.

    • #33762
      silentp
      Member

      As far as TTs, my only feeling is that they should be the same for all conferences. The same goes for the block sensors. For instance, some conferences are going to the relay touchpads to eliminate human error and discussions like these, but others are not. Is that fair when the ultimate goal for many of those teams is to qualify for the same meet? Also, the way TTs are done are different for different conferences. In the MIAC, TTs must be done before the session begins. I am not saying one way is better than the others, i just think that the NCAA should have all conferences abide by the same rules.

      Speaking of TTs, does anyone recall the year UW-Lacrosse (i believe it was Lacrosse, but i get them confused) got in at least 1-2 relays in based on either a time trial or 2nd chance meet? They qualified those relays but at NCAAs i don’t believe most of those relays even made it into consols. How many times do you see a relay who got in, not make consols? That’s usually just the team that has 4 guys so they try another relay. I’d say that’s a lot fishier (probably not a word) than anything done in the MIAA.

    • #33763
      facenorth
      Member

      What are people upset about? The fact that Hope is qualifying relays in a Time Trial? Or that Calvin got DQed and Hope dadn’t? To me this is a dad issue, DEAD ISSUE, DEAD ISSUE! (sorry)

      Let’s look at the last 3 years.

      2004. Relay qualifies with a Time Trial. But the time in the actual event itself was faster than the qualifying time. The time trial allowed Hope another crack at the relay, there was no way of knowing at that point that the 1:23.99 was definitely going to qualify. Single conformation on the first exchange, none on the other two. The relay didn’t produce at Nats, but it didn’t even produce what it did in the actual event at MIAAs, tough to fault the TT for that.

      2005. Relay qualifies with a TT. The time from the event would not have qualified this time. The event time of 1:24.3 turns into a 1:23.7 at Nationals, actually going faster than the TT, heaven forbid. Can’t fault the TT for that.

      2006. Top swimmer sits the relay and it doesn’t qualify. TT qualifies. Time would’ve qualified easily with Blohm’s open 50 time leading off the relay in the meet.

      Obviously I have my own bias just as everyone else does, but what are we complaining about exactly? The fact that two officials saw one guy jump from a different team and only one official saw a guy from the other team?

    • #33764
      DonCheadle
      Member

      A little history, just for fun:

      1) At League meet in 1994 Mike Shoemaker (of Calvin) TT’d the 100 fly 3 times (REALLY) and finally made the meet on his last swim. The next year he TT’d twice again qualifying for Nats with his last swim.

      2) In 1995 Kzoo swam a 200 Free Relay at a Hope 2nd chance meet. Dennis Kelley from Kzoo led off the relay. He came out of his start and STOPPED swimming, anouncing, “I am not going anywhere.” Everyone on decked looked around and was like “Is that legal?” Who knows, but he toweled off, started the relay again and went a time that got them to Nationals. At Nats the relay got 4th with a 1:24 low. I think Hope was 3rd in that relay (2nd at the meet overall). Worth noting that this is the only time Kzoo has ever qualfied a 200 Free relay.

      3) In 1996 Kzoo TT’d a 200 Free Relay where Garret Olson lead off in a 21.24 a life-time best by a good amount (kzoo’s top 10 list is wrong [ it says 21.25 ], as was the time Bob Kent submitted to the NCAA. Oh well). The relay went something like 1:24.6 which seemed good enough to make the meet, but as it turned out it wasn’t, and thus Mark Hannum was left off the nationals squad. Garret’s swim was good enough to get him to the meet individually though, which was fortunate because he wasn’t on any qualifying relay.

      4) In 1998 Hope TT’d a 200 free relay that dropped a ton of time from their 200 Free Relay in the actual race. There were no new swimmers on the TT trial race. Said Time Trial moved Hope about a tenth in front of St Olaf, and Hope made the meet while Olaf stayed at home (the afore mentioned Josh Ficke was the only one who was really affected by this because the rest of the relay had already qualfied on the 400 Free Relay). Olaf was pissed and kind of protested. Bob Kent supported Hope (along with Patnot of course) and it became a non-issue.

      5) When Ficke TT’d the 50 free in 1999 there was nothing fishy about the swim at all. It was just a once in a life-time swim. At leagues that year he went around 21.7 in the open race. Imagine dropping .6 in a TT!

      6) The Kzoo 200 medley relay in 1999 had a 20.40 split by Domin. This is probably the 2nd fastest split ever by a Hornet (Kurtz).

      7) In 2003 Casey Lanser TT’d a 200 fly. He took it out in a 52 and came back in a 1:05. Ouch!

    • #33765
      swim5599
      Member

      How did that guy get to TT the event 3 times? I was told you get one shot at it and that is it.

      I think TT are hands down some the most exciting things to watch. ALmost as good as swim offs.

    • #33766
      SixBags
      Member

      I don’t believe I made a stupid mistake, I went through my exchange a bit too quick and tried to get a good exchange, that’s what you try to do on time trials. I don’t know what you mean by saying your raking me over the coles…?

      I understand that Hope didn’t get caught and all the better for them, maybe they do need timing pads so that the officials don’t need to turn their heads when Hope’s time trialing next time.

      Stevo-no reason to comment on your post, no one really cares what you have to say.

    • #33767
      Stevo
      Member

      You do care what I have to say or else you wouldn’t have commented about it at all.

      With your explanation there must be a conspiracy theory, and the refs favored the hope time trial over the calvin one. Keep making excuses why your relays didn’t make it to NCAA’s, that will make it all better. Jump or not your relay wouldn’t have made the meet. In the famous words of Ian Kobes, “It’s a no go”

    • #33768
      silentp
      Member

      @Stevo wrote:

      In the famous words of Ian Kobes, “It’s a no go”

      Speaking of Kobes and not of TTs, can we get him to announce this year again? I’d actually put him above the Kenyon announcer at Nationals and far above Rowdy Gaines for NBC (although behind Summer Sanders purely based on looks, no offense Kobes).

      I should start a petition.

    • #33769
      facenorth
      Member

      I will only sign your petition if we can all ‘rise for the standing of the national anthem.’

    • #33770
      stiles
      Member

      A few things:

      On that list of TT history, that one about the guy stopping at the 25 is probably the coolest IMHO. It is cocky and confident and everything all roleld into one because he proved himself right when they made the cut.

      Also, great story about hope qualifing over St. Olaf. I’d be mad at them Hope as well. But that’s the way the cookie crumbles.

      Who TTs 3 times in a meet? Further, who TTs three times in a meet and makes the cut on the third try? Ok, for all the smarta** out there, I know its Mike Shoemaker.

      I am going to swimoffs are more exciting than TTs. Why? How often do you get to see two guys square off, one on one, in a race they already tied in?! I know I had a one on one when I was in college. It was at the olivet meet during the 2001-2002 season….two guys…Exhibition heat 100 free…I will say it wasn’t exciting, pretty much over after the first 12 1/2. It was against Mr. Slagh. He was a 47.mid if I recall. I think I broke 57. Not sure. If someone could find results from that meet, it would be worht having a good laugh over.

      Maybe I didn’t make myself clear enough when when I was raking SixBags over the coles. I don’t really want to go into it because you are just a calvin swimmer with a small brain.

    • #33771
      N Dynamite
      Member

      @stiles wrote:

      I was raking SixBags over the coles… with a small brain.

      Ugh…

      It’s coals people, coals… When you rake coals you are turning them over so the hot part is exposed. Raking something over the coals would be extremely painful. It means to scold or reprimand someone. A cole is any vegetable related to caggage – for example, broccoli, kale, brussel sprouts.

    • #33772
      iamdonovan
      Member

      Cheadle, are you sure that the 1995 200 Free Relay is the only K relay to make the meet? I think we were discussing earlier that they managed it in the early 00’s as well. Either way, the story is brilliant, and I enjoy hearing stuff like that.

      stiles, I don’t think anyone knows what you’re talking about. Being raked over the coals isn’t any fun at all, but as for being raked over the coles… who rakes someone over cabbage?

      I am kind of excited to see Paul “wanna bet I can hold 28’s?” (not sure if that’s the nickname from last year or not) in the mile this year. The 500, if it includes Heyboer, should be a really good one too. And the relays will probably be exciting to watch, including any time trials.

    • #33773
      quacker
      Member

      Can the moderators step in and move posts around a bit? How about a separate “I Dislike Calvin” thread or “Hope Cheats All the Time” thread?

      This thread started about top races, but it seems like every long discussion gravitates towards the same subjects of biases and whatnot. I’m okay with all that, but how about some organization for when I’m checking this when I should be working?

      And yes, I realize that by posting this I am also not following my own suggestion of following the thread topics. I’m an idiot.

    • #33774
      N Dynamite
      Member

      Watch out, quacker, stiles might rake you over the cabbage

    • #33775
      silentp
      Member

      Quacker, i like it.

      Is anyone else excited for the 1650? Yeah, the winner will lap the field, but 2nd place is a huge question mark: The boys from Olivet? Julio who’s been 16:45 last year? JRich who’s swam very well so far this year? It seems wide open, and with it being the 1650, 2nd place, may see several lead changes. Not only 2nd, but the 1650 tends to have several different races going on at once, all of which could be exciting and if I’m wrong, could change the outcome of the meet. Not to mention, you’ll want to keep your eye on the winner to see if he sets a new league standard!

    • #33776
      teemohtay
      Member

      @stiles wrote:

      ALso, SixBags, you made a stupid mistake and I am raking you over the coles. THis is similar to the way others rake Hope’s relay for “jumping”. I enjoyed watching the relay a great deal especially since it was a no go.

      To me, this registers VERY high on the unintentional comedy scale. Smack talk coming from a dude with a Harry Potter avatar and a signature with release dates of upcoming Harry Potter movies. Almost as good as watching the first couple episodes of American Idol. Thank you, Stiles, for brightening my day.

    • #33777
      maverick1
      Member

      @facenorth wrote:

      What are people upset about? The fact that Hope is qualifying relays in a Time Trial? Or that Calvin got DQed and Hope dadn’t? To me this is a dad issue, DEAD ISSUE, DEAD ISSUE! (sorry)

      facenorth and stevo-

      yeah sorry that i opened this can of worms again…..unfortunately i had to come to starbucks during my very busy day just to be able to post on d3swimming.com. the issue was brought up, again, because of the stevo comment that he wanted the k 200 med relay to have to TT this year and that apparently struck a nerve and now everyone is being all pissy about it.

      silentp-

      usaswimming just sent the team that i coach our copy of 2006 pan pacs and rowdy gaines is just out of control during the commentary. i was on the ground laughing at the man because it got to the point of being ridiculous. i understand getting excited during close or fast races, but rowdy needs to lay off the speed before announcing.

      to all-

      the bears will win this weekend.

      [/list]

    • #33778
      DonCheadle
      Member

      @swim5599 wrote:

      How did that guy get to TT the event 3 times? I was told you get one shot at it and that is it.

      The rules was changed in 1998 or 1997. The rule change was known, at that time, to be the Mike SHoemaker rule. Really this did happen. Some of the older guys can varify…

    • #33779
      Derek
      Member

      @quacker wrote:

      Can the moderators step in and move posts around a bit? How about a separate “I Dislike Calvin” thread or “Hope Cheats All the Time” thread?

      I did consider both those titles for the thread, but decided in the end to be somewhat civil.

    • #33780
      DonCheadle
      Member

      @stiles wrote:

      A few things:

      Also, great story about hope qualifing over St. Olaf. I’d be mad at them Hope as well. But that’s the way the cookie crumbles.

      Who TTs 3 times in a meet? Further, who TTs three times in a meet and makes the cut on the third try? Ok, for all the smarta** out there, I know its Mike Shoemaker.

      The cool part of the St Olaf story is that Hope’s biggest defender was Bob Kent.

      When Shoemaker TT’d the 100 fly for the 2nd time in 1995, I thought it was just plain stupid. It was at the end of the meet and was the 4th time he swam it all out in 2 days (prelims, finals, TT1 and TT2). He Tt’d after prelims on Sat and was much slower thanthe day before. But all that went out the window because he improved his time enough to make the meet.

      Another TT worth noting. In 1998 Latham swam freestyle on a 200 medley relay TT at Wheaton. The relay was Sheeran, Sterns, Robbins, Latham. Latham flinched on the start (robbins stroke is so long, even in a sprint, and it makes it hard to judge) and only managed a 21 low. Sterns cranked out a 26 low, much faster than what he went at MIAA’s, because he was really inconsisent on the start and as a result the relay went like a 1:35.0 (I really don’t know), which was really close to the 1:34.8 that we went at MIAA’s. Had Latham not had a problem with the start, Sheeran probably would have gone to Nats instead of me, though the real issue was Sterns inconsitency, not Latham.

      Donovan: I don’t know if Kzoo was ever qualified a 200 Free Relay since that meet. It was kind of a guess by me. I’ll see what I can find.

    • #33781
      DonCheadle
      Member

      @iamdonovan wrote:

      Cheadle, are you sure that the 1995 200 Free Relay is the only K relay to make the meet? I think we were discussing earlier that they managed it in the early 00’s as well. Either way, the story is brilliant, and I enjoy hearing stuff like that.

      You’re right, the 2002 squad qualified becuase there is no otherway that Anthony Duda would have made the meet.

    • #33782
      Low Tide
      Member

      Didn’t Dan Shelley time trial numerous times before finally getting a 21 low he thought would go? And then it didn’t… though he did get in on the relay? Memory is a bit fuzzy there.

      I’m not the biggest fan of time trialing or even second-chance meets for that matter, but if Shoemaker could swim the 100 fly 4 or 5 times in one meet and finally qualify on the LAST one… by god, let him go to nationals 🙂

      I think he also went a 24 in the 50 free at nationals!

    • #33783

      @teemohtay wrote:

      @stiles wrote:

      ALso, SixBags, you made a stupid mistake and I am raking you over the coles. THis is similar to the way others rake Hope’s relay for “jumping”. I enjoyed watching the relay a great deal especially since it was a no go.

      To me, this registers VERY high on the unintentional comedy scale. Smack talk coming from a dude with a Harry Potter avatar and a signature with release dates of upcoming Harry Potter movies. Almost as good as watching the first couple episodes of American Idol. Thank you, Stiles, for brightening my day.

      Haha to me this registers even higher on the unintentional humor scale…A guy with a retard as his avatar makes a crack about a Harry Potter fanatic…thank you Stiles and Teemohtay for brightening my day as well.
      😆

    • #33784
      Stevo
      Member

      just for clarification purposes, my initial post on this subject was talking about the post Maverick made about the 200 FR being an event that he was looking forward to and brought up the time trials.

    • #33785
      JackBauer
      Member

      So far it’s been a pretty hectic day….but never to hectic to take on the important issues of Division III swimming. For my first post I wanted to put an end to this Time Trial issue.

      1. Stevo- No one gives a rip who started it…why don’t you get your panties in a bunch about an issue that happened years ago.
      2. Stiles- Even though some other people have posted about, grow some balls….hairy potter is for elementary school kids.
      3. Silentp- Are you trying to take yoda status away from Milhouse and Doncheadle? Calling Hope cheaters for their TT was a low blow, you’re not that sweet.
      4. Maverick- you’re just mad that you were a distance guy and never got on a relay
      5. Cheadle- The history of time trials was about as sweet as me never dying and being way more of a bad ass than chuck norris.
      6. Sixbags- You and Stevo can duke it out about who is the most angry on this forum. Look on the bright side about Disqualifying your attempt at making nationals, at least you didn’t cry about it in the warm down pool like your fiance.
      7.Quacker- If your allegations of K being baby killers proves to be true, there will be no more K swimming after I get done with them.

      The bottom line is I will tell you like it is, whether you like it or not. Outside of torturing my brother, killing one of my best friends Curtis, getting beaten in China, I will always make time to tackle D3swimming like a terrorist.

    • #33786
      silentp
      Member

      @JackBauer wrote:

      4. Maverick- you’re just mad that you were a distance guy and never got on a relay

      Actually Maverick qualified for NCAAs in 2004 on the 800 FR. That relay also won MIAAs.

      @JackBauer wrote:

      6. Sixbags- You and Stevo can duke it out about who is the most angry on this forum. Look on the bright side about Disqualifying your attempt at making nationals, at least you didn’t cry about it in the warm down pool like your fiance.

      Actually, it’s fiancée. Learn the difference.

    • #33787
      JackBauer
      Member

      SilentP- I stand corrected, i might be sweet but everyone makes mistakes like killing audry’s husband, or going against the president’s orders, but it’s all part of a greater good. My knowledge of previous swimming has been foggy because of the 18 months i spent getting beaten in China. My apologies to Maverick. As for the spelling error….that is just a sign that you don’t like me, and eye dont kare!

    • #33788
      facenorth
      Member

      Bauer,

      Your avatar is too wide. Could you please find a smaller picture?

    • #33789
      silentp
      Member

      @JackBauer wrote:

      SilentP- I stand corrected, i might be sweet but everyone makes mistakes like killing audry’s husband, or going against the president’s orders, but it’s all part of a greater good. My knowledge of previous swimming has been foggy because of the 18 months i spent getting beaten in China. My apologies to Maverick. As for the spelling error….that is just a sign that you don’t like me, and eye dont kare!

      It’s not as much spelling as it is using a word correctly. Fiance is used for the male, so it’s just improper use. An example of incorrect spelling would be your hometown of “las angelas”… did you mean Los Angeles?

    • #33790
      Old Man
      Member

      One question to make this discussion more interesting. Do time trial times count towards MIAA records? If so, Hope’s 200 Free Relay from 2006 should be the new record.

      Has this happened before?

    • #33791
      facenorth
      Member

      Old man,

      The time from the TT last year of VanderBroek, Holton, Vroegindewey and Blohm would be the MIAA Open Record (1:22.47), bettering the TT in ’04 with Hamstra, Taber, Blohm and Heydlauff of 1:23.25. So it has happened at least once before. It is possible that it happened previous to ’04 as well. But the meet record is still 1:23.49 with Vroegindewey, Heydlauff, Slagh and DeHaan. The meet record must be performed in the actual event itself, not a time trial. Open records can come from any other swim, MIAA or unrelated, including Time Trials.

    • #33792
      JackBauer
      Member

      Facenorth the picture is staying

      Old Man, a TT can not be a MIAA record, in the case of the 200 FR, that is why Hope’s relay in 2002 still holds the record (1:23.49) even though two different time trials have gone faster. Speaking of Facenorth….

    • #33793
      Insight
      Member

      I would like to propose a rule when posting back to Jack Bauer, you must put in a Jack Bauer-ism. For example:

      “When Jack Bauer jumps in the water, he doesn get wet, the water gets Jack Bauer.”

      In regards to the records, the 1:22.47 from Hope is an MIAA Open Record but not a MIAA meet record, exactly as facenorth described.

    • #33794
      SwexasTim
      Member

      anybody remember, i’m guessing 2002 when jeff suuny vroegindewey had numerous time trials at the 50 free to get his b cut so he could swim it at nationals. If you want to complain about taking advantage of the rules then this is it.

      50 prelims

      50 finals

      50 TT

      200 free TT

      I’m sorry to pick on you sunny but looking back pretty fun that the cut was 21.39 and you put up solid 21.4’s every time

    • #33795
      Stevo
      Member

      Sunny definitely took advantage, and 21.4 it was every single time. The 50 free is frustating, and being less than a tenth off a nat cut in that particular event makes it even worse.

      and JackBauer, as much as i am a fan of your show, you’re a tool.

    • #33796
      teemohtay
      Member

      @Insight wrote:

      I would like to propose a rule when posting back to Jack Bauer, you must put in a Jack Bauer-ism.

      I think that to settle this debate, Jack should show up at MIAA’s, time trial the 1650, stop at the 800 mark to torture the official timekeeper for the whereabouts of Fayed’s Jenison headquarters, finish the swim, and still manage to set a MIAA open record in the process. Then, on his way out, he should stop to torture anyone who still doubts the value of time trials. Only then will we as a forum be able to move on to the next topic of real value – trash talking regarding the alumni meet.

    • #33797
      Buck
      Member

      A minor correction for the numerous time trials swam in 2002. The open 100 was never swam as a time trial, figured that wouldn’t be right to do an open turn. But yes, i successfully swam the 50 6 times that weekend all within a tenth of a second of the cut but never quite making it…

Viewing 54 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.