It's frankly disrespectful to all Channel swimmers to equate following agreed Channel rules and what others have done previously with hanging onto a boat or not actually finishing a swim.
I think if you talk to the experienced EC pilots in a pub in Dover or Folkstone you will find that they are aware that there skill at piloting is sometimes used to assist the swimmer...
I think if you talk to the experienced EC pilots in a pub in Dover or Folkstone you will find that they are aware that there skill at piloting is sometimes used to assist the swimmer...
Makes you wonder, doesn't it? As an indication of the contribution of the pilot's skill, at the elite level it can be costly to start an EC as little as 15 minutes past the "best start time", which is to say that one's pilot needs to be able to determine the 'best start time' with an accuracy of at least 15 minutes. Here is a link to this analysis and analyses of other factors. Moreover, consider the last three registered EC's record holders to date:
06:55:?? Grimsey 2012-09-07 M. Oram Gallivant
06:57:50 Stoychev 2007-08-24 M. Oram Gallivant
07:03:52 Wandratsch 2005-08-01 M. Oram Aegean Blue
Same pilot, but at different levels of experience. Wandratsch produced his world record when Oram had 7 fewer years of experience, and was piloting Aegean Blue, a 5.5% shorter boat with a 10% shallower draught, which is to say, speculatively, a smaller bow wave.
EDIT:
For completeness, compiled from here, a list of the 9 fastest ECs:
06:55:?? Grimsey 2012-09-07 M. Oram Gallivant
06:57:50 Stoychev 2007-08-24 M. Oram Gallivant
07:03:52 Wandratsch 2005-08-01 M. Oram Aegean Blue
07:05:42 Kudinov 2007-08-24 unavailable unavailable
07:16:25 Rostislav 2009-08-14 M. Oram Gallivant
07:17:00 Hundeby 1994-09-27 R. Brickell Helen Ann Marie
07:20:00 Wandratsch 2003-08-20 R. Brickell unavailable
07:21:08 Stoychev 2006-08-22 M. Oram Aegean Blue
07:22:00 Meca 2005-08-29 R. Brickell unavailable
@oxo You seem to have completely missed the "in comparison" after "negligible". My point is that some people are questioning a possibly tiny assistance, i.e. swimming in the bow wave, while accepting a much greater assistance, i.e. swimming in the lee of the boat. Please, read sentences right to the full stop before you attempt any interpretation.
@owenswims93 - Sorry for the confusion. I did not miss your comparison. In fact, that comparison prompted me to comment.
The comparison, if I understand it correctly, is that A is smaller than B, and in that light, discussion of A is pointless. My comment was that there exist some issues that are smaller than B that are so worthy of discussion that there are explicit rules governing them. From there one might conclude - as I do - that the relative size of two issues cannot be used to determine which are worthy of discussion.
If the chairman of a given Swim Association tells the swimmer where to swim, and the swimmer does so, then I would think that the swim will not violate that SA's rules in that regard in either letter or in spirit. But an SA's self-written set of rules are not rules for the route. They are the rules for getting your name on that particular SA's list. If you get on an SA's list and your swim was more X than anyone else on that list, then that SA will probably say that you hold that SA's course record in terms of X.
People assign other meaning to a given SA's set of rules, and people have their own ideals. These three - rule set, assigned meaning, personal ideals - are independent of each other. That independence, to me, has been the, er, nourishment of this thread's history.
Of course one could argue that the rules should be reexamined for possible change and developing a consistant set of rules.. Remember the speed suit controversy? Records set with stood despite the advantage it gave the swimmers at the time.
The SBCSA voted at its recent board meeting to add the following item to our Swim Rules, which are read aloud by the observer before every channel swim:
9. The swimmer may not intentionally draft off either the escort boat or the support swimmer.
I disagree. The rule is written very carefully, with two aims:
1. To discourage swimmers (or boat pilots) from implementing a deliberate, intentional drafting strategy in order to enhance speed.
2. To allow for "incidental" drafting, in and out of feedings, or if the swimmer temporarily or accidentally swims close to the escort boat.
As with any swim rule, the observer is in charge of interpretation. The observer decides, based on the circumstances, if any drafting is intentional or incidental. A warning will precede any disqualification.
In my opinion, the distinction between accidental drafting and drafting-as-deliberate strategy will be obvious. Hopefully, the mere existence of the rule will discourage anyone from trying it.
Plus, kayak support is allowed and encouraged in Santa Barbara Channel swims. If a swimmer uses a kayaker (and they should), there is no need or excuse to swim too close to the escort boat.
If we're talking zodiacs or other very small boats in SBCSA swims I'd say 1-2m would be ok, but for the boats and conditions typically encountered on California Channel Island crossings I prefer the swimmer more like 3-5m from the boat for safety purposes.
When I'm in the water I generally feel the boat is the most dangerous thing to me as a swimmer.
1-2 meters is ideal but 3-5 meters is oké.
On flat water one could use kayaks but here in the Netherlands they are not considered suitable for safety.
The two most commonly used escort boats for Channel Islands swims are, respectively, 50 feet and 62 feet. It is simply not safe for a swimmer to stay 1-2m from this large of a boat. It's difficult for the pilot to even see the swimmer at that close of a distance.
What's suitable in the Netherlands is irrelevant. What's suitable in the English Channel is also irrelevant. The topic is a SBCSA rule, for swims in the Santa Barbara Channel.
If a swimmer goes under how fast can the kayak-er get to him from 2 meters and retrieve the swimmer to the surface?
Rescue diving from a boat is faster and the diver probably has a better idea of the last location of the swimmer then someone sitting low as in a kayak.
In our swims here, a kayaker is in a much better position to rescue the swimmer than people on the boat. They are closer to the swimmer, they are already at water level, they are most likely already wearing a wetsuit. The people on the boat are fully clothed, are 5-6 feet above water level, and not in a good position to do "rescue diving."
Boat sizes vary. The swimmer's distance from the boat will vary with boat size. For me I want to be able to see the Captain at the helm because then I know he can see me.
Comments
I was wondering why Trent's was the only swim being criticized here and not the records prior to his
@ChickenOSea. Makes you wonder, doesn't it.
loneswimmer.com
We could talk about this instead:
"I never met a shark I didn't like"
Same pilot, but at different levels of experience. Wandratsch produced his world record when Oram had 7 fewer years of experience, and was piloting Aegean Blue, a 5.5% shorter boat with a 10% shallower draught, which is to say, speculatively, a smaller bow wave.
EDIT:
For completeness, compiled from here, a list of the 9 fastest ECs:
http://fermoyfish.com – Owen O'Keefe (Fermoy, Ireland)
The comparison, if I understand it correctly, is that A is smaller than B, and in that light, discussion of A is pointless. My comment was that there exist some issues that are smaller than B that are so worthy of discussion that there are explicit rules governing them. From there one might conclude - as I do - that the relative size of two issues cannot be used to determine which are worthy of discussion.
If the chairman of a given Swim Association tells the swimmer where to swim, and the swimmer does so, then I would think that the swim will not violate that SA's rules in that regard in either letter or in spirit. But an SA's self-written set of rules are not rules for the route. They are the rules for getting your name on that particular SA's list. If you get on an SA's list and your swim was more X than anyone else on that list, then that SA will probably say that you hold that SA's course record in terms of X.
People assign other meaning to a given SA's set of rules, and people have their own ideals. These three - rule set, assigned meaning, personal ideals - are independent of each other. That independence, to me, has been the, er, nourishment of this thread's history.
http://santabarbarachannelswim.org/rules.html
1. To discourage swimmers (or boat pilots) from implementing a deliberate, intentional drafting strategy in order to enhance speed.
2. To allow for "incidental" drafting, in and out of feedings, or if the swimmer temporarily or accidentally swims close to the escort boat.
As with any swim rule, the observer is in charge of interpretation. The observer decides, based on the circumstances, if any drafting is intentional or incidental. A warning will precede any disqualification.
In my opinion, the distinction between accidental drafting and drafting-as-deliberate strategy will be obvious. Hopefully, the mere existence of the rule will discourage anyone from trying it.
Plus, kayak support is allowed and encouraged in Santa Barbara Channel swims. If a swimmer uses a kayaker (and they should), there is no need or excuse to swim too close to the escort boat.
Is that all you've got, then, @Niek?
When I'm in the water I generally feel the boat is the most dangerous thing to me as a swimmer.
What's suitable in the Netherlands is irrelevant. What's suitable in the English Channel is also irrelevant. The topic is a SBCSA rule, for swims in the Santa Barbara Channel.
In our swims here, a kayaker is in a much better position to rescue the swimmer than people on the boat. They are closer to the swimmer, they are already at water level, they are most likely already wearing a wetsuit. The people on the boat are fully clothed, are 5-6 feet above water level, and not in a good position to do "rescue diving."