CSA & CS&PF
evmo
SydneyAdmin
Comments on original thread, Who Earns the Title 'Channel Swimmer', had veered off-topic, so I split the off-topic comments into this new thread.
For an earlier, related thread see:
Channel Swimming Association versus Channel Swimming and Piloting Federation
Edit: I changed @evmo's title slightly. - Donal
For an earlier, related thread see:
Channel Swimming Association versus Channel Swimming and Piloting Federation
Edit: I changed @evmo's title slightly. - Donal
Tagged:
Comments
http://notdrowningswimming.com - open water adventures of a very ordinary swimmer
Not sure what you're trying to imply here?
The CS&PF are quite clear with their recording of swims and should not be faulted by the decision of certain people to not disclose the facts of their swim/crossing/whatever.
...anything worth doing is worth overdoing.
To me, a CSA channel swimmer leaves no doubt.
Based on what @Niek posted, we know that both do not recognise 'assisted' swims as official crossings, but do they both allow swims to continue if rules are clearly being broken? Or are going to be broken at the start?
Perhaps you should refer to the CS&PF list of successful SWIMS (which include CSA swims). If you still have doubts, perhaps it is your faith that is lacking.
...anything worth doing is worth overdoing.
You completely misrepresent the CS&PF. They will take you across in your choice of crossing but they DO NOT RATIFY assisted swims as no Observer is provided for these swims. If someone does start a normal swim and stops or changes to wetsuit, there is NO ratification. You directly imply there is doubt over CS&PF swims. It's not the first time you've indirectly cast aspersions on the CS&PF as an organisation.
My personal hero worship of CS&PF Secretary & King of the Channel Kevin Murphy and being a CS&PF swimmer myself aside, one of the reasons we should all value the CS&PF is precisely that it allows people to pursue their Channel dreams regardless of these constrictions. I personally don't feel I have to right to deny anyone their dreams.
We all place a different value on different achievements. If it was left to the CSA, those dreams and achievements would remain unfulfilled and literally impossible.
I might think of a Channel Swimmer as any of the 6 already in this thread at time of writing (I think I have the numbers right). But if I was sitting in a pub with Philipe, I wouldn't be saying "hey, you're not one of us". Nor would I compare him to Roz Hardiman. I can actually only vaguely begin to imagine what it took each of those two people (Dover regulars will know Roz) to achieve what they did. Who am I ( or anyone else) to tell Philipe he can't call himself a Channel swimmer but Roz can?
loneswimmer.com
Also, wasn't the CS&PF once called The Channel Crossing Federation? Highlighting an early principle that they wanted to encourage alternative crossings and therefore increase the number of aspirants to include the new breed of wetsuit, triathlete and any one else who needed to employ an escort boat?
http://cspf.co.uk/cs-and-pf-and-the-csa
As I understand it, the English Channel is somewhat special in that in order to get permission to do a crossing at all you pretty much HAVE to be doing it through one of the two organizations.
Someone who wants to do a wetsuit swim to Catalina is not constrained to do it through the Catalina Channel Swimming Federation, so there is no need for the CCSF to support such swims (that said, I actually have no idea if the CCSF supports or not such swims, but the point remains, if they chose not to support them it would not block anyone from attempting such a swim).
Denying the very opportunity to swim across the channel in wetsuit would seem unfair, so given the duopoly that exists it is good that the organizations choose to support the alternate crossings.
Now what those folk participating in alternate crossings choose to call themselves is a whole other ball of wax.
http://notdrowningswimming.com - open water adventures of a very ordinary swimmer
I would say very clearly, I support 100 per cent any crossing and often these are exceptional . Wetsuit swimmers doing the Arch to Arc, disabled swimmers and even those who still want to face their channel attempt but would otherwise not even try (but for the CS&PF ). Goodness, even my next swim in Sept (which I am still afraid to make public) may be frowned upon, and that bothers me, because I would not like my next swim / crossing / attempt to be undermined by people not accepting it.
I did my EC crossing under CSA. Both organizations have people who if were removed would make the organizations so much more credible.
@dc_in_sf - the CCSF does not place observers on boats if the swimmer uses a wetsuit.
Of course a discussion on CSA and CS&PF is really not the issue that Jgal brought to the table in the first place but has become a tangent off of the original topic. This discussion began because there are those among us who will skew the truth for publicity.
However, what constitutes allowing a person to refer to themselves as a Channel Swimmer (the original question), has to be accepted as correct, as long as one of the governing bodies has ratified it. That is why we have governing bodies.
If you think the CSA should be the only body certifying swims and the CSPF should certify other such channel crossings, you are of course entitled to think that but it does not reflect reality.
With regards the lady in the original story, let her call herself whatever she wants as long as she is happy - its largely totally out of my control. I don't go around telling people I'm a channel swimmer; but if somebody feels the need to lie about it for their ego let them off.
I really don't understand that or why anyone would want to belittle my achievement (and that of all the swimmers on the ratified CS&PF list). Anyway, I know that I swam the Channel under strict Channel rules and that knowledge will stay with me forever, so I don't care what anyone thinks!
In my opinion, the CS&PF were professional from start to finish and I would have absolutely no hesitation in recommending them as an organisation.
Some of my very best friends are CSA swimmers and I have no grudges against the CSA either.
Back to the original topic, I agree with @jgal's sentiments though.
loneswimmer.com
Of course, 20 years ago things were different with far fewer swimmers. The great thing about the CS&PF is they have expanded the volume of swimmers by accepting any of those that would have otherwise been rejected by CSA.
Maybe I am stuck in the past. But I am unsettled by the thought of the pilots sharing out maybe 40 swimmers between them and getting a few each. Then someone has the idea that if they can take wetsuit swimmers and other crossings, they could earn 20 crossings a year rather than 5. The CSA hate the idea, a split is created and people leave the CSA to form their own version .
Had this split not happened, many great swims as loneswimmer points out, would never have occurred. Therefore the splinter group have done a great service in availing the Channel to a far greater audience. But also has been the primary factor for facilitating an easier way to get across.
Before around 1995 if someone said they swam the channel, we all knew what that meant. Now, we have to be more explicit or more questioning. Especially where the swimmer did it the modern way, but misses out mentioning the wetsuit bit.
Weighing it all up, the CS&PF have done the sport a great favour.
Does anyone know when the CSA and CS&PF become the only organizations that the various regulatory agencies would deal with?
http://notdrowningswimming.com - open water adventures of a very ordinary swimmer
If one looks at the details, the UK abdicate to the French, and the French abdicate to the UK. For example [1], here is the UK abdicating to the French:
"Except for the CS&PF and the CSA, the Maritime Prefect of the Channel and the North Sea [2] expressly forbids swimming and associated activity of an unorthodox nature within the Dover Strait Traffic Separation Scheme, and within French territorial waters. The sole events excluded from the prohibition are those Cross Channel swimming attempts organised and approved by the CS&PF and the CSA. More information can be found on the MCA website at this link."
That is a quote from a UK website, and it talks about the French. The square bracketed link is mine, whereas the 'More information' link is the UK's.
For reference, the expression in French for swimming the channel is, for example [3] Quelqu'un a traversé la manche à la nage l'année dernière, n'est-ce pas?
The British Maritime and Coastguard Agency [4] states that the French allow only those swim attempts "organized and approved" those two SA's [5]. The UK MCA cites the French document No 14/93 [6] for this, but 14/93 does not mention either SA nor swimming in itself.
The French document No 15/93 [7] is not cited by the UK. 15/93 does mention swimming, but does not mention either SA. It is in Article 2 in 15/93 that the French abdicate to the UK.
Searching premar-manche.gouv.fr for the name of either SA does not return any pertinent results. Here is an example search for CSA: link
I’m more concerned that there are channel swimmers out there that will continue to imply that the CS&PF isn’t clear in reporting the results and conditions by which crossings were completed. To those of us to whom this information matters to, it is quite readily available. To say otherwise = epic fail
...anything worth doing is worth overdoing.
I am trying to make a point that because the CS&PF started to take wetsuit swimmers, nobody knows (without looking into their results page) how any swimmer got across. So, when a swimmer says they have swam the Channel , and that is all they say, we are none the wiser.
The bit that I have mentioned that upsets people is because they take it as an implication somehow their swim was less worthy. This is not the case but serves only to highlight the problem posed by the OP.
If you have swam with the CS&PF and say you have swam the Channel, because you chose them, and mostly because of their wetsuit policy, in order to let people know you were a traditional swimmer, you have to say you swam in speedos.
The problem never occurred when there was just the CSA.
Swimmers that swim a traditional and ratified swim should be the only ones 'allowed' to use the phrase 'Channel Swimmer''. Others should use the phrase 'Assisted Channel Swimmer' or 'Relay Channel Swimmer' and these or similar phrases should be added to the rules of the governing bodies.
And I really do apologise to Zoe and others for upsetting you, it was not my aim to do so.
I am a 'lurker' on this forum, and haven't post before. Haydn has 'inspired' me to put fingers to keyboard.
This thread has obviously gone far wider than should someone who swam the EC in more than a costume be misleading (by wilfull omission) the press. We've seen it before, and we'll see it again!
The CSA vs CS&PF debate comes up again and again too. What is most annoying/boring is people banding around incorrect information. Basically, there are two bodies that are allowed by the authorities to escort swimmers across. There are differences between the organisations, and swimmers should do their research and decide who to go with. Swim successfully (properly attired) by either and you can call yourself an EC swimmer.
The CSA were the first to escort wetsuit swimmers, and started doing so in 2001. One notable swim/swimmer was Eddie Ette doing the swim part of his A2A. The CSA sent an observer on this swim.
There is a very good open letter from a well respected swimmer, Duncan Heenan, about this time in the CSA and the antics that went on, well worth a read:
http://www.swimclub.co.uk/forum/archive/index.php/t-1390.html
The creation of the CS&PF was not a result of wetsuit swims. It was not so that some pilots could 'split off' and pilot more swims! In my opinion a bit of competition is a good thing, as unchecked the CSA would, and were, ramping up the costs SIGNIFICANTLY!
Haydn is right that the sport has changed massively over the years. I have been a Channel Swimmer for 21 years now, and have seen a lot of very boring politics in my time. I was there for the creation of the CS&PF. I have seen some truly reprehensible things done by some really rather nasty and conniving people, but there is little point going on about the past, we are in the present and should just get on with things, and make the future of our sport better.
This is a really sensitive topic for discussion, and if we stay on it, it will get nasty and help nobody. I am happy to give anyone the facts if they ask me for them off the forum. If you weren't there, and don't know the facts, don't talk crap!
Big love
Nick
[CS&PF President]
http://fermoyfish.com – Owen O'Keefe (Fermoy, Ireland)
loneswimmer.com
CS&PF: 2
CSA: 0
What is my point? The issue of CSA vs CS&PF is simply not relevant in 2013 - it is old news. Many who sign up today to swim the EC have no idea there was this giant split years ago. I swam with CSA but wold tell anyone planning to swim to try and book with CS&PF because right now today they have more to offer the swimmer and we all like to get as much bang for our buck as possible.
Budgie smugglers are just not a good look for me...
http://notdrowningswimming.com - open water adventures of a very ordinary swimmer
This is why there is now concern that assisted swimmers, succeed with their swims, but some allow their success to appear as a traditional success.
This thread has been thought provoking and I still believe the benefits of these assisted swimmers being brought under the umbrella is preferable and expands the business of Channel Swimming and brings it to hundreds more people. So many more now have the chance to pursue (perhaps an easier dream).
It remains for all swimmers to have the integrity to be more forthcoming in the way they have swam. Categories of 'Channel Swimmer' 'Assisted Channel Swimmer' 'Relay Channel Swimmer' seems to solve the issue quite neatly.
And so, I apologise finally for speaking my view and being a little lazy in not researching it more thoroughly. I would defend myself by suggesting this thread has caused some interest and if we were all together discussing this at a swim camp, none of us would stay silent for a couple hours while researching the points on our ipads first. We would have a lively discussion.
I am a proud Round Jersey Relay swimmer, as well as a proud 2way English Channel Relay swimmer. They are accomplishments in their own right, and I learned a ton on my respective teams. So long as we are honest about our endeavours, the sport remains pure.
I like this forum because we all have opinions, but can all learn a thing or two from other perspectives.
I wish you great luck this summer in your attempt!
(I was with Kevin and put 2+2 together afterwards, D'oh - sorry!)