Richard wrote:
>The national and state federations have different rules that fit
>with their particular political agendas as to how much control they wish
to
>exercise. That's why the TFN recognized records are typically superior to
>the NSSF records--they are less constrained by arbitrary time and
>affiliation definitions.
Exactly right.
>A counter-hypothetical: A top Texas athlete becomes ill the week of the
>league meet and fails to qualify to the sectionals/regionals, but that
>athlete recovers quickly. He goes to a nearby state which has not yet
>started its qualifying process, and competes in an invitational, and sets
a
>national record. The Texas state season is not yet over, but the athlete
>was not eligible to compete in any further Texas meets. Is that a
national
>or state record?
Well, it's certainly not a State Record for the University Interscholastic
League. In fact, silly as it may seem, Steve Magness's awesome 4:01.58
1600 in his District 15 meet this year might be a State Record for the more
sensible sorts http://www.texastrack.com/state_records.htm , but if I'm
correct the UIL would only consider it a "State Record" were it run not
only against HS competition ... or against Texas HS competition ... but
against HS competition in the UIL State Meet. So Magness's 4:01.58 has no
official record status, outside of being a "District 15 Meet Record".
We do things kind of backwards down here - just check out our politicians.
Phil
