Sandy Pashkin keeps job as WMA Records Committee chair
Contrary to my earlier speculations, Sandy Pashkin of Oregon has been retained as Records Committee chairwoman of World Masters Athletics, according to a WMA source who wished to remain anonymous. This means she’ll continue to oversee the WMA records page and review records submissions. Having lost her bid for WMA vice president-stadia, she’ll presumably have time to fix a broken records page. She can start by reviewing Olympic and IAAF world championships results for the past 10 years, or since the dawn of the Internet. Many, many marks worthy of WMA indoor and outdoor records have been overlooked. Searching this blog would also help her discover oversights. But other WR performances may have been missed here as well. Sandy also serves as USATF Masters T&F records chair, although her committee consists of herself alone.
My source also confirms these other WMA committee leaders, chosen by new President Stan Perkins shortly after the Lahti world meet: Finland’s Vesa Lappalainen for Organizational Advisory Committee, Britain’s Winston Thomas for Law & Legislation Committee and Germany’s Dieter Massin for Antidoping and Medical Committee.
Still awaiting word on who will be webmaster of WMA’s Web site, which contrary to all sense and logic features the new council as the lead photo. That’s liking putting Bud Selig’s picture on the front page of MLB.com.
C’mon, WMA. Give us something new and different — like an athlete maybe?
18 Responses
We have the technology, we have the internet, we have video, we have witnesses. Why is it so hard to officially recognize records?
I find this hard to believe, considering the wave of discontent on her records handling here in the U.S. Speaking of that, and I apologize if I missed it, but has anyone put together a list of unrecognized records from U.S. competitors just so the powers that be can see the size of the backlog? It would need to include a status on whether it was submitted, and if so, was it rejected and why. As you suggested, it may require looking back 10 years.
Warren:
I used to estimate that the list would be more than 200, but I now think it is much larger than that. But by the way, if a listed record has been broken 14 times (approximate number for one of the women’s marks), I would say that would mean “14,” not “1.” Other records have been broken only once as far as I know.
I now estimate that the number would be between 250 and 500, and I don’t know whether anyone is working on a compilation (I certainly am not and will not). Some of the omissions are particularly egregious, but I’m going to go to work in a few minutes. How’s this one:
Kay Glynn, co-masters T&F athlete of the year for 2008, set a world mark in the pole vault during 2008, had it authenticated by the referee, steel-taped before and after the jump, submitted a complete application, etc. This was the Pacific Assoc. USATF champs, and Kay never even reached “pending.”
There is a huge amount of work to do, and I will try (with apologies to Andrew Heckler and Dave Albo) to articulate the positions these two distinguished gentlemen seem to have taken in the past. In brief, the idea should be that the best credible mark should be the record.
In short, we should start with the performance and then go from there. If, for example, Aaron Thigpen ran the fastest M40 100 ever for an American (he did, 10.60 FAT at Mt. SAC, wind legal), that should be where we begin. We should not start at the opposite end, which is trying to find which people survived the “records process” — if one person out of twenty survived it, she or he is the recordholder. That is simply the wrong direction.
That’s Hecker, not Heckler. Sorry, Andy. Anyway, let’s accept the legitimate records, that would be a good idea.
PLT
Perhaps this is a huge task that requires more assistants. I would be willing to assist the chairperson with updating, maintaining, or data gatherinig if needed.
Linda 🙂
I believe you guys need to submit your problems directly to Sandy. On the ones not pending or approved there is always a problem.
An added advantage to having Sandy doing both US and WMA records; any world records get approved immediately after Sandy approves the paperwork. So one could have a world record and not have the American record until the USATF annual meeting in December.
George
But George, what do we do if the athlete asked for a review from Sandy, was denied, and now has nowhere to turn? One example would be the one I used above, Kay Glynn. Her record set in 2008 was completely legit (USATF Pacific Assoc champs), an application was submitted, and she got nowhere. She requested a review and got none. Is she supposed to give up? Or is she supposed to go back to Sandy again in the hope of a different outcome?
Wow….um, ok. Well, after the fiasco with the heptathlon record, I’ve been foolish enough to break the American record for the W40 decathlon. Or…perhaps the record I broke wasn’t the real record, but a number that happened to trickle through? Will my mark get posted? Or will it end up in an alternate universe along with my unmatched socks?
The officials at the combined- event nationals were extremely careful about documenting everything, right down to the wind readings, weights,etc…why can’t their efforts be matched on the other end?
Sandy always gives a reason for denial. We need to speak to that reason every time we bring up the situation. What caused the denial. Sandy is supposed to present all records she has denied to to the Masters Committee at the annual meeting and give an explanation for denial.
I assume your delegates approved that denial.
I believe that Gary has set up a review committee to look at all these denials before the annual meeting.
I guess we need to see the written rules, not the rules person’s rules, establishing some of the requirements such as the required copy of the flight sheet.
I am being denied my world indoor weight record because they didn’t have a copying machine at the meet and the person who was to mail it lost it. 4 officials signed the forms. Everything else was ok. Sandy says that WMA has the same requirement. I assume that it’s in their rules and regulations somewhere.
If I can’t get it done, heaven help the 90 year olds.
If we don’t conform to the rules and regs our records will be meaningless outside the US. Seattle officials are among the very best.
And so it is, George
There must be some way to automate the submission of data for records. Here we are in the year 2009 and the submission of the necessary documentation for American and World Records is just as bad as the record keeping in my former primary care doc’s office. She could lose stuff faster than a 1 year old can spit out mushed up canned peas. I would wait for weeks for test results and when I called (assuming I could get through the switchboard)I would hear papers being shuffled. After waiting for an hour to see her – she would come in with a folder filled with papers and start flipping through them in a vain hunt- I changed to a medical practice that not only has electronic records but also allows me to login on the web and see them quickly.
How about working towards electronic submission – If a meet has electronic timing – it most likely has internet access. All the necessary data could be submitted by meet officials on the spot. If there is no computer access at the meet – there are certainly computers available to officials at the meet to load up the data and submit later.
This could bring some order into what is chaos – and make everyone’s life better – including Sandy Paskin whom I am sure does not enjoy being the object of so many athletes’ scorn.
George,
My record for the heptathlon wasn’t denied. It was verified and posted on the records page in 2007 (the year is important here) as was the previous record set by Caren Ware in 2006. So, once I was sure I had the official record I happily informed my family and friends as well as a sports writer who did a very nice piece on it. I happened to check the records page a month ago and found my score had been replaced by a mark, hundreds of points higher, set by Caryl Senn-Griffiths in 2003. 4 years before my mark was verified, 3 years before Caren’s mark was verified. My e-mail to Sandy, just asking for an explanation, remains unaswered. In the meantime, anyone who checks the page to see my record will be convinced that I am a liar and a fraud. And, almost as bad, a great score inexplicably went into a 4 year hibernation before Caryl got credit for it.
Electronic submission might be a big help, but somewhere there still has to be “real people” involved. You need a rule book to go by, but you need “people” to handle the part of life that is not black and white.
Let me remind you that my submission was accurate and complete back in the summer of 2008 when I vaulted the 3.08 in the Pacific Masters Regional Championship. Neither my physical record attempt nor the filing for a world record was the issue! I sent in the properly signed and completed application form with all the necessary paperwork to go with it (raw results, program for the meet, etc.) I also made copies of everything I sent. When I found out several months later that it was rejected, I sent a letter to Sandy (which was not acknowledged) asking if it could be reviewed. I still have a copy of that letter, too. Also, since it was never listed as “pending,” it didn’t appear that there was going to be any discussion about it.
The issue is still the fact that the meet directors forgot to pay their bill for sanctioning the meet. How often, if ever, has that happened, and how is that the athlete’s fault? Since it was a regional championship meet, it was a given that it was sanctioned. So an athlete loses a world record because someone forgot to pay a bill?
As I travel around the country and vault, and as people ask me how high I vault and what the record is, I have to explain “the situation” to them. I actually am embarrassed to explain it. With a puzzled look on their face, they always say, “That’s just not right.”
We’re getting closer, but we need to keep working together and communicating to find a solution to our problem so that others won’t have to go through what many of us are facing right now.
Thank you so much, Kay, for commenting. As the people you meet around the country say, “That’s just not right” (to lose a record after you have set it in the most legitimate way possible at a USATF championship, no less).
If you had achieved this height last Friday (August 14) and nothing had been done, I could understand it (5 days would be very quick). But we are now talking about 1 year and 2 months, are we not? And still you have not achieved redress. If yours was an isolated case, that would be one thing, but it’s not.
I promised myself I would not write so much on records (on masterstrack.com), but it is still a huge issue, and thus I must request again that Masters T&F begin to accept ALL legitimate records. It’s not only wrong not to accept them — it’s become embarrassing.
I understand the problem. How is it Sandy’s ( a volunteer)fault the someone didn’t pay a bill. Don’t kill the messenger. I have asked Sandy to please be a better communicator with everyone. I think she is taking it to heart. Praise of her hard work goes a long way. You all need to get behind your delegates, get them to vote for approval at the annual meeting and demand that this be reviewed and be accepted by the USATF Records committee. This is a representative form of governance.
And so it is.
George
It’s Sandy’s fault because she can’t see the forest for the trees. Kays record is legit. There is absolutely no question about it. NONE. Yet Sandy refuses to verify it because someone didn’t send in a check? George, can you please explain how not receiving a check erases the fact that Kay absolutely without a shadow of a doubt vaulted a new world record for her age group???? Damn, I’m sure Kay wouldn’t mind sending you a check for what? $150 or so in order to get her record verified.
If you and Sandy say that Kay didn’t set a record then basicaly you are saying that all of the USATF certified officials who signed off on her record are baldfaced liars. I’m sure they would love to know that.
Just checked the USATF.org site. Records set as recently as June 2009 are already up as official (not pending) world marks. Did not see Kay Glynn’s mark up there even though she set it in a USATF championship and the officials as well as the meet referee signed off on it. What I am wondering is why this mark can’t be accepted today (August 24). After all, mark was set way back in 2008. I don’t see this as a matter of voting for approval — she set the record.
George, please let me ask you and Sandy something as respectfully as possible. Based upon the written evidence and signatures of the officials on the record certification that Kay sent in, do you believe that she set the vault record? Disregard the issue of the check. Is there anything on this certification that would lead either of you to believe that this record is in error? I’m wondering if there is any problem with the process of Kay’s certification or any question about the legitimacy of her performance besides the missing fee.
Leave a Reply