MSF Documented Swims Review

Thanks for helping with the MSF Documented Swims peer review and ratification process.

Once the two fields below are complete, the other tabs will activate

Your previous reviews

To avoid a conflict of interest, please do not review any swim you were personally involved in as swimmer, crew, or observer.

General Introduction

by Evan Morrison

MSF Documented Swims is a platform for documenting and officially recognizing independent solo marathon swims (self-organized swims attempted in waters not governed by a local sanction association).

As a reviewer, your general objective is to evaluate a swim claim based on evidence and data:

  • A swim claim consists of a swimmer, route definition, date, elapsed time, and rules.
  • The required evidence and data include an observer log, GPS tracking data, a narrative account, photos, and video. These requirements are designed to allow domain specialists (experienced marathon swimmers and observers) to evaluate the claim without having personally witnessed it. The evidence should speak for itself.

I recommend reading through the documentation once in full before answering the review questions - and then going through each in order. However, you will develop your own methods as you gain experience.

One final thing to keep in mind: Typically the swimmers and observers submit the data, logs, photos, etc. in relatively raw and unprocessed form. I then compile and format the documentation into its final form that appears on the MSF website. So, I have already spent several hours with each swim. Any major issues have likely already been uncovered and dealt with (but I’m certainly not infallible!). A swim with an obvious major problem (no log, no GPS track, or only a single witness) will generally not make it to this point (published on the website) in the first place.

Ratification Process

The swims listed as available for review have not yet been ratified. If a swim receives three reviews that unanimously recommend ratification, then the swim is considered ratified. If there is disagreement among the first three reviews, we will solicit additional reviews until a consensus develops. If no consensus develops, it is escalated to the MSF core team. Once a swim is officially ratified (or non-ratified), it is removed from the list of available swims to review.

The list of all Documented Swims (ratified OR pending review) can be viewed at: https://marathonswimmers.org/swims/

Finally…

This app works best in a modern web browser (recommend Google Chrome or Microsoft Edge) on a laptop or desktop PC. No guarantees on mobile browsers.

Any questions? Please reach out - evan@marathonswimmers.org

Instructions

Please familiarize yourself with the documentation requirements below, and evaluate whether the submission satisfies them.

A submission that is missing one or two minor items may still be ratified, depending on the significance of the swim. Example non-"deal-breaking" omissions:

  • A warm-water swim with inconsistent or missing temperature observations.
  • A cursory or uninformative narrative for a relatively common or short swim.
  • Photo and video content that doesn't cover a fully representative sample of the swim.

A submission that is missing one or more major requirements - such as a GPS track or observer log - will generally not be ratified.

Documentation Requirements

Swimmer

  • Biographical details - gender, age, nationality, location of residence.
  • Previous marathon swims - link to LongSwimsDB profile; or if no previous marathon swims: description of swimming background and previous swims completed.

Support Team

  • List of support crew members and their roles.
  • List of escort vessels.
  • Observer(s) - name and (if applicable) qualifications and previous swims observed.

Rules and Equipment

  • Stated swim rules - should be MSF Rules or equivalent unassisted rules in the tradition of English Channel swimming.
  • List of any deviations from standard MSF Rules.
  • List of swimwear and equipment.

Swim Route

  • Fully specified and repeatable route, defined by natural geography.
  • Description and latitude/longitude coordinates of start, finish, and any intermediate waypoints.
  • Total route distance as measured by the minimum swimmable path.
  • Route history & previous swims: link to LSDB event page or previous documented swims or informally acknowledged swims.

Dates and Times

  • Start time, date, and local timezone
  • Finish time and date
  • Elapsed time: hours and minutes (seconds if available).
  • For multi-segment swims: start, finish, and elapsed times of each leg

Observer Report

Grid-format log and/or narrative-style report with regular, timestamped observations of:

  • stroke rate
  • water temp
  • air temp
  • wind speed or force
  • other notable events

Swimmer Statement

Narrative report authored by swimmer or responses to the three standard question prompts:

  • What inspired you to do this swim?
  • Please describe how you planned for the swim.
  • How did the swim go, generally? Did you face any unanticipated challenges?

GPS Tracking Data

  • Raw data from device (GPX, CSV, or TCX format) - recommended 10-minute trackpoint frequency, minimum 60-minute.
  • Map visualization of track (made by Evan).
  • Speed plot visualization (made by Evan).

Photos and Video

  • At least 30 seconds of video showing the swimmer’s stroke.
  • Representative collection of photos and/or video from various parts of the swim.
  • If a comprehensive video is submitted, photos are optional.

Instructions

Please evaluate the consistency between the claim: [swimmer] swam [route] in [elapsed time] according to [rules] and the objective evidence.

Suggested checks:

  • Elapsed time is equal to difference between the start time of day and finish time of day.
  • No significant gaps (> 1 hour) in the observer log - consistent with continuous observation.
  • GPS track timestamps are consistent with the observer log timestamps.
  • GPS track confirms the route definition was fulfilled.
  • Route is accurately measured according to the "shortest swimmable path" principle.
  • Speed plot looks realistic.
  • Photos and video are consistent with the observed conditions.
  • No obvious swimwear/equipment violations visible in the photos/video.
  • Video of swimmer's stroke appears consistent with the swimmer's speed.
  • Swim appears realistic given the swimmer's background, skill, and previous swims.

Route

Below is a map showing the route definition and measurement. If you wish, you can re-create this at Google Maps.

Instructions

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" -- in other words, our expectations are calibrated by the magnitude of the swim.

A bare-minimum documentation effort may be acceptable for a relatively common or short swim. But a significant, rare, unprecedented, or massively long swim should be supported by extensive, high-quality documentation from a credible independent observer.

Examples

Ideal documentation for a shorter swim. Note all requirements fully satisfied, with sufficient narrative detail and a representative sample of photos to clearly convey how the swim went down.

Note: a MSF-format observer log is not required, as long as it satisfies the definition of regular (minimum hourly) timestamped observations of water temp, air temp, wind speed, stroke rate, and any notable events. See Kim Hedges - Round-Trip Angel Island (documented by Lisa Amorao) for an example of a fantastic custom-formatted log, and Dave Van Mouwerik - Estero Bay (documented by Evan Morrison) for an example of a narrative-style observer log.

Minimally-acceptable documentation for a shorter and/or very well-established route. This submission only provides 4 photos and 7 seconds of video, but otherwise meets the requirements. Consider, however, this is a 4.5 hour swim on an extremely well-established route (Maui Channel). Both the swimmer and observer are highly credible, well-known individuals in the Northern California open water community. The observer log is competently done. All considered, these factors override the borderline photo/video content. The swim was ratified.

Additionally, we are more lenient with swims in non-Anglophone countries, where there is less familiarity with MSF standards and less experience supporting and documenting marathon swims. For example, Adriano Passini’s Laje de Santos, Brazil swim has a somewhat uninformative observer log but compensates with a fine narrative (translated from Portuguese) and plentiful photos and video.

Ideal documentation for a multi-day swim or major first/record attempt. Other fine examples by non-MSF observers: Cameron Bellamy - Around Barbados (documented by Alison Pile), Sarah Ferguson - Around Easter island (documented by Camila Ahrendt), and Krzysztof Gajewski - Masurian Lake District, Poland (documented by Leszek Naziemiec and Tomasz Madej).

Minimally-acceptable documentation for a multi-day swim or major first/record-attempt. Narrative content is somewhat lacking here - perhaps understandable given the observer and swimmer’s limited English. This shortcoming is compensated by (1) incredible photo and video content, (2) extensive local media coverage, and (3) the credibility of the observer and swimmer as board members of the nearby Menorca Channel Swimming Association.

Instructions

Please provide an overall recommendation for whether the swim should be ratified. Your recommendation should account for the following considerations:

  • Does the documentation fulfill the requirements?
  • Do you believe the swim occurred as claimed?
  • Does it appear that the swim was conducted consistently with MSF standards and the spirit of unassisted marathon swimming?

Over the 7 years of MSF Documented Swims, approximately 95% of submissions have been ratified. Here are a few reasons swims have been non-ratified:

  • No observer log.
  • No GPS data.
  • Photos showed swimmer wearing neoprene jammers.
  • Photos showed swimmer attached to a tow float.
  • Single-witness swim - same person acting as observer, crew, and pilot.
  • Offshore start (non-repeatable route).

Do you have any other comments or questions that weren't covered by the previous items? These will be available only to the MSF core team.

Do you wish to make any comments about this swim, to be included in the final annual report on this year's Documented Swims? These comments are public but anonymous - i.e., they will be published on the web but without names attached.

Submit Review

Your review was successfully submitted.

To review another swim, refresh your browser.