Has the Championship Committee, or other entity within USMS ever discussed having a more strict policy of enforcement in regards to the NQT's?
Why do we state that you must have 3 cuts, in order to swim more events? Why not require a swimmer to have 6 cuts in order to swim 6 events?
Just like to understand more from a historical point of view. I have read post that asked, or suggested how to control the size and length of the National meets. Would not having a stricter enforcement of this policy help? Or would it cause swimmers to shy away from these meets?
Just a curious thought.
Thank you.
Here we go again eh, Matt? I will exhibit self control and only allow myself one post on this much debated topic, mainly because Matt and I had different viewpoints.
Matt, to your "Pro" summary I must disagree (from my perspective and others I have spoken to about this). It was never a way of "limiting" the field to those with a "legitimate" shot at being a national champion. Nor was it supported to try and attain "ideal" conditons to become one.
The "Pro" camp that I fall into feels:
1) Meets should not be so large that the races go until 9pm or 10pm in the evening (not a problem in recent years). By setting "reasonable" time standards we limit the number of heats swum.
2) Some reasonable cut off time should be set for most events. Much of the concern about this is in distance events, for example if the QT for the mens 50-54 1650 is 21:36.80, should someone with an NQT of 1:30.22 be allowed to swim?
3) Very debatable point; but the idea that goal setting and attainment through progessive steps ads value comes into play. I think I made the point that I'd love to play in the masters nationals for 40-44 in tennis without going through the qualifying rounds. However I understand that I need to work my way up through local, state and regional events, which for me makes it far more valuabe than if it we're "given" to me.
OK, I'm done......fire away!!!
PS: Matt, did you ever get a new suit?
Here we go again eh, Matt? I will exhibit self control and only allow myself one post on this much debated topic, mainly because Matt and I had different viewpoints.
Matt, to your "Pro" summary I must disagree (from my perspective and others I have spoken to about this). It was never a way of "limiting" the field to those with a "legitimate" shot at being a national champion. Nor was it supported to try and attain "ideal" conditons to become one.
The "Pro" camp that I fall into feels:
1) Meets should not be so large that the races go until 9pm or 10pm in the evening (not a problem in recent years). By setting "reasonable" time standards we limit the number of heats swum.
2) Some reasonable cut off time should be set for most events. Much of the concern about this is in distance events, for example if the QT for the mens 50-54 1650 is 21:36.80, should someone with an NQT of 1:30.22 be allowed to swim?
3) Very debatable point; but the idea that goal setting and attainment through progessive steps ads value comes into play. I think I made the point that I'd love to play in the masters nationals for 40-44 in tennis without going through the qualifying rounds. However I understand that I need to work my way up through local, state and regional events, which for me makes it far more valuabe than if it we're "given" to me.
OK, I'm done......fire away!!!
PS: Matt, did you ever get a new suit?
