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.
These two statements are in contradiction:
Originally posted by Ion Beza
You don't make NQTs in men ages 40 to 44, with a 100% adult swimming background and 0% age-group swimming background.
I don't.
...
and
Originally posted by cinc310
I understand about you starting late Ion. But there are some good women and men swimmers...
...
In the 30-34 age group we have a guy that can clock a 49.0 in 100 yard free and he started working out in his 20's as you did.
...
The one statement that I think is right is mine, and the one that I suspect is wrong is Cynthia's.
When looking at the results of the 2003 USMS Short Course Nationals for the 100 freestle, I proclaim that:
#1 John Smith 46.40 is not a late starter (he swam in college the 200 free in a fast 1:35);
#2 Paul Smith 47.05 is not a late starter (he competed in the U.S. Olympic Trials in the 80s);
#3 David Boatwright 48.01 is not a late starter;
#4 Donald Jennings 48.06 is not a late starter;
#5 Richard Schroeder 48.41 is not a late starter (he competed for U.S. in the 1984 Olympics and the 1988 Olympics);
#6 Michael Fell 48.48 is not a late starter;
#7 Vernon Rogers 48.56 is not a late starter;
#8 Brant Allen 48.71 is not a late starter;
#9 Greg Remmert 49.07 is not a late starter;
#10 Stanley Fujimoto 49.29 is not a late starter;
...
#59 Ion Beza (myself) 58.40, I am a late starter since I joined my first swimming club at age 28;
...
Similar results appear in the 2003 USMS Short Course Nationals for the 100 freestle, men ages 30 to 34.
I don't know about the instance brought up by Cynthia's post, but often late starting in swimming and subsequent amazing achievements are trumpeted by media and individuals when fooling the audiences in the style of the official story of the 2000 Olympian, Ed Moses (U.S.).
His official story wants to say that he started swimming at age 17, but conveniently in order to claim a genious swimmer doesn't account for five years of prior to that summer league swimming, and before that for swimming lessons.
The five years and lessons compound to over three years of year round swimming.
Thus his starting age compounds to less than 17.
14.
In general, I can judge that a late starter claimant is fooling, by watching the technique for flipturns and diving -which if good, are likely a hint of age group swimming-, by watching the technique in four strokes, especially the hard to learn breastroke -which if good, is likely a hint of age group swimming- and by investigating about summer league swimming which is frequently not mentioned.
In my experience, the difference between an adult starter and an age-group swimmer, is mostly in the degree of development of swimming specific VO2Max, as in blood vessels connecting swimming muscles (triceps and lats) with the lungs:
a growing age-grouper gets more blood vessels than an adult starter when both train the same amount of time.
This post is dealing once more with people who make and people who don't make NQTs in USMS for men ages 40 to 44, and my take about the value of NQTs at the USMS Nationals is again:
Originally posted by Ion Beza
...
So, the USMS Nationals is inclusive:
.) People who make NQTs with their age-group swimming backgrounds, they get to swim more events;
.) People who don't make NQTs, but want to excel, they get to swim fewer events.
...
These two statements are in contradiction:
Originally posted by Ion Beza
You don't make NQTs in men ages 40 to 44, with a 100% adult swimming background and 0% age-group swimming background.
I don't.
...
and
Originally posted by cinc310
I understand about you starting late Ion. But there are some good women and men swimmers...
...
In the 30-34 age group we have a guy that can clock a 49.0 in 100 yard free and he started working out in his 20's as you did.
...
The one statement that I think is right is mine, and the one that I suspect is wrong is Cynthia's.
When looking at the results of the 2003 USMS Short Course Nationals for the 100 freestle, I proclaim that:
#1 John Smith 46.40 is not a late starter (he swam in college the 200 free in a fast 1:35);
#2 Paul Smith 47.05 is not a late starter (he competed in the U.S. Olympic Trials in the 80s);
#3 David Boatwright 48.01 is not a late starter;
#4 Donald Jennings 48.06 is not a late starter;
#5 Richard Schroeder 48.41 is not a late starter (he competed for U.S. in the 1984 Olympics and the 1988 Olympics);
#6 Michael Fell 48.48 is not a late starter;
#7 Vernon Rogers 48.56 is not a late starter;
#8 Brant Allen 48.71 is not a late starter;
#9 Greg Remmert 49.07 is not a late starter;
#10 Stanley Fujimoto 49.29 is not a late starter;
...
#59 Ion Beza (myself) 58.40, I am a late starter since I joined my first swimming club at age 28;
...
Similar results appear in the 2003 USMS Short Course Nationals for the 100 freestle, men ages 30 to 34.
I don't know about the instance brought up by Cynthia's post, but often late starting in swimming and subsequent amazing achievements are trumpeted by media and individuals when fooling the audiences in the style of the official story of the 2000 Olympian, Ed Moses (U.S.).
His official story wants to say that he started swimming at age 17, but conveniently in order to claim a genious swimmer doesn't account for five years of prior to that summer league swimming, and before that for swimming lessons.
The five years and lessons compound to over three years of year round swimming.
Thus his starting age compounds to less than 17.
14.
In general, I can judge that a late starter claimant is fooling, by watching the technique for flipturns and diving -which if good, are likely a hint of age group swimming-, by watching the technique in four strokes, especially the hard to learn breastroke -which if good, is likely a hint of age group swimming- and by investigating about summer league swimming which is frequently not mentioned.
In my experience, the difference between an adult starter and an age-group swimmer, is mostly in the degree of development of swimming specific VO2Max, as in blood vessels connecting swimming muscles (triceps and lats) with the lungs:
a growing age-grouper gets more blood vessels than an adult starter when both train the same amount of time.
This post is dealing once more with people who make and people who don't make NQTs in USMS for men ages 40 to 44, and my take about the value of NQTs at the USMS Nationals is again:
Originally posted by Ion Beza
...
So, the USMS Nationals is inclusive:
.) People who make NQTs with their age-group swimming backgrounds, they get to swim more events;
.) People who don't make NQTs, but want to excel, they get to swim fewer events.
...
