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.
There is short-term memory in this post:
Originally posted by cjr
...
I agree with Tall Paul, 110%. And Gail Roper too.
...
It means that CJ agrees with this:
Originally posted by Paul Smith
...
I truly believe that we value things that we attain through hard work and dedication far more than those that we are "given".
...
How much of the NQTs are 'given' in USMS to CJR (and in another age group than CJR's, to each of the USMS people that I highlighted previously as making the top rankings in men ages 40 to 44), whose background is made almost 100% outside of the USMS, appears here:
Originally posted by cjr
Greetings-
Ion-
My background is as follows. I have swum since age 6. I swam for a few USS clubs, summer league, and High School. I have made Jr. National & YMCA Nationals cuts. Then I swam in college for 4 years, which I did swim in the Conference Champs & NCAA's.
Ion, your right my background is such that I have made the NQT's based off what I did before my adult phase of life. As discusses in the other forum 'Average Weekly Training?' from the 'General Discussion' “My workouts depend on the season. In short course yards season (winter) I try to get in 12K per week in 4 workouts”. This is because I don’t need to workout that much because I know myself and what I am capable of...
...
Notice the "...This is because I don’t need to workout that much..." in it.
Here are NQTs 'given' in USMS, based on a non-USMS background.
Phil Marsom explains this background built outside of the USMS, but used for NQTs in USMS:
Originally posted by Phil M.
...
As a returnee after a 23 year layoff I had no problem meeting qualifying times. This had nothing to do with lots of yardage and good coaching. It was because I had a strong swimming background. (age 12 - 22)
...
Like I posted my position before, I side with Phil's entire post, and with Dominick's post here:
Originally posted by Dominick Aielloeaver
...
More so should not hard work be reward?We all can not be as good as others . But we can be as good as we can be.:) :cool: :)
My take, is:
leave the USMS Nationals like they are now, inclusive of different backgrounds, competitive and non competitive prior to USMS.
The one area where I might compromize, is the sixth event:
.) all non-NQT seed times could be divided into 'consideration' times, and 'non-consideration' times;
if the USMS Nationals get too full and the timeline doesn't look good, then scratch a few (not many) 'non-consideration' times rather than scratch the sixth event made on NQT;
.) or like Phil (i.e.: Phil Marsom) wrote, if the USMS Nationals get too full and the timeline doesn't look good, then add a day to the Nationals.
There is short-term memory in this post:
Originally posted by cjr
...
I agree with Tall Paul, 110%. And Gail Roper too.
...
It means that CJ agrees with this:
Originally posted by Paul Smith
...
I truly believe that we value things that we attain through hard work and dedication far more than those that we are "given".
...
How much of the NQTs are 'given' in USMS to CJR (and in another age group than CJR's, to each of the USMS people that I highlighted previously as making the top rankings in men ages 40 to 44), whose background is made almost 100% outside of the USMS, appears here:
Originally posted by cjr
Greetings-
Ion-
My background is as follows. I have swum since age 6. I swam for a few USS clubs, summer league, and High School. I have made Jr. National & YMCA Nationals cuts. Then I swam in college for 4 years, which I did swim in the Conference Champs & NCAA's.
Ion, your right my background is such that I have made the NQT's based off what I did before my adult phase of life. As discusses in the other forum 'Average Weekly Training?' from the 'General Discussion' “My workouts depend on the season. In short course yards season (winter) I try to get in 12K per week in 4 workouts”. This is because I don’t need to workout that much because I know myself and what I am capable of...
...
Notice the "...This is because I don’t need to workout that much..." in it.
Here are NQTs 'given' in USMS, based on a non-USMS background.
Phil Marsom explains this background built outside of the USMS, but used for NQTs in USMS:
Originally posted by Phil M.
...
As a returnee after a 23 year layoff I had no problem meeting qualifying times. This had nothing to do with lots of yardage and good coaching. It was because I had a strong swimming background. (age 12 - 22)
...
Like I posted my position before, I side with Phil's entire post, and with Dominick's post here:
Originally posted by Dominick Aielloeaver
...
More so should not hard work be reward?We all can not be as good as others . But we can be as good as we can be.:) :cool: :)
My take, is:
leave the USMS Nationals like they are now, inclusive of different backgrounds, competitive and non competitive prior to USMS.
The one area where I might compromize, is the sixth event:
.) all non-NQT seed times could be divided into 'consideration' times, and 'non-consideration' times;
if the USMS Nationals get too full and the timeline doesn't look good, then scratch a few (not many) 'non-consideration' times rather than scratch the sixth event made on NQT;
.) or like Phil (i.e.: Phil Marsom) wrote, if the USMS Nationals get too full and the timeline doesn't look good, then add a day to the Nationals.
