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.
It is naive to judge NQTs as being too easy to make, from the fact that most competitors going to the Nationals do make NQTs:
.) by the Nationals' design to allow more swimming by people making NQTs, the majority of swims at the Nationals do make NQTs;
so, obviously there is no surprise that most swims at the Nationals, they do make NQTs;
.) most swimmers in USMS do not make NQTs;
a few amongst those who don't make NQTs, have the courage to go to the Nationals, and risk themselves trying to overcome ridicule in a high competition, on the three mercy events rule.
Regarding:
Originally posted by Sam Perry
...
It is the "USMS National Championships" but when the rubber meets the road, the true National Championships are the top 10 lists published at the end of each season.
...
the "USMS National Championships" and the 'true National Championships' (aka: "...the top 10 lists published at the end of each season."), are about the same:
.) this is according to me seeing that the top 10 ranks for the year (and far beyond the top 10) are on swims made almost exclusively at the National Championships;
.) with some exceptions only, like the swims by Barbara Dunbar.
So, having the 'true National Championships' generously including people not meeting NQTs, who -as Val writes- have "...made the effort to take time off from work and family." and are humble and inspired to compete in this top environment, works almost 100%.
Bert states: "It ain't broke so don't fix it!!".
Otherwise, you are going to break something that works well now.
It is naive to judge NQTs as being too easy to make, from the fact that most competitors going to the Nationals do make NQTs:
.) by the Nationals' design to allow more swimming by people making NQTs, the majority of swims at the Nationals do make NQTs;
so, obviously there is no surprise that most swims at the Nationals, they do make NQTs;
.) most swimmers in USMS do not make NQTs;
a few amongst those who don't make NQTs, have the courage to go to the Nationals, and risk themselves trying to overcome ridicule in a high competition, on the three mercy events rule.
Regarding:
Originally posted by Sam Perry
...
It is the "USMS National Championships" but when the rubber meets the road, the true National Championships are the top 10 lists published at the end of each season.
...
the "USMS National Championships" and the 'true National Championships' (aka: "...the top 10 lists published at the end of each season."), are about the same:
.) this is according to me seeing that the top 10 ranks for the year (and far beyond the top 10) are on swims made almost exclusively at the National Championships;
.) with some exceptions only, like the swims by Barbara Dunbar.
So, having the 'true National Championships' generously including people not meeting NQTs, who -as Val writes- have "...made the effort to take time off from work and family." and are humble and inspired to compete in this top environment, works almost 100%.
Bert states: "It ain't broke so don't fix it!!".
Otherwise, you are going to break something that works well now.
