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.
I was going to stay out of this, having said quite enough already, but since I think I sorta started some of this, I feel obligated to say something more.
Gail, expecting Nationals to be over by 5:00 each day is unrealistic. If you want the meet to be that short, then changes would have to be even more drastic than talked about here. Even when we had a much smaller National meet in Elizabethtown in 1999 we weren't finished that early. And there were only 700 swimmers at that meet.
And I agree with Rob: when I come to a meet I expect to stay as late as is necessary to swim my event. I'd like a general idea about what time to expect to swim, and I adjust my schedule accordingly. I can be flexible.
The social aspect (to me) is every bit as important as the competition, and I do plenty of socializing while at the meet and also after the meet. And Paul, I can do flip turns, so will you have a pizza and a beer with me the next time we're both at Nationals?
I never meant for this thread to degenerate into an elite vs. flounders debate. I regret if anything I said fueled that. I want to see Nationals be as inclusive as possible. I realize the need to control the meet, but I don't think it's fair to exclude all but the elite. By the same token, it's not fair to accuse the elite of looking down on everybody else. I think the system we have now, which limits the number of splashes for nonqualifiers, but still allows them to participate at a reduced level, is fair, and allows a reasonable timeline for the meet. To paraphrase what someone said quite a few posts back, it ain't broke (yet) so don't fix it.
I was going to stay out of this, having said quite enough already, but since I think I sorta started some of this, I feel obligated to say something more.
Gail, expecting Nationals to be over by 5:00 each day is unrealistic. If you want the meet to be that short, then changes would have to be even more drastic than talked about here. Even when we had a much smaller National meet in Elizabethtown in 1999 we weren't finished that early. And there were only 700 swimmers at that meet.
And I agree with Rob: when I come to a meet I expect to stay as late as is necessary to swim my event. I'd like a general idea about what time to expect to swim, and I adjust my schedule accordingly. I can be flexible.
The social aspect (to me) is every bit as important as the competition, and I do plenty of socializing while at the meet and also after the meet. And Paul, I can do flip turns, so will you have a pizza and a beer with me the next time we're both at Nationals?
I never meant for this thread to degenerate into an elite vs. flounders debate. I regret if anything I said fueled that. I want to see Nationals be as inclusive as possible. I realize the need to control the meet, but I don't think it's fair to exclude all but the elite. By the same token, it's not fair to accuse the elite of looking down on everybody else. I think the system we have now, which limits the number of splashes for nonqualifiers, but still allows them to participate at a reduced level, is fair, and allows a reasonable timeline for the meet. To paraphrase what someone said quite a few posts back, it ain't broke (yet) so don't fix it.
