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.
Lainey, awarding an award for only 1st place in a fast talking event is quite an elitist attitude on your part. Now you need to set some NQTs for the event but be sure not to alienate some of the slower fast talkers
Accusing me of and elitest attitude is absolutely preposterous 'cause I'm one of those slow drawling girls from GA who wouldn't stand a chance in that event either! :p
Lainey
PS: Rob, the rate of speech wasn't exactly the kinda fast talking I had in mind... lol
Originally posted by Matt S
...
Tall Paul, I always suspected you were a closet Royalist! While we're at it, let's restore Louis XVIII (or his great-great-grandson) to the throne of France!
...
Matt "Le Dauphin" Shirley
and
Originally posted by Paul Smith
...
Matt, sorry to say that King Louis is out for the French throne, I have it from reliable sources that Ion's in (given that Bucharest has wanted posters of Ion hanging everywhere)! Only problem is France won't take him back becuase he's become so Amercianized, I heard he was even eating a PowerGel at nationals).
...
:D
Bwahaha :) hehe!
From a history book, comes:
"Yet Louis XVIII -old, ugly, and crippled by gout- totally lacked the glory and magic of Napoleon."
in contrast to a more glorious Louis, described a few hundreds of pages before this (and before the era of Louis XVIII -the last Bourbon-) :
"In the reign of Louis XIV (r. 1643-1715), the longest in European history, the French monarchy reached the peak of absolutist development. In the magnificence of his court,..."
When I first met Paul, it was during the 2001 Short Course Nationals in Santa Clara.
Laura was taping a long shadow in the background, in a black, full bodysuit, at the start of the 1000 yards free:
I was passing by, near a pretty blonde leaning on a railing with a camera on hand, and heard her yelling "Go, Pablo!";
I asked myself: "Now, who the heck is Pablo, here?";
I asked the blonde - who introduced herself as being Laura Smith-, and she said is Paul Smith;
doing a first 100 free all-out, for the record in the age group, then warming down for the remaining 900 yards;
"OK, I watch it.", I said since I knew the name of the champion;
47.00 in the first 100 free all-out, then (as I refresh my memory now with that result) relaxing into a 10:51.37 for the 1000 free.
Afterwards, talking with Paul, we touched such groundbreaking subjects as of why this wasn't a 46.99 instead, how he knew my name since I joined two months earlier this forum and was heckled by posters about my bragging of fast times as a late starter, how he went to my native Romania when representing U.S. in the World University Games, and being exposed to many cultures unlike an average poster.
It seemed to me that 'Tall Paul' was not the cyborg I was picturing from seeing the name associated with fast times, but a human.
Like Fritz Lehman -the backstroker- turned out to be also, later on.
The story is to say that this is what you get at the Nationals when you have the excellent, and some other backgrounds too:
an inspiration and an openness;
I doubt the inspiration and the openness would be at the Nationals, if they were restricted to cold business between strict NQT aquanerds.
Originally posted by cjr
...
So really here are the questions that need answers.
1. Are NQT's important? Why are they important?
2. Are NQT's valid? How do we make them valid?
3. What purpose do they serve in the current form?
4. Should NQT's be re-elevated? If they need to be then how is this accomplished?
...
Lots of posters here, have answered these questions by now.
Each question.
You should take the answers into consideration, by now.
Originally posted by cjr
The post was initiated to ask, do we all agree that it needs to be revamped? I think the resounding answer is yes. Obviously this system does “work”, but I use the term rather loosely. The system is not broken, but it needs some tweaking.
It is now up to those that have the responsibility to act upon this, the Championship Committee.;)
C.J.,
I don't see how you can say that the resounding answer was yes. It seemed to me that more people thought the system was working fine as it is and needs no tweaking. At most, the opinion was 50-50.
Also, the Championship Committee is not all-powerful. They have their meeting at convention, they submit a report to the House of Delegates, and their report, including any recommendations, is approved or disapproved. I can tell you right now that as a voting member of the House of Delegates I will NEVER vote in favor of changing the current NQTs. The NQTs as they stand now are fair and reasonable. They do not need to be toughened up, and there is no need to do away with the three free events.
Hi Meg,
I'll agree with 50-50. Obviously this has been and always will be a much debated topic. You really can't win in this situation.
Ion,
I never said we need to tighten up NQTs so that many enthusiasts don't come anymore. Again in another post, I suggested to add 3 more relay events. Why, because it creates more opportunity to swim.
Your right, I don't make Nationals a regular event. If it fits into my schedule around work, family and vacation then I will go. This also includes YMCA Nationals. I gave you my background only to state that for me, I am relying on it heavily to make an NQT. I only train 3-4 days per week now versus in college where 2 a days 6 times a week produced different results. I never said, nor considered myself to be anything else but a swimmer. Sorry that I gave you the wrong impression.
Now, I grant you the 5:34 in the 500 is nothing to rave about. And I'm not. But the NQT for 25-29 age group in 2000 was still faster than the 40-44. In 2000 I did swim a couple of events where I did surpass the NQT (50 & 200 ***). Since I have aged up (30-34), the NQT's have gotten a bit faster in all events.
I knew that I was not going to SCY Nationals, but my training was centered on making the NQT's for as many events as possible. It gave me a chance to shoot for something.
This was fun for me.
Hope that makes my view a bit clearer to you.
Thanks,
CJ
You finally did it!! You posted a reply that: (1) I could follow completely while reading it through one time only, and (2) completely agreed with everything in it! Good Lord, this doesn't mean there is some kind of telekinetic karma kind of connection thing going on, does it? We wouldn't want to show up at a meet wearing the same outfit, or anything like that.
Matt
One of the gals I swam against in the 200 fly claimed an NQT in the event. I was dubious about her claim, since she actually swam 40 seconds slower than the time she seeded. When I asked her, she said she had not swum the event in years.
On the other hand, she did place in the event. (As did I, even though I didn't have an NQT.)
So, in the older age groups and less popular events, the NQT system is actually blocking people who would place in the event.
I still like the current system. If master swimming keeps growing, eventually we might have to kick out the slower swimmers (like me.)
Sue
Originally posted by Matt S
You finally did it!! You posted a reply that: (1) I could follow completely while reading it through one time only, and (2) completely agreed with everything in it!
...
I am trying really hard.
Writing one comprehensive post out of 322, that's better than writing none:
to me, it was worth 322 tries.
Originally posted by Matt S
...
We wouldn't want to show up at a meet wearing the same outfit, or anything like that.
Matt
No, man, let's make sure that doesn't happen...
Hi Ion,
I guess we agree to disagree on the subject. It is hard to put into words my message. Hopefully we will meet at a Nationals to talk about this someday.
Thanks for your feedback.
CJ
