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.
Hello all,
I swam at Nationals simply because it was here. From what I gather, quite a few other locals swam in the meet for that same reason...when/where else will you get a chance to swim next to some great swimmers?
With that in mind, it was also great to swim with guys in my own age group too. Since my times are not the best, for our smaller state meets, I usually end up with people 10+ years older. Makes the meet go smoothly, but I never get to really compete against others in my age group.
As far as keeping the NQT's, I totally agree to keep the 3 'freebies', and enforce NQT's for the others. I've been doing masters swimming (and any competitive swimming) for about 5 years now (started at 28), well beyond the typical start time. However, having the NQT's keeps me trying to achieve them. Over the past 3 years alone, my 100 and 200 *** have edged closer and closer. Maybe one year I'll make them...if only the times started getting better as I 'age up.'
Yes, we have at least 5 good state-level meets (that I know of)here in AZ, with more within commuting distance (S Cal, NM, etc).
You do not have to be attached to a team to participate in these meet, and information is easily available through the LMSC and team web pages. If anyone has suggestions or ideas for more local meets, I would suggest that they become more involved with their local team (member or not) and/or LMSC.
Tim Murphy
Unlike Ion I'm not interest in competing at nationals. But the time standards give you a way to compare yourself and that's my interest. I agree with Paul Smith that smalller meets are important. The larger population LSMC's, like Pacific Masters or Southern Pacific and the Colonies back east usually have a few more meets to chose from. Arizona has at least more than one in the short course and long course divided between Phoenix metro and Tucson metro area. As I stated before, I think that masters could expand, if there are more meets but that is time consuming and involves a lot of work. I don't think we have to copy USA swimming. When we started, the model was AAU swimming in the 1970's and lots of things have change since them. I agree with Emmet, most people are not going to cheat on their times. Also, a masters friend of mine from down under, competed in a postial event where there was a 800 yard breastroke and 800 Im, some new ideas on the postial events. Also, Ion there are other ways to succeed, one masters swimmer around 50 years old completed 20,000 yards in one time during the holidays, this person would probably never place high at nationals.
Having looked at the top times for the whole US in Ion's age group in 100 yard free there is a total of 293 and he ranks at 170. This means as he stated their a lot of folks out there that don't make the NQ's times and his age group and gender is far more competive than others. In my age group the 45-49 year old women there were only 111. in the 100 yard free. Why there are some many male swimmers in the 40 to 44 age group everyone can discuss out there. Anyway, it just shows that his age group is a lot more difficult than the others.
This is the data that I am familiar with, and this is what I point out in regards to NQTs at the USMS Nationals:
Originally posted by cjr
Greetings-
...
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.
...
USMS is looking for legitimacy in the quality of its top swims, the top swims that fall into the U.S. Swimming standards or decline a little bit due to aging of participants, and these are the swims trumpeted in www.swiminfo.com and Swim magazine.
However, the fact is that most USMS programs do neglect the specialized preparation for swimming competitions when they cather to the 'stay in shape' uncompetitive masses, and the fact is that adult starters in swimming -like me- have less physiological potential to make NQTs than the early starters.
Originally posted by Paul Smith
Ion, I'm trying to understand.
...
The question then is 54.52 fair?
Or, should masters have NQTs that offer a "swimming background" conversion similar to an "altitude" conversion?
...
To me, 54.52 is fair as NQT for 100 yards free in men ages 40 to 44:
.) I wrote in four of my previous posts in this thread that the USMS Nationals are inclusive (unlike the Olympics, since five days ago), because they give three mercy events to anyone, including to participants like me -who want to excel around the best there is out there, but don't have the youth developmental background-;
.) swimmers who make NQTs in USMS, they swim more events.
So, I like how the USMS Nationals and their NQTs are organized.
Originally posted by Paul Smith
...
My point to you which was ignored is "what are you"? A sprinter? Middle distance? Distance? I know very few people of any swimming background that would choose events as diverse as the 100 free and 1000 free to train for and compete in (and/or expect to make NQTs, Top 10, etc.).
...
I am a distance swimmer, and I train for distance.
My 1000 free at the 2003 Short Course Nationals was a quality 'B' time for me, but still got me a #14 ranking.
(Also a #39 ranking out of 63 participants for the year 2003, but my faster time in the 1000 free from two weeks earlier didn't get reported to give me a ranking for it).
My plan at the 2003 Short Course Nationals was to get an 'A' time in the 1000 free, then next year to slip into the 1650 yards free; my plan got derailed by fact.
My 100 free at the 2003 Short Course Nationals was a surprising quality 'A' time for me, and got a #59 ranking.
I don't expect my 100 free to make NQTs.
I comment in this thread on the 100 free, because I got a good time for me in the 100 free, and because the 100 free is what most people relate to.
For the Nationals, I train for distance and the sprints are a bonus making sure that I cultivate my speed and not let it degrade.
Regarding the number of competitions:
Paul, do what you preach;
Laura told me that she didn't race before the La Jolla competition, since last December;
I guess (I don't know for a fact) that you didn't either;
if this is true, then it must be no race in between the La Jolla competition from April 2003 and the Short Course Meters meet in Las Vegas from December 2002 (formerly the Long Beach meet);
so for you, in 2003, that could be two meets only, one meet in La Jolla and the Nationals;
well, I competed in five meets in 2003 so far;
that averages to one meet per month.
CJ,
since last December, I trust a Masters program which is run by the distance coach of the NCAA Division II, UCSD.
It is definitely geared for preparing for competitions.
I hope it will make me faster and faster.
Just a few thoughts on the subject:
1. NQTs could be enforced by random checks, asking the swimmer for documentation of times. This could be done on site.
2. There are numerous other meets (without qualifying times) throughout the year, encouraging participation regardless of ability.
3. Fewer swimmers at Nationals could impact revenue; I assume that this could be predicted using historical data.
4. How much an individual athlete can achieve (at any age) and the relative contributions of genetics and training are I believe unanswerable questions and among the more exciting aspects of sport.
Does anyone think that CJR (and about any man in the younger age groups) makes USMS NQTs, as stated in:
Originally posted by cjr
...
For the most part I have made and NQT in all the events that I normally swim.
...
considering CJR's post in 'Average Weekly Training?' from the 'General Discussion':
Originally posted by cjr
My workouts depend on the season. In short course yards season (winter) I'm like our friend Lefty here I try to get in 12K per week in 4 workouts.
...
with a 100% of training as an adult swimming in USMS and a 0% as a pre-adult swimmer?
I don't:
Originally posted by cjr
...
This too is WAY less than what I did in college...
...
I would like to see the name of the first man in the group 40 to 44 who makes NQTs with 100% training in USMS and 0% training from pre-adult.
Paul, I posted this:
Originally posted by Ion Beza
...
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.
...
and
Originally posted by Ion Beza
...
A valid comparison of talent for me, is in between people who started swimming late and me.
...
So, no more of the 10 years old David Wharton and 15 years old Rowdy Gaines here: that's entirely different, even when years later they come to win in USMS.
Originally posted by mattson
Having people swim way faster/slower than the others was a big reason why Nationals fell behind schedule. (Besides the occasional power outage... :confused: )
It is my understanding that the Hy-Tek meet manager calculates the time line by using the slowest swim in the heat then adds a time between heats. Mixing the faster and slower swimmers in the same age group has no effect upon the calculated time line. (it does affect the ultimate time line as the fastest way to run a meet is to put all the age groups together then swim rather than break out each age group).
There were two other reasons for having long days. There were fewer scratches than what has happened in the past. (8% actual versus a historical 16%). And two - the time between heats was MUCH slower than in the past.
michael
I train by myself and do my own stroke correction. Who am I to blame for my performance shortfalls? Hmmmm....
There are four competitive strokes plus an IM; There are three distances in three of the strokes, plus three more in IM; There are six !! distances in pool Freestyle plus at least four more for open water swimming. If my Math. is correct, therefore, there are around 18 events in which to specialize. I can only do two worth a darn.........Who can I blame for that ?
Maybe if someone out there is not happy with their performance, they could try other strokes and/or distances........
Who knows ? That person could be a closet breaststroker !! Or ??
Bert :p
I don't think Ion is a breastroker since he has swam for over 20 years and doesn't like the stroke. There are two other strokes, but fly takes a lot of work. I know because it taking me a while to get back to a fly where I can swim under 40 seconds in a 50yard fly. Maybe, he could try back but I never heard of him swimming that.
