Thanks to everyone involved in the Ft. Lauderdale Nationals. I had a great time and met some exceptional people. I especially want to thank Doug Malcolm for the competition in the adjacent lane. It looks like (from USMS data) you have not competed for quite a while and had a great meet! I had not competed for over 20 years when I entered the 2001 Nat's at Santa Clara and have done pretty well for the past few years. Doug exemplifies what our sport should be all about; a true competitor who brings out the best in someone like me who may not have accomplished the standards acheived in Ft. Lauderdale without someone like him next to me. I never got a chance to thank you so I am doing so now. Keep up the good work!
I would also like to congradulate John Blank for being the first male competitor over 45 to break one minute in the 100 yard breaststroke; a great accomplishment! I have never broken a minute in that event and am full of envy.
Lee Rider
What I read into the replies is that the idea of having two seperate team competitions, one for total points in which participation is encouraged and the larger clubs will almost always dominate, and one for fixed size teams of small enough size that smaller clubs could enter a team and compete on a level field, so that small clubs also have a team competition that they can be competitive in without needing to amalgamate with other clubs, is somehow too radical to be considered. All the replies appear to presume that there can only be one competition that must be based on total points whether it is a simple total or averaged or split into catagories. Rather than continuing to go in circles perhaps someone can simply address why it is undesirable to have two competitions to reflect the two contradictory goals of encouraging participation and allowing small teams to compete on a level field?
To address Connie's question of "why not average?", it is because averaging means that any swim that doesn't score points becomes a liability and most people will not accept a schema that discourages participation by club members who are not going to score big points. Again, the two goals are contradictory and ANY scheme to "balance" them within a single competition will compromise one of the goals.
To address Paul's question of "Level what playing field?" my proposal is to create a new playing field on which teams from small clubs can compete on an even basis with teams from large clubs, it is really very analogous to relay competition. I am NOT proposing to do away with the total points competition. Small clubs will rarely if ever win the total points competition but at least they will have a field on which they can be competitive.
I do not see how my proposal would ever limit swimmers from larger teams or how any sort of cap would ever result. We already have relays which are competitions for teams of four swimmers without any resulting limits or caps. There is no need for formulas to balance anything and the competition is as pure as any.
What I read into the replies is that the idea of having two seperate team competitions, one for total points in which participation is encouraged and the larger clubs will almost always dominate, and one for fixed size teams of small enough size that smaller clubs could enter a team and compete on a level field, so that small clubs also have a team competition that they can be competitive in without needing to amalgamate with other clubs, is somehow too radical to be considered. All the replies appear to presume that there can only be one competition that must be based on total points whether it is a simple total or averaged or split into catagories. Rather than continuing to go in circles perhaps someone can simply address why it is undesirable to have two competitions to reflect the two contradictory goals of encouraging participation and allowing small teams to compete on a level field?
To address Connie's question of "why not average?", it is because averaging means that any swim that doesn't score points becomes a liability and most people will not accept a schema that discourages participation by club members who are not going to score big points. Again, the two goals are contradictory and ANY scheme to "balance" them within a single competition will compromise one of the goals.
To address Paul's question of "Level what playing field?" my proposal is to create a new playing field on which teams from small clubs can compete on an even basis with teams from large clubs, it is really very analogous to relay competition. I am NOT proposing to do away with the total points competition. Small clubs will rarely if ever win the total points competition but at least they will have a field on which they can be competitive.
I do not see how my proposal would ever limit swimmers from larger teams or how any sort of cap would ever result. We already have relays which are competitions for teams of four swimmers without any resulting limits or caps. There is no need for formulas to balance anything and the competition is as pure as any.
