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
On a straight-up points basis, is there anyone who thinks realistically that a small team (VCM: 2005 SCY nats 8 members) can "compete" with a large team (CMS/NEM/IM: 2005 SCY nats > 60 members each)? Unlikely. While we might be able to hold measure via individual points thanks to a couple of our "stars", a team such as ours has a lot more trouble fielding relays than a larger team. It's not necessarily a talent issue; we're talking a basic numbers issue and relays require 4 people.
When there were separate team divisions, the playing field wasn't level either. There were separate fields! With the elimination of the arbitrary team divisions, there is only one field - and a very large one at that. "Our" field was taken away!
Over the past few years, we (VCM) enjoyed our place in the small division (as high as 3rd, Men's), and used that for our local newspaper reporting and advertising purposes. Now we're embarrased to ("local masters swimmers 41st in 2005 National competition". Nice headline eh? It happened). In an area where swimming is an incredibly minor sport, we are interested in using everything positive at our disposal to gain community awareness (not necessarily recognition). It's not about ego. And it isn't just about increasing our numbers. It is also about gaining respect in our community, and some of the perks that come with it - i.e. pool availability and space - not just for our Masters team but for our age group program as well.
The comments by Paul and others are well taken. If we don't like our current place in the single division pecking order, we have the option to try to create something more competitive team-wise. Clearly a formulaic approach to try to "level" the playing field is not a popular idea, and any formula that might be agreed by a representative group of people as being "fair" would likely be too complicated to implement. The only avenue left to us, if our goal is to be competitive as a team, is to increase our membership and/or combine into a larger association (any takers for an SPMA team at Nationals?). Until we do so, we will continue to watch the "team" competition from the outside looking in.
With the talk of Masters swimming being so inclusive, at least on an individual level, the team competition at Nationals seems to me to be an area that is inconsistent with that broadly-stated goal. Perhaps it should be scrapped. If group point totals are to be kept, how about an association competition based on LMSC?
On a straight-up points basis, is there anyone who thinks realistically that a small team (VCM: 2005 SCY nats 8 members) can "compete" with a large team (CMS/NEM/IM: 2005 SCY nats > 60 members each)? Unlikely. While we might be able to hold measure via individual points thanks to a couple of our "stars", a team such as ours has a lot more trouble fielding relays than a larger team. It's not necessarily a talent issue; we're talking a basic numbers issue and relays require 4 people.
When there were separate team divisions, the playing field wasn't level either. There were separate fields! With the elimination of the arbitrary team divisions, there is only one field - and a very large one at that. "Our" field was taken away!
Over the past few years, we (VCM) enjoyed our place in the small division (as high as 3rd, Men's), and used that for our local newspaper reporting and advertising purposes. Now we're embarrased to ("local masters swimmers 41st in 2005 National competition". Nice headline eh? It happened). In an area where swimming is an incredibly minor sport, we are interested in using everything positive at our disposal to gain community awareness (not necessarily recognition). It's not about ego. And it isn't just about increasing our numbers. It is also about gaining respect in our community, and some of the perks that come with it - i.e. pool availability and space - not just for our Masters team but for our age group program as well.
The comments by Paul and others are well taken. If we don't like our current place in the single division pecking order, we have the option to try to create something more competitive team-wise. Clearly a formulaic approach to try to "level" the playing field is not a popular idea, and any formula that might be agreed by a representative group of people as being "fair" would likely be too complicated to implement. The only avenue left to us, if our goal is to be competitive as a team, is to increase our membership and/or combine into a larger association (any takers for an SPMA team at Nationals?). Until we do so, we will continue to watch the "team" competition from the outside looking in.
With the talk of Masters swimming being so inclusive, at least on an individual level, the team competition at Nationals seems to me to be an area that is inconsistent with that broadly-stated goal. Perhaps it should be scrapped. If group point totals are to be kept, how about an association competition based on LMSC?
