team scoring

Mark mentioned the arbitrary nature of dividing teams into categories. I can understand how that can be a challenge, as well as the frustration of being on a "small" team that sometimes gets lumped into the "medium" category. I've also heard rumor of teams that prevent swimmers from entering meets so the team can stay in the smaller category and not have the "extra" swimmer push the team over the edge into the next larger division. Perhaps the answer lies not in determining divisions by number of swimmers entered, but rather by total number of events entered. Looking over psych sheet for larger meets, I have seen a breakdown by team that includes number of participants per team and total entries by team. For example, team ABCD has 75 swimmers with 235 event entries, while team WXYZ has 17 swimmers and 85 event entries. In this example, the larger team has more entries, but fewer entries per swimmer (3.1 vs. 5 for team WXYZ); however, the larger team has more opportunities to score points. By looking at the total event entries per team, we are treating every event entry as an equal opportunity to score for the team. Looking solely at number of participants, we overlook the fact that some entries may be relay-only swimmers (no individual events entered), or may have only entered one or two events (while other swimmers entered the maximum allowed). This would be especially effective at a meet like Nationals, since swimmers not meeting NQTs are limited to three swims. It would also prevent coaches/teams from discouraging participation because "one more swimmer" will push them up a size. No, it's not a perfect solution. Relay entries are usually deck entries, so they would need to be factored in, along with a dozen or more things I haven't thought of yet. But I'm sure someone could come up with a formula that allowed adjustments for relay entries. Maybe something that looked at the number of men vs. women entered, or just counted relays as an event? As an example, when my team went to Colonies Zones, we were the smallest team in the medium team category. We had several swimmers who entered the max number of entries, and a few who only entered two or three. We also only had two women at the meet, so we could not score points in the women's relays. The team did well due to some strong individual swims, but not being able to score realy points, we could not compete on the team points level. It was one swimmer that put us over the "small team" cutoff. We did not know that until the meet started, and that was fine. Interestingly, we had one swimmer enter the meet who has not been practicing with the team. We were all glad to see him at the meet. He placed well in his events, scoring individual points in all. It would have been great to think, "More points for us!", but we were also thinking, "Darn him, he put us over the limit!" Just some food for thought, Dana

Mark mentioned the arbitrary nature of dividing teams into categories. I can understand how that can be a challenge, as well as the frustration of being on a "small" team that sometimes gets lumped into the "medium" category. I've also heard rumor of teams that prevent swimmers from entering meets so the team can stay in the smaller category and not have the "extra" swimmer push the team over the edge into the next larger division. Perhaps the answer lies not in determining divisions by number of swimmers entered, but rather by total number of events entered. Looking over psych sheet for larger meets, I have seen a breakdown by team that includes number of participants per team and total entries by team. For example, team ABCD has 75 swimmers with 235 event entries, while team WXYZ has 17 swimmers and 85 event entries. In this example, the larger team has more entries, but fewer entries per swimmer (3.1 vs. 5 for team WXYZ); however, the larger team has more opportunities to score points. By looking at the total event entries per team, we are treating every event entry as an equal opportunity to score for the team. Looking solely at number of participants, we overlook the fact that some entries may be relay-only swimmers (no individual events entered), or may have only entered one or two events (while other swimmers entered the maximum allowed). This would be especially effective at a meet like Nationals, since swimmers not meeting NQTs are limited to three swims. It would also prevent coaches/teams from discouraging participation because "one more swimmer" will push them up a size. No, it's not a perfect solution. Relay entries are usually deck entries, so they would need to be factored in, along with a dozen or more things I haven't thought of yet. But I'm sure someone could come up with a formula that allowed adjustments for relay entries. Maybe something that looked at the number of men vs. women entered, or just counted relays as an event? As an example, when my team went to Colonies Zones, we were the smallest team in the medium team category. We had several swimmers who entered the max number of entries, and a few who only entered two or three. We also only had two women at the meet, so we could not score points in the women's relays. The team did well due to some strong individual swims, but not being able to score realy points, we could not compete on the team points level. It was one swimmer that put us over the "small team" cutoff. We did not know that until the meet started, and that was fine. Interestingly, we had one swimmer enter the meet who has not been practicing with the team. We were all glad to see him at the meet. He placed well in his events, scoring individual points in all. It would have been great to think, "More points for us!", but we were also thinking, "Darn him, he put us over the limit!" Just some food for thought, Dana