first of all, congrats to the meet directors and all the volunteers on a job well done. so organized and efficient!! very impressive. the only thing i wish someone could explain to me is why the usms champ. committee changed the team scoring from large, medium and small team to clumping everyone in the same category. seems extremely unfair to have what i call "real teams" competing against state mega teams. there is no possibility for "real teams" to ever come close to competing against them. if you are going to give team awards at the end of the meet, is there any way you can do it fairly? our team is extremely proud to have gotten as many team members as we did to go to natls. (most of them for the first time), but unfortunately they were very disillusioned (as was i) with the idea that we would be competing against state teams. as one of the coaches i didn't have an explanation. even though we were very proud of our 7th place finish in men's division, and our 12th place in combined, we were only one of a few "real teams" in the top ten. would appreciate responses. maybe even someone from the champ.committee could explain how they felt this scoring system would be more fair to the majority of swimmers. then i can pass it along to my teammates.. i don't want them to be so disillusioned that they lose interest in attending any future natls. thanks
One of the barriers to communication in discussing this is mixing two issues: super-teams for relays and definition of team sizes and membership criteria for purposes of team scoring. I put forward the concept of no team scoring as a talking point, one which would not preclude various relay forms winning relay events and garnering records. It is a related topic, but muddies the team scoring issue to assume that no team scoring equals no relays.
BTW, my mind was musing on this issue (I fear, perhaps a symptom of encroaching senility) when I fell upon a vision of pure black humour: At Nats all swimmers must declare political affiliation and swim under them- talk about blood in the water. No I am not serious, just extrapolating from the occasional 'spirited' discussion that flares on the forums when partisanship flares.
One of the barriers to communication in discussing this is mixing two issues: super-teams for relays and definition of team sizes and membership criteria for purposes of team scoring. I put forward the concept of no team scoring as a talking point, one which would not preclude various relay forms winning relay events and garnering records. It is a related topic, but muddies the team scoring issue to assume that no team scoring equals no relays.
BTW, my mind was musing on this issue (I fear, perhaps a symptom of encroaching senility) when I fell upon a vision of pure black humour: At Nats all swimmers must declare political affiliation and swim under them- talk about blood in the water. No I am not serious, just extrapolating from the occasional 'spirited' discussion that flares on the forums when partisanship flares.
