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
I propose a formula by which we can even out the large teams and the small teams, the near teams and the distant teams, in the scoring at nationals. The formula would reward teams for bringing a larger PERCENTAGE of their team to the meet and it would also reward teams coming from a greater DISTANCE. Here is the formula:
Total points scored x x = Adjusted points. The distance component of the formula is 1 for the host team and any team less than 100 miles from the meet. Looking at the meet in Federal Way, PNA would have 3440 x x = 917. NCMS would have 538 x x = 359. Walnut Creek would have 907 x x = 614. Very Small Team X from 1000 miles away with only 2 swimmers registered with USMS and both coming to the meet with a combined score of 40 points would have 40 x x = 400. Using this system we get rid of useless terms like super or mega teams and simply acknowledge that folks swim on different teams based on local availability along with a whole host of other factors. We also acknowledge the efforts of teams to a) encourage a large number of members to go to nationals, b) get a large PERCENTAGE of members to go to nationals, and c) travel distances to come to nationals.
I propose a formula by which we can even out the large teams and the small teams, the near teams and the distant teams, in the scoring at nationals. The formula would reward teams for bringing a larger PERCENTAGE of their team to the meet and it would also reward teams coming from a greater DISTANCE. Here is the formula:
Total points scored x x = Adjusted points. The distance component of the formula is 1 for the host team and any team less than 100 miles from the meet. Looking at the meet in Federal Way, PNA would have 3440 x x = 917. NCMS would have 538 x x = 359. Walnut Creek would have 907 x x = 614. Very Small Team X from 1000 miles away with only 2 swimmers registered with USMS and both coming to the meet with a combined score of 40 points would have 40 x x = 400. Using this system we get rid of useless terms like super or mega teams and simply acknowledge that folks swim on different teams based on local availability along with a whole host of other factors. We also acknowledge the efforts of teams to a) encourage a large number of members to go to nationals, b) get a large PERCENTAGE of members to go to nationals, and c) travel distances to come to nationals.
