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
Jon:
You have an interesting forumla.
The problem with your forumla is that it gives too much weight to the number of swimmers participating over the number in a team. I would like to see more top ten swimmers participating at the national championships. To get more average swimmers, while it is great for a meet host (and does pay for the meet) is not what I think you want to see. In 1987, there were over 2300 swimmers at the short course yards championships, after that meet, time standards were instituted.
Lets just look what I could do if I wanted to game the system. If I were Kerry, I might form the Walnut Creek National Team. Now lets say that only 45 swimmers are part of the National Team. Now Walnut Creek has 907 x x = or 4236.
If North Carolina were to game the system and only have 42 members of the national team then NCMS would have 538 x = 6321. Congratulations on the NCMS great win!!
Now, of course, we are only talking theoretically, we know that no one would game the system. :-)
michael
Jon:
You have an interesting forumla.
The problem with your forumla is that it gives too much weight to the number of swimmers participating over the number in a team. I would like to see more top ten swimmers participating at the national championships. To get more average swimmers, while it is great for a meet host (and does pay for the meet) is not what I think you want to see. In 1987, there were over 2300 swimmers at the short course yards championships, after that meet, time standards were instituted.
Lets just look what I could do if I wanted to game the system. If I were Kerry, I might form the Walnut Creek National Team. Now lets say that only 45 swimmers are part of the National Team. Now Walnut Creek has 907 x x = or 4236.
If North Carolina were to game the system and only have 42 members of the national team then NCMS would have 538 x = 6321. Congratulations on the NCMS great win!!
Now, of course, we are only talking theoretically, we know that no one would game the system. :-)
michael
