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
as I understand it, Team Tyr would NOT be a "regional team" -- Paul, please correct me if I am wrong, but they always compete as Team Tyr, wherever the meet is held?
If that is the case, then under the format we have been discussing, they are a "local team" of swimmers representing their club, Team Tyr--even though they draw from all over the country (I am using "Local team" as the replacement term for the tem "Club team"). As a local team they would be scored at Nationals in the same division as other "local temas" like The Olympic Club, Woodlands and Walnut Creek.
And that is exactly why the "if you always compete for the same club you're a local club" model won't work. It sounded great when I first heard it, but the more I thought about it, I realized that it wasn't quite there. If a club that draws swimmers from all over the country isn't the definition of a regional club, then I don't know what is! If we're going to define two classes of clubs, then we should just say that a local club operates primarily out of one pool and a regional club consists of members who train in different pools throughout an LMSC or even the country. Past a certain point, it doesn't matter if the people are 100 miles apart or 1000 miles apart.
This result is why Carolyn is attempting to come up with a geographic limitation on where club members actually live.
I do not disagree with Carolyn that there needs to be a geographic component, as stated above. But specifying a radius is too cumbersome.
S-M-L is small, medium and large (like t-shirt sizes). Since the most common reasons to dump the S-M-L division have been that (i) the break points are arbitrary, and (ii) people would game the system, why not just specify those break points up front?
Then everyone knows with certainty how they will fit in, and the break points will not be arbitrary, they will be published. As Scott and other forum participants have said, if a coach can get more people, great, and if they can't, then they know what division they will be in.
What about small = 10 swimmers or less (can field two relay teams)
medium = 11-24 swimmers
large = 25 or more swimmers (if people want, this division can also be called "megateams" or "superteams")
It makes no difference to me whether the divisions are made before or after the entry deadline. I think the dividing lines you've proposed make a lot of sense. In our case, we would still have to wait until after the entry deadline to find out what size division we wind up in, because we never know who's going to enter the meet ahead of time! I am always surprised when the meet rosters come out at who has entered. Of course, Mark Gill and I are usually there, but the rest are a mystery, not only in quantity but identity!
as I understand it, Team Tyr would NOT be a "regional team" -- Paul, please correct me if I am wrong, but they always compete as Team Tyr, wherever the meet is held?
If that is the case, then under the format we have been discussing, they are a "local team" of swimmers representing their club, Team Tyr--even though they draw from all over the country (I am using "Local team" as the replacement term for the tem "Club team"). As a local team they would be scored at Nationals in the same division as other "local temas" like The Olympic Club, Woodlands and Walnut Creek.
And that is exactly why the "if you always compete for the same club you're a local club" model won't work. It sounded great when I first heard it, but the more I thought about it, I realized that it wasn't quite there. If a club that draws swimmers from all over the country isn't the definition of a regional club, then I don't know what is! If we're going to define two classes of clubs, then we should just say that a local club operates primarily out of one pool and a regional club consists of members who train in different pools throughout an LMSC or even the country. Past a certain point, it doesn't matter if the people are 100 miles apart or 1000 miles apart.
This result is why Carolyn is attempting to come up with a geographic limitation on where club members actually live.
I do not disagree with Carolyn that there needs to be a geographic component, as stated above. But specifying a radius is too cumbersome.
S-M-L is small, medium and large (like t-shirt sizes). Since the most common reasons to dump the S-M-L division have been that (i) the break points are arbitrary, and (ii) people would game the system, why not just specify those break points up front?
Then everyone knows with certainty how they will fit in, and the break points will not be arbitrary, they will be published. As Scott and other forum participants have said, if a coach can get more people, great, and if they can't, then they know what division they will be in.
What about small = 10 swimmers or less (can field two relay teams)
medium = 11-24 swimmers
large = 25 or more swimmers (if people want, this division can also be called "megateams" or "superteams")
It makes no difference to me whether the divisions are made before or after the entry deadline. I think the dividing lines you've proposed make a lot of sense. In our case, we would still have to wait until after the entry deadline to find out what size division we wind up in, because we never know who's going to enter the meet ahead of time! I am always surprised when the meet rosters come out at who has entered. Of course, Mark Gill and I are usually there, but the rest are a mystery, not only in quantity but identity!
