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
Hi,
In the Pacific proposal, there are only two divisions (Regional and Local Teams).
This was done in response to concerns raised on this forum about (1) keeping the scoring method simple, and (2) keeping down the number of awards.
If people feel strongly about adding other classifications, please feel free to speak up.
AUSTIN RESULTS
As a reference, here are the scores for each of the Mens/womens/combined classes at this year's short course Nationals at Austin. Teams that would be classed as "Regional Teams" under the Pacific proposal are noted with a "*".
I do not know whether results were skewed because FINA Worlds in Australia were just before this Nationals (with some swimmers choosing one meet and not the other), but the "Local Teams" (particularly those from Texas) did better this time than in other Nationals (see Post #7 on this Forum for previous years' results).
COMBINED
* 1 Colorado Masters Swimming CMS 2228.5
* 2 Arizona Masters ARIZ 1336.5
3 Woodlands Masters Swim Team WMST 1281
* 4 Pacific Northwest Aquatics PNA 983
5 Longhorn Aquatics TXLA 918
* 6 Team Illinois Masters IM 846
7 Fort Lauderdale Aquatics FLAQ 775.5
8 Walnut Creek Masters WCM 771
9 Southern Methodist Masters SMU 769.5
10 The Olympic Club TOC 751
WOMEN
* 1 Colorado Masters Swimming CMS 1126
2 Woodlands Masters Swim Team WMST 592
* 3 Virginia Masters Swim Team VMST 533
* 4 Team Illinois Masters IM 506
* 5 Arizona Masters ARIZ 489
* 6 Oregon Masters OREG 448
* 7 New England Masters Swim Club NEM 438
* 8 Pacific Northwest Aquatics PNA 431
9 Masters of South Texas MOST 422.5
10 Walnut Creek Masters WCM 384
MEN
* 1 Colorado Masters Swimming CMS 888.5
* 2 Arizona Masters ARIZ 767.5
3 Longhorn Aquatics TXLA 671
4 Woodlands Masters Swim Team WMST 555
5 The Olympic Club TOC 540
* 6 Pacific Northwest Aquatics PNA 480
7 Fort Lauderdale Aquatics FLAQ 434
8 Southern Methodist Masters SMU 378.5
9 West Hollywood Aquatics WH2O 374
10 Walnut Creek Masters WCM 323
Leianne
^^^^
Hi,
In the Pacific proposal, there are only two divisions (Regional and Local Teams).
This was done in response to concerns raised on this forum about (1) keeping the scoring method simple, and (2) keeping down the number of awards.
If people feel strongly about adding other classifications, please feel free to speak up.
AUSTIN RESULTS
As a reference, here are the scores for each of the Mens/womens/combined classes at this year's short course Nationals at Austin. Teams that would be classed as "Regional Teams" under the Pacific proposal are noted with a "*".
I do not know whether results were skewed because FINA Worlds in Australia were just before this Nationals (with some swimmers choosing one meet and not the other), but the "Local Teams" (particularly those from Texas) did better this time than in other Nationals (see Post #7 on this Forum for previous years' results).
COMBINED
* 1 Colorado Masters Swimming CMS 2228.5
* 2 Arizona Masters ARIZ 1336.5
3 Woodlands Masters Swim Team WMST 1281
* 4 Pacific Northwest Aquatics PNA 983
5 Longhorn Aquatics TXLA 918
* 6 Team Illinois Masters IM 846
7 Fort Lauderdale Aquatics FLAQ 775.5
8 Walnut Creek Masters WCM 771
9 Southern Methodist Masters SMU 769.5
10 The Olympic Club TOC 751
WOMEN
* 1 Colorado Masters Swimming CMS 1126
2 Woodlands Masters Swim Team WMST 592
* 3 Virginia Masters Swim Team VMST 533
* 4 Team Illinois Masters IM 506
* 5 Arizona Masters ARIZ 489
* 6 Oregon Masters OREG 448
* 7 New England Masters Swim Club NEM 438
* 8 Pacific Northwest Aquatics PNA 431
9 Masters of South Texas MOST 422.5
10 Walnut Creek Masters WCM 384
MEN
* 1 Colorado Masters Swimming CMS 888.5
* 2 Arizona Masters ARIZ 767.5
3 Longhorn Aquatics TXLA 671
4 Woodlands Masters Swim Team WMST 555
5 The Olympic Club TOC 540
* 6 Pacific Northwest Aquatics PNA 480
7 Fort Lauderdale Aquatics FLAQ 434
8 Southern Methodist Masters SMU 378.5
9 West Hollywood Aquatics WH2O 374
10 Walnut Creek Masters WCM 323
Leianne
^^^^
