team scoring

Hi, Sorry I didn't comment sooner. Spent late Friday night/Sat morn with my daughter in the ER. Really sick. Still sick today, but at least the fever's down... Leianne, I think it would be easier for us to define a local team because we're in one (that's what I tried to do, and if it isn't a local team then it's a regional one). Meg, I understand why it would seem we need to define each, however, we are defining the second by saying it isn't the first! :) Hee hee. Semantics, gotta love it. I like Meg's definition. It's very basic, but a great place to start. This doesn't need to be complicated. I think what would be nice is to try to come up with a club definition, implement it at a Nationals and see what happens. Perhaps some teams (say in FL) will find a loophole or??? And while it may seem that we (or some of us) were off-task with our debating this issue, I think that we're having a valuable discussion to reiterate concerns all around. It does appear obvious that everyone knows what someone "means" when they say club vs. regional, we just need to define it- which we all agree is why we're here. Looking at 201.2 that seems the logical place to start... Maybe combine it with the definition of an LMSC? Because if the clubs are registered THROUGH the LMSC then how can a club BE an LMSC?! Does that make any sense what I'm trying to say? I think if nothing else, a nap is in order for me!

Because if the clubs are registered THROUGH the LMSC then how can a club BE an LMSC?! Easy answer. A club can NOT be an LMSC. A club is a member of USMS, just like each of us is a member of USMS. An LMSC is a Local Masters Swimming Committee, which a committee of USMS.

Hi, To Carolyn's point #2, yes, Rules Committee did agree that a regional division was an appropriate proposal. In addition, the regional team definition that had the most support ("do you always swim for the same club listed on your USMS registration card, or do you swim for another entity when the meet is inside your LMSC?") was proposed by members of Rules and Legislation. As I recall, Rules Committee members suggested adding language about a regional team being one where it competed within its LMSC as separate "entities" because they indicated that the word "team" as used in the USMS rulebook often has the meaning of a relay team. However, I also was told that while a "club" is how everyone is registered within USMS, a "team" is the actual group of swimmers that represents a club at any competition..... How's that for more semantics? Any way, that is why the L2 proposal discussed divisions for regional "teams" and club "teams". The "club team" label has caused a lot of misunderstanding I think, and so maybe it needs to be very clear that the proposal covers regional teams (made up of members from a club that competes as separate entities within its LMSC but as one team for Nationals), and local teams (made up of teams representing all the other types of clubs within USMS). As noted, if a team thinks it has been put in the wrong division, then there needs to be a process to appeal that classification. Like Karen, I would like to understand better how the LMSCs that have what we are calling "regional teams" actually operate so that whatever rule is proposed it will be workable. Leianne ^^^

Hi Karen, Here is information from the USMS website about PNA -- from the summary page that pops up when you click on the map under "Local Programs" (information listed is from 2004-2005): PNA LMSC Size: 1,085 members, 1 club at the close of the 2004-2005 Season Here's the info for Illinois: ILLINOIS LMSC Size: 1,467 members, 11 clubs at the close of the 2004-2005 Season You can also check the number of clubs that other LMSCs have --Here is what is listed for Pacific: PACIFIC LMSC Size: 9,641 members, 104 clubs at the close of the 2004-2005 Season Leianne ^^^

Rob, Isn't Pacific Northwest an LMSC? And don't they compete under that name? What about Illinois Masters? Just curious...The Pacific Northwest LMSC (PN-36) is an LMSC. The Pacific Northwest Association of Masters Swimmers (PNA) is a registered club. The Illinois LMSC (IL-21) is an LMSC. Team Illinois Masters (TIM) is a registered club. USMS members who swim in competitions, always represent their club (or they swim unattached) and never their LMSC. For example, I could register a club in Georgia called “Pacific Masters” and I could compete as Pacific Masters, but the Pacific Masters club in Georgia and the Pacific LMSC would be 2 distinct entities. Swimmers registered in the Pacific LMSC could not also be members of my Pacific Masters club. All clear, right? Still curious???

1. Meg, the Championship Committee had this discussion about team scoring over multiple years and did not come up with a proposal that everyone could agree upon. Pacific, because it is a Rule now, could take it upon themselves to propose a rule change. If all the rules governing Nationals were decided by the Championsjip Committee, a person (or LMSC) who had a good idea would have to go through the Ch. Committee, rather than going through Rules. The Championship committee could then get bogged down on discussion of one item, an item which does not matter as much as other items in actually running the meet, or helping hosts run the meet. Keeping Article 104 in the RuleBook allows any LMSC or other committee to feel they have some power to affect that meet. Taking Article 104 out of the Rule Book would give Rules too little to do,I imagine, and, as noted above, tie up the Championship Committee in a discussion in which many people outside the committee would also like to participate. 2. At convention, the Rules Committee seemed to agree that a regional club was one where parts of the club competed under different names in regional meets, so I think we should keep that as part of the definition of the regional club division. Then we need to add some geographic wording so that we do not have a Holmes Lumberjack team (where members were recruited from throughout the US and did stay members of that club) from competing against clubs whose large majority live close enough to the club center to work out with the club at least occasionally. 3. In defenrence to Paul, I do not see him saying we should not have two divisions. I read him as saying both types of clubs are equally good, but they are different and it is fine to divide them for purposes of scoring only.

Rob, Isn't Pacific Northwest an LMSC? And don't they compete under that name? What about Illinois Masters? Just curious...

Hi, I am unfamiliar with Lumberjack, but 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. This result is why Carolyn is attempting to come up with a geographic limitation on where club members actually live. To Paul's concern: Nothing in the L2 proposal says that he cannot swim with his college buddies or with Arizona or Colorado -- he just needs to register with the club he will swim with and then the team of competitors that the club sends to Nationals will have thier points scored in either the Regional Team (if he joins Arizona or Colorado), or the "local team" division (if he joins his college buddies or Team Tyr)..... 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") I know Jerry Clark has reviewed attendance at recent Nationals and will have some input on this topic...... Leianne ^^^

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!

The can of worms needs some stirring I think. How about this? Heh, heh, heh. Separate the divisions at Nationals: Regional Team vs. Local Club Team Within these two divisions have SML. Use the numbers Leianne suggested, or something similar. But THEN, if any team is excluding a member from competing at Nationals (because they are trying to fit into a predetermined division) then that team should have sanctions against them, and that swimmer (being excluded) should have the opportunity to swim at Nationals unattached. I await my doom :agree: