team scoring

I really don't know the in's and out's of team swimming. I do remember in Masters track that, teams would try to "buy" the championship by entering runners in tons of events in the hopes of scoring some points in their age groups. Even with embarrasingly slow times. I always thought there should be a minimum time standard to score points to avoid this.

Hello, Here is the current version of what Pacific LMSC would be proposing to the Rules Committee this year. Please feel free to provide comments. Sorry for the long post, but we would like to get input from members before the Convention to provide an alternative that many people (not all -- we are not that optimistic!) can agree on. Several years ago, as a result of perceived inequities, scoring at Nationals was changed from small, medium and large divisions to scoring all teams in a single division. There has been significant dissatisfaction with the single division method of scoring also. Last year, Pacific LMSC proposed a means of scoring in two divisions, which raised significant debate at the House of Delegates, and afterwards on the USMS Discussion Forum for “Team Scoring at Nationals”. Pacific LMSC again proposes to change the method of scoring at National Championships, using a two division system, as follows. These proposed Rules changes reflect the final proposal as proposed in the USMS House of Delegates, as well as comments on this discussion forum from the following participants (among others): Jim Clemmons, Paul Smith, Rob Copeland, Meg Smath, Jim Matysek, Carolyn Boak, Jerry Clark, Michael Moore, Leianne Crittenden, Scott Williams, Betsy Durrant. This is a very long forum discussion (showing how much interest there is!), but if you want to see some of the posts that were taken account of, please see Posts on this forum numbered: 7, 90, 105, 131, 139, 141, 144, 159, 187, 189, 192, 195, 212, 226, 240, 245 as well as any others that you may be interested in! RATIONALE FOR PROPOSED RULE CHANGES: Several years ago, team scoring at Nationals changed from Small/Medim/Large divisions to a single division. Since 2004, posts on two USMS Discussion Forums have criticized the current method of scoring. Participants have noted thatunder the single division method of scoring, teams that draw from a local area are at a strong disadvantage when competing against teams drawing from an entire state or region. For a complilation of team scoring results in recent SCY Championships (2003-2007), made by Michael Moore, go to Post #7 of the “Team Scoring at Nationals” USMS Discussion Forum. However, going back to the previous method of scoring (using small, medium and large team categories) is also unsatisfactory, because of the arbitrary nature of determining what will be a small, medium or large team, and who will determine those categories. Many suggestions have been made on the USMS discussion forum: (1) Score the meet using the highest average scores by number of splashes (the number of swims by a team, divided by the number of swimmers to derive the average score per swimmer), (2) Using Regional and Local team divisions with the following ideas: (a) defining regional and local teams using a geographic component by requiring that 90% (or another portion) of all club members reside within a certain distance from a club’s designated headquarters (prevents national recruiting of an elite team, but would be difficult to confirm the number of registered swimmers on a specific club that live close to the club headquarters); (b) using small/medium/large classes within each division (forum participants thought this was an arbitrary measure); (c) using specified classes of small (10 or less swimmers)/medium1(11 to 24 swimmers)/large (25 or more swimmers) teams within each division (to prevent teams from discouraging participation so that they could be in a specific classification, but still viewed as arbitrary, and many participants did not believe that coaches discouraged swimmers from going to Nationals); (d) using mens/womens/combined within each of the two divisions (no consensus, except a concern about the number of team awards to be given at Nationals) (3) No team scoring at Nationals at all (generally rejected by Forum participants as not in keeping with a Championship meet); (4) Scoring addressed by the Championship Committee only (rejected by forum participants as not adequately representing members’ concerns, given that the volume of posts on this forum was more than three times the traffic on other USMS discussion forums). Most of these alternatives would create administrative difficulties, which is why Pacific is proposing a very simple proposal, in keeping with the general comments on the Discussion Forum to “Keep It Simple Stupid”. Recognizing that there is no perfect method of scoring National Championships, Pacific submits this proposal to define what is a “Regional” or LMSC team, and then to score Nationals based on two divisions: “Regional” Club Teams and “Local” Club Teams, through ten places in each division (twenty total team awards). The proposed Rule change spells out how a Regional and Local team is determined, based on a swimmer’s registration with a club that is a member of the LMSC. Swimmers register with USMS as a member of a “club” and the club sends swimmers to Nationals, who compete as the “team” that represents the club. ******** A. PROPOSED REVISIONS TO TEXT OF APPLICABLE RULES: Regional Team and Local Team Categories: Article 104: NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP MEETS 104.5.6 Club Scoring at National Championships A Scoring—All national championship meet scoring and awards shall be treated as if the meet were swum in a 10-lane pool, regardless of the actual number of lanes available. Points shall be awarded as in article 102.12.3. B Categories—Club scoring will be tabulated in two categories. (1) Regional Teams. For competition at National Championship Meets, a “Regional Team” consists of a team made up of those swimmers who represent a club at Nationals, but at competitions within their LMSC, they compete for an entity or subgroup (such as a workout group) that is different than the one they compete with at Nationals. (2) Local Teams. For competition at National Championship Meets, a “Local Team” consists of a team made up of those swimmers who represent a club at Nationals, and at competitions within their LMSC they compete for the same club, and that club has a single management structure that is responsible for administering the club’s activities (including, for example, acquiring facilities and/or providing coaches). (3) The Championship Committee is responsible for publishing a list of Regional and Local Teams no later than February 15 of each year. Where a club contests its designation, it may file an appeal with the Chair of the Championship Committee at least 60 days prior to the National Championship Meet. C Overall Point Total—The overall point totals for each club shall be published in all results documentation. Article 104.5.7 – Awards A Awards—All top finishers in each race will be given awards regardless of the nationality of the swimmer. Duplicate awards will NOT be given except in the case of ties. Appropriate awards as determined by the Championship Committee will be awarded for places one through 10. B USMS championship award (i.e., patch or some similar award to be determined by the Championship Committee)—Each individual who wins a short course or long course individual or relay championship shall be awarded a USMS championship award. Swimmers winning more than one championship may purchase one additional award for each additional championship won. C. Team awards – The organization conducting the national championship meet shall provide awards to the first through tenth place for two categories: the Regional Team category and the Local Team category. B. OPTIONAL: Revert back to current scoring if not ratified in three years by House of Delegates. If this method of scoring is not ratified by a simple majority vote of the House of Delegates three years after it is enacted, team scoring at National Championships will go back to the scoring method set forht in the 2008 Rule Book. ******* In addition to these basic Rules changes, please note that there are two other points: 1. The Championship Committee, in consultation with the USMS Registrar, will determine and publish a list of Regional Teams no later than February 15 each year. If a club contests its classification, it can appeal to the Championship Committee by submitting a complete written claim not later than 60 days prior to the first day of competition at the National Championship Meet. Since SCY Nationals is usually in May, this should provide adequate time for submission of protests and decisions. 2. OPTIONAL PROVISION This scoring system is implemented for three years to see how it works – if not ratified by House of Delegates after three years, then the scoring system reverts back to the single division scoring that is in place today. Again, sorry for the long post, but I wanted to provide complete information! Leianne ^^^^

(1) Regional Teams. For competition at National Championship Meets, a “Regional Team” consists of a team made up of those swimmers who represent a club at Nationals, but at competitions within their LMSC, they compete for an entity or subgroup (such as a workout group) that is different than the one they compete with at Nationals. (2) Local Teams. For competition at National Championship Meets, a “Local Team” consists of a team made up of those swimmers who represent a club at Nationals, and at competitions within their LMSC they compete for the same club, and that club has a single management structure that is responsible for administering the club’s activities (including, for example, acquiring facilities and/or providing coaches). I make these comments not to be deliberately destructive, but as if I were acting to take advantage of these regulations. Please bear in mind that I have no better ideas myself! The first problem is that the regional and local team class as written here do not encompass all teams that could be in an LMSC. In this case, what I would be thinking of is an LMSC with one large club, but members compete for the large club inside and outside of their LMSC. For example, in my LMSC, it would be as if you competed for NCMS inside and outside of the LMSC. Now the issue is that this kind of club is not a regional team because they compete for the same entity intra-LMSC as they do outside of the LMSC, but it isn't a local team either because it lacks the single management structure. So what needs to happen in this proposal is either a third group, or the other class needs to be "all clubs that are not the other type". This kind of club is also the weak point of this proposal. Based on what happened with last year's proposal, my feeling is that your intent is to classify such a team as a local team, and not a regional team. I don't think every LMSC with a conglomerate team will do this, but I would imagine at least a few would. Or a few current smaller groups within the LMSC would band together and conglomerate as a club (this kind of consolidation is occuring to a certain extent in USA Swimming, even if the groups aren't really nearby!). I'm also wondering whether or not the ratification in three years part is something that can go in Part 1 of the rulebook. Since something in three years would be in 2011--an odd-numbered legislative year, it would seem to have the effect of a rules change in a non-rules year, which is different than the amendment procedures currently in effect in Part 6 (see 601.4). If this really has the effect of changing the amendment procedures, then this part would be a legislative change in a non-legislative year. There's a high probability that I could be wrong about this, but it seems to add a lot of complexity to the proposal (which is probably why it's optional!). I'd recommend just completely severing it and not even bringing it as an option. If people don't like the scoring system in two or four or 2n years, they can amend it then. Patrick King

I think the way things are now is the simplest solution. The team with the most points wins. There is one calculation. It doesn't get much simpler than that. If people are against the super-teams having an advantage, then outlaw super-teams. Everyone will need to compete within their "Workout Groups" as they are called in some LMSCs. Or combine everyone into their LMSCs and there are only 52 teams. I'd love to swim relays w/ folks on other teams in my LMSC. Who does scoring affect? I'd argue only a few hundred people at most. Personally, I don't attend Nationals to score points - I go to hang out with teammates, friends and try to beat my times from last year. I could care less about our team's points. Since ~5% of USMS swimmers actually attend one or both National Championship Meets in a given year, I think too much time is being spent on this topic. I hear discussions to this topic are lengthy and animated at convention. Perhaps USMS would be better served addressing the needs of the large portion of its membership who do not compete in Nationals (or meets, for that matter), and figure out how to keep those swimmers interested and how to bring in new members. :dedhorse:

But Jeff, apparently you don't understand the award fees and endorsement deals that come with being the number 1 team,oh wait.......... /Emily Lattella Never mind /Emily Lattella

In addition to that I think that the regional teams who are not in the zone where the national championship meet is taking place should be considered a club team. For example, a team like New England Masters should not be in the same division as teams like Pacific Northwest Aquatics like last year when it was in Federal Way, Washington. I disagree. In fact, I think this defeats the entire purporse of the proposed rule change. Yes, teams close to where the meet is held are going to have an advantage, but I think that's inevitable and doesn't need to be accounted for. Think of it as a perk for hosting the meet. Some years geography will benefit your team, other years it won't. Heck, having this incentive to encourage teams or facilities to host the meet can only help, IMO.

It's not like teams are lining up to host in order to get the banner: And Paul makes an excellent that these is a lack of a clear mission within our House of Delegates, for which I am greatly responsible. To this point, the HOD spend an hour in passionate debate about who takes home a banner from national, yet we blew right by what I feel is a bigger issue, that there was only one bidder for each of our 2009 nationals. God bless Indi and Clovis, but if USMS nationals isn’t viewed as an attractive property (positive cash flow to host, community impact, increased local membership, etc) then, in my opinion, we have bigger problems than who gets a banner.

I don't know if this has been suggested already but I was thinking that there should be some kind of club division and another division for regional teams. In addition to that I think that the regional teams who are not in the zone where the national championship meet is taking place should be considered a club team. For example, a team like New England Masters should not be in the same division as teams like Pacific Northwest Aquatics like last year when it was in Federal Way, Washington.

This proposal has a means of measurement (removing the arbitrary sizing) and an appeals process if someone has a complaint. I would support such a measure (if I had the authority).

I would support such a measure (if I had the authority). So, come to convention and you can vote on it.