team scoring

I like the proposal.I'd tweak it by having 4 divisions: 1)Regional Team in Zone 2)Local Team in Zone 3)Regional Team out of Zone 4)Local Team out of Zone. This would mitigate the geographic advantage as Teams from across the country wouldn't be up against the hometown swimmers.

Interesting that no one has yet commented on Austin having scoring in place that showed small, medium and large team breakouts?

One of my teammates told me he saw that posted, but I didn't see that myself. What would those results be?

Hi, I am glad to get this dialog going before Convention, and also would like to make sure that whatever is proposed is something that has significant support. That said, there were a couple previous posts that indicated that maybe you just define what is a "Regional Team", and then if you do not fit that definition, then all other teams will automatically be classed, as a default category, in the "Local Team" division. In a previous post on this forum, I indicated that I think it would be hard to define a "Local Team" due to the many different types of structures that are in place, so I will suggest again, maybe we only classify what is a "Regional Team"? There is no intent to change any of the existing structures for clubs, workout groups, teams or registration, but instead to find a means of classifying the teams in order to fit the existing models, so I would be interested in hearing what people think... 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 ^^^^

First of all, I'd like to thank Leianne for your active role in this process. I love the proposal, and it's simplicity. I also like that there are no arbitrary measures for S/M/L team divisions. Now every team, in both Regional and Local team divisions will be rewarded for bringing as many people to Nationals as possible. As Patrick points out, however, there seems to be a loophole in the definitions (i.e., NCMS). Perhaps for the Local team definition, it needs to be specified that a team must meet BOTH requirements in order to qualify as a Local team, otherwise they are a Regional team. Correspondingly, the definition of a Regional team would need to allow for exceptions such as NCMS to fall within its parameters. It seems clear to me that North Carolina Masters would be considered a Regional team. I have another question, as I'm not as familiar with how USMS teams are registered throughout the country. What would a team like Gold Coast be considered? I know that they have 10-15 "workout groups" spanning probably 100 miles along the southern coast of Florida. Therefore, I would consider them a Regional team. Are their USMS registration cards for Gold Coast, or their respective Local team/workout group? Are there any other exceptions out there? I love that we are working on this prior to the convention so that all the hiccups are worked out in advance to prevent 11th hour scrambling. :) Thanks again everyone, Brian

Hi, In Pacific's proposal, there are no categories for mens/womens/combined. There are no small/medium/large categories. There are only Regional and Local team divisions. Scoring would go 10 deep in each, for a total of 20 team awards. People were joking about having 60 or 90 team awards --that would obviously be expensive and complicated, and not what Pacific wants to present. Here is the text of the proposal: "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." As I recall there were people at convention who really seemed to want to have both types of teams defined. It looks to me like the definition of Regional Team is simple and clear -- "... 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." It is the definiton of a "Local Team" that would be difficult, given that those clubs do not all have coaches or facilities or governing boards or any of the distinctions we tried to specify. As a reference, here is what the Pacific Proposal defines as a "Local Team": "... 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)." That is why it may be that the suggestion to have one definition "If you meet the following standards your team will be scored in the Regional Team Division at Nationals, and if you don't then your team will be scored in the Local Team division" may be the easiest and simplest way to revise the team scoring at Nationals..... Leianne ^^^

Back to my original question, at the meet they posted results that showed small, medium and large teams...was this something the meet host did on their on? Can someone get that info and post here for everyone?

Carolyn Boak was the Championship Committee liaison for the meet and has been active on this forum. I will send a note to ask her for information, and ask her to post a response on the forum if she has information. Leianne ^^^

Oops, also, the proposal states awards will be given to the top 10 teams in each division, Regional and Local. I assume that includes Men's, Women's, and Combined Team as well??? Should that be explicitly stated, or is that a given?