I contend that a 1:35.88 (100 *** 60+ time) is equivalent to a 3:33-34 for the 200 not 3:27.79. This may discourage seniors from doing the 200 as opposed to the 100 and 50.
According to the VA ratings calculator, you are correct: for a 62-year-old male the 1:35.88 time is equivalent to 3:33.76 in LCM.
www.vaswim.org/.../rcalc.cgi
Of course the ratings calculator uses a much different algorithm (ie, FINA world record times in LCM) than the NQT formula.
Possibly it might discourage participation in the longer events. Then again, since one gets three "freebies" perhaps swimmers might be grateful that the shorter events have slightly easier NQTs than the longer ones in this particular case :)
I contend that a 1:35.88 (100 *** 60+ time) is equivalent to a 3:33-34 for the 200 not 3:27.79. This may discourage seniors from doing the 200 as opposed to the 100 and 50.
According to the VA ratings calculator, you are correct: for a 62-year-old male the 1:35.88 time is equivalent to 3:33.76 in LCM.
www.vaswim.org/.../rcalc.cgi
Of course the ratings calculator uses a much different algorithm (ie, FINA world record times in LCM) than the NQT formula.
Possibly it might discourage participation in the longer events. Then again, since one gets three "freebies" perhaps swimmers might be grateful that the shorter events have slightly easier NQTs than the longer ones in this particular case :)
