I'm guilty of it. I imagine we're all guilty of it: seeing a meet announcement and seeing our favorite two events back to back, or four events we want to swim on one day and then only 1 then next day. We get irritated and wonder why the meet director couldn't have designed this to better suit our needs? We moan at workout, whine on the forums, ***** on our blogs, etc. I'd like to encourage my fellow forumites to join me in taking a pledge:
I hereby pledge to:
just be grateful that there are volunteers, teams and facilities willing to host Masters meets,
recognize that no matter how hard these dedicated volunteers try, they'll never be able to create the order of events that satisfies all Masters swimmer,
recognize that, even if I can't swim those two favorite events in this meet because they are back to back (or whatever my complaint is), I've got a multi-decade Masters career ahead of me in which to swim them at different meets,
to, therefore, stop whining/moaning about the order of events, and
look at a different order of events as an opportunity to branch out and try new events!
Signed,
Patrick "Indebted to Masters Meet Directors/Officials/Volunteers" Brundage
Nationals is a bit different, they tend to be huge, and there's usually enough heats to get plenty of rest on back to back races.
Right. That's why I think data from Nationals would be the best for a study like this--people are more likely to swim the events they want to swim rather than the events they can swim due to the event order. Not to mention there are so many swimmers at Nationals and the data is readily available.
It would be nice if we could enter more than 6 individual races at Nats
why not 8 or 9
Length of the meet is the obvious answer.
aka Aquapocalypse, the sprinter day of doom.
Aquapocalypse. I love it. Somebody please start a "Swimmers' Dictionary" thread so that this can be the first entry...
I never really understood the rationale behind this. Yes the 1650 or 1000 can be a taxing event on a person's body, but after a good night of sleep I wouldn't see any problem with doing a 500 on the next day at all.
I think the idea of the rule is good, but it's made moot by the fact it means the 400 IM will generally follow the distance day because of it. A lot of distance swimmers swim the 400 IM, so either way they're going to be swimming an arduous event the day following distance day.
The only thing I would suggest to meet directors is maybe to move things around a little from year to year, like nationals does. If it is the SAME event order year after year after year, that means you always have the same choices or sacrifices to make.
Since 2000, we have never run the same order of events at the NE LMSC SCY Champs. Every year is different, and every year will continue to be different.
-Rick
A simple rule of thumb is to ask:
What percentage of the swimmers might want to double various events and attempt to put one or 2 events between them
That's not completely "simple". In a meet with 22 events*, there are 253 different double combinations to keep track of.
* 50/100/200/500/1000/1650 free (6)
* 50/100/200 stroke (3 x 3 = 9)
* 100/200/400 IM (3)
* 200/400 medley relay (2)
* 200/400 free relay (2)
-Rick
BEST IDEA EVER: Organize a 2-day SCM meet for December 31 & January 1. The first day of the meet is a true last-chance opportunity for the ending SCM season, and the second day is a first-chance opportunity for the new season, especially for people who are aging up. The best part is that simply by having half the events the first day and half the second day, there is absolutely no chance that anyone will be happy with the event order. The meet director can judge the success of the meet by the number of whiny forum threads, anguished emails, desperate split requests, and actual on-deck faintings. The timing of the meet would really be a non-issue since New Year's Day is a dumb holiday anyway. The more I think about this, the more I like it! :agree:
I actually like your idea That Guy. I think it would be a fun way to start the new year.
I think so too! The event order sideshow would just be an added benefit. :banana:
I think a 7am warm-up with a 9am start would be idealI'd opt for 10:00 PM warm up and start the 1500 at 11:50 PM on Dec 31st so the officials can figure out if the race counts for this year or next year. What if you built a pool that spans the international date line? How would the race count if it starts/finishes in one year but half the race is swum in the next year?
I'd opt for 10:00 PM warm up and start the 1500 at 11:50 PM on Dec 31st so the officials can figure out if the race counts for this year or next year. What if you built a pool that spans the international date line? How would the race count if it starts/finishes in one year but half the race is swum in the next year?
:bliss:
