Dual Meets

RE: Dual Meets

jim thornton — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 12:30:03 GMT

Having insurance is what allows us to have practices and meets and open water events. No facility or organizer would ever allow us to use their facilities without it. The fact that USMS provides this benefit as cheap part of our membership is fantastic. I understand that, Bill. However, I think what USMS says with regards to recognized meets is that it is not responsible for insuring any of the swimmers. The facility and/or league holding the meet must make their own arrangements. There are all kinds of leagues, high school meets, etc. that hold competitions that aren't covered by USMS insurance. Presumably, they are insured in other ways. I suspect that wherever Paul plans to hold his dual meet, the pool facility would have its own insurance, which would either cover meets or not, in which case I am not sure who would be on the hook if someone filed a claim. Perhaps Paul himself? This might be something he should look into. As for Jeff Roddin and the Albatross meet, I was in the lockerroom at the end of the competition, and this guy slipped on the tile and banged his head pretty hard. I went out and found someone who was able to get him a bag of ice and file an accident report. Was this the incident for which a claim was filed? Yikes! Is it possible I played a part in the litigious melodrama?

RE: Dual Meets

aquageek — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 09:06:30 GMT

The question: How often is USMS insurance actually used to pay claims, and what are the most common claims? Swimmers slipping and falling in locker rooms? Starters developing tinnitus after years of shooting blanks (in yesteryear) and blasting beeping horns (today)? Cerebral vascular events provoked by having Top 10 times from Canadian Nationals failing to count for USMS TT consideration? Really, I am curious about this. Lots of different organizations have insurance, but in my experience, I have never seen anyone make a claim and/or get paid. On a completely separate front, what would you say is the easiest way to make a fraudulent claim and not get caught? Maybe even just get paid a small settlement to "go away"? Again, this is purely intellectual curiosity and not a request for some sort of "how-to" manual, though if you did happen to have one, could you send me a copy? Having insurance is what allows us to have practices and meets and open water events. No facility or organizer would ever allow us to use their facilities without it. The fact that USMS provides this benefit as cheap part of our membership is fantastic.

RE: Dual Meets

Michael Heather — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 06:22:47 GMT

Paul, Southern Pacific has been holding club dual and triple meets irregularly since the 1980s. They have not been sanctioned, despite SPMA's urging to do so, because the meet host did not want to require USMS membership of all participants. In fact, there used to be a north - south dual meet (sanctioned) between Pacific and Southern Pacific LMSCs that was great fun.

RE: Dual Meets

SwimDogs — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 04:34:02 GMT

Paul: Good luck with your dual meet. It sounds fun! I have an idea for a "Workout Group" meet that would be structured like a high school invitational: Each team gets one male and one female in each individual event with one mixed relay. Trophy for the winner. Out of curiosity, how are you going to score your dual meet while taking ages and genders into consideration? Hope all is well with you and Laura in AZ. Any plans for visits to Colorado and Lowry this summer? Mark Johnston

RE: Dual Meets

Chris Stevenson — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 01:58:29 GMT

this is not an elitist thing Sure, that's just what an elitist would say.

RE: Dual Meets

Paul Smith — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 01:28:58 GMT

We carry 3rd party insurance (which is NOT cheap)...partly because the City of Mesa requires it and partly because there are huge gaps in both USMS & USA Swimming's insurance policies. With regard to hosting a dual meet...we want to do so for a variety of reasons (rivalry, friends, something different, shorter session, etc.). I get the whole be "inclusive" deal but this is not an elitist thing simply a dual meet just like high schools, club teams, colleges, etc. all do every weekend! Anyhow...thanks for the assistance in clarifying this folks, we are moving forward!

RE: Dual Meets

Former Member — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 14:33:34 GMT

I am wondering why getting a dual meet "sanctioned" would be preferable to getting it "recognized"? I will answer your question in more general terms, for any meet (not just a dual meet). The advantages of obtaining a sanction instead of a recognition are: 1) More comprehensive insurance coverage for the event. In a sanctioned meet, the swimmers, officials, volunteers, and meet director are all covered by our insurance. This is not the case for some of those categories in a recognized event. See the Insurance Grid on Page 9 of our General Insurance Information. 2) Times swum in a sanctioned meet can be considered for FINA Top10 and FINA world records. Times swum in a recognized meet cannot be considered for FINA Top10 and world records (but they can be considered for USMS Top10 and records).

RE: Dual Meets

philoswimmer — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 12:48:36 GMT

Having the insurance there is a CYA thing, isn't it? If the meet organizers were to be sued, that could be quite bad...

RE: Dual Meets

jroddin — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 12:34:16 GMT

RE: Dual Meets

jim thornton — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 11:22:17 GMT

I will answer your question in more general terms, for any meet (not just a dual meet). The advantages of obtaining a sanction instead of a recognition are: 1) More comprehensive insurance coverage for the event. In a sanctioned meet, the swimmers, officials, volunteers, and meet director are all covered by our insurance. This is not the case in a recognized event. See the Insurance Grid on Page 9 of our General Insurance Information. 2) Times swum in a sanctioned meet can be considered for FINA Top10 and FINA world records. Times swum in a recognized meet cannot be considered for FINA Top10 and world records (but they can be considered for USMS Top10 and records). Anna Lea, you are a treasure! Pith and readability! As long as you mention these two items, one additional general question and a general observation. The question: How often is USMS insurance actually used to pay claims, and what are the most common claims? Swimmers slipping and falling in locker rooms? Starters developing tinnitus after years of shooting blanks (in yesteryear) and blasting beeping horns (today)? Cerebral vascular events provoked by having Top 10 times from Canadian Nationals failing to count for USMS TT consideration? Really, I am curious about this. Lots of different organizations have insurance, but in my experience, I have never seen anyone make a claim and/or get paid. On a completely separate front, what would you say is the easiest way to make a fraudulent claim and not get caught? Maybe even just get paid a small settlement to "go away"? Again, this is purely intellectual curiosity and not a request for some sort of "how-to" manual, though if you did happen to have one, could you send me a copy? The observation: Assuming Paul's proposed dual meet is in a SCY venue, FINA TT/Records don't apply anyway. And from what I have managed to glean over the years from Paul's occasional libertarian-minded postings, the idea that anybody might benefit from insurance (which is as close to socialist collectivism as our corporate overlords will ever venture) seems to me a likely anathema to Paul's philosophical approach. Thus I would venture to suggest he would probably be better off going for a recognition that a sanction. Hold it in a yards pool where the rest of the world could care less about the results. And hold it without any kind of namby pamby insurance coverage, and let Darwinian forces hold sway.

RE: Dual Meets

jim thornton — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 10:06:31 GMT

I am wondering why getting a dual meet "sanctioned" would be preferable to getting it "recognized"? It seems to me that the latter would be a lot easier to do, give you more control on who swims, and the times would still count for TT, etc. Maybe I am missing something here.

RE: Dual Meets

Rob Copeland — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 08:48:51 GMT

Rob, I am not sure I understand your statement. Could you elaborate?Yes I can, but I’ll send it via email so I don’t inundate Paul’s thread with legislative drivel.

RE: Dual Meets

jim thornton — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 01:36:13 GMT

An insurance claim was filed (and upheld) at the 2011 Albatross Open. But generally speaking I think it is rare to see a claim from a meet. However, as a meet director I'm not about to go with less insurance coverage just because the odds are in my favor there won't be a claim! For the record, just let me state that despite Jeff Roddin's utter magnificence at running the Albatross meet this year and in year's past, I opted not to file for an Alienation of Affection lawsuit, though god knows I would have been within my rights to do so! Lordy, what a magnificent fellow he is! But I shan't leave my family for him. No I shan't!

RE: Dual Meets

Former Member — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 13:28:48 GMT

I also believe what is causing some confusion is rule 401.2 about eligibility to participate, which does not specifically allow restrictions for 2 clubs. Rob, I am not sure I understand your statement. Could you elaborate?

RE: Dual Meets

Chris Stevenson — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 12:41:43 GMT

Where did you get the information that dual meets were not allowed? The 2012 Rule Book defines a dual meet as between 2 clubs (xi) and explains scoring (p 26). Betsy, I seem to remember that there was a VA vs NC dual meet (between LMSCs, not clubs) some years ago. And there was this: www.usms.org/.../meet.php (I like the idea of LMSC-level dual meets ever better than club dual meets. Bragging rights!)

RE: Dual Meets

Chris Stevenson — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 12:38:05 GMT

Is there some requirement in USMS that all meets must be open to all USMS members? This would be the only reason I can think of that would forbid dual meets. I don't have my rule book here and don't feel like looking this up in the electronic version. But if there is such a requirement I would think it could be avoided pretty easily. Call the meet a "Dual Meet" of X vs Y but allow anyone to register to swim. Just don't include non-members of X and Y in the scoring between the two clubs. I believe (but again can't check now) that the meet host has some flexibility in seeding. So maybe you can even make sure that the fastest heats of each event contain only members of X and Y. And make sure that the relays of X and Y are always next to one another so they can square off.

RE: Dual Meets

Betsy — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 12:09:15 GMT

Where did you get the information that dual meets were not allowed? The 2012 Rule Book defines a dual meet as between 2 clubs (xi) and explains scoring (p 26).

RE: Dual Meets

knelson — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 12:06:52 GMT

RE: Dual Meets

Former Member — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 07:52:21 GMT

RE: Dual Meets

jaadams1 — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 07:26:59 GMT

Thanks Rob...guessing you know me well enough to recognize that "I" have nothing figured out but am at least smart enough to have someone who's really good at it doing it for me (Erin, meet director for our nationals and our team manager)!! Cool...now we can get moving on taking those pesky Phoenix Swim Club masters down! Big time beer bet on this one baby!! You definitely need to have a beer chug :chug: relay event at the end of the meet, after all the sanctioning stuff is over with. :) Just to crown the real champs of the meet!

RE: Dual Meets

Paul Smith — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 07:25:10 GMT

Paul (Mr. I have those categories figured out). USA Swimming has "observed" events (actually “observed swims”). USMS has “recognized” events. Either way, I believe what you are looking to sanction, a dual meet between 2 USMS clubs, should be sanctionable. I also believe what is causing some confusion is rule 401.2 about eligibility to participate, which does not specifically allow restrictions for 2 clubs. Thanks Rob...guessing you know me well enough to recognize that "I" have nothing figured out but am at least smart enough to have someone who's really good at it doing it for me (Erin, meet director for our nationals and our team manager)!! Cool...now we can get moving on taking those pesky Phoenix Swim Club masters down! Big time beer bet on this one baby!!

RE: Dual Meets

jaadams1 — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 07:13:18 GMT

There was a dual meet between Lake Washington Masters (a PNA workout group) and their affiliated USA Swimming club, WAVE Aquatics, last year. I see the results in the USMS database for the masters swimmers, so I'm assuming it was sanctioned. In any event, I think dual meets are a great idea. Is there some requirement in USMS that all meets must be open to all USMS members? This would be the only reason I can think of that would forbid dual meets. We had a discussion of this very example at the NW Zone meeting at the NW Zone meet last weekend. Walt Reid brought up this particular meet as the example. I'm not sure if it was sanctioned, or recognized, but however they worked it, it was just between the two of them. Our USA team is going to be holding a developmental meet sometime in May, and the idea we have is to get a dual sanction USMS/USAS completed for it. The USA team is going to be using this for their younger, and less experienced swimmers, and this would also be perfect for most of our masters group as well. In the works in Wenatchee. :)

RE: Dual Meets

Rob Copeland — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 06:20:41 GMT

the Grand Canyon State Games this summer which will be a USMS "observed" event...so I think I have those categories figured out!!Paul (Mr. I have those categories figured out). USA Swimming has "observed" events (actually “observed swims”). USMS has “recognized” events. Either way, I believe what you are looking to sanction, a dual meet between 2 USMS clubs, should be sanctionable. I also believe what is causing some confusion is rule 401.2 about eligibility to participate, which does not specifically allow restrictions for 2 clubs.

RE: Dual Meets

Paul Smith — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 04:52:35 GMT

Paul, I wonder whether you are misunderstanding something. Are you sure you are not thinking of "dual-sanctioned meets" that are sanctioned by both USMS and by USA Swimming? Years ago I believe this was not allowed. But it is today. Appendix B of the Rule Book even has a section about it: "Dual Sanctioned Events," beginning on page 129. If you read that you'll see that a dual-sanctioned, "Combined meet" can have swimmers from both organizations seeded in the same heats. The only separation of the two organizations is in the warmup lanes - USMS and USA swimmers can't share the same warmup lane (they must be separated by a divider such as a lane line). If you have more questions, give me a call at 941-556-6279. Thanks Anna....I am going back to my two contacts that told me know and will clarify as i was very specific in wanting to host a dual meet against another team here in AZ and was told it wasn't allowed. We have actually done a couple of dual sanctioned events and will be hosting the Grand Canyon State Games this summer which will be a USMS "observed" event...so I think I have those categories figured out!!

RE: Dual Meets

orca1946 — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 04:17:04 GMT

I agree with above. Maybaedifferent word phrasing?