There being no objections, herewith the final versions:
8589
8590
8591
The notes below are now appended to each set of tables.
Bonus!
I also made these tables, which track the 10th place times for all events for the last seven years. This will give you some idea how the 10th place time varies from year to year in your favorite events.
8592
8593
8594
-------------------------------------
Motivational times (MTs) are calculated from the base time given in Column X. The algorithm for calculating the base time is similar, but not identical to, the method USMS uses to calculate national qualifying times (NQTs) for the annual SCY national championships.
Most of the time, Column X is
(A) the average of the previous three year’s 10th place times.
However, if there are fewer than three 10th place times over the previous three years, we use, in order,
(B) average of two 10th place times over the previous three years. If there are fewer than two 10th place times,
(C) average of three 5th place times + 4.45%. If there are fewer than three,
(D) average of two 5th place times + 4.45%. If there are fewer than two,
(E) No Time (NT).
If one of the alternatives B-E is used, it’s indicated by a superscript.
The rest of the columns are proportional to Column X as follows,
AAAA = X + 5% A = X + 20%
AAA = X + 10% BB = X + 30%
AA = X + 15% B = X + 40%
For MTs, the same algorithm is used for all three courses, SCY, LCM, and SCM.
Relationship to NQTs. For SCY, as long as Column X is calculated using method A, B, or E, Columns AA and AAA should be,but are not guaranteed to be, exactly the NQTs for sprints and 200+ events respectively. However, there will be some small differences for methods C and D. For LCM, the MTs should be different from the NQTs in all cases. USMS does not publish NQTs for SCM or for age groups 85+.
Column X. I like to think of Column X as “the moral equivalent of a Top Ten time”. Of course, in any given year, the 10th place time will be faster or slower by some amount than the average of the three previous years, so of course, Column X is not an actual Top Ten time. Too bad, huh? You can also think of it as “the time I need to hit to have about a 50/50 chance.”
Mens 45-49
50 *** SCY :33.52
50 *** SCM :37.27
The above times are actual and not converted, however as a check I went to www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/.../conversions.asp and converted the actual times from SCY to SCM and vise versa... and the results came back within a tenth of a second.
I don't always trust the Swimming World converter, but the VA Calculator also rates these as essentially equivalent times. I suppose it isn't surprising that the 10th-place times show some variability from course to course (and year to year, though the 3-year averaging period helps with that).
I don't always trust the Swimming World converter, but the VA Calculator also rates these as essentially equivalent times. I suppose it isn't surprising that the 10th-place times show some variability from course to course (and year to year, though the 3-year averaging period helps with that).
I've used your calculator in the past too. Thanks for that.
Wow! I just compared my short course and long course times to the charts and found a huge disparity in one event- 200 butterfly. In all other events, my times (more or less) keep me at the same rating. The longer event, the higher I rate in long course compared to short course, so there is a greater disparity. In 400 IM, I'm an "A" in long course and a "BB" in short course.
200 butterfly is an entirely different story:
Short course time = 3:53.91 (March 2014 meet) equates to missing the chart entirely by more than 4 seconds. :badday:
Long course time (using converter) = 4:22.53 equates to almost an "AA" (4:21.76)! :bliss:
Even if I don't use the converter and take some previous long course times of around 4:31, I would still be an "A". :D
It amazes me that in short course, my time is humiliating :blush: when compared to the chart; however, in long course, it would be considered quite respectable. :wiggle:
... In SCY I had an "A" time and in SCM I had an "AAA" time. Granted in the SCY I missed an "AA" time by less than a quarter second, but surprised by the different outcomes.
You shouldn't be surprised: The columns in the motivational times are not at all quality metrics, in the same sense as Chris's VA calculator, and shouldn't be used for time conversions.
Motivational times could, in principle, be used for time conversion, but only if approximately the same top ten swimmers compete in each course, under approximately the same conditions. That your SCM time was "AAA" while your SCY time was "A" tells you that a different (somewhat slower) group of swimmers compete in SCM, under different conditions (no SCM national championships, for instance).
Another way to think about it might be, the Motivational Times are comparisons versus other swimmers who actually compete in that course. That is, there is one group of USMS swimmers who compete in SCY, another group in LCM, and still another group in SCM. Of course, the groups overlap, but they are different groups.
Unfortunately, I can't find the Venn diagram tool ...
That your SCM time was "AAA" while your SCY time was "A" tells you that a different (somewhat slower) group of swimmers compete in SCM, under different conditions (no SCM national championships, for instance).
Another way to think about it might be, the Motivational Times are comparisons versus other swimmers who actually compete in that course. That is, there is one group of USMS swimmers who compete in SCY, another group in LCM, and still another group in SCM. Of course, the groups overlap, but they are different groups.
Yup, I came to that conclusion after viewing the top 10 times and noticed a larger gap between 1st and 10th in the SCM. Still find it interesting from a statistical point of view.
