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.”
I'm curious if this holds true for the USA-S motivational standards too. Are they equally hard (or not) across courses?
USA-S motivational standards are based on the all-time 16th fastest time. Explanation here (h/t pmccoy). Presumably, at some point in the entire history of USA-S, 16 super-fast swimmers competed in each event in each age group in each course. So the standards should be about the same degree of difficulty in all courses.
Karl_S suggested that we should base the masters MTs on a similar, all-time 10th place time. I didn't want to do that this year since it's a more difficult calculation. The advantages would be that the times would be more stable, year over year, and they should be of similar difficulty from course to course. The disadvantage would be that a tiny number of super-fast swimmers who have been around for a long time (e.g. a Karlyn Pipes or a Chris Stevenson) would dominate all of the all-time top ten lists, and thus the MTs would be less representative of the current population in each age group.
Pick your poison. Basing the MTs on the average 10th place time over the past three years means they will be less stable, but more responsive to changes in the sport as she is swum.
It would be fun to make an all-time top ten list, don't you think?
Edit: Just noticed this: USA-S SCM standards are based on the all-time SCY 16th place time, with an adjustment.
I'm curious if this holds true for the USA-S motivational standards too. Are they equally hard (or not) across courses?
USA-S motivational standards are based on the all-time 16th fastest time. Explanation here (h/t pmccoy). Presumably, at some point in the entire history of USA-S, 16 super-fast swimmers competed in each event in each age group in each course. So the standards should be about the same degree of difficulty in all courses.
Karl_S suggested that we should base the masters MTs on a similar, all-time 10th place time. I didn't want to do that this year since it's a more difficult calculation. The advantages would be that the times would be more stable, year over year, and they should be of similar difficulty from course to course. The disadvantage would be that a tiny number of super-fast swimmers who have been around for a long time (e.g. a Karlyn Pipes or a Chris Stevenson) would dominate all of the all-time top ten lists, and thus the MTs would be less representative of the current population in each age group.
Pick your poison. Basing the MTs on the average 10th place time over the past three years means they will be less stable, but more responsive to changes in the sport as she is swum.
It would be fun to make an all-time top ten list, don't you think?
Edit: Just noticed this: USA-S SCM standards are based on the all-time SCY 16th place time, with an adjustment.
