I'm in my late 50s, have been swimming for about 35 years. In h.s. I was a track and CC runner. So I don't know a lot about the tactics of a swim meet, and how meets are conducted. But when my daughter (now in her 20s) joined the swim team in h.s., I got more into the rules, and perusing local high school swim meet results in the newspapers. I know that coaches have lots of varying talent they have to consider and juggle when assigning specific swimmers to an event. And I know that a swimmer is only permitted to swim in four total, two individual events. But when I see something like this, I really scratch my head. In a dual meet, the winning time in the 500fr has a 'per 100' pace faster than the winning times for 100fr and 200fr (and is actually pretty close to the 50fr pace)...which were all won by the other school. The school that won the 500fr lost the meet by a margin that could have been gapped if they'd won just one more event. Presuming that the fast 500 swimmer was in maximum events (others which apparently he didn't point in), why not INSTEAD have him in two of those other events that he certainly would have won (based on his 500 time)? He would have pointed in two events instead of just one, and presumably his team would have won the meet.
Dan
Many other possibilities:
--The 500 time was a misprint.
--The good swimmer was also in all three relays, trying to score the team points there.
--The good swimmer was disqualified in his/her other event.
--The coach didn't realize how close the meet would be.
--The coach made a tactical blunder.
--Other possibilities?
Many other possibilities:
--The 500 time was a misprint.
--The good swimmer was also in all three relays, trying to score the team points there.
--The good swimmer was disqualified in his/her other event.
--The coach didn't realize how close the meet would be.
--The coach made a tactical blunder.
--Other possibilities?
