How do you feel about copying the kid's swimming method of organizing Masters by time standards??
For example, there would be A, B and C times for all ages and both sexes. Local meets would be either A, A/B, B, B/C, C or OPEN.
There could be Championships for any of these categories at the LMSC level. To go to Regionals would require having made a new category, the Regional time. National entrantrants would come from the Regional pool or perhaps from the "A" pool.
I'm ambivalent on this as it seems too unwieldy at this early stage of our development but does answer the needs of folks who are looking for the mythical level playing field.
Emmett; we could still have the "Mediocre" Champs as an extra event (suggested in your earlier post). Since there are 26 letters in the alphabet, we could go an even larger number of categories with an ever declining number of swimmers. (Avoiding, of course, the politically incorrect "F" time standard.)
Heck, I can see a day when EVERYONE wins something !
To Lainey,
Why would it results in more Masters meets?
To Ken,
No, the issue is NOT semantics, the issue is whether or not the organization wants a championship meet or a national invitational meet. They are two vastly different concepts.
Yes, you can change the name, and have staus quo.
Or, you can reorganize USMS Nationals. What got me started today was Mark's comment that to add SCM Nationals would require a facility with 2 x 25-meter courses plus warm-up area. I believe he made that comment because our "championships" are so large, that only the largest facilities (which are very few in number) in the country could handle a newly added national meet.
My comments were to point out that if we truly have national "championships" we would most likely find additional facilities (such as Belmont Plaza in Long Beach and many other 50-meter pools) which could handle the reduced number of swimmers who would then attend a national meet. However, that is not possible until (if ever ???) USMS changes its stance on what is a national meet.
To Lainey,
Why would it results in more Masters meets?
To Ken,
No, the issue is NOT semantics, the issue is whether or not the organization wants a championship meet or a national invitational meet. They are two vastly different concepts.
Yes, you can change the name, and have staus quo.
Or, you can reorganize USMS Nationals. What got me started today was Mark's comment that to add SCM Nationals would require a facility with 2 x 25-meter courses plus warm-up area. I believe he made that comment because our "championships" are so large, that only the largest facilities (which are very few in number) in the country could handle a newly added national meet.
My comments were to point out that if we truly have national "championships" we would most likely find additional facilities (such as Belmont Plaza in Long Beach and many other 50-meter pools) which could handle the reduced number of swimmers who would then attend a national meet. However, that is not possible until (if ever ???) USMS changes its stance on what is a national meet.
