Originally posted by mbmg3282
If we can come up with something that encourages superclubs to actively participate in the meet, that is good.
If we can come up with a something that encourages smaller clubs to also participate that is good.
:) (Just to show that we are on the same page, although we are posting somewhat different viewpoints.)
Originally posted by LindsayNB
The question of why have team competition at all needs to be answered before one can consider the advantages or disadvantages of different systems.
I was thinking about that myself. It's not like I've seen the team banners once Nationals are over. It's not like there is great fortune and fame for placing 2nd in the medium team category.
I approach meets twofold: a place to see what my racing limits are, and a check what is possible. So for the first part, I pick seed times against people of comparable speed, so I'm most likely to race my best. I can see what is holding me back (muscle strength? out of breath? short glides after turn?). The latter part is to see what I *might* be able to do, if I continue to work in practice. (I'm not going to catch Santos in the 400 IM, but since it is humanly possible to swim 50 seconds faster, I should be able to shave 5-10 seconds off with work.) So having a level ("fair") playing field allows me to compare my swims with others.
So I think the team awards are to give a small motivation during the meet, to not scratch events, or to psych yourself up to try to get in the points. It is not a big deal, but by the same token it's fun to have around. (In Cleveland, we and another team were separated by 1 point. I can think about a 10th place I got, or a low-placing relay I swam on, and enjoy that I made a difference.) My viewpoint is that team standings are a fun addition, and an ideal system would allow more teams to feel like they have something to shoot for.
Originally posted by mbmg3282
If we can come up with something that encourages superclubs to actively participate in the meet, that is good.
If we can come up with a something that encourages smaller clubs to also participate that is good.
:) (Just to show that we are on the same page, although we are posting somewhat different viewpoints.)
Originally posted by LindsayNB
The question of why have team competition at all needs to be answered before one can consider the advantages or disadvantages of different systems.
I was thinking about that myself. It's not like I've seen the team banners once Nationals are over. It's not like there is great fortune and fame for placing 2nd in the medium team category.
I approach meets twofold: a place to see what my racing limits are, and a check what is possible. So for the first part, I pick seed times against people of comparable speed, so I'm most likely to race my best. I can see what is holding me back (muscle strength? out of breath? short glides after turn?). The latter part is to see what I *might* be able to do, if I continue to work in practice. (I'm not going to catch Santos in the 400 IM, but since it is humanly possible to swim 50 seconds faster, I should be able to shave 5-10 seconds off with work.) So having a level ("fair") playing field allows me to compare my swims with others.
So I think the team awards are to give a small motivation during the meet, to not scratch events, or to psych yourself up to try to get in the points. It is not a big deal, but by the same token it's fun to have around. (In Cleveland, we and another team were separated by 1 point. I can think about a 10th place I got, or a low-placing relay I swam on, and enjoy that I made a difference.) My viewpoint is that team standings are a fun addition, and an ideal system would allow more teams to feel like they have something to shoot for.
