Super teams

Fritz (or anyone else for that matter), One problem I see with our current scoring is that it encourages smaller clubs to feel like they need to combine together with others to be competitive. The superclubs are much larger in size (4x on average). I believe that superclubs are a good thing. I have enjoyed swimming with Arizona Masters and now am a member of Kentucky Masters. However, I have also been a part of a smaller team and enjoyed that experience. Our system of small, medium and large didn't work for a number of reasons. I feel Jerry's suggestion of 7 divisions would be even more problematic. What would be a good way to having scoring at nationals that doesn't encourage club to feel like that need to be part of a suerclub to be competitive? A system that allows the superclub to have fun, but also the independent teams to have fun?

Originally posted by mbmg3282 Jerry has brought up some interesting points that I want to address and try to explain why the old system of making categories (small, medium and large) based on entered swimmers at nationals didn't work well. In theory, it does sound good. Small teams compete against teams with similar numbers. Same with medium and large teams. The reality of the situation was that we had several problems. 1) It was difficult to divide the teams into logical categories. In many meets, only two or three teams would be in the large category (the closest geographically). The division between small and medium teams was even more diffucult. A team with 24 swimmers was medium and a team with 23 swimmers was small. One team would have a fun meet and have a good chance of winning a national championship. The other would be competing with teams more than twice its size in the medium division. If you don't think this is fair, what is fair about a team that has only 23 swimmers competing with teams that are large in size and may have 100 swimmers. Isn't that how the new system is working? Unless I misunderstood what is being said. At least when it was broken up in divisions the smaller team had a better chance at winning something. Now they have no chance. I don't think that any system will be totally fair to all teams. Unless each team has their own division and then everyone can win. What happen to just swim and have fun?

I've been thinking about this a little more trying to see if I'm just missing it. 1) females don't swim against males (mixed relays excepted) It's accepted, though not always trued, that males are bigger and stronger than females so in theory men have the advantage. 2) 19 year olds don't swim against 85 year olds. In theory our youth selves are younger and stronger than our older selves. I can accept that because I'm getting older and slower. 3) club teams are different than SUPERTEAMS (for reasons above and shouldn't be made to compete against them- no matter how good or bad either is) There's nothing here that shows anything about advantage or fairness. Different? OK but club teams are different as well. Karen, it's your fairness argument that I can't get. If you want to argue that there are different types of teams and we shouldn't mix then fine. I can sort of understand that. Just be prepared to define, in measurable terms, how teams are defined. I still won't agree with segregating because of geography, which is what I think this is, but at least I'll understand the argument.

Originally posted by mbmg3282 Fritz (or anyone else for that matter), One problem I see with our current scoring is that it encourages smaller clubs to feel like they need to combine together with others to be competitive. The superclubs are much larger in size (4x on average). I believe that superclubs are a good thing. I have enjoyed swimming with Arizona Masters and now am a member of Kentucky Masters. However, I have also been a part of a smaller team and enjoyed that experience. Our system of small, medium and large didn't work for a number of reasons. I feel Jerry's suggestion of 7 divisions would be even more problematic. What would be a good way to having scoring at nationals that doesn't encourage club to feel like that need to be part of a suerclub to be competitive? A system that allows the superclub to have fun, but also the independent teams to have fun? I'll go back to something I said earlier. What's the problem we are trying to solve? What's our objective?

"what is fair about a team that has only 23 swimmers competing with teams that are large in size and may have 100 swimmers. Isn't that how the new system is working?" SWinkleblech, This is exactly how the new system will work. When the decision was made to allow the rule to go before the House of Delegates, the Rules Committee checked the results of previous years. In each case, the teams that placed in the small team divison either placed in the top 10 or were competitive for spots in the top 10 overall. In each case over the last 4 years, the small division champion placed in the top 10. Typically, the only team that is coming to the meet with over 100 swimmers is one that is located near the meet. Outside of those few teams, the team sizes are much smaller (often under 50 at SC and under 30 at LC). Our new system favors the larger superclubs (greater likelihood of more swimmers at the meet). That is why I have suggested having a separate division for independent clubs. It would make the meet more fun for them without taking away anything from the superclubs.

Originally posted by Fritz I'll go back to something I said earlier. What's the problem we are trying to solve? What's our objective? Fritz, I think the problem to be addressed is how to score nationals such that independent clubs don't feel the need to become superclubs to be competitive. I am open to suggestions.

Why the club/superteam criteria for divisions? Yes, it's a "difference" but there are many others. I read the top 10 but how are some of these things "unfair" for scoring points or being in the same division for team awards at nationals? Maybe these are ADVANTAGES of being a club rather than a superteam. Is there an advantage to a superteam? Why were superteams put together? To be more competitive against the superclubs to equalize sizing issues? Tall, small, lean, fat, training background, etc, etc, etc....all differences. How is a mixed relay fair for a gay club? We all make the best of our situations. Gender, age, # of competitors - those are advantages. How is "different" (club/superteam) an advantage/disadvantage? What's the advantage of 50 superteam swimmers competing against 50 club swimmers? Why does WCM competing against DAM level the playing field rather than competing against a state team. More population/geography to draw a better talent base? Is this group of 50 superteam swimmers a better mix than the club mix? Are they better, faster, score more points, stacked, loaded, recruit, what? What's the advantage/disadvantage that's trying to be identified?

Originally posted by Swim Freak How is a mixed relay fair for a gay club? Now there's something that I had never even pondered. It's a valid point. Since we have to do away with clubs or superteams so that everyone can get a shiny medal, I guess it's about time to do away with mixed sex relays as well. After all, it's not about competition anymore, it's about making sure everyone gets a toy. Fitness begone!

My bad...didn't see that we are not identifying any advantages, only differences. With that in mind, if there isn't an advantage, why even bother with a separate category?

What about a gay/*** superteam? Wouldn't they have an advantage over mixed set superteams, especially if they were all superswimmers? Someone mentioned making team scoring/placement based on number of splashes. Wouldn't that put a superteam with some super fatso's in a more advantageous position? Imagine the cannonballs off the starting blocks and the splash generation from that. What if he/she were super fat AND on a super team AND a super swimmer? It's almost inconceivable what kind of damage that could cause to the integrity of USMS.