Race Club Article

Aquageek, I agree with you a lot more than you would expect by reading our posts. Absolutely, we should not redefine or bowdlerize the meaning of first, second or third. They are what they are, and the State Champion probably worked just a little harder and put more of himself into his event than the kid that showed up for practice about half the time but swam the same event and finished way back in the pack at the local meet. My beef is recognizing ONLY first, second or third. I have two problems with that. First, kids that worked and swam their hearts out to finish in the pack, but a few places higher and a few seconds faster than last year have achieved something too, and that needs to be recognized for what it is. Second, you find a small enough pond, and you too can be the biggest fish in the water. Some people are so much more talented than the competition that "winning" has little meaning for them. Yes, they could seek out faster meets, but maybe they want to for example, go to a Div III program for the education and not have to sacrifice it for their swimming career. They've made a choice and a valid one, but we're kidding ourselves if we think "winning" in those conditions has much meaning. My larger point is that a healthy program will recognize different kinds of achievement in different ways. An unhealthy program will hyperfocus on one goal (dual meet winning record, conference champions, record setting swims, size of the program...whatever) and treat everyone who does not contribute to that exhalted goal as a red-headed step-child whose presence is tolerated only to the extent they don't "get in the way." So I say give out medals, but only to 1st, 2nd and 3rd and treat them as meaning what they mean. Recognize swimmers who break PRs and what that means. Keep track of school records and remind folks from time to time what that means. Give out "letterman" awards to those who participate faithfully on the team, even if they never make an A relay. Moreover, on a team that focuses more on younger and first time swimmers, skew the rewards more towards participation. A couple of examples from my piddly little summer league coaching experience. We made a point of taking EVERY kid who wanted to swim at the League Championship Meet, not just our 4 fastest swimmers in each event. That might mean a couple of middling fast swimmers gave up their third event so one of our slower swimmers could get two splashes. Experiencing the mad-house of Leagues was part of the experience. Also, we intentionally changed the dynamic of what events kids wanted to swim by having "ice cream" day for every kid that swam at least once in the dual-meet season all the individual events in their age group. Instead of "coach, I don't like that event." We got, "coach, I need to swim this event." And, everyone still on the team at the end of the dual meets legitimately earned the ice cream. Especially in an Olympic driven sport like swimming, 1st, 2nd & 3rd have special meaning. We need to preserve that and recognize it for what it means. We don't need to turn it into a fetish and disregard everything else that is going on. By the same reasoning, Aquageek is 100% correct when he argues we can't make "participation trophies" the only award we give out. Awards and recognition need to heterogeneous. Matt

Aquageek, I agree with you a lot more than you would expect by reading our posts. Absolutely, we should not redefine or bowdlerize the meaning of first, second or third. They are what they are, and the State Champion probably worked just a little harder and put more of himself into his event than the kid that showed up for practice about half the time but swam the same event and finished way back in the pack at the local meet. My beef is recognizing ONLY first, second or third. I have two problems with that. First, kids that worked and swam their hearts out to finish in the pack, but a few places higher and a few seconds faster than last year have achieved something too, and that needs to be recognized for what it is. Second, you find a small enough pond, and you too can be the biggest fish in the water. Some people are so much more talented than the competition that "winning" has little meaning for them. Yes, they could seek out faster meets, but maybe they want to for example, go to a Div III program for the education and not have to sacrifice it for their swimming career. They've made a choice and a valid one, but we're kidding ourselves if we think "winning" in those conditions has much meaning. My larger point is that a healthy program will recognize different kinds of achievement in different ways. An unhealthy program will hyperfocus on one goal (dual meet winning record, conference champions, record setting swims, size of the program...whatever) and treat everyone who does not contribute to that exhalted goal as a red-headed step-child whose presence is tolerated only to the extent they don't "get in the way." So I say give out medals, but only to 1st, 2nd and 3rd and treat them as meaning what they mean. Recognize swimmers who break PRs and what that means. Keep track of school records and remind folks from time to time what that means. Give out "letterman" awards to those who participate faithfully on the team, even if they never make an A relay. Moreover, on a team that focuses more on younger and first time swimmers, skew the rewards more towards participation. A couple of examples from my piddly little summer league coaching experience. We made a point of taking EVERY kid who wanted to swim at the League Championship Meet, not just our 4 fastest swimmers in each event. That might mean a couple of middling fast swimmers gave up their third event so one of our slower swimmers could get two splashes. Experiencing the mad-house of Leagues was part of the experience. Also, we intentionally changed the dynamic of what events kids wanted to swim by having "ice cream" day for every kid that swam at least once in the dual-meet season all the individual events in their age group. Instead of "coach, I don't like that event." We got, "coach, I need to swim this event." And, everyone still on the team at the end of the dual meets legitimately earned the ice cream. Especially in an Olympic driven sport like swimming, 1st, 2nd & 3rd have special meaning. We need to preserve that and recognize it for what it means. We don't need to turn it into a fetish and disregard everything else that is going on. By the same reasoning, Aquageek is 100% correct when he argues we can't make "participation trophies" the only award we give out. Awards and recognition need to heterogeneous. Matt