USMS Virtual National Champion

Very interesting,especially that we(OREG) beat PNA by a point in SCY:banana:.Let the trash talking begin. I will be interested how OREG did in LCM in 2008.

I had the 2007 Top Ten data already in Excel, it wasn't hard to calculate. I used a 12-10-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 point system for the top ten. Here are the top ten teams in each course. SCY 07 CMS 1569 SDSM 1526 OREG 1396 PNA 1395 IM 1375 NEM 1091 WCM 963 MICH 779 NCMS 739 ISF 675 SCM 07 SDSM 1883 NEM 1667 ARIZ 1231 WCM 1090 OREG 902 VMST 834 MICH 821 NOVA 673 NCMS 643 GSM 642 LCM 07 SDSM 1395 WMST 1151 NEM 1073 ARIZ 1031 FMM 1008 OREG 955 FLAQ 802 FACT 790 WCM 717 MICH 671 You've still got clubs scored with regions, and some regions are represented by only one club like WCM and NOVA. Where's Pacific, where's SPMA? Great idea tho'.

So how much of a challenge will it be to sort out clubs from regional teams when the new scoring system is implemented next year? Would still love to see the data used in that manner as I'm sure it will help folks better understand who they are competing against.

So how much of a challenge will it be to sort out clubs from regional teams when the new scoring system is implemented next year? Would still love to see the data used in that manner as I'm sure it will help folks better understand who they are competing against. Being new to the discussion group, I didn't see this thread quoted until it was addressed again today on another thread. Last year Mike and I were interested in finding out how NOVA stacked up next to the other big teams in the country. We draw 100+ Nova swimmers to our Regional Championship but very few to Nationals and were simply curious. We had a data guy who swims on the team try to come up with a report for us. But they seemed to loose interest perhaps due to the amount of extra work. It appears Chris Stevenson already has a functioning worksheet as long as the teams are identified correctly. Would it help now that meet registration requires club no. and USMS no. in identifying where swimmers belong? We weren’t and are not interested in a virtual championship which races single teams against giant collections of programs under one team name. We wanted to see the big powerhouse single teams and the great regions of masters swimming from the results of the season. Relays had to be a part of the equation since that is part of team competition. Before anyone gets all excited and starts ranting on who cares about the giant powerhouse teams, consider this: Those big teams are doing something right in building and promoting masters swimming. The big powerhouse teams and regions may have something special going on like location or facilities or great year-round weather. But they can and should be called on to serve as mentors and to offer support in ways the much smaller programs might not be capable of offering. If your LMSC has 1 or 2 or 3 powerhouse teams, I hope everyone knows the coaches because they are very visible and contributing to the LMSC and USMS. I hope swimmers consider dropping into a practice at the powerhouse team every now and then for inspiration and ideas for their own clubs. Especially the unattached swimmers, who could find support in setting up their own new masters programs. And I hope the smaller teams find ways to challenge the powerhouses in relays, highpoint awards, records, and team spirit, etc. My LMSC is the SPMA in Southern California. There are some smaller clubs I always love to watch. Rose Bowl coming on strong with their enthusiastic coach Chad. LAPS and their great swimmers. The sleeping giant SCAQ in Los Angeles. The UCLA women swimmers who always make a show at meets. The Grunions who put on the most stellar of meets and support everyone. And my good and always present neighbors at UC Irvine, SoCal Aquatics, Fullerton, and Corona. Now about that “Virtual Championships”… I agree with Paul that a nationwide competition like this could build fantastic competition at Nationals. And real pride in masters swimming regionally. Another way to stoke the fire for USMS and then watch it spread like wildfire!

It is very difficult for anyone to follow this thread without a clear understanding of the players. We need to agree on at least keeping the two main reference words clear. A club pays money to be registered with USMS as a group identity. Swimmers at nationals represent a club (or are unattached) to score points. A team is any designated part of a club. Workout groups, chapters, and relay teams are all in this category. Teams do not pay money to USMS. If we can keep these straight, the discussion stays simple. They are not interchangeable terms.

Kudos to Chris S and his heroic excel efforts (must have been a ton of countif statements) - BUT - how hard would it be for the National Office and Top Ten/competition group to do this work? They have the data! And furthermore - it's clean and ready for other analyses - Pool All Stars for example - or SCY/LCM/SCM high point, etc. Writing software should not be a huge task. The national office could ask for volunteer software developers (maybe even sponsor a contest) or put it out to bid. Once the program is written, it should not be too hard to maintain (esp. with clubs and LMSCs table data apart from the TT data). It was not a huge task even for an amateur like me, it took less than 30 minutes to do even the first time when I was putzing about with it. For anyone else who wants to play with something like this, here is what I did: 1. Get the data from the USMS web site into Excel. You can download them as CSV files which Excel reads. 2. Assign points to each swim. I wrote a short function to do this, using the SELECT CASE statement. 3. Get a list of names of unique teams. I cheated here: I own the Power Utility Pack for Excel (written by guru John Walkenbach) and used one of the functions, UNIQUEITEMS. (Hey, why write from scratch what someone else has already done?) 4. Use a logical array function to add up the points for each unique team. Here is the statement: {=SUM((RC=R2C9:R4540C9)*R2C2:R4540C2)} where "RC" refers to the cell with the team name, the first range (R2C9:R4540C9) is the list of all the teams for each swim, and the second range (R2C2:R4540C2) is the point value assigned to each swim. Copy that statement down for each team and voila. Sort as needed. It can easily be done by LMSC instead of teams, of course. There may be better ways to do this, but I don't program for a living. :)

A club pays money to be registered with USMS as a group identity. Swimmers at nationals represent a club (or are unattached) to score points. A team is any designated part of a club. Workout groups, chapters, and relay teams are all in this category. Teams do not pay money to USMS. Thanks Michael - this is my fault. I confuse these. Probably in my "rage" of disliking these built up teams. They do not train together but gather up at championship time to demolish the clubs who do work together as a unit! Ah well, no one else seems to mind. :)

Thanks Michael - this is my fault. I confuse these. Probably in my "rage" of disliking these built up teams. They do not train together but gather up at championship time to demolish the clubs who do work together as a unit! Ah well, no one else seems to mind. :) Actually lots of folks mind and I respect the differences in opinion...I've been a part of both sides. Much of the problem for those concerned about scoring should (hopefully) be resolved with the new scoring system in place. As for relay records thats another issue. I would argue however that it's been around probably as long as masters swimming has existed...I would guess that quite a few "clubs" have from time to time pulled in a ringer or two for relays...KPN has swam for almost every "club" and country in the world...and more power to her because she brings a level of increase interest and participation to our sport in doing so. One (partial) solution I'd like to see is a complete overall of the FINA rules regarding World Championships which allows folks who would like to swim for their countries a chance to do so. This would then elimiate for the most part debate about "super teams" owning relay records much in the same way it does so for USA Swimming (National teams almost alays will hold world/country records). More importantly however is I think it would raise the visiblity and "respect" of masters swimming... Heck...I'll even settle for a one on one USA vs. Italy! A few of us have been itching to go up against those guys again ever since Worlds!

Heck...I'll even settle for a one on one USA vs. Italy! A few of us have been itching to go up against those guys again ever since Worlds! I understand that The World Masters Games (in Australia next Summer) allow these "Country" relay teams. That would be SO fun! Last year in Perth there were several of my friends going to World's whose clubs were not sending any swimmers. They wanted to swim relays but couldn't since they had no club members. 2 of them ended up affiliating with our club just to swim relays! Let me go on record to say I do not agree with the whole "bring in a ringer" idea... at all. Those great ringers could use their "swimming greatness" to promote masters swimming in their own hometown or area - support a good coach - and build an awesome club of their own. But that takes a bit of selflessness. Period. Still, I love the idea of a competition where we could showcase our best USA masters swimmers, in head to head competition with other countries. Maybe it could be an exhibition type of competition - like after The FINA World Masters meet concluded. All for fun of course!

Let me go on record to say I do not agree with the whole "bring in a ringer" idea... at all. How about when some former college swimmers reunite? What if you find no one is going from your "club" and want to be on relays and have friends to hang out with so you register with a team of buddies that are going? I know these are not exactly cases of "ringers" but it does show cases where it makes sense. And for the record I personally have never heard of a "clubs" coach organizing/recruiting ringers...I think it is suaully a person making a call to a friend or two saying come play with us next meet.