When I started swimming masters a few years ago, I soon found myself wanting some time standards to compare myself against. Sure, tracking my own PRs is motivating, but I also wanted some sort of objective mark to measure myself against.
There is the Top 10 list, of course, but I'm not close enough to those times for them to serve as realistic motivation. Nationals qualifying times provide a slightly lower bar, but these are still out of many masters' reach. It seems like there should be some sort of time standards that are more widely applicable -- like the A, AA, ... motivational times in kids' age group swimming.
I did use those USA Swimming motivational times for a while, but I got tired of comparing myself to 12-year-olds. Eventually I decided to create my own masters' motivational time standards, using the same method that is used for the kids.
I have really enjoyed using these motivational times over the past couple of years, and I'm guessing they might be useful to others as well. Especially for those, like me, who are competitive enough to be motivated by a quantitative benchmark, but not fast enough to aspire to the Top 10 list.
I have just updated the SCY list, and figured I would post it here for others to use.
Please enjoy. I'd also love to hear any feedback.
I think I can do this. ...
Does anyone know what that method is? I think it's something like, "AAAA = three year average of 10th place time plus 10% for each category", but that could be wrong. Before I start, I'd like to know that I'm calculating the right thing.
The key information is in the earlier posts in this thread. Here are the key ones:
forums.usms.org/showthread.php
forums.usms.org/showthread.php
forums.usms.org/showthread.php
forums.usms.org/showthread.php
forums.usms.org/showthread.php
Using the all-time 10th place time instead of a 3-year moving average of the 6-10th place times would produce a more stable table. It would be somewhat harder to extract the needed information, however, because there is no all-time top-10 list on the USMS web site (that I know of, correct me if I am wrong) so you would have to sort through the data for all the years.
On the other hand, using the exact same base time as the USMS NQTs would be desirable, because AA (or AAA) would then correspond exactly to NQT.
IMO, both NQT and the motivational times ought to be based on the all-time 10th place time so that they are more stable and just gradually tighten over the years instead of jumping around. I recognize, however, that the NQTs are official USMS standards and these motivational times are not so one "governing body" doesn't control both. That being the case, it's probably better that the motivational standards be set in a stable way, than to have them exactly match NQTs.
EDIT: Oh and one other thing; I hope everyone who is eagerly awaiting the updated motivational times is mentally prepared for the fact that they are almost certain to be a lot tougher.
I think I can do this. ...
Does anyone know what that method is? I think it's something like, "AAAA = three year average of 10th place time plus 10% for each category", but that could be wrong. Before I start, I'd like to know that I'm calculating the right thing.
The key information is in the earlier posts in this thread. Here are the key ones:
forums.usms.org/showthread.php
forums.usms.org/showthread.php
forums.usms.org/showthread.php
forums.usms.org/showthread.php
forums.usms.org/showthread.php
Using the all-time 10th place time instead of a 3-year moving average of the 6-10th place times would produce a more stable table. It would be somewhat harder to extract the needed information, however, because there is no all-time top-10 list on the USMS web site (that I know of, correct me if I am wrong) so you would have to sort through the data for all the years.
On the other hand, using the exact same base time as the USMS NQTs would be desirable, because AA (or AAA) would then correspond exactly to NQT.
IMO, both NQT and the motivational times ought to be based on the all-time 10th place time so that they are more stable and just gradually tighten over the years instead of jumping around. I recognize, however, that the NQTs are official USMS standards and these motivational times are not so one "governing body" doesn't control both. That being the case, it's probably better that the motivational standards be set in a stable way, than to have them exactly match NQTs.
EDIT: Oh and one other thing; I hope everyone who is eagerly awaiting the updated motivational times is mentally prepared for the fact that they are almost certain to be a lot tougher.
