PDA

View Full Version : distance swimmers shorted



swiminsota
May 9th, 2011, 05:22 PM
I was just looking over the schedule for long course nationals in Auburn, AL and I see the 800 and 1500 are on the same day, as were the 1000 & mile in Mesa. Please have one race at the beginning of the meet and one at the end of the meet so distance swimmers can do all their races, thanks!

pwb
May 9th, 2011, 05:57 PM
RIGHT ON! I think it has almost always been this way and I don't know why. There are plenty of examples of 4 day order of events from USAS that allow d-folks to do both. One can argue that a full four day schedule could also spread out the stroke and short events -- 'cuz those sprinters love to whine about only having like 2 hours between events :)

swiminsota
May 9th, 2011, 06:30 PM
I know atleast 3 people that would consider going if they could swim ALL their distance events...just saying

Chris Stevenson
May 9th, 2011, 07:00 PM
RIGHT ON! I think it has almost always been this way and I don't know why. There are plenty of examples of 4 day order of events from USAS that allow d-folks to do both. One can argue that a full four day schedule could also spread out the stroke and short events -- 'cuz those sprinters love to whine about only having like 2 hours between events :)

Adding a day to the meet for one more event? Maybe you'd get some more distance folks but I bet that there would be many more who would opt for zones (or whatever) instead. Probably me among them; I have a hard enough time "selling" my wife on nationals as it is, since she has to be a single mom while I am away.

swiminsota
May 9th, 2011, 08:02 PM
yeah, what I meant was not to add another day, but to spread the events out over the four days with one distance event at each end of the meet, just thoughts from a distance swimmer who feels shorted

my coach actually suggested signing up for BOTH the mile and 1000, but I had to tell him only ONE was an option, haha

jroddin
May 9th, 2011, 09:14 PM
Let's look at past Long Course meets to see how it would have worked out. We can't use last year's meet (Puerto Rico) as a guide because there were only 632 swimmers, the meet was mid-week and held outside the 50 states. We can't use 2009 (Indy) as a guide because they had the all relay day option. So let's use 2008 (Portland) as an example.

Portland had just over 1100 swimmers, making it slightly larger than average (average is about 1000). They had a traditional 4 day meet with the distance day on Thursday and distance swimmers could only choose the 800 or 1500. Plus they even had to deck seed the 200s. Here was the estimated timeline for that meet:
http://www.usms.org/comp/lcnats08/heats/timeline.pdf

The projected ending times were:
Thursday: 9:20pm
Friday: 6:40pm
Saturday: 8:40pm
Sunday: 5:50pm

If you shuffled the events around and added the couple to three extra hours for those who picked both distance events, how would you do it? As it was Sunday ended much too late for those who wanted to fly out on Sunday evening. Saturday night already was a rally killer for any kind of social or dinner plans with teammates.

We have had meets where swimmers could do both distance events, but they have typically been cases where a 5 day format was offered or the facility could accommodate extra capacity (e.g. second 50m competition pool). If swimmers were allowed to do both the 800 and 1500 during a traditional meet (4 days, one 50m course) there would have to be tradeoffs somewhere else. For instance, the whole meet would likely have to be deck seeded (so you wouldn't have a nice program to follow the whole meet plus there will be an unfortunate small group of swimmers who fly all the way to the meet but forget to check-in; plus that requires extra staffing on behalf of the Host to accommodate). We'd probably also have to seed most events strictly by time (except for the 50s) instead of by age group. In Portland men and women already had to swim together in the 800 and 1500 - we'd probably have to combine genders in shorter events as well.

It's unfortunate the distance swimmers cannot swim both events but unless we have two 50m courses for Summer Nationals or a third 25y course for Spring Nationals, it isn't feasible.

Jeff

Ahelee Sue Osborn
May 9th, 2011, 09:49 PM
It's unfortunate the distance swimmers cannot swim both events but unless we have two 50m courses for Summer Nationals or a third 25y course for Spring Nationals, it isn't feasible.Jeff

Don't give up distance swimmers!
If you want to swim both events badly enough, there are facilities built to accommodate such large championship events.
Find them and then - encourage them to bid for the championships.
Maybe you won't get the distance schedule every year, but what a nice thing for you if it was occasionally possible.

tjrpatt
May 9th, 2011, 10:12 PM
The Canadian Masters Nationals Schedule (http://cmsc2011.ca/schedule.html) make it feasible for the distance swimmers do the 800 and 1500 over a 4 day period. Yes, there are less swimmers than the American version. Sprinters don't have to choice betwee the 50 and 100 free.

Thurs
1000 or 1650/1500 or 800
half of Friday's events

Friday
1000 or 1650/1500 or 800
half of Friday's normal events

Just a suggestion!

pwb
May 9th, 2011, 10:53 PM
I was just looking over the schedule for long course nationals in Auburn, AL and I see the 800 and 1500 are on the same day, as were the 1000 & mile in Mesa. Please have one race at the beginning of the meet and one at the end of the meet so distance swimmers can do all their races, thanks!
Katie, one strategy to follow for Nationals in your future is to train primarily for your 1650 early in the season and do a mini-taper meet late February or early March. Then, turn your focus to the 1000 and 500 for Nationals. It's not optimal, but it is a practical approach to get 'taper' swims in for both the longer distances. Plus, tapering for both the 500 and 1000 at Nationals is easier to balance than trying to have your body primed for both the 1650 and 500.

Rykno
May 10th, 2011, 08:47 AM
atleast all the distance events are offered at the US nationals.

over here in sweden our nationals (only 450-550 swimmers) is bunched into 4 sessions. Friday afternoon through sunday lunch.

odd years the men swim the 1500 and women the 800 and even years men the 800 and women the 1500.

same thing with the 400 and 200 IM. the year you can swim the 800 is the year you can swim the 400 IM.

knelson
May 10th, 2011, 09:49 AM
I have to say the idea of swimming a 1500 or 1650 as the last event of a meet sounds awful. I kind of like getting the distance events done with the first day. I guess I'm not a real distance swimmer because I don't understand the appeal of wanting to swim both distance events! :)

Undeniable
May 10th, 2011, 11:23 AM
Having never been a meet director, I'm not sure I can really offer anything useful, but here goes:

Currently, I think USMS national meets allow people to enter 3 races without qualifying for any of them. Basically, unqualified swimmers ARE allowed to enter, but to save time, their entries are limited in number.

Could we make similar compromises with distance swimmers, like the 2 suggestions below?

1: Allow distance swimmers who want to enter both the 1000 and 1650, to only enter two other races (for a total of 4, rather than 6 races). If time restrictions force everyone else to drop their 6th race, then people in both 1000 & 1650 would have to drop to 3 total races. At least in my own case, I would gladly give up my right to do 3 shorter races (which I'm not really that good at anyway) if it meant I could do one more distance race. That's really what distance people train for.

-AND/OR-

2: Make a second set of faster qualifying times for the 1000 and 1650 for people who want to do both. If you only want to do one or the other, then only the standard QTs apply to you. If you want to do both, however, you would have to meet the faster QTs for both races. The faster set of QTs for both races probably wouldn’t need to be super-fast, just fast enough to keep the meet moving along. I guess numbers would have to be crunched to determine the faster QTs, though. Devil’s in the details.

In the case of both suggestions above, the 1000 and 1650 would preferably no longer be on the same day; it doesn’t make much sense to swim both if you have to do them so close together. I know, b/c I’ve done that at YMCA masters nationals. But if they have to be on the same day, then so be it; at least you would be able to do both races. And anyone doing both races would probably be equally tired when the 2nd race rolled around.

I also think it would be a good idea to rescind the “swim 3 races without qualifying for them” rule for any race 400 and longer. After all, why be inclusive of un-qualified swimmers at the expense of deserving qualified distance swimmers, including the super-fast distance swimmers like Laurie Hug, Ethan Saulnier, Chris Derks, et al? Non-qualifiers can still enter any 3 of the shorter races if they like. This would allow USMS to remain inclusive of its slowest members while no longer excluding its distance people.

Any thoughts? I’d be excited to hear if this is feasible from people who have actually been meet directors.

That Guy
May 10th, 2011, 01:59 PM
Read: http://www.usms.org/rules/part1.pdf

Pages 27-38 describe how Nationals are run. Pages 30-32 are particularly relevant to this discussion.

Of note, on page 30:




With Championship Committee approval, a swimmer may compete in both of the two longest freestyle events at the meet. The Championship Committee shall decide how national qualifying times will affect the entry.

couldbebetterfly
May 10th, 2011, 02:27 PM
Disclaimer: I've not attended Nationals in the US, so feel free to ignore me!

In the UK, where granted, there are a lot less swimmers - 500 or so, they run Nationals over 3 days with 7 sessions:
Friday afternoon is the 1500 only, and is mixed, then they have Friday evening, 3 sessions on Saturday, making the Saturday evening one short if possible to allow for the all important social that goes on, and 2 sessions on the Sunday, with the 800 being in one of the Sunday sessions.

They also completely time-seed the field, so you are not swimming with your age group, simply people your speed. So it is kind of humbling to swim next to a 60 year old record holder, but its also kind of cool!

And they run 2 courses one pool for men and one for women (it alternates each year). Often the mens pool is running longer than the women's due to more entrants, but it never seemed too bad - and once the women had finished their session, that pool would open for warm-up.

The 1500 is swum with odd heats in one pool and even heats in the other.

So interesting to note the differences and similarities - I always wondered why the 1650 and 1000 were together at the start of the meet, rather than having the 1000 as the final event. Then everyone not wanting to watch more distance freestyle could go home.

Undeniable
May 10th, 2011, 04:34 PM
Also from the rule book:

"The Championship Committee may limit participation in either the 800-meter or the
1500-meter freestyle to only those who meet the national qualifying time for that event."

So it seems that one of the ideas I presented was already on the books! The wording only mentions meters, but it may be possible that they're speaking of meters and yards interchangeably.

knelson
May 10th, 2011, 06:06 PM
1: Allow distance swimmers who want to enter both the 1000 and 1650, to only enter two other races (for a total of 4, rather than 6 races). If time restrictions force everyone else to drop their 6th race, then people in both 1000 & 1650 would have to drop to 3 total races.

I don't like this because it sort of implies distance swimmers are taking up more than their "fair share" of the competition time.


2: Make a second set of faster qualifying times for the 1000 and 1650 for people who want to do both. If you only want to do one or the other, then only the standard QTs apply to you. If you want to do both, however, you would have to meet the faster QTs for both races.

This seems reasonable.

That Guy
May 10th, 2011, 07:02 PM
This seems reasonable.

What about the higher age groups who do not have QT's?

Kurt Dickson
May 10th, 2011, 07:11 PM
The 80-84 age group has 45 plus minute qualifying times which is not going to help shorten a meet.

Last nationals I did that had both was Mission Viejo--800 first day and 1500 on Monday. If host is willing to sit around for another day, I would do it.

To do both and contain it to a reasonable time, much faster qualifying times would have to be in place and the threat of a hook if one falls off pace.:)

Somone much wiser than me said she knew it was time to stop swimming a particular event when she heard polite clapping afterwards...good advice.

pwb
May 10th, 2011, 08:24 PM
Adding a day to the meet for one more event? Maybe you'd get some more distance folks but I bet that there would be many more who would opt for zones (or whatever) instead. Probably me among them; I have a hard enough time "selling" my wife on nationals as it is, since she has to be a single mom while I am away.Chris, while I "get" this and understand the pain and significant negotiations required to make a 4 day meet, in effect, EVERY single year and EVERY single Nationals, ONLY the distance swimmers are asked to commit to a 4 day meet. That hardly seems fair. A better solution would be to either alternate meet schedules so that some years the distance events were on, say, Friday, OR put forth a full 4 day schedule with the 1650 at the end of the 1st (or 4th) day and the 1000 at the end of the 4th (or 1st) day.

That Guy
May 11th, 2011, 12:50 AM
Chris, while I "get" this and understand the pain and significant negotiations required to make a 4 day meet, in effect, EVERY single year and EVERY single Nationals, ONLY the distance swimmers are asked to commit to a 4 day meet. That hardly seems fair. A better solution would be to either alternate meet schedules so that some years the distance events were on, say, Friday, OR put forth a full 4 day schedule with the 1650 at the end of the 1st (or 4th) day and the 1000 at the end of the 4th (or 1st) day.

From Page 31:



(3) Full days on the schedule may be interchanged so that the 400/500


freestyle and the 1500/1650 freestyle shall not be swum on consecutive days.

aquageek
May 11th, 2011, 09:17 AM
I have to say the idea of swimming a 1500 or 1650 as the last event of a meet sounds awful. I kind of like getting the distance events done with the first day. I guess I'm not a real distance swimmer because I don't understand the appeal of wanting to swim both distance events! :)

There are a lot of good pro and con arguments on this thread but this is the one I basically side with. Waiting until the last day to swim the hardest event would be awful.

While I occasionally grumble about not getting both the 1650 and 1000 I do really enjoy the distance only day. It is much less crowded and there's a calm at the pool. Then, we know the meathead sprinters and chest thumpers will show up Friday through Sunday, prance around, whine about only getting 3 hours rest between events, and do their thing.

Chris Stevenson
May 11th, 2011, 09:43 AM
So let's use 2008 (Portland) as an example.

The projected ending times were:
Thursday: 9:20pm
Friday: 6:40pm
Saturday: 8:40pm
Sunday: 5:50pm

If you shuffled the events around and added the couple to three extra hours for those who picked both distance events, how would you do it?

And I seem to recall Thursday ending later than that (I was counting for someone). And this was west-coast time, too: I was counting for someone who was basically swimming at almost 1am by his internal clock. And this is WITHOUT allowing distance swimmers to double up.

There are options but they are also unpalatable for many. For example:

-- You HAVE to have NQTs to enter any event, period.
-- Allow distance swimmers to enter both, but set a cap on the number of entries that are accepted.
-- Make the distance NQTs harder and insist that they must be met by entrants in those events.

Others have given suggestions. I may be mistaken, but I think that any solution would generate more complaints than we have right now. And most discriminate in some way against distance swimmers.

Kirk mentioned that there is a perception that distance swimmers take more than their "fair share" of competition time. I don't know about fair, but the plain fact is that distance events take longer to swim and it is harder to fit them in.

aquageek
May 11th, 2011, 10:08 AM
There are options but they are also unpalatable for many. For example:

-- You HAVE to have NQTs to enter any event, period.
-- Allow distance swimmers to enter both, but set a cap on the number of entries that are accepted.
-- Make the distance NQTs harder and insist that they must be met by entrants in those events.



Chris:

This is a really good list. I am of the opinion that you should be limited to 1 or 2 events you don't have an NQT in, not the current 3+ format. The offset to this is that the past few short course nationals have been run so well that the timeline wasn't an issue.

I don't know why we couldn't swap the 1000 and 500. I don't know how that would impact a meet, however.

The NQTs for distance are relatively easy as compared to other events. I agree they should be tightened up and policed better.

knelson
May 11th, 2011, 10:13 AM
Kirk mentioned that there is a perception that distance swimmers take more than their "fair share" of competition time.

I don't think there is the way the meet is currently scheduled, but I think there would be if swimmers were forced to forfeit other events if entering both distance events.

ourswimmer
May 11th, 2011, 12:27 PM
There are a lot of good pro and con arguments on this thread but this is the one I basically side with.

Me too. I mean, I have swum both the 800/1000 and the 1500/1650 in the same multi-day meet, but I am not sure I have ever raced both and I am very sure I have never raced both well. When I have room in my life for a swim "season," one or the other of these events is pretty much always going to be my focus event in my focus meet, which is why I want it on the first day and why I would not plan to race the other one in the same meet anyway.

pwb
May 11th, 2011, 01:20 PM
There are a lot of good pro and con arguments on this thread but this is the one I basically side with. Waiting until the last day to swim the hardest event would be awful. I look at it completely in reverse -- why screw up the rest of my meet by trashing myself on the 1650 on the 1st day of the meet? When I return to distance events this fall and spring, I'll almost for sure enter the 1000 on the 1st day of Nationals because it takes so much less out of me than the 1650 (primarily because I still don't train enough to effectively race either!). My preferred 4 day race format at Nationals would be something like:


Day 1 - 1000 free
Day 2 - 400 IM and 200 free
Day 3 - 500 free and 200 IM
Day 4 - 1650 free

You can easily find USAS meets that have a format similar to this ...

aquageek
May 11th, 2011, 01:49 PM
I look at it completely in reverse -- why screw up the rest of my meet by trashing myself on the 1650 on the 1st day of the meet? When I return to distance events this fall and spring, I'll almost for sure enter the 1000 on the 1st day of Nationals because it takes so much less out of me than the 1650 (primarily because I still don't train enough to effectively race either!). My preferred 4 day race format at Nationals would be something like:


Day 1 - 1000 free
Day 2 - 400 IM and 200 free
Day 3 - 500 free and 200 IM
Day 4 - 1650 free

You can easily find USAS meets that have a format similar to this ...

First, kids are bionic. I'm old and feeble.

That would actually be a reasonable meet set-up, to be honest.

jim clemmons
May 11th, 2011, 05:47 PM
From Page 31:
Quote 3) Full days on the schedule may be interchanged so that the 400/500 freestyle and the 1500/1650 freestyle shall not be swum on consecutive days

This must be an old rule developed when they thought old people would die swimming a 400/500 the day after a 1500/1650. We've (championship committee) discussed possibly changing this to afford more flexibility in scheduling event lineups. At least in order to let the swimmer decide to swim/not swim and not legislate the decision.

That Guy
May 11th, 2011, 05:59 PM
This must be an old rule developed when they thought old people would die swimming a 400/500 the day after a 1500/1650. We've (championship committee) discussed possibly changing this to afford more flexibility in scheduling event lineups. At least in order to let the swimmer decide to swim/not swim and not legislate the decision.

Glad to hear it! That rule did seem strange to me when I saw it there.

pwb
May 11th, 2011, 07:10 PM
This must be an old rule developed when they thought old people would die swimming a 400/500 the day after a 1500/1650. We've (championship committee) discussed possibly changing this to afford more flexibility in scheduling event lineups. At least in order to let the swimmer decide to swim/not swim and not legislate the decision.


Glad to hear it! That rule did seem strange to me when I saw it there.
Yes, especially when they put the 400 IM the day after the 1000/1650 and that's a way tougher event than the 500.

jaadams1
May 11th, 2011, 07:56 PM
My preferred 4 day race format at Nationals would be something like:


Day 1 - 1000 free
Day 2 - 400 IM and 200 free
Day 3 - 500 free and 200 IM
Day 4 - 1650 free


Wait....no 200 Fly!!???!?? :D

swiminsota
May 11th, 2011, 09:11 PM
I look at it completely in reverse -- why screw up the rest of my meet by trashing myself on the 1650 on the 1st day of the meet? When I return to distance events this fall and spring, I'll almost for sure enter the 1000 on the 1st day of Nationals because it takes so much less out of me than the 1650 (primarily because I still don't train enough to effectively race either!). My preferred 4 day race format at Nationals would be something like:


Day 1 - 1000 free
Day 2 - 400 IM and 200 free
Day 3 - 500 free and 200 IM
Day 4 - 1650 free
You can easily find USAS meets that have a format similar to this ...

This gets my vote, the one that matters since I started all this, lmao

orca1946
May 16th, 2011, 02:40 PM
The meet does not put the 50 - 100 - 200 on the same day!!!

swiminsota
May 17th, 2011, 10:28 AM
The meet does not put the 50 - 100 - 200 on the same day!!!

EXACTLY! Try that sometime and see what happens (that would be kinda funny actually)

Bill Brenner
May 17th, 2011, 11:10 PM
I'm swimming at Canadian Nationals this weekend. There are 1200 swimmers entered in the meet. Not only can you swim both the 800 and 1500 free, the first and last days of the meet respectively, you can swim 8 events over the 4 day meet. There are two 25 meter pools and very reasonable timeline.
Let's find a way to offer both events for qualified distance swimmers. Tighten the qualifying standards. It is our national championship. Why should everyone feel entitled to swim the 800/1000 or the 1500/1650 at this meet. There are plenty of other meets that offer these events.

jroddin
May 18th, 2011, 08:54 AM
The Canadian Masters Nationals Schedule (http://cmsc2011.ca/schedule.html) make it feasible for the distance swimmers do the 800 and 1500 over a 4 day period. Yes, there are less swimmers than the American version. Sprinters don't have to choice betwee the 50 and 100 free.

Thurs
1000 or 1650/1500 or 800
half of Friday's events

Friday
1000 or 1650/1500 or 800
half of Friday's normal events

Just a suggestion!



I'm swimming at Canadian Nationals this weekend. There are 1200 swimmers entered in the meet. Not only can you swim both the 800 and 1500 free, the first and last days of the meet respectively, you can swim 8 events over the 4 day meet. There are two 25 meter pools and very reasonable timeline.
Let's find a way to offer both events for qualified distance swimmers. Tighten the qualifying standards. It is our national championship. Why should everyone feel entitled to swim the 800/1000 or the 1500/1650 at this meet. There are plenty of other meets that offer these events.


Yes, I understand Canadian Nationals offers the option to swim both distance events in a 4 day format. It was just said above that Canadian Nationals has 1200 swimmers and two courses. Our Spring Nationals has two courses but significantly more swimmers (almost 2000 in Atlanta, over 1800 in Mesa). That equates to us requiring at least a third course to have the same ratio (1200+ for 2 courses; 1800+ for 3 courses; 2400 for 4 courses, etc.). Even with only 632 swimmers last summer, our Summer Nationals average is 1000 for the past 10+ years. And we only have one course for most Long Course nationals. Like I said earlier, if we had a third course for Short Course or a second course for Long Course, we could offer the option to do both distance events in a 4 day schedule (or a 5 day schedule with just 2 courses for SC and 1 course for LC).

That is why we cannot use Canadian Nationals as an example that it can be done.

Jeff

thewookiee
May 18th, 2011, 09:10 AM
Yes, I understand Canadian Nationals offers the option to swim both distance events in a 4 day format. It was just said above that Canadian Nationals has 1200 swimmers and two courses. Our Spring Nationals has two courses but significantly more swimmers (almost 2000 in Atlanta, over 1800 in Mesa). That equates to us requiring at least a third course to have the same ratio (1200+ for 2 courses; 1800+ for 3 courses; 2400 for 4 courses, etc.). Even with only 632 swimmers last summer, our Summer Nationals average is 1000 for the past 10+ years. And we only have one course for most Long Course nationals. Like I said earlier, if we had a third course for Short Course or a second course for Long Course, we could offer the option to do both distance events in a 4 day schedule (or a 5 day schedule with just 2 courses for SC and 1 course for LC).

That is why we cannot use Canadian Nationals as an example that it can be done.

Jeff


Jeff,

Why can swimmers at Y masters nationals swim both distance events on the same day without having to get special permission to do so?

jroddin
May 18th, 2011, 09:15 AM
Jeff,

Why can swimmers at Y masters nationals swim both distance events on the same day without having to get special permission to do so?

:frustrated:

How many swimmers do they have in their meet? I went once (2009) and I think they had maybe 500 swimmers.

thewookiee
May 18th, 2011, 09:18 AM
:frustrated:

How many swimmers do they have in their meet? I went once (2009) and I think they had maybe 500 swimmers.

That's why I ask. I don't know how many they have at their meet, I know that people can swim both events though.

swimmieAvsFan
May 18th, 2011, 09:52 AM
:frustrated:

How many swimmers do they have in their meet? I went once (2009) and I think they had maybe 500 swimmers.

officially, it was 651. looking back to 2001, the numbers work out as follows:
2001-613
2004-555
2005-518
2006-408
2007-501
2008-558
2009-651

i think 2009 is skewed a bit, since i know a lot of USMS members decided fort lauderdale was an easier trip than clovis, so i think that year's attendance is artificially high.

i can't find numbers for 2002, 2003, 2010 or 2011, but based on the 7 years listed, you can't even begin to compare Y nats to USMS nats. i think a closer comparison would be Y nats to new england's LMSC champs. and they swim their distance events on a completely different weekend than the rest of the meet.

jroddin
May 18th, 2011, 01:37 PM
... you can't even begin to compare Y nats to USMS nats. i think a closer comparison would be Y nats to new england's LMSC champs. and they swim their distance events on a completely different weekend than the rest of the meet.

What do you mean they have to swim their distance events on a separate weekend? That is wholly unfair to the distance swimmers. You wouldn't make a sprinter swim the 50 on one weekend and the 100 a week later...:afraid:

thewookiee
May 18th, 2011, 02:10 PM
What do you mean they have to swim their distance events on a separate weekend? That is wholly unfair to the distance swimmers. You wouldn't make a sprinter swim the 50 on one weekend and the 100 a week later...:afraid:

Some of them might actually enjoy doing the 50 and 100 that way.

aquageek
May 18th, 2011, 03:25 PM
Some of them might actually enjoy doing the 50 and 100 that way.

Most would still complain about inadequate rest between races.

thewookiee
May 18th, 2011, 04:02 PM
Most would still complain about inadequate rest between races.

Most complain about the lack of rest between the 1st 25 and 2nd 25 of the 50

Chris Stevenson
May 19th, 2011, 11:00 AM
Most would still complain about inadequate rest between races.

That can be fixed with the proper sandbagging technique.

swiminsota
May 19th, 2011, 11:41 AM
What do you mean they have to swim their distance events on a separate weekend? That is wholly unfair to the distance swimmers. You wouldn't make a sprinter swim the 50 on one weekend and the 100 a week later...:afraid:

agreed! do not seperate distance swimmers from others, that defeats some fun of the meet, to interact with everyone!

mrubacky
May 22nd, 2011, 01:26 PM
i can't find numbers for 2002, 2003, 2010 or 2011, but based on the 7 years listed, you can't even begin to compare Y nats to USMS nats. i think a closer comparison would be Y nats to new england's LMSC champs. and they swim their distance events on a completely different weekend than the rest of the meet.


And NE LMSC Champs you have to choose between the 1650 and the 1000. And since it's a seperate Saturday it make tappering difficult. This year I skipped tappering for this meet and tappered for nationals instead.

Because of this I brook it into to distance seasons, the first half was my 1650 season, with NE LMSC Champs being my last 1650, then I took my 1000 split from that and used it to enter Nationals and then swam my only the 1000 after that.

But I would rather swim both at NE LMSC Champs and SCY Nationals. I'm better at the longer distances but instead I end up swimming the 100 and 200 free at these meets. Maybe if they'd let us swim both, there would be less in other events.

Chris Stevenson
May 22nd, 2011, 09:05 PM
I'm better at the longer distances but instead I end up swimming the 100 and 200 free at these meets. Maybe if they'd let us swim both, there would be less in other events.

Maybe, but it would still take longer. Think about it: in your own situation, you are suggesting that you would (say) substitute the 1000 for the 100 free. I'm sure it takes you longer to swim the distance event...

No one on the Championship Committee "has it in" for distance swimmers. But it is simply harder to accommodate them while keeping the timeline reasonable.

mrubacky
May 23rd, 2011, 10:14 PM
Maybe, but it would still take longer. Think about it: in your own situation, you are suggesting that you would (say) substitute the 1000 for the 100 free. I'm sure it takes you longer to swim the distance event...

No one on the Championship Committee "has it in" for distance swimmers. But it is simply harder to accommodate them while keeping the timeline reasonable.

Agreed, I don't believe anyone has it in for distance swimmers, it's more that we can't have a 5 day national meet. Even still it didn't stop me from going to Mesa in my first year as a Masters Swimmer. I'd love to see it though.

Most likey next year I'll do the same training. Work for the 800 meter at NE SCM, then the 1650 and the Hour swim in the winter and the 1000 at Spring Nationals.

Bill Brenner
May 23rd, 2011, 11:06 PM
Jeff, What about a tougher qualifying time to limit the numbers that want to swim both. Eliminate the distance events from the events that you can swim without a QT. You can get the numbers down to a manageable level. It's a national championship not a zone meet.

Allen Stark
May 25th, 2011, 05:01 PM
Jeff, What about a tougher qualifying time to limit the numbers that want to swim both. Eliminate the distance events from the events that you can swim without a QT. You can get the numbers down to a manageable level. It's a national championship not a zone meet.
Many swimmers love the distances.If you can swim a 50 free without making the NQT why not a 1500 or 800 otherwise you are "shorting" another group of distance swimmers.This year at Auburn you must make NQT to swim the 1500.This seems a reasonable compromise to me,but I am not a distance swimmer.My wife is and would rather swim the 1500,but she hasn't made the NQT,at least not yet.Granted Puerto Rico was an unusual meet,but my wife hadn't made the NQT in the 800 and finished 2nd ,which really made her meet.I would hate for someone else in that position to not even get to swim any distance event.

couldbebetterfly
May 25th, 2011, 05:22 PM
As it seems the reason for restriciting the distancers to 1 of those events is to ensure the meet runs within a reasonable timeframe, has anyone ever thought how it would affect the length of the meet if you restricted the sprinters so they had to choose betweeen the 50 free and 100 free? Those events may be shorter in distance, but have many more heats :worms::bolt:

Chris Stevenson
May 26th, 2011, 05:41 PM
As it seems the reason for restriciting the distancers to 1 of those events is to ensure the meet runs within a reasonable timeframe, has anyone ever thought how it would affect the length of the meet if you restricted the sprinters so they had to choose betweeen the 50 free and 100 free? Those events may be shorter in distance, but have many more heats :worms::bolt:

Check out the timeline for Mesa and you can answer this question:

http://www.usms.org/comp/scnats11/timeline.pdf

Even with more heats AND forcing d-types to choose, the sprint events took much less time than the distance events.

jroddin
June 2nd, 2011, 12:11 PM
Jeff, What about a tougher qualifying time to limit the numbers that want to swim both. Eliminate the distance events from the events that you can swim without a QT. You can get the numbers down to a manageable level. It's a national championship not a zone meet.

Please look back at Portland again (2008 Summer Nationals). Distance swimmers had to choose either the 800 or the 1500 but not both. The projected timeline said the distance day would end at 9:20pm. I wasn't there but heard it actually went much later than that. So I would say you first need to have tougher qualifying times to be able to swim even one event before you begin to think about how to allow swimmers to do both. Again, a 5 day format or two courses solves the challenge. Two courses is ideal because not everybody can manage to take the time off from work/home for a 5 day meet.

Jeff

jroddin
June 3rd, 2011, 10:12 AM
Jeff, What about a tougher qualifying time to limit the numbers that want to swim both. Eliminate the distance events from the events that you can swim without a QT. You can get the numbers down to a manageable level. It's a national championship not a zone meet.

Also, some meets do in fact require an NQT for a distance event (Auburn - 1500m). I think above you are suggestion the NQT should be required for either and then if somebody wants to swim both they have to meet a tigher NQT still. These are plausible ideas to allow some swimmers to do both but they come at the expense of discriminating against slower distance swimmers. I hear what you are saying that this Nationals and not a Zone/local meet. But we are also not USA-S and we do our best to accommodate all.

Also, there is a rule on the books that says the 400/500 cannot be the day after the distance day. This was put in place because too many distance swimmers complained about coming back the next day to swim the 400/500 free. That is why the 400 IM is usually on Friday (day after distance day). So I find it odd that some distance freestylers can't come back and do that double yet others say they can do both 800/1000 and 1500/1650 on the same day? :dunno:

Jeff

pwb
June 3rd, 2011, 10:37 AM
Also, there is a rule on the books that says the 400/500 cannot be the day after the distance day. This was put in place because too many distance swimmers complained about coming back the next day to swim the 400/500 free. That is why the 400 IM is usually on Friday (day after distance day). This is a dumb rule and distance swimmers who complained should be embarrassed to call themselves distance swimmers.

My view on this topic is completely unbiased by the fact that I enjoy both the 400 IM and the 1000/1650/800/1500.;)

jroddin
June 3rd, 2011, 11:44 AM
Rules cannot be broken, but they can be changed (any LMSC or standing committee can propose a change at the annual convention). Here is the current rule that ties our hands:

104.5.2B Rotation of meet schedulesóThe particular schedule shall be rotated
in order (1, 2 and 3) among the three basic schedules shown in article
104.5.2A without regard to course.
(1) In odd-numbered years, menís events shall be odd-numbered. In
even-numbered years, menís events shall be even-numbered. On
the distance day only, menís and womenís heats may be alternated
regardless of whether the year is odd-numbered or even-numbered.
(2) In each schedule, at the option of the meet director and with the
approval of the Championship Committee, the 800/1000 freestyle
and the 1500/1650 freestyle may be swum as either the first day
program or the last day program.
(3) Full days on the schedule may be interchanged so that the 400/500
freestyle and the 1500/1650 freestyle shall not be swum on consecutive
days.

However, I wonder if there is a loophole here. What if the HOD passes an order of events that violates this permutation (400/500 free and 1500/1650 being on consecutive days)? The rulebook appears to prohibit changing the days so this doesn't happen, but doesn't say anything about an original order of events having this violation. I'd need a Rules expert to clarify. Even so, order of events are set through 2015 Nationals. And the 2011 convention is not a "Rules" year so the earliest we could remove 104.5.2B (3) would be in 2012 (which would apply to 2013 Nationals and beyond). Rules can be proposed any year, but every other year it has to be considered an emergency. And quite frankly, this isn't an emergency.

jim clemmons
June 3rd, 2011, 11:59 AM
And quite frankly, this isn't an emergency.

Certainly not an emergency concern for those considered as "short distance specialists". :chug:

knelson
June 4th, 2011, 03:03 PM
The projected timeline said the distance day would end at 9:20pm. I wasn't there but heard it actually went much later than that.

I had to consult my swimming diary for this! I swam the 1500 there and was in the penultimate heat. I wrote that I swam at around 9:30 p.m., so the final heat probably finished around 10:00.

Of course swimming at night wasn't so bad at this meet considering it was around 100 degrees during the day time during that entire weekend.

JPSWMCCH
July 12th, 2011, 10:38 AM
Interesting...USMS wants to recruit more swimmers: a fairly large number are triathletes, yet we do not really promote the swimming of events thaey might like to swim if they went to Nationals!!! I've swum both the distance events on the same day at Y Nats. Below, Jeff, are some good ideas about how a meet could be run! JP

Bill Brenner
July 13th, 2011, 10:23 PM
[QUOTE=jroddin;244432] So I find it odd that some distance freestylers can't come back and do that double yet others say they can do both 800/1000 and 1500/1650 on the same day? :dunno:

I'm suggesting the 800 be swum as the morning session of the first day with other events in the afternoon and the 1500 be swum the last day as the afternoon session. Put the 400 Free as the first event of the day, the day before the 1500, which in most cases would be on the meets third day.

Switch up the 1500 and 800 each year for those who would like the 1500 as the first event. The 400 Free would remain on the day before the last distance event.

PhyllisQuinn
August 8th, 2011, 05:42 PM
I do not understand why the distance swimmers have to chose one or the other event. I should be allowed to swim both if I chose. The sprinters are not limited to swim either the 50 or 100, so why are the distance swimmers limited. I do not by the argument that it would make the meet longer, not that many people would chose both. Also if this were an option, make the swimmer meet the qualifying times in both.

mattson
August 9th, 2011, 09:58 AM
...not that many people would chose both...
Considering how many people are willing to do a 2.4 mi. swim, 112 mi. bike, and 26.2 mi. run back-to-back-to-back, I'm thinking a lot more people than either of us would guess.

Chris Stevenson
August 9th, 2011, 12:06 PM
The sprinters are not limited to swim either the 50 or 100, so why are the distance swimmers limited. I do not by the argument that it would make the meet longer, not that many people would chose both. Also if this were an option, make the swimmer meet the qualifying times in both.

Sprinters aren't limited because it takes a lot longer -- more than 30X as long -- to swim a 1500 than a 50.

I disagree that "not that many people would choose both," but even a few will lengthen the meet noticeably. I have had the "pleasure" of being at a nationals late into the night even with the current rule; when you are at the pool at 11pm and you are swimming the next day, even an extra 30 minutes is a little painful. (It is not a great way to encourage volunteers, either.)

The bottom line is this: distance events take a long time, and time is a limited resource. Somebody is going to come up short no matter what you do. For example:

-- If you insist on NQTs, and make them more challenging to control the timeline, then the title of this thread will change to "slow distance swimmers shorted."

-- If you insist on a 5-day nationals, instead of 4 days, then people will either pay for an extra day of hotel, food and rental car, or they will skip a day of nationals and lose the opportunity to swim the events that were on that day.

Either of these options (or some other) may be preferable to the majority of people than the present situation. But there is no such thing as a free lunch.

knelson
August 9th, 2011, 12:09 PM
I do not by the argument that it would make the meet longer, not that many people would chose both.

I don't think there's any question it would make the meet longer, it's more a matter of exactly how much longer it would make the meet. Anyone entering both the 1000 and 1650 would either be replacing a different (shorter) event or simply swimming an additional event that they otherwise would not have. In both cases it's going to add time to the meet.

Allen Stark
August 9th, 2011, 07:08 PM
My wife loves longer swims.She liked the 5 K postal and thought the 10 K was OK.She is 63 by FINA age and not the fastest person in her age group,but would enter both if she could so that she could swim as much distance as possible.I expect there are many like her.The "I want to get as much for my money" group is well represented in the forums.If people could enter both I suspect most distance swimmers would,and if they were on different days nearly all would.

Jazz Hands
August 10th, 2011, 08:26 AM
I do not understand why the distance swimmers have to chose one or the other event. I should be allowed to swim both if I chose. The sprinters are not limited to swim either the 50 or 100, so why are the distance swimmers limited. I do not by the argument that it would make the meet longer, not that many people would chose both. Also if this were an option, make the swimmer meet the qualifying times in both.

Really? After reading all of that, you actually do not understand?

jaadams1
August 10th, 2011, 10:35 PM
While I am good at distance races, I don't actually think I would enjoy doing both the 1000/1650 at a Nationals meet. It would just make me way too exhausted to perform well enough in the other events. Split request is always available to get a time in the shorter distance race while swimming the longer one.
Keep it like it is with only one distance race per person allowed.