PDA

View Full Version : Pay more for longer events?



Hugh
April 1st, 2012, 11:58 AM
I see that the Championship Committee is finally considering having distance swimmers pay more for their splashes. See https://www.usms.org/admin/minutes/champ-2012-3-25-1.pdf. This is long overdue since they are the reason that national championships last so long. If we only had 50s and 100s wed be done by noon every day. Maybe with increased fees swimmers will think twice before entering a 1650.

gull
April 1st, 2012, 12:24 PM
Maybe with increased fees swimmers will think twice before entering a 1650.

Maybe if I owned a fast twitch fiber I would think twice before entering the 1650.


TEN CONSECUTIVE YEARS WITHOUT A TOP TEN

thewookiee
April 1st, 2012, 12:31 PM
I see that the Championship Committee is finally considering having distance swimmers pay more for their splashes. See https://www.usms.org/admin/minutes/champ-2012-3-25-1.pdf. This is long overdue since they are the reason that national championships last so long. If we only had 50s and 100s wed be done by noon every day. Maybe with increased fees swimmers will think twice before entering a 1650.

Why should someone pay more because they are better at longer events? Having to pay mire because someone can swim more than a 50 without needing a break to recover is absurd

pwb
April 1st, 2012, 12:57 PM
I see that the Championship Committee is finally considering having distance swimmers pay more for their splashes. See https://www.usms.org/admin/minutes/champ-2012-3-25-1.pdf. This is long overdue since they are the reason that national championships last so long. If we only had 50s and 100s wed be done by noon every day. Maybe with increased fees swimmers will think twice before entering a 1650.Sure, then let's go to 25s only and then we'd be out by 9am. Hey, better yet, how about we just race to the flags and call it a day?

What a stupid idea.

This is called swimming ... if anything, we need to remove the 50s, especially in short course, so we can see more swimming and less starting, turning and underwater dolphin kick.

Fresnoid
April 1st, 2012, 01:11 PM
Sure, then let's go to 25s only and then we'd be out by 9am. Hey, better yet, how about we just race to the flags and call it a day?

What a stupid idea.

This is called swimming ... if anything, we need to remove the 50s, especially in short course, so we can see more swimming and less starting, turning and underwater dolphin kick.

:applaud:

Jazz Hands
April 1st, 2012, 01:22 PM
Whiny distance dweebs. This proposal is rational. We should pay for the resources we use, and time is a limited resource at meets.

The Fortress
April 1st, 2012, 01:23 PM
... if anything, we need to remove the 50s, especially in short course, so we can see more swimming and less starting, turning and underwater dolphin kick.

:afraid: Then I would have to retire.

Are distance swimmers whining?! :)

Jazz Hands
April 1st, 2012, 01:32 PM
Why should someone pay more because they are better at longer events? Having to pay mire because someone can swim more than a 50 without needing a break to recover is absurd

Nobody is asking you to pay more because you are soooo truly special and talented that you are able to swim > 50 meters, although I assure you we are all in awe. This about paying fairly for the pool time you use while being as truly special and talented as you are. Really, I mean it: congratulations on how far you can swim!

slow
April 1st, 2012, 01:55 PM
50s and 100s will be $3 per splash

200s will be $5 per splash
500 free will be $10 per splash
1000 free will be $20 per splash
1650 free will be $25 per splash (to be generous, if you enter both distance events it will only be $40)






That'd be fine with me. I'd also pay extra for split requests.

Fresnoid
April 1st, 2012, 02:13 PM
Whiny distance dweebs. This proposal is rational. We should pay for the resources we use, and time is a limited resource at meets.

You should be paying us because we give you the rest you need between your events.

chowsh
April 1st, 2012, 02:50 PM
i'm no distance donkey, but don't think it's fair to penalize mid D and D swimmers just cause they swim the longer events! events that are OFFERED AT THE MEET BY THE MEET ORGANIZERS/nats committee!

should they decrease number of entries per event? but, not to the point that swimmers that don't make QTs can't participate in nats?

should they limit number of events per swimmer/enfore the drop 6th event rule? are they already doing this and have to start considering max 4 events, possible drop 5th? what is the minimum number of events you'd travel to nats for?

should swimmers who don't make the QT pay a surcharge?? for full disclosure, i don't make QTs, but then again, i don't go to nats either

should they try a increasing prorated entry fee--pay higher fee for each event you enter? that would make nobody happy, but at least its "fair"

mrubacky
April 1st, 2012, 02:56 PM
Did any of you look at the date on that? April 1st... Hmmmmm....

Fresnoid
April 1st, 2012, 03:09 PM
Did any of you look at the date on that? April 1st... Hmmmmm....

Did you hit the link? It is the minutes from a March 25 meeting.

Fresnoid
April 1st, 2012, 03:17 PM
Nobody is asking you to pay more because you are soooo truly special and talented that you are able to swim > 50 meters, although I assure you we are all in awe. This about paying fairly for the pool time you use while being as truly special and talented as you are. Really, I mean it: congratulations on how far you can swim!

So slower swimmers should pay more too? The people who swim 100 free close to 2 minutes are consuming twice as much pool time as the guys going 50 seconds. Double their entry fees? How about a sliding scale where the entry fee goes up by 25 cents for each 5 second increase in entry time? Of course, we would need to discourage cheapskates who enter faster times by imposing a penalty of twice the fee difference if you miss your seed time.

slknight
April 1st, 2012, 03:18 PM
Did you hit the link? It is the minutes from a March 25 meeting.

And it was "submitted" today. Read the entire document. Do you really think they're going to have warmup for the 2014 Nationals in the Charles River? And that Trojan is going to be a Nationals sponsor?:joker:

Chris Stevenson
April 1st, 2012, 03:20 PM
And it was "submitted" today. Read the entire document. Do you really think they're going to have warmup for the 2014 Nationals in the Charles River? And that Trojan is going to be a Nationals sponsor?:joker:

Starting in 2013 it will be the "2013 Trojan United States Masters Swimming Spring National Championships." Good news for lovers of tech suits, right?

jbs
April 1st, 2012, 03:27 PM
Starting in 2013 it will be the "2013 Trojan United States Masters Swimming Spring National Championships." Good news for lovers of tech suits, right?

:lmao:

Fresnoid
April 1st, 2012, 04:43 PM
And it was "submitted" today. Read the entire document. Do you really think they're going to have warmup for the 2014 Nationals in the Charles River? And that Trojan is going to be a Nationals sponsor?:joker:

Whoops, I didn't go that far. :blush:

Bobinator
April 1st, 2012, 04:44 PM
I see that the Championship Committee is finally considering having distance swimmers pay more for their splashes. See https://www.usms.org/admin/minutes/champ-2012-3-25-1.pdf. This is long overdue since they are the reason that national championships last so long. If we only had 50s and 100s wed be done by noon every day. Maybe with increased fees swimmers will think twice before entering a 1650.

Why are we in such a hurry to get the meet over with so quickly? If they don't want to be there they should just cancel the meet!
I thought swim meets were supposed to be a celebration of all ages, speeds, strokes, and types of swimmers coming together to celebrate the art of swimming. I love to watch the sprinters muscle their way through the water but at the same time I love the grace and endurance of the distance swimmer. How is charging the miler's more money going to make the meet shorter anyway. If I pay for an airplane ticket to fly to a National Champ meet I'm guessing I'll go ahead and pay extra to swim the event I want to swim. This is probably the dumbest thing I've read on this forum in a long time.

orca1946
April 1st, 2012, 04:45 PM
YEAH!! And a discount for those of us over 65!!!!
OR go slower than your entered time !!

knelson
April 1st, 2012, 04:50 PM
I'm always amazed when people fall for these April Fools pranks.

That Guy
April 1st, 2012, 04:55 PM
I'm always amazed when people fall for these April Fools pranks.

I'm not amazed anymore. http://www.bing.com/search?q=people+who+believe+the+onion&src=ie9tr

Jazz Hands
April 1st, 2012, 05:01 PM
I'm always amazed when people fall for these April Fools pranks.

Prank? This is not funny, and it's actually a very good idea.

Betsy
April 1st, 2012, 05:11 PM
Michael Moore has had his fun - again! He is a master at stringing us along.
Thanks, Michael.

knelson
April 1st, 2012, 05:25 PM
But I do like the idea of long course nationals being held in Aspen, CO. Now we've just got to get the city of Aspen to build a 50 meter pool!

A 1500 at 8,000 feet elevation isn't going to be easy, but since I'll be paying those increased fees to swim the distance events at least I'll be getting my money's worth! :)

Allen Stark
April 1st, 2012, 06:59 PM
This was amazing,just enough mix of the mundane and the absurd to be believable.

philoswimmer
April 1st, 2012, 08:00 PM
Glad to hear this is an April Fools. What an unfair idea! (I say this as someone who might occasionally do a distance event, but most often will not).

jroddin
April 1st, 2012, 08:24 PM
I am writing to say the Championship Committee Minutes for the conference call were in fact fabricated 100% to be an April Fool's joke. About the only morsel of truth in the entire document was the Greensboro status report. For what it's worth, nobody in USMS was even aware of this idea, so if anybody has any issues with what we've done please blame Michael and I and not the rest of the Championship Committee because I never asked for an endorsement to do this. I figure it would be pretty hard to get fired from being a volunteer...:D

This was all supposed to be in good fun and I hope nobody is too disappointed to learn it was all a hoax.

See you in Greensboro! I'll be hiding somewhere from the distance swimmers. :afraid:

Jeff Roddin
USMS Championship Committee Chair

slow
April 1st, 2012, 08:56 PM
Humor aside, why not discuss the idea of a modest surcharge on 500's and up?

Maui Mike
April 1st, 2012, 09:24 PM
". . . fabricated 100% to be an April Fool's joke."

And you've blown the cover on the Haleakal Crater Open Water 10K.

michaelmoore
April 1st, 2012, 09:33 PM
For what it's worth, nobody in USMS was even aware of this idea, so if anybody has any issues with what we've done please blame Michael and I and not the rest of the Championship Committee because I never asked for an endorsement to do this. I figure it would be pretty hard to get fired from being a volunteer...:D

Jeff Roddin
USMS Championship Committee Chair

Uh - Jeff - you did not get the message, Nadine accepted our "resignations."

-michael

ALM
April 1st, 2012, 09:54 PM
I'm not amazed anymore. http://www.bing.com/search?q=people+who+believe+the+onion&src=ie9tr

Thanks for posting that. Hilarious.
http://literallyunbelievable.org/

Edit: That site links to this one, which is possibly even funnier:
http://leasthelpful.com/

knelson
April 2nd, 2012, 12:19 AM
Humor aside, why not discuss the idea of a modest surcharge on 500's and up?

How about making people who warm up longer pay more, too? After all they're using the pool more than everyone else. Or tack on an additional fee for really slow swimmers. Sound fair?

osterber
April 2nd, 2012, 12:22 AM
I started reading those minutes.... and started to realize.... I wasn't on that call.... I'm not even on that committee! :-)

-Rick

Michael Heather
April 2nd, 2012, 01:20 AM
But will it still be OK for us to warm up in the Charles?

Laszlo
April 2nd, 2012, 09:08 AM
I applaud this long overdue initiative. We all like a free lunch - but there is no such thing, someone always has to pay. Pool time is expensive and those who use it longer should pay their fair share. Does everyone pay the same cab fare no matter how far they travel? the same train fare? etc. etc.

fmracing
April 2nd, 2012, 09:52 AM
Fully for the fee... April fools or otherwise :)

philoswimmer
April 2nd, 2012, 10:53 AM
We could charge by the second, say, 10 cents per second, regardless of event. Then we'd all have an incentive to swim faster.

We should also start charging for the people who splash too much. They are wasting water.

Then there are the people who don't shower before getting into the pool. A charge for them, because they cost extra chlorine.

I'm sure there are lots of things we could start charging for if we really put our minds to it.

lefty
April 2nd, 2012, 11:06 AM
This was a great prank because there is a tiny bit of rationale behind the idea. FYI: If you sign up for a triathlon that has multiple distance options, you pay more for the longer distances. True.

slow
April 2nd, 2012, 11:10 AM
How about making people who warm up longer pay more, too? After all they're using the pool more than everyone else. Or tack on an additional fee for really slow swimmers. Sound fair?

There are at least two ways to consider it.

First, there are some precedents for having people pay higher entry fees to do longer sporting events.

Running: I am looking at five fliers for running races that simultaneously held events of different lengths. If it is a 5k/10k race, the 10k entry fee is always a few dollars more. For a 10k/half marathon, the half marathon entry fee is about 50% more expensive. The "swag" and finisher prizes for these events were identical, too.

Triathlons: There is simultenaously a sprint event held on the same course as an olympic triathlon. The olympic competitors receive a wicking shirt in their goodie bag while the sprint competitors get a regular t-shirt, but otherwise the price is 250% higher for the olympic distance.

Open water swimming: I am looking at an event that offers 0.5k ($40), 2.5k ($50), and 5k ($85) distances. These are late/"day of event" registration prices...it was much cheaper if you registered early.

Cycling: To undercut my point, I have two fliers for bike rides that offered three or four distances up to a century distance. The entry fee is the same no matter which course you complete. Everyone got the same "swag" regardless of distance. Of course, cycling is a different mindset in that these are not "races" but "rides". (Actual racing has categories, etc., based on skill -- which would be a separate discussion.)

But in three of four cases, coordinators are charging higher entry fees for people wanting to do the longer events. I doubt the motivation is pure greed or a wish to penalize distance people. So it seems to represent the greater overhead cost to hold such events.

:blah::blah::blah:

As a second consideration, what is the true "cost" of a 1650? I am not sure. Many months ago, out of my own curiosity, I looked through results database and saw that 1650 free is more frequently swam than 200 fly. But when I looked at a dozen random upcoming events, 1650 was offered only a couple of times while 200 fly was almost universally offered as an event. So it seems many times they dropped the more popular 1650 event because it "cost" too much to offer.

I admit "cost" might be more of a administrative headache or a logistical problem than an actual financial cost for renting the pool. But it is just a question -- could the overhead "cost" be mitigated by higher entry fees? Otherwise, the more popular distance free events will continue to be left off the program while shorter but less popular events will be included.

:blah::blah::blah:

So okay, those are two quick considerations and I'll leave it at that. Again, personally I would pay more for distance events. I'd be interested in what the event coordinators have to say.

osterber
April 2nd, 2012, 11:16 AM
My first reply -- in the spirit of April 1 -- well done! It definitely gave me a hearty laugh. I've already started talking to marine contractors about the best way to string lane lines along the Charles River.... :-)

-Rick

osterber
April 2nd, 2012, 11:25 AM
As for the charging more for distance events? No. Absolutely not. All events in the same meet should be the same price. (*)

If I charge more for the 500 free than the 50 free... should I charge more for the person who does a 6-minute 200 fly? They're taking longer than many of my 500 freestyle swimmers.

We have a swimmer who has routinely come to our championship meet, and competes in the 1650 freestyle in about 70 minutes. We know he's coming, and we plan for it. He paid for his spot just like everyone else. We set the entry fees for the meet so that all of this is taken into account. It all averages out.

As most people would probably expect, I'd be much more in favor of charging penalties for people who have terrible seed times. I already reward (financially) people who have good seed times.

-Rick

(*) I will note that at our NE LMSC Champs, we offer 1000 and 1650 free in both the deep racing course, and our shallow warmup course. You can't dive in the shallow course, and it's shallow. So we offer a $2 discount for the shallow events. This price differential is because we're offering it in a lower-tier competition facility compared to the others, which I think is OK.

(*) I will also carve an exception for relays, which by convention are priced differently.

knelson
April 2nd, 2012, 11:37 AM
Out of curiosity, for big meets like Nationals is the pool rental usually done on a per diem basis? If so it's kind of a sunk cost. I guess you could argue the meet needs a fourth day because of the distance events, but I consider them part of the meet program. I don't think you can directly compare a pool race in swimming to something like a bike ride, triathlon, or road race. To host a marathon, for example, you need people staged all throughout the course. You need roads closed, you need police. All of these things are going to be more expensive the longer the race is so the entry fees should reflect this.

Rob Copeland
April 2nd, 2012, 11:52 AM
Resignation: Jeff introduced President Nadine KM Day. Nadine said regretfully she has accepted Jeff's resignation as chairman of the Championship Committee effective at the end of this meeting. :bliss::cheerleader::bliss:

She said Jeff has done a great job over the past five years…:confused: :shakeshead: :confused:

I am writing to say the Championship Committee Minutes for the conference call were in fact fabricated 100% to be an April Fool's joke.:rant3::badday::violin::censor:

Rob Copeland
April 2nd, 2012, 12:58 PM
My apologies to Jeff.

Somehow my quotes pointed to the wrong text. It should have been:

See you in Greensboro!
Jeff Roddin
USMS Championship Committee Chair:bliss::cheerleader::bliss:

P.S. If you do see Jeff in Greensboro, please thank him for all his service to Masters Swimming.:bow:

orca1946
April 2nd, 2012, 04:11 PM
WOW ! was this a joke that took on a life of it's own?????????? :afraid:

Edward The Head
April 3rd, 2012, 09:34 AM
I just want to know how Jeff is planning on hiding from his wife who has a better 400 with a one year old then I've ever had.

chowsh
April 5th, 2012, 09:49 PM
waa haa haa! good one!! the attached minutes was the icing!!:applaud:

aquageek
April 6th, 2012, 09:45 AM
Whiny distance dweebs. This proposal is rational. We should pay for the resources we use, and time is a limited resource at meets.

Actually, sprinters should pay more as without the distance events the whining by sprinters would be even worse than it already is since they couldn't get their requisite 9 or 10 day rest between events.

The horror of that 51st yard is unbearable!

Water Rat
April 6th, 2012, 11:54 AM
Personally, I think distance swimmers should pay less. The price of an additional 2 hrs sleep the morning of a big meet? Priceless!