Enforcement of NQT's for National Championships

[cjr]

Has the Championship Committee, or other entity within USMS ever discussed having a more strict policy of enforcement in regards to the NQT's?

Why do we state that you must have 3 cuts, in order to swim more events? Why not require a swimmer to have 6 cuts in order to swim 6 events?

Just like to understand more from a historical point of view. I have read post that asked, or suggested how to control the size and length of the National meets. Would not having a stricter enforcement of this policy help? Or would it cause swimmers to shy away from these meets?

Just a curious thought.

Thank you.

[Matt S]

CJ,

Just a bit of background info, the suggestion that Nationals should be limited to those who can make an NQT touched off what has been the most controversial forum discussion topic in the history of this website. To outline the pros and cons:

Pros: it's an effective way to keep Nationals from getting out of control and ensuring optimal conditions for competition. It limits "National Championships" to those who have a legitimate shot at being National Champions. It's widely used and everyone already understands it.

Cons: U.S. Masters was originally founded as an inclusive sport where everyone was encouraged to participate regardless of ability; this would be contrary to that value. The goals and the participation of slower swimmers are just as worthy as those of faster swimmers. It is not yet necessary; Nationals are still managable with proper organization.

I'm not sure we want to go there.

Matt

[theberb]

I think that those who wish to swim at the national meet should have the opportunity. I understand the concept of qualifying times and I agree that there should be some. Some of us master's swimmers don't make those times or even come close and some may never get to that level. I think the just the experience is so valuable. It is an opportunity that may never come again as well. I would have never even considered going if I had to qualify for all the events i signed up for and many in the group i swim with would not either. We wish to go, swim an event or two, cheer on our team mates. I think competition is a great thing but it's not as fun without your team mates cheering you on and wanting to be there to share the experience with you in and out of the water.

[Paul Smith]

Here we go again eh, Matt? I will exhibit self control and only allow myself one post on this much debated topic, mainly because Matt and I had different viewpoints.

Matt, to your "Pro" summary I must disagree (from my perspective and others I have spoken to about this). It was never a way of "limiting" the field to those with a "legitimate" shot at being a national champion. Nor was it supported to try and attain "ideal" conditons to become one.

The "Pro" camp that I fall into feels:

1) Meets should not be so large that the races go until 9pm or 10pm in the evening (not a problem in recent years). By setting "reasonable" time standards we limit the number of heats swum.

2) Some reasonable cut off time should be set for most events. Much of the concern about this is in distance events, for example if the QT for the mens 50-54 1650 is 21:36.80, should someone with an NQT of 1:30.22 be allowed to swim?

3) Very debatable point; but the idea that goal setting and attainment through progessive steps ads value comes into play. I think I made the point that I'd love to play in the masters nationals for 40-44 in tennis without going through the qualifying rounds. However I understand that I need to work my way up through local, state and regional events, which for me makes it far more valuabe than if it we're "given" to me.

OK, I'm done......fire away!!!

PS: Matt, did you ever get a new suit?

[Ion Beza]

I compare these two statements:

Originally posted by Paul Smith

...
It was never a way of "limiting" the field to those with a "legitimate" shot at being a national champion.
...
2) Some reasonable cut off time should be set for most events. Much of the concern about this is in distance events, for example if the QT for the mens 50-54 1650 is 21:36.80, should someone with an NQT of 1:30.22 be allowed to swim?
...

1) The first one (i.e.: "It was never a way of "limiting" the field to those with a "legitimate" shot at being a national champion."), is barely true in NQTs for men ages 40 to 44:

the NQT being 10% slower than the average of the last three years' tenth times, allows competing by the ones with a 'legitimate' shot at being a national champion, plus a few other ones who are close behind;

as a late starter in swimming who joined my first swimming club at age 28, I don't measure up to these NQT standards, no matter that I trained and train harder and smarter than the national top ten swimmers;

it is because a late starter at 28 who raises to a higher level than mine -for example someone who started at 28 to become a Michael Phelps (U.S.) alike and make the Olympic Team-, doesn't exist through history;

physiology specialized for swimming -like striated tissue defending joint ligaments from the water pounding a swimmer's body- develops in the teenage years of age-group swimming, not later than that;

also, most USMS clubs that I saw and see in California, Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey and Tennessee are not instilling a competitive swimming spirit in workouts, like the age-groups clubs do;
the USMS clubs address mostly the encompassing of non-competitive masses of members;
a late starter in swimming finds the competitive spirit of swimming in USMS clubs, only when looking almost with a flashlight -like I do- for the exceptionally competitive USMS coach and club;

2) The second one (i.e.: "2) Some reasonable cut off time should be set for most events. Much of the concern about this is in distance events, for example if the QT for the mens 50-54 1650 is 21:36.80, should someone with an NQT of 1:30.22 be allowed to swim?"), is true in an exaggerated way:

someone with a time of one hour, thirty minutes, twenty-two seconds for the 1650 freestyle, hasn't done a proper work to be in shape;
I say this, since even by being a late starter in swimming but doing consistent workouts to be in shape, I produce a 1650 in less than twenty-two minutes;

3) Then, what is a fair NQT, between two extremes, one in 1) (of former top age-groupers, now in USMS making competitive NQTs) and one in 2) (of a slob)?

I think it is slower than the average time of the last three years' tenths times plus 10% -so that it includes competitive late starters like me-, but is less than one hour, thirty minutes, twenty-two seconds;

it should also consider how non-standardized across U.S. the local meets are, since the notion of 'regional' and 'zone' meets is not uniform throughout U.S. to provide the same climbing ladder anywhere in U.S..

4) I notice that the NQTs for men 45 to 49 are easier;
however that won't last for much more than two years, because beasts like Fritz Lehman, Bill Specht, Tom McCabe, Paul Carter, Andreas Seibt, Brett Phillips, will graduate soon or just graduated from the 40 to 44, and will quickly raise the NQTs in the 45 to 49.

5) This topic is recycled by new members of the forum;

when it was discussed the last time, I remember that Hugh Moore stated that the Nationals needs money from a number of participants since it doesn't break even easily;

for example, I remember Michael (not Hugh) Moore stating that the 2001 Short Course Nationals in Santa Clara was assigned to Santa Clara;

because there were no bids.

[Beards247]

To ya'll -

I appreciate Matt's summation of the view points and Paul's clarification on the "pro" NQT point of view.

From the sounds of it, our brilliant and wonderful leaders have mitigated this mine field well. Tall Paul, People are only allowed to swim three events they have not qualified for - effectively reducing the large volume of swimmers. Matt, by allowing three swims even if NQT is not met, the meet is inclusive of all people who would like to swim.

I doubt I have added anything much to this conversation, but I hope I have highlighted how well the rules fall between the two "camps".


Now here comes my soap box: As a person on the cusp of SCY NQT's, they are a source of motivation for me to stay focused. Knowing that all of the people I swim with will never come close to NQT's, they still enjoy going to the meets - to marvel at those who can, gain motivation, and socialize - the very nature of USMS swimming.

Chris

[michaelmoore]

It should be pointed out that about 85% of the splashes are by swimmers who have entered 4 or more events. That does not mean that swimmer made all of the NQTs.

Of the swimmers who did not swim a NQT or faster time at a recent nationals, there was high percentage of locals. Which is what we would expect. One of the things about nationals is that it can be used as a recruiting tool for the local LMSC. (Nationals are coming to the area, join USMS, practice then swim at Nationals).

I think most people are satisfied with the size of SCY nationals, the days are not too terribly long. It is the LCM championships that are too long right now. It presents a problem. If there were two heats of every age group, it would be too long. The problem is how to limit it. It appears we will do it by NQTs. The current 10th plus ten may allow too many swimmers to make NQTs. It will be a problem on how to get them under control.


michael

[Matt S]

Paul,

I'd prefer not to engage you in another serious debate on this subject (it's much more fun to sling non sequitur, ad hominem barbs at you over nothing in particular )! My point was not to mischaracterize your view, I was trying to summarize the main points of several folks in the pro-NQT camp. I think Emmett was the leading advocate of Nationals should be for those with a legit shot at being National Champions.

Me, I like things just the way they are. I get my 3 events any year I would like to go. Folks like you and Karlyn can swim as many as 6. And for that slice of the population for whom an NQT is a challenge, but an attainable one, they get a motivating tool.

Good luck at SCY's.

Matt

[Paul Smith]

Matt,
Maybe we'll see more of each other if you get sent out west, I'll miss seeing/harassing both you and Priscilla this year! Looks like Ion will have to enjoy more abuse than necessary (Ion remember the two "key" words from la Jolla?).

By the way, you never answered my question about getting a new suit, must be the real reason you aren't coming!

[Ion Beza]

Originally posted by Paul Smith

...
Ion remember the two "key" words from la Jolla?
...

I remember.

[Matt S]

Paul,

You have an unnatural fascination with full body swim suits. Yes, I bought a shoulders to knees Speedo at the end of Seattle LCN's, and it has been my competition suit (pool and open water, including the Big Shoulders swim in Lake Michigan, thank you very much) ever since. Results? A meet record in the 200m fly, a PR in the 50m fly, masters best times in the 200m, 500y and 1650y free, and a 5k open water time (fresh water no less!) that still boggles my imagination.

Matt

[Paul Smith]

Matt, actually its not a matter of fascination with full body suits (although I'm gald to hear of your results).

Rather, its the fear that Laura, Priscilla, Ion and I have that you might wear that old one with the hole in the butt and shock innocent men, women and children who happen to be watching!

No doubt the great improvements are a combination of your "religous" devotion to TI and the lack of drag that occurs when all body flesh is tucked in where it should be!

[cinc310]

I think we need more smaller meets. But some states have small populations and its a great distance even to go to a state meet. for them. We have a few local ones in the Tucson area and Phoenix Metro has the other meets. Flaggstaff has one meet. The distances between Tucson and Phoenix is similar between LA and San Diego which is not bad. As for nationals making everyone qualifying, I don't know. Swimmers like Ion and Matt would not be able to go to nationals until they are 50 years old. And they do like to swim it. Others like myself who only qualified last summer in the 50 meter breastroke it isn't as important since I didn't even go to the local nationals in my area.

[Dominick Aielloeaver]

How would you arrange smaller meets

[cinc310]

Well, it depends upon the local teams and of course the facility needs to be able. Our next door neighbor-SPMA had about 6 meets this past short course. But they have about 20 teams that compete in master events. Some different clubs are more able and willling to do it.SPMA is in an area of 16 million people bigger than the population of most states. In Arizona, the Phoenix metro is about 3 million, the size of Orange County in the SPMA, they held about three meets in Orange County in short course. I don't know if local members can get their local teams to do more meets. For the smaller population states that have maybe 10 teams in the whole state that are hundreds miles apart this is harder to do.

[Dominick Aielloeaver]

I think that is apart of the soluation. But I do not belong to any clubs . But it would be nice to get to some of the meets that way. But what would we do we a meet like the Nationals?

[Frosty]

C.J.,

I don't know if the leaders have discussed actually ENFORCING NQTs, but if they have, they have discovered that NQTs in their current form are really unenforceable. To proactively police NQTs, you would have to establish some sort of verification system for times that would be painful and expensive.

I think that the leaders see that what is in place now works well enough...members are honest (enough) with the current NQT system that the nationals remain "at a reasonable size". (If not, the no-sixth event rule can always be invoked.)

[Ion Beza]

For curiosity reasons, I post that in another world, the world of Olympics, www.swiminfo.com wrote yesterday that the Olympics do enforce now their kind of NQT:

.) if a country has many competitors with the 'Olympic Qualifying Time A' in an event, then that country can send two competitors that made the time 'A' to the Olympics in that event,

.) if a country has at least one competitor with the slower 'Olympic Qualifying Time B' in an event, then that country can send one competitor that made the time 'B' to the Olympics in that event,

.) if a country doesn't have anybody with at least the slower 'Olympic Qualifying Time B' in an event, then the International Oltmpic Commitee decided two days ago that the country doesn't send anylonger a competitor to the Olympics in that event.

The Olympic swimming has a different mission than USMS swimming, though.

[Beards247]

I think this is a travesty! No more Eddie the Eagles or Jamacian Bob Sled teams? (or was the ruling only for swimming?).

Are they a waste of time? On some level yes. But they are also living proof that sports are not only for the most elite.

my .02,

Chris

[Rob Copeland]

Chris, according to the SwimInfo article, this ruling applies to all sports.

“IOC president Jacques Rogge parted ways with his predecessor, Juan Antonio Samaranch, resolving the debate by saying the IOC will eliminate "wild card" entries in the Games. Under the "wild card" rule, each country was allowed one male and one female entrant in each sport, regardless of that individual's accomplishments.”