Why doesn’t USA Swimming use cut-off dates like every other youth sport?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ and this is why it’s easy to see who has a kid without a Feb/early March bday when they argue it’s equitable the way it is. I get that they need some kind of cut off but to say it’s fair is wrong. If it is so fair, then do it for summer swim and kids age up mid season. The same relay problem happens during club swimming when a kid ages up…so that’s the same problem year round.

The summer swim argument is a completely different issue. It’s like an 8 week season and a PITA to deal with aging kids up on their birthdays, although in theory I wouldn’t be opposed to it. Relays are a fun part of the big club meets but they mean nothing and often the kids swimming the relays are from all different sites of a club and may have never met each other before that day. In a true individual sport like club swim is, you can’t have a kid that turned 11 in January swimming 10 and under events in mid/late March. Your argument really boils down to wanting to disadvantage someone other than your February/March birthday kid.

Nope. It’s not about disadvantaging someone else. It’s about consistency and not disadvantaging anyone.

Do you really think an 11 yr +2 months is very different from a 10 yr 11 months? The 10 year old with an April birthday is 10 yr+11 mos swimming against 9 yr+0 mos currently. Is that more fair?

Oh please, it absolutely is about disadvantaging someone else as long as that someone is not your kid. It’s an individual sport that is divided by age group categories, there is no reason to swim as anything other than your actual age.

Who is it disadvantaging? Please do tell.

Are you really that obtuse? You know damn well that allowing kids who turn 11 in January to race as 10 and unders in mid to late March disadvantages the spring birthday kids who would otherwise be in line to make finals, be on relays, etc.

Are YOU serious? You’re talking about kids who are 3 months apart in age.

I mean your kid can just get faster so they don’t have to rely on being allowed to swim as a 10 and under months after they turn 11.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those who think the USA swimming rule is fair obviously have kids who are unaffected by the misfortune of having a late January-early March birthday. Many clubs put undue emphasis on end of season champs, especially short course, even at young ages. Qualifying for these meets can affect group placement, swimmer recognition, travel opportunities, etc etc. when you have a swimmer who ages up a few days or weeks before these important meets, you have put them in a situation where they are training all season with an appropriate age group, meeting appropriate goals, but then suddenly removed from all the opportunities their peers will enjoy because they were born a week or two earlier. In all other youth sports, there is a cutoff date and the purpose of that is to keep peer groups together, training at appropriate levels and not having to suddenly jump to a whole new team/training group with much higher standards mid-season on the DAY of their birthday. They should either use a seasonal cutoff date or do away with championship meets for age group swimmers.

So, because your kid does not have a prime birthday for short course champs, no one should be able to compete? Come on. The sports with the cutoff date are team sports and it is not conducive to a successful team to have moving parts during a season. A basketball or soccer team need to practice and work together as a unit, swimmers do not. Our training groups are both age and ability based, there are kids from multiple age groups.

No. There should not be “champs” that are the training focus of the entire season when the results of that champs meet are based primarily on the relative age of the swimmer and the same kids have a massive disadvantage every single year.

My kids focus on one meet at a time and the club doesn't put any particular emphasis on one meet over another. Maybe you should suggest that your kids, and their club, adopt a similar approach.

If measuring relative progress is all you care about though, there are plenty of ways to do that outside of one specific meet each year. Take IMX for example. If their IMX score at 11 years and 2 months is higher than it was at 10 years and 2 months, they are getting better. Good for them. You don't need to stop the world from turning or to schedule a separate "champs" meet just to figure this out though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those who think the USA swimming rule is fair obviously have kids who are unaffected by the misfortune of having a late January-early March birthday. Many clubs put undue emphasis on end of season champs, especially short course, even at young ages. Qualifying for these meets can affect group placement, swimmer recognition, travel opportunities, etc etc. when you have a swimmer who ages up a few days or weeks before these important meets, you have put them in a situation where they are training all season with an appropriate age group, meeting appropriate goals, but then suddenly removed from all the opportunities their peers will enjoy because they were born a week or two earlier. In all other youth sports, there is a cutoff date and the purpose of that is to keep peer groups together, training at appropriate levels and not having to suddenly jump to a whole new team/training group with much higher standards mid-season on the DAY of their birthday. They should either use a seasonal cutoff date or do away with championship meets for age group swimmers.

So, because your kid does not have a prime birthday for short course champs, no one should be able to compete? Come on. The sports with the cutoff date are team sports and it is not conducive to a successful team to have moving parts during a season. A basketball or soccer team need to practice and work together as a unit, swimmers do not. Our training groups are both age and ability based, there are kids from multiple age groups.

No. There should not be “champs” that are the training focus of the entire season when the results of that champs meet are based primarily on the relative age of the swimmer and the same kids have a massive disadvantage every single year.

The swim season is 10-11 months long. There are champs meets in December, March and July for age groupers. It sounds like you are just hyper focused on the March champs meets.

Most teams and LSCs are hyper focused on the March champs meets and arrange their groups accordingly. I know that’s what our club does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ and this is why it’s easy to see who has a kid without a Feb/early March bday when they argue it’s equitable the way it is. I get that they need some kind of cut off but to say it’s fair is wrong. If it is so fair, then do it for summer swim and kids age up mid season. The same relay problem happens during club swimming when a kid ages up…so that’s the same problem year round.

The summer swim argument is a completely different issue. It’s like an 8 week season and a PITA to deal with aging kids up on their birthdays, although in theory I wouldn’t be opposed to it. Relays are a fun part of the big club meets but they mean nothing and often the kids swimming the relays are from all different sites of a club and may have never met each other before that day. In a true individual sport like club swim is, you can’t have a kid that turned 11 in January swimming 10 and under events in mid/late March. Your argument really boils down to wanting to disadvantage someone other than your February/March birthday kid.

Nope. It’s not about disadvantaging someone else. It’s about consistency and not disadvantaging anyone.

Do you really think an 11 yr +2 months is very different from a 10 yr 11 months? The 10 year old with an April birthday is 10 yr+11 mos swimming against 9 yr+0 mos currently. Is that more fair?

Oh please, it absolutely is about disadvantaging someone else as long as that someone is not your kid. It’s an individual sport that is divided by age group categories, there is no reason to swim as anything other than your actual age.

Who is it disadvantaging? Please do tell.

Are you really that obtuse? You know damn well that allowing kids who turn 11 in January to race as 10 and unders in mid to late March disadvantages the spring birthday kids who would otherwise be in line to make finals, be on relays, etc.

Are YOU serious? You’re talking about kids who are 3 months apart in age.

I mean your kid can just get faster so they don’t have to rely on being allowed to swim as a 10 and under months after they turn 11.

Lol. Nice! And your kid can stop relying on the fact that they are basically two years older than the youngest ones in their age group and can only qualify/win because of that stroke of luck. Does your nearly-13 year old really feel superior for crushing kids who just turned 11 days ago and spent the whole season training as a 10 and under?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ and this is why it’s easy to see who has a kid without a Feb/early March bday when they argue it’s equitable the way it is. I get that they need some kind of cut off but to say it’s fair is wrong. If it is so fair, then do it for summer swim and kids age up mid season. The same relay problem happens during club swimming when a kid ages up…so that’s the same problem year round.

The summer swim argument is a completely different issue. It’s like an 8 week season and a PITA to deal with aging kids up on their birthdays, although in theory I wouldn’t be opposed to it. Relays are a fun part of the big club meets but they mean nothing and often the kids swimming the relays are from all different sites of a club and may have never met each other before that day. In a true individual sport like club swim is, you can’t have a kid that turned 11 in January swimming 10 and under events in mid/late March. Your argument really boils down to wanting to disadvantage someone other than your February/March birthday kid.

Nope. It’s not about disadvantaging someone else. It’s about consistency and not disadvantaging anyone.

Do you really think an 11 yr +2 months is very different from a 10 yr 11 months? The 10 year old with an April birthday is 10 yr+11 mos swimming against 9 yr+0 mos currently. Is that more fair?

Oh please, it absolutely is about disadvantaging someone else as long as that someone is not your kid. It’s an individual sport that is divided by age group categories, there is no reason to swim as anything other than your actual age.

Who is it disadvantaging? Please do tell.

Are you really that obtuse? You know damn well that allowing kids who turn 11 in January to race as 10 and unders in mid to late March disadvantages the spring birthday kids who would otherwise be in line to make finals, be on relays, etc.

Are YOU serious? You’re talking about kids who are 3 months apart in age.

You're literally arguing to change the cutoff because YOU don't like how it falls relative to your kid's birthday. You aren't saying that cutoffs aren't fair, but just that you don't like when this one falls. That's crazy. Your proposed cutoff is no more fair and is 100% more arbitrary than the current cutoff.

--parent of a kid with an August birthday who is the youngest and disadvantaged on every single team except summer swim

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those who think the USA swimming rule is fair obviously have kids who are unaffected by the misfortune of having a late January-early March birthday. Many clubs put undue emphasis on end of season champs, especially short course, even at young ages. Qualifying for these meets can affect group placement, swimmer recognition, travel opportunities, etc etc. when you have a swimmer who ages up a few days or weeks before these important meets, you have put them in a situation where they are training all season with an appropriate age group, meeting appropriate goals, but then suddenly removed from all the opportunities their peers will enjoy because they were born a week or two earlier. In all other youth sports, there is a cutoff date and the purpose of that is to keep peer groups together, training at appropriate levels and not having to suddenly jump to a whole new team/training group with much higher standards mid-season on the DAY of their birthday. They should either use a seasonal cutoff date or do away with championship meets for age group swimmers.

So, because your kid does not have a prime birthday for short course champs, no one should be able to compete? Come on. The sports with the cutoff date are team sports and it is not conducive to a successful team to have moving parts during a season. A basketball or soccer team need to practice and work together as a unit, swimmers do not. Our training groups are both age and ability based, there are kids from multiple age groups.

No. There should not be “champs” that are the training focus of the entire season when the results of that champs meet are based primarily on the relative age of the swimmer and the same kids have a massive disadvantage every single year.

My kids focus on one meet at a time and the club doesn't put any particular emphasis on one meet over another. Maybe you should suggest that your kids, and their club, adopt a similar approach.

If measuring relative progress is all you care about though, there are plenty of ways to do that outside of one specific meet each year. Take IMX for example. If their IMX score at 11 years and 2 months is higher than it was at 10 years and 2 months, they are getting better. Good for them. You don't need to stop the world from turning or to schedule a separate "champs" meet just to figure this out though.

You don’t seem to understand the sport of swimming very well. A swimmer is never going to swim their fastest at a mid-season, untapered, timed finals meet compared to a championship prelims/finals meet with all the excitement, adrenaline etc when they are properly trained, rested, and tapered. Swimmers who age up just before these meets never get to experience that at the top of their age group or even close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those who think the USA swimming rule is fair obviously have kids who are unaffected by the misfortune of having a late January-early March birthday. Many clubs put undue emphasis on end of season champs, especially short course, even at young ages. Qualifying for these meets can affect group placement, swimmer recognition, travel opportunities, etc etc. when you have a swimmer who ages up a few days or weeks before these important meets, you have put them in a situation where they are training all season with an appropriate age group, meeting appropriate goals, but then suddenly removed from all the opportunities their peers will enjoy because they were born a week or two earlier. In all other youth sports, there is a cutoff date and the purpose of that is to keep peer groups together, training at appropriate levels and not having to suddenly jump to a whole new team/training group with much higher standards mid-season on the DAY of their birthday. They should either use a seasonal cutoff date or do away with championship meets for age group swimmers.

So, because your kid does not have a prime birthday for short course champs, no one should be able to compete? Come on. The sports with the cutoff date are team sports and it is not conducive to a successful team to have moving parts during a season. A basketball or soccer team need to practice and work together as a unit, swimmers do not. Our training groups are both age and ability based, there are kids from multiple age groups.

No. There should not be “champs” that are the training focus of the entire season when the results of that champs meet are based primarily on the relative age of the swimmer and the same kids have a massive disadvantage every single year.

The swim season is 10-11 months long. There are champs meets in December, March and July for age groupers. It sounds like you are just hyper focused on the March champs meets.

Most teams and LSCs are hyper focused on the March champs meets and arrange their groups accordingly. I know that’s what our club does.

We are with one of the big clubs and March champs are no more of a focus than December or July. Our training groups, particularly the more advanced ones, have some age requirements, like you can’t start with the group until you are 11 or 13 or whatever, but the age you are for certain champs meets doesn’t matter.

[Anonymous]

OMG, JOs is such small potatoes. It is ridiculous to be so riled up about this. Get a life, people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ and this is why it’s easy to see who has a kid without a Feb/early March bday when they argue it’s equitable the way it is. I get that they need some kind of cut off but to say it’s fair is wrong. If it is so fair, then do it for summer swim and kids age up mid season. The same relay problem happens during club swimming when a kid ages up…so that’s the same problem year round.

The summer swim argument is a completely different issue. It’s like an 8 week season and a PITA to deal with aging kids up on their birthdays, although in theory I wouldn’t be opposed to it. Relays are a fun part of the big club meets but they mean nothing and often the kids swimming the relays are from all different sites of a club and may have never met each other before that day. In a true individual sport like club swim is, you can’t have a kid that turned 11 in January swimming 10 and under events in mid/late March. Your argument really boils down to wanting to disadvantage someone other than your February/March birthday kid.

Nope. It’s not about disadvantaging someone else. It’s about consistency and not disadvantaging anyone.

Do you really think an 11 yr +2 months is very different from a 10 yr 11 months? The 10 year old with an April birthday is 10 yr+11 mos swimming against 9 yr+0 mos currently. Is that more fair?

Oh please, it absolutely is about disadvantaging someone else as long as that someone is not your kid. It’s an individual sport that is divided by age group categories, there is no reason to swim as anything other than your actual age.

Who is it disadvantaging? Please do tell.

Are you really that obtuse? You know damn well that allowing kids who turn 11 in January to race as 10 and unders in mid to late March disadvantages the spring birthday kids who would otherwise be in line to make finals, be on relays, etc.

Are YOU serious? You’re talking about kids who are 3 months apart in age.

You're literally arguing to change the cutoff because YOU don't like how it falls relative to your kid's birthday. You aren't saying that cutoffs aren't fair, but just that you don't like when this one falls. That's crazy. Your proposed cutoff is no more fair and is 100% more arbitrary than the current cutoff.

--parent of a kid with an August birthday who is the youngest and disadvantaged on every single team except summer swim

New poster: August is one of the best birthdays. You get through: summer swim, long course champs, and zones. You then get most of aug, sept and at least part of Oct before your next meet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those who think the USA swimming rule is fair obviously have kids who are unaffected by the misfortune of having a late January-early March birthday. Many clubs put undue emphasis on end of season champs, especially short course, even at young ages. Qualifying for these meets can affect group placement, swimmer recognition, travel opportunities, etc etc. when you have a swimmer who ages up a few days or weeks before these important meets, you have put them in a situation where they are training all season with an appropriate age group, meeting appropriate goals, but then suddenly removed from all the opportunities their peers will enjoy because they were born a week or two earlier. In all other youth sports, there is a cutoff date and the purpose of that is to keep peer groups together, training at appropriate levels and not having to suddenly jump to a whole new team/training group with much higher standards mid-season on the DAY of their birthday. They should either use a seasonal cutoff date or do away with championship meets for age group swimmers.

So, because your kid does not have a prime birthday for short course champs, no one should be able to compete? Come on. The sports with the cutoff date are team sports and it is not conducive to a successful team to have moving parts during a season. A basketball or soccer team need to practice and work together as a unit, swimmers do not. Our training groups are both age and ability based, there are kids from multiple age groups.

No. There should not be “champs” that are the training focus of the entire season when the results of that champs meet are based primarily on the relative age of the swimmer and the same kids have a massive disadvantage every single year.

My kids focus on one meet at a time and the club doesn't put any particular emphasis on one meet over another. Maybe you should suggest that your kids, and their club, adopt a similar approach.

If measuring relative progress is all you care about though, there are plenty of ways to do that outside of one specific meet each year. Take IMX for example. If their IMX score at 11 years and 2 months is higher than it was at 10 years and 2 months, they are getting better. Good for them. You don't need to stop the world from turning or to schedule a separate "champs" meet just to figure this out though.

You don’t seem to understand the sport of swimming very well. A swimmer is never going to swim their fastest at a mid-season, untapered, timed finals meet compared to a championship prelims/finals meet with all the excitement, adrenaline etc when they are properly trained, rested, and tapered. Swimmers who age up just before these meets never get to experience that at the top of their age group or even close.

Ok, here’s the thing, if someone understands all of what you just wrote (and I actually do thanks to my kid) chances are your kid is a high level swimmer who is making cuts for all the champs meets regardless of whether their birthday is good for a particular meet, or whether they are at the low end of the age group. This age cutoff really is only an issue for kids who are on the margins and once every other year want to be able to get into one of those meets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ and this is why it’s easy to see who has a kid without a Feb/early March bday when they argue it’s equitable the way it is. I get that they need some kind of cut off but to say it’s fair is wrong. If it is so fair, then do it for summer swim and kids age up mid season. The same relay problem happens during club swimming when a kid ages up…so that’s the same problem year round.

The summer swim argument is a completely different issue. It’s like an 8 week season and a PITA to deal with aging kids up on their birthdays, although in theory I wouldn’t be opposed to it. Relays are a fun part of the big club meets but they mean nothing and often the kids swimming the relays are from all different sites of a club and may have never met each other before that day. In a true individual sport like club swim is, you can’t have a kid that turned 11 in January swimming 10 and under events in mid/late March. Your argument really boils down to wanting to disadvantage someone other than your February/March birthday kid.

Nope. It’s not about disadvantaging someone else. It’s about consistency and not disadvantaging anyone.

Do you really think an 11 yr +2 months is very different from a 10 yr 11 months? The 10 year old with an April birthday is 10 yr+11 mos swimming against 9 yr+0 mos currently. Is that more fair?

Oh please, it absolutely is about disadvantaging someone else as long as that someone is not your kid. It’s an individual sport that is divided by age group categories, there is no reason to swim as anything other than your actual age.

Who is it disadvantaging? Please do tell.

Are you really that obtuse? You know damn well that allowing kids who turn 11 in January to race as 10 and unders in mid to late March disadvantages the spring birthday kids who would otherwise be in line to make finals, be on relays, etc.

Are YOU serious? You’re talking about kids who are 3 months apart in age.

You're literally arguing to change the cutoff because YOU don't like how it falls relative to your kid's birthday. You aren't saying that cutoffs aren't fair, but just that you don't like when this one falls. That's crazy. Your proposed cutoff is no more fair and is 100% more arbitrary than the current cutoff.

--parent of a kid with an August birthday who is the youngest and disadvantaged on every single team except summer swim

What?! There is no cutoff! That’s the point! There is no point at which a swimmer can finish their season in their age group even if their birthday is the day before the meet. Do you think a kid gains a year of size, strength, and development on the day they turn a new age? How is it arbitrary to let a child finish their season in the same age group they competed in the entire season, right up to the champs meet? Do you think this would only apply to one age group? No - it would be across the board. How is that disadvantaging anyone??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ and this is why it’s easy to see who has a kid without a Feb/early March bday when they argue it’s equitable the way it is. I get that they need some kind of cut off but to say it’s fair is wrong. If it is so fair, then do it for summer swim and kids age up mid season. The same relay problem happens during club swimming when a kid ages up…so that’s the same problem year round.

The summer swim argument is a completely different issue. It’s like an 8 week season and a PITA to deal with aging kids up on their birthdays, although in theory I wouldn’t be opposed to it. Relays are a fun part of the big club meets but they mean nothing and often the kids swimming the relays are from all different sites of a club and may have never met each other before that day. In a true individual sport like club swim is, you can’t have a kid that turned 11 in January swimming 10 and under events in mid/late March. Your argument really boils down to wanting to disadvantage someone other than your February/March birthday kid.

Nope. It’s not about disadvantaging someone else. It’s about consistency and not disadvantaging anyone.

Do you really think an 11 yr +2 months is very different from a 10 yr 11 months? The 10 year old with an April birthday is 10 yr+11 mos swimming against 9 yr+0 mos currently. Is that more fair?

Oh please, it absolutely is about disadvantaging someone else as long as that someone is not your kid. It’s an individual sport that is divided by age group categories, there is no reason to swim as anything other than your actual age.

Who is it disadvantaging? Please do tell.

Are you really that obtuse? You know damn well that allowing kids who turn 11 in January to race as 10 and unders in mid to late March disadvantages the spring birthday kids who would otherwise be in line to make finals, be on relays, etc.

Jan isn’t as bad as early March. At least you get 2 months (1/6 of a year) to adjust. Some kids have days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those who think the USA swimming rule is fair obviously have kids who are unaffected by the misfortune of having a late January-early March birthday. Many clubs put undue emphasis on end of season champs, especially short course, even at young ages. Qualifying for these meets can affect group placement, swimmer recognition, travel opportunities, etc etc. when you have a swimmer who ages up a few days or weeks before these important meets, you have put them in a situation where they are training all season with an appropriate age group, meeting appropriate goals, but then suddenly removed from all the opportunities their peers will enjoy because they were born a week or two earlier. In all other youth sports, there is a cutoff date and the purpose of that is to keep peer groups together, training at appropriate levels and not having to suddenly jump to a whole new team/training group with much higher standards mid-season on the DAY of their birthday. They should either use a seasonal cutoff date or do away with championship meets for age group swimmers.

So, because your kid does not have a prime birthday for short course champs, no one should be able to compete? Come on. The sports with the cutoff date are team sports and it is not conducive to a successful team to have moving parts during a season. A basketball or soccer team need to practice and work together as a unit, swimmers do not. Our training groups are both age and ability based, there are kids from multiple age groups.

No. There should not be “champs” that are the training focus of the entire season when the results of that champs meet are based primarily on the relative age of the swimmer and the same kids have a massive disadvantage every single year.

My kids focus on one meet at a time and the club doesn't put any particular emphasis on one meet over another. Maybe you should suggest that your kids, and their club, adopt a similar approach.

If measuring relative progress is all you care about though, there are plenty of ways to do that outside of one specific meet each year. Take IMX for example. If their IMX score at 11 years and 2 months is higher than it was at 10 years and 2 months, they are getting better. Good for them. You don't need to stop the world from turning or to schedule a separate "champs" meet just to figure this out though.

You don’t seem to understand the sport of swimming very well. A swimmer is never going to swim their fastest at a mid-season, untapered, timed finals meet compared to a championship prelims/finals meet with all the excitement, adrenaline etc when they are properly trained, rested, and tapered. Swimmers who age up just before these meets never get to experience that at the top of their age group or even close.

Again, my kids' experience differs greatly from yours. I guess when you put all the focus on one meet, then that's the only time they do well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those who think the USA swimming rule is fair obviously have kids who are unaffected by the misfortune of having a late January-early March birthday. Many clubs put undue emphasis on end of season champs, especially short course, even at young ages. Qualifying for these meets can affect group placement, swimmer recognition, travel opportunities, etc etc. when you have a swimmer who ages up a few days or weeks before these important meets, you have put them in a situation where they are training all season with an appropriate age group, meeting appropriate goals, but then suddenly removed from all the opportunities their peers will enjoy because they were born a week or two earlier. In all other youth sports, there is a cutoff date and the purpose of that is to keep peer groups together, training at appropriate levels and not having to suddenly jump to a whole new team/training group with much higher standards mid-season on the DAY of their birthday. They should either use a seasonal cutoff date or do away with championship meets for age group swimmers.

So, because your kid does not have a prime birthday for short course champs, no one should be able to compete? Come on. The sports with the cutoff date are team sports and it is not conducive to a successful team to have moving parts during a season. A basketball or soccer team need to practice and work together as a unit, swimmers do not. Our training groups are both age and ability based, there are kids from multiple age groups.

No. There should not be “champs” that are the training focus of the entire season when the results of that champs meet are based primarily on the relative age of the swimmer and the same kids have a massive disadvantage every single year.

My kids focus on one meet at a time and the club doesn't put any particular emphasis on one meet over another. Maybe you should suggest that your kids, and their club, adopt a similar approach.

If measuring relative progress is all you care about though, there are plenty of ways to do that outside of one specific meet each year. Take IMX for example. If their IMX score at 11 years and 2 months is higher than it was at 10 years and 2 months, they are getting better. Good for them. You don't need to stop the world from turning or to schedule a separate "champs" meet just to figure this out though.

You don’t seem to understand the sport of swimming very well. A swimmer is never going to swim their fastest at a mid-season, untapered, timed finals meet compared to a championship prelims/finals meet with all the excitement, adrenaline etc when they are properly trained, rested, and tapered. Swimmers who age up just before these meets never get to experience that at the top of their age group or even close.

Again, my kids' experience differs greatly from yours. I guess when you put all the focus on one meet, then that's the only time they do well.

The coaches do that though. And the meet format itself. Do you think a swimmer can really say, “actually I’m not going to focus on champs, I’m going to choose this random meet as my focus and go ahead and taper myself, oh - and can you just make the meet director make it prelims/finals just for me?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ and this is why it’s easy to see who has a kid without a Feb/early March bday when they argue it’s equitable the way it is. I get that they need some kind of cut off but to say it’s fair is wrong. If it is so fair, then do it for summer swim and kids age up mid season. The same relay problem happens during club swimming when a kid ages up…so that’s the same problem year round.

The summer swim argument is a completely different issue. It’s like an 8 week season and a PITA to deal with aging kids up on their birthdays, although in theory I wouldn’t be opposed to it. Relays are a fun part of the big club meets but they mean nothing and often the kids swimming the relays are from all different sites of a club and may have never met each other before that day. In a true individual sport like club swim is, you can’t have a kid that turned 11 in January swimming 10 and under events in mid/late March. Your argument really boils down to wanting to disadvantage someone other than your February/March birthday kid.

Nope. It’s not about disadvantaging someone else. It’s about consistency and not disadvantaging anyone.

Do you really think an 11 yr +2 months is very different from a 10 yr 11 months? The 10 year old with an April birthday is 10 yr+11 mos swimming against 9 yr+0 mos currently. Is that more fair?

Oh please, it absolutely is about disadvantaging someone else as long as that someone is not your kid. It’s an individual sport that is divided by age group categories, there is no reason to swim as anything other than your actual age.

Who is it disadvantaging? Please do tell.

Are you really that obtuse? You know damn well that allowing kids who turn 11 in January to race as 10 and unders in mid to late March disadvantages the spring birthday kids who would otherwise be in line to make finals, be on relays, etc.

Are YOU serious? You’re talking about kids who are 3 months apart in age.

I mean your kid can just get faster so they don’t have to rely on being allowed to swim as a 10 and under months after they turn 11.

Lol. Nice! And your kid can stop relying on the fact that they are basically two years older than the youngest ones in their age group and can only qualify/win because of that stroke of luck. Does your nearly-13 year old really feel superior for crushing kids who just turned 11 days ago and spent the whole season training as a 10 and under?

No, I actually have one of those kids that can make the cuts even when they age up right before the meet (late spring birthday, made LC champs in multiple events at the low end of the age group). It never crossed my mind to think that my kid should have been able to swim LC champs in the younger age bracket because they had just aged up a couple months earlier. Honestly it would have been kind of embarrassing for my kid to show up and trounce people in the age group below.