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:

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??

There is too a cutoff. It's on the meet invite and is typically the first day of the meet. Changing the cutoff to whatever arbitrary date you suggest (Jan 1?) Just disadvantages different kids with different birthdays. In your example, the kid with the December 31 birthday would age up while your January 2 birthday would swim down an age group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?”

When all meets are treated the same, there is no tapering, etc. It's just kids having fun and trying their best every time out.

[Anonymous]

This is just so silly, and some of you are WAY too invested in this. My February birthday swimmer missed out on a bunch of March champs as a younger swimmer. She did great at the December ones and focused on that. Once they pass age 14 they start hitting futures (etc) cuts. The "bad birthday" has not affected her college recruiting at all, if that is the end game here.

[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.

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.

Sure, it's good for swim. But not for soccer, basketball, lacrosse, field hockey and pretty much all other sports. Pretty much every rec sport and many select teams use grade-based cohorts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?”

There are generally 3 different champs meets with prelims/finals formats: December, March and July. It gives everyone a shot at a champs meet where their birthday isn’t a disadvantage. And if your club doesn’t offer this and it is that important to you, maybe you need to look for another club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?”

My oldest swam in a prelims/finals meet in December and then bettered all those times in a timed finals meet in January.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is just so silly, and some of you are WAY too invested in this. My February birthday swimmer missed out on a bunch of March champs as a younger swimmer. She did great at the December ones and focused on that. Once they pass age 14 they start hitting futures (etc) cuts. The "bad birthday" has not affected her college recruiting at all, if that is the end game here.

Exactly. Get some perspective, people. I know it seems like whether your 11yo makes JOs is super-important, but it just isn't. You'll see in a few years that none of this really matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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??

There is too a cutoff. It's on the meet invite and is typically the first day of the meet. Changing the cutoff to whatever arbitrary date you suggest (Jan 1?) Just disadvantages different kids with different birthdays. In your example, the kid with the December 31 birthday would age up while your January 2 birthday would swim down an age group.

You’re doing a good job but there is no reasoning with this poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Sure, it's good for swim. But not for soccer, basketball, lacrosse, field hockey and pretty much all other sports. Pretty much every rec sport and many select teams use grade-based cohorts.

Okay.

[Anonymous]

Please confer with all the people up in arms about summer swim cutoff. Can’t have it both ways.

[Anonymous]

The problem is that there is no fair way. There is just shifting who gets hit the most. For summer swim everyone with a may birthday has it hard. For sc champs, February. For lc champs, June. The only really possinly equitable answers are to make 1 year (instead of 2 year) brackets so that there is a 12 month window instead of 24 month and/or the LSC to step up and make some December LSC sanctioned champ meets that can allow the swimmers with first quarter birthdays to compete in “big meets”. Beyond that there is no functional change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that there is no fair way. There is just shifting who gets hit the most. For summer swim everyone with a may birthday has it hard. For sc champs, February. For lc champs, June. The only really possinly equitable answers are to make 1 year (instead of 2 year) brackets so that there is a 12 month window instead of 24 month and/or the LSC to step up and make some December LSC sanctioned champ meets that can allow the swimmers with first quarter birthdays to compete in “big meets”. Beyond that there is no functional change.

There are big meets all year round. I have swimmers with bdays at different times of the year. Their "big meets" are different, but they all have an opportunity to be the oldest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that there is no fair way. There is just shifting who gets hit the most. For summer swim everyone with a may birthday has it hard. For sc champs, February. For lc champs, June. The only really possinly equitable answers are to make 1 year (instead of 2 year) brackets so that there is a 12 month window instead of 24 month and/or the LSC to step up and make some December LSC sanctioned champ meets that can allow the swimmers with first quarter birthdays to compete in “big meets”. Beyond that there is no functional change.

There are big meets all year round. I have swimmers with bdays at different times of the year. Their "big meets" are different, but they all have an opportunity to be the oldest.

Having an opportunity to be the youngest also builds character. IMO, working hard to just barely make cuts after they age up ranks higher than just barely making a final when they are max age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that there is no fair way. There is just shifting who gets hit the most. For summer swim everyone with a may birthday has it hard. For sc champs, February. For lc champs, June. The only really possinly equitable answers are to make 1 year (instead of 2 year) brackets so that there is a 12 month window instead of 24 month and/or the LSC to step up and make some December LSC sanctioned champ meets that can allow the swimmers with first quarter birthdays to compete in “big meets”. Beyond that there is no functional change.

There are big meets all year round. I have swimmers with bdays at different times of the year. Their "big meets" are different, but they all have an opportunity to be the oldest.

There are not big meets all year round. For 99.99% of the swimmers, what big meets are there in Sept, Oct, Nov, Jan, Feb, April, or June?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that there is no fair way. There is just shifting who gets hit the most. For summer swim everyone with a may birthday has it hard. For sc champs, February. For lc champs, June. The only really possinly equitable answers are to make 1 year (instead of 2 year) brackets so that there is a 12 month window instead of 24 month and/or the LSC to step up and make some December LSC sanctioned champ meets that can allow the swimmers with first quarter birthdays to compete in “big meets”. Beyond that there is no functional change.

There are big meets all year round. I have swimmers with bdays at different times of the year. Their "big meets" are different, but they all have an opportunity to be the oldest.

There are not big meets all year round. For 99.99% of the swimmers, what big meets are there in Sept, Oct, Nov, Jan, Feb, April, or June?

What are all those swimmers doing for the other 5 months of the year?