swimming up someone nvsl

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I’m at a d2 pool that does this and I guarantee the majority of the team doesn’t like this. Would love an open vote. Of course some do. But no one has ever asked me about it. And my kid doesn’t lose a spot. But I see how it affects those that do

Almost every d2 pool has done it this year. It's not unusual at all for the higher divisions.

Keep in mind that for every older slower kid that doesn't get to swim in an A meet, a younger faster kid does. I wouldn't want to be the one to explain to the faster younger kid and her parents that she doesn't get to swim because a slower swimmer's mommy complained.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the mid level divisions this doesn't happen. Younger kids only swim up if it means they can get an empty lane that wouldn't be filled.

It happened in Division 10 last week. See girls 13-14 medley relay results and compare against individual event results: https://www.mynvsl.com/results/26840?back=dt

And, btw, that team would not have won the 13-14 medley relay without help from a superstar 11 year old. That equates to a 10 point swing in the overall meet results. In some cases, that can be the difference between winning and losing a meet.

They still lost. Question is... for division classification next year, does her time count for 11-12 or 13-14 group?

I don’t think I understand your question? Her individual times go with her, regardless if she swim up in a single individual event. She still gets credit for whatever relays she swims in if you look how the NVSL stores information for me it doesn’t really attach ages. It’s just times to the swimmer and the date that they did the swim. They do limit how you can swim in divisionals relay, Carnaval, and that limits how you can swim in all stars, those are the only events that you swim in your age group or a required to the rest of the meats are all strategy and strategy can me and swimming somebody up if you have phenomenal swimmers, you use them to your advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

They still lost. Question is... for division classification next year, does her time count for 11-12 or 13-14 group?

I don't know how seeding works, but I doubt they get down to that level. That would take a crazy amount of effort. Most likely they look at overall team record, points scored in divisional relays, points scored in all star relays, and points cored in all stars. Then move best team up and worst team down. If there is a crazy discrepancy in points scored in either of the relays maybe move a team up 2 divisions or down 2 divisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They still lost. Question is... for division classification next year, does her time count for 11-12 or 13-14 group?

I don't know how seeding works, but I doubt they get down to that level. That would take a crazy amount of effort. Most likely they look at overall team record, points scored in divisional relays, points scored in all star relays, and points cored in all stars. Then move best team up and worst team down. If there is a crazy discrepancy in points scored in either of the relays maybe move a team up 2 divisions or down 2 divisions.

Teams can lobby how far up or down they move. If your points are coming from 18 year olds and kids on the high end of age groups, you're in a different position than pools where points are coming from younger kids. At least at the mid level divisions, you get some say. D1, 2, and 3 are more intense

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m at a d2 pool that does this and I guarantee the majority of the team doesn’t like this. Would love an open vote. Of course some do. But no one has ever asked me about it. And my kid doesn’t lose a spot. But I see how it affects those that do

Almost every d2 pool has done it this year. It's not unusual at all for the higher divisions.

Keep in mind that for every older slower kid that doesn't get to swim in an A meet, a younger faster kid does. I wouldn't want to be the one to explain to the faster younger kid and her parents that she doesn't get to swim because a slower swimmer's mommy complained.

NP, and I've got no dog in this fight since our team only swims kids up in individual events if there would otherwise be empty lanes so my kid isn't affected, but you could easily just reframe the bolded. It's not that the kid isn't swimming because a slower swimmer's mommy complained, it's that she's not swimming because *she's* the slower swimmer *in her own age group*. Even the youngest kids on DCs team understand this.

If the age groups are meaningless compared to times, NVSL could/should have "time based groups" instead. Let all kids (heck, even mix genders if you want) whose times are between A and B compete in one heat, then all kids with times between C and D, and so on. But I'm guessing age groups matter on some level given that 1) they exist and meets are structured around them, and 2) you can't swim up in the most important meets; Divisionals, Relay Carnival and All Stars all enforce age grouping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m at a d2 pool that does this and I guarantee the majority of the team doesn’t like this. Would love an open vote. Of course some do. But no one has ever asked me about it. And my kid doesn’t lose a spot. But I see how it affects those that do

Almost every d2 pool has done it this year. It's not unusual at all for the higher divisions.

Keep in mind that for every older slower kid that doesn't get to swim in an A meet, a younger faster kid does. I wouldn't want to be the one to explain to the faster younger kid and her parents that she doesn't get to swim because a slower swimmer's mommy complained.

NP, and I've got no dog in this fight since our team only swims kids up in individual events if there would otherwise be empty lanes so my kid isn't affected, but you could easily just reframe the bolded. It's not that the kid isn't swimming because a slower swimmer's mommy complained, it's that she's not swimming because *she's* the slower swimmer *in her own age group*. Even the youngest kids on DCs team understand this.

If the age groups are meaningless compared to times, NVSL could/should have "time based groups" instead. Let all kids (heck, even mix genders if you want) whose times are between A and B compete in one heat, then all kids with times between C and D, and so on. But I'm guessing age groups matter on some level given that 1) they exist and meets are structured around them, and 2) you can't swim up in the most important meets; Divisionals, Relay Carnival and All Stars all enforce age grouping.

Saturday dual meets are a team competition where balance over all ages is rewarded. The age groups, or no-older-than limits, force teams to develop as much talent as possible in each of the 10 competitive bins (boys/girls x 8&u/9-10/11-12/13-14/15-18). Some teams are very strong in some age groups but very weak in others. When such disparities show up in adjacent age groups, the no-older-than limits can help teams balance out their strengths and weaknesses. It's really that simple.

Divisionals and All-Stars are individual events, vice team events. Not sure why NVSL decided to stick to more rigid age boundaries for Relay Carnival than a regular A meet though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in a division two pool and this discussion was brought up by some parents because they were seeding younger faster kids to grab points.

The parents of the slower older kids thought their swimmers had a right because of their age.

The majority of the team say it is a sport and you play to win. If you have some speedsters you use them to your advantage. The A meets are supposed to be a competition and that means it teaches lessons. Summer swim has all the fun stuff as well and B meets where everyone swims. So it is all worlds.

I’m at a d2 pool that does this and I guarantee the majority of the team doesn’t like this. Would love an open vote. Of course some do. But no one has ever asked me about it. And my kid doesn’t lose a spot. But I see how it affects those that do

But it’s probably up also why you guys are D2.

This. You’re a D2 pool because you win a lot, and part of how you do that is strategy rather than just rolling out the fastest kids in order for each event in each age group. You’re a D2 pool on the backs of your fastest swimmers, not the average 13 year old.

Choose a D15 pool if you don't want competitive. Seriously. You are members of a D2 pool, how do you think that happens? With a competitive strategy. There are a lot of mid-range teams that could do a lot better if they actually seeded correctly based on times.

The reason NVSL doesn't allow swim ups for Relay Carnival and divisionals is because those are the only events that lock in age groups and rate them against their peers. It is not a requirement for dual meets which should be all about seeding strategy.

Um- it’s our neighborhood pool. Chill. We didn’t pool shop

+1. Most of us are joining our neighborhood pool. We are not joining based on swim team policies. There are lots of pools that do not allow younger kids to swim up unless there are empty lanes. This is a league wide rule in MCSL. This whole thread really makes me cringe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If the age groups are meaningless compared to times, NVSL could/should have "time based groups" instead. Let all kids (heck, even mix genders if you want) whose times are between A and B compete in one heat, then all kids with times between C and D, and so on. But I'm guessing age groups matter on some level given that 1) they exist and meets are structured around them, and 2) you can't swim up in the most important meets; Divisionals, Relay Carnival and All Stars all enforce age grouping.

You don't understand how the age groups work. The names are misleading. They are really 18U, 14U, 12U, 10U, and 8U.

Divisionals and All Stars are individual and not team meets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m at a d2 pool that does this and I guarantee the majority of the team doesn’t like this. Would love an open vote. Of course some do. But no one has ever asked me about it. And my kid doesn’t lose a spot. But I see how it affects those that do

Almost every d2 pool has done it this year. It's not unusual at all for the higher divisions.

Keep in mind that for every older slower kid that doesn't get to swim in an A meet, a younger faster kid does. I wouldn't want to be the one to explain to the faster younger kid and her parents that she doesn't get to swim because a slower swimmer's mommy complained.

NP, and I've got no dog in this fight since our team only swims kids up in individual events if there would otherwise be empty lanes so my kid isn't affected, but you could easily just reframe the bolded. It's not that the kid isn't swimming because a slower swimmer's mommy complained, it's that she's not swimming because *she's* the slower swimmer *in her own age group*. Even the youngest kids on DCs team understand this.

Except she is, objectively and factually, NOT the slower swimmer in a race she is eligible for.

[Anonymous]

NVSL should not allow swim up if the team has X number of swimmers in that group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NVSL should not allow swim up if the team has X number of swimmers in that group.

MLB should not allow teams to bring up players from the minors unless there is a injury or retirement. This is exactly how you sound. If there’s a better player, err swimmer, at a lower level who can help the team, then promote them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NVSL should not allow swim up if the team has X number of swimmers in that group.

Then advocate to have the rule changed. Or start a new non-competitive league.

[Anonymous]

We are at a mid-division NVSL pool and our team never swims up unless there would be an empty lane. Summer swim is competitive, but it’s not about parsing the rules for every possible advantage. If that means who lose a close meet that we could have won if we rearranged swimmers and played with the age groups, so be it. It is so much more rewarding to see a slower kid in an age group get a chance to fill the last lane in a race — they are often incredibly excited to have the chance to swim in an A Meet. I’d hate to take that away just to possibly gain a few extra points by swimming up a younger swimmer.

Perhaps we are just lucky in this regard that our pool is relatively small and we don’t have a ton of extra kids on our team. If someone is fast, they are swimming in the A Meet regardless. No one is being left out simply because we swim kids in their actual age groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are at a mid-division NVSL pool and our team never swims up unless there would be an empty lane. Summer swim is competitive, but it’s not about parsing the rules for every possible advantage.

It's not parsing the rules. It's explicitly allowed in the rules. See 2. POOL AND COMPETITOR ELIGIBILITY, Article IV (c)

[Anonymous]

Our team does this when the lanes would otherwise be empty, and they always move up the slower kids in the lower age group who wouldn't otherwise be swimming. The one exception to this is that there's an 8u kid swimming in the mixed age relay instead of a 9-10. This kid has a faster time than any of the 9-10s, so they're doing it to win, but it kind of sucks for the 9-10s who now don't have a chance to swim in that relay.