Reply to Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters

Forum Index » Swimming and Diving

Reply to "Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The only thing I would change is moving the date to July 1 instead of June 1 or maybe June 15…. Just to try and capture the age kids are for the bulk of the season.

I think age has next to no effect for the 12 and under kids.  It can be brutal for those 13 and over boys!  Big difference to be 13 racing a 15 year old!!  But it is what it is.[/quote]

Dumb idea.

Why?  The cut off could easily be the Monday before the first A meet of the season instead of a set date.

[/quote][/quote]
Cool. So then the 8 year olds that swam 25s at time trials don’t get to swim the first A meet if they turned 9 in between and won’t have times for 50s? Sucks to be them but at least your kid doesn’t have to swim against that 9 year old, so you’re fine with this. [/quote]

Why on earth would they swim 25s at time trials if they were competing for a spot in 50s at the first A meet?[/quote]

The debate is about swimming in the correct age group and then swimming up as the swimmer ages (ie an 8 year swims a 25m at time trials, ages up that week, then would need to swim
50m as a 9 yr old). [/quote]

This scenario is so crazy it’s not even believable. The kid would obviously swim 50 m at time trials to get a seed time and to be ready for the meet. Stop trying to counter crazy with even crazier. [/quote]
Time Trials is maybe not the best example since you could use an age up date as the first A meet.  What about if kid ages up in between the first A meet and the second?  Then they would have no times.   Makes no sense and makes a ton of work.  You have to use a consistent age up date as this is not USA swimming and these meets are run by parent volunteers and sometimes inexperienced coaches.   Whoever is suggesting this is obviously one of those parents that likes to complain and not help at all. [/quote]
I hate that this argument comes up year after year. A cutoff time is needed for such a short season, but these people pretending that June 1 is so much fairer than say August 1 crack me up. It’s 2 sides of the same coin, the only difference is whose kid will be disadvantaged. All meets are automated, there is no issue with age ups, you just set the software appropriately. All of our swimmers are in the system with their age as of the age up date. So we have 11 year olds that still show up in heat sheets as 10 since that was their age on June 1. If you went with age on the day of the meet the program would account for that, same with if you went with age as of August 1. [/quote]
If June 1 and August 1 are equally fair, why change the rule that's been in place for years?

It's no big deal if a kid has just turned 11 and is racing in the 9-10 bracket because their birthday was after the cutoff date unless you're being ridiculously literal for the sake of being literal.  The bracket is exactly two years in width.  No one is more than 2 years older than any other swimmer, even if they are already 11 yo, as the youngest 9 yos are swimming in the 8u bracket.

--parent of kids who don't have a June or July birthday [/quote]

What's even more insane is that I have encountered parents who complain about the summer swim age cut off disadvantaging their kid with an April or may birthday but then they will redshirt that kid for school. Which for the record I have no issue with -- redshirt if you want and it makes sense for your kid. But it's nuts to me to go out of your way to make sure your kid starts kindergarten at 6 and change but then freak out because he will sometimes swim against a kid who is 9 years and 1 month in the 8u division of summer swim.

[b]At that point it's really obvious that these people define "fair" as "rules that benefit my kid specifically" and "unfair" as anything that advantages any kid that isn't their kid specifically. It's not even worth engaging because it's such a self-serving argument that ignores all kinds of logistics and practicalities that actually dictate a lot of the rules around age cohorts (not making sure one person's child has an advantage for one short rec season).[/b][/quote]

Doesn't fairness around ages have to get defined that way? No matter what rule you use, there will be an oldest and a youngest. Parents with younger kids (who are overly involved enough to care) will say unfair, parents with older kids won't care [/quote]

I mean -- not if you are an adult. I have a kid with an August birthday who is not redshirted and is often the youngest in class as well as anything grade based. This means often we have to manage a maturity gap around school and activities that can be tricky. It's just the straw she drew as a person and we drew as parents. I have never once in my life claimed it was "unfair" that this is how it is because it's not. It's just life. Some kids have learning disorders and some have mental health challenges. Some kids are very short or very tall or struggle with gaining weight or maintaining a healthy weight. That's life. As a parent you roll with it and parent the kid you have which in my case means I have to parent a kid who is often on the younger age of an age cohort and I have to do stuff other parents don't have to do to help her navigate that. Other parents are dealing with other stuff.

Whiny immature parents are the ones who get mad that they have to parent their kid through the sometimes frustrating but also normal experience of having to compete against someone older or bigger than they are. The fact that kids with spring birthdays are at a slight disadvantage in summer swim is probably GOOD for them because they have not often experienced being the youngest in their cohort but at some point in life they will be and now they can figure out how to deal with it. And then they won't be whiny babies when they are the youngest in their intern class or the least experienced member of the project team. They will understand how to navigate that situation.

So no "unfairness" is not inevitable when there are age cutoffs. It's only unfair if you have this sense of entitlement around never having to compete against someone a tiny bit older or bigger than you are. What my kid knows is that once you acclimate to working with people who are a bit older and bigger and more mature than you are you actually become better at whatever it is -- swimming or running or reading or playing games or whatever. It pushes you to work harder and you learn what is possible sooner. It's a gift. It's not "unfair".[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics