Anonymous
07/23/2024 23:23
Subject: Re:Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Dumb idea.
Why? The cut off could easily be the Monday before the first A meet of the season instead of a set date.
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.
Why on earth would they swim 25s at time trials if they were competing for a spot in 50s at the first A meet?
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).
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.
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.
Anonymous
07/23/2024 22:33
Subject: Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
I think it’s fine to pick a cut off and stick to it. I understand why it would be administratively challenging to have kids changing age groups mid season.
Thems the breaks. And this is coming from a person with a boy in 11-12 this summer where some have practically completed male puberty and some haven’t began it.
The truly, exceptionally good kids are light years ahead of their same age peers.
Thems the breaks. And this is coming from a person with a boy in 11-12 this summer where some have practically completed male puberty and some haven’t began it.
The truly, exceptionally good kids are light years ahead of their same age peers.
Anonymous
07/23/2024 21:28
Subject: Re:Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Dumb idea.
Why? The cut off could easily be the Monday before the first A meet of the season instead of a set date.
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.
Why on earth would they swim 25s at time trials if they were competing for a spot in 50s at the first A meet?
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).
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.
Anonymous
07/23/2024 21:22
Subject: Re:Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Dumb idea.
Why? The cut off could easily be the Monday before the first A meet of the season instead of a set date.
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.
Why on earth would they swim 25s at time trials if they were competing for a spot in 50s at the first A meet?
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).
Anonymous
07/23/2024 20:51
Subject: Re:Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Dumb idea.
Why? The cut off could easily be the Monday before the first A meet of the season instead of a set date.
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.
Why on earth would they swim 25s at time trials if they were competing for a spot in 50s at the first A meet?
Anonymous
07/22/2024 23:26
Subject: Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On our team, in the younger ages, most of the divisionals swimmers were swimming in the “wrong” age group. 11 year olds swimming as 9/10. 9 year olds swimming as 8&under. In the older kids, many of those dominating came back from college to swim a final year.
This rule was literally cooked up in a back room by the parents of summer birthday kids. It should be done away with. We follow USA Swimming rules for everything else. We should for aging up as well.
I was curious if this is even true. So lets look at the NVSL results for divisional in the top 3 divisions for boys 9/10
Division 1 Freestyle: 4/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old placed 2nd
Division 2 Freestyle: 5/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds placed 2nd, 3rd, and 5th
Division 3 Freestyle: 3/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 3rd
Division 1 Backstroke: 4/12 are 9 years old. 9 yard old finished 1st!
Division 2 Backstroke: 4/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 2nd and 4th
Division 3 Backstroke: 2/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 2nd
Division 1 Breaststroke: 4/12 are 9 year olds
Division 2 Breaststroke: 7/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds finished 1st, 3rd, 6th!
Division 3 Breaststroke: 1/12 is 9 years old
Division 1 Fly: 3/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 5th
Division 2 Fly: 5/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds finished 1st and 5th!
Division 3 Fly: 5/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 1st!
Division 1 IM: 6/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds finished 1st and 3rd!
Division 2 IM: 7/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds finished 1st, 3rd, and 5th!
Division 3 IM: 3/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 3rd
Doesn't seem like "over age" (which is not the right term anyway) are dominating 9/10 boys. 9 year olds won 4/15 events.
Seems like this is a non issue.
Not sure this assessment is completely accurate. Looking at the 9 year olds (a few of whom are actually 10, but are considered 9 because of the summer cutoff), these kids are actually swimming in the RIGHT age group. What would be a better assessment is looking at the 10 year olds in the 9-10 age group, some of which are actually competing when their true age is 11.
An example of this is looking at club swimmers who do long course over the summer (which makes you swim your true age). There are some club swimmers whose times are just okay, but are impressive for summer league because of the age advantage.
What are you talking about? If they were born between June 2nd 2013 and June 1 2015 they are the right age. The fact that they had a birthday after the cut off doesn't make them not the right age. They are the age that the league has decided is allowed to swim in that meet. That makes them the "right" age.
Summer swim is a team sport. Name another team sport where kids age up on their birthday. I can't think of any. The fact that the relatively small segment of swim that is club age group swimming does is irrelevant. They're the outliers, and are doing something entirely different from summer swim.
And your focus on kids swimming LC is absurd, because any kid who does club and rec in the same sport, at least any other sport, knows that rec is about having fun with your friends. Trying to make rec into club so you can beat the rec kids is really really really terrible sportsmanship.
Anonymous
07/22/2024 23:14
Subject: Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On our team, in the younger ages, most of the divisionals swimmers were swimming in the “wrong” age group. 11 year olds swimming as 9/10. 9 year olds swimming as 8&under. In the older kids, many of those dominating came back from college to swim a final year.
This rule was literally cooked up in a back room by the parents of summer birthday kids. It should be done away with. We follow USA Swimming rules for everything else. We should for aging up as well.
I was curious if this is even true. So lets look at the NVSL results for divisional in the top 3 divisions for boys 9/10
Division 1 Freestyle: 4/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old placed 2nd
Division 2 Freestyle: 5/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds placed 2nd, 3rd, and 5th
Division 3 Freestyle: 3/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 3rd
Division 1 Backstroke: 4/12 are 9 years old. 9 yard old finished 1st!
Division 2 Backstroke: 4/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 2nd and 4th
Division 3 Backstroke: 2/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 2nd
Division 1 Breaststroke: 4/12 are 9 year olds
Division 2 Breaststroke: 7/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds finished 1st, 3rd, 6th!
Division 3 Breaststroke: 1/12 is 9 years old
Division 1 Fly: 3/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 5th
Division 2 Fly: 5/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds finished 1st and 5th!
Division 3 Fly: 5/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 1st!
Division 1 IM: 6/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds finished 1st and 3rd!
Division 2 IM: 7/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds finished 1st, 3rd, and 5th!
Division 3 IM: 3/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 3rd
Doesn't seem like "over age" (which is not the right term anyway) are dominating 9/10 boys. 9 year olds won 4/15 events.
Seems like this is a non issue.
Not sure this assessment is completely accurate. Looking at the 9 year olds (a few of whom are actually 10, but are considered 9 because of the summer cutoff), these kids are actually swimming in the RIGHT age group. What would be a better assessment is looking at the 10 year olds in the 9-10 age group, some of which are actually competing when their true age is 11.
An example of this is looking at club swimmers who do long course over the summer (which makes you swim your true age). There are some club swimmers whose times are just okay, but are impressive for summer league because of the age advantage.
Anonymous
07/21/2024 19:34
Subject: Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
This whole thing is funny because the majority of A meet/Divisional swimmers are in ages 9-15. You know what happens in this age range? Puberty. Your “man” 13 year old could swim next to a 14 year old who is half his height and weight. Should we revert to wrestling classes now? Height and weight determine what kids swim against each other? Let’s have girls share whether they have had their period? Because many girl swimmers plateau and then start to drop time around when they get their periods.
This whole thing is a joke. My young 9 year beat so many 10 (and 11) year olds in IM yesterday, she made All-Stars. And she’s tiny.
This whole thing is a joke. My young 9 year beat so many 10 (and 11) year olds in IM yesterday, she made All-Stars. And she’s tiny.
Anonymous
07/21/2024 18:54
Subject: Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
I had one of the 9 year olds in division 3 and we are proud of him! Did he swim against kids who were much bigger and clearly older? Sure. He also had a great summer with his team and will look forward to seeing what he can accomplish next year (and during club). There’s always going to be someone older, bigger, faster, stronger, etc. There are lots of great life lessons to be learned in summer swim!
Anonymous
07/21/2024 12:20
Subject: Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s a recreational swim league, who cares? Logistically it makes sense to use June 1 that’s why leagues all over the country have done it for decades. It’s a short season and I doubt seriously that any college is recruiting at
divisionals
Want to make it truly fair and level the playing field, do what other sports do and don’t allow the club athletes to participate in the recreational league.
Problem solved.
Yes, you're right - I can't imagine my travel sport kid playing in the rec league too... totally unfair. Summer swimming had always been that way though, but it's weird.
Its not weird at all. Lots of "travel" kids playing in our summer rec basketball league. Rec sport is for everyone to have *fun*.
People who don't understand "fun" should probably stick to club only.
Anonymous
07/21/2024 12:14
Subject: Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
Anonymous wrote:On our team, in the younger ages, most of the divisionals swimmers were swimming in the “wrong” age group. 11 year olds swimming as 9/10. 9 year olds swimming as 8&under. In the older kids, many of those dominating came back from college to swim a final year.
This rule was literally cooked up in a back room by the parents of summer birthday kids. It should be done away with. We follow USA Swimming rules for everything else. We should for aging up as well.
I was curious if this is even true. So lets look at the NVSL results for divisional in the top 3 divisions for boys 9/10
Division 1 Freestyle: 4/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old placed 2nd
Division 2 Freestyle: 5/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds placed 2nd, 3rd, and 5th
Division 3 Freestyle: 3/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 3rd
Division 1 Backstroke: 4/12 are 9 years old. 9 yard old finished 1st!
Division 2 Backstroke: 4/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 2nd and 4th
Division 3 Backstroke: 2/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 2nd
Division 1 Breaststroke: 4/12 are 9 year olds
Division 2 Breaststroke: 7/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds finished 1st, 3rd, 6th!
Division 3 Breaststroke: 1/12 is 9 years old
Division 1 Fly: 3/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 5th
Division 2 Fly: 5/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds finished 1st and 5th!
Division 3 Fly: 5/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 1st!
Division 1 IM: 6/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds finished 1st and 3rd!
Division 2 IM: 7/12 are 9 years old. 9 year olds finished 1st, 3rd, and 5th!
Division 3 IM: 3/12 are 9 years old. 9 year old finished 3rd
Doesn't seem like "over age" (which is not the right term anyway) are dominating 9/10 boys. 9 year olds won 4/15 events.
Seems like this is a non issue.
Anonymous
07/21/2024 11:57
Subject: Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s a recreational swim league, who cares? Logistically it makes sense to use June 1 that’s why leagues all over the country have done it for decades. It’s a short season and I doubt seriously that any college is recruiting at
divisionals
Want to make it truly fair and level the playing field, do what other sports do and don’t allow the club athletes to participate in the recreational league.
Problem solved.
Yes, you're right - I can't imagine my travel sport kid playing in the rec league too... totally unfair. Summer swimming had always been that way though, but it's weird.
Are travel baseball players banned from Little League?
No. They actually want them to still play rec so they can actually have a rec league. It’s not good for any sport to only have rec kids.
Anonymous
07/21/2024 11:47
Subject: Re:Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
Anonymous wrote:
Dumb idea.
Why? The cut off could easily be the Monday before the first A meet of the season instead of a set date.
So, kids who are close to the cut off end up with 3 years in one division and 1 in the next?
Having the same cut off year to year makes sense.
Anonymous
07/21/2024 11:47
Subject: Re:Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Dumb idea.
Why? The cut off could easily be the Monday before the first A meet of the season instead of a set date.
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.
Anonymous
07/21/2024 11:41
Subject: Re:Divisionals really shows why the unfair birthday rule matters
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Dumb idea.
Why? The cut off could easily be the Monday before the first A meet of the season instead of a set date.