Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This got hashed and rehashed last summer.

NVSL should have a list of agreed upon criteria a pool must meet to host the league wide meets. Evaluate all the pools in the league and identify which ones are suitable. Incentivize those pools to host somehow (entry fees, other ideas?). If none step up, don't have the meet.

The histrionics about well if you don't like it your pool should do it are a waste of time.

They do. And Pinecrest was evaluated against all that criteria before they were given the go-ahead to host.

Water depth was not part of the criteria to be evaluated for a swim meet not using in-water starts? That’s laughable and quite frankly kind of illustrates why summer league should not be taken as seriously as people in NVSL take it.

Again, take it up with the NVSL. Complaining about it on an anonymous forum in a thread about a meet that already past and a pool that is not hosting next year is pointless.

Here’s some historical pools that have hosted large meets in the past.

1984 ASR - Sleepy Hollow Bath and Racquet
1985 IAS - Old Keene Mill
1985 ASR - Mansion House
1986 IAS - Stratford
1986 ASR - Dunn Loring
1987 IAS - Wakefield Chapel
1987 ASR - Dunn Loring
1988 IAS - Wakefield Chapel
1988 ASR - Mansion House
1989 IAS - Wakefield Chapel
1989 ASR - Truro
1990 IAS - Wakefield Chapel
1990 ASR - Stratford
1991 IAS - Wakefield Chapel
1991 ASR - Ilda
1992 IAS - Waynewood
1992 ASR - Ilda
1993 IAS - Waynewood
1993 ASR - Mosby Woods
1994 IAS - Cardinal Hill (they love to host Divisionals)
1994 ASR - Mosby Woods

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This got hashed and rehashed last summer.

NVSL should have a list of agreed upon criteria a pool must meet to host the league wide meets. Evaluate all the pools in the league and identify which ones are suitable. Incentivize those pools to host somehow (entry fees, other ideas?). If none step up, don't have the meet.

The histrionics about well if you don't like it your pool should do it are a waste of time.

They do. And Pinecrest was evaluated against all that criteria before they were given the go-ahead to host.

Water depth was not part of the criteria to be evaluated for a swim meet not using in-water starts? That’s laughable and quite frankly kind of illustrates why summer league should not be taken as seriously as people in NVSL take it.

Anonymous wrote:This got hashed and rehashed last summer.

NVSL should have a list of agreed upon criteria a pool must meet to host the league wide meets. Evaluate all the pools in the league and identify which ones are suitable. Incentivize those pools to host somehow (entry fees, other ideas?). If none step up, don't have the meet.

The histrionics about well if you don't like it your pool should do it are a waste of time.

They do. And Pinecrest was evaluated against all that criteria before they were given the go-ahead to host.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on our pools swim team board. I’ll even volunteer to be on the NVSL board. Which NVSL position is open?

I still think diving in 2.5ft is absurd AND I appreciate Pinecrest stepping and their efforts.

Please don't. We need people who make hard decision and help make it happen, not those who say "I still think diving in 2.5ft is absurd" and do or offer NOTHING to rectify the issue/problem.

Oh stop. You said to put up or shut up. I’m willing to put up and I do put up on a more local level.

I’ve been involved with hosting Divisionals and Divisional Relays. Heck as a former NVSL all star swimmer myself (whose parents also volunteered as officials) I’d even vote for all stars reverting back to top 12 swimmers instead of top 18 to make it less of a production/burden for any club.

Bottom line - I’m offering to help rectify the issue.

Anonymous wrote:This got hashed and rehashed last summer.

NVSL should have a list of agreed upon criteria a pool must meet to host the league wide meets. Evaluate all the pools in the league and identify which ones are suitable. Incentivize those pools to host somehow (entry fees, other ideas?). If none step up, don't have the meet.

The histrionics about well if you don't like it your pool should do it are a waste of time.

+1, this is the answer. No swimmer should be diving into 2.5 feet of water at a league sanctioned meet. Just yelling into the abyss about well you step up then is not a solution to the objective problem that diving into 2.5 feet of water is unsafe. The post above has actual potential solutions.
-NP and non-NVSL longtime swim parent

Anonymous wrote:Why don’t they just start the 50s on the same side they start the 25s? Timers can walk to the other side of the pool OR start the 25s from the shallow side since fewer races are 25s and those kids are smaller

\

Because the only thing harder than an 18 yr old diving into 2.5 ft of water is trying to turn in 2.5 ft of water.

We swam at a pool one summer that hade a very shallow turn end and there were quite a few DQs because kids pushed off the bottom due to the very shallow turn.

Anonymous wrote:Why don’t they just start the 50s on the same side they start the 25s? Timers can walk to the other side of the pool OR start the 25s from the shallow side since fewer races are 25s and those kids are smaller

Maybe it has something to do with the electronic timing system.

Anonymous wrote:I am on our pools swim team board. I’ll even volunteer to be on the NVSL board. Which NVSL position is open?

I still think diving in 2.5ft is absurd AND I appreciate Pinecrest stepping and their efforts.

Please don't. We need people who make hard decision and help make it happen, not those who say "I still think diving in 2.5ft is absurd" and do or offer NOTHING to rectify the issue/problem.

Anonymous wrote:This got hashed and rehashed last summer.

NVSL should have a list of agreed upon criteria a pool must meet to host the league wide meets. Evaluate all the pools in the league and identify which ones are suitable. Incentivize those pools to host somehow (entry fees, other ideas?). If none step up, don't have the meet.

The histrionics about well if you don't like it your pool should do it are a waste of time.

NVSL does write a check to the pool hosting. It has pretty much covered Pinecrest expenses. We've made money on concessions each year.
Enough to justify all the work that goes into it?
I think we could raise the same amount of profit by increasing our membership dues by 10-15 bucks for the year.

Why don’t they just start the 50s on the same side they start the 25s? Timers can walk to the other side of the pool OR start the 25s from the shallow side since fewer races are 25s and those kids are smaller

Anonymous wrote:I am on our pools swim team board. I’ll even volunteer to be on the NVSL board. Which NVSL position is open?

I still think diving in 2.5ft is absurd AND I appreciate Pinecrest stepping and their efforts.

They are always looking for new members so that others can step down. Offer your support at askNVSL@gmail.com

This got hashed and rehashed last summer.

NVSL should have a list of agreed upon criteria a pool must meet to host the league wide meets. Evaluate all the pools in the league and identify which ones are suitable. Incentivize those pools to host somehow (entry fees, other ideas?). If none step up, don't have the meet.

The histrionics about well if you don't like it your pool should do it are a waste of time.

Anonymous wrote:I am on our pools swim team board. I’ll even volunteer to be on the NVSL board. Which NVSL position is open?

I still think diving in 2.5ft is absurd AND I appreciate Pinecrest stepping and their efforts.

Email askNVSL@gmail.com and volunteer.

Anonymous wrote:I am on our pools swim team board. I’ll even volunteer to be on the NVSL board. Which NVSL position is open?

I still think diving in 2.5ft is absurd AND I appreciate Pinecrest stepping and their efforts.

Hello, fellow sane person!