Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!

This would probably make a much better new topic, but I will add that cohorts matter. You see really good swimmers in small clubs and they are the top dog there. But they will/are not reaching their potential there could be more but they are not training appropriately. The most these clubs can do is move them inwith older kids, which is not appropriate training.

The other big kicker is the quality of the coaching. NCAP really works on improving the strokes of its top performers. They are trying to make three events for the swimmer. They focus on Nationals and college as their end game, whereas most smaller clubs will focus on making an all around decent swimmer. Both of these goals are correct for the swimmer they are targeting. Most kids will not be elite swimmers, so you want them to be good.

This is such BS. The best female swimmers right now are at ASA not NCap.

What NCap is good at doing is pretending it’s the best when it no longer is.

With the exception of NCap West that is- that site is run really well across all age groups

Swimming rankings say otherwise. ASA definitely has some strong female swimmers but they are not the best. The swim cloud rankings for PVS this season has 3 ASA girls in the top 30 and NCAP has 9. The team rankings also have NCAP 1st and ASA 7th.

Anonymous wrote:This has gone off the rails. Kids from all teams/ages/genders are slapping, jumping, stretching, doing windmills, etc. at the blocks while waiting on their heats. That’s very different than holding up a race while taking off a parka and doing some sort of I’m-more-important-than-everyone else slapping ritual while other swimmers are standing on the blocks cold, anxious, and ready to race. Did the block require adjusting or was this kid just obnoxious?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!

This would probably make a much better new topic, but I will add that cohorts matter. You see really good swimmers in small clubs and they are the top dog there. But they will/are not reaching their potential there could be more but they are not training appropriately. The most these clubs can do is move them inwith older kids, which is not appropriate training.

The other big kicker is the quality of the coaching. NCAP really works on improving the strokes of its top performers. They are trying to make three events for the swimmer. They focus on Nationals and college as their end game, whereas most smaller clubs will focus on making an all around decent swimmer. Both of these goals are correct for the swimmer they are targeting. Most kids will not be elite swimmers, so you want them to be good.

This is such BS. The best female swimmers right now are at ASA not NCap.

What NCap is good at doing is pretending it’s the best when it no longer is.

With the exception of NCap West that is- that site is run really well across all age groups

Swimming rankings say otherwise. ASA definitely has some strong female swimmers but they are not the best. The swim cloud rankings for PVS this season has 3 ASA girls in the top 30 and NCAP has 9. The team rankings also have NCAP 1st and ASA 7th.

As a PP said earlier - smaller clubs can have a superstar swimmer. No one is arguing that. But that superstar might not be realizing their potential or hitting a plateau. That swimmer would benefit from an NCAP or RMSC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!

This would probably make a much better new topic, but I will add that cohorts matter. You see really good swimmers in small clubs and they are the top dog there. But they will/are not reaching their potential there could be more but they are not training appropriately. The most these clubs can do is move them inwith older kids, which is not appropriate training.

The other big kicker is the quality of the coaching. NCAP really works on improving the strokes of its top performers. They are trying to make three events for the swimmer. They focus on Nationals and college as their end game, whereas most smaller clubs will focus on making an all around decent swimmer. Both of these goals are correct for the swimmer they are targeting. Most kids will not be elite swimmers, so you want them to be good.

This is such BS. The best female swimmers right now are at ASA not NCap.

What NCap is good at doing is pretending it’s the best when it no longer is.

With the exception of NCap West that is- that site is run really well across all age groups

Swimming rankings say otherwise. ASA definitely has some strong female swimmers but they are not the best. The swim cloud rankings for PVS this season has 3 ASA girls in the top 30 and NCAP has 9. The team rankings also have NCAP 1st and ASA 7th.

As a PP said earlier - smaller clubs can have a superstar swimmer. No one is arguing that. But that superstar might not be realizing their potential or hitting a plateau. That swimmer would benefit from an NCAP or RMSC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!

We started at a smaller club and moved to one of the big clubs when my swimmer went to high school. Their smaller club was ok until then. We ended leaving the small club because they didn’t have quality training partners for my swimmer. I think the kids push each other in practice each day and that is how they all improve. I honestly think most of coaches my kid had at the smaller club were fine, but in the end they lacked the competition in practice.

Tell that to Daniel Dhiel (IYKYK)

PP- I know who Daniel is, my swimmer is not a generational talent like Daniel. He is a one in million type of swimmer with an amazing unique story.

There’s a superstar girl at that club too.

Are there other club options out in Cumberland? Just because a club is a Y club doesn’t mean it isn’t good. There was a Y club from Connecticut at NCI this weekend and they had some great swimmers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!

We started at a smaller club and moved to one of the big clubs when my swimmer went to high school. Their smaller club was ok until then. We ended leaving the small club because they didn’t have quality training partners for my swimmer. I think the kids push each other in practice each day and that is how they all improve. I honestly think most of coaches my kid had at the smaller club were fine, but in the end they lacked the competition in practice.

Tell that to Daniel Dhiel (IYKYK)

PP- I know who Daniel is, my swimmer is not a generational talent like Daniel. He is a one in million type of swimmer with an amazing unique story.

There’s a superstar girl at that club too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!

We started at a smaller club and moved to one of the big clubs when my swimmer went to high school. Their smaller club was ok until then. We ended leaving the small club because they didn’t have quality training partners for my swimmer. I think the kids push each other in practice each day and that is how they all improve. I honestly think most of coaches my kid had at the smaller club were fine, but in the end they lacked the competition in practice.

Tell that to Daniel Dhiel (IYKYK)

PP- I know who Daniel is, my swimmer is not a generational talent like Daniel. He is a one in million type of swimmer with an amazing unique story.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!

We started at a smaller club and moved to one of the big clubs when my swimmer went to high school. Their smaller club was ok until then. We ended leaving the small club because they didn’t have quality training partners for my swimmer. I think the kids push each other in practice each day and that is how they all improve. I honestly think most of coaches my kid had at the smaller club were fine, but in the end they lacked the competition in practice.

Tell that to Daniel Dhiel (IYKYK)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!

This would probably make a much better new topic, but I will add that cohorts matter. You see really good swimmers in small clubs and they are the top dog there. But they will/are not reaching their potential there could be more but they are not training appropriately. The most these clubs can do is move them inwith older kids, which is not appropriate training.

The other big kicker is the quality of the coaching. NCAP really works on improving the strokes of its top performers. They are trying to make three events for the swimmer. They focus on Nationals and college as their end game, whereas most smaller clubs will focus on making an all around decent swimmer. Both of these goals are correct for the swimmer they are targeting. Most kids will not be elite swimmers, so you want them to be good.

This is such BS. The best female swimmers right now are at ASA not NCap.

What NCap is good at doing is pretending it’s the best when it no longer is.

With the exception of NCap West that is- that site is run really well across all age groups

Swimming rankings say otherwise. ASA definitely has some strong female swimmers but they are not the best. The swim cloud rankings for PVS this season has 3 ASA girls in the top 30 and NCAP has 9. The team rankings also have NCAP 1st and ASA 7th.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!

This would probably make a much better new topic, but I will add that cohorts matter. You see really good swimmers in small clubs and they are the top dog there. But they will/are not reaching their potential there could be more but they are not training appropriately. The most these clubs can do is move them inwith older kids, which is not appropriate training.

The other big kicker is the quality of the coaching. NCAP really works on improving the strokes of its top performers. They are trying to make three events for the swimmer. They focus on Nationals and college as their end game, whereas most smaller clubs will focus on making an all around decent swimmer. Both of these goals are correct for the swimmer they are targeting. Most kids will not be elite swimmers, so you want them to be good.

This is such BS. The best female swimmers right now are at ASA not NCap.

What NCap is good at doing is pretending it’s the best when it no longer is.

With the exception of NCap West that is- that site is run really well across all age groups

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!

We started at a smaller club and moved to one of the big clubs when my swimmer went to high school. Their smaller club was ok until then. We ended leaving the small club because they didn’t have quality training partners for my swimmer. I think the kids push each other in practice each day and that is how they all improve. I honestly think most of coaches my kid had at the smaller club were fine, but in the end they lacked the competition in practice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!

This would probably make a much better new topic, but I will add that cohorts matter. You see really good swimmers in small clubs and they are the top dog there. But they will/are not reaching their potential there could be more but they are not training appropriately. The most these clubs can do is move them inwith older kids, which is not appropriate training.

The other big kicker is the quality of the coaching. NCAP really works on improving the strokes of its top performers. They are trying to make three events for the swimmer. They focus on Nationals and college as their end game, whereas most smaller clubs will focus on making an all around decent swimmer. Both of these goals are correct for the swimmer they are targeting. Most kids will not be elite swimmers, so you want them to be good.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why the NCAP hate? It’s not our club, but it seems a little over the top?

Honestly, because they are good and so the parents of the kids at mediocre clubs are bitter.

🤣

It’s kind of a tell when a poster ends their post hating on NCAP saying something like it’s too high pressure for my swimmer, but it works for some people.

I wasn't the PP, and I don't hate NCAP-- but where I do get frustrated with the team on occasion is when people start chest-thumping and claiming NCAP itself is creating all these fantastic athletes. If you look at all the points scorers from last weekend at least half on the girls' side were swimming (and swimming well) for other teams at 12, 13, or even 14+. They are a superteam because they draw talent from other teams-- and that's fine, but own that.

Here’s the thing, if you have a kid who is an exceptional athlete and they have chosen swim as their preferred sport, there are only a few clubs that can help them maximize that. I would not say the original club made that kid a great swimmer, their athleticism determined that. But a club like NCAP, RMSC, Machine can maximize that potential with the level of training and the training cohort available. An exceptional swimmer who started at a mediocre club cannot reach their maximum potential risk if they are not training with a competitive cohort.

This is a genuine question. As a parent of a high-performing swimmer (subjective, but at least A or AAs or higher in all events) that does not swim for one of these 3 clubs, I'd love to understand the "level of training" these clubs offer that differs from other clubs (aside from training with a competitive cohort). Again, this is not sarcastic. My swimmer seems content with their coach and level of challenge, but I acknowledge that there are no bells and whistles. It's four days/week for age 12, pool only, and just intentional yardage and sets with standard-issue individual equipment. My swimmer continues to improve (as expected at this age), but I wonder what these destination clubs that churn out top-ranked swimmers are doing differently to achieve what you stated is a higher level of training. It sounds like it's more than volume of swimmers and strong swimmers moving in due to reputation. Is it quality of coaching? Equipment? Intensity/diversity/frequency of training? Wondering if I need to consider a move... thanks!