New Scoring

Moderators: Diesel471, ThePlowman

Troy Polamalu
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:42 pm

Post by Troy Polamalu » Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:30 pm

i hate to break it to duuude or however u spell that name, but i would first and foremost like to see a swimmer on steriods. i mean i think that the NCAA ban's those, and also i dont' know a single ONU swimmer on any and i assume no JCU, don't know about BW or mount, or wilmington. so ya, i think that ur crazy for making that comparison.

Also from what i gathering from duuude, he brought the work ethic in here and people who work for years to perfect a stroke and not score but then have a guy who just decides to swim it score in front of someone who tries. (this is a summary from what u said) Well, y don't u make up a system that grades on someone's improvement from the last season to this season.... but wait if u did that, then the slowest swimmers would win bc they would have the largest time drops. so wait, i guess that that woudlnt' work. hmmm, we'll have to think of somehting else, o ya, then u switched from the people who work really hard to only getting people who would score in the top 6........ ya, huh
big difference......

by the way, if ur goign to post without us knowing what school ur from, which one is it?? and y don't u swim the 200 fly, or if u do, y don't more of ur team to do it, i mean it sounds like ur team must have gotten the shaft or something last year, and i guess u coulda gotten points from that event, since u sound like such a seasoned veteran i figured that u prolly coulda finished the 200 fly...

swimmin hard
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 1:51 pm

Post by swimmin hard » Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:48 pm

i think we are missing a point here...............this is D3 swimming.........people do it for the love of the sport. furhtermore, cutting down to only 6 people does not help small schools in our league at all. it will destroy recruiting, and in a few years the league will be reduced to only 3 teams, BW, ONU, and JCU, in which case they will be finding other leagues to swim in. i totally agree with what dorsch has been saying. furthermore, just because some one isn't " gifted" doesnt mean they shouldnt be allowed to score points. for instance, i know a swimmer who is prolly gonna go about 50 point at conference, he works his butt off, but looking at the times this year, a 50 point is probably not going to make finals. you say "Consider this also...that year a 50 free swimmer had to go a 23.09 (a respectable time) to score a single point.".........i would say that 50 seconds in a 100 is also respectable is it not, but now because the league reduces it down 6 he doesnt get a chance to improve in the consols at night. .........................and diving started all this somehow?, it is not the problem of the other teams in the league that wilmington and mount do not have diving programs. its the same thing as saying, oh we dont have any distance freestylers, or well we didnt recruit and breastrokers. well if you dont have them, then you dont, you take your knock for that event and move on.............i find it hard to believe that people even make a case about not having diving or other events, look at the Kenyon swimming program. heck they win every year at D3 nationals, and they do not have any divers at all. 0, zip, notta............hmm seems that they still manage to fair alright.

Dorsch
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 8:03 pm
Location: Detroit, MI
Contact:

Post by Dorsch » Mon Jan 09, 2006 5:59 pm

TP-

I was gonna make the streoids comment earlier, but was too confused by people thinking that only the people who are, as I would call, "sweet" should score. But seeing the silence from the only person supporting scoring 6 on this forum, I would have to assume that "the duuude abides" (for those of you who also enjoy The Big Lebowski).

Back to dodgeball, though. Since people think only the best should count, then I say we play sudden death dodgeball. And everyone is lucky that I graduated last year because I happen to be the man in dodgeball, and believe it or not, I am the best ever at sudden death dodgeball.

Keep it real, and remember kids, take the duuude's advice and if you aren't the best, you aren't worth crap (self-edited to save the time of the moderators)

Troy Polamalu
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:42 pm

Post by Troy Polamalu » Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:32 pm

i like swimmin hard's comment. but i don't know about Dorsch being the best sudden death dodgeballer.... and also im glad that we didnt' have to get Syracuse82 in here to clean up the language... he is a great moderator... two shout outs go to him... maybe he is reading the forum still???

duuude
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:41 am

Post by duuude » Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:41 pm

all i will say is that this isn't special olympics and everyone should not score. only the best should. and "my silence" is because i don't live on this message board, buddy. and this message board isn't exactly very big and reading the messages, there are less than 10 who are writing about this issue who all seem to be from larger schools. I am not in the OAC, i go to westminster and swam in high school, but not here in college. I do have an interest in swimming, particularly in the OAC, and have been following it. i also take an interest in the issues i hear about from friends of mine that swim for schools in the OAC. This decision to score only 6 was a good decision and i think it will help increase competitiveness in your conference.

The reason for the steroids comment (while extreme) was to make a point that "fairness" is an important issue and shouldn't be cast aside because, as Dorsch said, "life isn't fair".

And everyone's arguments agains't scoring six are dumb because, using your reasoning, you should allow every swimmer that swims to get a point. Why stop at 12? What about that kid who got 13th, but worked really hard to get to where he was? what about 14th and up? if you are going to reward hard work, then there should be no cutoff and the coaches should determine who gets the points...which gets rid of the point of a conference meet.

and about the kid that went three minutes in the 200 fly, i don't know why you would take offense from me stating his time, buddy. he went that time and, sorry to break it to you if you don't already realize it, that isn't very fast. yet he scored. great for him for swimming instead of playing football. good for him for trying. GREAT for him for finishing the 200 fly at the conference meet. that is a really good achievement. But for him to score points for that time? sorry...but thats a little much.

and swimmin hard, a 50 is a respectable time in the 100 free...and it would be aggravating to not be able to score or make it to finals in that event. but i think it is more aggravating to go a 50 and score 1 or 2 points and watch someone barely finish the 100 fly and score twice as many points.

so i am guessing everyone would be for scoring every swimmer? that wouldn't "punish" the bigger schools...

Troy Polamalu
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:42 pm

Post by Troy Polamalu » Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:47 pm

if u dont' swim in college y are u on this forum? also, y would u call the OAC conference "our" conference if ur not in it???? so im thinking that ur in our conference and just don't want to identify urself.

duuude
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:41 am

Post by duuude » Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:13 pm

i said something on this message board because i follow swimming and, as i said, i think that the OAC is a good conference (PAC isn't a very exciting conference). if i was a swimmer at an OAC school, i would be making a lot more choice comments about other issues. i use the term "our" because i figured someone would use the comment "why are you talking about a conference when you aren't in it". i don't care whether or not the top 6 rule is used, but i think it is dumb to say that giving everyone points is supposed to be fair. i think it is the right choice to have the points go to the best and most talented swimmers. i don't know how that is arguable

BearsSwimming
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 7:07 pm

Post by BearsSwimming » Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:44 pm

Okay, not to knock any teams in this conference because I really do appreciate the effort everyone puts in, but seriously, can anyone prove to me that scoring 6 will BENEFIT Wilmington or Mount? Based on the top times report, there are very few swimmers from EITHER team even in the top 6. I know that doesn't mean a whole lot right now, but it certainly does attest, at least somewhat, to the fact that both schools would score more points if either the top 8 or 12 were scored. I don't understand the argument that scoring 6 will benefit the smaller schools, and I agree wholeheartedly with dorsch. Scoring 6 will only turn OACs into the second dual meet of the season between BW and ONU and Mount and JCU. Please, if anyone has any calculated proof that scoring 6 will benefit the smaller teams (i.e. Wilmington and Mount), post it on the forum. I also noticed that the PAC scores through 16. The PAC may be better than the OAC, but it certainly doesn't warrant 16 scoring places by your philosophy. I think we can equate a 13:03 1000 (16th place at PAC last year) to a 3 minute 200 fly. In the 400 IM only 14 people placed and 14th was a 5:38. In the 100 breast a 1:12 scored. Only 13 scored in the mile. Same in the 200 back. A 2:38 scored in the 200 breast. Only 15 scored in the 200 fly. 10 in diving. Need I go on? I am guessing this is the trend around the country, barring probably the NCAC, UAA, and a few others. Maybe you should fight for these injustices in your own conference before you start bickering with others in other conferences.

Troy Polamalu
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:42 pm

Post by Troy Polamalu » Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:01 pm

I guess that i coulda have definately taken better than 14th in the 400 IM.... i think that that would be crazy, i mean my 1:20 or 1:15 100 Breast stroke could actually get me somewhere!!! so lets see here, if i went the same splits that i would go for breast then that would put me at a 520, Frankle check me if im wrong here, but i think that thats what it would put me at, and if i took my 100 Free back in a 120, somebody shoot me. please. huh, i guess that there are trouble's in other conferences as well, i am glad taht u pointed that out!

Dorsch
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 8:03 pm
Location: Detroit, MI
Contact:

Post by Dorsch » Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:04 pm

in case anyone is confused, in the swimming world there are 2 conventional ways to score a championship meet, and a third way is starting to be used more and more among FINA sponsored meets. the first convention is for a six lane pool. when a championship style, prelim and final meet is held in a six lane pool, the convention is to score 2 heats , more points being awarded for the faster of the two heats. the second convention is for such a meet held in an 8 lane pool, which would be the same, but have 2 heats of 8. no one in this forum is saying that the oac should move to an 8 lane pool and score 16. that would be rediculous. in fact, in 2004, the oac championships was swam as case western, an 8 lane pool, and only top 12 was scored. last year, the oac scored top 8, which was not done properly seeing as the swimmers in the second heat could not move above 7th place as they should have been able to according to the ncaa rules. the third method is still scoring 16, but having a bonus heat (known by many derogatory names not to be mentioned here) which does not score, but gives athletes the opportunity to have a finals ecperience at say the US Open. however, in my 17 years of involvement in competitive swimming, both as an athlete and a coach, i have never heard of a championship meet scoring top six when there are almost 100 athletes competing. just because the conference is slower than other conferences and the slower races may not be as exciting to watch and even if you just don't think slow times warrent points, that doesn't make the conference so special that they should deviate from the set forth ways of scoring a meet that have been around much longer than the measly oac.

duude, i love how you say you know these people at mount and wilmington and they are all for this. notice that these are two of the FIVE teams in the oac. that means 2/5, and for those who aren't that good at math, that is not even half. in fact, a majority of the schools that have swimming in the oac were not in favor of scoring only six. it makes us look even more like amateurs. it sucks that the five schools that have no swim teams were included in a decision that has absolutely no bearing on anything in their athletic department. the only thing it can do is sway the all-sport standings for the men and the women.

and one aspect that i brought up earlier is that this scoring is rediculous for the girls side. the don't get much love on this forum (hopefully they are getting enough outside of it, if you know what i mean...), but their events are well over full every year and this decision to score 6 really makes the oac look like a bunch of jamokes, as my roommate would say.

i guess it is just amateur hour, which explains why "couldn't cut it" (as i will now refer to the out of conference poster) is posting here like he is/was a member of the oac. i will leave you all with a quote from one of my favorite one-hit-wonders of the late 90's by citizen king and it speaks for the state of the oac: "i've seen better days"

Dorsch
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 8:03 pm
Location: Detroit, MI
Contact:

Post by Dorsch » Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:07 pm

frankle,

i have no life now (as if you couldn't guess that), but i am working on a mock oacs from mid season times. i will let you know when i come up with some scores.

BearsSwimming
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 7:07 pm

Post by BearsSwimming » Mon Jan 09, 2006 11:13 pm

Can't wait to see the results. Just one quick thing though. The ONU relays from Wooster are not listed on the top times. You may want to include them.
200 Free Relay: 1:27.05
400 Medley Relay: 3:35.18
200 Medley Relay: 1:38.23
800 Free Relay: 7:16.35
400 Free Relay: 3:13.48
I don't know if you want to include those or not, but I figured you could have them just in case. Anyway, I'm about tired of fighting duude. I'm excited for the results.

BearsSwimming
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 7:07 pm

Post by BearsSwimming » Mon Jan 09, 2006 11:16 pm

And Rob Frankle could bring some unexpected heat in the mile. He swam it in 17:29 this weekend against Hiram. First time ever swimming it. Not too shabby, although I may be SLIGHTLY biased! :-P

swimmin hard
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 1:51 pm

Post by swimmin hard » Mon Jan 09, 2006 11:57 pm

i would also have to say, that reducing the scoring to 6 by the league, only shows that they are nieve, and uncaring and uneducated about "minor" sports, such as swimming, which many of us have seen and known for years..........as far as wilmington goes, i have spoken with several of thier swimmers and they are totally in favor of scoring 12, as is Tripp (thier coach)

OutsideSmoker27
Moderator
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 2:20 am
Team Affiliation: Grove City
Location: Baltimore, Maryland

Post by OutsideSmoker27 » Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:30 pm

duuude wrote:(PAC isn't a very exciting conference)
Have you been to a PAC conference meet?

I know I'm not in the conference, but I've been reading along and I feel like speaking my peace (an unfortunate problem of mine from time to time), so take it for what it's worth. I think Dorsch is exactly right. Championship meets, unless they're timed finals, always have two heats in the evening. That's just the way it's done. Now I suppose some league somewhere might only have one (well, other than the OAC now), but why bother making the change? The case of a few events being "unfair" because they aren't full just doesn't stand up. 52 guys is what you need to fill 12 places across all individual swimming events (60 if you throw in diving). The OAC had 74 last year, way more than enough. If an event isn't full, it's because coaches haven't chosen to fill it, pure and simple. Maybe it's because it's a harder event, maybe it's because they think they can do better in other events and don't have anyone left over for these ones. But it's a strategic choice. I don't think the OAC athletic council (or the duuude) understand and/or accept that, but that's really what they're penalizing. Like swimmin hard said, makes them look naive and uneducated (and probably uncaring too). Additionally, I still have trouble seeing how the fact that some events don't always get filled to 12 places makes it suddenly fair to reduce every single event to only scoring 6. I just don't see it.

From the PAC perspective, since I know more about it: there are regularly events where the full 16 places aren't filled, usually 2-3 a year, plus diving. It's rare enough to fill the 200 fly or the 400 IM, and sometimes it happens in other events, too. No one in this conference (or out of this conference) is suggesting that we cut back to scoring top-8 or top-12. Certainly no one is suggesting cutting back to just one evening heat.

But back to the OAC: sure, cutting back to top-6 would reward the better swimmers more and would cut out the really bad ones. But in a conference like the OAC where there are more than plenty of swimmers to fill the available scoring spots (12 or even 8), you start running a serious risk of rewarding only the very good (relative to the rest of the conference) swimmers, and leaving the swimmers who are decent but not great with absolutely nothing. Duuude is right, this isn't the special olympics. But it is D-3 swimming, and if you're decent-to-good at an event, it's not unreasonable that you should expect to be able to score at least a few points for your team. If that means there are other events where some scoring spots are empty (again, largely because coaches haven't set up their lineups to fill them), well, so be it.
Families share the bond of blood; teams share the bond of toil, tears, and sweat. Both share the bond of the heart.

Post Reply