200 FR

Forums General National Championships 200 FR

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 49 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #12080
      silentp
      Member

      It’s the first race of the meet and right now, the most open relay as far as number of teams who could win it. It’s early and we haven’t seen enough to truly gauge, but it’s worth some discussion.

      Pick your horse!

    • #31948

      I would put my odds on GCC b/c they return the most. But, you dont know how they will be year to year because this is really the first time they have been up top. Courage is a stud at hte back, but he needs help. Denison seems like a good choice to me too, but they lost a couple solid legs. They should be able to replace. I dont know where KC is gonna find speed, but I wont put it past them. GAC has the speed, but doesnt seem to be able to put it together at NCAAs and I think W&L is a guy short. The other 2 teams I would include are Emory who returns 3/4 i think. If they can find another 20.7 relay guy they have a shot. And of course I gotta throw some love to the Jays. They were 4th last year and return one of the top 2-3 50 guys in Test. It looks like they have a number of frosh who could go 20.7 with relay starts in Thomas, Blood, Mahoney. I would include them in the discussion. Should be a close race to the wall and if Courage is anywhere near the front when he gets off the block, look out.

    • #31949
      99 Red
      Member

      I’m looking at the improvements that Behnke and Geissinger have been making to their sprints this year, and that makes me like DUs chances. Vs. Kenyon last year Geissinger was 22.5, this year, 21.8. Behnke’s backstroke has gotten faster (55.9 to a 53.6, and he was down to a 21.0 relay split v. the Lords this year. Throw in Byers, Bryce, Curtis, maybe a freshman that has big winter taper drops, and you have plenty of depth and at least 4 guys who can split 20.0-20.4 with the relay.

      Now maybe DU just got up for the Kenyon meet more this year than last year. Or maybe Behnke and Geissinger are just faster this year than they were last year. In any case, I’m voting Red Sprints in ’07.

    • #31950
      swim5599
      Member

      Yeah I would have to think it would be Denison or GAC. GAC probably has the most speed, but we will see what happens to them in March

    • #31951
      N Dynamite
      Member

      I had written something along these lines not too long ago in the MIAC forum – someone had written that GAC would be in contention for the 200 FR. Some of this was cut and pasted from a previous post, but I did add a little.

      Of the three that were at or under 1:22 last year at NCAAs, all have significant losses – Kenyon graduated two (although at least Harris should be able to step right in, I would be surprised if they don’t have another who could also), Wash U lost three, and Grove City lost their second best guy (who was a 20.57 flat start going into NCAAs). After those three things were pretty wide open – and Hopkins, Denison, and Wheaton each lost two and Emory graduated Hake. If they can get it together GAC could pull it off.

      However, looking over the results, and also remembering something Cheadle pointed out at the time, Grove City could be a tough one to beat. They have four of the five guys back that participated on that relay at NCAAs last year – Young (20.81 split in prelims) was replaced by Snyder (21.09 in finals). Cheadle pointed out before Nats that Whitbeck (21.16 lead off) was a 20.6 in high school. He has already been 21.17 this year. Plus, Courage anchored a 19.68 in finals (which I think may have been the fastest 50 split of the meet). Those four are 3 sophmores (Whitbeck, Snyder, and Young) and a junior (Courage) this year.

      In addition, Denison could be extremely dangerous in this event this year. While they graduated two guys, their freshmen appear to be great freestylers, so they’ll probably be right up there. Hopkins has their two top guys from that relay returning in Test (20.69 lead off) and Walsh (20.50 split), and Emory was 1:22.47 in prelims so if they can replace Hake they’ll be in the mix also – maybe even the favorites by season’s end.

      W&L’s time to date is especially intriguing – they were “only” 1:23.70 in a DQ effort at NCAAs. They graduated one guy, but he was their weakest leg. With McGlaston going 20.66 already and Ginder putting up 20.11 split last year, they appear to be a huge threat.

      Still, I voted for GCC – with 4 returnees (of 5) from a 2nd place showing (both in prelims and finals) as well as an apparent return to form by Whitbeck leads me to believe they have experience and ability on their side.

    • #31952
      Chris Knight
      Member

      @N Dynamite wrote:

      W&L’s time to date is especially intriguing – they were “only” 1:23.70 in a DQ effort at NCAAs. They graduated one guy, but he was their weakest leg. With McGlaston going 20.66 already and Ginder putting up 20.11 split last year, they appear to be a huge threat.

      As the alum in question, I take no offense! 8) The 2nd leg has already improved by .3
      However, I would note that we did go 1:23.24 to get in and 1:23.22 in prelims, in addition to the dissapointing 1:23.7 / DQ.

    • #31953
      The15mMark
      Member

      The 200 FR isn’t a sure thing when the lead-off guys are stepping on the blocks, much less at this point! None-the-less I’ll throw my vote out there for W&L. They’ve got some horses, no doubting that. I’d vote for GAC, but as it’s been said, they haven’t been able to pull it together at national’s lately.

    • #31954
      swim5599
      Member

      ON paper it should probably be GAC’s, but the race is never won on paper. SO I will say Denison

    • #31955
      The Treat
      Member

      @swim5599 wrote:

      ON paper it should probably be GAC’s, but the race is never won on paper. SO I will say Denison

      yeah, i think denison will put it together. as last year proved, on paper means NOTHING. its just fun for us to discuss πŸ˜€

    • #31956

      The Grove City men just swam a 1:24.4 at the Kenyon pool today, without much competition. Whitbeck is definitely back to his high school form. He could easily go 20.4 flat start (tapered) this year. If the two middle guys average 20.8 with relay splits, and Courage swims a 19.7 again, you have a time around 1:21.7. I’m going to put them as the front runners for this debate.

    • #31957
      gccswimmer16
      Member

      Whitbeck was a 20.87 today at Kenyon, to reinforce that he is back to his old form. This beats his best time last year shaved and tapered by almost 2 tenths of a second. Look for him to continue to improve throughout the season.

    • #31958
      silentp
      Member

      wow, great swim. Any idea if they rested at all for this? I know they weren’t tapered, and a 1:24 is great whenever you go it, but just wondering… not that anyone would admit it if they were

    • #31959

      @silentp wrote:

      Any idea if they rested at all for this?

      I would tend to doubt it (and not just because I like being on the Grove City bandwagon πŸ˜€ ).

    • #31960
      gccswimmer16
      Member

      Yeah, I would agree with OutsideSmoker that these guys are not tapered, unless it was an “accident” like what has been talked about in other forums. I know from swimming with them that all of the guys, but especially Caleb and Timmy, get up for big meets against fast teams, and the combination of that with a fast Kenyon pull was probably why they swam very well yesterday.

    • #31961
      swim5599
      Member

      Is it possible that we have seen 2 sub 21 second 50’s that are unrested? If that is the case we should see some great swims at the end of the year. I hate to say it, but I have to think that these guys were a little rested.

    • #31962

      @swim5599 wrote:

      Is it possible that we have seen 2 sub 21 second 50’s that are unrested?

      No. Whitbeck maybe, since he still is 2 tenths off of his HS PR – the guy should be faster than he was last year. Someone coming in at 20.6 ought to be a 20.0 or faster college swimmer, so if he is getting back into HS form (and better), I could see 20.8 on little or no rest from him.

      Courage and Whitbeck on the same relays… probably the two most rawly talented sprinters in D3 right now… a bit scary.

    • #31963
      gccswimmer16
      Member

      Also scary is the fact that Whitbeck is only a sophomore, and Courage is a Junior. Regardless of who swims the 200 Free Relay this year (there seems to be a fight for the last two spots) they will all return next year.

    • #31964
      gcc62
      Member

      I’m not going to try to dispell whether Tim was rested or not – nothing I say here will change anyone’s opinion. If he was rested it was purely accidental. However, if his 50 is any indication, his 100 (his HS best was 46.5, he was only 50.82) should be pretty fast by the end of the season also. He has a hard time maintaining his speed over that distance, especially right after the 50 or at the end of the meet. Hopefully when he is rested that will come together for him.

      If you’re curious as to my explanation – he trained all summer and came to school in shape. He has some pretty lofty goals that I won’t get into here. When he came to GCC in January last year he had just had 2 months off (from the pool, the weight room, any dryland whatsoever), so he was in terrible shape (for him).

    • #31965
      swim5599
      Member

      I don’t mean to sound like an ass when I say this, but I do not know many 20.6 50 freestylers that go close to that in season while unrested. I know of guys that fast that have probably been about 21.3 or so while in heavy training. I just think that Whitbeck and Mcglaston were probably a little rested, and I am not saying there is anything wrong with that, because there isn’t. I hope these guys do well. We will never know if they were rested or not, because it is almost taboo to admit if you were rested in the sport of swimming.

    • #31966
      MentalEdge
      Member

      In their 3rd meet in 4 days Whitbeck and Courage had an epic battle in the 50 tonight. It was their first 50 race of the season and it was sweet (I wish I could have seen it but I was in the pool too). What I heard though is that Courage had it from the first turn but Timmy wasn’t far behind. Caleb was 20.81 and Timmy, 20.98. These guys are fast… and their only competition thus far has been themselves.

    • #31967
      The Treat
      Member

      @MentalEdge wrote:

      In their 3rd meet in 4 days Whitbeck and Courage had an epic battle in the 50 tonight. It was their first 50 race of the season and it was sweet (I wish I could have seen it but I was in the pool too). What I heard though is that Courage had it from the first turn but Timmy wasn’t far behind. Caleb was 20.81 and Timmy, 20.98. These guys are fast… and their only competition thus far has been themselves.

      where meet was this? link to results?

    • #31968

      @gcc62 wrote:

      I’m not going to try to dispell whether Tim was rested or not – nothing I say here will change anyone’s opinion. If he was rested it was purely accidental. However, if his 50 is any indication, his 100 (his HS best was 46.5, he was only 50.82) should be pretty fast by the end of the season also. He has a hard time maintaining his speed over that distance, especially right after the 50 or at the end of the meet. Hopefully when he is rested that will come together for him.

      If you’re curious as to my explanation – he trained all summer and came to school in shape. He has some pretty lofty goals that I won’t get into here. When he came to GCC in January last year he had just had 2 months off (from the pool, the weight room, any dryland whatsoever), so he was in terrible shape (for him).

      I agree, and to respond to both of you and 5599, I don’t think Whitbeck is a 20.6 college guy. A lot of guys who go 20.6 in HS, go 20.6 in college untapered, and then go 19+ at taper time… Whitbeck is no McGlaston.

    • #31969
      MentalEdge
      Member
    • #31970
      silentp
      Member

      @MentalEdge wrote:

      The Meet was GCC vs Gannon:

      http://www2.gcc.edu/sports/M-Swimming1/0607%20files/gannonsru112006.htm

      Andrew Gilbert seems well ahead of his pace, considering he’s 1:00 right now and was only 59-low at conference meet last year.

      All of the guys seems pretty close to conference meet times, might be a fast year for Grove City if this improvement keeps up.

    • #31971
      maverick1
      Member

      whitbeck may have a nice 50, but that guy is the man in the 100

    • #31972
      not_a_grover
      Member

      @maverick wrote:

      whitbeck may have a nice 50, but that guy is the man in the 100

      If by nice you mean he goes 30% slower on his second 50.

      The Grove City guys are going to be 1:21 mid or low. Timmy and Caleb will both be 20.3 or less flat (possibly faster).

      Tim will be scary fast if he actually tries.

    • #31973
      swimfrchrst
      Member

      I agree that if Whitbeck swims like he should be swimming, Crove City is going to be fast. I don’t think a 1:20 is out of the picture, and considering that they were a 1:21 high last year and got 2nd, I don’t think that Kenyon or any other teams can beat them. I would guess that Tim would be a lead off, since he seems to be their fastest flat start swimmer and he would go around a 20.1 or maybe faster. The next two legs are between three Grove City sophomores; Drew Snyder, Mitch Young, and Peter Larsen. Snyder split a 21.09 last year with a horrible start and has already split 21.24 this year. I think he can go a 20.5 or lower this year at NCAA’s. Larsen has split a 21.43 already and I think he can go a 20.6 at least relay split. Young split a 20.81 last year at NCAA’s and seems to be swimming pretty slow this year so far, but I think he can go a 20.5 or so as well. With Courage anchoring last year with a 19.68, and being capable of going even faster, I’d be scared. That’s a 20.1-20.5-20.5-19.6. That’s pretty quick.

    • #31974
      Aflac
      Member

      I’ll take the over on a Grove City 1:20.7

    • #31975
      Aflac
      Member

      Why doesn’t Courage get to drop time? You have everyone else dropping boatloads.

    • #31976
      MentalEdge
      Member

      I don’t think it’s a big deal not to expect a big drop from Courage. Timmy will be very fast now that he’s in shape and with three guys gunning for the last two spots, two of them are bound to be 20-mid. If the first three go as fast as swimfrchrst expects, then GCC will be 1:01.2 or so through the first 150 yards. I just don’t see Courage getting pushed as much as he did last year (where he tracked down Triebe). He always seems to go just as fast as he needs to go to win. One thing’s for sure though, if he’s winning when he hits the pool, there’s no looking back for Grove City.

    • #31977
      not_a_grover
      Member

      @swimfrchrst wrote:

      I agree that if Whitbeck swims like he should be swimming, Crove City is going to be fast. I don’t think a 1:20 is out of the picture, and considering that they were a 1:21 high last year and got 2nd, I don’t think that Kenyon or any other teams can beat them. I would guess that Tim would be a lead off, since he seems to be their fastest flat start swimmer and he would go around a 20.1 or maybe faster. The next two legs are between three Grove City sophomores; Drew Snyder, Mitch Young, and Peter Larsen. Snyder split a 21.09 last year with a horrible start and has already split 21.24 this year. I think he can go a 20.5 or lower this year at NCAA’s. Larsen has split a 21.43 already and I think he can go a 20.6 at least relay split. Young split a 20.81 last year at NCAA’s and seems to be swimming pretty slow this year so far, but I think he can go a 20.5 or so as well. With Courage anchoring last year with a 19.68, and being capable of going even faster, I’d be scared. That’s a 20.1-20.5-20.5-19.6. That’s pretty quick.

      Do I smell some best case scenario action? You can’t push the starts too much… I’d go with 20.3, 20.65, 20.65, 19.7… which puts me right about where I guessed 1.21.3ish. Courage could have a crappy start and/or not get pushed like last year as Edge mentioned. If he doesn’t have that he won’t perform the same.

      Here’s to the sticky icky last year, haha. Nice win against Bethany!

    • #31978
      swim5599
      Member

      I do not think they will go that fast. I know that Mcglaston went 20.6 already, and of course everyone says he was not rested. They have swum in races since then and he has been 20.9 and 21.0. I think he could be 20.5 by the end of the year, but probably not a whole lot faster.

      Denison has been 1:22.00 already, and I fully expect 1:21.5 out of them, They will be your nat champs

    • #31979
      swim5599
      Member

      How was Courage not pushed in last years 200 FR? They got 2nd last time I checked

    • #31980
      Chris Knight
      Member

      All I’m willing to predict for this race is that it will be insanely fast. I think all the teams mentioned in this poll will be in the 1:21’s. I think there’s a very good chance that it will come down to the touch, and everyone will have to check the scoreboard to actually find out who won.

    • #31981
      The Treat
      Member

      @swim5599 wrote:

      How was Courage not pushed in last years 200 FR? They got 2nd last time I checked

      i think they meant that there is a chance that he might not be pushed as hard as he was last year. tricky wording which you can take to mean either way.

    • #31982
      MentalEdge
      Member

      @The Treat wrote:

      they meant that there is a chance that he might not be pushed as hard as he was last year

      Treat’s got it. You guys really think a 1:21.5 will be enough for first?

    • #31983
      N Dynamite
      Member

      A few points to ponder:

      1. Who was the fastest seed at Christmas last year in the 200 FR and what place did they come in?
      2. Who was the fastest seed going to Minnesota last year in the 200 FR and what place did they come in?
      3. Who was the fastest seed going to Holland in 2005 and what place did they come in?
      4. Which Kenyon relay did not get invited to Holland in 2005 and what place did it come in?
      5. Who came in second in 2005 and what place did they get in 2006?

      Here’s my point – Good luck to Denison, good luck to Grove City, good luck to W&L, Hopkins, GAC and UCSC. Just because Kenyon doesn’t enter guys in the 50 doesn’t mean they can’t sprint – just ask Duda. Going fast now doesn’t mean anything. It’s whoever puts down in March that matters, and for quite a while it’s been Kenyon. Safe money bets on them again this year.

      One last thing – this conversation is getting somewhat confusing – doesn’t McGlaston swim for W&L? What was swim5599 referring to?

      Oh, and by the way – I hope I didn’t offend you Treat – just trying to make a point.

    • #31984
      swim5599
      Member

      No I meant to say Whitbeck I apologize for the confusion. I was making a statement regarding the fact that I do not think he will be quite as fast as 20.2 flat start. Probably 20.5 is more like it. This race is going to be fun.

      So potentially we could see GCC at 1:21 mid, Denison at 1:21 mid, GAC at 1:21 mid, and who else? Are there any others out there. Does emory return just about everyone on that relay from last year with the exception of Hake? They could make a run also. But in the end I really think it will be Denison.

    • #31985
      N Dynamite
      Member

      Too many Tim’s. Especially since they both swam very fast already this year. Since McGlaston was brought up – I think it’s safe to say W&L will be down there too. Hake was the only senior from Emory last year, so they’ll be in the mix. I mentioned UCSC earlier because it seems that their sprinters are doing quite well already – were they rested for the meet the nearly qualified in though? I think this could be the most exciting relay. Great way to start the meet.

    • #31986
      swim5599
      Member

      Yeah it is interesting that UCSC is brought up. I feel like it has been awhile since they have been on the map. W and L will contend.

      Was anyone really surprised by ALex Sweet’s 100? That was a great swim

    • #31987
      Chris Knight
      Member

      I wasn’t
      πŸ˜€

      Sweet is Courage with less experience: 6’7″, incredibly powerful stroke but has a little trouble getting off the blocks. The 50 is a little short for him but the 100 is perfect.

    • #31988
      swim5599
      Member

      What was his best time previous to the 45.3 that he went?

    • #31989
      Chris Knight
      Member

      46.06 from prelims; before that, 46.69 from last February.

    • #31990
      The Treat
      Member

      @N Dynamite wrote:

      A few points to ponder:

      1. Who was the fastest seed at Christmas last year in the 200 FR and what place did they come in?
      2. Who was the fastest seed going to Minnesota last year in the 200 FR and what place did they come in?
      3. Who was the fastest seed going to Holland in 2005 and what place did they come in?
      4. Which Kenyon relay did not get invited to Holland in 2005 and what place did it come in?
      5. Who came in second in 2005 and what place did they get in 2006?

      Here’s my point – Good luck to Denison, good luck to Grove City, good luck to W&L, Hopkins, GAC and UCSC. Just because Kenyon doesn’t enter guys in the 50 doesn’t mean they can’t sprint – just ask Duda. Going fast now doesn’t mean anything. It’s whoever puts down in March that matters, and for quite a while it’s been Kenyon. Safe money bets on them again this year.

      One last thing – this conversation is getting somewhat confusing – doesn’t McGlaston swim for W&L? What was swim5599 referring to?

      Oh, and by the way – I hope I didn’t offend you Treat – just trying to make a point.

      none taken πŸ˜€

      its an valid point to bring up. kenyon was overlooked last year and they had some young guns step up huge and take that relay. their 200 FR has been their weakest entry on paper for the past few years, but still came out on top.

      i just like rooting for the underdog. then again, who doesnt? its fun to believe.

    • #31991

      by the way can you tell me what team has:

      20.5 relay split from last year’s NCAA
      20.8 freshman split from last week
      21.0 freshman split from last week (B relay)
      20.6 lead off from last year’s NCAA
      1:22.3

      With an average improvement of a tenth or two across the board (especially from the freshmen), JHU may be 1:21mid to low in Houston. They deserve a look.

    • #31992
      N Dynamite
      Member

      @green monster wrote:

      With an average improvement of a tenth or two across the board (especially from the freshmen), JHU may be 1:21mid to low in Houston. They deserve a look.

      Absolutely, JHU has “quietly” been swimming very well. Chris Knight said it best – when the race ends everyone will immediately turn their heads to the scoreboard to see who wins. With so many close teams there will probably be a pause and then the place will erupt. I wouldn’t be surprised to see more than two teams under 1:21.

      Is there any better way to start the meet?

      One other thing I noticed from last year’s meet – Kenyon almost missed finals. They were 7th in prelims and there wasn’t that much seperating them from 9th. I don’t know that anyone can mess around in the morning this year – everyone will have to put their studs into prelims to ensure that they make finals. How much could that hurt Kenyon’s chance t #29 if they end up 9th in a relay they could win?

    • #31993
      Chris Knight
      Member

      @N Dynamite wrote:

      How much could that hurt Kenyon’s chance t #29 if they end up 9th in a relay they could win?

      As much as 22 points – no small matter.

      W&L @ JHU on 1/27 will be a great meet, especially with regards to this relay.

    • #31994
      swim5599
      Member

      I will be interested to see who will be on Kenyon’s 200 FR this year. I was trying to see what their fastest split was on the 1:24.3 200 FR that they just went, but the final time is the only time listed. Does anyone have splits for that relay.

      Hopkins will be a factor, Test is already swimming faster then he did at nats last year.

    • #31995
      The Treat
      Member

      @N Dynamite wrote:

      @green monster wrote:

      With an average improvement of a tenth or two across the board (especially from the freshmen), JHU may be 1:21mid to low in Houston. They deserve a look.

      Absolutely, JHU has “quietly” been swimming very well. Chris Knight said it best – when the race ends everyone will immediately turn their heads to the scoreboard to see who wins. With so many close teams there will probably be a pause and then the place will erupt. I wouldn’t be surprised to see more than two teams under 1:21.

      Is there any better way to start the meet?

      One other thing I noticed from last year’s meet – Kenyon almost missed finals. They were 7th in prelims and there wasn’t that much seperating them from 9th. I don’t know that anyone can mess around in the morning this year – everyone will have to put their studs into prelims to ensure that they make finals. How much could that hurt Kenyon’s chance t #29 if they end up 9th in a relay they could win?

      i would believe kenyon would have a bit more of a sense of urgency for this relay than last year. no duda (and his not shaving/wearing fast suit in prelims), or the pretty depedable 20.0 split out of berger. i think they’ll make it.

      though i think it is possible teams will be under 1:21, i dont think it is all that likely. still to date the fastest time is 1:22.00 from denison. there is still a full second for teams to drop to get to under 1:21. obviously on paper it all seems good, but once again, its just paper. you have to get all the guys to have swims of their lives at the right time, make sure you all have fast starts, and have a little bit of luck with not hitting waves in the water, which could arguably take a tenth or two off a time.

      also, we’re assuming some of these young guns can continue to drop time, as well as perform on the national stage. sometimes pressure gets to people. look at zarins from kenyon. theres no reason why he shouldnt have 3, maybe 4 more national titles at this point.

      one thing for sure, it will be a great race. unfortunate that i likely wont be there to see it.

      here’s a crazy idea. with the youtube explosion going on, if someone could videotape some of these races and them put them up on youtube, that’d be pretty sweet. quality wouldnt be great, but better than nothing. i dont expect to watch the entire mile, but some of the sprints and relays might be fun to watch. anyone else agree? anyone gonna be there that has a video camera?

    • #31996
      silentp
      Member

      @The Treat wrote:

      here’s a crazy idea. with the youtube explosion going on, if someone could videotape some of these races and them put them up on youtube, that’d be pretty sweet. quality wouldnt be great, but better than nothing. i dont expect to watch the entire mile, but some of the sprints and relays might be fun to watch. anyone else agree? anyone gonna be there that has a video camera?

      This is a fantastic idea! Hell, i’ll watch the mile to see if Dunn can set a new mark! But i understand why someone might not want to video tape all of it.

      I sat near an uncle of Nelson Westby’s at the meet in Carthage and he was taping the race, then letting Nelson’s family see it on Youtube (since they live in Oregon)… so this is a similar idea, except with more races.

Viewing 49 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.