- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
@silentp wrote:
Great times all around.
Very much agreed. And in the hype about Tim Whitbeck (who apparently eats deodorant?) and Caleb Courage, let’s don’t forget Chris Lehberger. His times weren’t quite in the same “amazing” category as the other two, perhaps, but 58.81 and 2:09.82 for breast are nothing to sneeze at — I think his 100 time was a PR — especially if, as I assume, he wasn’t rested. Should see some really excellent times out of him at PACs.
Also, seems like there were a lot of close touches, most of which went to Westminster. The biggest exception to that trend had to be the 100 fly; can’t wait to see the rematch of that one in a few weeks.
-
-
@swim5599 wrote:
Looks like Grove City rested a bit for this meet. 45.2 for Courage is fast, and the 20.6 is a PR for Whitbeck correct?
I’d guess they had Sunday off and only one practice on Monday. Wait for PAC’s… these boys are going to be fast.
-
-
-
Whitbeck and Courage are also roommates at GCC. And yes, I believe the 20.61 is a pr for Tim in the 50. His best HS time was a 20.68 at the PA State HS champioships in 2005.
Just a few comments about this meet. Strong swims by Pat Smith and Chris Lehberger even without a taper. Both are looking solid to win in three weeks. And a very gutsy swim by Pete Larsen to take the 100 Fly. From the splits it looks like he was going stroke by stroke with Simpson throughout the entire distance. I suspect the decibel level pool side was off the register. This is another indicator of how close this rivalry has become. If Larsen doesn’t win, then GCC must scramble the 400 relays to get the meet victory. Last comment – Courage’s impressive victory in the 200 IM to beat the defending champ by about 2.5 secs. It would make strategic sense to me for him to swim this event at PACs instead of the 50 free. If he were to swim the 50, he might pick up a better seed at Nationals (but not significantly). However a victory here in the 200 IM at PAC’s would pick up for GCC some important points in what likes like a close championship.
-
@weedwacker2000 wrote:
Courage’s impressive victory in the 200 IM to beat the defending champ by about 2.5 secs. It would make strategic sense to me for him to swim this event at PACs instead of the 50 free. If he were to swim the 50, he might pick up a better seed at Nationals (but not significantly). However a victory here in the 200 IM at PAC’s would pick up for GCC some important points in what likes like a close championship.
I like the thinking on this one. Very creative. And it wouldn’t be the first time Coach Fritz moves a usual-suspect sprint freestyler (but who sometimes swims the IM in season) over to the IM for PACs.
Let’s run a few quick numbers: Courage leaving the 50 bumps up two GCC swimmers (GCC+2) and 3 Westminster guys (WC+3). Assuming he wins the IM, as he probably would, he gets 20 instead of the 17 he would have gotten in the 50 (or Whitbeck gets 20 instead of 17 in the 50 because Courage goes to the IM; either way, GCC+3). In the IM, Grove City has two guys knocked down a place (GCC-2) and 3 or more WC swimmers (WC-3).
The result:
GCC: +2+3-2 = +3
WC: +3-3 = no changeTo make it even more interesting, I checked the Q-times for the 2IM over the last few years. The fastest time yet is 1:54.47, from 2005 (last year was 1:54.60). What are the chances Courage beats that by enough to get an invite this year? 3 seconds is a long way to fall, but I’ll throw it out there as a possibility.
-
-
-
@swim5599 wrote:
He just went 1:57 correct? Why couldn’t he go 1:54 low?
1:57.16 was the time. If he didn’t have a weakness (relatively speaking) in breaststroke, I’d say there’s no question. As it stands, if we were doing over/under on 1:54.5, I think I’d still be willing to take the under. (All of this presumes that he actually swims it at PACs, and that isn’t exactly a foregone conclusion.) If he were to end up getting an invite in the 2IM, though, I agree with not_a_grover that we won’t see him swimming it in Houston.
-
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.