Hope 200Free Relay

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 37 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #11921
      maverick1
      Member

      if blohm isn’t around can they make nats in this relay……i think they’ll have a better chance in the 400 with cvb and heyboer being better at the intermediate freestyles than the 50

    • #29893
      silentp
      Member

      @maverick wrote:

      if blohm isn’t around can they make nats in this relay……i think they’ll have a better chance in the 400 with cvb and heyboer being better at the intermediate freestyles than the 50

      Heyboer won’t be on it, he split 47.91 and while i do believe he will improve, i am not sure this will get on the relay. They could end up getting close in on the relays, but get none in.

    • #29894
      David Simms
      Member

      SilentP if I read your post correctly, and I’d like to think I did, you’re predicting Hope won’t get ANY relay to Nationals? I think of you as someone who knows a little bit about a lot. Would you be so kind as to predict Hope’s end of the season times in all 5 relays for us eager readers, please?

      Congratulations and Thanks.

    • #29895
      silentp
      Member

      @David Simms wrote:

      SilentP if I read your post correctly, and I’d like to think I did, you’re predicting Hope won’t get ANY relay to Nationals? I think of you as someone who knows a little bit about a lot. Would you be so kind as to predict Hope’s end of the season times in all 5 relays for us eager readers, please?

      Congratulations and Thanks.

      I am saying it could happen, not that it will, but here goes:

      2FR: 1:23.88
      4FR: 3:06.74
      8FR: 6:54.12
      2MR: 1:34.27
      4MR: 3:27.44

    • #29896
      DonCheadle
      Member

      Those are all really good times, but none are shoe-ins for Nats. What I think is that Hope will be right around those times in all 5, but one or two will be fast enough to make the meet. Overall those are some darn good times.

    • #29897
      The15mMark
      Member

      @DonCheadle wrote:

      Those are all really good times, but none are shoe-ins for Nats. What I think is that Hope will be right around those times in all 5, but one or two will be fast enough to make the meet. Overall those are some darn good times.

      I would be surprised if Hope didn’t show up at Natty’s. A great group of atheletes, it would be a shame to not see them sporting those fantastic white warmups in Houston.

    • #29898
      N Dynamite
      Member

      It’s interesting to look at the qualifying guide (something that needs updated, by the way) and note that some of those times that P predicted would qualify in years gone by. I know none of them would have qualified last year, but I wonder if last year was an anomaly or a sign of things to come.

      By the way, with all of the talk about the breaststroke rule change last year, how did the qualifying time compare? Neither 2005 or 2006 (for the 100 breast) are listed in the guide. If I’m not mistaken, the 200 Medley QT actually rose slightly. I don’t remember the 400 MR QT…

    • #29899
      Lane2AllStar
      Member

      @silentp wrote:

      @maverick wrote:

      if blohm isn’t around can they make nats in this relay……i think they’ll have a better chance in the 400 with cvb and heyboer being better at the intermediate freestyles than the 50

      Heyboer won’t be on it, he split 47.91 and while i do believe he will improve, i am not sure this will get on the relay. They could end up getting close in on the relays, but get none in.

      Well actually he went a 47.4 in prelims if that matters. So if he drops a second in a 100 which is what a lot of people have been giving people like Hennigar than he would be just as fast as Hen. Im not sure if this is true but I swear someone gave Hen like a 46.5 or 46.0 relay and he wasnt on the relay at state this year and the worse guy on that relay was a 47.5. He was a 47.96 flat start but a 46.5 still could be a stretch. But just as likely as Phil the Boer in my opinion.

    • #29900
      silentp
      Member

      @Lane2AllStar wrote:

      Well actually he went a 47.4 in prelims if that matters. So if he drops a second in a 100 which is what a lot of people have been giving people like Hennigar than he would be just as fast as Hen. Im not sure if this is true but I swear someone gave Hen like a 46.5 or 46.0 relay and he wasnt on the relay at state this year and the worse guy on that relay was a 47.5. He was a 47.96 flat start but a 46.5 still could be a stretch. But just as likely as Phil the Boer in my opinion.

      He was a 47.4 (or.3) as a junior from a flat start, take off .7 for the relay and you get 46.7. Seems like Heyboer had more PRs in prelims than in finals… maybe a sign of things to come… maybe not

      @N Dynamite wrote:

      It’s interesting to look at the qualifying guide (something that needs updated, by the way) and note that some of those times that P predicted would qualify in years gone by. I know none of them would have qualified last year, but I wonder if last year was an anomaly or a sign of things to come.

      I actually think it was somewhat of an anomaly, but not completely. D3 is getting faster (given the fact that D1 & D2 schools keep cutting their programs alone is helping) and I don’t see it completely changing, but there will always be off years and off events. I believe all the relays will be slightly slower (other than the 800 FR which will be about 1 full second faster) with the 200 being slower by about .5 and the 400s by just under a full second at .8.

    • #29901
      facenorth
      Member

      So SilentP, what you’re telling us is A) Hope will go 1:23.88 next year and B) not get invited to the meet…. C) but the invite for the 200 relays will increase by about half a second.

      So if A, B, and C are all true, the following statements must be untrue.

      If: 1:23.60 + .5 = 1:24.10

      Then: 1:24.10 < 1:23.88

    • #29902
      silentp
      Member

      @facenorth wrote:

      So SilentP, what you’re telling us is A) Hope will go 1:23.88 next year and B) not get invited to the meet…. C) but the invite for the 200 relays will increase by about half a second.

      So if A, B, and C are all true, the following statements must be untrue.

      If: 1:23.60 + .5 = 1:24.10

      Then: 1:24.10 < 1:23.88

      Ok, the 200 FR will NOT be slower, but not faster either. It will stay the same. I figured i would be called out on that 😀

    • #29903
      Lane2AllStar
      Member

      He was a 47.4 (or.3) as a junior from a flat start, take off .7 for the relay and you get 46.7. Seems like Heyboer had more PRs in prelims than in finals… maybe a sign of things to come… maybe not

      Well If the being better in Prelims is somthing to look forward too for Phil than getting worse each year could be somthing for Hen…GOTCHA.

    • #29904
      DonCheadle
      Member

      Was Hen faster as a junior?

    • #29905
      Lane2AllStar
      Member

      Well Hen wasnt a 47.3 this year if that answers your question. More like a 48 flat.

    • #29906
      silentp
      Member

      @Lane2AllStar wrote:

      Well Hen wasnt a 47.3 this year if that answers your question. More like a 48 flat.

      Exactly, and Hope’s new breastroker is a 1:00 breastroker who can’t get the job done in prelims.

    • #29907
      Lane2AllStar
      Member

      @silentp wrote:

      @Lane2AllStar wrote:

      Well Hen wasnt a 47.3 this year if that answers your question. More like a 48 flat.

      Exactly, and Hope’s new breastroker is a 1:00 breastroker who can’t get the job done in prelims.

      Thats cold.

    • #29908
      Stevo
      Member

      This is turning nasty…i’m just pumped to see that the MIAA is on its way back. This is going to be a fun year of talk and swimming.

      and to save you the trouble i’m the guy that loses goggles in prelims at nationals and we miss finals….but like hen and our new breastroker they will have their moments of glory….i’ll gurantee that

      I think that Hope will have 8 or nine guys at nats qualifying a medley relay and 2 free relays. My prediction the 200 FR, 800 FR, and 400 MR.

      Kzoo will qualify a medley and a free relay…probably 400 MR and 400 FR sending 5 guys to nats.

      Feel free to dispute as you wish…i am biased, i know it, and i think hope will win the MIAA meet (assuming they don’t go after nat cuts at wheaton and not fully taper everyone for league meet)

    • #29909
      silentp
      Member

      @Stevo wrote:

      This is turning nasty…i’m just pumped to see that the MIAA is on its way back. This is going to be a fun year of talk and swimming.

      and to save you the trouble i’m the guy that loses goggles in prelims at nationals and we miss finals….but like hen and our new breastroker they will have their moments of glory….i’ll gurantee that

      I think that Hope will have 8 or nine guys at nats qualifying a medley relay and 2 free relays. My prediction the 200 FR, 800 FR, and 400 MR.

      Kzoo will qualify a medley and a free relay…probably 400 MR and 400 FR sending 5 guys to nats.

      Feel free to dispute as you wish…i am biased, i know it, and i think hope will win the MIAA meet (assuming they don’t go after nat cuts at wheaton and not fully taper everyone for league meet)

      I would say Hope sending 9 might be true, did that include Gardner? Because I believe he went through a “sophomore slump” but will come back to make the 1650.

      I think saying Hope only get one medley into NCAAs (and it being the 400 instead of the 200) is overlooking the 2 incoming studs. The backstroker has been 23.5 and the breastroker has been 29 in LCM, from a flat start… that alone will get them if they have someone decent anchoring it. I also believe the freestyler and the flyer will be different for both relays, giving them 6 guys at NCAAs.

      Also, i think it doesn’t matter how fast they go at Wheaton, they will rest everyone for MIAAs because unless it’s an A, it’s not in. We saw that last year in some relays… Kzoo Women were in 1st 2 years ago and got left out of the meet after not going faster at MIAAs in the 2FR

    • #29910
      Stevo
      Member

      p,

      Here are my 8/9

      Phil Heyboer
      Brandon King
      Kyle Waterstone/Ryan Nelis
      Chaz Vanderbroek
      Ryan Vogelzang
      Dan Gardner
      Matt Rose
      Transfer (sorry no one has spilled the beans so i can’t)

      There it is….it will be either waterstone or nelis swimming fly on medley’s, they reason i leave it at nine is because i think K Waterstone has potential to make the meet in some individuals.

      You bring up a great point about the 200 medley, i guess i wasn’t all that familiar with Heyboers 50 back and kings long course breast, i spend to much time trying to sell boats.

      I think you’re right about wheaton, but i think they will be more aggressive at Wheaton than they have been in years past. So we’ll see.

      The Kzoo guys will be dekker, heninger, espinosa, and ellis for sure, i am not all that familiar with the rest of the guys so i can’t say past those four.

    • #29911
      maverick1
      Member

      gardner did kind of have a sophomore slump in the mile……next year i think thery’ll be a few more guys within 10 seconds of him so that’ll probably help him get close to 16:15 again, but that won’t make nats so he’ll have to drop somewhere around 10 more seconds to make it in

      we’ll see how it goes, i think with krone way out front and nobody around him last year it was kind of tough

    • #29912
      Trousers Ron
      Member

      Hey there everybody!

      In recent threads I’ve read about how these new Hope guys either can’t get it done in prelims or chach out in finals (apparently there is something wrong with every one of them). Is it just me or are they the only team that has guys that didn’t swim the exact same time from Prelims to Finals? I mean all of those K recruits must be super consistent. I bet everyone from Olivet swims the same time everytime when tapered.

      What’s with all the bickering?

    • #29913
      maverick1
      Member

      you’re a cubs fan, therefore you’re opinions are useless until trump or cuban buys them a championship level team

    • #29914
      silentp
      Member

      I think Waterstone will be on the 2MR and Nelis on the 4MR. This also assures Hope of another swim at NCAAs, even if Waterstone doesn’t get the invite, because I think he’ll get the B cut at least.

      Cubs do suck, it’s like a bandwagon of a bad team. They are more of a “fashionable” team than anything else.

    • #29915
      Insufficient
      Member

      waterstone will swim one of the medleys… he’s a senior and his times will be close enough to nelis (if not better) that it shouldn’t make a difference.

      don’t be surprised to see waterstone on one medley and hoesch on the other if nelis doesn’t have the big drops some of you are expecting from the froshie.

      also, i doubt waterstone has an individual that makes the meet, but he will swim one or two based on b cuts he obtains

    • #29916
      swim5599
      Member

      Not knocking Hope at all, but traditionally they do not blow the doors off at the Wheaton Invite with of course the exception of Boss who broke the nat record at one point in the 100 breast, and then his record in the 200 breast 2:00.07 I believe. However they absolutely tear it up at their conf meet pretty much every year. With Kalamazoo getting some horses in this year, the conf meet should really be exciting.

    • #29917
      silentp
      Member

      @Insufficient wrote:

      waterstone will swim one of the medleys… he’s a senior and his times will be close enough to nelis (if not better) that it shouldn’t make a difference.

      don’t be surprised to see waterstone on one medley and hoesch on the other if nelis doesn’t have the big drops some of you are expecting from the froshie.

      also, i doubt waterstone has an individual that makes the meet, but he will swim one or two based on b cuts he obtains

      This all may be true, but i am not sure any relays will be risking it this year with what can happen, as seen by a 6:51 800 FR not making it last year.

      Even if Nelis doesn’t have the drops, i’d still say he’s equal to Waterstone and better than Hoesch (in terms of fly) right now and no one is saying either of the other 2 will see big drops.

      Waterstone could get in in the 200 IM with how close he was last year. Add in senior year and my projection of some slightly slower Q times… i think he could make it.

    • #29918
      Waldo
      Member

      Also in my short experience at Hope, we do not always come down to a real taper for wheaton. I know we did not have any more then a 3 day rest last year. It will be interesting to see what Patnott has instore for the meet this year. Eather way I assume that most if not all hope swimmers will be come down all the way for MIAA’s simply because Nats means nothing to most of us in comparison.

    • #29919
      silentp
      Member

      @Waldo wrote:

      Eather way I assume that most if not all hope swimmers will be come down all the way for MIAA’s simply because Nats means nothing to most of us in comparison.

      Also the fact that if you don’t, Heyboer would be the only one with a shot of going to NCAAs…

    • #29920
      The Treat
      Member

      @silentp wrote:

      @Waldo wrote:

      Eather way I assume that most if not all hope swimmers will be come down all the way for MIAA’s simply because Nats means nothing to most of us in comparison.

      Also the fact that if you don’t, Heyboer would be the only one with a shot of going to NCAAs…

      do we have a schedule for hope yet?

    • #29921

      @The Treat wrote:

      do we have a schedule for hope yet?

      Not only that, but thanks to the quirks of the English language, Hope also has a schedule for us (sorry, it’s been a long week): http://www.hope.edu/pr/athletics/msw/.

    • #29922
      Waldo
      Member

      I did not mean to say that if fully tapered hope swimmers would for sure qualify for nats at wheaton because there is no swimmer on the team that is a for sure qualifier. That is my mistake for writing my post to quickly. I simply mean to say reguardless of if people did qualify at wheaton (and even if the relays did), I still feel that swimmers would come all the way down for MIAA’s. Again my apologies for not reading my post carefully.

    • #29923
      silentp
      Member

      @Waldo wrote:

      I did not mean to say that if fully tapered hope swimmers would for sure qualify for nats at wheaton because there is no swimmer on the team that is a for sure qualifier. That is my mistake for writing my post to quickly. I simply mean to say reguardless of if people did qualify at wheaton (and even if the relays did), I still feel that swimmers would come all the way down for MIAA’s. Again my apologies for not reading my post carefully.

      I’d also disagree with this strongly. Perhaps you haven’t been around long enough to know (but even i haven’t been around that long), but Patnott does not worry himself that much about MIAAs and if the relays, or perhaps Heyboer, were a shoe-in, 100% lock for NCAAs, they would not fully taper for MIAAs. That, however will not happen, as we can all agree…

    • #29924
      Chris Sabo
      Member

      Silent P,

      You seem to know a lot about Patnott for a Kalamazoo alumni. I think Patnott takes things year by year. Certainly when Hope qualifies relays at Wheaton ( I think that has happened, maybe not I am no historian here) then there are a number who do not taper at Leagues.

      I qualified for nationals at Wheaton my junior year, and tapered for MIAAs. I’ll let you gurus try to figure out who I am. It’s not that hard.

      Just don’t oversimplify Patnott. There is no formula that describes his bahavior. He is an interesting character and he likes to experiment.

    • #29925

      SilentP,

      What makes you think you know ANYTHING about Patnott and how he tapers people at Wheaton? You know absolutely nothing just like I know absolutely nothing about the way the past K coaches tapered their swimmers at the mid-season meet. I can respect you (barely) talking about K swimming but why don’t you stop talking like you know something about Hope Swimming…just because you talk with Hope Alumni doesn’t mean that you know all about Hope. It varies year-to-year in whether people FULLY taper for the mid-season meet (at least when I was there).

    • #29926
      silentp
      Member

      I was merely speaking off of what i had seen in my years, i did not mean to judge or act like i was “in the know”. It did not seem that Hope had tapered for their mid season meet and it seemed to me that Patnott had prepared his swimmers most for their last meet of the year, whether that be NCAAs or MIAAs. In the cases it was required to train for MIAAs to make NCAAs, it seemed he would do that with success. I am not on the team and do not have inside knowledge so I was wrong, my bad.

    • #29927
      maverick1
      Member

      @vazzy vazquez wrote:

      It varies year-to-year in whether people FULLY taper for the mid-season meet (at least when I was there).

      so basically there’s no way to predict what he does at mid season and it should be pretty apparent each year what he chooses to do? is that what you’re trying to say and thus giving silentp the ability to have at least a bit of knowledge about it, or at least as much as you (except for the years that you swam).

    • #29928
      Stevo
      Member

      Billy Gilmore wrote:

      Cheadle, you’re right. Stevo really does want to be loved. He just doesn’t know how to express his need

      If you guys think i need some love what about Vazzy?

    • #29929
      Derek
      Member

      @Stevo wrote:

      Billy Gilmore wrote:

      Cheadle, you’re right. Stevo really does want to be loved. He just doesn’t know how to express his need

      If you guys think i need some love what about Vazzy?

      Excellent point. Vazzy is much more in need of love than you.

Viewing 37 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.