Olympic Trials

Forums General General Olympic Trials

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 53 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #12809

      Olympic trials are this June in Omaha. Who from D3 is going? Westby and Stewart from the MIAC?

      LCM ~ SCY
      50 FREESTYLE 23.49 ~ 20.2
      100 FREESTYLE 51.59 ~ 44.52
      200 FREESTYLE 1:52.89 ~ 1:37.65
      400 FREESTYLE 3:59.99
      1500 FREESTYLE 15:53.59
      100 BACKSTROKE 57.99 ~ 48.42
      200 BACKSTROKE 2:04.99
      100 BREASTSTROKE 1:04.69 ~ 55.37
      200 BREASTSTROKE 2:20.79
      100 BUTTERFLY 55.59 ~ 48.25
      200 BUTTERFLY 2:03.99
      200 IM 2:07.39 ~ 1:49.17
      400 IM 4:30.49 ~ 3:53.89

    • #40603

      @Mac of the MIAC wrote:

      Olympic trials are this June in Omaha. Who from D3 is going? Westby and Stewart from the MIAC?

      LCM ~ SCY
      50 FREESTYLE 23.49 ~ 20.2
      100 FREESTYLE 51.59 ~ 44.52
      200 FREESTYLE 1:52.89 ~ 1:37.65
      400 FREESTYLE 3:59.99
      1500 FREESTYLE 15:53.59
      100 BACKSTROKE 57.99 ~ 48.42
      200 BACKSTROKE 2:04.99
      100 BREASTSTROKE 1:04.69 ~ 55.37
      200 BREASTSTROKE 2:20.79
      100 BUTTERFLY 55.59 ~ 48.25
      200 BUTTERFLY 2:03.99
      200 IM 2:07.39 ~ 1:49.17
      400 IM 4:30.49 ~ 3:53.89

      Unfortunately, past results from DIIIers going to LCM haven’t been good. There won’t be many swimming at Trials. Is Westby any good at LCM? I would think Whitbeck could make the 50 free.

    • #40604

      Unfortunately for the D3 community they rarely, if ever, get to train or compete meters. There’s quite a difference between training and swimming meters over yards, especially if you get used to the “rest” or extra boost off a wall.

    • #40605

      For those who are interested in more about the meet, like finding tickets and/or a hotel, here’s the link:

      http://www.visitomaha.com/microsites/index.cfm?action=Cover&meetingid=22

    • #40606
      N Dynamite
      Member

      It’s been covered pretty extensively that Courage is: https://d3swimming.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3385

    • #40607

      You can qualify with your SCY times, right? I couldn’t find the standards, but had always assumed that most college kids qualified with their times from nationals.

    • #40608

      I believe that you get provisional qualification with SCY to LCM conversion, and then have to prove yourself in LCM before you are fully qualified. Then again, I could be WAY off on that.

    • #40609
      griz
      Member

      Don’t they have DI’s in LCM in the Olympic years so that college swimmers can get cut times? I thought they changed it so that you needed an LCM qualifying time…

    • #40610

      Close, griz. Olympic years D1 Nationals is held in SCM, which I think is accepted.

    • #40611
      maverick1
      Member

      can’t use scy to qualify

      i’m not sure about using the conversion to get into the meet

    • #40612
      TheDon
      Member

      I’m pretty sure this year you can only qualify LCM http://www.usaswimming.org/USASWeb/_Rainbow/Documents/c076aa53-1ba8-412d-aa18-366abc9cf785/08TrialsCuts.pdf (used to be different in the past). Which is why D1 was talking about changing to LCM from SCM in Olympic years. They have yet to implement that change. Personally, if they do change to LCM for D1 every four years, I think it will be the death of a lot of programs in D1 (the ones that don’t have LCM water). That will be the convenient excuse the AD’s need to say they can’t remain competitive without a new facility.

    • #40613

      Wouldn’t the construction of D1 level facilities at more locations across the US benefit the sport at every level from age group to elite?

    • #40614

      @Rustie Gustie wrote:

      Wouldn’t the construction of D1 level facilities at more locations across the US benefit the sport at every level from age group to elite?

      Of course it would! But looking at the current trends, why would that happen? Schools will instead cut their programs instead of dropping 25 million on a new LCM facility on a non-revenue sport.

    • #40615

      Yes. Completely forgot.

      @Rustie Gustie wrote:

      Close, griz. Olympic years D1 Nationals is held in SCM, which I think is accepted.

    • #40616

      It’s ridiculous for the NCAA’s to change their standards 1 out of every 4 years. We are talking about qualifying for Olympic trials, not qualifying for the Olympics. Just accept SCY, and if some swimmer makes it in the 50 with his turn, and takes last at trials, no big deal. All it would take for the USOC is an intern with a card board sliding converter. But they ask 100 D1 programs to train in meters for a year to accomodate them? Doesn’t make sense.

      @TheDon wrote:

      I’m pretty sure this year you can only qualify LCM http://www.usaswimming.org/USASWeb/_Rainbow/Documents/c076aa53-1ba8-412d-aa18-366abc9cf785/08TrialsCuts.pdf (used to be different in the past). Which is why D1 was talking about changing to LCM from SCM in Olympic years. They have yet to implement that change. Personally, if they do change to LCM for D1 every four years, I think it will be the death of a lot of programs in D1 (the ones that don’t have LCM water). That will be the convenient excuse the AD’s need to say they can’t remain competitive without a new facility.

    • #40617

      @Mac of the MIAC wrote:

      All it would take for the USOC is an intern with a card board sliding converter. But they ask 100 D1 programs to train in meters for a year to accomodate them? Doesn’t make sense.

      I would imagine that this sort of thing would more likely be accomplished by computer, with little to no user input. Coaches submit times to a database and specify the pool type, computer makes everything LCM and spits out the list.

      As far as the training goes, I don’t think that D1 teams train or compete LCM all season on Olympic years. I believe that they make the switch during taper for Nationals, which is the first time they see LCM during any season.

    • #40618
      babwik
      Member

      The NCAA used to have d1 champs scm in Olympic years, but only in 2000 and 2004. Ian Crocker and Anthony Ervin set scm world records at these meets, as did others.

      You MUST qualify LCM. The last time scm or scy times were accepted for Olympic Trials cuts was 1996.

      The philosophy behind this makes sense. The purpose of this meet is to qualify our strongest Olympic team. It makes no sense to fill heats with Short Course specialists. The philosophy of this meet, as opposed to maybe nationals or junior nationals or even NCAAs, is NOT about participation. Trials is pretty damn cutthroat. The only reason the cuts are even as slow as they are (relatively speaking of course, as trials cuts are not competitive for making an Olympic Team) is to give up and comers a trials experience, so when they have matured in four years, they will know what trials is all about.

    • #40619
      Chris Knight
      Member

      @Mac of the MIAC wrote:

      It’s ridiculous for the NCAA’s to change their standards 1 out of every 4 years. We are talking about qualifying for Olympic trials, not qualifying for the Olympics. Just accept SCY, and if some swimmer makes it in the 50 with his turn, and takes last at trials, no big deal. All it would take for the USOC is an intern with a card board sliding converter. But they ask 100 D1 programs to train in meters for a year to accomodate them? Doesn’t make sense.

      The swimming and diving committee made the choice to switch to SCM in olympic years to drive up publicity for the D1 meet – particularly for the men, it is the fastest annual meet in the world, but nobody pays much attention b/c it’s in SCY, so the rest of the world didn’t understand how fast the swims were (ex: To Fred Bousquet’s fans back in France, breaking 19.00 didn’t mean as much as it did to his fans from Auburn), and b/c the American public isn’t likely to pay attention unless the words WORLD RECORD flash. As babwik pointed out, you couldn’t use the SCM times to qualify for OT’s.

      Now, they’ve decided to do away with it b/c after two times through I guess they realized that it wasn’t serving to generate any more press. Good decision, I say, b/c frankly it was dumb. Unless and until every SCY pool in the US is altered to SCM (obviously impossible), you have to accept that SCY is our standard short-course format. And overseas swim fans don’t really care about SC or the NCAA that much, anyway, so who cares if they’re paying attention?

      However, I do feel that there should be SC cuts for OT’s. Think about Ian Crocker in 2000 – Maine has 0 LC pools. What if Ian had been going through a breakout SC season in 99/00 but for some reason didn’t get in enough LC work to qualify in time? I know that’s ridiculous b/c he was on the 99 Pan Pac team and b/c he’s phenominally gifted, but I just think that by not allowing SC cuts, they’re potentially robbing some truly talented athletes from competing in our greatest meet. Have some super hard SC cuts, people will still use their LC times if they have them to avoid being in the earliest heats.

    • #40620
      DonCheadle
      Member

      In 2000 the there was Olympic Trials were also “summer nationals” so the Trial cuts were, relatively speaking slow. Brett Robbins from Kzoo cleared the cut in the 100 fly by a half second and more than a handful of D3 swimmers went to the meet. Tom Dolan and a few coaches were adament that the Olympic Trials needed to be the “Olympic Team Selection Meet.” This attitude is generally accepted now and that is why it is LCM times only.

    • #40621
      Colbybr
      Member

      @Chris Knight wrote:

      @Mac of the MIAC wrote:

      It’s ridiculous for the NCAA’s to change their standards 1 out of every 4 years. We are talking about qualifying for Olympic trials, not qualifying for the Olympics. Just accept SCY, and if some swimmer makes it in the 50 with his turn, and takes last at trials, no big deal. All it would take for the USOC is an intern with a card board sliding converter. But they ask 100 D1 programs to train in meters for a year to accomodate them? Doesn’t make sense.

      The swimming and diving committee made the choice to switch to SCM in olympic years to drive up publicity for the D1 meet – particularly for the men, it is the fastest annual meet in the world, but nobody pays much attention b/c it’s in SCY, so the rest of the world didn’t understand how fast the swims were (ex: To Fred Bousquet’s fans back in France, breaking 19.00 didn’t mean as much as it did to his fans from Auburn), and b/c the American public isn’t likely to pay attention unless the words WORLD RECORD flash. As babwik pointed out, you couldn’t use the SCM times to qualify for OT’s.

      Now, they’ve decided to do away with it b/c after two times through I guess they realized that it wasn’t serving to generate any more press. Good decision, I say, b/c frankly it was dumb. Unless and until every SCY pool in the US is altered to SCM (obviously impossible), you have to accept that SCY is our standard short-course format. And overseas swim fans don’t really care about SC or the NCAA that much, anyway, so who cares if they’re paying attention?

      However, I do feel that there should be SC cuts for OT’s. Think about Ian Crocker in 2000 – Maine has 0 LC pools. What if Ian had been going through a breakout SC season in 99/00 but for some reason didn’t get in enough LC work to qualify in time? I know that’s ridiculous b/c he was on the 99 Pan Pac team and b/c he’s phenominally gifted, but I just think that by not allowing SC cuts, they’re potentially robbing some truly talented athletes from competing in our greatest meet. Have some super hard SC cuts, people will still use their LC times if they have them to avoid being in the earliest heats.

      I think, looking at the standards, its not too unreasonable to assume that there won’t be anyone qualifiying for the team who doesn’t have a senior national cut the previous year, and therefore a chance to attend LC Nationals and make the qualifying standard. If you could provide evidence that they are preventing people with legitimate shots at making the team from participating then I would agree that SCY cuts are needed

    • #40622
      DonCheadle
      Member

      I wouldn’t be surprised if Phelps didn’t have a Senior cut until after 1999, but that is just a guess.

    • #40623

      As far as the training goes, I don’t think that D1 teams train or compete LCM all season on Olympic years. I believe that they make the switch during taper for Nationals, which is the first time they see LCM during any season.

      The D-I programs that I’ve worked for and am familiar with train LCM and SCY year-round.

      One of the many reasons they did away with SCY cuts was because so many people were getting into the meet that really had no reason being there. If I remember correctly, Shubert said about 18% of swimmers went lifetime bests in the meet. This year’s OT cuts are not overly tough because USA-S wants to have a large meet – 1,060 swimmers I think is what was said – and because they are shooting for 60% lifetime bests. Personally, I think you should have to qualify within two years of the meet. There are a lot of people who will be there that qualified back in February 2005 who will be going just to say they went.

    • #40624

      1060 is a pretty big meet for OT’s. I thought I remember that the cuts used to have to be met within two years of the meet, but I guess I am incorrect. I also assumed that the cuts were at least the FINA “B” cut, but I could be wrong there as well.

      Even with looser cuts, USA-S, I’m sure, is still assuming that both event qualifiers in each event will still make the IOC/FINA cut, so both swimmers can go to the Olympics. The prelims, semis and finals format (except for the 400, 800 and 1500 free and the 400IM’s) certainly goes a bit further in weeding out the swimmers who are a flash-in-the-pan for one meet and one day and are never heard from again. That said, I guess I could use that argument to support the idea of SCY and SCM cuts, since everyone has to swim three rounds, but I am just being devil’s advocate on that. However, the flip-side is that OT’s and the Olympics are still LC meets, and qualifiers for OT’s should have proven LC racing experience. So, I don’t know where I stand on that. It’s all academic anyway: I don’t coach anyone who has a cut. America’s best are groomed for LC with many LC meets during the inter-Olympic years, so there are plenty of opportunities for the best to make the meet, and the best end up as our qualifiers.

      Speaking of the FINA cuts, at Australian trials in 2000, a second 100 breaststroker on the men’s side did not make the FINA Cut. Amazing how even a great swimming super-power didn’t have the second swimmer in an event. As I said, the USA assumes both swimmers make the FINA Cut. For relays, as we know, up to 6 swimmers can go in the FR’s, provided the US doesn’t exceed 26 swimmers on the team, and provided that the US has made the FINA cut in those relays at a FINA meet. I think we had a bit of worry when our men’s 400 MR (?) was DQ’ed at WC’s a while back. Am I remembering that correctly?

    • #40625
      silentp
      Member

      @DonCheadle wrote:

      I wouldn’t be surprised if Phelps didn’t have a Senior cut until after 1999, but that is just a guess.

      USASwimming.com doesn’t even have results for him, so it’s hard to say. In 1999, he had 1 National cut for the SCY season, then got 3 for the LCM season. They were in the 400 IM, 200 fly and 1500. The last one of the group surprised me. By 2000 he had the 400, 800, 1500, 100 and 200 fly, and the 200 and 400 IM.

    • #40626

      Does the USOC pay expenses for swimmers going to trials? If not, why are they so concerned with the amount of kids competing? It could be like March Madness. Sure Iona isn’t going to win, but it’s pretty fun to watch them try.

      Plus, anyone who can drop a 20.2 in the scy 50 free is not a hack. I say raise the cuts a bit, include scy, and have a free-for all. It’s not like the sport is in danger of becoming too popular anytime soon.

    • #40627
      Chris Knight
      Member

      I agree with Mac. If they had alternative cuts I would say make them so fast that it’s only practical to use them if you really and truly have no fair chance to swim a fast LC meet. If USA-S is so concerned about having the meet be only for those who have a legit shot at making the squad, how can they reconcile having over 1,000 swimmers come? I think it’s safe to say that the number of swimmers with a real chance is closer to 100 than it is to 1,000. So I think having SC cuts is like throwing a lit match into a forest fire – it may bring some more people in who don’t have a real chance, but it’s not going to make a real difference. It just gives people another option.

    • #40628
      Mickey Mouse
      Member

      If you want to swim in a “free for all” that you have cuts for, go to Senior Nationals.

      I really like it the way it is. Trials is all about qualifying for the Olympics. Quickly looking at the 2004 Trials, there were ~50 swimmers per event. Unless you’re in the top 20 who have legit shots at making the team, and that may be generous, you’re the Iona of the bunch and just happy to be there. For the bottom 30, it’s a just a great experience.

      I’m afraid that if it’s expanded, it creates a lot more time between events for the people that actually have a shot and shortens the time between the morning and night swims because they’re the ones the meet is really for.

      Also, does anybody think that if the meet gets bigger, you’ll get A LOT more people who don’t take it very seriously and say “I made Trials..I’m going to go just to go, who cares what shape I’m in and if I don’t even come close to my Q time.”? If I were one of the elite who were vying for a spot, those people would really piss me off.

    • #40629

      It is an interesting point about less time between morning and afternoon sessions (or in this case, is it prelims evening, semis next morning and finals in the evening? ) . If it was a traditional meet, then morning-afternoon tiem spread might matter a bit, but we’re talking about the top 16 in an event for semis. I’d say because the field is weeded out, then maybe the top 12 REALLY have a shot, and if one of those top 12 doesn’t make it from semis to finals, then too bad. Obviously, that’s a tough deal, but Trials is not for the faint-of-heart. In the end it does come down to really the top 5-6 swimmers having a “real” shot (in events with only two qualifiers).

      HOWEVER, if there’s a male swimmer in the 100-200 br and maybe the 400 and 1500 free, there is really only ONE slot open, considering that Hansen and Jensen are in those events. In the 100-200 fly, 200 back and 200-400 IM, there is really only a SLIGHT chance for a spot, but not really (Crocker, Piersol, Lochte and Phelps). I’m not saying those spots are locked up (and stranger things have happened), but someone has to be completely at the top of his game to get into the 1-2 spots. And who knows about the 100 back? Phelps is actually closer to the WR in that than in the 100 fly.

      100 back: Phelps, Piersol, Lochte, Grevers?
      200 back: Lochte, Piersol
      100 Fly: Crocker, Phelps (?)
      200 Fly: Phelps, xxxx
      200-400 IM: Phelps, Lochte, VENDT???
      100-200 Br: Hansen, xxxx
      200, 400 free: Phelps
      1500: Jensen

      So, that leaves the pretty much only the 50 wide-open, and of course, the 6 spots each in the 100 and 200 free.

      50 free: Wildman-Tobriner, Grevers, Jones, Hall Jr????
      100 free: Which six guys are studs on that day?
      200: Phelps, Lochte plus 4 guys

      But, ANYTHING can happen: that’s why there are Olympic Trials. Swim tough or retire.
      Dark-horses, anyone?

    • #40630
      Chris Knight
      Member

      I’m not sure that the 2nd spot in the 2 IM is locked up, b/c I’m not sure Lochte will swim it. I know that seems crazy since he’s the 2nd fastest of all time, but it’s the same night…I mean morning…as the 2 Back. The only thing in between is the women’s 2 Back semis, and that would not give him very much rest at all, certainly not enough to overcome Phelps’ free leg. I know Lochte is amazing, but even Phelps hasn’t tried 2 individual finals in one session…I just think he might end up picking the race he has the WR in over the one that he’s #2 in.

    • #40631

      It is an interesting point about less time between morning and afternoon sessions (or in this case, is it prelims evening, semis next morning and finals in the evening? ) .

      In Omaha they will be swimming Finals at night, Prelims in the morning
      a) for television-they plan to be live at night and may, I believe, even hold up the finals sessions until the stands are full
      b) its similar to the time difference (about 12 hours) in Beijing.

    • #40632
      t3hhammer
      Member

      To respond to MAC, 20.2 has become marginalized. Its impressive to watch someone go 20.whatever at a D3 meet, but in the grand scheme of things unless a swimmer is dropping 20s in high school a coach for a good college team wouldn’t bat an eyelash.
      To respond to Chris Knight, I see your point about not getting much rest. However, look at the grand prix results from last week where Lochte swam the 2bk and the 2fly about 15 minutes apart and still rocked both of them. He’s a competitor and I have to imagine he’s chomping at the bit to go after Phelps in everything he can.

    • #40633

      GE,
      I didn’t know if USA was going to follow the morning prelims-evening finals format, so thanks for reminding me.

      OT’s in your home state!

    • #40634
      Colbybr
      Member

      @DonCheadle wrote:

      I wouldn’t be surprised if Phelps didn’t have a Senior cut until after 1999, but that is just a guess.

      Actually Phelps appears on the 1998-1999 LCM Top 16 times as compiled by USA Swimming with a 2:04 200 fly, which I believe at the time was both a senior national cut and olympic trials standard. And he went on to qualify for the team as we all know. So even in this case the lack of an easier standard or scy standard did not affect the US selecting its best swimmers for the team.

    • #40635
      Derek
      Member

      @Chris Knight wrote:

      I know Lochte is amazing, but even Phelps hasn’t tried 2 individual finals in one session…I just think he might end up picking the race he has the WR in over the one that he’s #2 in.

      I’d put my money on Lochte over Phelps for being able to pull off this sort of incredible double. Lochte is the real deal when we’re talking about tough talent, Phelps is simply talented… the most talented, no doubt, but I don’t see him having the fight that Lochte brings every time he swims.

    • #40636
      silentp
      Member

      @Derek wrote:

      I’d put my money on Lochte over Phelps for being able to pull off this sort of incredible double. Lochte is the real deal when we’re talking about tough talent, Phelps is simply talented… the most talented, no doubt, but I don’t see him having the fight that Lochte brings every time he swims.

      That’s stupid. He doesn’t show the fight because he doesn’t have close races anymore. He is simply racing the clock. Just because Locthe beat Piersol and broke his WR, suddently he’s a fighter, that’s crap. Let’s not forget that at Nationals Phelps almost broke that record and wasn’t 100%. No one practices 7 days per week because they swim off of talent.

    • #40637
      Derek
      Member

      On the SCY/SCM/LCM debate… I’ve seen how decisions are made at USA Swimming and at this level and it is all about the rich getting richer… The top programs have incredible access to LCM pools and want to use them year round (justifiably), and the same coaches have the most political power in USA-S. If you can only qualify in LCM, you are going to go to a school that has the ability to train LCM year round, regardless of other factors. Who wins? The coaches that already have the best positions and pools in the country.

    • #40638
      Chris Knight
      Member

      @Derek wrote:

      I’d put my money on Lochte over Phelps for being able to pull off this sort of incredible double. Lochte is the real deal when we’re talking about tough talent, Phelps is simply talented… the most talented, no doubt, but I don’t see him having the fight that Lochte brings every time he swims.

      I’m not saying that it’s impossible or that he definitely won’t try…just that the schedule is really bad for him, putting both of his best races in the same session, and that it creates the possibility that he’ll scratch one. I’m kind of surprised that Swimming World hasn’t done a story about this.

    • #40639
      Derek
      Member

      @Chris Knight wrote:

      I’m kind of surprised that Swimming World hasn’t done a story about this.

      Clearly we know more about international and Olympic swimming than they do…

    • #40640

      D1 nationals is the biggest annual swimming event in the country. It’s counter-productive to ignore qualifying times from this event.

    • #40641

      What top programs have constant access to LCM? For all their practices? I might be wrong, but very few, if any, will be able to devote all their training between now and OT’s to LC.

      Examples:
      CW has the college program to support, so they are swimming SCY some practices.
      MV Nadadores: have USA programs. I actually took a team training there over break a few years ago, and we did NO LCM training, even in the morning.
      MAC: can’t convert the city pool to LCM, probably at all.
      Lakeside: The quarry is drained after Labor Day
      Longhorn: college teams training
      SCSC: club teams
      CUBU: 50m outdoors only
      RMSC: Montgomery Aquatic Center 50m only on weekends (but 25m daily)

      As I said, I may be wrong, and my recollections of which pools are available LC year-round may be poor. I can think of maybe 1-2 pools that will be able to be LC until next year:

      NBAC: has TWO 50m LANES in one of their sites: great for Hoff.
      Race Club? Stanford (with two 50m pools one HAS to be LC)?

      Pine Crest is the only pool I can think of that is 50 ONLY, and cannot be converted to SCY/M.

      You can bet the Aussies, Chinese, Japanese, Europeans will have access to 25m pools exclusively through January, and then all 50 through August.

      The US just is not equipped to have full-time 50m training. Too many pools have other components to program: club practices, college practices, recreationaly use, etc. Whether that is a detriment is another thing altogether (and another thread). I tend to think water is water, 25y or 50m.

    • #40642

      @t3hhammer wrote:

      To respond to MAC, 20.2 has become marginalized. Its impressive to watch someone go 20.whatever at a D3 meet, but in the grand scheme of things unless a swimmer is dropping 20s in high school a coach for a good college team wouldn’t bat an eyelash.

      This is amazing to me. Let’s say I’m a senior, and I drop a 20.4 at my state meet. Do I get a scholarship offer from Minnesota and Wisconsin? Do I get one from Michigan, Cal, or Texas? I’m asking because I don’t know.

    • #40643

      Great insight. Based on the history of the USOC (Salt Lake City), I’d have to completely agree with you.

      @Derek wrote:

      On the SCY/SCM/LCM debate… I’ve seen how decisions are made at USA Swimming and at this level and it is all about the rich getting richer… The top programs have incredible access to LCM pools and want to use them year round (justifiably), and the same coaches have the most political power in USA-S. If you can only qualify in LCM, you are going to go to a school that has the ability to train LCM year round, regardless of other factors. Who wins? The coaches that already have the best positions and pools in the country.

    • #40644

      @Mac of the MIAC wrote:

      @t3hhammer wrote:

      To respond to MAC, 20.2 has become marginalized. Its impressive to watch someone go 20.whatever at a D3 meet, but in the grand scheme of things unless a swimmer is dropping 20s in high school a coach for a good college team wouldn’t bat an eyelash.

      This is amazing to me. Let’s say I’m a senior, and I drop a 20.4 at my state meet. Do I get a scholarship offer from Minnesota and Wisconsin? Do I get one from Michigan, Cal, or Texas? I’m asking because I don’t know.

      This can depend on the school and what they need etc. There is not a lot of scholarship money for mens swimming. 9.9 Scholarships, 1.5 must go to diving, that leaves a team with 8.4 scholarships for an entire team. A 20.4 high school kid would get a lot of attention, more if they have a 2nd and third event. Ex, There is a MN boy who went to MN (his name slips my mind), he was the 2nd fastest kid in the 50 at around a 20.2, but he was much higher in the 100 free at around 45.5 or 45.6.

      Bottom line, you would get a scholarship offer, but how much is the question. The programs that would offer them to you depends on the coaches.

      Ex. Jordan Watland, his senior year went 20.8 in the 50 free and 44.96 in the 100 free. In the 100 he was around 5 over all that year amonst high schoolers and I think around 2nd amongst seniors who swam high school. He got the same scholarship offer from MN and Michigan. He had interest in going to Texas, but Eddie Reese told him (or more Eddie told his Dad) he was not quite what they were looking for. Jeremy Harris went around a 45 low as a Senior several years later and Eddie Reese wanted him at Texas. Watland was faster out of High School, one of the best in the nation and Eddie didn’t really want him. Harris was a little slower, but Eddie wanted him (might be because Jordan was about 5’10” and Harris was around 6’6″)

    • #40645
      maverick1
      Member

      back in the day the resident team trained at the otc in colorado springs, and they trained long course whenever they pleased. there also was an outdoors pool that they could use, which was scy, but that one is closed indefinitely (i still have one of the signs that were posted around i

    • #40646
      babwik
      Member

      In response to Lochte and Phelps doubling events:

      A few years back I read that Michael Phelps levels of lactic acid when tested immediately after a race were about 1/3 of what the average world class swimmer’s were. His level of lactic acid suggested that he would be FULLY recovered from an all out performance within 15 minutes. Beyond being naturally gifted, perfect body type, etc, his biology is even better than everyone else’s.

      As for being tougher, that impression in Lochte’s favor may have something to do with Phelps completely rehearsed “aw shucks” interview persona. Meanwhile, Lochte is less conscious of this, and he always cracks me up for some reason, with the grills and all that.

      Either way when they step on the blocks they are both certified badass competitors.

    • #40647
      swim5599
      Member

      I am pretty sure that you could still qualify for the Trials SCY in 2000. I remember Randy Boelk swam the 100 back at the trials that year. I am pretty sure he used his 49.3 100 back time from D3 nats to get in. Josh Boss also used his scy times that year.

    • #40648

      I believe you are right. Matt Zelen from St. John’s also swim at the trials in the 50 free and I believe he used his yards time.

    • #40649
      CaseBrst10
      Member

      @Mac of the MIAC wrote:

      @t3hhammer wrote:

      To respond to MAC, 20.2 has become marginalized. Its impressive to watch someone go 20.whatever at a D3 meet, but in the grand scheme of things unless a swimmer is dropping 20s in high school a coach for a good college team wouldn’t bat an eyelash.

      This is amazing to me. Let’s say I’m a senior, and I drop a 20.4 at my state meet. Do I get a scholarship offer from Minnesota and Wisconsin? Do I get one from Michigan, Cal, or Texas? I’m asking because I don’t know.

      Rumor has it, Bowman won’t really look at a kid unless he’s got a US Open cutS (emphasis on more than one) or better, which is 20.29…

    • #40650
      JHU84
      Member

      there is far more than just time, what program did they come from, do they fit in to the current team, need, size, potential. Guys like bowman reese, marsh, busch … are great at analyzing this thats why they are where they are. In TX reese starts looking at kids when they are 14 and sees how they progress in HS, he can step out of his office and watch a club meet. takes alot of homework and knowledge but they do it, it is why they are great coaches.

    • #40651
      gomez2354
      Member

      yo, you need to get you’re OT cuts in LCM.

      as evidence: the olympic trials cuts are only released in LCM

    • #40652

      @CaseBrst10 wrote:

      Rumor has it, Bowman won’t really look at a kid unless he’s got a US Open cutS (emphasis on more than one) or better, which is 20.29…

      not true. if you look at the incoming freshmen, there some who dont.

    • #40653

      @wickedfoolish wrote:

      @CaseBrst10 wrote:

      Rumor has it, Bowman won’t really look at a kid unless he’s got a US Open cutS (emphasis on more than one) or better, which is 20.29…

      not true. if you look at the incoming freshmen, there some who dont.

      Of course it isn’t true, particularly for sprinters. How many incoming freshman under 20.3 has Michigan had in the past … 10 years (Yes, I know that goes past Bowman)? I don’t know and I’m not going to count, but it isn’t many, I’m guessing you could count them on one hand. Two obvious reasons for this – first, there are only a few guys each year (what, like 2 to maybe 10 depending on the year) who post times faster than 20.3 out of HS. Second, those 10 guys usually choose to go to a school known for sprinting.

    • #40654
      swim5599
      Member

      I am guessing they may have had maybe 2 or 3 total. Borges comes to mind and I can not come up with anyone else.

    • #40655
      swim5599
      Member

      I believe Urbancheck (spelling) once said they he did not consider a guy to be a sprinter unless he broke 20 seconds in the 50 in HS, at that time no one had ever done it.

Viewing 53 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.