Sectionals are approaching for the girls swim season, and that means one thing (to borrow a phrase) -- swim fast or go home.
In swimming, there are only two ways to qualify for the state meet -- win a sectional title in a given event, or finish as one of the fastest remaining swimmers in the state. In Division 1, 24 slots are set aside for state qualifying (which results in three heats of each event in the 8-lane UW Natatorium, where the state meet is held).
That means the six sectional winners in each event automatically qualify for state, regardless of their time, while the remaining 18 slots are awarded to the 18 fastest remaining swimmers. In theory, all 18 of those slots could come out of one sectional. Other than the sectional winners, the WIAA allots state qualifying bids solely on time.
That differs from some other sports -- notably golf and cross country -- in which a certain number of slots are set aside for state qualifiers from each sectional, regardless of the time or score. That makes sense -- in golf, for instance, Div. 1 players at sectionals are competing for state bids on six different golf courses, which vary considerably in set-up and difficulty. Same with cross country, where runners throughout the state are competing for state bids on courses that vary in difficulty. So it makes sense not to penalize a golfer who has to play a sectional qualifying tournament at a difficult golf course, or the runner competing on a hilly course.
By the same token, goes this line of thinking, it makes sense to base qualifying for swimming on times. A 25-yard pool is the same, more or less, regardless of where a sectional meet is held.
Perhaps not.
A review of qualifying times for last year's Div. 1 girls state meet indicates that qualifiers from one pool -- the sectional hosted at the Waukesha South High School pool -- swam much faster than qualifiers from any of the other five D1 sectional meets. A total of 72 swimmers and relays qualified last year for state from the Waukesha South sectional, the most of any D1 sectional in the state.
Talent, of course, explains a lot it. Defending state champion Hartland Arrowhead swims at the Waukesha South sectional, as do D1 state powers Waukesha South/Mukwonago and Muskego. The two Brookfield high schools (Central and East), as well as the Waukesha North/Kettle Moraine co-op, also had several strong swimmers qualify for state out of the Waukesha South sectional last year.
But a closer look at qualifying times from last year reveals that, to an unusual degree, swimmers qualifying for the state meet from that sectional swam their fastest times at the Waukesha South pool, and not the UW Natatorium.
Most swimmers qualifying for state post their fastest times of the season at the state meet at the Natatorium. Training is a large part of it; most swimmers are trained to "taper" at the state meet, with the easing up on training producing a fresher swimmer and, in theory, faster times. Additionally, the frenzied atmosphere and intense competition of the state meet usually propel swimmers to their fastest times. But part of it is the pool, as well; the Natatorium (albiet old) is a competition-only pool, and in particular its depth is conducive to fast times.
(What makes for a fast pool? Width, depth, gutter systems that dissipate waves -- all factor into a pool's ability to foster fast times. See this article from National Public Radio that describes the fast times produced at the Beijing Olympic pool: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93478073)
Times from last year's state meet bear out the notion that swimmers (and relays) post their fastest times at the state meet at the Natatorium. At last year's D1 state meet, 154 of the 265 swimmers who qualified for state (58 percent) cut time from what they swam at sectionals. A total of 110 swimmers (42 percent) added time. (There was one extra qualifier for D1 state last year -- a tie for the 24th spot in the 100 butterfly. In addition, one swimmer at state swam her exact sectional qualifying time.) The same held true for the girls Div. 2 meet at the Natatorium -- of the 175 swimmers and relays competing (there was one DQ in the meet), 129 of them (74 percent) cut time from sectionals, while only 46 (26 percent) added time.
But the 58 percent of the D1 swimmers who cut time at state last year is skewed dramatically by the performance of the Waukesha South state qualifiers. If you take out the Waukesha South qualifiers, the performances of the rest of the D1 swimmers mirrors that of the D2 state meet -- 68 percent of all D1 swimmers (not counting the Waukesha South qualifiers) cut time at last year's state meet; only 32 percent added time.
Why the disparity? Because most of the Waukesha South sectional qualifiers added time at state, instead of cutting time. Of the 72 Waukesha South state qualifiers, 48 (or 67 percent) added time, while only 24 (33 percent) cut time.
In other words, two out of every three swimmers who qualified for the D1 state meet at a sectional pool other than Waukesha South cut time at state. Meanwhile, two out of every three swimmers who qualified from the Waukesha South pool added time at state.
Perhaps it's the level of competition that spurs on such fast times at the Waukesha South pool. After all, the sectional last year hosted the eventual state champs (Hartland Arrowhead), as well as the 4th (Waukesha South/Mukwonago) and 5th (Muskego) place teams at state. But the Middleton sectional is arguably just as competitive; it featured the defending state champs from 2008 (Madison East), perennial power Madison Memorial (3rd at state last year), plus two other teams (Middleton and Madison West) that finished in the top 10 at state last year. While the Waukesha South sectional qualified 72 swimmers and relays to state, the Middleton sectional was close behind with 69 swimmers and relays.
But Middleton sectional qualifiers performed considerably better at last year's state meet than the Waukesha South qualifiers. While only 33 percent of the Waukesha South qualifiers cut time at state, 85 percent of the Middleton state qualifiers (59 of the 69 entries) cut time at state.
Of course, sectional qualifying times play an important role in seeding and lane placement for the state meet. They determine which of the three heats swimmers and relays swim in, with only the eight fastest times qualifying for the last, fastest heat. While anyone (or any relay) can win a state-meet event from any heat, the surest way to earn a spot on the coveted awards podium (where the top six swimmers are formally recognized at the meet) is to swim in the last heat with the fastest swimmers. At last year's D1 state meet, 55 of the 66 swimmers and relays who earned a spot on the podium came from the final heat.
It's hard to argue against using the Waukesha South pool as a sectional qualifying site. It's centrally located for the D1 teams competing there, has very good spectator seating, and the folks there know how to run swim meets effectively and efficiently. But it's also the newest of the six D1 pools used for sectional qualifying; it first became available for the sectional qualifying meet in 2005. It bills itself, at state club competitions frequently held there, as the fastest competitive pool in the state, and employs the latest in fast-pool technology.
So do swimmers at the Waukesha South sectional enjoy an advantage over the rest of the D1 field by virtue of the pool they swim in? Comments, as always, are welcome.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
I read your post and it just prompted me to ask a whole bunch of questions;
Can a pool ever be too fast?
When will the people involved with swimming in the state of Wisconsin wake up and realize how far behind they are in terms of world class facilities? Especially UW. It's quite a statement that a high school facility is considered the fastest pool in the state.
Why not swim high school state at Waukesha if it is the fastest pool in the state? It can seat pretty close to the same amount of people as the Nat.
It almost seems, reading in between the lines, that you question whether the qualification process should change to eliminate the so called advantage those who swim sectionals at Waukesha have or actually change locations to elminate that advantage. As I have advocated before, why not change the whole qualification process and reformat the whole state meet?
James:
I knew I could count on you for comments! Thanks!
A few thoughts:
-- As I said, it's hard to argue against the Waukesha South pool as a sectional site, given its advantages in a whole lot of areas (seating, parking, eight lanes) that are part and parcel of hosting a big meet like that.
-- Having said that, the entire basis of the WIAA using only times (save for the sectional winners) for state qualifying carries with it a presumption of a level playing field for all participants. The results from last year suggest, pretty strongly to me (others may disagree), that swimmers at the Waukesha South sectional enjoy something of an edge, given how fast that pool is.
-- I used to be skeptical of those who argued Waukesha South was faster than the Natatorium. After last year's state high school meet, and this past spring's 13-and-over state club meet, I'm pretty much convinced that it is faster.
-- I think it's worth throwing into the debate about moving state to Waukesha South, as has been occasionally mentioned in swimming circles. But two very big caveats:
1)I don't think it'd be fair, then, to continue to have a sectional qualifying meet at Waukesha South. No state golfer should be able to qualify for state at University Ridge, site of the state golf tournament. No cross country runner should be able to qualify for the state meet at the Ridges in Wisconsin Rapids, site of the state cross country meet. Same should hold true with swimming.
2) Seating is a major issue at Waukesha South, if it hosts state, isn't it? The advantage of the Nat is that all the swimmers are on the deck, with the fans above. At Waukesha South, wouldn't you have to devote half the spectator seating to competitors? That cuts seating capacity in half, from 2,000 down to 1,000. The Nat holds about 1,500; it's main drawback for the state meet, to me (besides the argument over its quickness relative to other pools), is that it needs about 500 more seats. I'd hate to see seating capacity reduced for the state meet solely for moving the meet to a faster pool (and remember that the Nat is a faster pool for all swimmers in the state save one group -- the ones who swim at the Waukesha South sectional).
-- I'm not sure the results from last year augur well for a move toward qualifying times. The problem, as I see it, isn't just on the back end (so to speak) of the qualifying standard (swimmers making it into the meet by virture of a faster pool). It's that Waukesha South sectional qualifiers up and down the line earn faster seed times, including seed times into the critical final heat, helped by what appears to be a faster pool. Qualifying standards doesn't get rid of that issue. (Having said all that, I'm not sure what the answer is.)
-- Agree on the need for a better state meet facility. But choices are limited - none of the collegiate pools would appear to be well-suited for a state meet, and Schroeder just doesn't cut it from a seating standpoint (and to me, spectator seating is a significant issue -- you can't grow the sport by limiting attendance at the biggest high school meet of the year to just families and teammates). The Nat is a good, but not great, site for state -- centrally located, with ample parking, and a great atmosphere for a state meet. It just needs more seating, and appears not to be the fastest pool in the state.
To specifically address the validity of Waukesha's ability to host a state meet: If anyone thinks the Nat has ample, adequate or even comfortable seating for the athletes is just plain delusional. Waukesha probably has more deck space and with some creative thinking could probably make it work, thus not impacting spectator seating. Also you mention parking at the Nat. As a spectator, it makes me livid that during the state meet, which is again going to be held during a home Badger game, spectators are forced to park a long ways away from the pool. Ample parking? No way. You mention growth of sport and accomodating spectators etc...in my opinion, the current location and facility do not present well at all.
James:
Swimming will always take a back seat to the revenue beast that is UW football (in all candor, I'm amazed the WIAA still finagles a weekend from the UW for its state football games at Camp Randall).
Email me and I'll share my secrets to finding parking at the UW that's not that far from the Nat. that few know about it...
Deck space at the Nat for swimmers isn't great; however, I can't see how you could provide space on-site at the Waukesha South pool for swimmers and not impact seating significantly.
You Could also argue that the girls at the Waukesha sectionals were wearing Blue 70s and most Madison swimmers did not have them until the Nat.
"You Could also argue that the girls at the Waukesha sectionals were wearing Blue 70s and most Madison swimmers did not have them until the Nat."
That could be (I wasn't at either of the Waukesha South or Middleton sectionals). On the other hand, in D2, DeForest showed up at the Baraboo sectionals with an entire team decked out in blue70s. They swam extremely well at sectionals, but at state, only 5 of the team's 18 qualifiers (individuals and relays) swam slower times than at sectionals; 13 swam faster. Although a narrow sample, that add time/cut time ratio is in line with the rest of the D2 field last year. A few other notable D2 swimmers who also worse blue70s at sectionals -- notably Jennah Haney of Milton -- also cut time from their sectional performances at the state meet.
I'm not going to comment on the suits other than to say I believe their affect is being way overstated. Some affect yes, but not to the extent that explains the time drops or lack there of at sectionals vs state.
As most can tell, I'm not a big fan of the current location or format of the state meet. What strikes me is I get a sense that most feel "it's always been this way and will always be this way." I admit to using some dramatic language to inspire some comments back to keep the discussion going, but I am surprised that more don't comment about it. I really don't know how most can be happy about having to fight for parking, get to the pool early to ensure you get a seat, wait in long lines for rest rooms (ladies), have team scores posted via flip cards, have the athletes enjoy the wonderful locker room amenities of the NAT..I could go on, but most seem to be ok with all that, plus an out of date meet format.
James:
The women's bathroom comment re. the Nat. is spot-on. (And the men's bathroom is no great shakes, either.) The flip-board scoring is 19th century, no question.
We probably have to agree to disagree on the format -- there are valid arguments on both sides.
My view on the Nat as a facility is a relative one; compared to, say, the University of Minnesota -- yes, it's second-rate. But what else is out there? Waukesha South's lobby is just as small, if not smaller, than the Nat's. (You should spend some time in the Baraboo lobby at a sectional meet --that's a sardine can.) The bathrooms aren't that much bigger. I'm not -- yet -- convinced you can get more people into W. South than the Nat. Parking is what it is -- fine most years, bad for one of the four state meets (Div. 1 girls) during a UW football game. Yes, seating is a pain (said as someone who often shows up four hours before the meet starts to "save" my seat) -- wouldn't it be elsewhere? I'm not sure if assigned seating ala the Kohl Center would work anywhere that doesn't have the kind of distinct, single-seating arrangement that the basketball arena provides. What else could provide a better overall experience -- Schroeder? Carthage College? Maybe the new Kenosha-area pool -- is that still on? All seem to have drawbacks.
I think some improvements can be made in the interim. But the best, long-term solution as you well know is a better collegiate facility on the UW-Madison campus.
Two distinct threads running here: 1) are the qualifying sites for state (the sectional sites) equal to the extent that it is fair to compare times swum at one site to time swum at another site to determine who gets into state? b) what is the best site for the state meet.
Taking the second one first, I think one other reason to favor the Nat, is the fact that it is a neutral site. I think there is a fairness aspect to not having the state meet at the home site of one of the competitors. Also the seating is, as bad as it is, as good as it gets. The seating at WSHS is about 600 on a side (we counted once during premlims for the mile). You get to 1500 by counting the bleachers at the end. You effectively lose the first 3-4 rows during a big meet, as you can't see anything over the people standing or walking on the deck. Also, for HS State, you will need one side for the athletes, there is no other deck space. One other factor, the diving well at the NAT is available for warmup/cool down. At WSHS you have on lane at the end, which creates a real bottleneck and viewing problem. In short, the NAT, with all its shortcomings, is still the best of an imperfect set of choices.
PS. The new pool at Kenosha broke ground, but seating wise it will be well under 1000 especially for a 25 yard event.
Tackeling the other issue: are the sites similar enough to make it fair to compare times as the basis for qualifying for state. On that one I really wonder. Not just WSHS being fast, but others being generically slow,or just generally not equal in any of the other ways that can impact the performance of the athlete. Poor ventilation, too warm of pool temp on the date of the meet, etc. Maybe it is time to think about a premlim final format, with a much broader base of qualifiers for prelims, so that those actually swimming for the points, and for the team titles all swam together at the same pool at the same time to make it to finals. Now we really have a prelim final, it just that the prelims are at 10 sites, a week before finals.
One thing that helped focus this issue for me is that they select the divers for state the same way. They compare the points earned in the sectional competition to select the rest of the field after the sectional champs. The obvious flaw is that it does not compensate for different judging styles, or the judges at one site being more liberal or more strict in their scoring. It makes sense to have all the divers judged under the same conditions and by the same judges. Likewise it make sense to have the swimmers all swim under the same conditions in the same pool.
"Now we already have a prelim final . . " Can't type tonight.
Would just like to make a coaches point of view statement in respect to facilities for state - We do not have a great venue anywhere in this state yet. But in defense of the Nat - at least spectators are up and away from the athletes. I do not think that it is conducive for the swimmers to have spectators roaming around the deck where athletes are. Too much distraction. I realize that the meet managers attempt to keep spectators off deck, but trust me - those that don't belong on deck find a way to get there. How many spectators roam around the perimeter of a football field? How many spectators are on the floor of the gym at the state b-ball tourneys. It is an issue at Waukesha but not at the nat.
Thanks for the nice blog about swimming.
Great blog, great topic, and great comments. Nancy – spot on also.
As a coach that has our sectional at South, I think that it is about 85% correct that the pool is faster, but also another 15% that it is hype. Let me explain. The kids in the area all believe that the South pool is fast. (Some still argue that Schroeder is faster) Add the big meet hype and the high tech suits last year, and they go really fast. They also believe that the Nat is slower. And for as much as I try to debunk that myth, it never really works. I swam in HS meets in the NA, and have been to State enough times to see incredible swims there, I try to refute this myth all the time. ((Jesperson in the 200 Free in 1992, Adams in the 100 Free in 1998...just to name a few)) They see the “oldness” of the pool and think slow.
If the kids on my team would have swam their State times at Sectionals last year they would have been lifetime bests. They swam lifetime best at Sectionals instead and swam their second best time ever at State. But we had to taper them to GET TO State. We could not afford to not taper and hope we swam fast enough to make it to Madison. Based off our fastest times to get there, we had to rest otherwise we would have been sitting at home.
I don't understand Coach Ky's point. Most girls from any sectional have to try to peak at sectionals to make it to State. How does that disadvantage his team? Swimmers at the Waukesha sectional appear to have an unfair advantage in qualifying. I would be interested in seeing the mean improvement (decrement) in times from sectionals to State from different sectionals. This could give an estimate of how much faster the Waukesha pool is.
In the debate regarding equality of pools there is certainly a difference between pools that is not entirely mental. For instance last year at Waunakee's D2 sectional the blocks are lower than the standard height (This is information given to me by my coach) which plays a huge factor in the sprint events.
Post a Comment