Draft Minutes until approved at the 2012 Spring Competition Committee Meeting
Potomac Valley Swimming
Winter Competition Committee Meeting
Lee Graham Community Center
7319 Lee Highway
Falls Church, VA 22042
January 3, 2012
· Attendance – Manga Dalizu – PVS, Bill Marlin – PVS, Riley Eaton – PVS, Paris Jacobs – PVS, John Ertter – PVS, Brian Pawlowicz – PVS, Nick Campbell – PVS, Brandon Fiala – PVS, John Ertter – PVS, Greg York – PVS, Tim Husson – PVS, Kent Williams – RMSC, Eric Adams – SNOW, Scott Bryant – PM, Emily Felker – HACC, Derek Young – AAC, Bob Petraites – JFD, Evan Stiles – AAC, Mark Murray – FBST, Tim Kelly – CUBU, Pete Morgan – CUBU, Mark Faherty – CUBU, Tom Ugast - CUBU, Carrie Tupper – UMD, Bruce Andersen – HACC, Shelley Gesker – YORK, Tony Murray – FAST, Brad Bowser – MACH, Rob Green – DCPR, Aaron Dean – OCCS, Christopher Huott – MSSC, Jim Garner – RMSC, Lynne Gerlach – MSSC
· Call to order – Age Group Chair, Manga Dalizu
· Approval of Fall CCM Minutes – Motion to approve the meeting Minutes from the Fall 2011 Competition Committee Meeting, September 24, 2011, seconded and approved.
· On-line Meet Entry training with Tim Husson – Tim gave a brief overview of the On-line Meet Entry system from USA Swimming. The PVS board has decided to try OME for the 2012 Junior and Senior Championship meets. OME is used for all USA Championships Meets including Sectionals, Junior Nationals and Senior Nationals. The direct benefit to coaches and clubs is the system is directly tied to the SWIMS database. Virtually all times will be in the database and there will be very little need for coaches to have to prove time.
o Q - What if a time is not in the database because it is from another meet? A - We can certainly research times if needed. But if the meet was Observed and in PVS it should be in the database. Most lead off relay splits from meets held in PVS should also be loaded into SWIMS. Bottom line, if there are any issues, Meet Management will work with you to make sure the correct times are used.
o Q - Is there a way to run an eligibility report or do we have to sort through all the people in your database in order to enter the few that are qualified? A- It was suggested to run an eligibility report in Team Manager and then use SWIMS.
· Order of Events for Friday of October Open – There have been inquires as to the possibility of changing the order of events for the Friday night session of October Open, so that the 13 & O swimmers swimming the 1000 yd freestyle can get out of the meet earlier Friday night, since they have to be back at the pool first thing Saturday morning.
§ Motion to change the order of the Friday night Distance Session of the October Open to 12 & U 200 Back, 13 & O 200 Back, Open 1000 Free, 12 & U 500 Free, seconded and approved.
· Distance Session for November Open – The Friday session of the November Open is getting larger and larger. We have more swimmers than ever swimming the distance events and because of that the Friday night sessions are getting longer and longer.
o Proposal to remove the 1650 from the Friday night session of the November Open, then move several events out of Saturday and Sunday to Friday night to relieve the longer timeline on those days as well, seconded and defeated.
§ One member of the body commented that he felt the Friday night sessions were fine at the site they attend and was concerned about when the swimmers would get the opportunity to swim the 1650.
· Club Meets-
o Last call for April 1 – August 31, 2012
§ RMSC – Maryland States, KSAC, 6/1-3/12
o First call for September 1 – December 31, 2012
§ MAKO – Fall Invite, GMU, 10/6-7/12
§ HAAC – Harvest Moon, Herndon CC, 10/6-7/12
§ AAC – Fall Gator Mini Meet, WL, 10/27-28
§ FAST – Odd Ball Challenge, Fairland, 11/17-18/12
§ CUBU – Pilgrim Mini Meet, Claude Moore, 11/18/12
§ MAKO – Holiday Invite, GMU, 12/1-2/12
§ CUBU – Tom Dolan Invite, UMD, 12/6-9/12
§ PM – Winter Classic, GMU, 12/6-9/12
o Motion to accept the recommendation of the Competition Committee to accept the above club meets and add them to the PVS schedule for April 1-August 31, 2012 and September 1-December 31, 2012, seconded and approved.
· Election for Assistant Coaches for Short Course Spring Zone – PVS asked for nominations for Assistant Coaches for the 2012 Spring Eastern Zone Team. Six PVS coaches from various teams submitted their names as potential coaches. Because six coaches are needed and there were no nominations from the floor, it was recommended to accept the six nominations by acclimation.
o Motion to accept Marye Carter-CUBU, Bruce Andersen-HACC, Scott Bryant-PM, Brittany Vocke-MACH, Tony Murray-FAST, Derek Young-AAC as Assistant Coaches for the PVS 2012 Eastern Zone Team, seconded and approved.
· Election for Head Coach and Assistant Head Coach for LC Summer Zones- PVS asked for nominations for the Head Coach and Assistant Head Coach for the 2012 Summer Eastern Zone Team. Steve Menard (AAC) was the only nomination for the Head Coach position. Emily Felker (HACC) and Scott Bryant (PM) were both nominees for the Assistant Head Coach position, indicating a need for a vote. After the call for a vote, Emily Felker indicated that she would like to remove herself as a nominee. Therefore Steve Menard and Scott Bryant could be named Coaches by acclimation.
o Motion to accept Steve Menard as Head Coach and Scott Bryant as Assistant Head Coach for the PVS 2012 Summer Eastern Zone Team, seconded and approved.
o General Chair – It is truly important for the members of the Competition Committee to weigh in on how the Championship meet season should work. These meeting are the coaching community’s opportunity to express their concerns, comments and suggestions to the Board of Directors.
§ Registrations fines – As a reminder, it is stated in PVS Policies & Procedures, By-Laws and in all meet announcements that all swimmers must be USA Swimming/PVS registered to compete in a PVS swim meet. If you enter a swimmer in a meet that is not registered properly and they swim in the meet, your team will be fined $100. All meets are run through a pre and post meet recon process, indicating where or not each athlete is properly registered. Please pay attention to these reports and make sure all athletes are properly registered. Unregistered athletes jeopardized your team or meets insurance policy through USA Swimming.
§ Athlete Protection – see report of recommendations from the PVS Athlete Protection Task Force.
· There have been several recent reports of incidents at various facilities during both practice time and at meets. Coaches need to pay particular attention in facilities that are open to the public during practice time and meets. Please review the report handed out, which includes recommendation on how to handle incidents reported to you, recommendation on policies for sending swimmers to the locker rooms and waiting for parents after practice.
· Included in Athlete Protection issues is bullying, vandalism, problems during warm up/cool down, etc.
· PVS is giving this to you the clubs, so you are informed. There are great guidelines and recommendations for your club to follow. Please take the time to read the report and apply the information that you feel is essential to you team/practice group. In addition, please share with other coaches from your club.
· Currently USA Swimming is considering a change in the name of the Athlete Protection Committee to Athlete Safety but the committee member would like it to stay “Athlete Protection”.
o Senior Report – see report submitted
§ Finals at Jr/Sr Champs - BoD defeated the recommendation to change the number of heats at Junior/Senior Champs Finals, 3 heats of Senior Final and 1 heat of Junior Finals.
· Many in attendance were very disappointed in Board decision to defeat this recommendation and would like to know why the board did not vote the way the Competition Committee.
· A suggestion was made to start Finals about 20 minutes early and run 3 heats of Finals for Senior Champs and 2 heats for Junior Champs.
· Several members of the felt that the PVS Coach Reps should have better represented the voice of the Competition Committee, and were disappointed they the wishes of the CCM were not properly voiced at the Board Meeting in October.
· Some members of the body feels that the proposal for the number of heats at finals (3 for Senior Champs and 1 for Junior Champs) should be revisited during the next Board meeting.
· Other members of the body expressed that they feel that 1 heat for Junior Champs as finals is not enough and if we revisit the issue then we should consider 3 heats for Seniors and 2 for Juniors.
· Motion to take the proposal for the number of heats at Junior and Senior Champs; 3 heats of Seniors and 2 of Juniors to the Board of Directors, seconded and approved.
§ Equipment Rental - There has been 25% reduction in equipment rental fee for all rentals thus far for the 2011-12 season. The Board of Director feels that it is appropriate to continue with the reduction in fees until there is enough sufficiently working equipment in circulation.
· The Controller, John Ertter, just sent all invoices for equipment rental for the fall 2011 meets.
§ Outreach program will now include home school athletes
§ 4 Hour Rule for 12 & U Sessions – As a reminder PVS in now enforcing the USA Swimming 4 hours rule for 12 & U sessions at all meets held in PVS.
· USA-Swimming say that includes all session that include events that are specifically for 12 & U swimmers. If they are Senior or Open events where 12 & U can participate, those sessions do not have to follow the rule.
· The Tech committee and Officials will work with Meet Managers to double check on timelines and will work with meet management to keep the timelines for the sessions with 12 & U.
o Age Group Report – information later in meeting
o Coaches Rep Report – No report submitted
o Diversity Report – No report submitted
· 2012 Championship Meets - We are doing some great things in this LSC. We continue to establish faster and faster cuts and the athletes continue to swim faster and faster.
o The committee formed at the Fall 2011 CCM has been continuing discussions since the fall on how to better structure the 2012 JO Championship meet.
o The biggest issue is the facility and facility availability. For the 2012 JO’s, we are locked into Fairland. For meets in the future we will be looking at both GMU and UMD. If we move to one of these facilities the pool rental price for this meet will increase significantly. Therefore the entry fee for each event will also have to be increase.
o The perceived goal is to return the JO meet to a two session meet (10 & U, 11-14 session). Timelines and session length are a major concern, especially with the enforcement of the 4 hours rule for any sessions including 12 & U events.
o Timelines, number of athletes and number of splashes, have been analyzed. After all meets through December 2011 there are about 5000 splashes and about 1000 athletes that are currently qualified for the JO meet. When you take out swims for athletes with more than 6 swims it brings the number o f splashes down to about 4000.
§ The question was posed to the body, do we want to reduce the size of the meet to about 4000 splashes, and have the timelines shorter, less time between events? This was a question that was hard for the body to answer.
§ There are still meets between now and the qualifying period; however history proves that most of the cuts were probably already made. Historically about 800 new cuts are made between December and March.
§ The way it looks right now (best guess) is that the two Thursday sessions (boys and girls) are a bit longer than in previous year, but most of the other sessions are predicted to be shorter.
§ The current prediction is that we will have about 4500 splashes and about 1200 athletes.
o There are a number of JO proposals to put forth to the body regarding the 2012 14 & U JO Championship meet.
o Motion to move the boys 10 & U 500 to Sunday, second, approved (1 opposed).
§ The 10 & U 500’s are currently split to Friday and Sunday because the boys and girls used to be in a single course; however the format of the meet is now for a dual course pool, so there is no longer an issue of sessions length with the 500s,
o Motion to swim the top 8 seeds of the 10 & U boys and girls 500 out of prelims and add them to the Sunday night Finals session, seconded, approved.
o Motion to move all 13-14 preliminary session warm up back 30 minutes (WU 6:30, 8:00 start), second, approved.
o Motion to move the 10 & U session 25 minutes earlier (WU 1:30, 2:30 start), second, approved.
o Motion to move the start of finals 30 minutes earlier (WU 4:45, 5:45 start), seconded and approved.
§ Remember while we ultimately we would like for all of the above proposals to work out, the conclusion will be larger determined by the size of the meet and timelines. If the meet gets drastically larger as it has in the past, warm up and start times may have to go back to where they were.
o The question on whether breaks will necessary during the JO meet was brought up.
§ The use of breaks will be determined by the Meet Management based upon the final timeline. The real discussion is whether or not to advertise the breaks in the meet announcement ahead of time. And if we do what is the best wording to use, so that parents do not assume that the use of breaks is an absolute.
§ Meet management feels it is important that the coaches know that breaks will be added in needed, but feels that it should not be in the meet announcement because when it is in the MA the parents feels that it will absolutely happen.
· Suggested wording for the meet announcement; “MM reserves the right to add in 5 minutes breaks”
§ Several coaches commented that it would be helpful prior to the meet to know whether or not there will be breaks, to aid in the picking of events for their athletes.
· Brian Pawlowicz suggested wording the statement, “MM reserves the right to insert breaks as appropriate, and within applicable USA Swimming and PVS Rules and Procedures, to allow athletes necessary rest to perform at an optimum level. “
· Then it was asked if we do have time for breaks, do we want a 5 minute break between each session or fewer/longer breaks at different times. What is preferred by the body? A straw poll was taken and the body was evenly spilt.
o Until this body decide what the goal of this association is; a Championship meets for everyone in this association or tighter cuts and shorter timelines taking things back to “the way it was”, then we will continue to talk in circles at these meetings.
o Motion to move event order around on Saturday so the 13-14 session doesn’t end with the 500 yd freestyle, seconded, defeated.
§ After a brief discussion regarding the order the motion was defeated.
o Motion to move the 800 Free Relay for 13-14 from Friday to the Thursday distance session as timed finals, seconded, defeated.
§ By stretching the meet longer on Thursday, it is adding another late night. It would save time during the Friday preliminary session; however this is not a problem session because it is the shortest of all prelim sessions.
o Motion to swim all 800 Free Relays during the prelim session for the 13-14 session on Friday, seconded and approved.
o Motion to rearrange the order of the events during the Thursday Distance session to start with the 1000/1650 yd Freestyle take a warm up break and then do the 11-12 500 yd Freestyle, second, approved.
o If the meet is large then we may have to put the event order and warm up/start time schedule back to the original times.
· 201 LC Champs
§ The summer LC Age Group Champs was a huge meet. What size do we ultimately want this meet to be? Do we want to decide by athlete count or by splash count?
· Controlling the splash count should make the timelines more reasonable.
· One concern of tighten the cuts is that if the times get too fast, many of the smaller teams may get cut out of the meet.
· One thought is to run a “B Level” meet for the meets who do not qualify for the JO meet. Many LSCs have multi-leveled meets/championships.
§ Is this body interested in holding the 2012 LC AG Champs to UMD?
· Straw poll, yes.
· At UMD we are not as concerned about body count, the facility can hold a large number of athletes.
· The suggestion of running preliminaries in two separate pool; boys at one facility and girls at another facility then bring them together for Finals. (Another option would be to split them by age instead of gender). There were lots of questions and comments regarding this suggestion.
o One member of the body feels that if we cannot guarantee this type of format for several years, then we shouldn’t even entertain it.
o There will also a need for 2 management team, more officials, more volunteers, etc.
o Tim Husson commented that the Official’s Committee would support any format that the Competition Committee, but it is up to the clubs to get officials certified and willing to work.
o A format like this would be increasingly difficult for families with multiple children in different age groups or different genders.
o Making a decision like this will also will ultimately be dependent on the budget. It will cost quite a bit more to run to pools for prelims, this increased cost would go back to the teams and families.
· It doesn’t appear that a format like this will work for the 2012 LC meet, but let’s keep the discussion going in the future and continue to think out of the box.
o UMD for March 2013 JOs - Carrie Tupper, the UMD Aquatics Director, confirmed that University of Maryland is available. By going with UMD there must be the understanding that the cost of running the 14 & U JOs meet will be increased. Do we pay for this increase by charging a higher entry fee JOs only or do we spread the cost across all meet entries all season?
§ Proposal – pay for UMD for 2013 AG Champs by increasing the2013 entry fees for Junior Champs, Senior Champs and JO’s by $2 , seconded
§ Friendly amendment: Proposal that we secure UMD for 2013 SC 14 & U JO’s, seconded and approved.
§ Motion the board considers a $2 per entry fee for the 2013 Championships meets (Senior, Junior and JO’s ), seconded and approved.
o Let’s close the discussion on 2013 JOs, until we complete 2012 SC JOs and we know if the recent changes work or not. Then we will know what else we can change.
· Warm up Policies, Open vs. Assigned – As a reminder if there is open warm up; there are very specific rules what lanes are for general swim, pace lanes and sprint lanes. At meets with open warm up if a referee or other official asks you to clear a lane in order to open sprint or pace lanes please be respectful and clear your swimmers out of the lane.
· Recap of December Meets –
o Winter Classic – The meet was big and the swimmers swam fast. There were 23 meet records set.
§ It was mentioned that there were a couple of issues regarding a Photographer. Several coaches were disgruntled because the photographer seemed to be “pushing” coaches out of the way in order to get pictures and was allowed on the bulk head where coaches were not allowed to go.
§ All teams were reminded that if you have a Team photographer or hire a photographer to shoot the meet, he/she must be registered as a non-athlete in order to be on deck.
o Tom Dolan Invitational – Parking was a little bit of an issue on Friday. The swimmers took a little time getting used to swimming off the bulk head, but it worked out. There were several National Age Group records set and dozens of PVS records. Meet Management considered the meet a success all the way around.
o Turkey Claus – It was a great meet; however there were continued to have safety issues at Takoma. The BoD is looking at this continued problem. The meet will be moving in the future.
o Reindeer Mini Meet – Another great meet. There were issues with the stands behind the blocks with the usage of cell phones and camera. According to USA Swimming Cell phones and camera are fine in the stands but not on the deck behind the blocks. Please be sure that everyone enforces the same rules at every meet.
o Christmas Champs – A 12 lane course was run and , everything worked well.
· Outstanding Coach of the Year – Information regarding the new form and nomination process will be posted soon.
· Equipment report – PVS has been experiencing significant equipment issues. The Board of Directors is aware of all the issues and is working to secure an equipment manager/technician who can perform maintenance on the equipment as needed. In the last couple of weeks PVS has purchased 60 buttons, and 3 harnesses, which will be available for upcoming meets.
· Old Business
o Athlete Protection Training – The due date for completing the required Athlete Protection Training through USA Swimming has come and gone. If you, any of your coaches or officials have not completed the free training, then that individual will not be allowed on deck until it is completed and they are properly registered with PVS and USA Swimming. Please make sure all coaches and officials complete the training as soon as possible.
· New Business
o Splash Fee – As a reminder at the May 2011 HOD meeting the motion to increase splash fees from $.45 to $.55, passed.
o Graduating Seniors – Over the next few months HS Seniors will be making their college decisions, send the athlete’s name, club and college decision to the Administrator, Terri.
o Meet Manager 4.0 – Hy-Tek has released MM4. There is no rush for clubs to get it, because 4.0 and 3.0 can share a database. However support for 3.0 will close at the end of this year, which is really the only reason for the switch.
o Outstanding Athlete – RMSC coach, Kent Williams has worked on preparing a new application and nomination process for the PVS Outstanding Athlete Award. He will send out the form electronically. Please contact him directly if you have any questions or comments and we will review as a group at the May meeting.
o Touchpad usage proposal – At a recent Board meet, Operations Chair, Brian Pawlowicz raised the question regarding the use of touch pads at all PVS meets. In order to get feedback from the coaching community a proposal is being made.
§ Motion to run all PVS meets (not club meets) without touch pads. PVS meets (Opens and Distance meets) would use buttons and stop watches only. This does not apply to the PVS Championship meets, seconded and defeated.
· If pads are no longer rented out by PVS or used at PVS Open/Distance meets, then all clubs will have to work on getting their share of timers.
· Pads are the most expensive pieces of equipment that PVS maintains. They are heavy and bulky to move from site to site. The wear and tear on touch pads is getting too expensive for PVS to reasonably maintain.
· Pawlowicz has talked to other teams and was told that many LSC’s don’t use pads for their club meets and were shocked to hear that we use pads for almost all our meets.
· After the November Open, Jim Thompson looked at some data, how many times adjustments were made due to pad malfunction; for 10 & U 50%, 11-12 25% and 13 & O about 20%. Contrasted with Senior Champs where the pad usage was 99% correct, but this was a GMU with their own equipment. So they also looked at a MAKO meet that runs their meet at GMU with GMU equipment too and the numbers were similar to the November Open.
· As a coach, it is easier to say to a swimmer, “the pad didn’t go off because you didn’t hit the wall hard enough”. Having pads is easier for coaches to help teach/train our swimmers to swim with pads, which is what is expected “at the next level”.
· There was a concern regarding backstroke starts, many pools have a slippery sides. Using touch pads helps the swimmer get a better grip at the start.
· If we move all championship meets to UMD and GMU then there will be less need for pads for Champs meets because at those facilities we use the facility’s equipment.
· There is a need for splits from the pads in meets. It is important for the swimmers to be able to look at their splits. Often times coaches have multiple swimmers in a heat and cannot get splits on all swimmers as the same time.
· There are more and more meets where NT are allowed, so getting lead off split are needed and important.
· There is a large line item in the budget to purchase equipment, so buy it.
o The concern is that while PVS has the money to buy the equipment, there is not currently enough in the budget to maintain the equipment.
o Distance Event Qualifying Times – The Distance sessions at PVS Open meets and at the January Distance meet are getting longer because more and more swimmers are participating in them.
§ Motion to lower the Distance qualifying times for 1000yd/800M to 14:00 and 1650yd/1500M to 23:00, seconded, approved.
§ Motion to lower the 13 &O entering the 1000yd/800M Free, requiring a 500yd/400M time to 6:30, and a 1000yd/800M time of 13:30 to enter the 1650yd/1500M Freestyle, seconded and approved.
o Plan of action for 2013 JO’s – The committee will sit down and discuss the meet prior to the 2012 JO meet, then again after the meet to discuss how the current changes affected the meet, both positively and negatively. Attempts will be made to hold a coaches meeting at the JO meet to get feedback. Ideas for the 2013 meet will be brought to the May meeting.
§ Q - Are we going to pursue the use of UMD for summer 2012? This will be taken to the Board as a recommendation.
§ Does this body want us to pursue getting two facilities for the LC AG Champs: straw vote: No
o Motion to Adjourn, seconded and approved.