AS APPROVED at the Competition Committee Meeting -- September 25, 2005
All motions passed by the Competition Committee are recommendations to the PVS Board of Directors.




PVS SPRING COMPETITION COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
May 15,, 2005 - 5:00 pm
Army Navy Country Club
Arlington, VA

Attendees-- Don Riedlinger, Chair; John Hirschmann, PVS; Bill Stephens, PVS, Ronald Whalen, PVS; Greg York, PVS; Evan Stiles, AAC; Robert Walker, ASA; Eric Moore, AST; Mark Faherty, CUBU; Manga Dalizu, FAST; Dan Haines, FGAC, Mike Kraeuter, FISH; Kerstin Severin, HACC; Christian Doud, MACH, Dan Jacobs, MACH: Paris Jacobs, MACH; Noah Rucker, MAKO; Chris Huott, MSSC; John Mason, MSSC; Angela Richard, MSSC; Kevin Ahearn, PM; Jim Garner, RMSC; Peter Karl, SDS, Victor Abrahamain, SDS;

Call to Order -- The meeting was called to order by Competition Committee Chairman, Don Riedlinger at 5:08 pm at the Army Navy Country Club in Arlington, Virginia

Agenda -- Don Riedlinger provided an agenda for use at the meeting. The agenda was accepted as proposed.

Approval of Minutes -- The minutes of the January 9, 2005 Competition Committee meeting were unanimously approved as submitted. They had been posted on the pvswim.org website and copies were available at the meeting for review.

Board Action on Prior Competition Committee Recommendations -- Don advised the Competition Committee that the PVS Board accepted all the recommendations made by the Competition Committee meeting at its January 9th meeting.

Club Sanction Requests for 2005-06 SC Season -- Hirschmann next presented the requests for Competition Committee endorsement of club sponsored meets to be held during the 2005-06 short course season. The Committee was provided with a copy of both the currently posted 2005-06 SC schedule as well noting that club sponsored meets previously approved were in the January minutes

Hirschmann noted that two meets approved by Competition are no longer on the schedule - these are the VSC Invite I on October 8-9 and VSC Invite II on November 5-6. This is due to South Run no longer being available due to closing for multi-month major maintenance. (Any subsequent meet would be a smaller meet run in a dual or tri meet format.)

Competition Committee's endorsement of six club meets for which requests had been submitted prior to this meeting were presented. Hirschmann advised that these are:

  • 9/U Friendship Mini Meet - Sunday October 23, 2005 at Providence sponsored by AST and YORK (1 session meet)
  • 9/U Friendship Mini Meet - Sunday January 8, 2006 at Providence sponsored by AST and YORK (1 session meet)
  • February Qualifier - February 25-26 at Providence sponsored by AST and YORK (2 session meet with events for 9-10, 11-12, 11/O, 13/O)
  • March Madness Meet - March 24-26, 2006 at Oak Marr sponsored by AST and YORK (same as last year's meet)
  • Mini Championships - March 18-19, 2006 at Olney sponsored by RMSC (same as 2005 - entry fee increased $.25 for individual events and $.50 for relays.)
  • President's Day Classic - February 18-20, 2006 (Sat/Mon) - President's Day Weekend , sponsored by OCCS- 10/U, 11-12, 13-14 events (no 1000 or 1650 Free) Meet would be at the Freedom Center so official sanction would need to come from VSI. (It needs to be clarified with OCCS whether their intent is to invite non-PVS teams and what VSI's views are on the matter.) It was noted this meet would be on the same weekend as the February Distance Meet - it was noted waivers have been granted in past to have meets on the same weekend as a PVS Distance meet.

The Committee voted to endorse sanctioning of these meet requests to the PVS Board.

The Committee was also advised that Chris Huott had requested some changes. Because of the Redskins schedule, PGS&LC is not available on October 22-23, therefore he is requesting permission to move the Senior Circuit Meet #1 previously sanctioned to October 29-30. The Senior Circuit Meet #2 is now planned to be hosted by SEVA in VSI territory and will be withdrawn from the PVS calendar.

MSSC also indicated it was no longer planning to conduct it's Winter Long Course Invitational scheduled for January 28-29, 2006. It was now requesting support for a new sanction request for a February Qualifier on February 5-6.

The Competition Committee voted to endorse the requests made by MSSC.

A request by MSSC for the Early Bird LC meet in May 2006 was deferred since the schedule for PVS sponsored 2006 long course meets has not been set yet.

MACH indicated it is planning to make a request to host a long course meet on April 22-23, 2006 at GMU and would be submitting a sanction request at the September competition committee meeting.

In response to a question, it was confirmed that it had previously been decided that the PVS 14/U Age Group Championship meet would be on the same weekend as the Eastern Zone Southern Sectional.

The Committee was advised that regarding Sectionals, the Eastern Zone last week awarded the Spring Northern Sectional meet and that it will be held at Harvard. Bids are still needed for both the Southern Sectional and the SC Age Group Zone Meets. Any PVS clubs having the capacity to sponsor such a meet were encouraged to consider doing so. Information on current funding available from USA Swimming for sponsoring these meets as well as pending changes to increase this support were also discussed.

Eastern Zone Short Course Team Report -- Mark Faherty as Head Coach made a brief report on behalf of Breanne Smith who served as Team Manger. He advised that the kids had behaved well, he appreciated the good support he got from his coaching staff and that kids had a good time despite not having the most competitive team. PVS finished 4th.

There were some problems at the hotel - the source of which is not entirely clear. The Meet Director had been advised of the problems PVS experienced and encouraged to not recommend that hotel to teams participating at any future EZ meets held at GCIT.

Breanne Smith will be preparing a written report. It was recommended she include "lessons learned" so her successor(s) can benefit from these experiences and not have to relearn the lessons.

Greg reported that Breanne Smith had concluded that the same person should not perform the duties of PVS Zone Team Coordinator and as a Zone Team Coach. This is both workload related and to have somebody free to deal with unforeseen circumstances involving facilities, transportation and/or PVS athletes. He also advised that Breanne would prefer to serve as a coach in the future.

Greg reminded the coaches that Mark Faherty had been selected as the PVS LC Zone Coach and Breanne Smith as the Assistant Head Coach in January. It was agreed that the remaining four coaches that PVS normally sends would be selected at the PVS 14/U Long Course Meet at Fairland on July 21-24. Coaches wishing to be considered should submit their nominations to Greg by e-mail by Wednesday, July 20.

Greg then reminded the Committee that PVS would need a new Zone Coordinator. It was noted that the Coordinator duties were significant - both prior to and during the meet. After discussion, Competition voted to recommend that PVS increase the stipend for being Zone Coordinator from $500 to $1500, add the requirement that the Zone Coordinator be present at the meet, that the Zone Coordinator not serve concurrently as a Zone team coach and should serve at least a one-year tenure (2 meets.)

.

PVS 2005 LC Zone Team Selection -- Don reminded the Committee of the criteria for selecting and participating on the PVS LC team, which had been endorsed at the January Competition Committee meeting and subsequently approved by the Board. That language was as follows:

"PVS's Long course zone team should be selected and managed the same as short course zones. The only exception would be that the top 3 swimmers are selected to go and represent Potomac Valley in each event. (The third fastest swimmer must satisfy the QT established by the Zone for that event.) If the selected swimmers have achieved the qualifying times in other events, they may swim those as well. Finally, the long course zones team will be funded for the same amount as the short course zone team starting in 2006 (The House will be asked in May 2005 to adjust 2005 funding to permit this to happen in 2005.)"

It was noted that this was the product of discussion over several Competition Committee meetings and was intended to produce a team environment and assure the best athletes would be available to swim relays.

Chris Huott then offered an amendment to add to the currently approved selection process the following additional language:

"Other Swimmers who have the Achieved the Qualifying Standard. Allow them to enter and attend the meet at their own expense. They are responsible for their own:

6. Transportation
7. Hotel
8. Food
9. Suit
10. Cap
They are not eligible for any relay competition"

There was discussion regarding the author's intent as to whether swimmers who were already eligible to qualify for the team by virtue of finishing in the "Top 3" could "scratch" and thus participate as an "Other Swimmer Achieving the Qualifying Standard." The author of the motion indicated it was his intent that they could do so. It was noted by doing so swimmers could arrive later and/or leave earlier since they would not be required to travel up and return with the team.

Others proposed that if you were eligible to travel up with the team, you must participate on the team on that basis or not attend the meet. They pointed out if this provision were in effect, PVS would be precluded from using its fastest swimmers available on the relay team. Questions were raised if the purpose of the change approved in January was to have our athletes participate on a team basis - whether they should then be able to waive out and attend on an individual basis.

It was pointed out that the swimmers traveling independently to the meet would only be under the coaches supervision from the time they entered the portion of the venue limited to athletes until they left it. They would NOT be permitted to attend team meals, group movies, travel on team bus if there were extra seats, etc.

There was discussion of whether it was desirable to have swimmers participating on the team on two different bases and whether the swimmers would understand why some swimmers being treated differently than others at a meet..

John Mason explained the purpose of the motion was to not exclude from the team those swimmers (including those in the lower half of an age bracket) who realistically could seek to achieve a qualifying time, but not be amongst PVS's 3 fastest swimmers. As now stands, it would result in concluding their LC training season about 3 weeks earlier.

It was pointed out their participation would not require the LSC (or the swimmers finishing in the Top 3) to spend anymore since they would be paying their own way.

Others noted that the motivation for the new zone team selection criteria was to have PVS participate as a team, and provide the athletes the experience of being part of a team. The sense of "team" has not been attained when the athletes both travel with and stay with their parents. Others noted we had spent considerable time getting to what was adopted in January and we should at least try it for one year before modifying it again.

The motion to amend the LC zone team selection process was called. The motion to amend was defeated 2-7.

A second alternative amendment to how the PVS LC team would be selected was then offered.

"All swimmers who make the QT for the meet would be part of the travel team."

This would mean all swimmers who entered the meet would travel up and return as a team, eat and be housed with team, etc. They would therefore not be able to either leave for the meet late or leave the meet early. It was estimated that under this proposal, the team might grow by 30-40 athletes from what was otherwise anticipated.

There was also discussion of the financial implications of this decision. It was noted that the PVS subsidy to the meet would not be changed because of this motion, and since total expenses would increase, the amount each swimmer participating on the team would have to pay would go up.

The question was called and this motion to amend the PVS EZ LC Team selection PASSED 10-1.

It was pointed out that this would require PVS zone coaches to be in charge of more swimmers for a longer period of time. It was therefore proposed that PVS send a full compliment of eight coaches - the maximum permitted by the Zone. The Competition Committee endorsed this recommendation.

In response to a question, it was indicated that based on the Zone manual, each LSC may receive credentials for up to 8 coaches plus the team manager (or alternate.)

Report from Eastern Zone 2005 Meeting --Hirschmann reported on many of the items since he now also Technical Chairman for the Eastern Zone. He reminded people that the prohibition on swimmers who had gone to a Sectional meet from attending a Zone meet had only applied to the Spring SC meet since it had never been addressed in the summer LC context. No changes were voted regarding the conduct of this summer's zone meet.

Starting with 2006 Zone meets (both SC and LC) for 13/Over swimmers, any swimmer who has ANY qualifying time for the new USA Swimming Junior Championship (actual - not bonus) may no longer attend an EZ Age Group Championship meet. (The prior rule on attending Sectionals has in effect been rescinded.)

The zone had previously standardized the order of events, QT's, scoring, and rules on bonus events for the two spring SC sectional meets. It has now standardized individual event, relay, team and individual high point awards, rules on number of relays/team, and that relay only swimmers may swim time trials. It also added a rule that a team whose swimmer is entered into Sunday finals when prelims are completely over and the scratch deadline has passed, who does NOT swim at finals will be fined $50 per occurrence, payable to the Zone. Sanction Penalty for not paying is barring of the team from future Sectionals.

The status of bids for meets had been reported earlier in the meeting. Riedlinger also advised that FINA this summer will be considering a proposal that will allow a single dolphin kick in breaststroke at the start and immediately following each turn. The United States is expected to oppose this rule change. It was stressed that this rule is NOT yet in effect.

Criteria for Receiving Travel Assistance for Attending 2005 US Open -- Don noted that the participation requirement for receiving PVS support for attendance at this meet was normally established at this meeting - since it required participation in PVS LC meets. He recommended that the requirement remain as it has been in the recent past - participation in 4 swims during the PVS 2005 LC season - at least two of which are in PVS sponsored meets. The meet will be held in Auburn, AL - December 1-3. The Committee voted to support this recommendation.

In response to questions, it was reported that travel assistance participation requirements for this summer's USA Swimming National Championships and the USA Swimming Junior Championship meets were previously set and are also participation in 4 swims during the PVS 2005 LC season - at least two of which are in PVS sponsored meets. A club may not request funding for the same athlete at both meets. This will be funded from the PVS 2006 budget which the House will vote upon next week. The Board had included funding for both meets in the budget it is recommending to the House.

Names on Relay Cards -- Don reminded the coaches of the importance of making sure for all relays, the names of swimmers participating are turned in on the appropriate form. If they do not do so, the time for relay will not be entered into SWIMS, and swimmer will not be able to use the time from a lead-off leg as an Official Time. There is a requirement under 102.4 of the USA Swimming rulebook to submit the names of swimmers participating on each relay team.

Therefore, it also important that the names not only be turned in - but entered into Hy-Tek before the meet results are finalized and submitted for entry into SWIMS and posting to the web.

Hirschmann also noted that SWIMS does check club registration status of all athletes on a relay and if all swimmers are not registered to the same club - including swimmers still in the "120 day transfer period" - the relay time will not be credited to the team.

Status report on Long Course meets with VSI -- Don gave a report on discussions that have been occurring with VSI about the possibility of having joint LC meets. He reported he had been in contact with several PV coaches of senior swimmers and also with the VSI Senior Chairman. Two proposals have been made

One is to combine the Senior LC meets for both LSC's. Since the meet would be bigger, the meet would be divided into two, the slower swimmers would swim in a prelim/final meet on the earlier weekend, the faster swimmers in a prelim/final meet on the following weekend. One meet would probably be in one LSC - the other in the other LSC.

The second proposal is to swim a timed final meet between the two LSC's with half the events on a Sat afternoon and the balance on a Sunday morning. There would be one heat per event, therefore each LSC could enter 4 swimmers per event. When this meet would occur in the LC calendar has not yet been addressed.

In general PV coaches appear to be interested in the first proposal, VSI coaches in general are reported to be more in favor of the second proposal. Further discussions may occur regarding implementing something for the summer of 2006.

It was felt that who might come to a PVS/VSI all-star meet might depend on both where and when the meet was held.

Garner was asked to brief the Committee on the status of discussions with VSI regarding inviting their teams to PVS meets. He reported that discussions began over disagreements regarding in which LSC must register if it expands across the established border. It was agreed that currently existing clubs could remain in the LSC where they are registered, and a process had been put into place as to where new clubs should be registered.

He indicated we would be trying to accommodate the ability of the northern most VSI clubs to attend our meets - hopefully starting with the PVS Senior/Age Group I and II LC meets.

Scheduling of PVS Sponsored 2006 LC Meets -- Hirschmann indicated that normally at this meeting, the scheduling of PVS sponsored meets for the 2006 LC season would be discussed and a recommended competition program sent to the Board for approval.

He indicated he was reluctant to do so now since that could limit options pertaining to scheduling a joint championship meet with VSI in 2006. He did, however, indicate that he might need to proceed with pool rentals before the next Competition Committee. Therefore, he asked to be able to proceed with scheduling on a basis similar to this summer if that proved necessary.

Competition indicated they were comfortable proceeding on that basis. It did however ask if the PVS LC Distance Meet needed to remain on Memorial Day weekend. It was noted that two Sundays (normally) have become available since PVS Age Group and Senior LC I and II meets have been combined. It was suggested the distance meet either be moved to one Sunday (both events), a Sat afternoon/Sunday morning format or on two Sundays..

PVS Swimposium October 2nd at GMU -- Paris Jacobs summarized PVS's plans to have a Swimposium at GMU on October 2nd. She reported four tracks have already been planned. They are Level II Coaches School -- Guy Edson- American Swim Coaches Association; Level III Coaches School - John Leonard- American Swim Coaches Association; Officials Pat Lunsford -- past chairman National Officials Clinic, Starter Olympics and USA Olympic Trials; and Club Business Management School -- Ira Klein - Eastern Zone Coordinator USA Swimming,

She sought input from the coaches regarding also offering a Parents track and if so, to which group of parents should it be pitched - those of younger or older swimmers. The view was expressed that attendance by parents of 13/O swimmers would be light and was most likely not going to reach the parents most likely to benefit. One possible topic that would be of interest to them would be swimming in college and receiving swimming scholarships.

Most felt a parents thread would be more likely to be successful if pitched to the parents of younger swimmers. They would be most likely to be attracted by a big name swimmer.

Paris noted the program offered by USA Swimming is "Parenting 101." She said USA Swimming had indicated it had experienced problems in getting attendance at this type of thread. They urge us to be careful in offering it unless we were comfortable we had something that would bring out attendees.

PVS Age Group Coach of the Year -- Don Riedlinger reminded those in attendance that information on submitting a nomination for PVS Age Group Coach of the Year had been posted on the PVS website -see http://www.pvswim.org/05agegrpcoach_instr.htm

Nominations are due by May 31, 2005. The person selected will have his/her expenses paid to the ASCA convention in September in order to receive the award in person.

Old Business - There was no Old Business to come before the Competition Committee.

New Business - Kevin Ahearn made a motion that PVS distance meets now include the 200 fly and the 400 IM and that these events no longer be included in PVS Open meets. He indicated he was making the motion to both have the PVS distance meet be more attractive financially and to provide an opportunity for swimmers competing in these events to do so separate from the other events they would swim at a PVS Open meet.

Questions were raised as to whether it was necessary to eliminate these events from PVS Open meets in order to have them in distance meets, whether these events would be swum before or after the distance events, the impact on officiating requirements since the 200 fly and 400 IM would need more officials to observe the strokes than are needed at a pure distance meet, timing system that would be used, etc.

It was also observed that the 2005-06 season has already been set and clubs are bidding to host those meets based on the current format. Therefore, it may not be possible to implement this prior to the summer of 2006.

The question was called. The motion was defeated 1-10.

A new motion was then made to add the 200 fly and 400 IM to the PVS distance meets without a provision for removing them from the PVS Open meets. There was further discussion of the proposal. The question was called and the motion was defeated 3-4.

A "straw poll" was taken and the coaches indicated that they would welcome more investigation into the feasibility of including the 200 fly and the 400 IM in future PVS distance meets.

Need for distance coordinator -- Don Riedlinger advised the Committee he was still looking for a Distance Coordinator to replace Rod Montrie, who no longer wished to serve in that capacity. A question was asked whether this function could be combined with that of the Open Water Coordinator - it was noted the later position had been inactive since 2003. Riedlinger stressed that someone would need to volunteer as Distance Coordinator if the desired investigation of adding other events to our Distance Meets was to occur. Peter Karl then volunteered to at least lead those investigations.

New Club Requirement -- Manga indicated he would like to develop a PVS policy pertaining to what is a club's obligation to the LSC to provide officials and other forms of parent support to conduct meets. He mostly talked in terms of the expectation that should apply to new clubs

Others asked him to expand the scope by addressing what requirements should be placed on existing clubs, whether/how it should vary as a function of club size, and what sanctions should be place on a club that does not do so.

The existence of the current LSC requirement to provide timers at meets and the reluctance of some officials to accept more responsibility than that of Stroke and Turn was also discussed.

Questions were also raised about how to get coaches and current officials more involved in the volunteer recruiting process. It was suggested this be concentrated with the parents of our youngest swimmers, whose registration numbers are way up this year.

Manga was encouraged to develop such a proposal and submit it to the Fall Competition Committee meeting for their consideration.

Next Meeting Date -- There was discussion of the date to have the next meeting. It was agreed to have it on Sunday, September 25th at River Falls. The time will be determined later. It may be coordinated with a Registrar's clinic to be held the same day. This would allow the meeting to occur one week following the end of the USAS convention and prior to the PVS Swimposium the following weekend.

Adjournment -- The meeting adjourned at 7:18pm