Class of Central District

BASESWIMPARENT

Well-known member
At least Princeton has its own beautiful pool. Both Lakota high schools (both boys and girls) get four lanes at the Lakota Y from 3 to 5 at the same time. It is like a football team practicing on a field that only has twenty yards and an end zone.
 
BaseSwimParent, where were you? St X swam Louisville St X this afternoon at Keating. Cincy X won by a single point. 90 state championships between them. At least ten junior national qualifiers. LX kid set pool record. Six relays posted All-American times. Probably the best dual meet east of the Mississippi. Check out the times on MeetMobile. Both schools exhibiting great TEAM spirit. LX had five coaches on deck and CX had four. Stands were 80% full. LX has as many parents as CX.
 
Last edited:

BASESWIMPARENT

Well-known member
Well, I work nights. So I am sleeping but I would have loved to be have been there. There are some X swimmers that I am friendly with and I would have enjoyed watching them perform. This meet between LX and CX is always very competitive and I think is a good example to prove my point. LX is the class of KENTUCKY swimming. Many of the LX swimmers are members of that really impressive club down in Louisville that has a huge pool right next to the waterworks. And, I believe, one can swim and can compete in club and high school swimming simultaneously in Kentucky. I don't think there is a school in Ohio that could compete LX. But, what if X had a program that did nothing but compete against teams like LX. The swimmers would be pushed and they would set many records all season long. It wouldn't have to be a part of the OHSAA so they could swim against Boles in early October or late September. They could swim against the Texas powerhouses in winter and finish in early spring against Irvine and/or Mission Viejo or other like schools. All the while, the boys could break off and swim in the junior nationals, open or even the pro series with no consequence.
 

Doconc

Member
Stupid. Why would anyone seim year round like that? There’s no precedent for that for good reason

u keep trying to minimize ohsaa. Just stop
 

BASESWIMPARENT

Well-known member
Because X is in a class by itself. For the last time, X winning state is expected and not impressive at all. The only teams it is even competitive with is out of state. X attracts swimmers from all over the tri-state area, has more coaches and one of the best pools on campus in the state. And quit saying it is stupid. I will make a prediction for you. X wins state this year and next year and the year after. Swim against D3 colleges. Give the kids better competition.
 

apeg

Member
Because X is in a class by itself. For the last time, X winning state is expected and not impressive at all. The only teams it is even competitive with is out of state. X attracts swimmers from all over the tri-state area, has more coaches and one of the best pools on campus in the state. And quit saying it is stupid. I will make a prediction for you. X wins state this year and next year and the year after. Swim against D3 colleges. Give the kids better competition.
Why? Because they're getting to college and underperforming because you say they haven't been challenged? Are you saying they aren't getting anything out of their high school experience? What's your reason for this obsession? If the kids at X don't feel challenged or don't love the experience, they don't have to swim there. But they do.
 

Doconc

Member
Why? Because they're getting to college and underperforming because you say they haven't been challenged? Are you saying they aren't getting anything out of their high school experience? What's your reason for this obsession? If the kids at X don't feel challenged or don't love the experience, they don't have to swim there. But they do.
Agree
But our x-obsessed poster thinks it was great the fosters swam heroically and finished and impressive second at state. But x is not impressive because they won without the nation’s top recruits. Make sense??
 

BASESWIMPARENT

Well-known member
Neither Gentlemen. First this was never about the Fosters (although you seem to be pre-occupied by them). They were and are the best swimmers to come out of Cincinnati in a very long time. The Aqua-Bombers knew it and know it. I still stand by my assertion that if Sycamore had the same number of state qualified swimmers X did, I think they would have won state with a team all based in the same school district. However, I am just offering up a different model, similar to what Iggy's is doing with their hockey team. Otherwise, keep on keeping on and wait for the inevitable.
 

Doconc

Member
Neither Gentlemen. First this was never about the Fosters (although you seem to be pre-occupied by them). They were and are the best swimmers to come out of Cincinnati in a very long time. The Aqua-Bombers knew it and know it. I still stand by my assertion that if Sycamore had the same number of state qualified swimmers X did, I think they would have won state with a team all based in the same school district. However, I am just offering up a different model, similar to what Iggy's is doing with their hockey team. Otherwise, keep on keeping on and wait for the inevitable.
If ur uncle had breasts they’d be ur aunt

u love the spunky fosters swimming in small meets but resent x winning without the nations top recruits. Don’t u see the hypocrisy?
 

apeg

Member
Neither Gentlemen. First this was never about the Fosters (although you seem to be pre-occupied by them). They were and are the best swimmers to come out of Cincinnati in a very long time. The Aqua-Bombers knew it and know it. I still stand by my assertion that if Sycamore had the same number of state qualified swimmers X did, I think they would have won state with a team all based in the same school district. However, I am just offering up a different model, similar to what Iggy's is doing with their hockey team. Otherwise, keep on keeping on and wait for the inevitable.
Ohhh, so the best swimmers to come out of Cincinnati didn't swim at X because X didn't compromise their team philosophy over individual and somehow X still won state, therefore they should seek competition elsewhere? Who's argued with your assertion about numbers? And, what is this "inevitable" you speak of?
 

BASESWIMPARENT

Well-known member
What are you two talking about? Quit putting words in mouth and trying extrapolate conclusions that are not spoken or implied. I could care less what happened with the Fosters at X. I don't think they cared about swimming for X. If they did, they would have. They did not want to stop training with their club team so they did not swim for X. I am guessing that it wasn't important for them. Their peers knew who the best swimmers were in the city. They went to X but did not swim for X. From my understanding, they liked the school so they stayed until it did not work out for them anymore. I just brought up Sycamore and the Fosters as an example of the fact that even though Sycamore had the best swimmers in the state, the institutional advantages that X has (the best swimmers in the region, the best and most coaches in the state and an Olympic caliber pool at their fingertips) could not be overcome. There is no hypocrisy. If you think through the model I proposed, the swimmers at X would not have to be part of a club program (perhaps saving $1000.00) and they could swim against the best swimmers in the nation every year. What I am also saying is that I can foresee a time where X's swim team will be asked not to be part of the OHSAA. The advantages they enjoy make the meets non-competitive.
 

Doconc

Member
What are you two talking about? Quit putting words in mouth and trying extrapolate conclusions that are not spoken or implied. I could care less what happened with the Fosters at X. I don't think they cared about swimming for X. If they did, they would have. They did not want to stop training with their club team so they did not swim for X. I am guessing that it wasn't important for them. Their peers knew who the best swimmers were in the city. They went to X but did not swim for X. From my understanding, they liked the school so they stayed until it did not work out for them anymore. I just brought up Sycamore and the Fosters as an example of the fact that even though Sycamore had the best swimmers in the state, the institutional advantages that X has (the best swimmers in the region, the best and most coaches in the state and an Olympic caliber pool at their fingertips) could not be overcome. There is no hypocrisy. If you think through the model I proposed, the swimmers at X would not have to be part of a club program (perhaps saving $1000.00) and they could swim against the best swimmers in the nation every year. What I am also saying is that I can foresee a time where X's swim team will be asked not to be part of the OHSAA. The advantages they enjoy make the meets non-competitive.
Ok mr snowflake - we will just take turns on who gets to win each year. This year Lakota gets it cuz their pool sux
Next yr sycamore since it a matter of meters (Dont ya know)
Maybe then colerain since they have more minorities

Oh and let’s ban louisville st x since they win too much too

don’t u see how ridiculous u sound?
 

Doconc

Member
You defend your case with name calling and assumptions on about my character that do not matter to the debate. You lose.
I don’t know anything about ur character other then u keep saying that st x shouldn’t win cuz it’s not impressive. Your points are bizarrely constructed and based on false premises

make u a deal- stop bringing up st x and I will stop skewering ur points
 
.
Top