Division II National Championships- Day Four Real Time Recaps

NCAA Division II Championships

Women 1650 Free

Boudreaux would take the early lead in the final heat of the event as she would have almost a body length lead at the 350 mark.  Holding her own on the outside is lane 8 would be Lauren Carastro followed by Alli Crenshaw.  At the 500, Crenshaw would start to make her move as she overtakes Carastro going into the wall.  Boudreaux would only extend her leading holding an almost two body length lead at the same time, nursing about a 3 second lead over the field.  The race seemed like it would be almost out of anyone else’s grasp as Boudreaux would continue to extend her lead over Crenshaw.  Novichenko would start to inch up on Carastro and pass her at the 800 mark closing in on Crenshaw as well.  Sarah Pullen would also start her climb as she would try and catch Carastro to secure the fourth spot.  Boudreaux would continue to increase her turnover as she continued to pull away from the field extending out to a 7 second lead over the rest of the field.  Novichenko would start to solidify her campaign for the silver medal at the 1100 mark as she started to inch away from Crenshaw who was still holding strong in third.  There would be very little excitement in the front of the race but Crenshaw would begin to fade as both Kyleigh Troxel and Alecia McGillivray would overtake Crenshaw with Troxel leading the way.  Even Novichenko wouldn’t be safe as Troxel and McGillivray inched up on her as well sitting right at her heels at the 1500 mark.  Troxel would indeed flip even with Novichenko at the 1600 mark and it would come down to the last 50 to decide second but it would be Boudreaux who would win in 16:44.88.  Troxel would indeed end up taking second and Novichenko would fall to third.


Men 1650 Free

Trying to take his fourth title of the meet, Victor Polyakov would already have about a body length lead after the first 50 followed by last year’s champion Alex Menke and Elijah Barrows at the 100 mark.  Menke would start to pull away from Barrows just a little at the 250 mark but it would be Polyakov that would maintain his lead followed by Menke and Barrows.  Gustavo Silva Santa and Alec Morris would put their sights on Barrows to real him in from the opposite side of the pool, but outside of Polyakov and Menke the rest of the field was practically neck and neck.  At the 500 mark it would still be Polyakov and Menkie in the front but Juan Tolosa and Morris would be the ones battling for the third spot. Polyakov would have a 3.5 second lead over Menke at the 600 mark and he continued to extend his lead. Morris would have a slight lead over Morris in the battle for third as they tried to keep Menke within their grasps.  At the 850 mark Polyakov would have about a 7 second lead over Menke as Morris moved in front of Tolosa to make his bid for the bronze.  Morris would put Menke in his sights to try and gun him down right around the 1000 mark, but Menke would still hold strong, until the 1100 mark where the two would practically flip even and Morris would indeed overtake Menke at the 1200 mark.  Polyakov would only be racing the clock at the point as he would still be nursing a 7 second lead.  Menke would show signs of fatigue as we drop back to a battle for third with Tolosa and Alex Bryson.  Polyakov would turn by himself passing every swimmer on his way back down the pool who end up taking the victory in 15:14.89.  Morris would take the silver with Tolosa finishing strong to take the bronze.


Women 100 Free Finals

Ana Azambuja would get a great start of the blocks leading from start all the way from start to finish as she would take the victory in this even in National Meet Record time of 48.94.  Nicole Cossey would take second with Wai Ting Yu rounding out the top three.


Men 100 Free Finals

Nicholas McCarthy, who already won the 50 this weekend, would take the early lead with Ruben Gimenez right on his hip holding that position the whole first 75.  Gimenez would make a late push in the last 25 of the race to take the championship in an time of 43.49 followed by McCarthy and Robert Swan to round out the top three.


Women 200 Back Finals

Mary Hanson would start quickly along with Yakaterina Rudenko but it would take more than just straight speed to win this event as Kathyrn Pheil would inch up to the lead after the first 100.  She was followed closely by Rudenko as coming out of lane 3 Caroline Arkelian would make a late surge to try and take over the lead going into the last 25 Arkelian and Pheil would flip together and it would be Arkelian who would defend her title with a National Meet Record time of 1:55.57.  Rudenko would take the silver and Pheil would earn the bronze.


Men 200 Back Finals

Matthew Josa led by a full body length at the first 50, almost a full second lead.  It was clear that the battle would be for second and it would be Luis Rojas who would be sitting in second place.  He would end up third with Igor Kowal taking second, but it would be Matt Josa to headline this event with a new National Record of 1:40.74.


Women 200 Breast Finals

Jaimie Bryan would be out to the early lead with Agnieszka Ostrowska at the first 50.  Alena Rumiantceva would also begin to battle with Ostrowska at the 150 mark but it would be all Ostrowska the rest of the way winning the event in a new National Meet Record time of 2:11.45.  Katharina Fischer would take second and Hannah Mattar would take the bronze.

NOTE: At this point we can mathematically say that The Drury Panthers will be the Women’s and Men’s team champions at the 2014 Division II National Championships

Men 200 Breast Finals

Korth would waste no time using a great pullout off the start to get out to a quick start with Nik Eriksson taking over the lead after the first 50.  Korth would be sitting right on his hip throughout the first 100 with the battle for third up for grabs.  The race for first would heat up going into the 150 wall as Korth would take the lead away from Eriksson and he would only extend it from there finishing in a new National Meet Record time of 1:54.45. Eriksson would take the silver and Banjo Borja would take the bronze.


Women 400 Free Relay Finals

Wayne State would be out to an early lead with a sub-50 split on their first leg, but it would be all Drury the rest of the way as they would use two 49. splits to gain the lead and take the championship with a winning time of 3:21.52.  Wayne State would hold on to take second and Queens would round out your top three.


Men 400 Free Relay Finals

Queens would pull out to and early lead with a blistering first leg by Matthew Josa of 42.75.   But Drury would use descending leg splits the rest of the way earmarked by a final leg of 42.86 by Nicholas McCarthy to take the victory in a National Meet Record time of 2:54.37.  Queens would wind up second with Florida Southern finishing a distant three seconds behind them to secure the bronze.

 

43
Leave a Reply

Subscribe
Notify of

43 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JOEBOB
8 years ago

Congrats to all the athletes, of all ages, at the meet. How many records were set?

JOEBOB
Reply to  JOEBOB
8 years ago

Also, even though I watched online, why did the writer of the article not mention anything about the last relay. Both were great races that came down to the finish.

DIIDAD
8 years ago

OK, I have to say as a parent that this kind of thing really irks me. I am sorry but there are international swimmers that are younger and I have no problem at all with it. They are good students and athletes and contribute to their programs and universities.

However, I see this ‘kid’ that is 26 from West Chester or a Drury ‘kid’ that is 28 and I have to ask…why?!? Is winning that important that coaches and programs lost sight of college athletics – after high school??? I have seen this age of student before at universities, and they are going for their doctorates, not freshman.

seattleslew
Reply to  DIIDAD
8 years ago

I agree DIIDAD, I feel that there are coaches and programs out there that really lost their moral compass and really only use these older athletes to make them look better and help them win. It is just a shame that with these cases, that this is what coaching has become, bring in the faster and older swimmer to win and get the instant result, over trying to develop a younger swimmer for more of a long term benefit. How much faster will these older swimmers really get anyways?

Nonsense
Reply to  seattleslew
8 years ago

So let me get this straight, you both are thinking that coaches have a moral obligation to do what YOU think is right? Really? Sorry, but go back to fantasyland folks. Tell that one to Calipari at UK when his one and dones are bringing in millions to the university and making the NCAA tournament. If these coaches can do it and win, they will do it and win.

DIIDAD
Reply to  Nonsense
8 years ago

I certainly welcome the opposing viewpoint, Nonsense. I hope you can accept it as well. I come from a different era, and I hope you can bear with me. Unfortunately, we live in an era that winning, and bringing in the fastest kids regardless of age, is paramount to what college athletics was founded upon. College athletics was a means to provide a pastime for students while they studied and worked towards a degree. The championships were provided to give an outlet for the best of these students to compete against others across the country, and now the world, while getting a valuable education.

We now live in a society that mocks this principle. It’s now about ‘come here and… Read more »

Kayylub
Reply to  DIIDAD
8 years ago

Very well said.

tall n wet
8 years ago

Oh I agree that there is a physical maturity difference, but theres the sense of a loss of amateurism if most of the racers at D2 Nationals are 25 and up. The majority of students are gonna fall within the 18-22 age range. AND, id just like to mention this has nothing to do with putting 18 year olds on a pedestal that Braden Keith stated earlier. Totally irrelevant to the discussion.

Silke Smooth
8 years ago

If they are legal and why people complain about them?

tall n wet
8 years ago

Then lets apply it to D2 and D3 then!! Im sorry to bring this up but what’s to say a swimmer comes in, competes for a year or so, takes off 2 years to train while using steroids, waits to come back clean, then competes being much stronger and more able to win?? Im not saying that happens, but given the chance it could, why allow for such a scenario to exist given the current rule arrangement???

howard
Reply to  tall n wet
8 years ago

Totally agreeing with what you said Tall N Wet… Lets think about this another way.

(Arbitrary) 27 year old and 18-20 year old… The 27 year old may have as well taken steroids compared to the 18 – 20 year old because of the physical maturity advantage.

I am not saying anyone has taken steroids, but what I am saying is that 27 year olds are just physically more mature than your standard 18-20 year old. Its a fact.

howard
Reply to  howard
8 years ago

18-22*

tall n wet
8 years ago

I think what I was trying to refer to more, as was Swammer, is that the rules should state those 10 semesters of eligibility should be CONTINUOUS, and not split up. It would be too easy for someone to compete for 2 years, then take off another 2 to constantly train, then come back in much better shape than other athletes, being older and more experienced, which allows them a better chance of winning. If it were up to me, the rules would grant an athlete 10 semesters of eligibility, allowing for 1 redshirt year and 4 of competition. The semesters would be continuous, so if a swimmer retired early, say after 2 years, then the rest of their eligibility… Read more »

Josh Christensen
Reply to  tall n wet
8 years ago

The NCAA does have those rules. They call it DI.

Josh Christensen
8 years ago

Lots of misinformation going on here:

1) The new rule allows for a 1 year grace period after high school graduation during which a student-athlete has to enroll full-time in college or university. If they do not enroll in that time, it is likely they will have to sit a year and lose 1 or more years of eligibility, depending on how much time passed.

2) There are military service/religious service exemptions. Yes, some countries do allow those in the military to train and compete. It is what it is.

3) Once a student-athlete enrolls full-time and completes a semester, then they have 10 semesters to complete their 4 years of eligibility. These can be spread out. You can… Read more »

howard
Reply to  Josh Christensen
8 years ago

Haha pullin the friendship card ey?

Coach V
Reply to  Josh Christensen
8 years ago

John,

Where is that rule in the rule book? I have had swimmers in the past penalized and I would like to read it in the NCAA book.

Thanks

Coach V
Reply to  Coach V
8 years ago

*Sorry meant Josh.

Swammer
8 years ago

Braden,

1) Do you really think the colleges are funding these foreigners to come here for their academic prowess? No. They are doing so purely for athletic gain. It undermines the whole concept of the student-athlete.

2) In the US, I believe it would be quite fair. We give what, a one year grace period after 18/high school graduation? This is US collegiate swimming we are talking about. You can be naive as you want about the NCAA “supporting the spirit of competition”, but it’s not really fair to universities that aren’t funding people who are around 27 from the Eastern bloc who are at their very prime to compete against athletes who are just stepping into and developing themselves… Read more »

About Michael Sanders

Michael started swimming at the ripe age of 6 with a small neighborhood team.  When he turned 8, a three sport athlete at the time, he started year-round swimming.  Eventually he let go of the other sports and focused his career on swimming.  Growing over the next few years he qualified for his …

Read More »