Skip to main content
Log in

Assignment of swimmers to events in a multi-team meeting for team global performance optimization

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Assigning swimmers to events in order to maximize global performance of the team in a multi-team meeting is not a trivial issue for coaches. In fact, often months of hard work and training is wasted if a mistake is made in the line-up decision process. Expert coaches use their long time experience in order to make correct decisions, but often without reaching an optimal assignment. Athletes preferences also affect the decision process making coaches job even harder and, furthermore, the actual goal to be achieved may vary among situations. In this paper two different integer programming models, based on an estimation of opponents performances capability, constructed following two different philosophies and addressing two different situations are proposed. The first model just maximizes the total score obtained by the team, while the second model aim to optimize the placement achieved by the team in the meeting final ranking and the advantage on the first follower in the ranking. A detailed analysis of good and bad points of the two approaches and of situations in which one approach may be preferred respect to the other is reported. A real case example, taken from an Italian Regional Master Meeting, is deeply analyzed and a discussion on the comparison among results obtained with the assignment provided by the two models and the actual lineup proposed by the coach, is provided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Armstrong, J., & Willis, J. R. (1993). Scheduling the cricket world cupa case study. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 44(11), 1067–1072.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, S. R. (1998). Dynamic programming in one-day cricketoptimal scoring rates. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 39(4), 331–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Della Croce, F., & Oliveri, D. (2006). Scheduling the italian football league: An ilp-based approach. Computers & Operations Research, 33(7), 1963–1974.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeze, R. A. (1974). An analysis of baseball batting order by monte carlo simulation. Operations Research, 22(4), 728–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hersh, M., & Ladany, S. P. (1989). Optimal pole-vaulting strategy. Operations Research, 37(1), 172–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, G., Knust, S., Ribeiro, C. C., & Urrutia, S. (2010). Scheduling in sports: An annotated bibliography. Computers & Operations Research, 37(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Normann, J. M. (1985). Dynamic programming in tennis: When to use a fast serve. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 36(1), 75–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Normann, J. M., & Clarke, S. R. (2007). Dynamic programming in cricket: Optimizing batting order for a sticky wicket. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 58(12), 1678–1682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, M., Epelman, M., & Pollock, S. M. (2006). Assignment of swimmers to dual meet events. Computers & Operations Research, 33, 1951–1962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, R. A., & Leung, J. M. Y. (1994). Devising a cost effective schedule for a baseball league. Operations Research, 42(4), 614–625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saltzman, R. M., & Bradford, R. M. (1996). Optimal realignments of the teams in the national football league. European Journal of Operational Research, 93(3), 469–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schonberger, J., Mattfeld, D. C., & Kopfer, H. (2004). Memetic algorithm timetabling for non-commercial sport leagues. European Journal of Operational Research, 153(1), 102–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sphicas, G.P., Ladany, S.P. (1977). Optimal strategies in sport. In S. P. Landany & R.E. Machol (Eds.), Dynamic policies in the long jump (pp. 101–112). North-Holland, New York.

  • Urban, T. L., & Russell, R. A. (2003). Scheduling sports competitions on multiple venues. European Journal of Operational Research, 148(2), 302–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Voorhis, T. (2002). Highly constrained college basketball scheduling. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53(6), 603–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Washburn, A. (1991). Still more on pulling the goalie. Interfaces, 21, 59–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M. B. (2009). 50 years of or in sport. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60, 161–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simona Mancini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mancini, S. Assignment of swimmers to events in a multi-team meeting for team global performance optimization. Ann Oper Res 264, 325–337 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2735-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2735-5

Keywords

Navigation