Last November I wrote a short editorial about my feelings toward the seeding rules for masters nationals. Between now and then I have been trying to get the editorial published in one of our two swimming publications, but to no avail.
So I am "publishing" it here, for all masters swimmers to read as we approach the spring nationals in Fort Lauderdale.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please excuse all the question marks in this column, but I have a lot to ask.
Why are the 400 IM and distance freestyle events seeded by time at nationals, while the other events are seeded by age first, then time?
Here’s the rule, from the United States Masters Swimming Rule Book, about seeding events at nationals: “Pre-seeded events shall be seeded, with oldest age groups first, slowest heats swum first in each age group.” Not “... may be seeded...” No room for leeway there.
Why is this a steadfast rule that applies to every national championship, but only an optional policy for regional, state and local meets? An option that, I might add, is never used.
How much longer can we stand to watch another man or woman win a race by three body lengths, then watch another man or woman win a race by the same amount three heats later? To make matters worse, we don’t notice -- or don’t care -- that often the swimmers (in different age groups, obviously) finish the race with times less than a second apart?
Case in point: At the 2004 masters long course nationals in Georgia, Razvan Petcu and Michael Ross set world records in the 100 fly in the 30-34 and 35-39 age groups, respectively. Ross was faster than Petcu by less than two tenths. Imagine the sub-56 second times both would have posted if they had raced in the same heat -- the fastest heat consisting of the top eight 100 flyers at the meet. Imagine the crowd’s enthusiasm at witnessing a great race between two extraordinary swimmers -- and the other six who would have definitely fed off their energy.
I’ll give you another example. I was one of hundreds to watch in amazement as the 25-29 100 yard freestyle at last year’s short course nationals featured a race that had three swimmers break 45 seconds. And yet, by that time, many had forgotten that two swimmers in the 40-44 age group, John Smith and Paul Smith, weren't too far off the pace, swimmig under 47 seconds.
How great it would have been to have the Smiths swim in the same heat as Sabir Muhammed and Gary Hall Jr. Would the Smiths have moaned about swimming against people 15 years younger? Doubtful. Would the younger swimmers have laughed at two men in their 40s racing them? Highly unlikely.
Unfortunately, that is a race we will most likely never see. And if the rule makers at FINA and USMS can’t see the inherent advantages of erasing this current rule, then we’ll never see races of that caliber.
We’ll continue to see Bobby Patten race all alone in the 200 fly, instead of getting pure competition from swimmers in other age groups who would jump at the chance to race one of master swimming’s best.
I’ve only been a part of masters swimming for five years, so I wasn’t around when this rule was passed. So can someone please tell me the logic behind it?
Are the older swimmers scared of getting their butts whipped by a 28-year-old? Did someone complain that they miss the days of age group swimming and wanted to return to that?
Please tell me the logic behind that rule -- if there is any logic.
And while you’re thinking of an explanation, think about what would happen if this rule were in effect in USA Swimming and Olympic/World Championship meets. It would mean that Michael Phelps and Ian Thorpe would never get to race because Phelps belonged in the 19-24 age group. Would Katie Hoff be relegated to the 15-18 age group, while Amanda Beard swims all alone in the 19-24 bracket?
Yep, that’s a bunch of baloney, but that what I’m seeing in masters swimming. And as some of us begin to map out our training and competition plans leading up to next year’s master’s world championships, I fear we’ll never get the kind of exciting matchups we take for granted in the Olympics.
Wouldn’t you rather see four swimmers duke it out for the overall title in the 200 free at nationals than to watch them one by one in their respective age groups? (Don’t worry. They’d still get their first place medals for winning their age groups.) And wouldn’t it be better for all swimmers to race people of their own ability?
What would it take to make this policy change? Would it just take one person to finally vocalize what so many have whispered about on decks around the world? OK, I’ve done that. What’s next?
I’ve asked a lot of questions here, and the answers (read: the future of US Masters Swimming) lie within you.
Originally posted by breastroker
I would like USMS to have sponsored races across the USA to build excitement. Kind of like the Clarol Challenge with Mat Biondi vs. Mark Spitz. Say a prize of $5000 .:D
If they're promoted right, perhaps they'd get some media coverage, and get a national sponsor or two interested in donating the prize money...
Or maybe have a webcast, if you can't get any networks interested in it.
Originally posted by LindsayNB
To me if you have one group that likes silver cars and one group that like blue cars, you can either argue over whether to make all cars silver or blue and take polls etc. etc., or you can let people choose the color of their own car.
Yeah, and if 300 people want a blue car, and 5 of them want a silver car, the cost of that silver paint and production goes way up, or you have to amortize it across everyone that buys the blue car as well. If the Blue cars find out that they paid for part of the silver one, you have a lot of ill feelings on your hands to deal with.
You kow, all the way up to the nationals, I gather that most meets are seeded according to your time. if elites are so eager to swim against one another, how come they haven't gotten together and decided to choose one or two regional meets acroiss the country, andmake it into a face-off?
We just held regionals in Southern California, there was plenty of room and time left for, easily another 50 or even 100 swimmers. Nice pool, nice facility and area, 3 day meet, could have had the the face off, time trial, exhbition event... It was at a local College that has it's own little TV broadcast...
In USMS you don't have to compete in your own LMSC or Zone...
Perfect setting to have the fast people swim against one another. Can anyone tell me why they weren't there? There's plenty of fast people just in our LMSC!
Can anyone explain to me hiw come in the fastest heat of men's 100 there were 7 no-shows, and only one guy swam it in a heat all by himself, at 40some seconds...
He *did* get a big standing ovation.
Yeah, theoretically we could do this and we could do that... getting the fickle to go along with the program and actually participate seems to be the struggle.
Originally posted by LindsayNB
While I acknowledge that your point is that my decision to enter the heat seeded by time would have an affect on you, .....
I'm curious, do you have much involvement with, or experience organizing swim meets?
You're setting up an argument that includes just one consideration of probaby 20, 30 or so that would have to be made to actually make it happen.
What if your meet entry fee for nationals went from 80 dollars to 350 dollars to accomodate the dual system and make up for the loss of disgruntled swiimers who didn't like the change and decided to not show up and make the meet feasible for the host. Would you still want that choice?
What if thr meet host charges exdtra 200 bucks per entry to give you a choice? What do you do with people that mail in their entry, and don't indicate their preference?
Would you agree to have your USMS Dues doubled, so that USMS can offer prize money to the elite swimmers, and make it more attractive?
You know, majority of USMS swimmers, the ones who would end up paying for it aren't that interested in competition. Lot of their concern is that too much of their money is already spent on the elite ompetition, and not enough representing their interests. These are the people that in a way 'own the organization', almost as if they're your stockholders. You kind of have to answer to them wny you're spending your efforts in one place, when they think there is a deficiency elsewhere.
Seems to me that profits vs. the effort it takes to organize the nationals are slim enough that you don't exactly have meet hosts flocking to put one on.
Sure, you can have anything you want, on paper. But if noone steps up to the plate to actually do it, you end up with a rather elaborate version of nothing.
Speaking of cars, there's a reason for manufacturers to give you limited choice of colors. Remember the old days, before cars were in mass production, before it was feasible, they were all the same color.
Every comment here has merit, and every comment makes sense in its own fashion. I don't have the absolute solution to my question. If I did, I might be already stumping to be my LMSC rep.
But talking about it often brings about a solution or an impasse. Either way, it's good to see that there are opinions on both sides and that this issue, which has been going on longer than I have been alive, is still hotly debated.
Originally posted by Conniekat8
...
Let's say it was a 100 free (a) and 100 free (b), and you could sign up for either, and have your time count... One seeded by age group, other by time... see where you get more signups.
I still think this idea has merit. It would be interesting to see how many people signed up for each although I don't see it as a majority rules issue, as long as there are enough people to populate the heats I don't see why you shouldn't let each group compete according to their own preferences. At worst, if you end up with a half heat of swimmers for the slowest heat of the time seeded heats you seed them in with the age seeded swimmers to avoid any impact on the timeline. In general the time seeded heats should reduce the timeline.
To me if you have one group that likes silver cars and one group that like blue cars, you can either argue over whether to make all cars silver or blue and take polls etc. etc., or you can let people choose the color of their own car.
Wayne wrote:
It's not how fast you swim, it's how fast you slow down.
All I have to do is not slow down into my eighties and I'll be a contender! ;)
While I acknowledge that your point is that my decision to enter the heat seeded by time would have an affect on you, I think it is interesting to note that the effect on you, having to swim in a heat with no one of similar speed is exactly the effect that the current rules impose on people who dominate their age group. And under the duel system you would at least have the choice to swim in a heat seeded by time if swimming against someone of similar speed was important to you. In your hypothetical setup if one swimmer decided stay home that also affects the other swimmer, but I doubt anyone would suggest that anyone be forced to attend the meet.
Extending my car color scenario, if one person prefers that ALL cars be silver and another person prefers ALL cars to be blue, one could argue that majority rules and that the person who prefers silver cars is affected if I am allowed to have a blue car. I think there is a distinction between saying you have your color car and I'll have mine and saying I want you to conform to my prefered car color.
Originally posted by matysekj
One issue is that these are not mutually exclusive decisions. We are running a national championship. Let's say that you and I are in the same age group and my preference is to swim under the current system where I compete against others in my age group, while your preference is to be seeded in the age-independent heats. Let's also assume (fantasize?) that you and I are the fastest two swimmers in our age group, much faster than all the others. Well, your decision to swim in the age-independent heats has affected me. I would have no competition in my heat and would be unable to swim against you head-to-head, while you may be swimming with others of similar speed. As you can see, letting everyone make their own decision does not "let each group compete according to their own preferences" because your preference impacts my situation.
Note: I have drowned in Jeff's wave during several 100 IMs in the lane next to him. He is younger, stronger and meaner than me........ so what. He reminds me that I have become weak and lazy in my old age. Hell, its good to draft off him !
I'm glad to be of service, John.
Hey folks, what your seeing her is the lashing out via sarcasm of a tired old man who just happened to marry and Olympian and it pisses him off everyday!
Besides, Karlyn scares the hell out of me and you could count on my not showing up to th blocks for ass whuppin she would put on me!!
Speaking of Mr. Cummings wave abuse (I've suffered it as well)......how can a man who's feet stick straight up out of the water when he kicks swim backstroke so fast???!!!
Don't get me wrong Mssrs. Smith, but I am constantly in amazement that I swim backstroke faster than those who can kick 15 meters off every short course wall. Seeing that I was second in my age group in the world in long course backstroke last year increased my confusion.
Believe me, Eddie did all he could to fix my ankles -- short of breaking them. If you look at my backstroke, what you see going on above my waist cancels out whatever is going on in my ankle area.
I know breaststrokers shouldn't be backstrokers. Why do you think almost every meet puts the two strokes back-to-back?
Originally posted by Conniekat8
I'm curious, do you have much involvement with, or experience organizing swim meets?
I did organize our club's meet two weeks ago but that is quite different from a Nationals size meet. My only involvement with larger meets is as a swimmer or in my roles as masters cochair at Swimming New Brunswick and as a member of the board of Masters Swimming Canada.
What if your meet entry fee for nationals went from 80 dollars to 350 dollars to accomodate the dual system and make up for the loss of disgruntled swiimers who didn't like the change and decided to not show up and make the meet feasible for the host. Would you still want that choice?
What if thr meet host charges exdtra 200 bucks per entry to give you a choice?
These seem like highly hypothetical possibilities to me. If you are not interested in exploring the feasiblity of offering a duel system that's fine, I don't see the harm of dicussing the possibility and am open to the possibility that there are good reasons to stick with the status quo. I think it would be good for everyone to have those good reasons out in the open and understood. At this point I see no reason why splitting the events into two sets of heats would drive up the costs to the radical extent your examples imply. I guess it is possible that people would stay away if they couldn't have their way, but I doubt it. For all we know a lot of people are currently staying away due to a dislike of the current system.
What do you do with people that mail in their entry, and don't indicate their preference?
I guess you would have a documented default? Presuming that you didn't implement each event as two events in your schedule (Event 12A 50Fly by time, Event 12B 50Fly by age group)
Would you agree to have your USMS Dues doubled, so that USMS can offer prize money to the elite swimmers, and make it more attractive?
I would neither propose nor support such a proposition.
You know, majority of USMS swimmers, the ones who would end up paying for it aren't that interested in competition. Lot of their concern is that too much of their money is already spent on the elite ompetition, and not enough representing their interests. These are the people that in a way 'own the organization', almost as if they're your stockholders. You kind of have to answer to them wny you're spending your efforts in one place, when they think there is a deficiency elsewhere.
Which is why I joined the MSC fitness committee and am putting my efforts into helping develop fitness oriented programs.
Sure, you can have anything you want, on paper. But if noone steps up to the plate to actually do it, you end up with a rather elaborate version of nothing.
I think it is constructive to have a good discussion of the pros and cons of a potential change before pushing to have it implemented. I thought that was what we were doing here.
I guess I should also make it clear for anyone who hasn't run across any of my times in other threads that I am not one of the elite swimmers that can't find competition in my age group, I am one of those much slower swimmers that some people enjoy seeing get lapped by the more elite swimmers in my age group.;)
