Swimming against your competion

This is what happens when we have a Championship Committee chair who thinks any race with a change of direction is a long distance event.

I agree. The adrenalin produced by swimming against those you are competing with for top 10, records etc. is perceptibly different than a field of people you don't know and can be decades younger or older. This was the same policy used at Omaha and the separation from your age group competitors was very noticeable. The Nationals is a special event that requires a different focus and investment than local meets (tapering, shaving, not to mention the time and financial investment). It should be treated as such and despite large numbers, not be compromised.

This is the Nationals. The ONLY time I get to swim against my own age group. There needs to be a better solution. The problem here is that a better solution for one swimmer will not be considered a better solution by some other swimmers. For example, there has been talk about replacing the "drop six event policy" with a new policy. When the meet is too big, what do you think about dropping all non NQT events for all swimmers but not dropping a swimmer below three events.

For the National Championships, yes I think nonqualified events should be dropped before qualified events (i.e. a qualified 6th event). There can be 'free' events if there is low participation at Nationals but not at the largest event in the history of the sport. I think it diminishes the spirit of a National Championship when the focus is on participation.

For the National Championships, yes I think nonqualified events should be dropped before qualified events (i.e. a qualified 6th event). There can be 'free' events if there is low participation at Nationals but not at the largest event in the history of the sport. I think it diminishes the spirit of a National Championship when the focus is on participation. Then, you definitely don't want to see me when I "race" the 400 IM and 200 Fly in Mission Viejo! :afraid: Fortunately for you, my 6th event (1500) got cut! :censor: I hear what your saying, but on a purely selfish note, I know, it was very exciting for me to finally make NQT's in my breaststroke events, so I could qualify to swim six events. :bliss: (The downside, however, is my inability to hit those NQT's, at the moment, due to recovering from injuries that messed up my training. :badday: ) The spirit of a National Championship may be diminished, in your opinion, when the focus is on paricipation, however, the spirit of USMS is inclusiveness. USMS is all about not being an elitist organization or they would not invite fitness swimmers to participate. If I had sensed USMS was not inclusive, I would not have joined. And, my guess is there are many swimmers out there who feel the same way.

There needs to be a better solution.I personally believe the Championship Committee and our Masters Swimming leadership DO come up with the better solutions. The committee does not make these decisions without a lot of discussion. And they generally fully understand the ramifications of the decisions they make. Are you suggesting it is fair and understandable that the 400/800/1500 swimmers can't swim against their age group but the 200s should swim against their age group? I don’t believe the original post mentioned fairness. It was more a matter of personal preference and perceived inconvenience. …I appreciate all the hard work that goes in to putting one on…This I completely agree with!

Jeff- At USMS’s premier competitive event, everyone should be able to swim against their competition. That is my point. I do not want to argue with Elaine about inclusiveness. I don’t care how fast or slow she swims her 400 IM or 200 Fly (but I wish her luck). I just want to swim against my competition in the National Championships—the only opportunity I have all year to swim in my age group.

I am not usually one to complain about swim meets, since I appreciate all the hard work that goes in to putting one on.... And I fully understand that this is the largest LCM Nationals in the history of Masters Swimming.... But really... Not being able to swim against your competition in the 200's??? This is not a local meet. This is the Nationals. The ONLY time I get to swim against my own age group. There needs to be a better solution. Please clarify. Are you suggesting it is fair and understandable that the 400/800/1500 swimmers can't swim against their age group but the 200s should swim against their age group? Jeff

I am not usually one to complain about swim meets, since I appreciate all the hard work that goes in to putting one on.... And I fully understand that this is the largest LCM Nationals in the history of Masters Swimming.... But really... Not being able to swim against your competition in the 200's??? This is not a local meet. This is the Nationals. The ONLY time I get to swim against my own age group. There needs to be a better solution. One observation I had about the Omaha Nationals was that a swimmer (in the 200s) could break a world record, or national record, or break into the world top ten and get 3rd or worse in his/her heat. This diminishes the accomplishment of this swimmer as it is not apparent to the audience how he/she is dominate in their age group. Suggestion - for the 200s - have 1 elite heat of the top 8 seeds in each age group/gender followed by the remaining swimmers seeded by time. I know this would lengthen the meet but I don't think it would be considerable.

Jim, I think what secondheart was proposing was really potentitally 16 elite heats (top 8 for each age group), followed by the rest in mixed age-group heats by time. Of course, for some of the older age-groups we don't have 8 people entered in some events. I like the idea, but I'm not sure it would save much time.