Swimming against your competion

Being an inclusive organization doesn't mean USMS has to include everyone in its national championship. It is not remotely elitist to have time standards for national championships or to be forced to eliminate NQT events because of attendance. It's nationals, not a run of the mill meet. I find myself in agreement with amswimmer. I decidedly prefer to swim against my competition at nationals and, as she notes, it is the only meet of the year at which this happens. And everyone knows I agree with Matysekj's comments! I don't want to be stuck in an outside lane catching the waves of the 20 somethings in a sprint event. Unless substantial (hours+) time is saved, I think the 200s should be seeded by age group. As for Jeff's point about the 400/800/1500 swimmers, I would be curious how they feel. The age group time spreads in those events is likely much greater than in the sprints, pacing is much more important, and waves from surrounding swimmers less of an issue (in fact, there may be drafting). So perhaps in those circumstances it is more desirable to swim against those with comparable times? I can see either side. But those events take so disproportionately much longer than the sprints, I'm sure there's no choice but to mix age groups. You bring up several good points and they are well taken. I must admit, when I first joined USMS as a newbie swimmer in February 2010, I was (pleasantly) surprised to learn I would be allowed to swim 3 events at Spring Nationals, at Georgia Tech. We are at opposite ends of our age group at Nationals. You are at the TOP as a world record holder and I am at the bottom of some of the events I entered- and, close to it for the others; at least with the times I have been swimming this year with my injuries. I'm just happy to be able to swim! But, at the elite level you are at, I completely understand your argument. Thanks for providing that insight.

Being an inclusive organization doesn't mean USMS has to include everyone in its national championship. It is not remotely elitist to have time standards for national championships or to be forced to eliminate NQT events because of attendance. It's nationals, not a run of the mill meet. I find myself in agreement with amswimmer. I decidedly prefer to swim against my competition at nationals and, as she notes, it is the only meet of the year at which this happens. And everyone knows I agree with Matysekj's comments! I don't want to be stuck in an outside lane catching the waves of the 20 somethings in a sprint event. Unless substantial (hours+) time is saved, I think the 200s should be seeded by age group. As for Jeff's point about the 400/800/1500 swimmers, I would be curious how they feel. The age group time spreads in those events is likely much greater than in the sprints, pacing is much more important, and waves from surrounding swimmers less of an issue (in fact, there may be drafting). So perhaps in those circumstances it is more desirable to swim against those with comparable times? I can see either side. But those events take so disproportionately much longer than the sprints, I'm sure there's no choice but to mix age groups. You bring up several good points and they are well taken. I must admit, when I first joined USMS as a newbie swimmer in February 2010, I was (pleasantly) surprised to learn I would be allowed to swim 3 events at Spring Nationals, at Georgia Tech. We are at opposite ends of our age group at Nationals. You are at the TOP as a world record holder and I am at the bottom of some of the events I entered- and, close to it for the others; at least with the times I have been swimming this year with my injuries. I'm just happy to be able to swim! But, at the elite level you are at, I completely understand your argument. Thanks for providing that insight.