We're considering a BSLL on how people feel about USMS members swimming in USA-S meets, with the kids. We have plenty of members who do and I have someone who can write the "pro" side. I'm looking for someone who disagrees with this practice and would be willing to share why in 300 words.
USMS has no official stance, just seeking to spark thoughtful discussion on this topic. Please PM me if you have interest.
Thanks,
Laura
I guess I didn't realize that masters members swimming at USA-S meets was controversial. Maybe it isn't very controversial and that's why Laura is having trouble finding someone? Some people live in LMSCs where the population of USMS members is sparse and masters meets are few and far between, and they go to USA-S meets out of necessity. Maybe in some places pool rentals are very high and only USA-S meets can get the attendance necessary to turn a profit (or at least avoid a large loss).
Let's assume neither of those scenarios apply. As someone who has been to both meets, my short take on the matter:
Advantages of USMS meets: more social interaction, generally more fun, more people I know, some events available (eg 50s stroke, 100 IM) that aren't at USA-S meets (personally I don't miss those events, but others might). While there is a certain novelty at being an old guy at a USA-S meet, it wears off quickly.
Advantages of USA-S meets: often better competition, the inspirational value a masters swimmer provides, spreading awareness that swimming can continue past college, the fact that some meets have a trials/finals format if you like that sort of thing.
I don't want to get the moderators mad with another tangent, but there is an issue that is related: Sanction vs Recognition. Say a club is interested in hosting a meet but would rather apply for USMS *recognition* rather than *sanction* in order to boost meet attendance (because sanctioned meets are limited to USMS members but recognized meets are not). What arguments could/should I use, if any, to convince them that sanction is the better choice? (Maybe it isn't.) This may be too technical a discussion for BSLL but, since USA-S meets are officially "recognized" meets, it is kind of related.
I guess I didn't realize that masters members swimming at USA-S meets was controversial. Maybe it isn't very controversial and that's why Laura is having trouble finding someone? Some people live in LMSCs where the population of USMS members is sparse and masters meets are few and far between, and they go to USA-S meets out of necessity. Maybe in some places pool rentals are very high and only USA-S meets can get the attendance necessary to turn a profit (or at least avoid a large loss).
Let's assume neither of those scenarios apply. As someone who has been to both meets, my short take on the matter:
Advantages of USMS meets: more social interaction, generally more fun, more people I know, some events available (eg 50s stroke, 100 IM) that aren't at USA-S meets (personally I don't miss those events, but others might). While there is a certain novelty at being an old guy at a USA-S meet, it wears off quickly.
Advantages of USA-S meets: often better competition, the inspirational value a masters swimmer provides, spreading awareness that swimming can continue past college, the fact that some meets have a trials/finals format if you like that sort of thing.
I don't want to get the moderators mad with another tangent, but there is an issue that is related: Sanction vs Recognition. Say a club is interested in hosting a meet but would rather apply for USMS *recognition* rather than *sanction* in order to boost meet attendance (because sanctioned meets are limited to USMS members but recognized meets are not). What arguments could/should I use, if any, to convince them that sanction is the better choice? (Maybe it isn't.) This may be too technical a discussion for BSLL but, since USA-S meets are officially "recognized" meets, it is kind of related.
