Darian Townsend entered a masters meet in Mesa over the weekend and broke five world records in the 25-29 age group. This was Townsend's first masters meet. For those of you who are not familiar with him, Townend is a three-time Olympian and gold medalist from South Africa.
Swimswam.com posted a story about Townend's incredible meet. Here's the link: swimswam.com/.../
I found the comments quite interesting especially this one by "HMMM":
I have no problem with athletes making money off of Masters but why have a separate division called Masters if there are no rules or restrictions? None of the sponsored people you mention in their 50′s are training for Rio are they?. Most people in Masters believe they are swimming against recreational swimmers which is why there is a separate Masters division and those records are set by recreational/retired swimmers. If Phelps remains retired and wants to swim Masters, well there goes a few records in his age group but none of us in our club would have a problem with it. We discussed that very subject this morning after practice and Phelps, like Rowdy Gaines is retired and would welcome him. Many of us have swam against and met Rowdy and it is a true honor to share the pool with him in a Masters meet. But our entire team would have a huge problem if Lochte decides to swim a Masters meet while he is still fully training for the Olympics and blows all the records out of the water. If Lochte swims 12 events, he is going to walk away with 12 records. Why have a separate record book? If he can do that, you might as well just call us all USA swimmers and do away with the Masters division. There are meets where fully training pros swim and they are called Grand Prix’s, Nationals, and Worlds. Call us old fashioned, call us Masters swimmers, but we all think Masters should be separate from the training pros..
So I'm curious what the rest of you think. Should someone like Darian Townend or Ryan Lochte be allowed to swim in masters meets when they are professional swimmers who are training full-time? And maybe "allowed" is a poor choice or word. The bottom line is do you think they have any business swimming masters meets?
Former Member
I think it would be interesting to see what slower swimmers think about this. I wonder if they would object to elites coming in first and setting records...
What is your definition of a "slower swimmer?"
Remember this from page one? When someone did she kinda got jumped on.We can disagree without being disagreeable.
This thread brings back memories of being jumped on for using this font! :afraid: Hey Aquageek and Wookiee: :wave:
I think it would be interesting to see what slower swimmers think about this. I wonder if they would object to elites coming in first and setting records...
I'm slow and I don't object! As I stated earlier, meeting Cullen Jones in Atlanta and seeing him again in Greensboro were USMS highlights for me. One of my favorite things about going to Nationals is seeing the elites race! :cheerleader:
What bothers me in this entire Forum though is that if one person has a different opinion than the majority, that person is automatically thrown under the bus...
Well when your opinion is wrong.. yes. What good is membership if you're going to exclude certain members from participating?
And my swimming pretty much looks horrible, I'd just feel very intimidated swimming anywhere near a really good swimmer.
Hey you can't worry about that. Masters swimming means something different to all different subsets of swimmers. There are those that are (clearly) hung up on whether or not they are in a TT list or setting records, and there are those that are there to accomplish a 200y swim for the first time. If you're worried about what some other swimmers might think of you because you get lapped twice in a 1500, rest assured most don't care, and they certainly don't form any meaningful opinion about you based on your performance at a swim meet. If they do - well you don't need those kind of people anyway.
I still don't understand why this topic exists or where the problem is. "If an elite swims I might not be able to set the NR. " So kick out your competition? Is that the answer? Or go faster?
Sojerz,
Correct me if I am wrong here, but it sounds like you are saying that TT times and records are easier as you get into the older age groups. I don't think that is true. I also think if a swimmer does not have NQTs now that he or she will be able to get TT or records when they get older.
For 1971 the #1 time in the 50 - 54 age group for men in the 100 SCY was 59.60. In 2013 the #1 time was 48.04 ( the current record is 46.59). By way of comparison, the #1 time in the 25 - 29 age group for the 100 free SCY in 1971 was 49.40! This means that the 50 year old today would have beaten the pants off of the 25 year old 42 years ago.
In 1971 the #1 time in the 60 - 64 age group for men in the 100 SCY was 1:06.80. In 2013 the #1 time was 51.03 (the current record is 49.14). When you look ahead 20 years the records look easy, but in 20 yeas the records will be much better than they are now - guaranteed.
People have the impression that as they age the top times are softer. Not true.
Yah, I get that...probably resulting from advances in training, technique, goggles, coaching, etc. We've gotten smarter and faster. Each younger AG is faster than the older and since times for the youngest AG are dropping, times as they get older will drop too. In about 1971 a 50.0 men's scy fr was a great time, those 20 somethings (my AG) are now 60-64 and the record is under 50.0, which is amazing. Yes, the youngest AGs keep getting faster and they will continue to be fast as they age.
But, the point of my posts is the same as Gobears:
While I personally agree that all times/swimmers who are registered should count, I get Britt's frustration....
Britt - you are fast enough that your time will come. You won't always have what you currently consider "elite" swimmers in your age group. You will likely always have someone who has been an "elite" swimmer,...
Read the Jim Thorton Story (his blog is out there) to believe patience and perseverance count and time remixes things.
mpmartin: I was never able to reach elite times, so I'm a slower fish (then and now) that loves to swim with faster ones. I had the opportunity to swim early mornings for a few summers with one friend that was a 1980 Olympic hopeful in the 400IM and another that was a DIII relay record holder (both much faster than me) and I enjoyed ever minute of it. I would love to swim in a meet or heat with an "elite" swimmer, it's motivational--ignore the time difference and enjoy the experience.
Now that Michael Phelps in back on the radar, if he chose to swim in a USMS meet, would you dispute it? I would try to travel to wherever the meet is just to be part of it. I think a lot of people would.
I think it would be interesting to see what slower swimmers think about this. I wonder if they would object to elites coming in first and setting records...
I think it would be interesting to see what slower swimmers think about this. I wonder if they would object to elites coming in first and setting records...
What do you mean by this? Slower swimmers might want to have the records?! Slower swimmers might want less competition? This whole discussion is somewhat bizarre ... Meets are by definition competitions. When you limit the competition, you devalue masters swimming. Why would we want to do that?
