There's a story on swimswam (swimswam.com/.../) about Anthony Ervin swimming at USMS Nationals and the first comment states:
There is nothing better than going to a USMS meet and seeing swimmers like Anthony Ervin compete. It makes you feel like a 12 year old fan again!
In the same breath I will ask; what is the point of letting their times count as USMS records? They are professional two-a-day swimmers in the same age group categories as young professionals who might make a few practices per week. There is no way real Masters swimmers are able to train to be able to beat them. The professional swimmers wouldn’t be able to beat themselves with the same schedule afforded to the a real Masters swimmer. Thoughts?
My thoughts are that this is ridiculous. Anyone who is registered in USMS has as much right to set a record as anyone else. Who exactly is the arbiter of what a "real masters swimmer" is?
My thoughts are that this is ridiculous. Anyone who is registered in USMS has as much right to set a record as anyone else. Who exactly is the arbiter of what a "real masters swimmer" is?
I am pretty confident in saying that usa cycling has a rule that of you held a pro license, then you need to sit out a year before competing in one of the amateur categories. Possibly two years.
That seems like a reasonable accommodation I could see being used.
The idea is that there is a difference between professional and amateur competition - for the most part. It obviously is fuzzy in some cases.
USA triathlon doesn't have a similar rule. However in both of those federations, you hold a "pro" or "elite" license and if you don't have that license aren't eligible for pro competitions; by the same token someone holding a pro or elite license doesn't race in the same division as amateurs. That isn't exactly the same for swimming, in swimming anyone can join usa swimming and if you are fast enough you can go to nationals or world championships.
Nevertheless I'd like to see the usa cycling type idea adopted. This would keep people from going right from elite competition to masters competition.
So they could still compete, but no less than a year after their last elite competition. We'd have to come up with some definition for "elite" competition, but it could be done.
My thoughts are that this is ridiculous. Anyone who is registered in USMS has as much right to set a record as anyone else. Who exactly is the arbiter of what a "real masters swimmer" is?
I am pretty confident in saying that usa cycling has a rule that of you held a pro license, then you need to sit out a year before competing in one of the amateur categories. Possibly two years.
That seems like a reasonable accommodation I could see being used.
The idea is that there is a difference between professional and amateur competition - for the most part. It obviously is fuzzy in some cases.
USA triathlon doesn't have a similar rule. However in both of those federations, you hold a "pro" or "elite" license and if you don't have that license aren't eligible for pro competitions; by the same token someone holding a pro or elite license doesn't race in the same division as amateurs. That isn't exactly the same for swimming, in swimming anyone can join usa swimming and if you are fast enough you can go to nationals or world championships.
Nevertheless I'd like to see the usa cycling type idea adopted. This would keep people from going right from elite competition to masters competition.
So they could still compete, but no less than a year after their last elite competition. We'd have to come up with some definition for "elite" competition, but it could be done.
