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?
I am going to go ahead and play devil's advocate. I do not have a problem with a retired world class swimmer breaking records at a master's meet, but a professional swimmer training for world class competition is unfair in all levels. Why is a world class swimmer midway through his prime swimming at a master's meet? Is he/she using the meet as a trial run before a bigger meet? In that case why not swim at short course/long course regions, or another sponsored United States Swimming meet?
Why a USMS meet and not a USS meet? That is the question.
Of course it's fair. Everyone's definition of world-class is different, and people hit their primes at different times. The unfair thing is to exclude people for being too good or working too hard.
Look at it from a different perspective: say some 30-something masters swimmer who never swam in high school or college works his or her butt off for eight years and qualifies for an Ultraswim or the Trials or something equally impressive. Is this newly-elite swimmer suddenly ineligible to set Masters records?
Excluding "elites" serves no purpose other than to punish people who are faster than other people. There's no good reason (or method) to do it.
I am going to go ahead and play devil's advocate. I do not have a problem with a retired world class swimmer breaking records at a master's meet, but a professional swimmer training for world class competition is unfair in all levels. Why is a world class swimmer midway through his prime swimming at a master's meet? Is he/she using the meet as a trial run before a bigger meet? In that case why not swim at short course/long course regions, or another sponsored United States Swimming meet?
Why a USMS meet and not a USS meet? That is the question.
Of course it's fair. Everyone's definition of world-class is different, and people hit their primes at different times. The unfair thing is to exclude people for being too good or working too hard.
Look at it from a different perspective: say some 30-something masters swimmer who never swam in high school or college works his or her butt off for eight years and qualifies for an Ultraswim or the Trials or something equally impressive. Is this newly-elite swimmer suddenly ineligible to set Masters records?
Excluding "elites" serves no purpose other than to punish people who are faster than other people. There's no good reason (or method) to do it.
