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?
Besides the stupidity of the comment you pasted, Ervin is not guaranteed to set any records. The 50 free is held by Nick Brunelli at 19.65 and the 100 is 44.53 by Mike Picotte. Those are not soft records, even for a guy like Ervin. If he breaks the records and doesn't get disqualified, there is no reason that he shouldn't have his name in the usms record books.
The comment about Ervin is not guaranteed to set any records is right on. I attended the 2007 SC Nationals in Federal Way and the big talk was that Ervin was there and he was going to demolish the record book. It did not happen and he got smoked in the 50 Free, 100 Free, and 100 IM. I am not saying that he is not capable of breaking them but a lot of swimmers like this come to these Nationals just to take in the fun and excitement and feel less pressure that the big USA National Meets that they attend. That was my feeling watching Ervin at this meet. He was with friends from New York and wanted to have a good time.
The same thing could be said when Gary Hall Jr came to Indy in 2004. If you would have told me based on his performances at that meet that he would again win the 50 Free at the Olympics, would you have had many people betting you because he was not even close to doing decent times that we are accustomed to seeing. In fact he was beaten by Sabir Muhammad and most of the Race Club in races and relay splits. In fact, I think he got a DQ in the 100 IM. My impression is that he was there to have a good time and support our organization.
I think if both of these 2000 50 Free gold medalists come to our meet and get records its great for our sport and organization. If they don't get records that is fine to. I really like Anthony Ervin because I really like that he donated his gold medal for a worth cause. And I like Gary Hall Jr a lot for all of his work with the Diabetes charities that he is involved with.
I think is great that we have some World Class swimmers at this meet. Darian Townsend and BJ Johnson are there and they have been swimming masters for the last 2 years. I was hoping that Eugene Godsoe would be swimming because he lives close to Santa Clara but he didn't enter. There will be a lot of records set and it will be swimmers that were really good from the past Olympics, NCAA Championships, and AAU/USA Nationals. And there will be records from swimmers that were still really good but never made the big meets.
Not letting an "elite" swimmer set masters records is the same as not letting them set age group (18 and under) records. Saying someone is too good or practices too much to compete with others in their age group just doesn't make sense to me.
I attended the 2007 SC Nationals in Federal Way and the big talk was that Ervin was there and he was going to demolish the record book. It did not happen and he got smoked in the 50 Free, 100 Free, and 100 IM.
True, but that was a different scenario. Ervin was just noodling around at that point and now he's back in serious training. I'm pretty confident he'll break both the 50 and 100 free records in Santa Clara.
Basically, on the subject of the original comment, it shouldn't matter unless you seek validation through records and medals. Masters swimming is better when more people compete. Fourth place behind three 'professionals' is as good as first place against 'amateurs'. And a gold medal in a one-horse race is no achievement.
If they are in Masters - all the better for our sport. I think it's pretty cool they "still" swim with us & us with them.
I watch and am amazed with the stroke that is done to perfection!
.........And a gold medal in a one-horse race is no achievement.
...unless you're in the 100-104 age group. Then the achievement is that you've out-aged them!
Masters celebrates swimming and swimmers of all ages and abilities.
If a pro swimmer wants to enter a masters meet, great for her.
If a pro swimmer breaks a masters national or world record, awesome!
There are no rules about who over 18 can or can't join. There are no FINA or USMS rules about life circumstances and acceptable training.
It would be relevant if one group was tested and the other was not. I was just trying to understand why cycling would divide competitors into pro and amateur divisions.
I see a bit of where some complaints are coming from; though I have no problem myself at the end of the day. Say for instance your church had a basketball league, and low and behold LeBron James is your BFF and happens to be free Sunday afternoon to play with your team. Most leagues...even just "fun lesgues" have certain rules about professionals joining in the fun (or perhaps the NBA has a rule about professionals playing in non-NBA basketball).
I certainly do not have an issue with Matt Biondi or even Rowdy Gaines being in the mix. I can see where Nathan Adrian is a bit more of a.???
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
