WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

gobears — Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:27:07 GMT

Keep in mind that many teams are very limited in space and/or on-deck coaching so they do need to enforce some minimum requirements. This is a very real concern for some teams. That said, the sport of swimming is different than many other sports. We need just about all the popularity we can get - in order to keep facilities open and profitable around the country. Or even our best swimmers won't have a place to swim!

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

Michael Heather — Wed, 19 Aug 2015 02:55:14 GMT

I'm still confused. Why is growth the goal? I'm happy with my small team, and even happier when my open water swims have less than 25 people. :) This is exactly the mindset that needs to be overcome. Why are you confused? Is there a reason not to grow? Do you think that it is right not to share the health benefits of swimming with every other American? Have you even considered how selfish you statement was? If your club never grows and the OW competitions never have more than 25 people, how long do you think they will remain financially viable? In my LMSC, we had three swim meets canceled this year because of low registration and those already had more than 25 people signed up. USMS is an organization that constantly ages. We need to grow just to remain at a stable number. There are significant rewards possible in advertising and sponsorship once we have over 100,000. It may even be the critical mass at which we do not even have to advertise any more, because our best recruiting tools are programs and people who are already members. Your team may be able to remain small even if USMS grows. In order to flourish or even remain in business, USMS must always attempt to grow. If we do not, you can prepare to pay ever-growing membership dues to pay for the services and benefits that continue to grow every year, along with the overhead of our national office staff salaries and benefits. The more USMS grows, the less each of us has to pay for the privilege of membership.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

swimark — Tue, 18 Aug 2015 11:03:02 GMT

Interestingly, some Masters clubs do have certain requirements to join, and they don't seem in line with the everyone is welcome message. I encountered several in my search for different clubs since we're contemplating a move back to New England at some point. This from the website for the BU Masters: Participants should be proficient at three of the four competitive strokes: butterfly, backstroke, breaststroke, and freestyle and be able to swim 500 yards in 10 minutes or less before enrolling. Leaves me out. Just did a quick search and see that BU also has a "Pre-Masters" group, so maybe that would work for you. 110350 - Pre-Masters Prereq: Ability to swim 500 yards continuously in less than 13 minutes (about a 2:30 interval per 100 yards) and competence in freestyle, backstroke and breaststroke. Designed for swimmers who want to gain endurance, learn training techniques, and improve strokes. This program will help prepare swimmers for either a Masters Swim Program or for the use of lap swimming as a form of aerobic exercise.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

DeniseMW — Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:44:08 GMT

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

knelson — Tue, 18 Aug 2015 04:50:08 GMT

Interestingly, some Masters clubs do have certain requirements to join, and they don't seem in line with the everyone is welcome message. Keep in mind that many teams are very limited in space and/or on-deck coaching so they do need to enforce some minimum requirements.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

Former Member — Mon, 17 Aug 2015 13:00:03 GMT

The New York Times looks at masters track and field: http:/.../

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

gobears — Mon, 17 Aug 2015 10:02:47 GMT

Good thoughts. As a former college swimmer, mom of 3 and masters coach, I personally value masters swimming mostly as an outlet for stress and a way to stay fit. My favorite competition is every day in practice. I don't feel like I have the time or the motivation to train seriously for swim meets. As a coach, training good swimmers to be faster is rewarding but not any more rewarding than taking a newbie from barely making it across the pool to swimming full practices. It's a blast when someone goes from disliking swimming to beginning to really understand swimming and enjoying it!

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

aquageek — Mon, 17 Aug 2015 09:33:52 GMT

Swim meets just don't seem to appeal to as many "participant" minded people as triathlons. I guess its partially because there are no "bragging rights" to be had just by being a participant. Tell a non-athlete you finished a triathlon, and you'll gain instant respect. Tell that same person you swam in a swim meet, and they'll need more information to decide whether or not you're participation is worthy of admiration. "Did you win? How fast are you compared to Michael Phelps? Do you think you could beat my 11 year old niece who swims year round for the local club team? She's really good, my sister says!" Completely disagree. Triathlons and triathletes are a dime for a hundred dozen these days. No one bats an eye anymore when you say you've done a triathlon. People will always raise eyebrows and express admiration when you say you compete in swim meets.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

DeniseMW — Mon, 17 Aug 2015 09:21:48 GMT

Interesting comments. I would not have joined if Masters had been all about competing. I joined because of the fitness workout. I think the competitive stats are skewed by people who join so they can train for a triathlon or one specific event then drop out. Which is fine. Each to their own. You can't tell if a person who starts with Masters for fitness today won't go on to swim a meet tomorrow. I think much of it depends on the coach. Some emphasize competition, and that's fine. I swam with a coach who obviously wanted to train competitors because that was his thing. I didn't belong there. I was getting ready to join another less competitive group when this shoulder injury relegated me to the sidelines.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

jpetyk — Mon, 17 Aug 2015 06:53:12 GMT

Gary, I think you just hit the nail on the head!

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

Gary P — Mon, 17 Aug 2015 06:39:38 GMT

Therein, I think, lies the rub. I don't think you can compare the two sports the way you are doing. Triathlons were originally invented as a competitive sport. The only reason, in my mind, to do a triathlon is to compete. Nobody just goes out and does a "recreational" triathlon on their lunch hour. I guess I differentiate "competing" from "participating" by the objectives of the person. A "competitor" has aspirations to finish in a certain position relative to his or her peers. A "participant" is someone who gets satisfaction just being part of the event, time and finish place be damned. Triathlon attracts plenty of both. For the participant-minded folks, who's primary objective in a triathlon is just to finish, a ladder system of distances exists, from Sprint, to Olympic, to Half Ironman, to full Ironman, that keeps "just finishing" a viable goal for years. Swim meets just don't seem to appeal to as many "participant" minded people as triathlons. I guess its partially because there are no "bragging rights" to be had just by being a participant. Tell a non-athlete you finished a triathlon, and you'll gain instant respect. Tell that same person you swam in a swim meet, and they'll need more information to decide whether or not you're participation is worthy of admiration. "Did you win? How fast are you compared to Michael Phelps? Do you think you could beat my 11 year old niece who swims year round for the local club team? She's really good, my sister says!"

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

smontanaro — Mon, 17 Aug 2015 01:55:55 GMT

When you see and talk with people who are triathletes, they identify with the RACE / the "big event" as a key factor in their training. Therein, I think, lies the rub. I don't think you can compare the two sports the way you are doing. Triathlons were originally invented as a competitive sport. The only reason, in my mind, to do a triathlon is to compete. Nobody just goes out and does a "recreational" triathlon on their lunch hour. (well, maybe if they are really weird. :D) Lots of people do go to the pool and swim on their lunch hour, though. Despite how fast (or slow) they might be, triathletes are racing (against themselves, against the clock, against their buddies, whatever). Not so, for swimming. Lots of us in USMS probably swam recreationally in our youth, and only started swimming for fitness later in life. Or got a competitive urge. Some competed, then came back to the sport later in life (to scratch a continuing competitive itch and/or for health reasons). The reasons why people swim vary. Competition isn't always it. I've been in a few meets the past ten years, and I'm still registered with Evanston Masters, so whenever I do enter a meet, any minimal points I might score get thrown their way. If I don't ever swim another meet, I doubt I will die feeling unfulfilled. I know many people swim as many meets as their schedules allow, go to all the Nationals meets, and so forth, but that has simply never been my desire. I doubt if I'm going too far out on a limb suggesting that perspective holds true for many USMS members. Now, maybe I'm looking at things bassackwards. I can accept that. After all, if I'm happy hopping in the lake to swim a mile, or going to the Y to swim laps, why even bother to join USMS? I'm not a highly social animal, so camaraderie isn't part of it for me either. Part of it is just habit. I renew every year. I use the Fitness Log (mostly to record my cycling these days). I can join a USMS-affiliated club and be "good to go", or if I'm out of town for some reason, I can hop in with a local USMS workout group. Maybe I'm just weird.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

Gary P — Sun, 16 Aug 2015 11:35:29 GMT

There are certainly hardcore triathletes who like to RACE but more who participate simply for the right to put that sticker on their car. And I use the word "participate" deliberately because they are not "racing" at all, they simply want to fuel their water cooler talk. I think you're on to something with the "water cooler talk" comment. The Ironman brand has become so strong, it casts an aura of mystique over the entire sport. The general public esteems the completion of a triathlon, even a sprint, to be an exceptional athletic achievement. There's just not the same perception about pool swimming. That said, the popularity of triathlons has brought us members, even if they don't regularly compete with our organization. I assume my workout group is quite typical where about a third are there just for the fitness, a third are at least occasional meet swimmers, and a third are triathletes (or aspiring triathletes) who come to us for the quality swim coaching. USMS Open Water events seem to be the opportunity where both competitive segments can converge.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

sydned — Sun, 16 Aug 2015 06:42:08 GMT

I'm still confused. Why is growth the goal? I'm happy with my small team, and even happier when my open water swims have less than 25 people. :)

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

Michael Heather — Sat, 15 Aug 2015 02:34:02 GMT

It would be much easier to reinvent USMS altogether than to change our reason for being. That is not competition, but fitness for adults. That simple. The 80+% of members who do not ever compete are members because they feel that swimming helps them in some way other than competition urges being fulfilled. If we are to grow, and I think we should be very aggressive about it, we need to find pools and people where there are not currently programs. As aquageek said, there is limited space in many pools and few people would relish the thought of having two new lane buddies at workout. On the national level, there are some who actively work against growth of the organization just because of that possibility. USMS spends a lot of money every year advertising competition but most of it is for our benefit. Competition events are a byproduct of the organizational structure of USMS, not a cornerstone. Many of the LMSC and National administrative members are competitors, so naturally give extra life and support to competitions at the expense of the majority of members who wish only to go swimming 3 or 4 times per week and work off some stress or weight. If we are to use competition as a recruiting tool for new members, it should be shown as a fun and social environment, inclusive on any level, and a great way to find out how your workouts have meaning other than to reduce stress and feel energized. Any other way will result in potential members walking away because they don't want to even consider competition. Even if (or maybe because) they have never participated in a competitive sport before.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

ourswimmer — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 09:19:12 GMT

Fitness and non competitive swimmers tend to be short term members. Not true on my team. A high proportion of our long-termers are people who seldom or never do organized OW swims or pool meets. Also, even those of us who compete a lot in some years go through periods when testing ourselves in the pool is not even on the radar, but we still keep coming to the pool and we don't let either our USMS or team memberships lapse.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

Former Member — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 09:07:23 GMT

...USAT references about 500,000 members... FYI, USAT is including all of their "one-day" memberships in that total. They sell many more one-day memberships than full, annual memberships. Anna Lea Matysek

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

aquageek — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 06:39:01 GMT

I might as well put it out there. Lane space is limited in most pools. Fitness and non competitive swimmers tend to be short term members. They also take up lane space. While it is good in theory to invite the huddled masses, these speed bumps impact others who are the core of every team. This isn't an issue for teams with ample lane space but is for smaller pools. I also agree with Chris' comments.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

Patrick W. Brundage — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 06:09:10 GMT

A telling stat, if possible, would be to cross reference those who compete with their average number of years as a member versus those who don't compete. That would give us a good idea of how important competition is to USMS as an organization.I think that would be very interesting. If you think about USMS as a business, most businesses have very high customer acquisition costs relative to customer retention costs, so retaining customers is a good thing. I would suspect that USMS customer retention costs are lower for people who compete (but, again, that could be my bias) and, hence, their "lifetime value" to USMS is better. It would be interesting to understand what the USMS membership retention looks like over time and how much churn there is. Great coaches and great clubs are the secret sauceI agree they are part of the sauce and I LOVE USMS and seek out these great clubs when I travel - but a great club for me is a great coach on deck and fast swimmers in the water who can push me and challenge me. I know I'm an outlier since I train so much on my own due to my work life (e.g., either because I'm traveling or because I try to minimize my time away from my family when I am at home and the great local teams are too far away), but I get the most social value / camaraderie out of swim meets when there is more time to actually talk with people. Trying to be a bit more objective about this, though, I think competitive swimming has a cultural problem from the age-group/college days where swimmers just end up burnt out and never want to compete again. Like you ... I joined masters at a pretty early age to work out in a stress-free envmt ... I joined USMS to train and was lucky enough to be working a few blocks away from Phoenix Swim Club when Matt Rankin was coaching. I wasn't thinking about competing, but Matt and others on the team encouraged me and I started competing. I was STUNNED to find out how utterly, completely different competing as a Masters swimmer was versus competing in my youth. The fun atmosphere, the relaxed feel, the camaraderie was awesome. It was revelatory and dispelled all of those "bad emotions" that I had about the intensity of competition from my age-group/collegiate days. That was 2001/2002 and I've been a member ever since, with the joy of competition and the camaraderie with people I get through those competitions being the drivers that keep me coming back. Yes, the health benefits are swell, but those are secondary now. I think USMS can be a great force for the swimming community by helping to eliminate that burn-out and get more swimmers engaged over their lifetime, but not by avoiding competition, but showing there is a healthy form of fun competition. It boils down to this: I think the competitions are the absolute best feature of USMS and I want to share that joy with more of our members. For those former age group/collegiate swimmers, I think they'd find a lightness and joy in racing they never got to experience from their pressure-filled days of making specific cuts, placing in a certain place, etc. For those who never competed before, I think they'd be pleasantly surprised with how much fun it is and how motivational it can be for them. I feel like USMS has this "killer app" called competition that they are not promoting enough to their members.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

Chris Stevenson — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 04:07:32 GMT

A telling stat, if possible, would be to cross reference those who compete with their average number of years as a member versus those who don't compete. That would give us a good idea of how important competition is to USMS as an organization. The issue isn't really "how important competition is" to USMS. Relative to the fraction of members who compete I think USMS allocates a lot of resources to competitive aspects of the sport. And I agree that those who compete tend to be more engaged. But the question Patrick was addressing is, I believe, how to best "sell" USMS to potential new members. I think once you get people in a good team environment where they like their teammates and coach, then you can convince them to go to swim meets. IMO emphasizing competition from day 1 will be a turn-off to many, including many former age-group swimmers who have been there, done that. I joined masters at a pretty early age to work out in a stress-free envmt, I stayed b/c I liked my teammates, I went to meets to meet more like-minded people. I don't think that's an unusual progression. Sure I grew to enjoy the competitive aspects of USMS but that wasn't the case initially.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

aquageek — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 02:24:29 GMT

When you get PWB and Chris to disagree you know you have a good topic! I tend to agree with PWB for the most part. Sure there is a camaraderie with working out with friends but nothing brings a team together like a swim meet. Competition is the core of USMS and those who compete are the ones you see for years on end. A telling stat, if possible, would be to cross reference those who compete with their average number of years as a member versus those who don't compete. That would give us a good idea of how important competition is to USMS as an organization.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

Former Member — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:48:32 GMT

Is that a euphemism for died. When I cross my final finish line, I hope somebody has my splits.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

Swimspire — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:33:28 GMT

Swimmers who want to fire up their competitive juices are already drawn to USMS because they are mostly the only game in town for adults who are serious about competitive swimming. Attendance at nationals flat-lined long ago and probably so has the number of swimmers in other sanctioned meets. Don't get me wrong, I think that the more competitive USMS members are a huge asset, and I think we should be more aggressive in pursuing swimmers who quit or "graduate" out of USA-S or college varsity/club swimming. But IMO even those people are less interested in competition than a great club environment. Great coaches and great clubs are the secret sauce, not more/better catering to competitive urges. Agreed. I think there is certainly a balance between attracting both competitive and non-competitive swimmers. On the one hand, after a lifetime of competitive swimming, many post-college/club swimmers should be encouraged to stay with the sport and experience the satisfaction of being competitive in the sport that they love (sometime even more competitive than they were as age groupers) within a welcoming club environment. And on the other hand, there should be plenty of encouragement given to non-competitive swimmers who would prefer to enjoy swimming for fitness, and who might even become potential future competitive swimmers, within a welcoming club environment. USMS is on the right track in welcoming both competitive and non-competitive swimmers, and understanding that this is the key to growth.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

Chris Stevenson — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:17:42 GMT

I'm going to p*** some people off, but this article really bugged me. So, here goes my :soapbox::bitching:: If the goal of the USMS leadership is to grow the membership, I think they are off-base strategically by de-emphasizing competition. USAT references about 500,000 members (www.usatriathlon.org/.../about.aspx), almost 10x as many as USMS. When you see and talk with people who are triathletes, they identify with the RACE / the "big event" as a key factor in their training. They take pride in the RACE, they advertise the RACE, they enthuse about the RACE. Just about anyone who sees a 140.6 or 70.3 bumper sticker on a car knows that the person in the car is a triathlete. I think this pride and joy USAT members show in the RACE is the main factor contributing to the organization's growth and the their membership's satisfaction and health impacts. We don't have that same broad-based racing culture in USMS. I think that hurts our membership numbers ... and I think that not emphasizing competition, not encouraging competition, not cajoling more of our members to compete means that USMS is doing a disservice to our membership, in terms of the mental/emotional and physical value they can get from the sport. Yes, everyone might not be comfortable racing, but growth and development is uncomfortable. I'd like to see people clamoring to buy "400 IM" or "1500 M" or "5K OW" bumper stickers. I'd like to see more Masters swimmers bragging about their last "Splash & Dash" as Rowdy likes to call the 50. I'd like to see the general public know what any of this terminology means in the way they understand triathlon lingo. I'd like to see USMS move away from the current "everyone gets a trophy for showing up to workout" mindset and to a competition-forward culture. There, my :soapbox: is over and I need to go train because I've got my next meet in less than two weeks. Disagree with most of this post. There are certainly hardcore triathletes who like to RACE but more who participate simply for the right to put that sticker on their car. And I use the word "participate" deliberately because they are not "racing" at all, they simply want to fuel their water cooler talk. And that's fine but I don't think there is much parallel to masters (pool) swimming, they are more like OW swimmers who take pride in completing a particular (possibly quite challenging) swim. Swimmers who want to fire up their competitive juices are already drawn to USMS because they are mostly the only game in town for adults who are serious about competitive swimming. Attendance at nationals flat-lined long ago and probably so has the number of swimmers in other sanctioned meets. Don't get me wrong, I think that the more competitive USMS members are a huge asset, and I think we should be more aggressive in pursuing swimmers who quit or "graduate" out of USA-S or college varsity/club swimming. But IMO even those people are less interested in competition than a great club environment. Great coaches and great clubs are the secret sauce, not more/better catering to competitive urges.

RE: WSJ Article on Masters Swimming

orca1946 — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 06:12:12 GMT

These comments were in THIS article. Many others that have been published, tell of the "average swimmers" in our sport. Maybe someone out there should pen for an upcoming publication , a counter piece on all the other than "elite swimmers" Anyone?? Beuhler? beuhler? Elaine k ??