celebration!
I know there is something unseemly about bragging about ones swimming times. I think for many masters swimmers, a sense of personal accomplishment is best savored inwardly. John Wayne, were he to have taken up masters swimming, certainly would never have jumped up and down in giddy pride over a personal record. Nor, I suspect, would Clint Eastwood.
Having said this, I would just like to take a moment to jump up and down in shameless giddly pride over a recent swim I had!!!
At Y nationals in Ft. Lauderdale a couple weeks ago, at the age of 49, I swam the best 200 yard freestyle of my life--a 1:55.11, which beat my high school and college time by nearly a full second. I realize this may actually say a lot more about my former mediocrity that it does about my current prowesss, but the fact remains that as I near semi-centenarian status, I was able to whoop my teenage self!!! (Sorry about that, youngster Jim; you just didn't know how to race smart back then.)
I went into the race hoping just to break two minutes; I had never before broken 1:56, and this didn't even enter my consciousness as a possibility. When I finished the race--splitting 57 and 58 respectively--I wasn't even all that exhausted. I looked over, saw my time on the big board, and I have been ludicrously, bumptiously proud of myself ever since.
Anyhow, I'm hoping that rather than annoying my fellow masters swimmers who may read this post, this exercise in self-congratulations/aggrandizment will encourage others to pen their own moments of personal satisfaction. Where better to celebrate than here, where your fellow swimmers actually know about swimming times and (unlike the world at large) conceivably even care?
Former Member
Jim,
If you don't toot your own horn once in a while, no one will for you. You deserve every bit of a sincere congratulations!
Jean's story reminded me of what I was able to accomplish at my first major meet (Colonies Zone) two weeks ago. I had to do a double-take towards the electronic board to make sure I wasn't dreaming about one my events.
When one works to accomplish a sincere goal, he/she has every right to brag, in my book. Again, a big Atta Boy!
Us near-sighted people will never have that double-take experience. At the last meet I dropped 2 s from my masters best in a 100, and didn't know it until the results were posted.
Jim:
SHOW OFF!
All kiding aside, 1:55.11 for a 200 free at 49 is a great time...., nice swim! Hard work and a lot of it...is the only way you swam that fast. Be proud....you earned it!
I'd just like to thank everybody for their very kind and tolerant replies! This summer, I get to swim in the 50-54 year age group, even though I technically won't turn 50 till Sept. 24th. I am hoping against hope to place on one the USMS much coveted top 10 lists--this would be a dream come true.
My one request: since the USMS Long Course Championships are (I think) in Cleveland this summer, could I please ask any and all potential 50-54 year old competitors to PLEASE boycott this competion? And if you insist on coming, could you swim only breaskstroke events? That would make my job significantly easier. Thanks in advance for your help. Remember: helping me get on a top 10 list is a GROUP effort. They also serve who sit out and wait!
Tom,
I don't think it was Muhammad Ali who said that originally. It may take me a while to remember who it was, but I believe it may have been Dizzy Dean. I'll give this some thought and come up with a definitive answer, but I'm certain it was someone before Ali. At any rate, you won't hear any braggin' from me as I'm not yet to the point where I can back it up.
By the way, am I operating under some illusion or is my age group (50-54) seeemingly the toughest to compete in? It seems as if maybe we are in the peak of the baby boomers as pure numbers go and there just seems to be an awful lot of very strong swimmers in this age range.
Jim,
I agree with your analysis of which are the tough age groups. At the risk of over-simplifying, one can illustrate it by looking at the trend of the winning 100m Olympic times as an indication of the abilities of the vast majority of competitive swimmers in each 'era'.
The hypothesis being that all swimmers of a particular era will have benefited from the progress and implementation of improved research in technique and training methods even if they were not the top swimmers.
1924 59.0
1928 58.6
1932 58.2
1936 57.6
1948 57.3
1952 57.4 'first string' in his day)
* The top 50-54 times are significantly better and would have been world class in 1960.
* The top 45-49 times have surpassed the world records of 1960 even by masters who may have been 'second string' in their era.
* Times in younger groups will level out like the open times of today, with records going to 'first string' swimmers who stay in the sport. (e.g. 37 year old Olympic Gold medallist, Richard Saeger setting a new world record of 1:54.86 for the LCM 200 at Federal Way last year)
If you do the same exercise with the women's 100m Olympic winning times, the same phenomenon occurs but later in time. The big drop in times happening in 1976. As a result, there are a bunch of really good women in the 35-39 and 40-44's.
In summary:
Masters records will continue to be demolished until the current 45-49 age group has moved right through the system (and I am long gone)
The age groups younger than the 45-50 are ALL tough. With the usual exceptions, older age groups are "easier".
The 'average' masters times will also improve in unison with the 45-50's moving through.
After this there will be a leveling out as you point out - unless there are some major technical breakthroughs.
Interesting research.
Applicable to me, I retain from it:
Originally posted by Ian Smith
...
* Times in younger groups will level out like the open times of today, with records going to 'first string' swimmers who stay in the sport. (e.g. 37 year old Olympic Gold medallist, Richard Saeger setting a new world record of 1:54.86 for the LCM 200 at Federal Way last year)
...
the very important:
Originally posted by Ian Smith
...
The age groups younger than the 45-50 are ALL tough. With the usual exceptions, older age groups are "easier".
...
and:
Originally posted by Ian Smith
...
...there will be a leveling out as you point out - unless there are some major technical breakthroughs.
Greg,
I think people in all age groups probably feel theirs is the toughest, but I agree with you--the 45-49 and 50-54 cohorts in men seem to me to be particularly tough. My theory is that guys our age all swam during the late 60s, early 70s Mark Spitz-7-gold-medals-around-the-neck era. The poster of this accomplishment seemed to hang on every other dorm room wall in the country. Male swimming was in its golden age back then, at least in the USA. (It's apparently in even more of a golden age in Australia right now.)
Since then, the combination of Title IX and the fashion trend towards baggy shorts have dealt something of a 1-2 punch to male swimming domestically. When I was a kid, the local Y team was significantly more than 50% boys; today, I doubt if 10% of the swimmers are male.
On our masters team in suburban Pittsburgh, there are a bunch of aging geezers like me, and a handful of 20-30-early 40 something women. In a sense, this makes practices kind of fun for us dirty old men. But it also hints that the next generation of masters record breakers are going to be distaff. I predict that many of the male records set in the next 5-10 years--by the likes of Jim McConica and his ilk--will stay in effect for an awfully long time. Twenty years from now, on the other hand, women's masters records will be dropping precipitously.
BTW, I don't mean to be mean-mouthing Title IX, because I do think it's done a lot of good for women athletes. It is interesting, however, to note that both of the 20-something ex-college swimmers on our team today say that they wish Title IX had NOT impacted male swimming programs so negatively. As one of these women put it, "As women swimmers, we want there to be men swimmers too to hang out with." Sadly for them, I suppose, today this means guys like me!
