Age-Grading for Masters Swimmers

The great *** stroking psychiatrist Allen Stark sent me a private message regarding age grading. He a'feared it sounded too lugubrious to post in the forum itself. I replied to him why I think age grading could eliminate a lot of his unnecessary misery about slowing down. He agreed to let me post our exchange given how serendipitously PERFECT his most recent 200 LCM *** at age 68 lines up to his "life time best swim" 200 LCM *** at age 62. Check it out! I will put Allen's words in underlined italics. This was not such a big deal for me in 60-64, but the piano has fallen in 65-69. In 2011, at 62, I broke the WR in the 200 BR in the best swim of my life in 2:50.44.I barely broke the WR and was ecstatic. It was my best time in 13 yr, but I had been mostly in the 2:52 during that 13 yr with very little slowdown. In 2014 I broke the 200 BR by over a second in 2:56.96 at age 65. I knew I could go faster, but the next year I went 3:00 and Rick Walker said to me after the race "I bet you never thought you'd be happy with a 3:00" and the damnable part was that I was happy with it. At 68 I went 3:03, really not happy with that, sure I can go faster, afraid soon I'll think that was fast. I am making his a PM as I feel I am kind of whining, but I am very frustrated with getting slower so fast. Hi, Allen, I actually tried to contact you when I was researching both this article and the piece on aging and performance I did for Swimmer. A post you made on your frustrations (which, by the way, I share, along with Rich Abrahams and many others) is what actually rekindled my interest in starting a new metric to supplement the times-only approach by which we swimmers (often overly harshly) judge ourselves! The switch from the relatively modest linear decline to a more severe quadratic drop-off does seem to happen somewhere between the late 60s to the mid 70s. David Guthrie actually suggested to me that by age 75 or at the very latest 80, they should have World Records every two years instead of every five, given how dramatic these declines can become. I was also a little surprised to learn that endurance goes faster than speed. To me the 200 *** is clearly an endurance event, the 200 LCM *** is (to my way of thinking!) practically unswimmable by mortal men! I just took the liberty of checking out your 50, 100, and 200 LCM breaststroke times dating back to 2009--i.e., during the years when you went from 60 to 68. Interestingly, in none of these 9 year periods has your average yearly decline exceeded 1 percent, though your 100 *** did come close. 68 to 60 37.14 (slowed down by 4.8 percent over 9 years = .52 percent per year) 36.16 35.99 35.78 36.26 35.10 35.28 35.37 1:24.09 (slowed down by 8.6 percent over 9 years = .96 percent per year) 1:20.87 1:21.75 1:19.88 1:20.89 1:17.99 1:17.50 1:16.83 3:03.39 (slowed down by 5.9 percent over 9 years = .66 percent per year) 3:00.01 3:00.21 2:56.96 2:59.47 2:50.44 2:52.74 2:52.54 the 9 year average isn't the same as each year to year change. From this year compared to last year (i.e., 67 to 68), for instance: your 50 speed declined by 2.6 percent your 100 declined by 3.22 percent and your 200 declined by 1.8 percent Numbers are peculiar, and it's hard to know what to make of this. I encourage you to check out Ed Gendreau's age rating site. www.egswim.com/.../RatingTimeOut.php EVENT: Men 200 *** COURSE: LCM (long course meters) AGE: 68 TIME: 3:03.39 RATING: 96.53 EVENT: Men 200 *** COURSE: LCM (long course meters) AGE: 67 TIME: 3:00.21 RATING: 96.99 EVENT: Men 200 *** COURSE: LCM (long course meters) AGE: 66 TIME: 3:00.21 RATING: 95.78 .... Your best time of your life: EVENT: Men 200 *** COURSE: LCM (long course meters) AGE: 62 TIME: 2:50.44 RATING: 96.53 Please note that the rating for your 2:50.44 at age 62 is IDENTICAL to your rating for a 3:03.39 at age 68. When I just ran these numbers, I had no idea what I would find. But it seems to me that this is very strong validation for why age-grading could help lots of swimmers better cope with their changing swim times. As a psychiatrist, you've no doubt encouraged more than a few of your patients over the years to "cognitively reframe" ideas that are unnecessarily making them miserable! I know it's hard to see your times getting slower, but I strongly urge you to take at least a little consolation from the fact that this past summer's 200 LCM *** -- on an age adjusted basis that takes into account the realities of human performance physiology -- is every bit as good as the swim you did at age 62. Moreover, you maintain that you know you can go faster. I have no doubt this is true. But wouldn't it be motivating to also tell yourself: Absolute time notwithstanding, I know I can improve my rating next year? PS I don't think your private message was at all whiney! I think you expressed something that many, many swimmers are feeling. If you agree, I would love to post your PM and my reply on the forum itself. I think people would find it illuminating. In any event, keep on the great swimming! Times notwithstanding, you are still swimming GREAT! Thank you so much.If you don't think my PM too whiny feel free to use it. Since my last meet I have been lifting weights more regularly in an attempt to turn back the clock.i know you are not pro-lifting, but i think I swim better when i lift regularly. I also gave up grains and have lost 8 lb while retaining muscle. The proof will be in the times. i had great hopes for my SCM meet, but hurt my shoulder( not swimming related injury) 3 wk ago which though off my training. We will see this weekend by how much. Thanks Allen

The great *** stroking psychiatrist Allen Stark sent me a private message regarding age grading. He a'feared it sounded too lugubrious to post in the forum itself. I replied to him why I think age grading could eliminate a lot of his unnecessary misery about slowing down. He agreed to let me post our exchange given how serendipitously PERFECT his most recent 200 LCM *** at age 68 lines up to his "life time best swim" 200 LCM *** at age 62. Check it out! I will put Allen's words in underlined italics. This was not such a big deal for me in 60-64, but the piano has fallen in 65-69. In 2011, at 62, I broke the WR in the 200 BR in the best swim of my life in 2:50.44.I barely broke the WR and was ecstatic. It was my best time in 13 yr, but I had been mostly in the 2:52 during that 13 yr with very little slowdown. In 2014 I broke the 200 BR by over a second in 2:56.96 at age 65. I knew I could go faster, but the next year I went 3:00 and Rick Walker said to me after the race "I bet you never thought you'd be happy with a 3:00" and the damnable part was that I was happy with it. At 68 I went 3:03, really not happy with that, sure I can go faster, afraid soon I'll think that was fast. I am making his a PM as I feel I am kind of whining, but I am very frustrated with getting slower so fast. Hi, Allen, I actually tried to contact you when I was researching both this article and the piece on aging and performance I did for Swimmer. A post you made on your frustrations (which, by the way, I share, along with Rich Abrahams and many others) is what actually rekindled my interest in starting a new metric to supplement the times-only approach by which we swimmers (often overly harshly) judge ourselves! The switch from the relatively modest linear decline to a more severe quadratic drop-off does seem to happen somewhere between the late 60s to the mid 70s. David Guthrie actually suggested to me that by age 75 or at the very latest 80, they should have World Records every two years instead of every five, given how dramatic these declines can become. I was also a little surprised to learn that endurance goes faster than speed. To me the 200 *** is clearly an endurance event, the 200 LCM *** is (to my way of thinking!) practically unswimmable by mortal men! I just took the liberty of checking out your 50, 100, and 200 LCM breaststroke times dating back to 2009--i.e., during the years when you went from 60 to 68. Interestingly, in none of these 9 year periods has your average yearly decline exceeded 1 percent, though your 100 *** did come close. 68 to 60 37.14 (slowed down by 4.8 percent over 9 years = .52 percent per year) 36.16 35.99 35.78 36.26 35.10 35.28 35.37 1:24.09 (slowed down by 8.6 percent over 9 years = .96 percent per year) 1:20.87 1:21.75 1:19.88 1:20.89 1:17.99 1:17.50 1:16.83 3:03.39 (slowed down by 5.9 percent over 9 years = .66 percent per year) 3:00.01 3:00.21 2:56.96 2:59.47 2:50.44 2:52.74 2:52.54 the 9 year average isn't the same as each year to year change. From this year compared to last year (i.e., 67 to 68), for instance: your 50 speed declined by 2.6 percent your 100 declined by 3.22 percent and your 200 declined by 1.8 percent Numbers are peculiar, and it's hard to know what to make of this. I encourage you to check out Ed Gendreau's age rating site. www.egswim.com/.../RatingTimeOut.php EVENT: Men 200 *** COURSE: LCM (long course meters) AGE: 68 TIME: 3:03.39 RATING: 96.53 EVENT: Men 200 *** COURSE: LCM (long course meters) AGE: 67 TIME: 3:00.21 RATING: 96.99 EVENT: Men 200 *** COURSE: LCM (long course meters) AGE: 66 TIME: 3:00.21 RATING: 95.78 .... Your best time of your life: EVENT: Men 200 *** COURSE: LCM (long course meters) AGE: 62 TIME: 2:50.44 RATING: 96.53 Please note that the rating for your 2:50.44 at age 62 is IDENTICAL to your rating for a 3:03.39 at age 68. When I just ran these numbers, I had no idea what I would find. But it seems to me that this is very strong validation for why age-grading could help lots of swimmers better cope with their changing swim times. As a psychiatrist, you've no doubt encouraged more than a few of your patients over the years to "cognitively reframe" ideas that are unnecessarily making them miserable! I know it's hard to see your times getting slower, but I strongly urge you to take at least a little consolation from the fact that this past summer's 200 LCM *** -- on an age adjusted basis that takes into account the realities of human performance physiology -- is every bit as good as the swim you did at age 62. Moreover, you maintain that you know you can go faster. I have no doubt this is true. But wouldn't it be motivating to also tell yourself: Absolute time notwithstanding, I know I can improve my rating next year? PS I don't think your private message was at all whiney! I think you expressed something that many, many swimmers are feeling. If you agree, I would love to post your PM and my reply on the forum itself. I think people would find it illuminating. In any event, keep on the great swimming! Times notwithstanding, you are still swimming GREAT! Thank you so much.If you don't think my PM too whiny feel free to use it. Since my last meet I have been lifting weights more regularly in an attempt to turn back the clock.i know you are not pro-lifting, but i think I swim better when i lift regularly. I also gave up grains and have lost 8 lb while retaining muscle. The proof will be in the times. i had great hopes for my SCM meet, but hurt my shoulder( not swimming related injury) 3 wk ago which though off my training. We will see this weekend by how much. Thanks Allen