One Meet a Year Studs

I thought it was better to start back competively in an older age group. The 40 to 44 was even more competitive so I entered in the 45 to 49. But there are a lot of women round 48 and 49 that have good times. And probably next year the 50 to 54 age group will also get more competitive because of these people. The age groups in the 30's are the hardest as far as times are concern. Those in the 40's and early 50's are harder because of the number of people in them.

I guess that the main public that doesn't swim that much would see us as professionals. The senior olympics lets anyone 50 and above to do it and I have 5 years to go. Personality, I don't care how many people swim only 1 or 2 meets a year. As for nationals, the one in Hawaii got more west coast swimmers and the one in Cleveland has more east coast swimmers. As someone before was talking about the vast distances and expensives turn many people off from attending the nationals. Next year I bet that the short course one in Tempe gets almost all the top swimmers from the states around Arizona and it will probably have the largest group of master swimmers from California and Arizona than many of the recent ones. As Ion states Paul Carter time in the 100 meter butterfly isn't recognized and this is something considering that when Paul was just 18 years old the record in 100 meter butterfly was 54. So Mr. Carter time is quite outstanding in that he is not far off from the top times of his youth.

You can make a pretty good case that USMS is more inclusive than some of the other masters record tabulating groups. As Rob pointed out earlier, USMS will recognize a record set by a USMS registered swimmer competing in a USS meet. FINA does not. I also think the earlier post about "when is the fastest time the fastest" wasn't an arguement for trying to determine the truly "fastest" time. People who compile records do not make that claim. The only claim is that it was the fastest swim reported in a sanctioned meet. In my somewhat limited experience the existence of five year wonders is an illusion. I swim with some truly gifted swimmers that set/break records on a five year basis. Some of these masters do not swim in meets all year round for all five years. HOWEVER, they do swim enough not to "lose it" and some train quite hard but pretty much give meets a miss due to other issues (family, work, open water venues, other sports, etc). It's my opinion that except for their extraordinary talent (they have it most of us don't) they truly exemplify masters swimming because they stay in the water and enjoy it for the rest of their lives.

The dream of owning a record does not entitle you to have a record. Maybe this ringer had/has the same dream and did what it took to break the record. It just so happens it took him five years to accomplish his goal. The nice thing about Masters is that you can compete at your whim without the strict requirement placed upon us during our youth (or yute, as I understand New Yorkers to say). Also, no where does it say that membership requires support. All that is required is a check. That is all that many of us want out of Masters. We want to swim and have fun. I have a dream - that I will stop getting up at 5:17 am to swim and still be in shape. Alas, I tried that and my belly became a nightmare.

I think what Tom is trying to get at, is, there are swimmers who show up once every 5 years to make their mark. For instance this year we (USMS) had an excellent swimmer show up and break a few records, the funny thing was the last time this swimmer showed up for a meet was 1997. Again, set quite a few records. Now, I understand there is absolutely NO way this can be controlled. "there is no controlling legal authority", Al Gore. We want what is good for USMS, is this good? Some may say yes, because having impressive records show credibility in an organization. Some say no, because it puts a real damper on any dream of owning a record. I came through my school records like a snow plow my freshman year. (for those of you in the south/southwest/hawaii, a snow plow is a big truck with a big thingy on the front to push frozen rain off the road) :D (I AM ONLY KIDDING). It was a small school with a really small swimming program (no scholarships, no real recruiting). I feel there was some animosity towards me going around, the thinking, why the hell did this big fish come to such a small pond. I swam through my years there, the program really started to pick up, and everything was cool, however, it wouldn't have been so cool, had I done that for 1 year, and then transfer. I'm just asking, what's right? Continuing support for the organization is what I think is right. «~» «~»

I bet that most of these every 5 year record swimmers are in the older age groups. Try doing that in the age groups in the 30's and 40's. In my age group there are women that can do the 100 meter breastroke around 1:22 if they have a really good meet. That means that when they were younger back in the 1970's they were not that far from national time standard. People like Laura Val and Ms Pipes don't have to swim every five years since they are in great shape for their ages and have retain much of their speed from their younger days. As for high school records, my high school didn't recognize them for girls in the 1970's and I might have still had the 100 yard butterfly and 100 yard breastroke if they did . There were about only 3 girls in 30 years at that high school that swam year round.

Isn't a true masters swimmer someone who has paid their dues and signed the release at the bottom of the form? The thing that I love about masters swimming is one is free to choose their level of competition. When I started masters swimming I was just there as a fitness swimmer. Meets were available to me if I wanted to compete. I didn't and wasn't forced to. A few years ago, I caught the competition bug again and started competing in the meets. Last year I decided to complete all of the standard pool events in all three courses (53 different events). My LMSC only had two SCM meets scheduled. 18 events can not be completed in only two meets but fortunately I could travel to a different LMSC to get in the remaining six events that I'd need to complete my goal. This is the beauty of being a masters swimmer--freedom of competition/freedom from competition. If someone wants to compete once every five years that's fine with me. If someone wants to compete in every meet that's fine with me too. If someone just wants to be a once a week 'fitness' swimmer, that's fine with me too. Worrying about someone else knocking you out of a top 10 time or record is pretty petty don't you think? If you want it, it's your responsibility to train harder and work on your stroke if it's that important to you.

i'm a newbie to the post, so here goes... Words I have heard and said often with masters swimmers is that on any given day there is probably someone out there that is BIGGER, BETTER and STRONGER...so the thing is to focus on your own goals and those things that are within your control. Some people are just as frustrated winning a national event but not doing their best (time) as those that are frustrated trying to break into the top 10 every year. As for the once every five years swimmers...I think of it very opposite of the posts. As we get older, family. job and other committments can pull people any from the pool and masters swimming but rather than lose that swimmer forever once every five years they rekindle their passion for swimming and come back to the sport to inspire and amaze a lot of us. I always like to think of Competition bringing out the best in me. And competing against faster swimmers always does that for me.

Hmm, The idea of showing up for one meet when most of the competition is in another age group is intriguing. However, I'm waiting for when I'm 44, not 45. Why? For whatever reason, there seems to be more talent up to 5 years above my age than 5 years below it. Don't get me wrong; I'm not dissing the 35-39 age group. They still have legions of swimmers that can wax me without breaking a sweat. What get depressing, though, is when the NQT's I have to meet are regularly the fastest of ANY age group (and consequently always just out of reach) while in the next youngest age group, hypothetically speaking, I would have a real shot. Enough of my pointless grousing; I've riffed on this before. Matt

I know where your at, Matt. So next year I move into that 45 - 49 age group (just in time to escape the age group of the Smiths) . . . Also, the typical times in my soon-to-be age group don't look all that fast. But wait! who comes up with me? Paul Carter, Fritz Lehman, and Bill Specht, three world record holders, and three swimmers, among many, that smoke my a**! I think you are right about that 5-year speedy group, we're just at opposite ends . . . (boo hoo!)