IThe forums have been a bit drab since our friend was kicked off. We need to spice things up. Here are some possible topics:
What should US swimming do more to promote the sport?
Should the qualifying times for nationals (masters) be lowered to make the meet smaller and more conducive to fast swimming?
400 IM - the true measure of swimming ability?
Has Bush exaggerated the threat of terrorism so that he can push his social agenda in the name of national security?
My answers: Yes, Yes, Yes, and Yes
Former Member
I'm not sure which is the harder event the 400IM, of which I can actually do, or the 200 Fly, which I have to struggle through and use the *** stroke kick.
I don't know what else US Swimming should do to promote the sport, though I'd like to see it more on ESPN, unlike Poker which I seem to see all the time. :rolleyes:
I would like to add that post-9/11 there were also lots of discussions that although they had little to do with swimming, the members of this forum used it as one of the links to hold on to in that strange period of U.S. history. Although this is a forum often dedicated to swimming topis, I've always thought of it as a forum "of swimmers" and we are part of it because we have a lot in common as swimmers. However, we also like to talk occassionally about other topics in this forum. That's my 2 cents.....
As to ION, please come back! You help to make this forum from being boring. :D
Lefty posted: Should the qualifying times for nationals (masters) be lowered to make the meet smaller and more conducive to fast swimming?
My opinion, for purely selfish reasons, is no. Here are my general rambling thoughts as I operate in work avoidance mode:
1. The purpose of USMS, as I understand it, is to promote participation in this fun and healthful endeavor. We want to promote inclusion and participation. The questions is how to find the right balance. As I've reviewed the results of short course nationals over the past few years, it seems that the meets have varied in size based on location. This year's at Tempe was one of the big ones, but my personal experience, and my teammates' was that it was pretty fun and we had a good time. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
2. Is there really a burning need to limit the number of heats in a particular event? How does a smaller meet promote faster times? Isn't that a function of the quality of the pool and the training of the athletes?
3. On a personal note, I had returned to the pool after a 30 year absence about six weeks before Tempe. Nevertheless, I was encouraged to go by my friends (who reminded me I had no pride to lose) and I'm glad I did. It kept me going back to practice. I am not one of those who can swim daily for the sake of fitness. I have to have a race or event that is part of motivation to keep coming back to practice. It helped make me feel like I was a part of my team (Rose Bowl) and was a total blast even though I scored no points and was limited to 3 swims.
4. For this year, I've got goals to hit Q times in 2 or 3 events so that if I travel all the way to Indy, I can get more swims in. Faster times would make that more difficult, possibly out of reach, and would thus make Indy less attractive to attend if I'm limited to 3 events.
5. If the goal is to encourage participation and growth, let's not make it more difficult for people to join in the fun of the national meets.
For what it's worth
carl botterud
This is why I got booted:
In the discussions over Biondi being a "flash in the pan" I referred to Ion as "she" (nod to Bill Parcels). I think what I wrote was "she is like an old dog, ignore her and she will go away."
I promise you that is all I said! I certainly did not use profanity!
Regarding political discussions:
The swimmers on my masters team are all good, quality people. This is not surprising; any group of people who spend a significant amount of time dedicated to self-improvement tend to be of good fiber. I was mostly joking about the political question, but the reason I posted it was because I figured if there was any public forum where this could be rationally discussed, this was the place.
But I suppose whatever rules Ashcroft... uhhh... I mean the administrators set need to be followed.
dcarson is right. After 9/11 there was a HUGE amount of posts in response to a post I made saying "God Bless America". Many of them were rather heated....and....I was a part of those posts. I believe they were good for our sport. It gave us all a chance to vent and discuss our divergent views and beliefs...which ultimatley..in my opinion, brings us closer. It also gave us all the opportunity to hear and understand others point of view. Let's face it, many of us tend to have friends and people we associate with that share our like views. I for one, was afforded the opportunity to read and feel a completely different thought process then I had been exposed to in many, many years.
It is difficult to convey jokes in the written word. I thought it was funny, not mean, but can see how the opposite could be concluded. I found the whole experience amusing. WHen I was in 7th grade I bought pop-pops to school and was suspended for one day. Being kicked off the website brought me down memory lane.
PS: When a prayer becomes a catch-phrases its usage needs to be reexamined.
