When a new masters swimmer asked on a different thread for a meters to yard conversion utility, I referred her to the following site:
www.swiminfo.com/.../conversions.asp
Unfortunately, as another poster quickly pointed out, this site will soon be available only to those who pay for it.
I am wondering if someone with some computer savvy could recreate this very useful utility for us masters, then post it in an area of the USMS web site where we could access it for free.
This same area could also include some other useful tools for swimmers. There is, for example, a fun (though perhaps somewhat suspect) "future times predictor" for aging swimmers at:
http://n3times.com/swimtimes/
In addition, my friend and teammate Bill White wrote an Excel spreadsheet (so far not posted on the web) that allows you to easily calculate your 100 pace for distance swims. You can either input the total distance and total time and it will give you your average 100; or you can input the average 100 you hope to swim and the total distance, and it will crank out what your overall time will be if you can hold that pace.
Anyhow, I propose the USMS web site add a new section called something like "Swimmers Tool Box" that collects, in one place, all these useful and/or just fun-to-play-around-with utilities we can come up with. I know many of the posters here are brilliant amateur mathematicians, who enjoy inventing these things; maybe we could even have an annual award for whatever new calculator we users vote as the most interesting! Kind of like a Touring Prize (is that the right name) for swimming math esoterica!
Originally posted by jim thornton
I am wondering if someone with some computer savvy could recreate this very useful utility for us masters, then post it in an area of the USMS web site where we could access it for free.
The 100 pace calculation is trivial. (As you might guess, I'm the one who likes to calculate relay splits during the meet.) I found that the times-as-you-age converter was way off what I did in HS and college (but that's just me).
The swiminfo calculator was made using info from a NCAA championship meet, right? There is nothing to stop us from doing the same, maybe with the USMS championship results from the last few years. (It would be interesting if Masters conversions are different than Div I college.)
The only question is, what would be the best method for conversion? You could take the best finishers, or take an average of the best heat. Maybe take the "average" swimmer. Average across age groups? Keep it simple, use NQTs? My point is, the calculation is simple, the only difficult part is what criteria to use to decide which swims go into the calculation?
Originally posted by mattson
The only question is, what would be the best method for conversion? the only difficult part is what criteria to use to decide which swims go into the calculation?
I think the first thing would be to list all the suitable lemgths to used in any calcs. i.e. 25 meter, 33 1/3 yard, 50 meter etc
Paul
Isn't Swimming World published by the same people who publish SWIM? Or at least when I call the 800# for renewals I always have to specifiy Swim Magazine.
Seems that if you do subscribe to Swim Magazine--you could use your subscriber # (ala People Magazine's website that needs a user ID # from your label) to gain admittance.
hi, lefty. you should check out the lengthy discussion on this topic from the old forum. your proposal to take top 10 times was suggested, but the problem here is that different cohorts of swimmers would confound the results.
Case in point: one of my friends won the 200 m backstroke last year at the long course nationals in Rutgers. He swam in the 40-44 age group, and turned in a time that ended up being the #1 time in the country for the whole year. He's a great swimmer, and I don't mean in any way to detract from his accomplishment.
However, if he had swum in the 45-49 year old age group, he would have come in 5th just at Rutgers! The older guys clobbered him!
My own theory is that there was a Mark Spitzian "bubble" of male swimming greatness/popularity during the early 1970s that is now making its way, like a pig through a python, through the masters ranks (this "pig" consists of swimmers from about 45 to 54) . Swimming as a male sport has subsequently waned in popularity in the US, thanks in part to the ascendancy of competing sports (bball, hockey, winter soccer, etc.)
You're probably correct is suggesting that males peaking at 19 is ludicrous. But on average, we must peak sometime--you see very few octagenerians in the Olympics, after all. So we're just quibbling over when this peak most likely begins--and how best to determine the age.
By the way, I have a pug named Lefty. You don't, by any chance, have a coat of fawn fur, do you?
I'm actually one of those guys who has done better as a coot than as a youngster. I swam a 1:55.11 for the 200 free at age 49; my best high school and college time for this event was 1:55.8. Basically, by staying the same (actually, by improving marginally over the decades), I've gone from very mediocre as a young age group swimmer to a lot better as an older age group swimmer!
I credit the improvement to several factors:
1) better stroke mechanics now than then, particularly streamlining off the turns and keeping my head down
2) better middle distance training (significantly lower yardage but higher quality sets)
3) and finally, and perhaps most controversially, the use of a body suit (either Aquablade or Fastskin.) I am definitely fatter and hairier than I was in high school, so these suits might not have helped me as much had they existed back then. But I definitely think they help me now.
Originally posted by jim thornton
You're probably correct is suggesting that males peaking at 19 is ludicrous. But on average, we must peak sometime--you see very few octagenerians in the Olympics, after all. So we're just quibbling over when this peak most likely begins--and how best to determine the age.
I agree, but how do we explain the ability of some Masters swimmers to surpass their college times? Perhaps for whatever reason they did not achieve their full potential in college.
This is all way off topic but...
I'm one of those old coots in the 45-49 200 back. There are indeed some of us swimming as fast or faster now compared to high school or college. I have some theories as well. Some are repeats.
1) Some of us are bigger and stronger than we were at 19-21. That certainly pays a dividend on the sprints. At this age we are all as physically mature as we are going to be. It wasn't always as equal growing up.
2) Some of us may not have achieved what we should have at earlier ages. Lots of reasons for why that could be. Sex, drugs, apathy. Who knows.
3) New styles/stroke techniques allow us to go faster with less training and effort.
4) Our attitudes are changing. We believe we can continue to swim fast. I'm pretty certain that's a big part of it.
One question/comment. Would people agree that the longer the race the more likely you are to be slower than in your youth? Not always but more likely.
Standard deviation should iron out any disparities that occur like the afore mentioned 200 backstroke. Plus you need to compate more than one year. THe first thing I learned in college: Anecodtal evidense is generally the most convincing but statsitically the most irrelevent.
To show show, I ran 4 years worth of data on the Mens 200 M back. The average top 10 from 2000-2003 for 40-44 was 2:27.01 with a delta of 5.26 The average for 45-49 was 2:33.10 with a delta of 4.29 This confirms what we already knew, Frit'z swim this past summer (which was 3 stds under the mean) was a better swim than the 2:22 that your friend swam. Also a 2:48.0 for a 40-44 is the equivalent of a 2:50.2 from a 45-49. That seems pretty accurate don't you think.
Oh, and I think we should officially refer to Fritz as an outlier.
