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!
Parents
Former Member
Hey folks, welcome to Cheers (sometimes of the Bronx variety).
Pull up a bar stool and let me pour you a Sammy.
Is everyone good so far?
OK, here is why the so called Finnish formula is only scientific enough for the present friendly confines, and will not be making an appearance in Cambridge any time soon.
What are we measuring? Yeah, sure, we all think we're measuring the swimming potential of people in the 20's versus their 40s versus their 60s. But, who exactly, and under what conditions? Most of the formulas I have heard explained to me are measuring TWO DIFFERENT GROUPS of people at the same time. Yes, the numbers are interesting at some level, but if you compare times for people who are in their 20's today versus those who are in their 40's today, are you really measuring anything more that the average ability of swimmers who choose to compete at their respective ages? There are so many more factors that can influence that than the supposed effects of aging on similar (but by definition, different) individuals. Availability of teams and pool facilities, the incentive to compete (college scholarship versus the awe and admiration of...dozens, maybe a few hundred for a Masters World Record), competing demands on one's time, the number of people in the general population of a certain age (I strongly believe in the baby-boom/Mark Spitz generation being like a demographic snake that swallowed an elephant, and its effects on Top Ten and NQT times), etc. etc. If you want to make more valid measurements, you ought to compare the times of each individual for his/her 20's, 40's and 60's, and then see what the average drop-off is. I have not heard anyone talking about a project like that.
Moreover, even if you go to the trouble measuring individuals as they age, what effects to you control for? If I achieve a certain time at 21 while working out for about 15 hours per week, can/should it be compared to a time I achieve at 41 when I can only manage about 4 hours per week? As Ion used to point out with such tiresome frequency, what is the effect of conditioning as a teenage swimmer vs. those who pick up the sport in their 20's? And, to what extent do you adjust for improved stroke mechanics (or just plain changes to the backstroke and breastroke rules)? More important, SHOULD you try to factor out all this stuff? If we factor out all the many ways I am a wiser and more cunning swimmer than when I was 21, it becomes a measure of how hard I am working now compared to 21. HEY! I don't need a scientific formula to tell me I used to work a heck of a lot harder when I was younger!
So Jim, I think this stuff should be be viewed as fun not science. Feel free to employ it to "hear de lamentations of der vomen," but do not be surprised if you hear the lamentations (and the derision and see the eye-rolling) of your friends, family and teammates if you bring this up too often.
Can I get anyone else another beer?
Matt
Hey folks, welcome to Cheers (sometimes of the Bronx variety).
Pull up a bar stool and let me pour you a Sammy.
Is everyone good so far?
OK, here is why the so called Finnish formula is only scientific enough for the present friendly confines, and will not be making an appearance in Cambridge any time soon.
What are we measuring? Yeah, sure, we all think we're measuring the swimming potential of people in the 20's versus their 40s versus their 60s. But, who exactly, and under what conditions? Most of the formulas I have heard explained to me are measuring TWO DIFFERENT GROUPS of people at the same time. Yes, the numbers are interesting at some level, but if you compare times for people who are in their 20's today versus those who are in their 40's today, are you really measuring anything more that the average ability of swimmers who choose to compete at their respective ages? There are so many more factors that can influence that than the supposed effects of aging on similar (but by definition, different) individuals. Availability of teams and pool facilities, the incentive to compete (college scholarship versus the awe and admiration of...dozens, maybe a few hundred for a Masters World Record), competing demands on one's time, the number of people in the general population of a certain age (I strongly believe in the baby-boom/Mark Spitz generation being like a demographic snake that swallowed an elephant, and its effects on Top Ten and NQT times), etc. etc. If you want to make more valid measurements, you ought to compare the times of each individual for his/her 20's, 40's and 60's, and then see what the average drop-off is. I have not heard anyone talking about a project like that.
Moreover, even if you go to the trouble measuring individuals as they age, what effects to you control for? If I achieve a certain time at 21 while working out for about 15 hours per week, can/should it be compared to a time I achieve at 41 when I can only manage about 4 hours per week? As Ion used to point out with such tiresome frequency, what is the effect of conditioning as a teenage swimmer vs. those who pick up the sport in their 20's? And, to what extent do you adjust for improved stroke mechanics (or just plain changes to the backstroke and breastroke rules)? More important, SHOULD you try to factor out all this stuff? If we factor out all the many ways I am a wiser and more cunning swimmer than when I was 21, it becomes a measure of how hard I am working now compared to 21. HEY! I don't need a scientific formula to tell me I used to work a heck of a lot harder when I was younger!
So Jim, I think this stuff should be be viewed as fun not science. Feel free to employ it to "hear de lamentations of der vomen," but do not be surprised if you hear the lamentations (and the derision and see the eye-rolling) of your friends, family and teammates if you bring this up too often.
Can I get anyone else another beer?
Matt
