What Is Wrong With Swimming??

Goldsmith's article certainly discusses a topic that needs to be discussed. But, I disagree with his statement that "I didn’t have to think much to write this article". The truth is that he sometimes needed to think more than he did. First, are kids different today? Well, I've worked with kids for more than a quarter of a century, and my perception is that the kids of today are busier than I've ever seen them before. Whether they need to be is another question. Goldsmith says that "Numbers of registered swimmers are down". Compared to when? I've been to a couple of summer swim league meets this summer, and there were plenty of kids. But when I was a kid, I didn't even know where to find a swim team. In fact, I was in junior high before I even knew that there were such things as swim teams. Every high school in my area appears to have a high school swim team, but that wasn't true in my day. My high school now has both a swim team and a hockey team. They had neither when I was there. He also says that "Kids all drop out of swimming when they turn 15 to concentrate on school." It's not just swimming. I used to do volunteer work with a youth organization that worked exclusively with high school kids. But now they've expanded into junior high. One reason is because they found that high school kids - particularly the older ones - were increasingly becoming unavailable. Many of them were getting jobs or were tied up with school activities that took up too much of their time. And now let's consider some of the aspects of swimming that he claims are "unique": "Swimming is an outstanding sport. It is a pure sport – little or no equipment required. Just athletes, swim suits, some goggles and add water!" Well, that's what it has tradionally been. But to an increasing degree it's being sold to people that you also need a $200 or $250 swimsuit that covers most of your body and is "slipperier than your own skin". And this trend is likely to continue unless/until the governing bodies decide to ban it. "Swimming teaches life lessons that create great people not just great athletes." And swimming is "unique" in this? "Swimming teaches teamwork. It teaches confidence and self-belief. Athletes develop goal setting abilities." It's hard to imagine a worse argument for swimming than to say that it "teaches teamwork". Swimming is a form of individual competition that has been converted into a team sport. About the only thing in swimming that is team oriented is the relay races, and even there it could be argued that what you really have are 4-person mini-teams. "They learn how to overcome adversity. They learn how to strive for excellence. "They develop values and virtues like integrity, honesty, humility, courage and discipline. "They learn about health, physical fitness and nutrition." And this is truer of swimming than it is of other sports? That rash word "unique" rears it's ugly head again. "Swimming prepares athletes for life." Well, there's one way in which it does: Swimming is the only sport I can think of in which participants from a wide variety of ages compete together on the same team. Most kids live in a world in which they are segregated based on age, but that is not going to be true once they enter the workplace. So, in that sense, being on a swim team is a good preparation for life. "There is nothing – nothing -- a successful swimmer can’t achieve in life." Nothing at all? ;) I will concede this: In swimming, more than in most sports, people set seemingly impossible goals, and then achieve them. Some even medal at the Olympics! Oh, excuse me. I got carried away. As Goldsmith notes, "Less than 1% of swimmers ever make it to a national team. Fewer than 1% of those ever win a gold medal at a major international championship." So we shouldn't be encouraging our swimmers to set loftly goals and then to try to achieve them. If they do that, they may not succeed, and then they may decide that they are failures in life. So let's encourage them, instead, to accept the fact that they are probably never going to be more than mediocre, and to concentrate, instead, on just having fun. That will prepare them for life! :rolleyes: "Swimming saves lives – learning to swim can save your life and the lives of people you love." True. "Swimming is non-weight bearing exercise that is great for joints and cardio-vascular fitness for all ages." Here, he's touched on what I think is one of the most important arguments for swimming: It is a sport in which people can reasonably hope to participate for their entire lives. Only a small fraction of the kids who play high school football will be good enough to play it in college. And only a small fraction of those who play it in college will be good enough to turn pro. And for those who aren't good enough, it's basically over. But that's not true for swimming. Goldsmith then makes some suggestions for changes to training schedules. To his suggestions, I'll add another: • Why not train fewer hours, but make those hours more effective? A high school swim coach named Art Aungst has authored a book titled Long Strokes in a Short Season (which is available at http://www.totalimmersion.net) in which he tells how he replaced his yardage-based training program with a program that was based, instead, on building technique. His swim team grew because swimmers who hadn't been able to able to commit the amount of time needed for the yardage-based program were able to commit the lesser amount of time needed for the technique-based program. And the performance of his team improved rather than declined. I'm puzzled by Goldsmith's list of the things he thinks are "normal" for most sports: • The child is constantly active and moving. I recently went to a baseball game in which a kid I knew was playing. He only played for about half the game. Even when he was "playing", he was only on the field when the other team was at bat. The rest of the time, he was in the dugout unless he was batting (which only happened twice). And when he was on the field, he spent most of his time standing around waiting to see if the ball would come to him (which it rarely did). • The game is over in 40 – 90 minutes. I think the baseball game lasted more like 2 hours. That's about how long most high school and summer swim league meets last. • They can usually watch the game from the sidelines for nothing in the local park. I've never had to pay to watch a swim meet, though I've usually had to pay to get into high school football games. I've only heard of them charging people to watch the really big swim meets. • They only have to watch the one game – the one their child is involved in. But it's rare that their child is playing all the time. The bottom line is: Swimming isn't all that different from other sports in this respect. Now, let's consider his suggestions for how to improve things: • Why not meets for backstroke only? Or only distance events? Or only medley? Doesn't sound productive. It's generally better to have one big meet than lots of little meets, because it cuts down on driving time. • Why not meets for 6-9 year olds only and only hold the meet for 2 hours at maximum with all kids swimming 5-6 times? • Why not events for 16-18 year olds only? The lack of age segregation is one of the benefits of swimming I noted above. Also, many families have kids of varying ages on the swim team, so age-segregated meets could simply mean that they have to go to more meets. I know a family whose boys are into baseball, and they face this problem all the time. • Why not more fun events? Why not? • Why not events where the total results of the team and club are the only ones that count? Total results are already being counted. What benefit could there be in not recognizing individual accomplishments? • Why not encourage swimming more events by not counting any one event but only the combined total time from swimming in all events in the age group? It certainly makes sense to make some kind of awards based on which kids earn the most total points at the meet. • Why not have the meet going all day, but 6-9 year olds in one two hour block, 10-13 year-olds in another two hour block, and 14 years and older in another block of time, so pool space booking is efficient, but everyone does not has to stay all day? The only thing that would concern me is that this might erode some of the team spirit by saying, in essence, "You don't need to be around to encourage your teammates." In my experience, meets that actually last "all day" are rare! • Why not provide other activities and entertainment for families with more than one child attending the meet? Why not? • Why not provide age related prizes for competitors rather than just ribbons or medals to all age groups? Do you think there's an age at which kids don't like getting medals and ribbons? I would suggest giving gold, silver, and bronze medals to the top three swimmers in each age group, with ribbons to the 4th, 5th, and 6th place swimmers. It costs a little more, but makes the experience more memorable and makes more of the kids feel like winners. And here's a suggestion of my own: • If you're going to have an all-day meet, why not combine it with a Masters meet? The adults can be timers for the kids' part, and the kids can be timers for the adults' part. This should help kids to realize that there's no age at which they will ever have to stop competing. And it could help to make competitive swimming more of a family affair.

Goldsmith's article certainly discusses a topic that needs to be discussed. But, I disagree with his statement that "I didn’t have to think much to write this article". The truth is that he sometimes needed to think more than he did. First, are kids different today? Well, I've worked with kids for more than a quarter of a century, and my perception is that the kids of today are busier than I've ever seen them before. Whether they need to be is another question. Goldsmith says that "Numbers of registered swimmers are down". Compared to when? I've been to a couple of summer swim league meets this summer, and there were plenty of kids. But when I was a kid, I didn't even know where to find a swim team. In fact, I was in junior high before I even knew that there were such things as swim teams. Every high school in my area appears to have a high school swim team, but that wasn't true in my day. My high school now has both a swim team and a hockey team. They had neither when I was there. He also says that "Kids all drop out of swimming when they turn 15 to concentrate on school." It's not just swimming. I used to do volunteer work with a youth organization that worked exclusively with high school kids. But now they've expanded into junior high. One reason is because they found that high school kids - particularly the older ones - were increasingly becoming unavailable. Many of them were getting jobs or were tied up with school activities that took up too much of their time. And now let's consider some of the aspects of swimming that he claims are "unique": "Swimming is an outstanding sport. It is a pure sport – little or no equipment required. Just athletes, swim suits, some goggles and add water!" Well, that's what it has tradionally been. But to an increasing degree it's being sold to people that you also need a $200 or $250 swimsuit that covers most of your body and is "slipperier than your own skin". And this trend is likely to continue unless/until the governing bodies decide to ban it. "Swimming teaches life lessons that create great people not just great athletes." And swimming is "unique" in this? "Swimming teaches teamwork. It teaches confidence and self-belief. Athletes develop goal setting abilities." It's hard to imagine a worse argument for swimming than to say that it "teaches teamwork". Swimming is a form of individual competition that has been converted into a team sport. About the only thing in swimming that is team oriented is the relay races, and even there it could be argued that what you really have are 4-person mini-teams. "They learn how to overcome adversity. They learn how to strive for excellence. "They develop values and virtues like integrity, honesty, humility, courage and discipline. "They learn about health, physical fitness and nutrition." And this is truer of swimming than it is of other sports? That rash word "unique" rears it's ugly head again. "Swimming prepares athletes for life." Well, there's one way in which it does: Swimming is the only sport I can think of in which participants from a wide variety of ages compete together on the same team. Most kids live in a world in which they are segregated based on age, but that is not going to be true once they enter the workplace. So, in that sense, being on a swim team is a good preparation for life. "There is nothing – nothing -- a successful swimmer can’t achieve in life." Nothing at all? ;) I will concede this: In swimming, more than in most sports, people set seemingly impossible goals, and then achieve them. Some even medal at the Olympics! Oh, excuse me. I got carried away. As Goldsmith notes, "Less than 1% of swimmers ever make it to a national team. Fewer than 1% of those ever win a gold medal at a major international championship." So we shouldn't be encouraging our swimmers to set loftly goals and then to try to achieve them. If they do that, they may not succeed, and then they may decide that they are failures in life. So let's encourage them, instead, to accept the fact that they are probably never going to be more than mediocre, and to concentrate, instead, on just having fun. That will prepare them for life! :rolleyes: "Swimming saves lives – learning to swim can save your life and the lives of people you love." True. "Swimming is non-weight bearing exercise that is great for joints and cardio-vascular fitness for all ages." Here, he's touched on what I think is one of the most important arguments for swimming: It is a sport in which people can reasonably hope to participate for their entire lives. Only a small fraction of the kids who play high school football will be good enough to play it in college. And only a small fraction of those who play it in college will be good enough to turn pro. And for those who aren't good enough, it's basically over. But that's not true for swimming. Goldsmith then makes some suggestions for changes to training schedules. To his suggestions, I'll add another: • Why not train fewer hours, but make those hours more effective? A high school swim coach named Art Aungst has authored a book titled Long Strokes in a Short Season (which is available at http://www.totalimmersion.net) in which he tells how he replaced his yardage-based training program with a program that was based, instead, on building technique. His swim team grew because swimmers who hadn't been able to able to commit the amount of time needed for the yardage-based program were able to commit the lesser amount of time needed for the technique-based program. And the performance of his team improved rather than declined. I'm puzzled by Goldsmith's list of the things he thinks are "normal" for most sports: • The child is constantly active and moving. I recently went to a baseball game in which a kid I knew was playing. He only played for about half the game. Even when he was "playing", he was only on the field when the other team was at bat. The rest of the time, he was in the dugout unless he was batting (which only happened twice). And when he was on the field, he spent most of his time standing around waiting to see if the ball would come to him (which it rarely did). • The game is over in 40 – 90 minutes. I think the baseball game lasted more like 2 hours. That's about how long most high school and summer swim league meets last. • They can usually watch the game from the sidelines for nothing in the local park. I've never had to pay to watch a swim meet, though I've usually had to pay to get into high school football games. I've only heard of them charging people to watch the really big swim meets. • They only have to watch the one game – the one their child is involved in. But it's rare that their child is playing all the time. The bottom line is: Swimming isn't all that different from other sports in this respect. Now, let's consider his suggestions for how to improve things: • Why not meets for backstroke only? Or only distance events? Or only medley? Doesn't sound productive. It's generally better to have one big meet than lots of little meets, because it cuts down on driving time. • Why not meets for 6-9 year olds only and only hold the meet for 2 hours at maximum with all kids swimming 5-6 times? • Why not events for 16-18 year olds only? The lack of age segregation is one of the benefits of swimming I noted above. Also, many families have kids of varying ages on the swim team, so age-segregated meets could simply mean that they have to go to more meets. I know a family whose boys are into baseball, and they face this problem all the time. • Why not more fun events? Why not? • Why not events where the total results of the team and club are the only ones that count? Total results are already being counted. What benefit could there be in not recognizing individual accomplishments? • Why not encourage swimming more events by not counting any one event but only the combined total time from swimming in all events in the age group? It certainly makes sense to make some kind of awards based on which kids earn the most total points at the meet. • Why not have the meet going all day, but 6-9 year olds in one two hour block, 10-13 year-olds in another two hour block, and 14 years and older in another block of time, so pool space booking is efficient, but everyone does not has to stay all day? The only thing that would concern me is that this might erode some of the team spirit by saying, in essence, "You don't need to be around to encourage your teammates." In my experience, meets that actually last "all day" are rare! • Why not provide other activities and entertainment for families with more than one child attending the meet? Why not? • Why not provide age related prizes for competitors rather than just ribbons or medals to all age groups? Do you think there's an age at which kids don't like getting medals and ribbons? I would suggest giving gold, silver, and bronze medals to the top three swimmers in each age group, with ribbons to the 4th, 5th, and 6th place swimmers. It costs a little more, but makes the experience more memorable and makes more of the kids feel like winners. And here's a suggestion of my own: • If you're going to have an all-day meet, why not combine it with a Masters meet? The adults can be timers for the kids' part, and the kids can be timers for the adults' part. This should help kids to realize that there's no age at which they will ever have to stop competing. And it could help to make competitive swimming more of a family affair.