Is there really a division between masters swimmers? i.e. one camp allied to a more low key fitness oriented approach with low membership growth vs. a meet oriented competitive (elite) camp?
This sounds ridiculous to me. I don't think I've ever run into anyone that acknowledged this debate on a pool deck.
What spawns this rift in Masters swimming? Is this an old guard vs. younger member phenonmenon?
Are there different motivations that exist that create this conflict in terms of the future of USMS? Why can't both coexist?
I say we poll some people out there and find out what they support.
John Smith
Yeah, I kind of balked at the term "elite swimmer" too, but I guess I'm probably a faster swimmer than 90% of the USMS membership, so by definition I suppose I am an elite swimmer.
I'm a little torn on the membership growth area. On the one hand, my team has enough swimmers. Any more and we wouldn't really have room in the pool. Also I think Nationals are generally plenty big. There are enough swimmers that the days are plenty long as is. However, more competitive swimmers in USMS could certainly lead to more meets at the local level, which would be a good thing, IMO. On the balance I would say growth of USMS is not a top priority for me.
Yeah, I kind of balked at the term "elite swimmer" too, but I guess I'm probably a faster swimmer than 90% of the USMS membership, so by definition I suppose I am an elite swimmer.
I'm a little torn on the membership growth area. On the one hand, my team has enough swimmers. Any more and we wouldn't really have room in the pool. Also I think Nationals are generally plenty big. There are enough swimmers that the days are plenty long as is. However, more competitive swimmers in USMS could certainly lead to more meets at the local level, which would be a good thing, IMO. On the balance I would say growth of USMS is not a top priority for me.
