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
Matt......here we are again talking about nationals and qualifying times again 4 years later!! Hate to admit, but I'm of the same opinion, use "reasonable" qualifying times but still require them.
Also......you might ask old evil one about his run in about lane usage where he swims, the threatend lawsuit, weapons drawn (OK just kidding there.....unless of course it had been with Geek).
The more I;ve read this thread and thought about it and past conversations, this probably does have far less to do with competitive vs. fitness swimmers but rather those who are growth vs no growth advocates of our sport.
I'd pose this question; if USMS we're to land a premier sponsor that paid us a decent amount of money to access our member database would you support it? How about if that sponosorship deal included direct benefits to the membership; discounts on their product for example?
Matt......here we are again talking about nationals and qualifying times again 4 years later!! Hate to admit, but I'm of the same opinion, use "reasonable" qualifying times but still require them.
Also......you might ask old evil one about his run in about lane usage where he swims, the threatend lawsuit, weapons drawn (OK just kidding there.....unless of course it had been with Geek).
The more I;ve read this thread and thought about it and past conversations, this probably does have far less to do with competitive vs. fitness swimmers but rather those who are growth vs no growth advocates of our sport.
I'd pose this question; if USMS we're to land a premier sponsor that paid us a decent amount of money to access our member database would you support it? How about if that sponosorship deal included direct benefits to the membership; discounts on their product for example?
