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
Parents
Former Member
As for nationals, I'd like us to make up our mind if we'd rather have a "festival" or a "championship" meet. I'd say we are closer to the festival (big, fun, social), which has its advantages for many people. The Nationals format does not seem to do so well at catering to the smaller group of faster swimmers (very long days, crowded warmups, segmented too much by age v. speed). I'm not saying the meet totally fails for these swimmers, but it could be improved. I'd prefer seeding by time over age, as that seems like it would provide better competition for the faster swimmers. At the facilities nationals are held at, it should not matter what lane you .
Sorry to drag up an old thread, but with so many newbies like myself, I thought it would be enlightening.
I think it's great that nationals is more like a "festival." Good fellowship and fast swimming is the best combination. Keep the qualifying times, but let the less elite swimmers come and swim their 3 free events. What a great feeling for them. If it inconveniences fast swimmers a bit because they can't leave by 2:00 pm, that doesn't really get my knickers in a twist. They can still have dinner and go to bed early while the festival continues.
As for the divide between elite and fitness swimmers, I haven't noticed a divisive schism since joining the forum. People genuinely seem to want to help or empathize. I have witnessed some elite swimmers being very opinionated about their views and a little bullying/dismissive of those who aren't as "elite" or who aren't themselves coaches.
Was there agreement on what was "elite?" Is it making national cuts or, as Gull said, just competing in meets?
As for nationals, I'd like us to make up our mind if we'd rather have a "festival" or a "championship" meet. I'd say we are closer to the festival (big, fun, social), which has its advantages for many people. The Nationals format does not seem to do so well at catering to the smaller group of faster swimmers (very long days, crowded warmups, segmented too much by age v. speed). I'm not saying the meet totally fails for these swimmers, but it could be improved. I'd prefer seeding by time over age, as that seems like it would provide better competition for the faster swimmers. At the facilities nationals are held at, it should not matter what lane you .
Sorry to drag up an old thread, but with so many newbies like myself, I thought it would be enlightening.
I think it's great that nationals is more like a "festival." Good fellowship and fast swimming is the best combination. Keep the qualifying times, but let the less elite swimmers come and swim their 3 free events. What a great feeling for them. If it inconveniences fast swimmers a bit because they can't leave by 2:00 pm, that doesn't really get my knickers in a twist. They can still have dinner and go to bed early while the festival continues.
As for the divide between elite and fitness swimmers, I haven't noticed a divisive schism since joining the forum. People genuinely seem to want to help or empathize. I have witnessed some elite swimmers being very opinionated about their views and a little bullying/dismissive of those who aren't as "elite" or who aren't themselves coaches.
Was there agreement on what was "elite?" Is it making national cuts or, as Gull said, just competing in meets?
