Elite vs. Fitness

It seems to me most fitness swimmers are elite swimmers in my books, why are we making such a fuss? The more the better why can't we be just be swimmers there really are very few real MASTER swimmers in the group.

Why wouldn't people want to more actively "market" USMS and have it grow? Is tight lane space the only real reason for this? I too am not happy being shoved in this "elite" camp especially after years of helping begginers, fitness oriented and triathlete based non swimmers with thier stroke technique and workouts. On the other hand, USMS Nationals is a huge event. It's too big in my opinion. I'm certainly in favor of cut off times to limit size and scope of this meet. John Smith

Originally posted by geochuck It seems to me most fitness swimmers are elite swimmers in my books, why are we making such a fuss? The more the better why can't we be just be swimmers there really are very few real MASTER swimmers in the group. What's a real "masters" swimmer?

I found out today that there are plans to make our Y's Masters group a better run group(like I have been begging for, for awhile), and I think making some changes will make this group grow......and I am excited about it, so I would say even though I am not elite, I certainly am not against growth!

The meet host is going to have to be "allowed" to make some money after it's all said and done. I don't think cutting back on attendance while increasing partcipation cost by a whole 5 bucks is going to cut it. The math can be done pretty easily. Short Course: Let's consider what last year (Ft. Lauderdale) and this year's site and how the two "larger" facilities are impacting how late the deal runs. What time did we end last year most days? Around 3? Or was it as late as 4? It certainly wasn't what I would term "late" in any sense. Besides, what are you there to do? Swim or what? You can do "what" after the meet concludes. Long course though might be a different matter.

My speed or actually lack thereof would put me well out of elite ranks, but isn't there something in between fitness swimmer and elite? I always think of the fitness swimmer as anyone who swims laps just doing it for the exercise. This somewhat reminds me of the debate in running circles about "runner" vs. "jogger" and there are so many gradations of commitment to a sport. I suppose I'd say I'm more low key than the fast swimmers in the more advanced lanes at my master's workouts. But the fact that I go to master's workouts might make me less low-key than someone who swims maybe a dozen or so laps for the exercise. (Of course, that dozen-lap swimmer might be able to swim circles around me and might think I should be committed... but that's a whole 'nother story.) ;) Okay, so now that I've non-answered the first question, another non-answer coming up: I'm down with lane space... love it in fact... hate crowded pools... and thus am all good with USMS growing. Contradictory? Maybe not. The more masters' groups and interest in them, the more people who understand about swimmers wanting lane space and thus the more lane space available. The "if you build it, they will come" school of expansion applied to the idea of getting more support for swim workout time both in groups and independently. While it's great to support kids' swimming programs, it would be nice to promote serious swimming for adults. I compete infrequently except with myself in the pool.. just time schedule and opportunity don't always mesh... but I see the occasional meet or open water race as a way to stay motivated and keep working on my swimming... and at the same time enjoy the workouts for their own sake--as mentioned, competing w/ myself, w/ my previous times, etc.

Matt, You guys should be commended for not bopping that guy on the noggin with the h2o polo ball. I would not have been able to restrain myself from doing so.

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?

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. originally posted by Knelson On the other hand, USMS Nationals is a huge event. It's too big in my opinion. I'm certainly in favor of cut off times to limit size and scope of this meet. originaly posted by Evil/Good Smith I think that we can also subdivide the issues of crowded lanes at practice and a crowded Nationals....As John points out in his quote above; The way to keep the Nationals relatively reasonable in size is by making the qualifying times faster.....Think about USS swimming....certainly there are waaaay more USS swimmers than there are Masters swimmers (even if you just include the 15 and over USS swimmers)....but Junior Nationals and Senior Nationals are not any more populated than Masters Nationals (or are they??).....and the reason of course is b/c the qualifying time standards for those big USS meets are set the way they are (at least) partly for the reason of controling the size of these big meets......I want Masters Nationals to be very competitive...don't get me wrong....I would rather not place in the top ten and have stronger competition in my age group (which is already pretty strong) then place in the top 3 in my age group in every event and have weak competition to face.....but the competitiveness of the Masters Nationals can still be preserved if the qulifying standards were harder to make....and we could still increase USMS membership without increasing the size of Masters Nationals.....I don't know what the obstacle to doing this actually is?.....Only a modest change in the qualifying time standards could probably slim the size of the meet down enough to make it a more comfortable experience for everyone involved...IMHO only of course!!

Now there's a good idea, one of the best yet - condition of USMS membership is that you agree to have your personal data sold to a company for marketing purposes. You do realize that a list of 50K names wouldn't cost any company more than a few dollars, right? Lists of names are one of the cheapest commodities out there. Most reputable organizations tend not to sell their members' names and personal data. Heck, most disreputable organizations don't do that anymore either. I'll happily pay my $30/year USMS dues and pay full price for a few swimsuits a year over the alternative you are proposing. Saving $5-$10 on a suit or goggles isn't worth that stooping.