Why is it that Masters level swimmers who participate in USS sanctioned meets under a separate USS registration can't have their times automatically qualify for USMS rankings and USMS National records? What is the reason for this separation? The rules with USMS and USS seem parallel enough to allow USS swims to qualify under USMS ranking and records. Do we care if elite older swimmers in their 30's (say Gary Hall Jr.) effectively end up owning the USMS national record by default? Is USMS afraid of merging to closely with USS? Why wouldn't USMS want to recognize the true best performance by and old man/women in the pool regardless of whether their card said USS or USMS on it?
John Smith
Parents
Former Member
John,
I would say participation in USMS meets is the key. I doubt elite swimmers in the 25-35 age group would ever bother showing up at a USMS meet if they knew their times would transfer as records. I think the USMS values participation over times and records.
I really got a kick out of watching the 25-29 50 free with Gary Hall, Aaron Ciala, and Sabir at the 2004 USMS Nationals at IU. Rob Peel's record of 19. something had stood for something like 8-10 years until that day. If Gary had not blown his turn, he might be holding the new record today instead of Sabir. I would like to see more of this in the future.
John,
I would say participation in USMS meets is the key. I doubt elite swimmers in the 25-35 age group would ever bother showing up at a USMS meet if they knew their times would transfer as records. I think the USMS values participation over times and records.
I really got a kick out of watching the 25-29 50 free with Gary Hall, Aaron Ciala, and Sabir at the 2004 USMS Nationals at IU. Rob Peel's record of 19. something had stood for something like 8-10 years until that day. If Gary had not blown his turn, he might be holding the new record today instead of Sabir. I would like to see more of this in the future.
