I know that I have seen others talk about "how good am I if I swim the 200 in this time", or "if my mile is 17min".
and then the responses are typically, look at results from previous meets, or last years top 10 time.
But does anyone try to take into account how many actually swim that event/distance? Is one a good swimmer merely because only 12 people swim the 400 IM.
I looked at the 2007 top 10 SCM for Men 30-34. for *** and IM I would have been top 10 in 3 of 6 events/distances.
50 br 33.37 outside of top 10
100br 1:14.08 (10)
200br 2:42.20 (7)
400 IM 5:19.71 (7)
but how many 30-34 competed in those events in 2007? I would guess that more people competed in 2006 at the World Championships in Cali.
In Sweden I have top 10 times in nearly everything but 50-100 free, but that is only because it's not too often that there are more than 10-12 swimmers in my age grupp. I know of 4-6 swimmers that will be 35-39 in 2010 and all of them are significanly faster than me, just not sure swimming at the Worlds is something they plan on doing.
I recently looked at a German time standard, since they had one for every year 11-18 and then an open I used the open table. The table was scaled to 1-20. 20 being the fastest. something simliar to the US AAAA standards but with more divisions. I was at best 6 of a possible 20 in Breaststroke. and not even 1 in Back and Fly. and between 1-2 for Free and IM. to me that seems more like a realistic measurement of my ability.
Similarly many of the Olympians were clocked doing crazy fast times (some faster than trials) during taper workouts leading into Beijing - those are known swimmers that are racing world class competition and no one doubts those claims.
I think I heard Phelps has broken (around 03/04) world records in practice - again it's Phelps and that was prior to his monsterous assault on world records so I buy it.
The national records in masters for the most part are darn legit. The record holders in most age groups trained hard, had lots of talent, and had great races. I know a few of these people - they don't touch their own records in practice so I personally find the claims that national records are broken in practice to be less than likely.
I think a lot of people on here misrepresent things (swims, times, etc.) whether intentionally or not. Those are names I won't list but I'll bet beers most people would agree.
We love to tar and feather each other on here ... most of my tarring and feathering is done to those who I know and love OR to those I know to be full of you know what ...
Similarly many of the Olympians were clocked doing crazy fast times (some faster than trials) during taper workouts leading into Beijing - those are known swimmers that are racing world class competition and no one doubts those claims.
I think I heard Phelps has broken (around 03/04) world records in practice - again it's Phelps and that was prior to his monsterous assault on world records so I buy it.
The national records in masters for the most part are darn legit. The record holders in most age groups trained hard, had lots of talent, and had great races. I know a few of these people - they don't touch their own records in practice so I personally find the claims that national records are broken in practice to be less than likely.
I think a lot of people on here misrepresent things (swims, times, etc.) whether intentionally or not. Those are names I won't list but I'll bet beers most people would agree.
We love to tar and feather each other on here ... most of my tarring and feathering is done to those who I know and love OR to those I know to be full of you know what ...
