Rankings (or rating yourself) --RANT--

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 ...

Hmmm, good question. Based on the repulsive looks I get from most women, including the 4 in my family, I'd say I rate about a 2 or 3. In Sweden I'd probably be lower and Germany a little higher. The cape picture puts you at least at a 5 ... the speedo picture a 6 ...

I find it hilarious that a large portion of you people act very childish when it comes to other people's accomplishments. Every time someone posts an improvement or an accomplishment on here, I'm happy for them, and I really hate when I'm not the best at something. That is just nonsense. People on the forum are uber-supportive (see Peter's attaboy thread, for example) and genuinely admire fast swimming and improvements. We are skeptical, however, of times that seem outlandish, such as swimming a 28 in SCY in practice and a 45 in SCM in a meet. That said, I quite look forward to junkpunching Geek again.

There are a number of very fast people "out there" who only compete occasionally (eg when nationals is near their home town). They do some very fast times -- NRs/WRs even -- then disappear for awhile. They are the "Jaws" of the Top Ten times...

I think you misunderstood my point, or perhaps I didn't present it well. Obviously if you are not swimming that fast in the meet, it doesn't matter. I was just addressing the fact that everyone jumped on that person for mentioning fast swimmers that don't compete with allegations that she was lying. If you swim super fast in practice and choke in a meet, then you aren't as good a performer as the guy who doesn't. Personally, I think swimming a 25.28 50m fly when the record is 24.98 is pretty good. I've been hanging around here for about 3 1/2 years. Pretty regularly, someone new jumps on and posts that they swim a 50 (somehow, it's always a 50) of x stroke in x time. Almost invariably, it's a time that would land them in the Top 10 for their age group in the stated course. Always invariably, the time turns out to be mythical, or in the wrong course, or using a sticking pace clock, or insert your excuse here. I've been to three Nationals, and have witnessed first hand record breaking swims. I've worked my ass off to shave precious tenths here and there. I'm not that slow. And I am a few light years away from cracking the Top 10 in my admittedly brutal 45-49 age group. I have nothing but respect for the swimmers whose names I see atop those lists year after year, and there is simply no way some hitherto unknown is knocking out record breaking swims at practice. Jeff Commings, yes. I saw him swim at Federal Way, and now that he's working his way through his phobia of modern technology and is wearing suits made in the last half century, I have no difficulty believing that he can do record-setting swims in practice. Look at Ande's blog, and how much effort he puts into fast swims in practice. He's one of the best swimmers in my age group, and he's not setting record times in practice -- but if he did, I'd buy into it. Dennis Baker, Roque Santos, Josh Davis, sure, I'll buy it. It's not that people are being deliberately harsh, it's just that many of us have seen and heard this tired routine before. Swimming fast takes hard work, dedication, skill, guts, determination, and effort; and a national record setting swim requires quantum increases in each. Whether it's the roll starts, leaving a second early, or a coach with a generous watch click, I somehow always feel much faster in practice than I turn out to be in meets. But the clock doesn't lie. Take a look at the recent Auburn relay practice on floswim. Why do you suppose they went to all the trouble to set up the horn and pads for a simple practice? Until a swimmer has entered a meet, stepped onto the blocks, gone at the horn, not been deked, and hit the pad, I can't believe in an alleged national record setting time.

mjgold - Most folks on this forum are very supportive of each other whether one competes or not. Folks here want to see people do well in practice and in meets. Also, folks are genuinely concerned when they hear about other swimmers here having health issues or life issues. As I have learned in my four months here on the forum, forumites are a tough, analytical bunch. It is, however, the argument being attacked, not the person or persons making the argument. There has to be a way to objectively measure things in society and this is done by tests, races, and rankings. No, rankings or tests do not measure everything or always reflect the whole picture, but there has to be some way to measure. To analogize, I imagine that when I applied to the college I graduated from, there were tons of people out there smarter than myself that could have gotten into the college and squeezed me out of the picture. They either didn't take the tests or chose not to apply, so they became irrelevant in the acceptance process. Saying that they became irrelevant in the acceptance process does not mean I don't care about the people. I think it is great that people are working out whether or not they chose to compete. If, however, one is looking at the rankings, you can't be hung up on "What if so and so had competed?" or "I wonder how many people out there could have beat me if every person in my age group had done this event?".

You can choose to believe what you want. If you don't think this can be done, then don't believe it--it really doesn't matter that much to me in the grand scheme of things. Someone was just looking at rankings and trying to find where they were relative to others. I only caution that these rankings are incomplete and that there are other swimmers out there that still have record-breaking speed.

You can choose to believe what you want. If you don't think this can be done, then don't believe it--it really doesn't matter that much to me in the grand scheme of things. Someone was just looking at rankings and trying to find where they were relative to others. I only caution that these rankings are incomplete and that there are other swimmers out there that still have record-breaking speed. How about giving us *any* data so that we can determine the real question - how *incomplete* are they. I agree in that rankings are NOT the end all, be all. I'm sure you clearly remember these record breaking swims in practice. How about describing them without the names. Coaches reaction; time; swimmers' reactions; event; conditions; etc. At this point, you've given us nothing. I think it would be fascinating to see what percentage of people are out there who are not swimming meets and who break national records in practice. (I feel it's few if any.) However, we can't determine this TO ANY EXTENT as we are not being given even the events; number of swims you witnessed; god forbid we ask for names (although if I brought this topic up, I would certainly obtain permission from said unofficial record breaker to be mentioned on this board; okay, I'd just spout out the name if it were me). However, no data is being given. Just blanket statements. I call crock. Triathletes?! :rofl:I swim with the #1 in the nation and world ranked triathletes including professional tris some of who are my personal friends (all distances including Ironmen distance). They are not setting national records in meets much less practice.

I see the swimmer formerly known as (S)he-Man, now known as Jiggly Puff, holds the top slot last year in her age group with a 5:12. Makes me feel a lot less bad about the whooping she put on me in the 500. Revenge will be mine, o' Puffstery one. Thanks. That's really not a fast time. The girls I now train with can do 4:50 to 5:10 at the slowest.

I'm sure there are others on this forum who could validate my claim about record-breaking swimmers who don't compete. Maybe they would chime in as well to help support my statement. I would be very uncomfortable with giving out names--even my own as you can tell by this forum. Surely I'm not the only person on a team with individuals like these. Alright...I respect that. However, what about times, events, and ages. If you don't know exact then you can give an approx. For me, as a coach, I find it hard to imagine that the Master's coach on that team is not hitting them and himself upside the head if this is the true case.