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.
I find it hilarious that a large portion of you people act very childish when it comes to other people's accomplishments.
Whose accomplishments? In this thread it's "those who shall remain nameless."
I can't be happy for - air. . .
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?".
I have to say that this is a great post! I agree that we need to step back and put as much effort to be objective into these debates. People do get caught up sometimes into something that they are passionate about; almost everyone has done that at least once (nobody is perfect). Anyway, I have to say that I agree with this post, but I have to put a disclaimer on this: "As a coach, I will be the biggest headache if you won't try to compete just once".
That's good for you. Luckily, I don't care, nor does it change the truth. 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.
They're NOT accomplishments - they're alleged accomplishments. There's a difference, and that's why they swim the meets, and use timing systems.
There are people on my team who have broken USMS national records for their age groups in workout. These same people do not compete. Be wary of ranking yourself according to the people who currently compete. There are a lot of other fast swimmers out there. At the same time, I think a top ten time is still a significant achievement and congratulations to anyone who can achieve them, regardless of participation.
There are people on my team who have broken USMS national records for their age groups in workout. These same people do not compete. Be wary of ranking yourself according to the people who currently compete. There are a lot of other fast swimmers out there. At the same time, I think a top ten time is still a significant achievement and congratulations to anyone who can achieve them, regardless of participation.
Why don't they compete?? That seems almost ludacris of them not to at least try a meet or two...just my opinion.
I'm skeptical of this claim. I don't know a single ultra fast swimmer who doesn't compete and breaks records in practice.
Ditto.
How about name(s) of the people/ person; event(s); and age groups in which the records would have been broken; and the time. I'm guessing it's not over 3 people if any. Give specifics at which point I think your point could be very interesting.
I too swim with World Record holders and past Olympians. They ain't breakin' the national records in practice. At all. Not even close.
