PB vs winning

Part of the reason I usually prefer the zone meets over nationals because the seeding is open vs. by age...almost always a good race to be had! Chris, I can see both sides and am actually OK with having seeding by time as an option at regional meet and age at nationals....the epic battles between folks in the same age group I think are great for the sport. I, too, love open seeding. But, Chris and Paul, if you want it so bad at nationals, stop with the sprinting and get into the distance events. (I know you did the 500 at Austin, Paul, so I'll cut you slack there). A best time over a win would be my choice. Naturally, I want both, but agree with this. Part of the reason I do like open water swimming, though, is because it seems almost purely about the race ... times are an after-thought in many cases.

I'll take a PB everytime. A) I'm not going to legitimately win anything, ever. B) It's hard enough just getting 3rd out of 4 or what not. If I have to use beating other folks as a barometer of my awesomeness, then I really do suck as a person.

A best time over a win would be my choice. Unless there's some sort of rivalry going on most masters might say the PR is more significant.

I remember watching the 84 games and the US backstroker Rick Carey was upset when winning the Gold Medal in a time that was well off his best. While I can't quite agree with that - I do understand it. I would take the PR - except for in any Big meet. At US trials - I think people will take finishing second over the PR ...

I, too, love open seeding. But, Chris and Paul, if you want it so bad at nationals, stop with the sprinting and get into the distance events. (I know you did the 500 at Austin, Paul, so I'll cut you slack there). Hey, the 500 is one of my regular events! I swam the 400 at Oregon, unlike the tall one. (Honestly, I don't recall if it was seeded by time-only, I don't think it was...the fastest people were in our age group anyway.) And I think you misread Paul's reply to this idea. I believe that meet directors at LC nationals have the option of seeding the 200s by time-only if the timeline looks particularly bad.

I would much rather get a Masters-PB than win, but I wouldn't mind getting a win with a bad time. I guess it really depends on the meet and how everyone else is swimming. if I have a tough line up. let's say the 100fly 2 events after the 50br I would rather have a high placing than a PB since I know i will not be 100% for the 100fly.

I like the racing part the best. A tight race against anyone is a far better memory than a PB. If that person is someone you have to race against over and over the the memories of those races grow and can be replayed with that person over and over, which is a great deal of fun. There is one guy I swim against over and over. I know how he swims and he knows how I swim. I go out fast, die and try to hold on and he starts slower and builds. By the last 75 we tend to be very close to one another. I am just hoping the pool will get shorter and he is swimming like a mad man to catch me. This has happened over and over and only twice out of the 15 or so times we have raced has either of us made PBs.

I would take a PB over place any time. When I tell my parents my meet results I always start with my times. They always ask me for my places. I have to usually think about that part since to me, I'm racing myself more than the field - except Nationals. Then it's a little more even of PB and placing.

Good post! PB every time... oh, and open seeding, cause you meet more people that way and you don't suffer the indignity of gasping at the wall while your "competition is already granting press quotes in their warm-ups! :blush:

I'll take a PB everytime. A) I'm not going to legitimately win anything, ever. B) It's hard enough just getting 3rd out of 4 or what not. If I have to use beating other folks as a barometer of my awesomeness, then I really do suck as a person. What he said.