Beat Watch 2009!

Perhaps not always though. It's just flat out tough in SCY. I know plenty of women trying/hoping/aspiring to make it into the top ten. I'm predicting #11 or 12 for me in the 200 IM. What, me competitive, Jim? :angel: Actually, some of the women in the 40-44 & 45-49 age groups are faster than their youngins. And check out Traci Granger's time of 26.77 in the 50 fly at age 50! Leslie, you didn't swim the 200 IM rested so #11 or 12 unrested is pretty nice! Thanks for letting me know the female perspective on this extremely important issue!!!!!

Three guys in my age group beat my best in the 50 fly. One did so handily, but the other two were by .02 and .01. Aughghgh! :rolleyes:

Leslie, you didn't swim the 200 IM rested so #11 or 12 unrested is pretty nice! Ugh, I did rest a couple days for that meet. The real problem was that I looked like a pink flower during the swim. At the rate you seem to be training and improving, Tom, I see many TTs ahead for you.

Scott-- You might come across the term "sand bagging" here, too. That's when you enter a seed time that is significantly slower than you actually are able to swim. A notorious sandbagger at Colonies Zones entered a 53.5 in the 100 freestyle, which was just a little slower than the 53.25 I entered. This guy ended up doing a :48, and I ended up swallowing his wake. Sandbagging is somewhat frowned upon, especially when it is this egregious. The same guy entered a 1:30 in the 100 i.m. and broke a minute easily. His rationale, I heard, was that he wanted to ensure smooth water. But a bit depressing for the sexagenarians he almost lapped.

Scott-- You might come across the term "sand bagging" here, too. That's when you enter a seed time that is significantly slower than you actually are able to swim. A notorious sandbagger at Colonies Zones entered a 53.5 in the 100 freestyle, which was just a little slower than the 53.25 I entered. This guy ended up doing a :48, and I ended up swallowing his wake. Sandbagging is somewhat frowned upon, especially when it is this egregious. The same guy entered a 1:30 in the 100 i.m. and broke a minute easily. His rationale, I heard, was that he wanted to ensure smooth water. But a bit depressing for the sexagenarians he almost lapped. I could have sandbagged my 400 IM at Colonies Zones due to the 200 fly shortly after, but I choose to take accept the challenge of swimming the 400 IM and 200 fly 20 minutes apart. I probably lost 5 seconds on my 200 fly but I am better swimmer for taking the Michael Phelps/Ryan Lochte route in this matter. Then again, there is no sandbagging at the Olympics. My fellow age grouper could have sandbagged the 400 IM at Colonies Zones because he had to do the 100 back like 5 minutes later. He choose the "man up" route as well. He probably could have done a :56 in his 100 back but had to settle for a :58.

I am happy to report that I only got bumped down one spot in the 200 free in the 35-39 age group. I am the seventh fastest 200 freestyler in my age group? What's up with that? you're a breaststroker...freestyle is child's play in comparison.

Tom--in terms of women, I think that for those who are around 50-ish + now, most did not get the benefit of Title iX, and I do think that it is probably relatively easier to make the top 10 for them. However, Rob Butcher told me that 62 percent of the USMS swimmers now registered in the 20-29 age groups are women. The competition in years to come will be increasingly brutal for the distaff gender. Um, check our own poster Ahelee's time for the 400 IM, a national record: 1 Osborn, Ahelee Sue 51 MVN 5:12.02 4:56.39N 30.44 1:07.53 (37.09) 1:45.14 (37.61) 2:22.32 (37.18) 3:05.29 (42.97) 3:48.74 (43.45) 4:22.83 (34.09) 4:56.39 (33.56) Maybe there aren't as many vying for Top Ten in the 50+ age groups for women, but there still sure are some fast times without the benefit of Title IX! Sorry, but I am amazed by the 50+ women's top times so far at this meet. Very very inspiring. Probably my main problem is that I am an acoustic swimmer. The pauses in the acoustic songs represent my small pauses at the wall for air... Maybe if I keep training hard until I am 80, and start listening to Metallica or AC/DC or, why not, Talking Heads . . .

Sorry to jump in here, and if my question is going to mess up this thread, just ignore me. But I need to do a little learnin' here. I don't know how to read the times that you folks are posting. If someone would please take the time to breakdown one of the swimmers times I would sure appreciate it. Maybe Don Gilchrist's time in the initial post for the 400 IM since there seems to be quite a bit to it. Thanks a lot, Scott

Sorry to jump in here, and if my question is going to mess up this thread, just ignore me. But I need to do a little learnin' here. I don't know how to read the times that you folks are posting. If someone would please take the time to breakdown one of the swimmers times I would sure appreciate it. Maybe Don Gilchrist's time in the initial post for the 400 IM since there seems to be quite a bit to it. Thanks a lot, Scott 1 Gilchrist, Donald55 NCMS 4:55.00 SEED TIME 4:41.09 ACTUAL TIME 29.32 1:01.98 (32.66) 1:39.57 (37.59) 2:16.63 (37.06) 2:56.44 (39.81) 3:36.93 (40.49) 4:09.45 (32.52) 4:41.09 (31.64) The time is give cumulative by 50 yard "splits" the individual split is shown in parentheses. E.G. The first 50 yards he swam in 29.3 secs, the second was in (32.66) secs totally 1:01.98

All right. Thanks a lot. I see where the numbers are coming from now. I'll go look at some more results to get a better handle on it. Dang, that Gilchrist fellow is the same age as me. Except this is me ->:cane: I won't even ask why the big difference between the seed & actual time. The heat of competition I suppose. Thanks again,