Interesting article argues Masters records should recognize all sanctioned swims by age-eligible swimmers (e.g., Torres, Lezak, Foster, etc.)
www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/.../21313.asp
However, the circumstances are quite different for elite USA-S swimmers and elite Masters. Lezak, et al., are paid to swim (housing, food, endorsements). They are still "real" swimmers, in that, that is what they do. That is a main focus in their life, and in fact, for some, their livelihood.
Many of the USA-S elite swimmers do not have "real" jobs, or families (children that they are raising, to be clear; of course, except for Dara who has a full time nanny while she trains). On the other hand a lot of masters swimmers would be happy to swim 5x/wk for even an hour. It's not a blame thing, it's just a difference, that's all.
I just always thought of Masters as adults who continue to want to swim, or compete, and also deal with a "real" life every day. And to me that makes the USMS records even more impressive.
Just different circumstances between the USMS swimmer and the USA-S swimmer training as such.
Every once in a while, this issue of "what makes a 'real' masters swimmer" comes up. I remember a slightly unpleasant thread where the accomplishments of Kevin Doak were somewhat demeaned because, essentially, he was young and trained a lot, even though he is a registered USMS swimmer.
Even among "real" masters swimmers, many people's situations are vastly different. You have a single mother of four who might be competing against someone who was never married and has no children and trains for hours every day. Some people don't have access to coached workouts, or even a nice pool. Others retire early in life and like to train to fill the time. Situations differ, that's just the way it is.
But the clock has no sympathy: whoever gets to the wall first wins.
The current definition of a "real" masters swimmer is to be old enough and to be registered with a masters swimming organization. Most professional/elite swimmers can't be bothered to do that, but some do and I would hope they would be welcomed at masters meets even if they don't have a "real" job or a "real" family.
Liking this proposal or not depends on your answer to a few questions:
-- what do you want FINA records to represent? As I said earlier, I like the idea that FINA records are true world records and not just "world records for masters swimmers with jobs and families, unless they don't have those things, and provided they don't train too seriously or swim too fast."
-- should FINA records only be set at designated masters meets?
-- does a person need to be registered with a masters organization (the USMS of their country) to set a FINA record?
I think reasonable people can differ in their answers to these questions.
I focused only on FINA records since they are "world" records, but I suppose parallel considerations apply for national records for any particular country.
However, the circumstances are quite different for elite USA-S swimmers and elite Masters. Lezak, et al., are paid to swim (housing, food, endorsements). They are still "real" swimmers, in that, that is what they do. That is a main focus in their life, and in fact, for some, their livelihood.
Many of the USA-S elite swimmers do not have "real" jobs, or families (children that they are raising, to be clear; of course, except for Dara who has a full time nanny while she trains). On the other hand a lot of masters swimmers would be happy to swim 5x/wk for even an hour. It's not a blame thing, it's just a difference, that's all.
I just always thought of Masters as adults who continue to want to swim, or compete, and also deal with a "real" life every day. And to me that makes the USMS records even more impressive.
Just different circumstances between the USMS swimmer and the USA-S swimmer training as such.
Every once in a while, this issue of "what makes a 'real' masters swimmer" comes up. I remember a slightly unpleasant thread where the accomplishments of Kevin Doak were somewhat demeaned because, essentially, he was young and trained a lot, even though he is a registered USMS swimmer.
Even among "real" masters swimmers, many people's situations are vastly different. You have a single mother of four who might be competing against someone who was never married and has no children and trains for hours every day. Some people don't have access to coached workouts, or even a nice pool. Others retire early in life and like to train to fill the time. Situations differ, that's just the way it is.
But the clock has no sympathy: whoever gets to the wall first wins.
The current definition of a "real" masters swimmer is to be old enough and to be registered with a masters swimming organization. Most professional/elite swimmers can't be bothered to do that, but some do and I would hope they would be welcomed at masters meets even if they don't have a "real" job or a "real" family.
Liking this proposal or not depends on your answer to a few questions:
-- what do you want FINA records to represent? As I said earlier, I like the idea that FINA records are true world records and not just "world records for masters swimmers with jobs and families, unless they don't have those things, and provided they don't train too seriously or swim too fast."
-- should FINA records only be set at designated masters meets?
-- does a person need to be registered with a masters organization (the USMS of their country) to set a FINA record?
I think reasonable people can differ in their answers to these questions.
I focused only on FINA records since they are "world" records, but I suppose parallel considerations apply for national records for any particular country.
