Open the Masters Records?

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Former Member — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 05:09:46 GMT

Michael, I used to support the side that said: let’s get the best time by whomever by age group 25-29, 30-34, etc regardless of where they swim (Olympics, Nationals or Masters). Currently I’m thinking more your way. If FINA wanted to track these records, fine – let them do it. Interesting stuff (Torres, Foster, Hall, etc). However, for Masters records, they should have to record these swims at a Masters meet. This forces the ‘elites’ to swim in a Masters meet, allowing all ages (us oldies) to see how well they perform, and have them to see all ages swim (and hopefully inspire them to compete as they age). If they don’t compete in Masters, they probably won’t know it even exists and if they tried, they might find out that the competition is a lot tougher than they thought. Recently in Canada, we have seen some Olympic gold medalists (Baumann & Tewkesbury) and ex-National team members reappear in Masters - this has given a great boost to the credibility of competitive Masters swimming. Ian

RE: Open the Masters Records?

michaelmoore — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 04:56:13 GMT

Liking this proposal or not depends on your answer to a few questions: -- what do you want FINA records to represent? . . . -- 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? IMHO FINA Masters records to represent the records set at Masters meets. The person should be registered as a Master's swimmer with their federation. I would like to support those organizations that organize and run Masters meets. When a great swimmer comes to a Masters meet there is a lot of "buzz." Other races stop and competitors watch the event where the fast swimmers are competing. I like that and I want to see it continue. (I thought it was great to Gary Hall, JR and Sabir Mohamad compete at a US Nationals. I stopped to watch a relay that had Dara Torres and Rowdy Gains swim - then get beat by a Colorado team that had Rich Abrams hold off Rowdy on the final leg.) I want people supporting those meets that are sanctioned by US Masters Swimming rather than an another adult swimming association. Of course, these are reasonable questions about which people can disagree. wearing my USMS on my chest. -michael

RE: Open the Masters Records?

michaelmoore — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 04:39:02 GMT

Anyone, was Torres's Olympic times eligible for FINA Masters Records. Just wondering. FINA Masters records must be set at a meet that has been sanctioned as a Masters meet by its federation. The Olympics were not a sanctioned Masters meet hence that records is not eligible. US Masters records could be set at a recognized meet, if one wants to do the paperwork, but it would be a US record not a world record. -michael

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Former Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 13:50:45 GMT

Forgive me if this has been covered before, but I don't think many recognize the irony with FINA world records. If a masters swimmer swims in a USA-S meet or a FINA sanctioned meet, like the Olympics, and sets a FINA world record - a "true" world record - FINA will not recognize the record as a Masters World Record. To me, that is just plain silly. Even having a USMS record recognized from a non USMS meet can be a challenge. My first time under 1:00 in the 100 Meter back, was effectively a Masters World record. I knew it would not be recognized as a Masters WR, but I thought having it recognized by USMS would be easy. I was wrong. USMS wanted the original tape from the meet. The meet was a USA-S Nationals and the meet officials would not give me the original tape, which I fully understood. The president of Omega timing systems signed a copy of the tape, as a compromise, but this evidence was not accepted. Perhaps I could have argued this point, but I just laughed it off, realizing that I would have had an easier time getting a "true" World Record recognized from the meet. I don't know why Dara's times were not recognized from Beijing, but it could be that she had a hard time getting proof of her swim. LOL

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Former Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 12:51:02 GMT

Open question: Would you rather set a USMS record in 100yds of your favorite stroke or go a second faster in a meet that wasn't sanctioned?

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Karen Duggan — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 12:51:02 GMT

I think I'm being ignorant here, so someone please correct me if I'm wrong! In that article recreational swimmers are mad b/c Masters swimmers are swimming at their meet and taking their medals? If they are just rec swimmers (to use their terms) WHY are they competing? I don't get it. If they don't want Masters swimmers, exclude them. Simple. And let me preface my next point by saying: I don't have a problem with former, or current Olympians, coming in to USMS and kicking my butt (or anyone else's), but I think they need to be registered with USMS. My point is that I would fully expect an Olympian to beat me, so what? I am not in to USMS for medals? I'm a grown up now, and I could go down to the trophy store and go crazy buying whatever I wanted :lmao: To me USMS is not about the medals, or even records, it's about still being able to compete, and meeting the amazing people and their "real life" stories. (cue foofy music) :blush:

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Rich Abrahams — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 12:38:12 GMT

I think the following post from 2003 which laments masters swimmers participating in the Senior games puts some of the complaints about world class swimmers setting masters records into perspective. I guess it all depends on your particular viewpoint. I'm with Chris on this whole issue. "I just competed (and I use the term loosely) in the 2003 National Senior Games and found it very disappointing to see that Master swimmers have pretty much taken over the awards platform. This event used to be mainly for recreational athletes who either could not or did not want to compete at a higher level. This was our opportunity to have a moment in the spotlight by competing against athletes who were “equal” to our level of skill. Our moment to believe we were the best in our group and to share our victories with our friends. By coming to this event, you (the Master swimmers) have assured that no one who is a recreational athlete will ever get a medal and you have pushed the minimum standard time so low that many athletes no longer qualify to even come to the National event. In talking with over 85 athletes of various ages, it was generally agreed that within the next few years, this will be “just another Master’s venue”. You already have four National Events EACH YEAR, the SC Yards, SC Meters, LC Meters, and the YMCA Nationals. Why can’t you leave ONE event that takes places every OTHER year for the swimmers who will never be at any of your meets? Out of the 85 swimmers I spoke with, an overwhelming percent said they would probably not go to the event in Pittsburgh, PA since there would probably be more Masters there and no place for them. I realize that this event is open to all seniors, but I ask you, how would you feel to have your only chance to win a medal taken away by someone who probably has a box full of them? If you look at the times, you will see that that the top three places in nearly all events went to Masters who all hold top 10 times in USMS. So the athletes, who are not Masters, had to settle for ribbons. There were so many disappointed families, friends, and swimmers who had hoped to win a medal and stand on the awards platform and share their shining moment with their families. Instead it was Masters and the majority of them didn’t even bring families. It was “just another meet” for them. I’m sure I’m going to be made the “bad guy” by writing this, but my mother is 83 years old and watched her medal go to a Master swimmer and my heart broke for her. She may not be here for any future games and she really worked hard to do well, then you guys showed up. Please, leave the recreational National Event for us and be happy with your four events each year."

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Former Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 09:33:18 GMT

Just love your remarks about this issue! Here, In Europe the main question is if we allow swimmers to have double license! We are far away from accepting any time as a “master time “ according to age. Any register Master swimmer in most Europeans countries that dedicates more than 1hour working out is consider either “professional” or taking doping! Getting away from the influences spread in Europe; yes, any time should be eligible for master word record according to age group. I will be crucified here for my remarkJ Medals, records are just some of the issues at a Master event: being part of a specific group, competing according to personal goals, meeting people, travelling, etc, are others issues motivating swimmers to participate at a Master event. ana

RE: Open the Masters Records?

tjrpatt — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 08:01:11 GMT

Don't we already have USMS-registered swimmers swimming at age-group type meets, and getting their times recognized by USMS? I really don't see how this is different. Anyone who is a USMS-registered swimmer, and who goes about the process to get the swim recognized (pool measured, officiating, etc), why shouldn't the swim count towards USMS records? They do, but you can't get a Masters FINA record at a USA-S meet. In addition, I don't think that Dara Torres was allowed to use her times from the Beijing Olympics to count for USMS Records. I think that part is correct. Anyone, was Torres's Olympic times eligible for FINA Masters Records. Just wondering.

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Former Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 06:36:41 GMT

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Former Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 05:39:50 GMT

What, a VO2 MAX graduated scale so late bloomers would get records too?

RE: Open the Masters Records?

aztimm — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 03:21:54 GMT

RE: Open the Masters Records?

aquageek — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 03:21:45 GMT

I don't care whether a world class swimmer is registered as a Masters or not, but am curious about the top times ever posted in each age group irregardless of what type of meet the swimmer competed in. I even get a kick out of hearing about great workout performances. I don't understand this. Who is running swim meets other than USMS for people over (for the most part) early 30s? I guess we could all compete in USA Swimming meets if USMS didn't exist. USMS is an organization. Either join or go away but your records don't count if you don't join and it's not real hard to join.

RE: Open the Masters Records?

knelson — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 03:15:07 GMT

Yeah, but what about FINA world records? The original post linking the Swimming World editorial only discussed FINA records, not USMS. Most people in this thread seem to agree that USMS records should be set by USMS registered swimmers.

RE: Open the Masters Records?

isobel — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 03:12:00 GMT

I think Great Bay Masters has a calculation that factors age into times: www.egswim.com/.../RatingTime.html I like keeping my comparisons local (to NEM) http://www.egswim.com/ne/. But at Worlds, it was exciting to swim in same heat as a former Olympic swimmer (can't remember who it was but she swam faster by about 2 minutes than her seed time). Most people on this bulletin board are as to me as Olympic swimmers are to you. I have my own goals, humble but satisfying. However, if I were an elite masters swimmer and suddenly found myself in a field of Olympic swimmers, even if they were swimming as USMS members, I'd feel a little cheated. Though at Harvard we had an Olympic triathlon dude swim the 50 free and it was very exciting to watch; he looked like a hovercraft. So I like the idea of being able to watch the Olympians close up (how cool could that be!), but feel for the elite masters who should not (IMHO) be comparing themselves to this group, and whose amazing times should not be bumped down as a result. As someone else posted, it confuses the whole idea of masters swimming, which is for regular people who love to swim and want to continue competing as adults, as opposed to professional swimmers who are in a league unto themselves. I would hate to see meets become intimidating for the slower swimmers, or for the older swimmers. It's very inspiring to see John Merrill (sp), age 94, I think, knock 2 minutes off his distance time from last year. Pretty darn cool. Right now masters meets are very open; if they opened in the fullest sense to the very fastest swimmers, this openness and awe of how swimming can aid longevity and connection to cool parts of life might get lost (racing at age 94 sure beats drooling over pudding in a nursing home). Though I do see that if someone joins masters and wants to race in masters meets, so they should. My memory from Worlds at Stanford is that someone beat Torres in one event. I may be wrong. The usual 3 a.m. incoherent thread....

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Redbird Alum — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 02:54:58 GMT

There's a reason they are called USMS records. They were set by USMS registered swimmers. As long as someone is registered, they count!

RE: Open the Masters Records?

knelson — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 01:50:29 GMT

As someone else posted, it confuses the whole idea of masters swimming, which is for regular people who love to swim and want to continue competing as adults, as opposed to professional swimmers who are in a league unto themselves. Here's what the USMS website has to say: United States Masters Swimming (USMS) is a national organization that provides organized workouts, competitions, clinics and workshops for adults aged 18 and over. Programs are open to all adult swimmers (fitness, triathlete, competitive, non-competitive) who are dedicated to improving their fitness through swimming. From http://www.usms.org/about.php I don't really see anything in that wording about 'regular people.' Basically USMS is for anyone 18 or over who wants to swim, whether for fitness, competition, water safety, whatever. If you choose to compete, I think you need to be willing to compete against all comers, from those who are getting in the water after a twenty year layoff to current Olympians.

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Former Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 16:51:57 GMT

I enjoy reading about record breaking times from the human potential perspective. How fast can a 45 year old woman swim is more interesting to me than what type of meet she was competing in.

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Karen Duggan — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 12:58:01 GMT

I would tend to think that Masters might become intimidating to some, knowing that the likes of Jason Lezak were in "our" ranks. :2cents: You have MLB and you have adult baseball leagues. I doubt that the adult baseball leagues would like to have to compete with MLB's records, no matter how tainted with steroids they might be! :) Mike- I agree. And I do believe that world records for swimming are listed in the Guiness Book of World Records. IMHO, that's where they belong.

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Former Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 12:19:47 GMT

I remember Ion had a interesting and humorous position about different records.

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Karen Duggan — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 12:06:05 GMT

I don't agree that they should be opened to USA-S. If these guys come and swim in a Masters meet fine, but their times in the Rome World Championships(!) shouldn't count in USMS. IMHO. I can't imagine that they aspire to break USMS records anyway.

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Chris Stevenson — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 07:45:45 GMT

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.

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Former Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 07:43:43 GMT

The fuss of including Olympians in the Masters rankings might be more of a non-issue after a certain age. It makes total sense to record the fastest time for a given age group...namely the younger ones. Obviously they're already ranked with FINA. I agree with Jeff...that a membership with usms should be required. But would having Olympians at meets discourage the average swimmer from attending? ...or do just the opposite? It would be pretty exciting in my opinion.

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Ahelee Sue Osborn — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 07:29:25 GMT

Derya Buyukuncu swam in the Beijing Olympics for Turkey. Went 55.43 in the 100 back. Three months later, he tore up the 100 back SCM world record at a local Masters meet in California. I was pleased to see him swimming (though a little mad that it meant no #1 time for me in that event) and was proud to see him break Martin Zubero's world record. But what if we counted his55.43 from the Olympics? He wasn't representing Turkey as a Masters swimmer and the time shouldn't count. Derya swims every single day at the 10:00am masters swim practice. He is affiliated with a USMS team. Required to in order to swim with the masters at that time. He represents Turkey in the Olympics because he can... when and if the country has a better backstroker, I know that Derya will welcome the swimmer to their national team. But Derya is legit.

RE: Open the Masters Records?

Former Member — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 07:15:40 GMT

The only thing that matters to me is the integrity of the records. This means events need to be properly sanctioned by the governing body (USMS) and officiated by officials opperating under the USMS umbrella. I know that the rules are 99.99% the same. I know that the same officials who work at USA-S meets work as USMS meets. But if you allow USA-S swims to count towards USMS records, then are you going to start allowing other leagues to count too? Where do you draw that line?