Open the Masters Records?

As a 25 year old USMS athlete, I recognize that I am not an elite swimmer by any stretch of the imagination. There are plenty of other people my age (not to mention both younger and older) that would blow me out of the water. My general impression from swimming masters is that there exists a general understanding that most of the under-30 crowd swimming masters are not going to be ex-Olympians or NCAA champs (my apologies to the very few that might be out there). The reality is that even a semi seasoned NCAA D1 swimmer could come in to USMS and set a good deal of records. Take the mens 18-24 SCY records - 50 y free in 20.25. Not going to deny this is a crazy fast time for most people, but the entire field at the NCAA championships this year swam faster then this time. Should Ceasar Cielo hold the 50 y free records for FINA Masters because he went a sub-19 at the NCAA's? Would it even be in good sport for a swimmer actively competing the swimming "big leagues" to come in and dominate in minors?

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 Totally agree about FINA WRs: I think they should represent the fastest that anyone has ever swum legally in that particular age bracket. BTW: FINA does not recognize the 18-24 age group. "Masters" begins for them at age 25. But it seems logical that USMS records -- what we generally consider "national records" -- should be for people registered with USMS at the time of the swim.

I would tend to think that Masters might become intimidating to some, knowing that the likes of Jason Lezak were in "our" ranks. :2cents: I disagree. I think everyone (even those who got beaten by him) got a great kick out of Rowdy Gaines swimming USMS Nationals. I think we'd all love it if Dara could fit another Masters Nats in her busy schedule. I'd personally love to see Jason Lezak and the other "old pros" swimming at Nationals. I think they'd bring exposure to the meet, add additional "holy crap that's fast" factor and just be cool. If we're celebrating excellence as we age, these people should be encouraged to come (providing, of course, USMS doesn't have to pay them their appearance fees:)). Totally agree about FINA WRs: I think they should represent the fastest that anyone has ever swum legally in that particular age bracket. BTW: FINA does not recognize the 18-24 age group. "Masters" begins for them at age 25. But it seems logical that USMS records -- what we generally consider "national records" -- should be for people registered with USMS at the time of the swim. I'm with you.

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 I get your point and realize this is just an off-the-cuff example, but wanted to point out that it's flawed example. :) Baseball statistics are influenced by others on your team (you can't bat in runners who aren't on base), who you are facing (opposing pitcher and defense), where you are playing (field effects), and more. Swimmers records aren't influenced by anything like this. Everyone races against the same clock. If I play in a baseball league and bat .300 against pitchers throwing 75 mph I can draw no conclusions on how I'd hit against major league pitching. In contrast, as a swimmer, I know exactly how I stack up against Jason Lezak or Michael Phelps just by comparing our times.

I understand what you're saying. And I too think it would be great exposure for USMS to have these guys, and indeed Rowdy (who just seems to be an overall nice guy) swim Masters. I'm not trying to exclude anyone. But I think that's the line. IMHO, they (Lezak, et al) should have to swim in USMS meets to get USMS records. If that is the goal (which I doubt). To be honest, I have so little respect for FINA that I don't really care about the world records. I realize someone needs to keep track, I just don't know if they are the best organization for that (they can't even regulate swimsuits!). Overall, it would make sense to have straight age-group records in the sport of swimming. 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.

I get your point and realize this is just an off-the-cuff example, but wanted to point out that it's flawed example. :) Baseball statistics are influenced by others on your team (you can't bat in runners who aren't on base), who you are facing (opposing pitcher and defense), where you are playing (field effects), and more. Swimmers records aren't influenced by anything like this. I disagree with that, particularly at big meets your competition can definitely bring out the best in you and change the way you race. If you are way ahead of the field then you might back off either consciously or unconsciously and not get that world record. While I think the current fina world record holder would still have the fastest masters swim time should they care to do it, they set their record against a different field of performers with different things on the line. Occasionally it happens at a run race that an amateur, starting in a different wave has a faster time than the pros. In that case the amateur does not get the money simply because the pros were racing against each other, not the amateur. There is no way to say how the race would have played out had the amateur started with and ran with the pros. I find this to be pretty analogous. It's an interesting point to discuss anyway, which is what the author wanted.

Occasionally it happens at a run race that an amateur, starting in a different wave has a faster time than the pros. In that case the amateur does not get the money simply because the pros were racing against each other, not the amateur. There is no way to say how the race would have played out had the amateur started with and ran with the pros. Yes, but you're talking about event placement rather than records. If that amateur ran the fastest marathon ever would it count as the record? In swimming if you placed ninth in prelims and missed the A finals you could still establish a world record in the B final even though you'd finish in ninth place.

In golf don't they have the seniors? To me that's like Masters. Why is their USMS if not to give adult masters a chance to compete with other like adults? I'm sorry, but Dara Torres is not like most masters women I know!

I contend that this would decrease interest in the 25-29 and 30-34 age groups. If I were 30 years old and a fairly good swimmer, I would lose any desire to even check the record books, knowing that Lezak's 47.8 is the Masters world record. And I would lose any desire to compete, that is, if my goal were to chase world records. I wouldn't mind in the least if Jason, Dara, Cesar, Aaron or any other Olympian over 25 showed up at a Masters meet and broke world records. Dara did it at the 2006 worlds, and everyone was thrilled to see her. Gary Hall showed up with the Race Club in 2004 and the meet stopped to watch them swim the 100 free. Masters world records are called "Masters" world records for a reason. They must be done by registered Masters swimmers in sanctioned Masters meets. I know USMS records can be set anywhere at any meet, so if no one minds, then by all means, let Jason Lezak's 47.8 count as a national record. But the swimmer should be a registered Masters swimmer.

Yep, I agree too that masters records should be open to everyone in that age group, not just those who happen to swim masters meets. Right now masters records, especially in the younger few age groups, feel somewhat arbitrary. If you set a new masters record as a 20-year-old in the 50 free you are not the fastest 20-year-old to swim the 50 free ever, you are just the fastest 20-year-old to swim the 50 free who has chosen to swim in a masters meet. Worldwide this would be relatively easy to do, the same organization, FINA, keeps masters world records and "real" world records. Nationally it would be a little trickier since we have USAS and USMS which are separate organizations. Just like I'm guessing you need to be a member of USAS to set a "real" national record you should need to be a member of USMS to set a masters national record, but you shouldn't have to do it in a masters meet. To take it a step further it would make sense to me, in a perfect world, for USMS to be a subset of USAS and have a single organizing body for competitive swimming for the country. But I realize that in the real world the size of the organizations and politics and the differing needs of an age-grouper and masters swimmer would likely prevent it from all falling under one umbrella.