Why isn't this taken seriously?

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

orca1946 — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:27:26 GMT

In Illinois, at the J V level, we still have the 100 IM in dual meets. It helps new kids get into the I M wihtout doing 50 fly right at the start.

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

Former Member — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 11:34:54 GMT

Thanks for posting, though there is no real answer to my question. It still is weird that other countries do the 100 IM but not us. :argue: :chug::frustrated:

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

pwolf66 — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:39:49 GMT

Good point and one that I've wondered about. Could this distance change be a contributing factor (granted a minor one at best) to a drop in participation in swimming during this age up period?

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

Redbird Alum — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 03:36:32 GMT

You would think that is true and this would seem to confirm it: YouTube- All Star Individual Medley . But, look what happens when they get older: YouTube- Aaron Peirsol, Ian Crocker, Rogers, Chapman - 100 IM Encore OMG!!! The comparison made me split my sides laughing! Thanks for this post! :)

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

Former Member — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:39:08 GMT

As previously stated, I think it just a historical issue with time to run swim meets. Few event offer all the swim event, so only have under-12 do 100 IM and over-12 do 200IM/400 IM is our best guess. Just like few elite event have few 50m events, we can only guess. FINA does keep world records for the 100IM SCM and all 50m events: www.fina.org/.../index.php So at least some events do hold 100 IM SCM for over 12-year olds !

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

pakman044 — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 07:38:13 GMT

When I turned 13, I felt a sharp jump from being able to swim 50's to be jumped up to 100's and 200's. While recently some meets have begun to add these events in the older age groups (slower though than the rate at which the younger age groups are getting the longer events that didn't used to be available to them), it's still slow. There still aren't any motivational time standards for the short events for 13 & Up swimmers, which makes it hard to set cuts for these events (other than the "use your 100 time as entry and qualification for the event"). Ultimately this is going to be the way it is until these events are added to the Olympics (they're even at world champs, and the world champs selections for the US don't take the 50's into account). Still there's nothing that stops a meet host from having 50's or the 100 IM for any age group as sanctioned events, in the same sense that there's nothing that stops a Masters meet host from having sanctioned 25's (or even for an LMSC/Zone to keep records for 25's to boot). If you want wider acceptance of these events, urge your meet hosts to add these events, and then patronize them. No meet host is going to complain about events if they get teams to come to the meet and are short on the timeline to boot. Patrick King

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

Former Member — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 05:01:20 GMT

I think the 50 fly, back, and *** and the 100 IM (for short course) should absolutely be added to USA swimming meet line-ups. Sprinting is FUN. When our sport is 'competing' against soccer, football, baseball, etc. for participation among teenagers, why not add these events? For those kids already excelling at the 200 strokes or the 400 IM, great. No need to make any changes. But those events are very daunting for many, especially 13-year-olds that have just aged out of the 50s. My son has been swimming for two years and is almost 13. He's enjoying it and doing pretty well. But the idea of swimming a 200 fly (in lieu of the 50) or 400 IM (instead of the 100) in a few months just makes him laugh with scorn. So, he'll have fewer options for races in meets in the foreseeable future. Is this anyway to encourage participation in the sport?

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

no200fly — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 05:00:20 GMT

I thought about this at practice last evening as I was pounding out a set of 100 IM's... From each wall, based on good start, streamlining, SDK's and such, upper aged, elite swimmers would only be taking a very few strokes on any given 25 length in the 100Y SC IM event. It would be a start and turns race more than anything else. ... not that my start and turns would put me in that class, mind you. There is always plenty of strokework for me in any event (especially that evil stroke where frog legs abound!). :D You would think that is true and this would seem to confirm it: YouTube- All Star Individual Medley . But, look what happens when they get older: YouTube- Aaron Peirsol, Ian Crocker, Rogers, Chapman - 100 IM Encore

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

Redbird Alum — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 04:49:32 GMT

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

knelson — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:59:30 GMT

My best guess is that there is no analog to the 100 IM in long course competition. For every other event there is an analogous event between short course and long course formats. I admit it's not a great reason, but that's probably the reason. The event I'd like to see added is the 800 medley relay. The reason for having the women do only an 800 free at the Olympics is historical, I presume. Back in the early 20th century I'm sure it was based in sexism, but I doubt anyone thinks the 1500 is too far for women today. They swim the 800 because they've always swum the 800. Sort of like how women play best of three sets in tennis and men do best of five in all the major tournaments.

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

Former Member — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:24:52 GMT

It makes no sense to me not to have a 1500. The 10k is fun to watch! looking forward to seeing it swum in the Serpentine.

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

SLOmmafan — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 11:59:21 GMT

I have always thought that adding the additional stokes "50 meter races" into major competition would be good from a viewing standpoint. As a distance swimmer myself I appreciate the effort and training that go into a 1500+ race...but when I tune in to the Olympic games it's all about the relays and sprints.

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

jim thornton — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 11:49:45 GMT

I don't pretend to know the answer, but my speculation is that there are so many various swimming events now that to add yet another one to the mix for elite swimmers, who presumably should have more than enough speed and stamina to swim the 200 and 400 i.m.'s, might just be too much. If you add the 100 i.m. for "pure sprinters" then why not the 800 or 1600 i.m. for "distance" types? The 100 i.m. is a USMS race, so I suppose if you hang on long enough, you can get back to your 11-12 year old roots eventually. I think a more pressing need is to add a 1500 swim for women. Having just finished the USMS 2-mile cable championships, where many of the top swimmers (Abbie Nun, Eney Jones) were women, it really seems crazy to me that the Olympics apparently think this distance is too far for our little flowers to motor. Our little flowers, alas, arranged themselves nicely on my grave at Chris Greene!

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

knelson — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 10:58:12 GMT

Turns out the women's 800 wasn't even added to the program until 1968! I figured it had been around since the early days, but I was wrong.

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

jim thornton — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 02:06:12 GMT

Sort of like how women play best of three sets in tennis and men do best of five in all the major tournaments. This is another outrage, in my opinion. I think it might stem back to the Chris Everett era where women tended to have extremely long baseline rallies and men tended to serve, volley, point over. But now you get these matches that last 5 hours for men and 37 minutes for women. Absurd!

RE: Why isn't this taken seriously?

philoswimmer — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 01:29:19 GMT

Back in the early 20th century I'm sure it was based in sexism In spite of Gertrude Ederle swimming the English Channel in 1926...