I think it was Ande that said "it's not how fast you swim, it's how fast you slow down." I read that a few years ago and keep on coming back to it as I have watched my kids grow in their USA Swimming careers. When kids are around 8-10, many of the races are 50s. Lots of kids can swim relatively fast 50s compared to other kids even when their stroke technique is truly awful. But then once the clock strikes 11 (years old), all of the 50s go away (less one) - and magically many of the kids with bad technique who seemed fast start losing to kids in the 100s and 200s with superior strokes. My question is at what age are we masters swimmers when we start thinking 50 backstroke, 50 butterfly and 50 breaststroke are OK to race again? It is not OK. It brings our sport down to a level where people who train only 100s or less and focus on 25s are taking over our pools. No more I say!!! I think USMS rules should only allow these races for people in their 70s and older. Who is with me?!!!
:worms: :bolt:
Former Member
50s are not real swimming races
Sounds to me like someone either sucks at swimming 50's, or is simply annoyed that people who don't swim 5k a day can be fast.
I can go swim a 500 or mile and make 50 mistakes and you'd be hard pressed to find them because a tenth is near meaningless... let alone i have time to think about all parts of my swim without trashing a race.
The thing i love about the 50 free.... to go your fastest, you can't make one single mistake. A perfect 50 relies on training almost more than a distance event. It's so fast, and there's no time to think. From the start, to the turn, to the technique of each individual arm pull and kick. If you try to think about even one part you're going to mess up another. This entire race of perfection must be done as instinct That's what makes the perfect 50 a thing of beauty.
I've been swimming the 50 my whole swimming career (almost 20 years) and I can count on one hand the amount of times I feel I swam a perfect race. For you to even imply it's not a real race? I don't even know how to correctly respond to that kind of stupidity.
Do you feel the same way about the 100m dash on the track?
Although I think that Cielo could also swim a better 1,500 than Salnikov could a 50...
Probably true, but give Salnikov a break--he's gotta be 50 years old now! :)
It seems that there is a sizable group out there that thinks that a good 50 breastroker can take a good 400 IMer any day. Who am I to argue with that?
It seems that you've missed the point. Who cares? You seem focused on creating an event hierarchy.
Anyway, 50 breaststrokers and 400 IMers are both a little odd. :bolt:
It seems that there is a sizable group out there that thinks that a good 50 breastroker can take a good 400 IMer any day. Who am I to argue with that?
In what? MMA?
In other words, it's easier to achieve a top ten time in a distance event simply because the fast swimmers (i.e. sprinters) would rather not swim anything that painful or difficult.
I find 100s incredibly painful and exhausting. You know you can't measure difficulty or pain by the number of lengths necessarily, Gull.
And that's it. I think I can take Allen Stark in the 400 IM, especially if he wasn't doing that damnable butterfrog. :D
First of all, I would like to thank USMS Fan for provoking a lively discussion. I do not think he is a troll, whatever this means exactly, but rather just a lively provocateur of debate for its own sake. Face it: without the suit issue to dead horse beat to death again and again, we argument buffs need fresh meat. I think USMS Fan has simply provided a fine hamburger slurry of it for our respective opinings.
The way I look at it is humans like to test the full spectrum of genetic/epigenetic/trainable attributes in the population at large.
Obviously, if you are a fast twitch predominate lunkhead, you are going to love sprinting. If you are a slow twitcher you are going to love distance. And if you are an amalgam of the two, you will love middle distance.
If your legs are bowled and/or you suffer other monstrous limb deformities, you might even like breaststroke!
The world is filled with all morphs of us, enough in each bin to create little competitive microcosms.
I, for instance, would love to see a middle distance swimming event during which the competitors must simultaneously come up with amusing vlog topics and worry themselves sick about their health. But there just aren't enough of my kind to justify creating a bin into which a competitive microcosm for such a parochial event might take place.
On the other hand, there are plenty of Leslie's and Paul Wolfe's who like to sprint (because, quite frankly, they just don't have the character to truly suffer); and there are plenty of Dave Barra's and Amanda Chickens of the Sea who like to circumnavigate populated islands nonstop (because, quite frankly, they are damaged goods.)
There are very few of us middle distance freestylers who truly define what swimming is all about--a magnificent bouillabaisse of elegance, power, endurance, courage, beauty, and magnetism to the young women who actually jockey about for the chance to shave our silvermane backs!
But do I want to consign sprints and distance or even that ludicrous breaststroke to the platypusary of swimming?
No.
For I understand that such comic events only serve as a foil to the grandest event of all: the 200 freestyle, race of the Lochtes, Biederbixbindernedermens, Thorntons, and similarly glorious Boy Kings of the Water!
platypusary?
I think you've been over-using this word lately.
Do 200 freestylers really need to shave their backs with all that elegance they have going on?
