2010 SCM Zone Championships

Jim, I'd say your analysis is pretty accurate. In '09 at the Ron Johnson meet I went a 25.1 for the 50 and a 57.3 for the 100 which may be a bit more comparable in terms of the suit effect (for me more like .7 per 50 and 1.3 for the 100). It's about the same for my LCM times. I think the lack of the tech suit has a bigger effect on my fly times. Rich According to the VA Rating Calculator (which takes aging into account), that 24.93 at age 63 would "degrade" to a 25.36 at age 65. And the 56.63 would become 57.74 two years later. So my estimate of the effect of the tech suit is 0.44 sec in the 50 and 0.94 sec in the 100. We both make what I would consider to be questionable assumptions: you that age has no effect on someone's speed when they are in their mid-60s, me that Rich is in the same shape now as he was two years ago. So I think the "truth" of the tech suit effect (in Rich's case at least) is probably somewhere between our two estimates: 0.5-1.0 sec per 50. Which edge of the range you prefer depends on which assumption you trust more. Rich and Chris, there are all sorts of variables to consider when comparing year to year swimming times in an aging masters swimmer. The two that Chris and I are focusing on are the effect of the suit change (body suit vs. jammer) and the yearly effect of age, especially in the upper decades. Rich, as the Undisputed King of Social Security Vested Sprint Swimming Men, I am wondering what your thoughts are about the impact of age. Chris, I am pretty sure, is arguing that even if you had swum in the body suit this year, your times would have been slower this year compared to last because you are a year older (and subject to forces, like sarcopenia of aging and decreases in maximal heart rate, etc.) that simply impact velocity. Though I agree that there is clearly an age effect across the population, I would argue that: 1) this is mitigated significantly by ongoing training 2) that when swimmers age up, they often--consciously or not--increase their training intensity in the hopes of doing really spectacularly when they become the new babies of the older age; thus the "age effect" is more likely to be seen, practically speaking, in the middle to later part of the age group, that most of us get a "motivational bump" in the first part In any event, Chris's math--again, if I am understanding this correctly--would suggest that the effect of age alone is about .55 seconds per year in the 100 in the mid 60s. I, on the other hand, think that your times slowed down almost entirely because of the suit change, that for the Magnificent Outlier that is Rich Abrahams, the increase in a year or two played virtually no role at all. What say ye? One other question. In my own case, I had a pretty good test comparison in LCM. My 50 slowed by exactly .50 from the summer of 2009 to the summer of 2010. My 100 slowed by exactly .97. These deteriorations, if you additionally factor in the wages of age (as Chris would have us do), would suggest the suit played very little difference--perhaps a little as a quarter second per 50. I just don't buy this. When warming up in a B70, I noticed my natural warm up stroke lead me to take 11-12 strokes per length (in a 25 yard pool); in a jammer, it was 13-15. This isn't just some negligible effect. One last question: do either of you think that the loss of the suit will have more or less of an impact in a short course vs. long course pool? It seems that my yards times to date have been affected more than my LCM times, and I wonder if one of the suit's most helpful aspects was faster, longer glides off the walls?

Jim, I'd say your analysis is pretty accurate. In '09 at the Ron Johnson meet I went a 25.1 for the 50 and a 57.3 for the 100 which may be a bit more comparable in terms of the suit effect (for me more like .7 per 50 and 1.3 for the 100). It's about the same for my LCM times. I think the lack of the tech suit has a bigger effect on my fly times. Rich According to the VA Rating Calculator (which takes aging into account), that 24.93 at age 63 would "degrade" to a 25.36 at age 65. And the 56.63 would become 57.74 two years later. So my estimate of the effect of the tech suit is 0.44 sec in the 50 and 0.94 sec in the 100. We both make what I would consider to be questionable assumptions: you that age has no effect on someone's speed when they are in their mid-60s, me that Rich is in the same shape now as he was two years ago. So I think the "truth" of the tech suit effect (in Rich's case at least) is probably somewhere between our two estimates: 0.5-1.0 sec per 50. Which edge of the range you prefer depends on which assumption you trust more. Rich and Chris, there are all sorts of variables to consider when comparing year to year swimming times in an aging masters swimmer. The two that Chris and I are focusing on are the effect of the suit change (body suit vs. jammer) and the yearly effect of age, especially in the upper decades. Rich, as the Undisputed King of Social Security Vested Sprint Swimming Men, I am wondering what your thoughts are about the impact of age. Chris, I am pretty sure, is arguing that even if you had swum in the body suit this year, your times would have been slower this year compared to last because you are a year older (and subject to forces, like sarcopenia of aging and decreases in maximal heart rate, etc.) that simply impact velocity. Though I agree that there is clearly an age effect across the population, I would argue that: 1) this is mitigated significantly by ongoing training 2) that when swimmers age up, they often--consciously or not--increase their training intensity in the hopes of doing really spectacularly when they become the new babies of the older age; thus the "age effect" is more likely to be seen, practically speaking, in the middle to later part of the age group, that most of us get a "motivational bump" in the first part In any event, Chris's math--again, if I am understanding this correctly--would suggest that the effect of age alone is about .55 seconds per year in the 100 in the mid 60s. I, on the other hand, think that your times slowed down almost entirely because of the suit change, that for the Magnificent Outlier that is Rich Abrahams, the increase in a year or two played virtually no role at all. What say ye? One other question. In my own case, I had a pretty good test comparison in LCM. My 50 slowed by exactly .50 from the summer of 2009 to the summer of 2010. My 100 slowed by exactly .97. These deteriorations, if you additionally factor in the wages of age (as Chris would have us do), would suggest the suit played very little difference--perhaps a little as a quarter second per 50. I just don't buy this. When warming up in a B70, I noticed my natural warm up stroke lead me to take 11-12 strokes per length (in a 25 yard pool); in a jammer, it was 13-15. This isn't just some negligible effect. One last question: do either of you think that the loss of the suit will have more or less of an impact in a short course vs. long course pool? It seems that my yards times to date have been affected more than my LCM times, and I wonder if one of the suit's most helpful aspects was faster, longer glides off the walls?