That's one of the problems that swimming has right now, which is hampering growth and creating bad feelings. If people continue to hold these attitudes, we will shut-out the very people that we need to bring in (ie, triathletes and fitness swimmers).
Take a quick look at annual memberships for a second:
USA-Triathlon: >115,000 annual members (not including 1-day memberships)
US Masters Swimming: ~48,000 members (not including 1-day memberships)
Note: USA-T annual membership never exceeded 21,000 until after 2000...
What would those numbers be if USA-T said "real athletes don't need wetsuits" and banned them from their events?
Think about it for a moment...
If we want to make masters swimming more attractive to new people, we should get rid of bad attitudes about wetsuits and the people who wear them.
NOTE: I do not own a wetsuit and have competed in open water swims in the Atlantic Ocean without one.
Growth for the sake of growth is both soulless and likely unsustainable (just ask the mortgage industry, they relaxed the rules to grow). The reality is that most open water events I participate in, have divisions that allow wetsuits, who is telling them no? Or is it that USMS is jealous that many of the major open water events are not sanctioned by USMS or USAT for that matter.. No you don't need to be a member of USMS or USAT to swim the La Jolla Roughwater swim, or many of my local openwater race series. FYI, my masters swim club has plenty of triathletes and fitness swimmers most have no need to be USMS members as they don't plan to compete in USMS sanctioned races.
I agree that "growth for its own sake" is a bad idea.
But I really dislike the "triathletes do, swimmers don't" attitude. It is, pardon me for saying so, incredibly snobby. I like to think of USMS as welcoming swimmers of various ability levels and confidence.
Part of the issue may be that there is something of a distinction between the pool and OW swim communities, though obviously there is overlap. OW swimming is more "macho," conquering the elements and so forth. There is perhaps less interest in helping weak swimmers overcome their fears, and certainly not by using wetsuits or other floaties.
There is some reason for this. A person who is a weak swimmer is always close to a wall or lane line in a pool, to hang onto and catch his/her breath. That isn't true in an OW swim, particularly an ocean swim, so it may not be a great idea to encourage marginal swimmers by allowing them to use wetsuits. People can still drown in them.
I'm sure there is a psychological aspect as well; panic attacks may be more likely in cold and/or wavy water, particularly if there is a lot of jostling from other swimmers.
I have always liked cable swims as a sort of intermediate step between pool swimming and "real" OW swimming. They may not always be the most interesting OW swims around (though I did really like the one I did at Lake Placid) but having the cable "lane line" there provides a sense of familiarity for someone who is a pool swimmer but OW novice.
That's one of the problems that swimming has right now, which is hampering growth and creating bad feelings. If people continue to hold these attitudes, we will shut-out the very people that we need to bring in (ie, triathletes and fitness swimmers).
Take a quick look at annual memberships for a second:
USA-Triathlon: >115,000 annual members (not including 1-day memberships)
US Masters Swimming: ~48,000 members (not including 1-day memberships)
Note: USA-T annual membership never exceeded 21,000 until after 2000...
What would those numbers be if USA-T said "real athletes don't need wetsuits" and banned them from their events?
Think about it for a moment...
If we want to make masters swimming more attractive to new people, we should get rid of bad attitudes about wetsuits and the people who wear them.
NOTE: I do not own a wetsuit and have competed in open water swims in the Atlantic Ocean without one.
Growth for the sake of growth is both soulless and likely unsustainable (just ask the mortgage industry, they relaxed the rules to grow). The reality is that most open water events I participate in, have divisions that allow wetsuits, who is telling them no? Or is it that USMS is jealous that many of the major open water events are not sanctioned by USMS or USAT for that matter.. No you don't need to be a member of USMS or USAT to swim the La Jolla Roughwater swim, or many of my local openwater race series. FYI, my masters swim club has plenty of triathletes and fitness swimmers most have no need to be USMS members as they don't plan to compete in USMS sanctioned races.
I agree that "growth for its own sake" is a bad idea.
But I really dislike the "triathletes do, swimmers don't" attitude. It is, pardon me for saying so, incredibly snobby. I like to think of USMS as welcoming swimmers of various ability levels and confidence.
Part of the issue may be that there is something of a distinction between the pool and OW swim communities, though obviously there is overlap. OW swimming is more "macho," conquering the elements and so forth. There is perhaps less interest in helping weak swimmers overcome their fears, and certainly not by using wetsuits or other floaties.
There is some reason for this. A person who is a weak swimmer is always close to a wall or lane line in a pool, to hang onto and catch his/her breath. That isn't true in an OW swim, particularly an ocean swim, so it may not be a great idea to encourage marginal swimmers by allowing them to use wetsuits. People can still drown in them.
I'm sure there is a psychological aspect as well; panic attacks may be more likely in cold and/or wavy water, particularly if there is a lot of jostling from other swimmers.
I have always liked cable swims as a sort of intermediate step between pool swimming and "real" OW swimming. They may not always be the most interesting OW swims around (though I did really like the one I did at Lake Placid) but having the cable "lane line" there provides a sense of familiarity for someone who is a pool swimmer but OW novice.
