Guest editorial by John Craig
PHOENIX, Arizona, June 4. THERE's a big dichotomy right now between the official Masters records in the younger age groups and the unofficial ones. As the rules stand, in order to set an official FINA Masters world record you must do it in a Masters meet, or at least in a meet sanctioned by a Masters organization.
This means that when, say, Alex Popov won the 50 meter freestyle at the World Championships in Barcelona in 2003, his time of 21.93 didn't count as a Masters record, even though he was 31 at the time. The official 30-34 Masters record is 23.21 by Rowdy Gaines. (Gaines has had so much recognition I don't think he'd miss this particular bit; and since then, by the way, Gary Hall Jr. has gone a 21.89 at age 33.)
Masters swimming is not a separate sport, it's the same sport. The fact that world bests set outside Masters competitions are not officially counted smells of petty fiefdoms. (And there's no reason for this, as FINA is the governing body for both.) The fastest 30-34 year old ever is the fastest 30-34 year old ever, regardless of what meet he swims in.
The current rules cheapen the Masters record book just a bit. Given that top swimmers often swim well past their college years, right now the 25-29 and 30-34 records, and in some cases even the 35-39 records, bear little resemblance to what the fastest times for those age groups on record are. Just to give one example: Dara Torres' American record of 24.07 in the 50 meter freestyle from Beijing is the fastest time by anyone in the 40-44 age group; it isn't the 26.59 which is listed as the official Masters world record. It wasn't as if Dara's time was done in an unsanctioned meet.
How much more interesting it would be to look at the Masters record book and see the fastest times ever done at a certain age, rather than the ones which were done only at Masters meets.
A few years back, the rules were changed so that national age group records could be set in high school competition. This made the record book much cleaner, and simpler. A similar change should be made for Masters swimming.
Here is a list of the official Masters world records for men 25-29. Next to it are the fastest men's 25-29 times from the last few years, from the FINA rankings. The FINA rankings list year of birth for each swimmer, so it's easy to tell which ones are at least 25, or at least turn 25 that year (which is the way that FINA measures age for Masters records).
Event; Official Masters record for men 25-29; Unofficial record for same age group
FREE
50; 22.59; Frederick Bousquet, 20.94
100; 50.74; Alain Bernard, 47.20
200; 1:52.17; Pieter Van den Hoogenband, 1:45.65
400; 4:00.98; Grant Hackett, 3:43.15
1500; 16:13.89; Grant Hackett, 14:38.92
BACK
100; 57.45; Aaron Peirsol, 52.54
200; 2:05.86; Aaron Peirsol, 1:54.32
BREAST
100; 1:02.65; Kosuke Kitajima, 58.91
200; 2:16.70; Kosuke Kitajima, 2:07.51
FLY
100; 53.09; Andriy Serdinov, 51.10
200; 2:03.26; Moss Burmester, 1:54.15
IM
200; 2:06.33; Darian Townsend, 1:57.03
400; 4:31.47; Alessio Boggiatto, 4:10.68
-A few other examples come to mind. The 30-34 men's 200 scm fly record would be 1:50.73 by Franck Esposito, not 2:00.21. The women's 25-29 100 lcm fly record would be 56.61 by Inge de Bruijn, not 1:01.04. The men's 35-39 50 lcm free record would be 21.96 by Mark Foster, not 22.76 (also by Foster). The men's 30-34 100 lcm free record would be 47.58 by Jason Lezak, not 51.34. The women's 100 lcm free record for 25-29 would be 53.05 by Britta Steffen, not 56.87. The list goes on.
This is not meant as criticism in any way of the current official Masters record holders: all are fine athletes, and all deserve credit for staying in great shape past their college years. But when their times are not really the fastest in their age brackets, the phrase "world record" rings a little hollow.
For social commentary by John Craig, visit his blog at justnotsaid.blogspot.com.
Search For More News About: John Craig
Reaction Time Comments
Reaction Time responses do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions
of Swimming World Magazine or SwimmingWorldMagazine.com.
Reaction Time is provided as a service to our readers.
June 4, 2009 Great idea! Perhaps Swiminfo can maintain this list. Submitted by: gailswim
June 4, 2009 Tht's rieddiculous.
To equate a time by Fred Bousquets to that of a guy in his late '20s who trains maybe a couple of times a week is absured.
Let the top swimmes in the world have their set of records and the people who really swim Masters have theirs.
I can't thinok of the woman's name off hand butshe's the one in the 35-39 or 40-44 agegroupwhio's always setting Msters wrsevery time she sets i nthe pool (she has a sister, maybe a twin, wo swims too).
Anyway how do you thik she'd like it if she were setting wrs for her age group but FINA/USS Masters didn't recognize them because some 20-year-old girlwas 10 seconds faster?
That's like sayinga guy who hits 75 homeruns in the Pacific Coast League (as Dick Stuart did some 50 yers ago when he hit 66!) should have the record for most horems in a season.\
Compeitive swimming is competitive swimming and Masters is Masters and they AIN'T the same sport. Submitted by: slickwillie32
June 4, 2009 Does anyone remember back when track and field did not recognize WRs set by professionals? Silly. The fastest time swum by a 30 year old in a FINA sanctioned meet should be the age group WR. Merging the record book makes sense, but one of the main obstacles to doing that is the issue of pool certification. FINA sanctions USA meets without remeasuring before and after every session like Masters requires. The reason (I suppose) is the likelihood of Masters WR being broken at small local meets and the relative unlikelihood of open WRs being broken on the local meet level. Eventually, the whole spectrum of swimming will enjoy more continuity from age group to open to age group. Submitted by: fluidg
June 4, 2009 As many elite swimmers remain in the sport into their 30's (and beyond) these days, this issue is one that needs to be recognized. Not doing so undermines the validity and credibility of Masters WRs. In the mean time, a separate list is a great idea. Submitted by: fluidg
June 4, 2009 Another reason that this is a problem is that some of the stroke rules for Open and Masters are different. Considering what 75 year old dudes like David Radcliff are doing these days (:58+ 100 free), Masters swimming has probably reached the point that these special rules are unnecessary, certainly for age groups below 70. Submitted by: fluidg
June 4, 2009 Having two sets of records is probably the best idea. USMS can maintain the USMS records for each age-group and set by registered Masters swimmers in a Masters meet. Someone, probably Fina, should have a list of Age-Group World Records made by anyone of the correct age, including masters swimmers, set in any offical meet. Submitted by: gailswim
June 5, 2009 John- I can understand why this question would cross the mind of someone outside of master swimming, and that coming up with your list makes for an academic comparision. However to suggest this as a viable idea demonstrates a lack of understanding of masters swimming and it's context within the sport.
I disagree with this idea for a number of fundamental reasons.
The whole remit of Masters swimming is to encourage lifelong participation in the sport for all swimming abilites, from all walks of life. Elite swimming is a very narrow and highly competitive area of the sport, all the swimmers you name check in your unofficial Masters WR list are highly paid full time athletes who receive huge support from corporate sponsors, national sporting bodies, colleges, universities and in some cases governments. It is a very different set of competitors who hold masters world records. FINA rightly distinguishes Masters swimming from elite swimming- because of the obvious mismatch.
Would holding a masters World Record really mean anything to say, Jason Lezak? This is a guy who has olympic medals, world and national records- I somehow doubt that this would be meaningful to him. Furthermore the majority of masters meets do not provide an opportunity for elite swimmers to qualify for their national teams or international events- so there is no reason for them to even be there. (the one notable exception to this was when Dara Torres competed at the world masters in 2006- it was her performance at this meet that made her decide to take a run at the olympics.) Ultimately when you're swimming at a masters meet you're racing a bunch of guys who put in 50 hour weeks at work, have a wife and a couple of kids to look after and probably make it to the pool a couple of hours a week. I personally think it's incredible that there are guys (and gals) in their 30s/40s50s and so on who can swim these times while holding down full time jobs, running families. I think these achievements should be respected and recognised as notable in their own right outside of elite competition.
For these reasons I think it would be a very sad day for masters swimmers and the spirit of masters swimming if the rules changes you are suggesting were taken seriously.
P.S. you should go to a big masters meet, talk to the people there, find out about them and I think there would be a fair chance that you'd feel differently Submitted by: Studio Master
June 5, 2009 There are some Masters swimmers who put in 25 to 50,000 to yards a week, highly dedicated people who work very hard........with jobs and families. They challenge themselves with competition, part of Masters swimming. Submitted by: gailswim
June 5, 2009 Studio Master --
You make a lot of good points, and you make them well. Thank you for your input.
I'm actually a masters swimmer myself, and I've been to masters nationals many times, starting in 1979 and most recently in 2003. I completely agree with what you say about the spirit of masters swimming and the good job it does keeping people active. I also am impressed with the times that some swimmers can do while holding down full time jobs and being parents etc. And yes, there's no comparison between an elite (professional) swimmer and someone who's doing it purely for love of the sport. I also agree that a masters record would mean less to a Jason Lezak than it would to a non-elite athlete. And as I said in the article, it was not meant as criticism in any way of the current masters record holders.
But if you look at the record book, virtually every record in the younger age groups, at least in the events up to 200, is held by a former (or sometimes, current) elite swimmer. Virtually all of these swimmers were, if not Olympians, at least NCAA finalists or of that approximate caliber. And a lot of 25-29 records have been set over the years by guys who swam at an elite level past their college years, then entered a masters meet just to set a record. Plus most 25 year olds don't have families yet, and many haven't settled into demanding careers just yet. So for the younger age groups, it's not quite the comparison you suggest.
As you pointed out, Dara Torres swam at Worlds in Stanford in 2006 (and went a leadoff 50 meter free leg in 25+, as I recall). But once she started training more seriously, she set the 40-44 50 and 100 yard freestyle marks; she certainly fits the definition of an elite/professional swimmer, yet her masters records are counted -- as they should be. Gary Hall Jr. made an appearance at masters nationals in the spring of '04, right before he won his gold medal in Athens. If he had set records, those would have been counted, too -- as they should have been. (The only reason they weren't was because his teammate Sabir Muhammad, also an elite swimmer, showed up and beat him at that meet.)
Yes, there is a huge difference between the professional swimmer and the full-time worker and parent who fits swimming in when he can. But realistically, for the most part, that's not the difference we're taking about as far as the records go. And where would we draw the line? There is also a difference between a 25 year old who's already started in his (non-swimming) career and one who hasn't, between those supported by national federations till, say, the age of 24 and those who weren't, those who had scholarships in college and those who didn't, between those who have access to good coaching and those who don't, etc. The list is endless, and as it stands, the masters record book doesn't distinguish between a Sabir Muhammad or a Dara Torres or a Ron Karnaugh or a Mark Foster and the rest of us. The only way the masters record book distinguishes now is by who has happened to register for a masters meet and who hasn't, and I think that's a somewhat artificial distinction given that almost all of the record holders in the younger age groups are or were, until shortly before they set their records, elite themselves.
Anyway, thanks for your input. I agree with a lot of your points. And I think it's great that a Susan von der Lippe can be a full time mother and still set records. But someone like her would not be affected by a change in the record books.
John Craig Submitted by: halfbreed
June 8, 2009 Hi John,
I think we'll have to agree to disagree - I like the petty fiefdoms of Masters WRs :-)
Presumably you'd apply the same principle to national, regional/state, county records?
You've definitely raised a point of interest, though I suspect FINA currently have one or two pressing matters to deal with right now before they go re-writing another set of record books.
Regards
Submitted by: Studio Master
Reaction Time responses do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions
of Swimming World Magazine or SwimmingWorldMagazine.com.
Reaction Time is provided as a service to our readers.
|
Subscribe Now!
|
