PDA

View Full Version : Torres out of 100



thewookiee
July 7th, 2008, 02:19 PM
Torres has opted out of the 100 free in Beijing. Lacy Nyemer(sp?) will swim the individual event in her place.

tjrpatt
July 7th, 2008, 02:24 PM
I think that Torres should have stayed with it.

KeithM
July 7th, 2008, 03:01 PM
I don't. She's unlikely to medal in the 100 so she's focusing on the 50.

Natalie it appears has not dropped the 200IM. Which means she will swim it in Beijing. She cannot drop it once she gets there like she could at trials.

pwolf66
July 7th, 2008, 03:02 PM
Makes me sad, understandable but still it does make me sad. Is she completely out or is going to take part in the 4x100?

KeithM
July 7th, 2008, 03:03 PM
Why is it sad?

She's still available for the relay according to the article on Swimming World. She's just subtracting *potentially* three less races to conserve for the 50.

ande
July 7th, 2008, 03:33 PM
smart move

Does Dara lose her spot on the
4 x 100 medley relay and the 4 x 100 free relay?

Does that bump the Kara Lynn Joyce, the 7th place swimmer, on the Olympic Squad?

FlyQueen
July 7th, 2008, 03:34 PM
I cannot imagine that she won't still swim the 4 x 100 FR Relay and hopefully anchor the 4 x 100 medley relay. But as was stated the 100 FR add 3 more swims and ends the day before the 50 which is less taxing and her best event.

hofffam
July 7th, 2008, 04:05 PM
Why would she lose her relay spot? Phelps has a spot and he just swam prelims. Dara was the fastest 100 free swimmer at Trials. She absolutely should be on the relay if she wants to swim it. Which she should. Not swimming the 100 individual though will eliminate 3 races as already mentioned.

ehoch
July 7th, 2008, 04:54 PM
This is a really smart move --- she has little chance of winning a medal in the 100 - but she can win one in the 50.

Of course she will swim the Free relay -- the question will be the Medley relay - but they can decide that after the Free relay. With Coughlin as the Backstroker, she is the fastest in the Free by a good margin.

KeithM
July 7th, 2008, 05:11 PM
It may depend on how Hoelzer does in the 100 back. If Dara is swimming the 50 final then she may not be on the medley relay since they're the same day.

USMSarah
July 7th, 2008, 05:25 PM
Why would she lose her relay spot? Phelps has a spot and he just swam prelims. Dara was the fastest 100 free swimmer at Trials.


Didn't Lochte do the same thing in the 200 Free?

Frank Thompson
July 7th, 2008, 06:37 PM
This is a really smart move --- she has little chance of winning a medal in the 100 - but she can win one in the 50.

Of course she will swim the Free relay -- the question will be the Medley relay - but they can decide that after the Free relay. With Coughlin as the Backstroker, she is the fastest in the Free by a good margin.

I think Dara will be on both relays. The question is will she be on both relays for the finals session. For the Free Relay, I say yes unless the four other swimmers in the 3rd thru 6th positions go faster than the :53.76 time that Dara posted at the Olympic Trials.

The big question is the Medley Relay and who will swim the Free leg of that relay in the Finals. Assuming that Natlie Coughlin beats Margaret Hoelzer in the 100 Back Finals than I believe she would be swimming the Back leg of the relay. If she does not, then she could be swimming the Free leg of the relay based on the time of :53.66 or a faster time at the Olympics in the individual event. Dara has a time of :53.76 for swimmers to beat to be on the Medley Relay.

I could also see Lacey Nymeyer getting that spot if Natlie does Back if she goes faster than :53.76 and gets a medal in the 100 Free individual event. Currently Dara is ahead (:53.76 to :54.02) but that could change with both swimmers with there performances in the Olympics. If Dara does not swim the prelims, then the :53.76 will be the benchmark. Lacey will probably swim the prelims if the coaches feel the individual event was not up to par. The 100 Free individual event will be over before this relay so the coaches will make the choice from these performances.

ehoch
July 7th, 2008, 07:24 PM
I love it already -

Coughlin gets a good lead and the US breast and Fly leg swim out of their minds -- Dara Torres goes into the water with a small lead over the WR holder and Gold Medalist Libby Lenton-Trickett .....

Frank Thompson
July 7th, 2008, 07:32 PM
And then what. Does she swim like Bruce Hayes, Kleete Keller, and Jenny Thompson in 2000. Or does the Relay end up for the USA like the Men's 2000 Olympic 400 Free Relay, Men's 2004 Olympic 400 Medley Relay, and the Women's 2004 Olympic 400 Free and 400 Medley Relay?

KeithM
July 7th, 2008, 07:44 PM
Or does the Relay end up for the USA like the Men's 2000 Olympic 400 Free Relay, Men's 2004 Olympic 400 Medley Relay, and the Women's 2004 Olympic 400 Free and 400 Medley Relay?
One of these doesn't belong!

thewookiee
July 7th, 2008, 08:19 PM
One of these doesn't belong!

Alex,

What is "Men's 2004 Olympic 400 Medley Relay" for 200 please.

thewookiee
July 7th, 2008, 08:20 PM
Or depending on how the flyers do(which I hope Christine Magnuson does really well...that Tennessee Pride)

The coaches might have Hoelzer go back...Coughlin fly....Torres/Nyemer free

Frank Thompson
July 7th, 2008, 09:48 PM
Alex,

What is "Men's 2004 Olympic 400 Medley Relay" for 200 please.

Should have been Men's 2004 Olympic 400 Free Relay.

OldH2O
July 7th, 2008, 09:51 PM
I love it already -

Coughlin gets a good lead and the US breast and Fly leg swim out of their minds -- Dara Torres goes into the water with a small lead over the WR holder and Gold Medalist Libby Lenton-Trickett .....

Don't you think it is more likely to be Torres vs Campbell ? (Which in a way is even more existing, 41 vs 16)

KeithM
July 7th, 2008, 10:09 PM
Again the 50 free final is the same session and they won't be able to wait until after the race to ask Dara how she's feeling to finalize the medley relay.

Blackbeard's Peg
July 8th, 2008, 12:17 PM
Again the 50 free final is the same session and they won't be able to wait until after the race to ask Dara how she's feeling to finalize the medley relay.

If they ask her, she'll do the race... she's so competitive, i don't think she can't say no to the opportunity. someone needs to step in and make the decision for her and the team, and have this planned out ahead of time so all the swimmers can properly prepare for glory!

knelson
July 8th, 2008, 12:43 PM
Can anyone think of another time a swimmer has qualified for an individual event at the Olympics and then not swum it? It's got to be pretty unusual.

TheGoodSmith
July 8th, 2008, 01:01 PM
Can anyone think of another time a swimmer has qualified for an individual event at the Olympics and then not swum it? It's got to be pretty unusual.


Perhaps selfish?


John Smith

Frank Thompson
July 8th, 2008, 01:04 PM
Two swimmers come to mind and I am sure there are more out there. In 2004, Michael Phelps quaified to swim the 200 Meter Back and choose not to contest this event at Athens. Shirley Babashoff qualified to swim the 400 IM by winning the Olympic Trials in this event and choose not to contest this event in Montreal at the 1976 Olympics.

aquageek
July 8th, 2008, 01:06 PM
Perhaps selfish?


John Smith

Perhaps, my arse, definitely! The Olympic schedule has been known for ages.

scyfreestyler
July 8th, 2008, 01:36 PM
Selfish? Really? Permitting somebody else to step up and swim a race they might have otherwise not been able to swim is selfish? Okay. It seems to me that she wants to conserve her energy and concentrate her efforts on the 50 Free. It would seem far more selfish to swim all of the events one qualified for and then not be able to perform well at them due to being overburdened by the workload.

Chris Stevenson
July 8th, 2008, 01:50 PM
Perhaps, my arse, definitely! The Olympic schedule has been known for ages.

It rubs me the wrong way too, a little too diva-ish. All the protestations about being 41 and getting tired from all that swimming seems a little out of sync with the fact that she dominated the field in the 50 on the last day of trials, setting a new record.

But, in Dara's defense about the schedule, perhaps she entered the 100 only to qualify for the relay, not expecting to be in the top two. That was certainly MY expectation; her winning the 100 was one of the two biggest shocks of the meet (the other being Hansen's implosion in the 200 breast).

scyfreestyler
July 8th, 2008, 01:52 PM
It rubs me the wrong way too, a little too diva-ish. All the protestations about being 41 and getting tired from all that swimming seems a little out of sync with the fact that she dominated the field in the 50 on the last day of trials, setting a new record.

But, in Dara's defense about the schedule, perhaps she entered the 100 only to qualify for the relay, not expecting to be in the top two. That was certainly MY expectation; her winning the 100 was one of the two biggest shocks of the meet (the other being Hansen's implosion in the 200 breast).

I am pretty sure she has said this in an interview already, so I think your suspicion is correct.

knelson
July 8th, 2008, 02:04 PM
I have to agree it's a little selfish. The fact that there's very little chance she could medal in the 100 does take some of the edge off it. However, The reality is the U.S. team's number one seed in the 100 free doesn't want to swim it because it might tire her out.

scyfreestyler
July 8th, 2008, 02:07 PM
I have to agree it's a little selfish. The fact that there's very little chance she could medal in the 100 does take some of the edge off it. The fact remains the U.S. team's number one seed in the 100 free doesn't want to swim it because it might tire her out.

So I guess the moral of the story is, unless you are prepared to swim the event at the Olympics, don't swim it at trials.

I can see the selfish side of the argument, but is it really so bad that she wants to swim the best 50 she can? :dunno:

scyfreestyler
July 8th, 2008, 02:10 PM
Two swimmers come to mind and I am sure there are more out there. In 2004, Michael Phelps quaified to swim the 200 Meter Back and choose not to contest this event at Athens. Shirley Babashoff qualified to swim the 400 IM by winning the Olympic Trials in this event and choose not to contest this event in Montreal at the 1976 Olympics.

So it seems selfish behaviour is not reserved only for the elder elite swimmers, but for the youth as well. :rolleyes:

tjburk
July 8th, 2008, 02:35 PM
I like the idea that she is doing this.....Focus on the event that she actually has a chance at making the stand. Like it was stated before, her main goal for the 100 was to make the relay team....she did a little better than that but doesn't want to waste the effort on a race she won't medal in.

Different then other peoples' train of thought but makes sense to me.

TheGoodSmith
July 8th, 2008, 02:45 PM
Let's not "waste" our effort on events we can't win or medal.

Perhaps I should teach that to my kids. "Don't bother playing if you can't win".

Perhaps all the qualifiers on our US team should bag the races they feel are marginal or they can't win or medal.

And don't kid yourself....... she's not doing this to be generous to the third place finisher.


John Smith

LindsayNB
July 8th, 2008, 02:57 PM
My assumption was that she wants to minimize the possibility that she underperforms in the relay or the 50. If she is unlikely to medal in the 100 why jeopardize the relay and the 50?

CreamPuff
July 8th, 2008, 03:03 PM
What the hay happened to the less is more mantra? She's older and supposedly follows it for her training/ yardage. So now she's swimming less (fewer events) to have more of an impact.

FlyQueen
July 8th, 2008, 03:04 PM
So I guess the moral of the story is, unless you are prepared to swim the event at the Olympics, don't swim it at trials.

I can see the selfish side of the argument, but is it really so bad that she wants to swim the best 50 she can? :dunno:

I am sure she was swimming the 100 to see what she could do and as a "back-up" plan for the 50.

smontanaro
July 8th, 2008, 03:26 PM
Based on the FINA world rankings, Dara's 53.78 in the 100 ranks 7th in the world this year. Her 24.25 in the 50 ranks 5th. A medal is a slim chance in either, but clearly better in the 50 where her ranking is higher and she has no risk of a bad turn. Looks like a wise choice.

Skip

scyfreestyler
July 8th, 2008, 03:26 PM
Let's not "waste" our effort on events we can't win or medal.

Perhaps I should teach that to my kids. "Don't bother playing if you can't win".

Perhaps all the qualifiers on our US team should bag the races they feel are marginal or they can't win or medal.

And don't kid yourself....... she's not doing this to be generous to the third place finisher.


John Smith

Maybe I am smoking too much crack these days, who knows. To me, it seems perfectly logical to skip an event to place more emphasis on your signature event(s). Would you rather swim two Olympic events and place 4th in each or swim one and make the medal stand? It's not about not bothering to play if you can't win, it's about being smart about your meet planning IMHO.

I am well aware that this was not an act of kindness to the 3rd place finisher.

tjburk
July 8th, 2008, 03:40 PM
Let's not "waste" our effort on events we can't win or medal.

Perhaps I should teach that to my kids. "Don't bother playing if you can't win".

Perhaps all the qualifiers on our US team should bag the races they feel are marginal or they can't win or medal.

And don't kid yourself....... she's not doing this to be generous to the third place finisher.


John Smith

I am curious....where did you get that out of what I said?

TheGoodSmith
July 8th, 2008, 03:51 PM
...... but doesn't want to waste the effort on a race she won't medal in.



Here.

tjburk
July 8th, 2008, 03:54 PM
Here.

So you are saying that if you were there, you would swim both? Even though swimming the one could possibly take you out of the running for your best event? I don't think anyone here would do that....not the smartest thing to do in my opinion.

aquageek
July 8th, 2008, 04:40 PM
I think she probably pulled out of the 100 knowing she couldn't medal. A medal is very important to her so she's going for it in the 50. It is very important because she might be able to parlay that into some money so she won't have to continue to sponge off wealthy sugar daddies.

hofffam
July 8th, 2008, 04:40 PM
I most admire swimmers that can say "to hell with it - I'm going to race - even if I get my ass kicked." I think that's what Phelps (great example is the 200 free in Athens) and Lochte (every time he races Phelps and Peirsol) do.

That's one of the things that bugs me about Coughlin. And now Dara too. I understand and sympathize with Dara's decision but for someone who is said to be SOOOOO competitive, she is backing down.

I must say though that it is a problem if the USA doesn't have a medal contender in the women's 100 free.

tjburk
July 8th, 2008, 04:47 PM
So then Phelps was wrong for backing out of the 400 Free, 100 Back and 200 Back at Trials? Oh and he only swam prelims in the 100 Free but that's Ok? He qualified in all of those....does that mean he is wrong and setting a bad example to the kids for not swimming them?

Blackbeard's Peg
July 8th, 2008, 04:50 PM
I do agree that it is somewhat selfish.

I am sure she was swimming the 100 to see what she could do and as a "back-up" plan for the 50.
Good point, queenie. GHJ may want to turn back the clock and think of doing the same thing.

lefty
July 8th, 2008, 04:52 PM
It was the evil-smith who did it, but with the logic displayed here swimming the 1,000 with the intention of only trying on the first 100 must be selfish too.

Does it matter that this is the Olympic games? If that is the difference here, then lets not apply the lessons of Dara to our kids. It either applies all the time or none of the time.

It seems to me that the Good Smith is interjecting his personal dislike for Dara into this argument.

The point of the Olympic games is to win medals. I leave it to the athlete to determine how to best achieve that.

hofffam
July 8th, 2008, 04:53 PM
So then Phelps was wrong for backing out of the 400 Free, 100 Back and 200 Back at Trials? Oh and he only swam prelims in the 100 Free but that's Ok? He qualified in all of those....does that mean he is wrong and setting a bad example to the kids for not swimming them?

I have no problem with Phelps. No one expects he (nor Lochte) to compete in every possible event. Just because they qualify in 8-11 events doesn't mean they should compete in them. There is no question attempting that many events will harm their swims - and in turn harm the USA team's performance.

Phelps needed a recent 100 free time to earn his relay spot.

In my view - Phelps is the the current "ultimate swim warrior" because he is willing to race 5 events, including the 400 IM and 2 200s.

craig68
July 8th, 2008, 05:00 PM
Lots of posts here assuming that Torres dropped the 100 just to focus on the 50. What about the two relays for which she is now qualified by virtue of her 1st place 100 free? If she thinks dropping the individual 100 will help her swim better in the U.S. team's relays, then great! She said at the Trials that 'she only has a few good swims in her.' Sounds like the opposite of selfish to me. If her relay teammates leave Beijing with gold instead of silver or bronze, I think they'd agree.
* Not to imply that she is carrying the relays. Rather, that often every tenth of every relay leg counts.

Maui Mike
July 8th, 2008, 05:10 PM
I'd think if she led off the 400 free relay, she'd post a PB, and it might be be the lift that team is gonna need.

ehoch
July 8th, 2008, 05:15 PM
Wow - I would not have thought in a million years as this being selfish -- I am not even sure how one can label this as being "selfish".

John - I usually respect your views even if I don't always agree with them - but now it just looks like a personal issue you have with Dara Torres.

She ALWAYS said that she wanted to qualify for the 400 Free relay and the 50 Free. How is it selfish that she is dropping out of the 100 Free ? The American TV viewing audience should be upset ? Other swimmers should be insulted ? She is not swimming the event because it will impact her other races. She just happens to swim less races than Phelps or Lochte.

The same people now saying she is selfish are also saying she can't be "legal".

This is not being selfish - it's being smart. Here is an example of a selfish swimmer - Britta Steffen will refuse to swim the 4x200 Free relay for Germany. The relay is on the same day as the 100 Free Semi - with the 100 Free final coming up the next day. She maintains that she can not swim both events - and Germany loses any medal hopes in the relay without her. The selfish swimmers drops a relay in favor of an individual event - the team swimmer drops an individual event in favor of a relay.

aquageek
July 8th, 2008, 06:24 PM
Everyone needs to relax. She is focusing on the 50 to get more endorsements if she wins. This will enable her to earn her own living and stop relying on the string of sugar daddies.

She might also require a certain "recovery window" to swim to her fullest potential and the 100 could interfere with that.

knelson
July 8th, 2008, 06:32 PM
After looking at the Olympic schedule I have to say I agree doing the 100 would make her schedule pretty difficult. Throw in the medley relay and that would be a lot of swims in three or four days.

scyfreestyler
July 8th, 2008, 08:07 PM
So you are saying that if you were there, you would swim both? Even though swimming the one could possibly take you out of the running for your best event? I don't think anyone here would do that....not the smartest thing to do in my opinion.


Of course he would...to do otherwise would be so selfish. ;)

Glider
July 8th, 2008, 09:29 PM
Wow...John, I respect your opinion, but I gotta call you out on this one.

I swam my one LCM meet (one day) this season a month ago. I entered 3 events. I swam the 200 BR first. Had about a 40 minute recovery to the 100 BR and it looked like a 30 minute break to my best and focus event, the 50 BR.

Now at 49, I know my body and I only have so many good swims in me in a given day. My "medal" for this meet was to get a Top Ten. I do NOT like to scratch any events, but I reluctantly scratched the 100 (She will vouch my debate.)

If I swim both the 100 and 50, I just wasn't going to swim well in either event in this small meet. My choice worked out well for me, but I hardly consider it selfish. Do you?

I also noticed you scratched the 200 FR at 2006 Worlds and the 50 BA at SCY Nats in 2006. Of course you did swim other events in those meets...

Selfish? Seems like a double standard to me...

Mark






Perhaps selfish?


John Smith

The Fortress
July 8th, 2008, 10:02 PM
I most admire swimmers that can say "to hell with it - I'm going to race - even if I get my ass kicked." I think that's what Phelps (great example is the 200 free in Athens) and Lochte (every time he races Phelps and Peirsol) do.

This is all well and good, and everyone admires a swim warrior. But we are talking about an old sprinter here. Recovery required, even for Mr. Dodging the 200 Free at Worlds and Nats! I think it was smart to pull out of the 100 free if her goal is to maximize success in the 50s and relays. Isn't that a fairly normal competitive attitude -- preferring to perform superbly in one event as opposed to pretty well in two? Or at least as equally valid an approach as striving to be a swim warrior? Both are admirable for different reasons.

If she was really only going for the 400 free relay, though, she didn't need to swim the 100 free in finals. (I don't think, however, that it was such a shocker that she made the team in that event.) And, as Geek notes, that second win really sealed her "star power." She is not just about swimming anymore. Her feats transcend swimming and even longevity in sports. She is a brand now. She could hawk anything, including granny granola bars at this point. (I do wish she'd stop pointing out how old she is, although I guess her surroundings reinforce that fact continually. Failure to see the electronic timing board is nearsightedness, not age.)

Maui Mike
July 9th, 2008, 12:33 AM
Seems like she lost some on the turn (no SDKs) but then made it right back. How old school is that? Those SDKs are tiring!

knelson
July 9th, 2008, 01:11 AM
I also noticed you scratched the 200 FR at 2006 Worlds and the 50 BA at SCY Nats in 2006. Of course you did swim other events in those meets...

Selfish? Seems like a double standard to me...

This is a really unfair comparison. John Smith, like all of us, is swimming purely for himself in masters swimming. Hopefully Dara doesn't think she's only swimming for herself at the Olympics.

Frank Thompson
July 9th, 2008, 06:35 AM
Wow...John, I respect your opinion, but I gotta call you out on this one.

I also noticed you scratched the 200 FR at 2006 Worlds and the 50 BA at SCY Nats in 2006. Of course you did swim other events in those meets...

Selfish? Seems like a double standard to me...

Mark

Mark:

John did intentionally scratch the 200 Free at both the 2006 Worlds an the 2008 Nationals in Austin. However, he never scratches sprint events and he was not paying attention to the proceedings at the 2006 Nationals in Coral Springs and missed his heat. I believe he was talking to Clay Britt and didn't realize he was at the wrong end of the pool and by the time he wanted to do something about this, it was to late and he was OUT of the 50 Back as Dan Hicks would say. I am not making this up and John explained what happened in the link below called "Losers who daydream and miss there heat."

http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?t=6158

dorothyrde
July 9th, 2008, 09:44 AM
Failure to see the electronic timing board is nearsightedness, not age.)
My thoughts too when I heard this. Age sight is not being able to read the lettering on that touchpad right in front of you!

TheGoodSmith
July 9th, 2008, 10:23 AM
Frank,

That 50 back was amusing in retrospect. As for my 200 free.... well if Dara scratched her events in advance of the Trials and didn't make the team, we'd be having a different discussion. But that's not whats happening.

As for comparing masters swimming in general to real swimming and the Olympic Games.......... that's a joke. I won't even go there.

Call me old fashioned but I expect anyone who finishes 1st or 2nd in the final heat of the Olympic trials (particularly the 1st place qualifier) to step up and represent their country in that event at the Games. Sending the 3rd place finisher does not maximize the US team's showing in that event. It is an honor and a responsbility to make the team. It is not about personal preferences on what you do and do not want to swim after you make the team.

Backing off on an event because it will make you tired or you don't feel up to it is simply disappointing. If Dara had a monster lineup like Phelps and Lochte, I'd agree with you. Dara has clearly shown she can stand up next to anyone half her age. I don't buy the too tired crap and saving up for the 50.

Again, we will have to agree to disagree.


John Smith

hofffam
July 9th, 2008, 10:32 AM
Call me old fashioned but I expect anyone who finishes 1st or 2nd in the final heat of the Olympic trials (particularly the 1st place qualifier) to step up and represent their country in that event at the Games. Sending the 3rd place finisher does not maximize the US team's showing in that event. It is an honor and a responsbility to make the team. It is not about personal preferences on what you do and do not want to swim after you make the team.

Backing off on an event because it will make you tired or you don't feel up to it is simply disappointing.


Well said. I agree with this, even though I don't agree with Mr. Smith in general on Dara.

She is an aging sprinter - but she is a friggin fast sprinter. She will get massages every hour. She will have amino acid supplements. She might have her own hyperbaric chamber to replenish oxygen. So I think she can do 3 more 54 second races in two days.

tjrpatt
July 9th, 2008, 10:37 AM
I thought that Christine Brennan from USAToday knew her facts unlike other mainstream sports writers when she was talking about Torres on Espn's PTI. I have to say that the guest hosts are better at covering swimming than the regular hosts. They seem brush off Phelps. I am psyched about all her mainstream coverage. But, Larry king or O'Reilly should have a segment on her instead of the ARod Brinkley coverage.

tjburk
July 9th, 2008, 11:04 AM
Frank,

That 50 back was amusing in retrospect. As for my 200 free.... well if Dara scratched her events in advance of the Trials and didn't make the team, we'd be having a different discussion. But that's not whats happening.

As for comparing masters swimming in general to real swimming and the Olympic Games.......... that's a joke. I won't even go there.

Call me old fashioned but I expect anyone who finishes 1st or 2nd in the final heat of the Olympic trials (particularly the 1st place qualifier) to step up and represent their country in that event at the Games. Sending the 3rd place finisher does not maximize the US team's showing in that event. It is an honor and a responsbility to make the team. It is not about personal preferences on what you do and do not want to swim after you make the team.

Backing off on an event because it will make you tired or you don't feel up to it is simply disappointing. If Dara had a monster lineup like Phelps and Lochte, I'd agree with you. Dara has clearly shown she can stand up next to anyone half her age. I don't buy the too tired crap and saving up for the 50.

Again, we will have to agree to disagree.


John Smith

So, Masters swimming is not "real" swimming? Interesting perspective....I think most around here would probably disagree with that.

And you are trying to say that you would take the chance of blowing a possible medal opportunity just to swim another event? Wouldn't that actually be more selfish then not swimming it...."I am going to throw away a medal opportunity for my country and myself because I am going to swim this other event that I know is going to make me tired."

I actually would agree with you if this was a points type meet.....but since the only thing that counts in the Olympics is 1, 2 and 3. I just don't see it.

tjburk
July 9th, 2008, 11:08 AM
Well said. I agree with this, even though I don't agree with Mr. Smith in general on Dara.

She is an aging sprinter - but she is a friggin fast sprinter. She will get massages every hour. She will have amino acid supplements. She might have her own hyperbaric chamber to replenish oxygen. So I think she can do 3 more 54 second races in two days.

I would challenge you to do exactly what you are asking her to do. At 40+ years of age, swim the Olympic schedule yourself.....giving max effort to each race and see how you feel....

gull
July 9th, 2008, 11:15 AM
Three possibilities:

1) She is afraid that swimming the 100 will adversely affect both her performance in the relay(s), thus jeopardizing the team's medal chances, and her performance in the 50, jeopardizing her best chance for an individual medal.

2) She is afraid that a nonmedal performance in the 100 will adversely affect her marketability.

3) She knows that she cannot risk using growth hormone during the Olympics and doesn't think she can recover adequately without it.

craiglll@yahoo.com
July 9th, 2008, 11:38 AM
I don't understand, she has been working for an individual medal for years. She gets a chance to win 2 and drops out. If she could win two, she would be a hero. I smell something besides fish in the water.

tjburk
July 9th, 2008, 11:52 AM
I don't understand, she has been working for an individual medal for years. She gets a chance to win 2 and drops out. If she could win two, she would be a hero. I smell something besides fish in the water.

She has gone 53.78 for the 100 which places her 7th in the world right now for the year...she will more than likely need to drop a half a second just to medal.....with her start and turn being a known problem it's possible but not likely....where as in the 50 she has gone 24.25 which places her 5th in the world so far this year....where she only needs to drop .1 to .2 to possibly medal....granted .1 or .2 in a 50 is still pretty hard to drop at that level but it's easier than .5 in a 100 when you know your start and turn are questionable. At least that is the way I see it.....and I have been wrong before!!! :doh:

tjrpatt
July 9th, 2008, 11:56 AM
didn't she win an individual medal in Syndey.

thewookiee
July 9th, 2008, 12:00 PM
Yea...but not gold's...she tied for 3rd in the 100 free with Jenny Thompson(loved the facial expressions of the two of them at that point)

hofffam
July 9th, 2008, 12:04 PM
I would challenge you to do exactly what you are asking her to do. At 40+ years of age, swim the Olympic schedule yourself.....giving max effort to each race and see how you feel....

This is silly. No one would ask me to do this because I am just a decent 45-49 male Masters swimmer. I don't have a lifetime of training and racing experience, an entourage, nor the talent. I did 6 races at Nationals and that was more than enough for me. I felt really bad after my 200 IM, but I think I could race a 50 or 100 with best effort 8 hours later.

knelson
July 9th, 2008, 12:05 PM
So, Masters swimming is not "real" swimming? Interesting perspective....I think most around here would probably disagree with that.

It's real, but it ain't the Olympics. There's a big difference between ditching an event at a masters meet and ditching one at the Olympics.

I think this has already been mentioned, but if she had no intention of swimming the 100 in the Olympics why didn't she opt to swim a fast enough time in prelims or semis to get her on the relay (a la Phelps and Lochte)? I have to think it has to do with her competitiveness. She had to prove she could win that event. You can decide for yourself whether this is selfish or not.

Paul Smith
July 9th, 2008, 12:07 PM
So, Masters swimming is not "real" swimming? Interesting perspective....I think most around here would probably disagree with that.

Tracy there is no question that training/racing in masters in a very sense is "real" for the vast majority of people that participate.

However if you have read any of the quotes from people like SVDL, Caroline Krattli, and anyone else who participated in swimming either via college or USS swimming the focus has shifted about 180 degree's from what was "real" to what is "fun".

If at one point the focus was National cuts or a national team, or OT or NCAA finals and you are dedicated to that full time than it is indeed "real" vs. what we do now. Not to dimmish or in any way insult those who are very motivated in USMS...just a very different reality...and in regard to a discussion about Dara makes sense.

And for the record...JS dodged me in the 200 knowing he would go down in flames...he had already tried to sabotage me after getting Laura & I sick a couple of weeks ahead of time and since that didn't sideline me he ran!!

LindsayNB
July 9th, 2008, 12:14 PM
Perhaps she swam all the 100 races to determine how she would do with the extra load due to the relays, which she didn't have to swim at trials. Not to mention that her place on the relay is more secure for having won at trials.

I find it odd that on the one hand people say she must be doping because a 41 year old shouldn't be able to swim at this level and on the other hand people want her to swim more races.

Steve Ruiter
July 9th, 2008, 12:46 PM
My goodness. She was trying to make the 400 free relay, the most definitive way to do that is to place in the top 6 in finals. While Phelps and Lochte did fast times in 100 prelims/ 200 semis for the relays, it would be "cleaner" if they had to place top 6 in finals. But its coaches discretion. So I can't fault her for eliminating any doubt about the relay spot.

I wish Dara's were my decision to make, but it aint.

Glider
July 9th, 2008, 01:09 PM
Sorry, Kirk, but I disagree…I think it is a VERY fair comparison, especially for “big” meets and especially if you are in a position to be competing for number one like both swimmers discussed here. They are both going very aggressively for the big prize (however they define it.) The only difference is the relative quality of competition between the two organizations.

Racing is racing whether you are paid or not, or on a USMS club team or USAS national team. At the end of the day, you want to win your priority races.

You make a judgment call – sometimes agonizingly so – and do what is right for you. Sometimes you drop your less important races – we do it in USMS and they do it in USAS (see Phelps’ 100 FR.)

Personally, I’d love to swim a lot of events on short rest…but I have the wisdom to know I don’t do well in that scenario. And I’d rather do well in my priority races than do mediocre in all of them – again my preference.

This is a matter of meet management and acknowledging the recovery needed of older swimmers to compete at their best. Most of us do it…even the top dog masters…planned or not.

And thinking that a 41 year-old can come even close to managing the same tough program like Phelps, who is almost half her age…well THAT is not fair at all.

I’m not at all trying to disparage anyone here, especially John. Just pointing out the double standard that it’s okay for one to scratch a race on your Master’s club team to recover, but it’s not for a 41 year old USAS feeling the same aches and pains we do.



This is a really unfair comparison. John Smith, like all of us, is swimming purely for himself in masters swimming. Hopefully Dara doesn't think she's only swimming for herself at the Olympics.

TheGoodSmith
July 9th, 2008, 01:18 PM
Glider,

I think it is readily apparent that Dara does NOT feel the same aches and pains as the rest of us her age. Secondly, there is no exemption clause after you make the team to call an "age" handicap for your special recovery needs in between events.


Lindsay,

I see no contradiction. People who are suspect of Dara's PED use expect more out of her performances for precisely the same reason.


John Smith

tjburk
July 9th, 2008, 01:42 PM
Glider,

I think it is readily apparent that Dara does NOT feel the same aches and pains as the rest of us her age. Secondly, there is no exemption clause after you make the team to call an "age" handicap for your special recovery needs in between events.


Lindsay,

I see no contradiction. People who are suspect of Dara's PED use expect more out of her performances for precisely the same reason.


John Smith


John, question....please don't take this the wrong way........

Somebody eluded to this earlier in the thread.....

Do you have a personal grudge against Dara?

I ask this because no matter how many people disagree with you on this or explain logical reasons for her doing what she is doing.....hell she even said this was what she was going to do prior to Trials....You still continue to bash her decision as being selfish.

Here is a question for you:

If you were ranked 7th in the world in the 100, probably not a shot at the top three, and you were 5th in the world in the 50 with a pretty good shot of making the podium.......You would actually swim the additional swims knowing it would wear on you for your best event?

TheGoodSmith
July 9th, 2008, 02:08 PM
tjburk,

Garret Weber-Gale is swimming the same events. How would you feel if he did the same thing? Why do the same people that give Dara the benefit of the doubt regarding PEDs and hail her stunning natural abilities also feel the need to protect her from too much effort at the Games? This is strange.

Evil Smith and I are merely here to balance the discussion..... :-)


John Smith

tjburk
July 9th, 2008, 02:19 PM
If the circumstances were the same for him I would not have a problem with it! Specially if the one event could bring a medal home and the other more than likely would not!

If that makes her selfish....then I can honestly say I would be just as selfish in that position. As would most of the people on here I think. Bringing home that one medal sure would feel better than none. And the small chance that swimming all of those extra swims would ruin my chances at one......that is an easy decision for me.

Glider
July 9th, 2008, 02:19 PM
Hey John,

Saw an old pic on the SAMS site recently of a Smith doing fly...was that you?

From what I've seen and read and heard, she most definitely feels the aches and pains. Something about feeling like a tank ran over her one morning.

And evidently there is an exemption clause, because I'm pretty sure she just triggered it.;-)


Glider,

I think it is readily apparent that Dara does NOT feel the same aches and pains as the rest of us her age. Secondly, there is no exemption clause after you make the team to call an "age" handicap for your special recovery needs in between events.


Lindsay,

I see no contradiction. People who are suspect of Dara's PED use expect more out of her performances for precisely the same reason.


John Smith

TheGoodSmith
July 9th, 2008, 02:30 PM
Glider,

If it's a photo of butterfly, it's probably the Evil One, not me.

Fly, back and breast are only a means to freestyle.


John Smith

gull
July 9th, 2008, 02:35 PM
From what I've seen and read and heard, she most definitely feels the aches and pains. Something about feeling like a tank ran over her one morning.


Of course if you were using, that would be just the thing you would want to say to dispel rumors. Wasn't that the day she set a new AR? ("I'm old, I'm sore, I can't see. Oh, look, a new American record!")

gobears
July 9th, 2008, 02:48 PM
Did Dara not discuss dropping the 100 free with the Head Coach of the Olympic Team (Schubert)? What if HE was the one that encouraged her to drop the event? We're assuming a lot here to say that it was entirely her own "selfish" decision, aren't we? Perhaps Schubert thinks this is the best move for the entire team.

Glider
July 9th, 2008, 02:58 PM
John,

See here: http://www.swimatlantamasters.com/page6.html. It looks like you had a secret admirer.


Glider,

If it's a photo of butterfly, it's probably the Evil One, not me.

Fly, back and breast are only a means to freestyle.


John Smith

knelson
July 9th, 2008, 02:59 PM
What if HE was the one that encouraged her to drop the event?

I can't imagine the head coach suggesting to a swimmer that they should drop an event they qualified in. Torres did mention Sunday night she would discuss the matter with Schubert. I really can't imagine he was the one to suggest it to begin with.

The Fortress
July 9th, 2008, 03:17 PM
Garret Weber-Gale is swimming the same events. How would you feel if he did the same thing?

Interesting. It does seem odd to have the fastest person in the US declining to swim the event. And she certainly didn't look or swim tired at trials, as Gull notes. But still, the "level of effort" is her choice. If she hadn't been to the Olympics 4x already, she might make a different choice. But, her main goal, making history, is already achieved.

Chris Stevenson
July 9th, 2008, 03:19 PM
Dunno about selfish, it just seems a tad wimpy to me...as much as one can say that about a 41-year-old AR-holder. This whole "I'm so old I can't see the scoreboard and I have aches and pains" thing is getting...old.

Racers like to race.

I don't care how old she is, she's not made of glass. She swims 25,000 a week, does other training, and has hired people full time whose sole purpose is to help her recover. She can handle a few races, it didn't seem to hurt her at Trials.

gobears
July 9th, 2008, 03:20 PM
I really can't imagine he was the one to suggest it to begin with.

I wasn't meaning to suggest he came up with the idea. I know she was talking about it on TV the night she won the event. She did say she was going to discuss the idea with Schubert before making any kind of decision. What if he thought it was a good idea? What if he thought it gave a better chance for relay medals or overall medals for the team? Just saying it's somewhat uninformed to assume it was all her own "selfish" decision with no regard to the rest of the team.

tjburk
July 9th, 2008, 03:25 PM
Comparing her to Garrett Weber-Gale is not really a very good comparison... seeing as how she had already broken the WR in the 50 3 times before he was even born.....she is almost twice his age.

The Fortress
July 9th, 2008, 03:28 PM
Dunno about selfish, it just seems a tad wimpy to me...as much as one can say that about a 41-year-old AR-holder. This whole "I'm so old I can't see the scoreboard and I have aches and pains" thing is getting...old.

Racers like to race.

I don't care how old she is, she's not made of glass. She swims 25,000 a week, does other training, and has hired people full time whose sole purpose is to help her recover. She can handle a few races, it didn't seem to hurt her at Trials.

True. Only real masters swimmers should be allowed to whine. At his point, she should just can the rhetoric and swim without "aging" herself every nanosecond.

Chris Stevenson
July 9th, 2008, 03:34 PM
John,

See here: http://www.swimatlantamasters.com/page6.html. It looks like you had a secret admirer.

...that's...really something special...:kiss1:

craig68
July 9th, 2008, 04:00 PM
Torres' decision to drop the 100 does not leave the US without a representative in that event, as several folks are claiming. Coughlin is still swimming it, and she set the AR (4 tenths faster than Torres went last week) just two months ago. She just had an 'off' night at the finals. She has a better chance of making it to the podium in the 100 than Torres does.

knelson
July 9th, 2008, 04:08 PM
Torres' decision to drop the 100 does not leave the US without a representative in that event, as several folks are claiming.

If someone claimed that I must have missed the post.

craig68
July 9th, 2008, 04:37 PM
Kirk - you are right. I wrote that several people 'claimed' we are without a suitable representative in the 100, and this was really my inference from the discussions - a statement that we might not have a medal contender, that we will be without the number one seed from the U.S., and the idea that her actions were 'selfish.' If folks posting here aren't concerned that the U.S. will miss its best shot at a medal in this event, then why is her decision an issue?

tjburk
July 9th, 2008, 04:47 PM
Based on best times of the year so far....Natalie has a better shot at a medal.

TheGoodSmith
July 9th, 2008, 05:36 PM
tjburk,

With your philosophy on the games, there would only be 3-4 viable participants entered in each event.

This... It doesn't matter that I scratch because I wasn't going to medal anyway and it'll make me too tired response is disappointing.

She's the number one female sprinter in the country and she's not swimming the 100 free for the US because it'll get her too tired and risk the rest of her meet. The whole thing sounds strange to me.

She could coast the prelims at the Games and still make the semis in this event no problem.


John Smith

tjburk
July 9th, 2008, 06:30 PM
tjburk,

With your philosophy on the games, there would only be 3-4 viable participants entered in each event.

This... It doesn't matter that I scratch because I wasn't going to medal anyway and it'll make me too tired response is disappointing.

She's the number one female sprinter in the country and she's not swimming the 100 free for the US because it'll get her too tired and risk the rest of her meet. The whole thing sounds strange to me.

She could coast the prelims at the Games and still make the semis in this event no problem.


John Smith

Natalie went a 53.39 early this year and is the fastest American swimmer out there in the 100 by alomst a half second....Dara just happened to swim faster than her that day.

How is it disappointing.....are you telling me that in your career...you've never scratched an event to focus on another one? I find that very hard to believe! I know I have.....and I would bet a lot of people have. I know Phelps dropped the 400 Free to focus on the 400 IM....was he wrong for doing that?

And the comment about the "It doesn't matter" garbage doesn't fly.....like I said earlier....if this was a points meet.....I'd expect her to swim everything that she could score points in. But, this is the Olympics, and at the end of the day the only 3 places that matter are 1, 2 and 3.....Gold, Silver and Bronze....

pwolf66
July 9th, 2008, 06:41 PM
PLease just stop this exercise in Sado-Necro-Bestiality.

I think everyone's views on this are clear and neither side is gonna change the other's viewpoint so....

White Buffalo
July 9th, 2008, 06:41 PM
Data and Comparative data never lie.

To equate what Torres is doing to a male would be for the 40-44 year old Master's WR holder (53.5) in the 100 freestyle, Rich Saeger, (1984 Olympian and Gold medalist) to swim a 49+ 100 meter freestyle. I believe he would confirm-no way.

Her first three Olympics she swam relays. She swam individual events in 2000, took 6 years off, had a child, and 2 surgeries in the past 10 months but is the fastest American women ever- you believers are simply "off the reservation" as it is performance enhanced.

Her 50 freestyle would equate to Rowdy Gaines coming back and going slightly slower than what Garrett Weber-Gale went- 21.7-21.8 in his 40s. It is absurd. She went 26.6 and then 25.9 leading off a relay in August 2006 and has now dropped 1.7 seconds in approximately 22 months, of which she had the two surgeries. I guess she had a lot of stretching/mashing/amino acids/nutrition then! So, if a male qualified for the trials at 23.4 and then dropped 1.7 seconds to go 21.7 in 22 months, PEDS would be suggested. Ben Wildman-Tobiner had pectoral surgery and with the new LZR swim suit, basically went his same 50 time as the year before when he was the world champion. Gary Hall at 33 could not eaqual his PR! Dara obliterates her PR and people want to believe it is real. The spread in the male to female 50 free WR is 2.7 seconds. In Men's Masters Dara is .1 slower than the AR held by Dave Boatwright. For now.......

Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy and Darra Torres.
WB

tjburk
July 9th, 2008, 06:46 PM
Data and Comparative data never lie.

To equate what Torres is doing to a male would be for the 40-44 year old Master's WR holder (53.5) in the 100 freestyle, Rich Saeger, (1984 Olympian and Gold medalist) to swim a 49+ 100 meter freestyle. I believe he would confirm-no way.

Her first three Olympics she swam relays. She swam individual events in 2000, took 6 years off, had a child, and 2 surgeries in the past 10 months but is the fastest American women ever- you believers are simply "off the reservation" as it is performance enhanced.

Her 50 freestyle would equate to Rowdy Gaines coming back and going slightly slower than what Garrett Weber-Gale went- 21.7-21.8 in his 40s. It is absurd. She went 26.6 and then 25.9 leading off a relay in August 2006 and has now dropped 1.7 seconds in approximately 22 months, of which she had the two surgeries. I guess she had a lot of stretching/mashing/amino acids/nutrition then! So, if a male qualified for the trials at 23.4 and then dropped 1.7 seconds to go 21.7 in 22 months, PEDS would be suggested. Ben Wildman-Tobiner had pectoral surgery and with the new LZR swim suit, basically went his same 50 time as the year before when he was the world champion. Gary Hall at 33 could not eaqual his PR! Dara obliterates her PR and people want to believe it is real. The spread in the male to female 50 free WR is 2.7 seconds. In Men's Masters Dara is .1 slower than the AR held by Dave Boatwright. For now.......

Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy and Darra Torres.
WB

Show me the money.......the proof....even an inkling of a shred of proof that what you say is true!!!! Actually, at least for now....all evidence points in the opposite direction.....so put that in with whatever you are smoking! LOL

knelson
July 9th, 2008, 07:19 PM
Dara obliterates her PR and people want to believe it is real.

I want to believe it's real, but I have to agree about the "obliterating" part. Here's some data. Dara last held the WR in the 50 free in 1984 with a 25.61(she was 17). At the 2000 Olympics she got a bronze with a 24.63. This past Sunday at Trials she went a 24.25.

scyfreestyler
July 9th, 2008, 07:46 PM
Data and Comparative data never lie.

To equate what Torres is doing to a male would be for the 40-44 year old Master's WR holder (53.5) in the 100 freestyle, Rich Saeger, (1984 Olympian and Gold medalist) to swim a 49+ 100 meter freestyle. I believe he would confirm-no way.

Her first three Olympics she swam relays. She swam individual events in 2000, took 6 years off, had a child, and 2 surgeries in the past 10 months but is the fastest American women ever- you believers are simply "off the reservation" as it is performance enhanced.

Her 50 freestyle would equate to Rowdy Gaines coming back and going slightly slower than what Garrett Weber-Gale went- 21.7-21.8 in his 40s. It is absurd. She went 26.6 and then 25.9 leading off a relay in August 2006 and has now dropped 1.7 seconds in approximately 22 months, of which she had the two surgeries. I guess she had a lot of stretching/mashing/amino acids/nutrition then! So, if a male qualified for the trials at 23.4 and then dropped 1.7 seconds to go 21.7 in 22 months, PEDS would be suggested. Ben Wildman-Tobiner had pectoral surgery and with the new LZR swim suit, basically went his same 50 time as the year before when he was the world champion. Gary Hall at 33 could not eaqual his PR! Dara obliterates her PR and people want to believe it is real. The spread in the male to female 50 free WR is 2.7 seconds. In Men's Masters Dara is .1 slower than the AR held by Dave Boatwright. For now.......

Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy and Darra Torres.
WB

Well there is really nothing left to discuss then, is there? :dunno:

aquageek
July 9th, 2008, 09:39 PM
Show me the money.......the proof....even an inkling of a shred of proof that what you say is true!!!! Actually, at least for now....all evidence points in the opposite direction.....so put that in with whatever you are smoking! LOL

So ironic you use a drug reference to support your side of the argument that she is clean.

tjburk
July 9th, 2008, 09:44 PM
Yep, I can do all I want anytime I want......So?

Blackbeard's Peg
July 9th, 2008, 11:46 PM
Kirk - you are right. I wrote that several people 'claimed' we are without a suitable representative in the 100, and this was really my inference from the discussions - a statement that we might not have a medal contender, that we will be without the number one seed from the U.S., and the idea that her actions were 'selfish.' If folks posting here aren't concerned that the U.S. will miss its best shot at a medal in this event, then why is her decision an issue?

Some of those girls looked pretty disgusted when they looked up at the results of their 100 finals. Maybe this is their chance to quit their bitching - vocal and facial expression - and let their swimming do the talking. This is a great chance for someone else to step up and become a "suitable" representative for the US.

But in the grand scheme of things, who cares if we don't have a medal contender in this event? There are enough other events where we'll have a nice haul.

tjburk
July 9th, 2008, 11:48 PM
I'll venture to guess that Natalie will be on the podium after finals!!!

Maui Mike
July 10th, 2008, 12:51 AM
I found it interesting to see how Torres times held up against the USMS top ten in the mens 40-45. She looks pretty good! But then it looks similar when I compared the USMS top ten men age 20-25 times against the times that the rest of our Olympic womens team put up at the trials. Be a good dual meet, but the women would win.

Paul Smith
July 10th, 2008, 09:50 AM
Some of those girls looked pretty disgusted when they looked up at the results of their 100 finals. Maybe this is their chance to quit their bitching - vocal and facial expression - and let their swimming do the talking. This is a great chance for someone else to step up and become a "suitable" representative for the US.

But in the grand scheme of things, who cares if we don't have a medal contender in this event? There are enough other events where we'll have a nice haul.

Funny thing...I saw a fair amount of those same looks in the early-mid 80's from both men and women in races against the East German & Chinese swimmers....most of whom never tested positive for any drug tests.

matysekj
July 10th, 2008, 10:43 AM
Funny thing...I saw a fair amount of those same looks in the early-mid 80's from both men and women in races against the East German & Chinese swimmers....most of whom never tested positive for any drug tests.

Funnier thing is.... I saw that very same look from the rest of the swimmers in YOUR heats and the spectators at nationals when you broke a record, and you've never tested positive for any drug tests. Hmmmm....

Give it a rest already.

TheGoodSmith
July 10th, 2008, 11:33 AM
Matesekj,

Yes, I agree..... Paul's new ultra lean physique at 230lbs is causing quite a stir in the sport.

When they begin testing for excessive quarter pounders with cheese and beer consumption, Paul will be nailed.


John Smith

scyfreestyler
July 10th, 2008, 11:46 AM
Matesekj,

Yes, I agree..... Paul's new ultra lean physique at 230lbs is causing quite a stir in the sport.

When they begin testing for excessive quarter pounders with cheese and beer consumption, Paul will be nailed.


John Smith

Yes, that is the purpose of PED's, to obtain a more streamlined physique. Please.

One could certainly use PED's to speed recovery and permit more race pace workouts with fewer rest days in between. Spare tire or not.

ehoch
July 10th, 2008, 01:48 PM
I wish people would stop comparing Dara's times to the Men's Masters times. This comparison is just plain silly - nobody in Masteres swimming has the type of training AND recovery program Dara is having.

Show me 10 Masters swimmers 40 years old that train full-time - by the way, they should also be Olympians in top physical condition. The only comparison I keep hearing is Spitz. I don't know what he was doing, but to simply say "she can't do it because Spitz could not" ?

Jason Lezak swam a 49.1 in 2000 at age 24. That is the prime age for swimmers - yes most world records in Men's swimming are still set between ages 20 and 24 --- so now he swims 47.5 . Sure - he has been training every year since 2000, but layoffs are by no means all that difficult to overcome as people imagine.

TheGoodSmith
July 10th, 2008, 11:30 PM
I wish people would stop comparing Dara's times to the Men's Masters times. This comparison is just plain silly - nobody in Masteres swimming has the type of training AND recovery program Dara is having.

Show me 10 Masters swimmers 40 years old that train full-time - by the way, they should also be Olympians in top physical condition. The only comparison I keep hearing is Spitz. I don't know what he was doing, but to simply say "she can't do it because Spitz could not" ?

Jason Lezak swam a 49.1 in 2000 at age 24. That is the prime age for swimmers - yes most world records in Men's swimming are still set between ages 20 and 24 --- so now he swims 47.5 . Sure - he has been training every year since 2000, but layoffs are by no means all that difficult to overcome as people imagine.

We gave you examples. How about Dennis Baker, Dr. Ron Karnough, Karlyn Pipes. . . Etc. None have beaten best times now that they are in their 40s let alone place in the top two at trials and set an AR.

knelson
July 11th, 2008, 12:36 AM
We gave you examples. How about Dennis Baker, Dr. Ron Karnough, Karlyn Pipes. . . Etc. None have beaten best times now that they are in their 40s

You sure about Karlyn? I know she's swimming a hair slower now than in her early 40s, but are you sure her masters times aren't faster than her previous personal bests?

Chris Stevenson
July 11th, 2008, 05:37 AM
We gave you examples. How about Dennis Baker, Dr. Ron Karnough, Karlyn Pipes. . . Etc. None have beaten best times now that they are in their 40s let alone place in the top two at trials and set an AR.

John, I agree with you in principle...but Lezak's time WAS a little eye-popping for a 32-year-old. It would be interesting to see if he would be able to keep it up into his 40s if he kept training. Or if he could pull a Dara and come out of retirement in 8 years to equal/better his latest times.

smontanaro
July 11th, 2008, 06:32 AM
We gave you examples. How about Dennis Baker, Dr. Ron Karnough, Karlyn Pipes. . . Etc. None have beaten best times now that they are in their 40s let alone place in the top two at trials and set an AR.

How many of them have been training essentially full time for the past two years and have the full complement of coach(es), trainers, masseuses, nannies and whatever other support staff that Dara has?

Skip

gull
July 11th, 2008, 09:24 AM
How many of them have been training essentially full time for the past two years and have the full complement of coach(es), trainers, masseuses, nannies and whatever other support staff that Dara has?


I once suggested to my wife that we hire an au pair girl from Sweden, but she said no. Maybe if I had told her it would help my swimming she would have agreed.

TheGoodSmith
July 11th, 2008, 11:05 AM
Chris,

I agree, Lezak's swims were eye popping. We'll see if he has the motivation in 7 years to make a comeback and equal his times.


ehoch,

I'm sorry but Mark did train seriously for his 40 year old comeback in California.


Kirk,

Let's throw out Karlyn from the comparison as she was never a US national champion in her day. She was more of a "John Smith" at US Nationals.... :-)


John Smith


John Smith

ehoch
July 11th, 2008, 12:20 PM
How about Dennis Baker, Dr. Ron Karnough, Karlyn Pipes

You are basically making my argument -- you can maybe come up with 3-4 swimmers who are somewhat close in terms of training as fasr as we know. None of the swimmer have the talent or swimming resume like Dara.

I read the training schedule for Dennis Baker -- while he is running around trying to make a living as a coach, Dara is either getting a massage or taking a nap. It does not compare.

It's another myth to always assume that people reached their full potential in prior years. I would bet that Dara is just now training like a true sprinter - anything she did before was probably way too much. Just saw a few things from the book that covered Santa Clara in 2000 - and she did not train like a sprinter. The first thing she now says about her prior training is " way too much". I trained under a few Olympic coaches and I could list many swimmers that swam well, but were not close to their potential -- for example Erik Vendt.

TheGoodSmith
July 11th, 2008, 02:26 PM
ehoch,

You're way out of bounds on your comments about Dennis Baker's talent and training. Perhaps you don't know who he is very well.

As for Dara not being trained correctly to hit her full potential when she was younger........ I find this laughable.

Let's watch over the coming years to see if any former elite swimmers with the financial resources that Dara has can qualify for the top 8.

Don't hold your breath.


John Smith

Big AL
July 11th, 2008, 02:43 PM
As for Dara not being trained correctly to hit her full potential when she was younger........ I find this laughable.

I agree she had the proper training and met her potential for a young woman in her 20's.

Beyond this, she has come to another phase... becoming a mother and having the tons of natural hormones flowing in her body. She has taken advantage of this to build and shape her body as never before, and combined with the mentality to train as a 40 year old (recovery based training), she has excelled once again.... no drugs required. Bravo!

justforfun
July 11th, 2008, 02:53 PM
I have another good comeback example no one has mentioned yet. Jeff Rouse came back for the 2004 Trials after a 5-6 year retirement. I believe he spent at least a solid two years training for the 100 back. He quit his job, returned to Palo Alto and trained with the Stanford men, at the time having many world class backstrokers in the pool with him. I think he was 34 at the time of the trials. I thought his performances were tremendous (55.0 or so). He made top 8 at trials, but didn't go anywhere near his previous best and WR of 53.8. He went much faster than any masters swimmer his age has ever been, but still not close to the elite swimmers in 2004. He is at least an equal comparison to Torres in terms of talent and training during a comeback attempt.

gobears
July 11th, 2008, 03:22 PM
I'm in the camp of the very guarded optimist regarding Dara. I want to believe in her but acknowledge that what she's done stretches the limits of believability. Wouldn't it be nice to think that age isn't as detrimental to performance as we once believed?

I remember Jeannie Childs (sp?) on the cover of Swimming World magazine when I was in high school. She was an OLD lady back then--21--and breaking all kinds of barriers. No one could believe a woman "that old" could swim as fast as she did. Shoot, when I swam in college in the 80's it was a relatively new idea that women could continue to drop time post-high-school.

I don't think anyone can know if Dara reached her potential during those years. She was part of the "be skinny at all costs" culture of women's swimming at the time. Eating disorders among women swimmers were relatively common as were weigh-ins. Nutrition was not nearly as recognized as a factor in athletic performance. Women swimmers were commonly avoiding fat (and, by doing so, protein as well). We were eating carbs. We were only beginning to see hydration as important. There were not the number of supplements now available back then.

I don't really know what to think. Like I said, many women went into college swimming without the knowledge that the peak of their athletic abilities lay ahead of them and not behind. The swimming world has really changed since then. It would be nice to think it can continue.

The Fortress
July 11th, 2008, 03:25 PM
Beyond this, she has come to another phase... becoming a mother and having the tons of natural hormones flowing in her body. She has taken advantage of this to build and shape her body as never before, and combined with the mentality to train as a 40 year old (recovery based training), she has excelled once again.... no drugs required. Bravo!

I don't know the medical basis for this, but it is really hard for me to fathom. I think pregnancy and childbirth and post-baby time are typically associated with flat out exhaustion. I had a kid at 39, and I didn't really experience this wonderful new phase of life. In fact, physically, I feel like I've gone mostly downhill since 40. I can't seem to recover at all.

Rouse is a good example.

I thought KPN WAS a professional masters swimmer. She may not have Dara's intensive recovery regimen, but still ...

FlyQueen
July 11th, 2008, 03:32 PM
I swim with a former college swimmer who is a pure sprinter. She is in her 30s now (I realize not the same age as Dara) but going big time PRs. She is swimming 3 times a week 4 at the most. And doing a couple of weight training sessions. Basically now she is really training like a sprinter. She swam at a well known school and has had a great coaching.

I am amazed by Dara and with all she is going through with getting tested I have 110% confidence in her! I hope she kicks major booty!!!!

Big AL
July 11th, 2008, 03:36 PM
I don't know the medical basis for this, but it is really hard for me to fathom.

I can't say I do, either. But, I known that a woman's body is flooded with natural growth hormone to put on weight, and most women do, but they "just go with it" and put on garbage weight (my mother did anyway, and a lot of other moms). With the right focus, pre/post-baby-time can make mommy more than just fat and puffy. I also know that the hormones keep flowing as long as mom breastfeeds, too. Having anything in there doesn't matter... just the act of nursing causes hormone generation.

gull
July 11th, 2008, 03:44 PM
I don't know the medical basis for this, but it is really hard for me to fathom. I think pregnancy and childbirth and post-baby time are typically associated with flat out exhaustion. I had a kid at 39, and I didn't really experience this wonderful new phase of life. In fact, physically, I feel like I've gone mostly downhill since 40. I can't seem to recover at all.

That's why you need a nanny. Or an au pair girl.

lefty
July 11th, 2008, 03:55 PM
Just for clarification on the previous issue, it is now evident that the one's who are calling her out for skipping the 100 are the same who are certain she is a steriod cheat! I for one am bothered by that, because I think she is a steroid cheat and find it distracting to the issue to make claims that she is selfish for scratching the 100. It gives the appearance of pettiness.

TheGoodSmith
July 11th, 2008, 04:03 PM
Gull,

Please add "petty" to the list of adjectives.


John Smith

The Fortress
July 11th, 2008, 04:04 PM
That's why you need a nanny. Or an au pair girl.

Nice idea, but I'm using all my spare funds to purchase cheatin' technical suits.

Whew, I'm not even petty. Banner day.

lefty
July 11th, 2008, 04:41 PM
Gull,

Please add "petty" to the list of adjectives.


John Smith

John, did you misunderstand me that badly? It is petty to claim she selfish for scratching the 100 in view of her other offenses.

Maybe I am not understanding you?

Chris Stevenson
July 11th, 2008, 04:44 PM
Just for clarification on the previous issue, it is now evident that the one's who are calling her out for skipping the 100 are the same who are certain she is a steriod cheat! I for one am bothered by that, because I think she is a steroid cheat and find it distracting to the issue to make claims that she is selfish for scratching the 100. It gives the appearance of pettiness.

I think the connection between the two issues is tenuous at best.

There is no direct evidence that she is cheating and it is unprovable that she isn't, so it is simply a matter of faith either way (ie, you either assume she is or she isn't).

Personally, I cannot believe she is cheating if the ONLY (or main) evidence is that she is swimming very fast. It means something that she is voluntarily going beyond the minimum requirements.

However, having been burned in the past, like some I am guarded in my attitude towards her achievements. Intellectually I can appreciate what she is doing, which is ground-breaking, but it has no emotional resonance with me. I admire her achievements while at the same time I confess that I don't really find HER all that admirable. (Dara-defenders, please don't jump down my throat. I am not accusing her of cheating nor am I calling her a terrible person.)

And I also do not admire her -- as a competitor -- for skipping out of the 100, whether you want to call it selfish or whatever. Reasonable people can differ on this and I certainly see the logic behind doing it, I just don't happen to agree.

tjburk
July 11th, 2008, 04:48 PM
I think the connection between the two issues is tenuous at best.

There is no direct evidence that she is cheating and it is unprovable that she isn't, so it is simply a matter of faith either way (ie, you either assume she is or she isn't).

Personally, I cannot believe she is cheating if the ONLY (or main) evidence is that she is swimming very fast. It means something that she is voluntarily going beyond the minimum requirements.

However, having been burned in the past, like some I am guarded in my attitude towards her achievements. Intellectually I can appreciate what she is doing, which is ground-breaking, but it has no emotional resonance with me. I admire her achievements while at the same time I confess that I don't really find HER all that admirable. (Dara-defenders, please don't jump down my throat. I am not accusing her of cheating nor am I calling her a terrible person.)

And I also do not admire her -- as a competitor -- for skipping out of the 100, whether you want to call it selfish or whatever. Reasonable people can differ on this and I certainly see the logic behind doing it, I just don't happen to agree.

Well said Chris...I just happen to be one of the others in regards to the 100.

smontanaro
July 11th, 2008, 04:50 PM
As for Dara not being trained correctly to hit her full potential when she was younger........ I find this laughable.

Haven't training techniques improved over the years? One of the reasons records fall is because later athletes take advantage of more modern training techniques. It's possible that she was trained the full potential of the available training techniques when she was younger, but that more appropriate techniques are available to her today.

I find Dara's current stroke (at least what I've seen out of the water) to be a thing of beauty. I didn't get that impression watching the video posted of her swimming the free leg of the 400 medley relay at the 2000 Olympics. It seems to me her stroke has improved significantly in the last eight years.

Skip

knelson
July 11th, 2008, 04:51 PM
You're way out of bounds on your comments about Dennis Baker's talent and training. Perhaps you don't know who he is very well.

I don't know Dennis, either, but from what I've read I think I can see ehoch's point. Obviously Dennis was an elite swimmer in college, but he certainly never held a world record like Dara did. But I think ehoch's main point is that Dennis is training hard now AND working several hours a day on the pool deck coaching. That is very different from what Torres is doing.

TheGoodSmith
July 11th, 2008, 05:24 PM
Interesting read on Dara and a supposed female bias. Personally, I think it's more of an age bias.

http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation/2008/07/does-dara-torre.html

"Does Dara Torres suffer from a double standard of doping scrutiny?
Interesting column from the normally logical Gwen Knapp today. She wonders why a 40 year-old male like Barry Bonds received a free pass when he belted a home run every time he spit, meanwhile a successful 41 year-old female swimmer -- Dara Torres -- comes under the intense scrutiny of the doping-suspicions crowd. (Torres simply delivered a baby at age ~39, then records 5% faster times in her postpartum swimming years than she did in her college competitions; maybe she cut down on that college drinking)."

LindsayNB
July 11th, 2008, 05:26 PM
I don't know Dennis either but it seems to me that the 200 fly is a particularly difficult race to go after in your forties. :eek: Spitz's choice of the 100 fly is still I think a bigger challenge than the 50 free.

The Fortress
July 11th, 2008, 05:32 PM
Interesting read on Dara and a supposed female bias.

http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation/2008/07/does-dara-torre.html

"Does Dara Torres suffer from a double standard of doping scrutiny?
Interesting column from the normally logical Gwen Knapp today. She wonders why a 40 year-old male like Barry Bonds received a free pass when he belted a home run every time he spit, meanwhile a successful 41 year-old female swimmer -- Dara Torres -- comes under the intense scrutiny of the doping-suspicions crowd. (Torres simply delivered a baby at age ~39, then records 5% faster times in her postpartum swimming years than she did in her college competitions; maybe she cut down on that college drinking)."

Nonsense. MLB simply endorsed steroid use.

TheGoodSmith
July 11th, 2008, 05:32 PM
knelson,

Dennis places 5th in the 200 fly in the 1983 summer nationals in Clovis and Dara places 4th in the 100 free at the 1984 Trials.

They were comparable in their talent and performances long ago. Dennis trains solidly compared to Dara and quite a bit more than most masters swimmers.

I think the point is that Dara's success is quite a bit more noticeable than Dennis's success.


John Smith

tjburk
July 11th, 2008, 05:37 PM
knelson,

Dennis places 5th in the 200 fly in the 1983 summer nationals in Clovis and Dara places 4th in the 100 free at the 1984 Trials.

They were comparable in their talent and performances long ago. Dennis trains solidly compared to Dara and quite a bit more than most masters swimmers.

I think the point is that Dara's success is quite a bit more noticeable than Dennis's success.


John Smith

John, I agree with most of this but Dara's best event has always seemed to be the 50 hasn't it? Her turn leaves a lot to be desired....even now.

knelson
July 11th, 2008, 05:42 PM
They were comparable in their talent and performances long ago. Dennis trains solidly compared to Dara and quite a bit more than most masters swimmers.

No question about that, but I think there might be a big difference in what they do out of the pool. Dennis continues to coach on deck and Dara is at home getting massages, etc.


I think the point is that Dara's success is quite a bit more noticeable than Dennis's success.

I certainly can't disagree with that. And I guess the question is then, if Dennis did emulate Dara's training program would he be able to perform at a comparable level to her? Odds are, no, he couldn't.

TheGoodSmith
July 11th, 2008, 05:46 PM
John, I agree with most of this but Dara's best event has always seemed to be the 50 hasn't it? Her turn leaves a lot to be desired....even now.


tjburk,

Agreed, Dara's upper body strength is what truly stands out in the race. Her start, turn and even her kick seem very average. Her stroke is long and her power is outstanding.

I do like the fact that she is beating people with the new ugly straight arm European/Aussi freestyle.


John Smith

ehoch
July 11th, 2008, 06:15 PM
So now making the finals at Olympic trials is the same as winning 9 olympic medals ?

And since progress in training makes no difference I should start believing that I was a better Freestyle swimmer than Mark Spitz ? My times were better just a little more than a decade later. Every 200 Free Finalist at this year's trials is a better swimmer than 2xtime Gold Medalist Daniel Loader ?

Dennis is a great swimmer, but he is workhorse - he is a "dog" (out of the cats and dogs interview about swimmers) who has to work for everything. I bet you anything that there are countless swimmers at all levels (even Olympic) out there who are cats - trained like dogs - and hated swimming for it.

What exactly is the "allowable" time difference to previous best times ? Just so I know for this summer.

TheGoodSmith
July 14th, 2008, 02:57 PM
ehoch,

If there were an 800 fly relay then the answer to your question is "yes".... :-)

Note, making the Olympic team in a relay is obviously great. It is not, however, as impressive as doing it on your own in an individual event.

As for the spread on times..... You raise an interesting question. Discounting the effect of the new rubber suits, most elite level former US finalists in their 40s who are motivated in masters can come within about 3-3.5 seconds of their best 100 free. The spread is slightly worse LCM vs. SCY for obvious aerobic reasons. If you trained for "real" for US Nationals, I could see dropping another second or so from that range. With the new rubber suits helping as much as say a half second per hundred..... I think it might be possible to get within 1.5 - 2.0 seconds of your lifetime best LCM.

As for beating your lifetime best 100 time in your 40's...... not a chance.... :-)


John Smith


John Smith

swimmerlady
July 15th, 2008, 05:47 PM
... And I guess the question is then, if Dennis did emulate Dara's training program would he be able to perform at a comparable level to her? Odds are, no, he couldn't.


Well - of course not ..... He didnt' have a baby!

knelson
July 15th, 2008, 05:55 PM
I guess that one went over my head. I don't get it.

scyfreestyler
July 15th, 2008, 06:04 PM
Here's an endurance athlete who did not let pregnancy slow her down.


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/04/eveningnews/main3450639.shtml

White Buffalo
July 15th, 2008, 09:45 PM
Paula Radcliffe is one of the greats. However, her 2.23.09 winning NYC marathon time in 2007 at age 33, an age not considered old for women's marathons, after having a child 9 months earlier is:

1) almost 8 minutes off her WR;
2) one second faster than her winning NYC marathon of 2004 when she was not in top form as admitted by her; and
3) not an explosive fast twitch event.

Finally, she is coming off a stress fracture and hip injury which should either 1) prevent her from running at all in the Olympics or lining up and having an extremely difficult time medaling.

I do not believe there is any comparison between her and Dara Torres other than they are both female athletes that had children.

The Fortress
July 15th, 2008, 09:50 PM
I guess that one went over my head. I don't get it.

Some people have this odd notion that having a baby at 40 or so is performance enhancing because of the influx of hormones.

:notworking: :lmao:

scyfreestyler
July 15th, 2008, 09:55 PM
Paula Radcliffe is one of the greats. However, her 2.23.09 winning NYC marathon time in 2007 at age 33, an age not considered old for women's marathons, after having a child 9 months earlier is:

1) almost 8 minutes off her WR;
2) one second faster than her winning NYC marathon of 2004 when she was not in top form as admitted by her; and
3) not an explosive fast twitch event.

Finally, she is coming off a stress fracture and hip injury which should either 1) prevent her from running at all in the Olympics or lining up and having an extremely difficult time medaling.

I do not believe there is any comparison between her and Dara Torres other than they are both female athletes that had children.

I don't know a lot about the woman and don't really follow running. I just noticed that she had won a high level marathon shortly after having a child. Seemed pretty impressive.

As for it not being an explosive and fast twitch event, I agree. It should be more difficult for somebody to compete in long distance endurance events with breaks in training and injuries. Fast twitch and sprint events are easier to maintain a certain level of performance in as one ages (or so I have read on FORUMS.USMS.ORG).

This came up as I was searching for some sort of research that covered the performance of female athletes after childbirth. I often hear that pregnancy can improve athletic performance but have never seen anything to document such claims.

tjburk
July 15th, 2008, 10:15 PM
Wasn't there a story about the East German women getting pregnant then aborting to try and elevate their natural hormone levels?

The Fortress
July 15th, 2008, 10:35 PM
Wasn't there a story about the East German women getting pregnant then aborting to try and elevate their natural hormone levels?

Yes, I saw the recent TV special on that. But the East Germans were teenagers. It's a bit different at 40. Then you confront insomnia, allergies, asthma, exhaustion. Let's have a survey of 40ish moms and see what they say ... I think there's a reason why many elite masters don't have kids.

tjburk
July 15th, 2008, 10:41 PM
I am curious why the hormone levels would be so different at 40 as opposed to 20......would be an interesting study!

scyfreestyler
July 15th, 2008, 10:46 PM
Yes, I saw the recent TV special on that. But the East Germans were teenagers. It's a bit different at 40. Then you confront insomnia, allergies, asthma, exhaustion. Let's have a survey of 40ish moms and see what they say ... I think there's a reason why many elite masters don't have kids.

Some mothers take to being pregnant rather kindly while others wind up with hyperemesis and TPN via PIC line.

I am pretty sure I have read that Dara was swimming through pregnancy and racing people in the pool with her baby belly. Exhaustion was probably not one of her symptoms.

I am sure there are some elite masters who don't want to take the chance of interrupting their swimming success by having children. Sounds kind of sad to me, but to each their own.

The Fortress
July 15th, 2008, 11:06 PM
I am curious why the hormone levels would be so different at 40 as opposed to 20......would be an interesting study!

I have no idea whether hormone levels are different between 20 and 40. But the effect of my hormones at 30 and 40 was vastly different!! And, let's face it, your body is different. Things are just not the same at 20 (or even 30) and 40! No way!

Matteo, I also have no idea what hyperemesis and TPN via PIC line is, but it sounds awful! I hope it wasn't your wife! Still, I don't think working out during pregnancy exempts you from complications during or exhaustion after childbirth. Unless perhaps your sleep is never interrupted because you have nannies ... And multiple children are, of course, more exhausting than having just one.

scyfreestyler
July 15th, 2008, 11:20 PM
I have no idea whether hormone levels are different between 20 and 40. But the effect of my hormones at 30 and 40 was vastly different!! And, let's face it, your body is different. Things are just not the same at 20 (or even 30) and 40! No way!

Matteo, I also have no idea what hyperemesis and TPN via PIC line is, but it sounds awful! I hope it wasn't your wife! Still, I don't think working out during pregnancy exempts you from complications during or exhaustion after childbirth. Unless perhaps your sleep is never interrupted because you have nannies ... And multiple children are, of course, more exhausting than having just one.

I am inclined to believe that Dara's pregnancy was pretty much trouble free and that she had plenty of help after the fact from nannies and such to permit her to train as she needed. A complicated pregnancy followed by sleepless nights with an infant who refuses to sleep for more than 30 minutes at a time, are simply not conducive to swimming at a world class level.

While I am familiar with pregnancies that are complicated and require things like TPN (liquid food fed into the heart essentially...and yes, my wife...two times..the next surgical procedure was mine :) ), I have also seen some others in which the mother was nearly symptom free and carried about her business right up until the day she gave birth. Certainly Dara would be categorized in the latter of the two.

knelson
July 16th, 2008, 12:23 AM
Let's have a survey of 40ish moms and see what they say ... I think there's a reason why many elite masters don't have kids.

Yeah, this seems like one of those things that people change to whatever supports their desired position. If it's them, they say "you can compare your time before you had kids with your times after," but for Dara somehow her pregnancy actually improved her times. Seems like a double standard to me.

scyfreestyler
July 16th, 2008, 12:30 AM
Yeah, this seems like one of those things that people change to whatever supports their desired position. If it's them, they say "you can compare your time before you had kids with your times after," but for Dara somehow her pregnancy actually improved her times. Seems like a double standard to me.


Or maybe that's not it at all. Perhaps too much is being made of the pregnancy in the first place. It might not be a factor at all. Not in a beneficial way and not to her detriment either.

gobears
July 16th, 2008, 09:05 AM
Or maybe that's not it at all. Perhaps too much is being made of the pregnancy in the first place. It might not be a factor at all. Not in a beneficial way and not to her detriment either.

I have had three kids (all when I was between the ages of 31 and 38) and would argue that for some, pregnancy isn't that big a deal as far as staying in shape. I was lucky and was able to work out each time all the way until the day I gave birth. As far as being exhausted, I think any tiredness I had was related to lack of sleep with a nursing baby rather than pregnancy.

Now, I will say that my hormones are now all over the place (in my early 40's). I think perimenopause is causing more fatigue for me than my pregnancies ever did.

I still don't think I could beat my college times even if I had a nanny and swimming was my full-time job. But, I'm not a sprint freestyler, so what do I know?!

dorothyrde
July 16th, 2008, 09:29 AM
I have had three kids (all when I was between the ages of 31 and 38) and would argue that for some, pregnancy isn't that big a deal as far as staying in shape. I was lucky and was able to work out each time all the way until the day I gave birth. As far as being exhausted, I think any tiredness I had was related to lack of sleep with a nursing baby rather than pregnancy.

Now, I will say that my hormones are now all over the place (in my early 40's). I think perimenopause is causing more fatigue for me than my pregnancies ever did.

I still don't think I could beat my college times even if I had a nanny and swimming was my full-time job. But, I'm not a sprint freestyler, so what do I know?!


My second pregnancy was quite normal and I was working out up until my water broke. That was when I was 31. I also bounced back very quickly from it, so working out while pregnant really helps.

As far as hormones in your 40's, I feel they are vastly different than 20's and 30's. I will also say at 46, I am in far better shape and am stronger than I was as a teenager, just because I put an emphasis on it. I have no college times to compare too, I started swimming at age 39.

Dara never stopped working out, even though she retired from competive swimming. She was still in top condition, did not become flabby and complacent. It think we are hard pressed to find a comparison, but the future might bring more as more woman strive to raise the age barrier.(and men too).

The Fortress
July 16th, 2008, 09:42 AM
Now, I will say that my hormones are now all over the place (in my early 40's). I think perimenopause is causing more fatigue for me than my pregnancies ever did.

No kidding!!

I had 3 between 31 and 39, but my last two were troublesome. Still worked out quite regularly and was never "flabby and complacent." Perhaps, as Matt says, the pregnancy itself is not that important either way if it's uncomplicated.

aquageek
July 16th, 2008, 09:53 AM
This discussion generally comes around to the point where we start comparing ourselves and USMS swimmers to Torres. We aren't talking here about lifetime bests of a very fit person. We are talking lifetime, historical and Olympic level bests of a person. I quit swimming at 14 and took it up again at 29 and I'm markedly faster now. However, that is completely different than what Torres is doing, kids, no kids, etc.

dorothyrde
July 16th, 2008, 11:41 AM
Exactly Geek. Torres, unlike the rest of us did not stop and rest, she continued to keep in top physical shape outside of swimming. So there is not a good model to compare to her to say she has to be doping because a 41 year old woman cannot do this. 41 year old woman usually do not follow this path in life where total focus is on fitness. They are busy doing other things.

But the world jumps to the conclusion that no other woman her age can do this, so she must be doping. I think there is not many who have the combination of genetics, talent, and such focus on fitness that she has had all her life.

aquageek
July 16th, 2008, 12:11 PM
But the world jumps to the conclusion that no other woman her age can do this, so she must be doping.

Wrong, she herself has jumped to this conclusion, or anticipated the controversy anyway. It is completely inaccurate to say the scrutiny is in any way fabricated when she was the first to acknowledge it.

I still wonder what was going on during her comeback when she swam minor meets or USMS meets. Both surprising and confusing. Then, she shows up looking like a mutant and blows everyone away. Is this the swimming version of Ali's rope-a-dope?

tjburk
July 16th, 2008, 12:19 PM
Wrong, she herself has jumped to this conclusion, or anticipated the controversy anyway. It is completely inaccurate to say the scrutiny is in any way fabricated when she was the first to acknowledge it.

I still wonder what was going on during her comeback when she swam minor meets or USMS meets. Both surprising and confusing. Then, she shows up looking like a mutant and blows everyone away. Is this the swimming version of Ali's rope-a-dope?

Showing up looking like a mutant? I knda like that mutant then! Got any comparison pics to show this drastic evolutionary change you spout about?

Sam Perry
July 16th, 2008, 12:28 PM
Exactly Geek. Torres, unlike the rest of us did not stop and rest, she continued to keep in top physical shape outside of swimming. So there is not a good model to compare to her to say she has to be doping because a 41 year old woman cannot do this. 41 year old woman usually do not follow this path in life where total focus is on fitness. They are busy doing other things.

But the world jumps to the conclusion that no other woman her age can do this, so she must be doping. I think there is not many who have the combination of genetics, talent, and such focus on fitness that she has had all her life.


What about Gary Hall and Neill Walker, and Josh Davis in 2004? Those guys didn't even stop swimming, are 10 years younger and aren't swimming their best times even with the new LZR. Don't get me wrong, I am completely undecided on this issue, but to say there is not examples anywhere else is plain wrong. Other than the fact since she wasn't training she wasn't subject to testing like these guys were. So being out of the sport for 7 years enabled her to stay in shape out of the pool without testing. That's is the main question many people have.

aquageek
July 16th, 2008, 12:29 PM
Showing up looking like a mutant? I knda like that mutant then! Got any comparison pics to show this drastic evolutionary change you spout about?

They were posted on the forum in the recent past. You can find them yourself.

tjburk
July 16th, 2008, 12:33 PM
They were posted on the forum in the recent past. You can find them yourself.

Nice dodge......

Been looking on the internet and every picture I have seen so far shows a woman who has always been in really good shape. You can tell that her focus this time around has been on a lot of dryland work. She looks more fit today then ever....but a mutant? That's a bit if a stretch ain't it?

aquageek
July 16th, 2008, 12:37 PM
Nice dodge......

You have your opinions, I have mine. That should do it, word.

tjburk
July 16th, 2008, 12:45 PM
You have your opinions, I have mine. That should do it, word.

I am sitting here looking at pics of her from 2001....where she is standing next to Gabrielle Reece....she looked like she had some pretty big guns all the way back then too......

I say nice dodge...because you make a statement about her showing up looking like a mutant....but can't back up what you are saying.....show me the money!!!!!

aquageek
July 16th, 2008, 12:48 PM
As I said, this was posted on the forum a few weeks ago but I'm happy to do the work for you.

http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?t=11117

tjburk
July 16th, 2008, 12:55 PM
As I said, this was posted on the forum a few weeks ago but I'm happy to do the work for you.

http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?t=11117

Ok, now where is the comparison picture that shows this mutant change?

Iwannafly
July 16th, 2008, 02:04 PM
What about Gary Hall and Neill Walker, and Josh Davis in 2004? Those guys didn't even stop swimming, are 10 years younger and aren't swimming their best times even with the new LZR. Don't get me wrong, I am completely undecided on this issue, but to say there is not examples anywhere else is plain wrong. Other than the fact since she wasn't training she wasn't subject to testing like these guys were. So being out of the sport for 7 years enabled her to stay in shape out of the pool without testing. That's is the main question many people have.

You have to keep taking PEDs in order for them to keep working. It's not like she could have been juicing for those seven years to get fast, then stop to make her comeback. All the gains she achieved would start to fade as soon as she stopped using. Look what happened to Jason Giambi.

The Fortress
July 16th, 2008, 02:06 PM
All the gains she achieved would start to fade as soon as she stopped using.

Really?

Paul Smith
July 16th, 2008, 03:06 PM
Exactly Geek. Torres, unlike the rest of us did not stop and rest, she continued to keep in top physical shape outside of swimming. So there is not a good model to compare to her to say she has to be doping because a 41 year old woman cannot do this. 41 year old woman usually do not follow this path in life where total focus is on fitness. They are busy doing other things.

But the world jumps to the conclusion that no other woman her age can do this, so she must be doping. I think there is not many who have the combination of genetics, talent, and such focus on fitness that she has had all her life.

Dorothy, do you really think TaeBo helps someone stay in swiming shape? So why did Gary Hall at 33 (who never took two 7 year breaks to do Taebo) and training harder than he ever has not do his best (very close) in the 50 and back out of the 100? Note he was also wearing the new technology suits that have effected times by 2-5%.

Mark Foster at 37 did his best...never took two 7 year breaks from the sport doing TeaBo...but the suit played a major part.

As Gull said...this is an anomoly and should be judged as such.

Iwannafly
July 16th, 2008, 03:06 PM
Really?

That is my limited understanding of PED use. That understanding is garnered mostly from observing the Landis saga and cycling in general. But you probably shouldn't take an Engineer's word on medical information. Perhaps Gull can weigh in! Or JazzHands!

tjburk
July 16th, 2008, 03:11 PM
Dorothy, do you really think TaeBo helps someone stay in swiming shape? So why did Gary Hall at 33 (who never took two 7 year breaks to do Taebo) and training harder than he ever has not do his best (very close) in the 50 and back out of the 100? Note he was also wearing the new technology suits that have effected times by 2-5%.

Mark Foster at 37 did his best...never took two 7 year breaks from the sport doing TeaBo...but the suit played a major part.

As Gull said...this is an anomoly and should be judged as such.

Paul, maybe that is one of the reasons why she is doing better than them.... just a thought. Maybe the breaks along with all of the other things she is doing different....are the reason....

Paul Smith
July 16th, 2008, 03:33 PM
The two Dara threads are converging so I'll post here. Some good (bad) reads on PED's:

"Aussie swimmers undergo EPO test"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics2000/swimming/919618.stm

"Schooling NFL players in steroid testing loopholes, Texas bodybuilder Dave Jacobs gets probation"
http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation/2008/05/schooling-nfl-p.html

"Trevor Graham receives the ban of a lifetime"
http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation/2008/07/trevor-graham-r.html

hofffam
July 16th, 2008, 03:44 PM
Note he was also wearing the new technology suits that have effected times by 2-5%.


I haven't seen a single piece of data to defend this statement. Mark Schubert's comments are not data.

Not one American Olympian at the 2008 Trials dropped 2% from their pre-trials lifetime bests.

tjburk
July 16th, 2008, 03:50 PM
The two Dara threads are converging so I'll post here.

They are kind of overlapping aren't they?????

Paul Smith
July 16th, 2008, 03:56 PM
I haven't seen a single piece of data to defend this statement. Mark Schubert's comments are not data.

Not one American Olympian at the 2008 Trials dropped 2% from their pre-trials lifetime bests.


Sorry dan but your 100% wrong. I advise you to go back and double check the times...

And for the record I'm not a Shubert fan and think his association (as well as USS's) with Speedo are horrible conflicts off interests...TYR has a case.

By the way, how many meets have you personally swam in any of these suits?

gull
July 16th, 2008, 04:08 PM
That is my limited understanding of PED use. That understanding is garnered mostly from observing the Landis saga and cycling in general. But you probably shouldn't take an Engineer's word on medical information. Perhaps Gull can weigh in! Or JazzHands!


My understanding is that anabolic steroids and growth hormone allow you to train harder because you recover faster. The BALCO regimen was carefully constructed and involved cyclic/intermittent dosing, part of the strategy to avoid detection. Landis was careless and stupid. Apparently he became desperate after losing a stage and gave himself an unnecessary dose of steroids.

Iwannafly
July 16th, 2008, 04:11 PM
Sorry dan but your 100% wrong. I advise you to go back and double check the times...

By the way, how many meets have you personally swam in any of these suits?

Now it's you who's letting your heart churn out the argument Paul. The suit and its advantages or lack thereof has been discussed in detail. Just because you feel faster in it doesn't mean that you have legitimate data to back up your 2-5% claim. And to answer your question, no, I have never worn one of those suits. But I have done a lot of fluid flow calculations and a couple of experiments.
Just out of curiosity, do you have an example of somebody at trials who dropped 2% or more from their lifetime best?

Iwannafly
July 16th, 2008, 04:14 PM
My understanding is that anabolic steroids and growth hormone allow you to train harder because you recover faster. The BALCO regimen was carefully constructed and involved cyclic/intermittent dosing, part of the strategy to avoid detection. Landis was careless and stupid. Apparently he became desperate after losing a stage and gave himself an unnecessary dose of steroids.
I never think of testosterone as an anabolic steroid, but I guess it is! My original point was to say that if Torres took 7 years off so that she could train and use steroids without fear of getting caught and then un-retired, she should have started losing her gains unless she continued her cycle of steroids.

The Fortress
July 16th, 2008, 04:18 PM
I think the onus is on you Paul to provide an example of somebody who dropped 2% from their lifetime best.

Elizabeth Beisel, Jessica Hardy, Elaine Breedon leap off the top of my head. I'm sure there were others .... Grevers in the 100 back? Stoval in the 200 fly? Kouch from GMU in the distance free events (and he didn't start swimming until 15 BTW!)

Seems like most of the swimmers had worn the LZR before trials as well, so probably dropped time then.

I don't see the controversy here. If you tried a spanking new technical suit, you would see that it makes you somewhat speedier, especially if you're a Clydesdale already.

tjburk
July 16th, 2008, 04:21 PM
Elizabeth Beisel, Jessica Hardy, Elaine Breedon leap off the top of my head. I'm sure there were others .... Grevers in the 100 back? Stoval in the 200 fly?

I am being sarcastic here........

We can't use them as examples because they are not old enough!!! LOL

dorothyrde
July 16th, 2008, 04:32 PM
Dorothy, do you really think TaeBo helps someone stay in swiming shape? So why did Gary Hall at 33 (who never took two 7 year breaks to do Taebo) and training harder than he ever has not do his best (very close) in the 50 and back out of the 100? Note he was also wearing the new technology suits that have effected times by 2-5%.

Mark Foster at 37 did his best...never took two 7 year breaks from the sport doing TeaBo...but the suit played a major part.

As Gull said...this is an anomoly and should be judged as such.

She did not just do Tae Bo as say I would do TaeBo(not really, never could stomach those videos), she was in them, and when these people film these videos, they train extensively first to be in absolute awesome shape. They are selling a product, and want anyone buying it to believe they can look like Billy, or Dara by doing TaeBo an hour a day. In reality, they are training hours a day to get ready for a video.

Iwannafly
July 16th, 2008, 04:41 PM
Elizabeth Beisel, Jessica Hardy, Elaine Breedon leap off the top of my head. I'm sure there were others .... Grevers in the 100 back? Stoval in the 200 fly?
First of all, thanks for correcting my spelling Leslie!:wiggle: I decided that I did not need to break out the dictionary for that one. I was wrong (stupid Latin words).

Breeden had a seed time of 58.8 in the 100 fly and went 58.21. That's only a 1% drop.
Beisel did in fact drop 2.5% (almost exactly) from her seed time in the 400 IM.
Grevers dropped 1.9% (close enough to 2) from his seed time in the 100 back.
Hardy dropped 1.5% from her seed time in the 50 free.
So, I will back off of my statement and admit I was wrong, but it seems to be far from the 2-5% across the board improvement.

Iwannafly
July 16th, 2008, 04:43 PM
I don't see the controversy here. If you tried a spanking new technical suit, you would see that it makes you somewhat speedier, especially if you're a Clydesdale already.

What are you trying to say Leslie??? I know I'm a little chunky, but...

The only controversy is when somebody says that these technical suits cause a 2% drop in time. There is absolutely no data to back that up.

The Fortress
July 16th, 2008, 04:51 PM
What are you trying to say Leslie??? I know I'm a little chunky, but...

The only controversy is when somebody says that these technical suits cause a 2% drop in time. There is absolutely no data to back that up.

I'm saying Smith is a Clydesdale!

Well, absent a well-controlled scientific study, all we have is anecdotal testimony. Maybe it helps chunky masters swimmers more than the leaner Phelps types.

I did note that those swimmers had previously worn LZRs! If they had previously worn them, then a further drop at trials would be due more to a taper. (I was thinking about Breedon's 200 fly, but am too lazy to look it up. I think Tarwater had a nice drop too. Stoval as well.)

Paul Smith
July 16th, 2008, 05:16 PM
First of all, thanks for correcting my spelling Leslie!:wiggle: I decided that I did not need to break out the dictionary for that one. I was wrong (stupid Latin words).

Breeden had a seed time of 58.8 in the 100 fly and went 58.21. That's only a 1% drop.
Beisel did in fact drop 2.5% (almost exactly) from her seed time in the 400 IM.
Grevers dropped 1.9% (close enough to 2) from his seed time in the 100 back.
Hardy dropped 1.5% from her seed time in the 50 free.
So, I will back off of my statement and admit I was wrong, but it seems to be far from the 2-5% across the board improvement.

What you are missing is that the top tier athletes were not fully rested for trials (Phelps, Crocker, Hansen, Piersol) so you will see more drops from these guys....also keep in mind that speed improvements res on a "spectrum"...the fastest 50 time for men is 21.2....its pretty easy for someone sitting in the middle of this spectrum (24-30 second range) to make big improvements/time drops with better training and stroke refinements...but as one approaches the sub 22 second barrier those improvements come much smaller and mean more. a drop from 22.0 to 21.7 is a MAJOR breakthrough...a drop from 26 to 24 not so much in this type of analysis.

So look down lower in the seedings and you'll see massive amounts of improvements by these swimmers.

By the way you forgot to mention Ricky Beren's and Garrett.....

My own experience? I wore a B70 last weekend, mid-season, broken down and swam faster unshaved/unrested than I ever have....I approached best (masters) times ever swam LC...and for the record I NEVER swim fast unrested. My wife wore the sam, did to best times and her 200 back would rank 1st in last years top 10...

I spoke with several friends about the experience and how felt that especially in long course where you have nowhere to "hide" you are used to being punished the last 15-20m for being unrested, out of shape or whatever...fatigue sets in and your body position drops in the water...the legs dragging. Not so with these new suits....body position stays high and tempo stays up and you can "finish". As one respected swimmer said..."if word got out to the total immersion students that you no longer needed to worry about body position thru technique Terry would go out of buisness".

Wait for the studies if you need to...case closed in my book.

Big AL
July 16th, 2008, 05:23 PM
Wait for the studies if you need to...case closed in my book.

Sweet...... I'm all in.... where do I put the chips.

Iwannafly
July 16th, 2008, 06:35 PM
My own experience? I wore a B70 last weekend, mid-season, broken down and swam faster unshaved/unrested than I ever have....I approached best (masters) times ever swam LC...and for the record I NEVER swim fast unrested. My wife wore the sam, did to best times and her 200 back would rank 1st in last years top 10...

I spoke with several friends about the experience and how felt that especially in long course where you have nowhere to "hide" you are used to being punished the last 15-20m for being unrested, out of shape or whatever...fatigue sets in and your body position drops in the water...the legs dragging. Not so with these new suits....body position stays high and tempo stays up and you can "finish". As one respected swimmer said..."if word got out to the total immersion students that you no longer needed to worry about body position thru technique Terry would go out of buisness".

Wait for the studies if you need to...case closed in my book.

I'll agree with you that technical suits absolutely will help somebody that doesn't have the body composition of a Phelps/Lochte/Peirsol. The discussion thus far has been about how much of an impact these suits have on Olympic caliber swimmers. I am reasonably certain that any suit that covered my belly and kept it from waving in the water, would make me faster.

You're right Leslie, Breeden dropped 2.25% in the 200 fly (from 2:09.68 to 2:06.75).

hofffam
July 16th, 2008, 07:06 PM
Sorry dan but your 100% wrong. I advise you to go back and double check the times...

And for the record I'm not a Shubert fan and think his association (as well as USS's) with Speedo are horrible conflicts off interests...TYR has a case.

By the way, how many meets have you personally swam in any of these suits?


Paul - if I were 100% wrong - then all athletes in the OTs - let's say top 8, would have dropped in the range you suggest. It seems a few, such as Breeden's 200 fly and Beisel's 400 IM, were > 2%. I certainly don't have the time to check every finalist's swimming history going back before the LZR or B70 were available. But I stand by my assertion that the time drops were not on a broad spectrum anywhere near the 2-5% range.

If the suits were that much faster - Phelps 200 fly should have been 2% faster than his WR time in Missouri last year - also swum unrested and not in a LZR. I suggest that the BEST way to show an improvement strictly due to the suit is with athletes already at the top of their game. They are the least likely to have made a sudden stroke or fitness improvement. The biggest new variable in their performance is the suit.

Highlighting a few > 2% drops doesn't prove that the LZR is 2% faster. Every OT has some athletes with big drops. They are the surprises that make things interesting.

And yes - I assume Phelps, Lochte, Coughlin, and a few others did not fully rest for OTs. But the vast majority of athletes were not assured of 1-2 finishes so they DID rest fully.

As for me - I have never raced in anything more exotic than a FS2 jammer. That's what I raced in a SC Nationals. So I have no experience with them at all. If I had a B70 or LZR bodyskin - I'd expect something very noticable. It oughta be for $400-$550.

I believe these suits are faster. I don't know how much. I don't believe they are consistently 2-5% faster. The evidence isn't there to show it.

Iwannafly
July 16th, 2008, 07:09 PM
Paul - if I were 100% wrong - then all athletes in the OTs - let's say top 8, would have dropped in the range you suggest. It seems a few, such as Breeden's 200 fly and Beisel's 400 IM, were > 2%. I certainly don't have the time to check every finalist's swimming history going back before the LZR or B70 were available. But I stand by my assertion that the time drops were not on a broad spectrum anywhere near the 2-5% range.

If the suits were that much faster - Phelps 200 fly should have been 2% faster than his WR time in Missouri last year - also swum unrested and not in a LZR. I suggest that the BEST way to show an improvement strictly due to the suit is with athletes already at the top of their game. They are the least likely to have made a sudden stroke or fitness improvement. The biggest new variable in their performance is the suit.

Highlighting a few > 2% drops doesn't prove that the LZR is 2% faster. Every OT has some athletes with big drops. They are the surprises that make things interesting.

And yes - I assume Phelps, Lochte, Coughlin, and a few others did not fully rest for OTs. But the vast majority of athletes were not assured of 1-2 finishes so they DID rest fully.

As for me - I have never raced in anything more exotic than a FS2 jammer. That's what I raced in a SC Nationals. So I have no experience with them at all. If I had a B70 or LZR bodyskin - I'd expect something very noticable. It oughta be for $400-$550.

I believe these suits are faster. I don't know how much. I don't believe they are consistently 2-5% faster. The evidence isn't there to show it.

Well stated Dan!

Paul Smith
July 16th, 2008, 07:22 PM
Paul - if I were 100% wrong - then all athletes in the OTs - let's say top 8, would have dropped in the range you suggest. It seems a few, such as Breeden's 200 fly and Beisel's 400 IM, were > 2%. I certainly don't have the time to check every finalist's swimming history going back before the LZR or B70 were available. But I stand by my assertion that the time drops were not on a broad spectrum anywhere near the 2-5% range.

If the suits were that much faster - Phelps 200 fly should have been 2% faster than his WR time in Missouri last year - also swum unrested and not in a LZR. I suggest that the BEST way to show an improvement strictly due to the suit is with athletes already at the top of their game. They are the least likely to have made a sudden stroke or fitness improvement. The biggest new variable in their performance is the suit.

Highlighting a few > 2% drops doesn't prove that the LZR is 2% faster. Every OT has some athletes with big drops. They are the surprises that make things interesting.

And yes - I assume Phelps, Lochte, Coughlin, and a few others did not fully rest for OTs. But the vast majority of athletes were not assured of 1-2 finishes so they DID rest fully.

As for me - I have never raced in anything more exotic than a FS2 jammer. That's what I raced in a SC Nationals. So I have no experience with them at all. If I had a B70 or LZR bodyskin - I'd expect something very noticable. It oughta be for $400-$550.

I believe these suits are faster. I don't know how much. I don't believe they are consistently 2-5% faster. The evidence isn't there to show it.

Every single swimmer I know who used one at trials, at meets leading up to trials, in masters meets and including myself....probably at least 40+ people say for fact that it made a huge difference. Was it an across the board 2-5%...I'll leave that for the scientests to figure out...but as I pointed out in an earlier thread fo an elite swimmer in finals at OT's to even have a 1% improvement at that end of the spectrum is a big deal.

By the way....every swimmer and coach I spoke to also said that the pool was incredibly slow (only 6' deep lots of turbulance) so any time improvements expected just only from training/resting were offset significantly so the suits played an even bigger factor. As one of the team coaches said, given the incredible pool in China we may see some substanial time drops.

Sam Perry
July 16th, 2008, 08:13 PM
Paul - if I were 100% wrong - then all athletes in the OTs - let's say top 8, would have dropped in the range you suggest. It seems a few, such as Breeden's 200 fly and Beisel's 400 IM, were > 2%. I certainly don't have the time to check every finalist's swimming history going back before the LZR or B70 were available. But I stand by my assertion that the time drops were not on a broad spectrum anywhere near the 2-5% range.

If the suits were that much faster - Phelps 200 fly should have been 2% faster than his WR time in Missouri last year - also swum unrested and not in a LZR. I suggest that the BEST way to show an improvement strictly due to the suit is with athletes already at the top of their game. They are the least likely to have made a sudden stroke or fitness improvement. The biggest new variable in their performance is the suit.

Highlighting a few > 2% drops doesn't prove that the LZR is 2% faster. Every OT has some athletes with big drops. They are the surprises that make things interesting.

And yes - I assume Phelps, Lochte, Coughlin, and a few others did not fully rest for OTs. But the vast majority of athletes were not assured of 1-2 finishes so they DID rest fully.

As for me - I have never raced in anything more exotic than a FS2 jammer. That's what I raced in a SC Nationals. So I have no experience with them at all. If I had a B70 or LZR bodyskin - I'd expect something very noticable. It oughta be for $400-$550.

I believe these suits are faster. I don't know how much. I don't believe they are consistently 2-5% faster. The evidence isn't there to show it.

If that is the case then why did everyone wear that or a Blue70? For some (not many) it was their first time to wear it as they didn't have access to it before trials. I believe they would never take a chance in using a new suit if it was a not a SCIENTIFIC reason for wearing it. Many of them I would believe would stick to what they know like a Fastskin. Everyone I saw was wearing the new technology.

hofffam
July 16th, 2008, 10:12 PM
If that is the case then why did everyone wear that or a Blue70? For some (not many) it was their first time to wear it as they didn't have access to it before trials. I believe they would never take a chance in using a new suit if it was a not a SCIENTIFIC reason for wearing it. Many of them I would believe would stick to what they know like a Fastskin. Everyone I saw was wearing the new technology.

I really can't believe you wrote this.

No one believes these suits are slower. All the publicity over the past six months and WRs made sure of that. There was no financial hurdle since Speedo (probably Tyr and B70) made the suits widely available at low cost.

Swimmers are just like other athletes and competitors - if they believe something is better they will try it and the increased confidence alone might cause it to be true.

hofffam
July 16th, 2008, 10:16 PM
Every single swimmer I know who used one at trials, at meets leading up to trials, in masters meets and including myself....probably at least 40+ people say for fact that it made a huge difference. Was it an across the board 2-5%...I'll leave that for the scientests to figure out...but as I pointed out in an earlier thread fo an elite swimmer in finals at OT's to even have a 1% improvement at that end of the spectrum is a big deal.

By the way....every swimmer and coach I spoke to also said that the pool was incredibly slow (only 6' deep lots of turbulance) so any time improvements expected just only from training/resting were offset significantly so the suits played an even bigger factor. As one of the team coaches said, given the incredible pool in China we may see some substanial time drops.

You are much more connected to elite swimmers. I don't doubt what they say nor what you say about your own experiences about these suits.

But the data doesn't show it. I'm sorry but how do you reconcile the very small improvements in best times at OT when compared to non-LZR swims? If the suit alone is supposed to be 2-5% - why didn't we see it?

As for the pool - I believe it was 2.58 meters deep (almost 9 feet), not 6ft. Maybe the warmup pool was 6 ft. I cannot believe USA swimming would host OTs in a pool barely deeper than the FINA minimum.

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=3943&u_sid=10345376

matysekj
July 16th, 2008, 10:28 PM
FWIW, I've seen that only 51% of the men and 40% of the women at Trials improved upon their seed times. From my unscientific viewing of four days of live events, I'm guessing that easily over 90% of the swimmers wore one of the new technical suits (LZR, Tyr, or B70).

knelson
July 17th, 2008, 12:37 AM
I'm guessing that easily over 90% of the swimmers wore one of the new technical suits (LZR, Tyr, or B70).

It's amazing how this has changed. Kiefer has a shot on the back cover of their catalog showing the start of a race at 2004 Trials. Every girl in the photo is wearing a traditional suit! Granted it's a breaststroke race, and breaststrokers seemed to be the last holdouts, but still...

Sam Perry
July 17th, 2008, 01:27 AM
I really can't believe you wrote this.

Thanks for your holier than thou judgment.

tjburk
July 17th, 2008, 09:45 AM
As for the pool - I believe it was 2.58 meters deep (almost 9 feet), not 6ft. Maybe the warmup pool was 6 ft. I cannot believe USA swimming would host OTs in a pool barely deeper than the FINA minimum.

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=3943&u_sid=10345376

If I remember right from sitting down there at deck level it was at least 8' deep.