PDA

View Full Version : Times for 50m freestyle (avg->good->great)?



BigBrother
June 13th, 2011, 11:24 AM
Hey guys, thread below on attaining a 24s 50m free got me wondering on time ranges for 50m freestyle.

Amongst masters swimmers, can you give me the rough ranges for what is considered beginner, decent/competitive, and top range? (Age is 30, if it helps). Broad ranges are fine.

Even though I'm not training for the clock, I realized I'm operating in a vacuum in this regard and it'd be very interesting to see.

Thanks!

scyfreestyler
June 13th, 2011, 11:42 AM
http://www.usms.org/comp/meets/toptimes.php

Swimosaur
June 13th, 2011, 11:43 AM
Inspired by USAS motivational times, Steve Stuart published collections of Masters Motivational Times for each course: SCY (http://forums.usms.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=1785&d=1260709586), SCM (http://forums.usms.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=1926&d=1269176569), and LCM (http://forums.usms.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=1796&d=1262192873).

Method:


Each category is some percentage slower than the bottom five times in the Top 10, averaged over 3 years. AAAA = 5%, AAA = 10%, ... BB = 40%.

That should give you some idea.

BigBrother
June 13th, 2011, 11:53 AM
Perfect. Exactly what I needed. Thanks guys!

fmracing
June 13th, 2011, 11:59 AM
Oh yeah, its gonna be AAAA for me this year once I shave :applaud:

I forgot about those. Thanks for the reminder link swimosaur.

EDIT: actually looking at it again I already have it. Boy the 100 qualify is much slower than the 50 it would seem.

__steve__
June 13th, 2011, 12:09 PM
I'm trying to accomplish an AAA by 2 weeks from now, LC.

__steve__
June 13th, 2011, 02:24 PM
I notice my speed is indirectly proportional to qty of running i do.

qbrain
June 13th, 2011, 02:40 PM
I swim with a large group, typically 35-40 swimmers at practice, and I'm usually in the 2nd or 3rd fastest lane (occasionally the fastest). I don't come anywhere near NQT's for any events, let alone top 10 times. In the chart referenced above, I'd be lucky to be in the B range.

Maybe I just swim with slow swimmers, but my experiences have been similar when I've swum with other teams. I think those charts are just a bit aggressive.

Those charts target meet swimmers. If you aren't swimming meets regularly, I don't think they offer much guidance.

Lane position is determined by a combination of aerobic capacity and speed, not speed alone and a lot of fast swimmers train on their own.

Finally, those charts are built off percentages, not percentiles so the B cut is 40% slower than what it would take to make the top ten (roughly), so they can't be aggressive, your age group is just fast.

fmracing
June 13th, 2011, 02:53 PM
I think those charts are just a bit aggressive.

I sometimes say that about the top ten times :angel:

aquageek
June 13th, 2011, 04:11 PM
The op didn't specify that they wanted times -v- meet swimmers, I think they said for masters swimmers.

There's probably just a handful of swimmers on my team who could swim a 50 LCM free under 30 sec, less than 10% for sure. And among all masters swimmers, I'd guess a similar percentage.

Apparently you don't understand how this works. It's not about how you view the world, it is about reported times, which obviously means meet swimmers. A sub 30 50 LCM is fast, but nothing special, hence it gets an A time. That's kind of how it shapes up in USS also.

I think the time charts very accurately reflect what I've seen at meets and knowing some very fast swimmers. If 50% could throw down a :30 it wouldn't be very fast, and certainly not an "A" time.

fmracing
June 13th, 2011, 04:29 PM
I'm not sure what one would want... C,D,E,...,Y,Z groups that go up to 10 minutes for a 50 just to be able to classify everyone in a group for the sake of inclusivity?

__steve__
June 13th, 2011, 05:29 PM
A sub 30 50 LCM is fast, but nothing special, hence it gets an A time.
until you turn 45, 30.19 is good for AA

Jazz Hands
June 13th, 2011, 05:40 PM
The definition of fast is always slightly faster than you are right now.

philoswimmer
June 13th, 2011, 05:49 PM
The OP asked for "the rough ranges for what is considered beginner, decent/competitive, and top range." The motivational times won't tell you that -- it is certainly not the case that just because someone fails to make even a B time that they are a "beginner."

BigBrother
June 13th, 2011, 06:36 PM
Rather than A, AA, meet, non meet, etc. in this case, how about just personal experience/opinion? 30 year old jumps in the pool. What would make sense to you for their 50m freestyle, given a beginner, a seasoned swimmer, and someone in top shape (male?) Broad ranges are fine here.

I'm going for those by-now subconscious classifications you probably have in your mind ("oh, 45 secs, beginner"..."37? not bad")

That sort of thing. This is by no means intended to be exhaustive or scientifically sound :)

Thanks guys!

Jazz Hands
June 13th, 2011, 06:46 PM
30 year old jumps in the pool. What would make sense to you for their 50m freestyle, given a beginner, a seasoned swimmer, and someone in top shape (male?) Broad ranges are fine here.

Try it. Whatever time you get is what a beginner does.

BigBrother
June 13th, 2011, 07:42 PM
Try it. Whatever time you get is what a beginner does.

How is your answer logical? I obviously know what my time is, and it's clearly that of a beginner. That only answers 1/3 of what I asked. How does that provide me with anything useful or anything to gauge progression by? You honestly carrying this over from the previous thread?

To the rest of the USMS community, you guys are admirable for tolerating this d bag who seems to thrive on pedantry and antagonism.

Jazz Hands
June 13th, 2011, 08:08 PM
How is your answer logical? I obviously know what my time is, and it's clearly that of a beginner. That only answers 1/3 of what I asked. How does that provide me with anything useful or anything to gauge progression by? You honestly carrying this over from the previous thread?

To the rest of the USMS community, you guys are admirable for tolerating this d bag who seems to thrive on pedantry and antagonism.

Here's how to gauge progression: are you getting faster?

rtodd
June 13th, 2011, 08:33 PM
The definition of fast is always slightly faster than you are right now.


I love that! It's true.

orca1946
June 13th, 2011, 08:57 PM
Look at the state & national times of past meets to see how you rate.

fmracing
June 13th, 2011, 11:14 PM
Rather than A, AA, meet, non meet, etc. in this case, how about just personal experience/opinion?

All you're going to get is subjective opinion with a question like that. The list that swimosaur posted is a pretty objective look at swim times in the competitive circuit for masters. I guess In a way I'd ask what the heck someone would care about times for if they don't compete? What do they matter if you're not really measuring them anyway?

You wanted opinion though...

my gauge, for the same age group i am in (30-34)

>30 = beginner
<30 and >26 = average
<26 = above average
<24 = elite

Of course there are a ton of other factors that could shift a category of a swim based on the individual. It's still all subjective. I feel that my 26.6 lcm 50 free this past weekend was pretty average even though it is a classified AAA time... and my 1:00.1 in the 100m free was pretty terrible, but it somehow comes in at AAAA?

... all subjective.

it would seem that you might need to ask someone in the same general ability bracket as you so that you get an opinion you like?

philoswimmer
June 13th, 2011, 11:20 PM
All you're going to get is subjective opinion with a question like that. The list that swimosaur posted is a pretty objective look at swim times in the competitive circuit for masters. I guess In a way I'd ask what the heck someone would care about times for if they don't compete? What do they matter if you're not really measuring them anyway?

You wanted opinion though...

my gauge, for the same age group i am in (30-34)

>30 = beginner
<30 and >26 = average
<26 = above average
<24 = elite

Of course there are a ton of other factors that could shift a category of a swim based on the individual. It's still all subjective. I feel that my 26.6 lcm 50 free this past weekend was pretty average even though it is a classified AAA time... and my 1:00.1 in the 100m free was pretty terrible, but it somehow comes in at AAAA?

... all subjective.

it would seem that you might need to ask someone in the same general ability bracket as you so that you get an opinion you like?

I'd like to see a beginning swimmer -- someone who has never done anything beyond lap swimming -- who can go 31 in 50 m swim, any age. I am willing to bet that no such creature exists.

fmracing
June 13th, 2011, 11:33 PM
I'd like to see a beginning swimmer -- someone who has never done anything beyond lap swimming -- who can go 31 in 50 m swim, any age. I am willing to bet that no such creature exists.

I'm sure there is. I wasn't far off personally. My first 50y free when i was 14 I went 29.9 after 3-4 weeks of swim practice. All i had done prior to that was swim in my backyard pool. I was a beginner, and could barely keep my head in the water. 29.9 doesn't convert too bad if you consider I could barely do a flip turn let alone a fast one. 33 even in lc meters maybe if I didn't have to stop and turn? I think its easy to arrive at that conversion. There's a counterexample for everything.

I'm just saying, asking for subjective opinion, you'll get responses like mine, and responses that are far from mine as far as how some people want to classify times. Note: I should've denoted my classifications was for men also. I don't want anyone to think that I feel "beginner" is a dig or negative opinion of someone. I am in competition and have been for 18 years. When i see people in my age group going 30+ in a 50free the first thing on my mind is that they haven't trained enough to step from beginner to average.

The list swimosaur posted is a very good objective classification of swimmers, but it would appear that it doesn't classify low enough to suit the needs of some.

philoswimmer
June 14th, 2011, 01:27 AM
I'm sure there is. I wasn't far off personally. My first 50y free when i was 14 I went 29.9 after 3-4 weeks of swim practice. All i had done prior to that was swim in my backyard pool. I was a beginner, and could barely keep my head in the water. 29.9 doesn't convert too bad if you consider I could barely do a flip turn let alone a fast one. 33 even in lc meters maybe if I didn't have to stop and turn? I think its easy to arrive at that conversion. There's a counterexample for everything.

I'm just saying, asking for subjective opinion, you'll get responses like mine, and responses that are far from mine as far as how some people want to classify times. Note: I should've denoted my classifications was for men also. I don't want anyone to think that I feel "beginner" is a dig or negative opinion of someone. I am in competition and have been for 18 years. When i see people in my age group going 30+ in a 50free the first thing on my mind is that they haven't trained enough to step from beginner to average.

The list swimosaur posted is a very good objective classification of swimmers, but it would appear that it doesn't classify low enough to suit the needs of some.

I agree with you about the subjectiveness of the question, but I think that's what the OP wanted -- a sense of what Masters swimmers tend to think of as fast. I also agree with you that the answers will be all over the map.

But when you say "I don't want anyone to think that I feel "beginner" is a dig or negative opinion of someone" -- read the post just below yours, and imagine how someone who has been training and working hard for all of those years will feel to be called a beginner. And when you say, "When i see people in my age group going 30+ in a 50free the first thing on my mind is that they haven't trained enough to step from beginner to average" again, I think it would be hard for such a person not to feel insulted (i.e., that they just haven't worked hard enough). It's great that you started early enough and had enough natural athletic ability to swim so fast after only 4 weeks of training. But that is not true of most people, and frankly, it's comments like yours that make people think that Masters (or this discussion board) is only for top competitive swimmers. I'm saying this not because I want to start an argument (I don't), but because I think you must not be aware of the vast number of people who have been swimming and working hard for many years without achieving your speeds. I think you're also not aware of how elitist your comments sound. I don't think you intended them that way, but you're not representing the majority of Masters' swimmers experiences.

aquageek
June 14th, 2011, 08:10 AM
I generally consider the NQTs to be a good starting point for defining a fast Master's swimmer. I also agree with Jazzy's statement of perceived fastness.

couldbebetterfly
June 14th, 2011, 10:21 AM
I agree with you about the subjectiveness of the question, but I think that's what the OP wanted -- a sense of what Masters swimmers tend to think of as fast. I also agree with you that the answers will be all over the map.

But when you say "I don't want anyone to think that I feel "beginner" is a dig or negative opinion of someone" -- read the post just below yours, and imagine how someone who has been training and working hard for all of those years will feel to be called a beginner. And when you say, "When i see people in my age group going 30+ in a 50free the first thing on my mind is that they haven't trained enough to step from beginner to average" again, I think it would be hard for such a person not to feel insulted (i.e., that they just haven't worked hard enough). It's great that you started early enough and had enough natural athletic ability to swim so fast after only 4 weeks of training. But that is not true of most people, and frankly, it's comments like yours that make people think that Masters (or this discussion board) is only for top competitive swimmers. I'm saying this not because I want to start an argument (I don't), but because I think you must not be aware of the vast number of people who have been swimming and working hard for many years without achieving your speeds. I think you're also not aware of how elitist your comments sound. I don't think you intended them that way, but you're not representing the majority of Masters' swimmers experiences.

:applaud: Well said - I must admit my first thought was "heck I've never gone sub 30 om 50m free and I'm no beginner" But then again I am a girlie and I never did the whole USAS/college swimming thing, although did compete as a kid. So totally subjective - for me sub 30 on 50m free is very fast and sub 1.00 on 100m free likely unachievable. Sub 1.00 on 100 yds is what I'm aiming at with the right training in a couple of years time.

To answer the original question though, I agree, the NQTs, motivaton charts and the event ranking listings are all good places to gauge what is fast or middling for competitive Masters swimmers in your age group.

fmracing
June 14th, 2011, 11:45 AM
But when you say "I don't want anyone to think that I feel "beginner" is a dig or negative opinion of someone" -- read the post just below yours, and imagine how someone who has been training and working hard for all of those years will feel to be called a beginner. And when you say, "When i see people in my age group going 30+ in a 50free the first thing on my mind is that they haven't trained enough to step from beginner to average" again, I think it would be hard for such a person not to feel insulted (i.e., that they just haven't worked hard enough). It's great that you started early enough and had enough natural athletic ability to swim so fast after only 4 weeks of training. But that is not true of most people, and frankly, it's comments like yours that make people think that Masters (or this discussion board) is only for top competitive swimmers. I'm saying this not because I want to start an argument (I don't), but because I think you must not be aware of the vast number of people who have been swimming and working hard for many years without achieving your speeds. I think you're also not aware of how elitist your comments sound. I don't think you intended them that way, but you're not representing the majority of Masters' swimmers experiences.

I understand what you're saying. Makes sense. Perhaps it is a bit elitist based on what I named the "categories". Call it beginner, or novice, or group C,D,E, or F if it sounds better. To classify times though, some people are classified in lower groups than others. Despite perhaps years of hard work, they may not make what I or others consider average. I'm not sure you can fix this perception of lower classification while still making classifications however broad? No matter what time i picked for the threshold, someone wouldn't like it... but the OP wanted 3 groups.

As far as not representing majority... subjective opinion was asked for a second time after swimosaur produced a more objective look. >30 seconds for 30 year old men is, I feel, a broad range for beginner... and thats what OP asked for.
:)

fmracing
June 14th, 2011, 11:53 AM
:applaud: Well said - I must admit my first thought was "heck I've never gone sub 30 om 50m free and I'm no beginner" But then again I am a girlie and I never did the whole USAS/college swimming thing, although did compete as a kid. So totally subjective - for me sub 30 on 50m free is very fast and sub 1.00 on 100m free likely unachievable. Sub 1.00 on 100 yds is what I'm aiming at with the right training in a couple of years time.

DO keep in mind I only gave those time guidelines based on my opinion of broad times that 30-34 males should achieve to move to the next level. That was not a catch-all classification for masters as a whole.

I suppose I should've never commented here :worms:

__steve__
June 14th, 2011, 12:04 PM
First what classifies a beginner? I would say experience, not ability. So a beginner would be anyone without former swimming coaching or competition, basically within the last year never swam an entire pool leangth. Intermediate would be this person up to the 3 year mark with successive training. Advanced is 3 year's up. Would this sound reasonable?

Fmracing, what is your 500?

fmracing
June 14th, 2011, 12:24 PM
First what classifies a beginner? I would say experience, not ability. So a beginner would be anyone without former swimming coaching or competition, basically within the last year never swam an entire pool leangth. Intermediate would be this person up to the 3 year mark with successive training. Advanced is 3 year's up. Would this sound reasonable?

Fmracing, what is your 500?


It would be reasonable classifications for this topic if the OP hadn't asked about times specifically :)

My 500? Infinity. I never swim it, even in practice the most I do at a time is 300. I did 2x300 scm, in by 3:45, 4:00 interval about a week ago without too much trouble. If you convert 1:15 per 100m, I can only give you an estimate that I can go under 5:30scy for the 500. I would normally be reasonably confident I could hit that TODAY from a pushoff... but today is my swimming off-day, lol. PB was 5:02 in 1998 lol.


Also it seems as though the word "beginner" has struck a nerve here. I only used that because OP used it.

knelson
June 14th, 2011, 12:32 PM
Are we talking long course here or short course? I'll assume short course. I'd say a "beginner" time is around 40 seconds. Obviously talented athletes might be faster, but I think that's a good ballpark figure for your average Joe. "Good" would probably be under 30 seconds. This is a time where at most meets you'll probably beat a few people, but plenty of people will also beat you. Is that good? Kind of depends on the definition. "Top range" to me means you are making Top Ten or very close. In 2010 the tenth place time in the 50 SCM free was 25.10 for the 30-34 age group.


I feel that my 26.6 lcm 50 free this past weekend was pretty average even though it is a classified AAA time... and my 1:00.1 in the 100m free was pretty terrible, but it somehow comes in at AAAA?

I agree. If this is true maybe there's an error in the tables. A 26.6 seems like a much better swim to me than a 1:00.1.

Peter Cruise
June 14th, 2011, 12:44 PM
Beware. This thread could easily lead to talk of late blooming and VO2max...

fmracing
June 14th, 2011, 12:48 PM
I agree. If this is true maybe there's an error in the tables. A 26.6 seems like a much better swim to me than a 1:00.1.

I don't even feel worthy of a quad-a on that swim lol. I don't think it is an error though... the 100 lcm times were just that slow last year in my age group. I was amazed that a double-o could make top 10 :confused:

aquageek
June 14th, 2011, 01:11 PM
I don't even feel worthy of a quad-a on that swim lol. I don't think it is an error though... the 100 lcm times were just that slow last year in my age group. I was amazed that a double-o could make top 10 :confused:

Don't you worry. All those college boys are sitting at home now disgusted by their girth and making plans to return to the pool. Then, you can enter the 40-44 and 45-49 AG and suffer.

fmracing
June 14th, 2011, 02:10 PM
Don't you worry. All those college boys are sitting at home now disgusted by their girth and making plans to return to the pool. Then, you can enter the 40-44 and 45-49 AG and suffer.

But, I am one of them :)

Couroboros
June 14th, 2011, 03:09 PM
I can speak as someone who began 2.5 years ago at age 20, so I'm in a bit of a unique position.

My first 50 free SCY was in February 2009, one month after I started swimming competitively. It was 34 seconds. In the same month, that went down to 32.5, then 31.08 in March, then 30.08 in April. Then I didn't swim the 50 free for a year. When I came back to the event in May '10, I went 27.72. Last January, I put up a 26.35 which I have hovered around roughly since. That 26.35 converts to just a hair over 30 LCM, which is the number people keep throwing around in this thread. That took two years of hard work, jokes about sprinting and sprinters aside.

It's been my own observation that for other young men my age who come to the pool completely new to competitive swimming, but essentially knowing how to swim for recreation, will put up around 34-35 seconds on their first 50 free in their first month of swimming. It has been impossible, however, to look at these same people over the span of two years and see how much they improve. Some aren't in it anymore, some are geographically elsewhere, some swim at different times, etc...

Before last October, I was obsessed with figuring out how I stood in relation to other swimmers, especially other latebloomers. I wanted to figure out a field of valid comparison. I would scour swimming times databases looking for other people who seemed to start around my age, people who maybe started earlier but weren't as dedicated, etc... I didn't want to compare myself to people of the opposite sex, people in the elite ranks, Olympians, etc... I think this preoccupation is only an all-too-natural inclination when you're in a competitive sport. People who start earlier than later in life, in childhood, in age-group, have a universe of close comparisons, entire galleries of fellow swimmers to make nemeses and rivals, to either best or chase after time and again. Before last October, I always thought this was such a tremendous advantage that I didn't have.

Last October, I had a disappointing meet after several months of very hard work. My times were all a second within my PBs. I don't know if my expectations were too high or if this is just normal for the beginning of a season (it was my first October meet ever, in retrospect). I started taking a different look at the swimmers around me, in the pool, in other pools, their times online, in other age-groups and clubs. I came to a very unexpected and quite-welcome realization... I am a fast swimmer. I am a great swimmer. I am top-range. I had done a lot of hard work in the last two years, I kept my nerve time and again, I never once thought about quitting.

If you want to know how good your times are, decide for yourself after honest, reasonably truthful assessment. If you think you are fast, you are fast. If average, you are average. If slow, slow. If everyone on this forum did this, I'd say 100% you should come to the realization that you are fast, that you are good, because I've seen what hard workers you are, what sacrifices you make, what conditions you've prevailed against. And then, with that in mind, remember that there is always faster, better, greater.

Back before October, I kept my vision narrow. I looked for people close to me and compared myself to them, tried to ask or probe when they started. This was a mistake. The fact that I didn't have a crowded field around me, obstructing my vision, is an advantage. It freed me up to look at the bigger picture. By all means, I started comparing myself to NCAA Div-1 college swimmers, to that one really fast guy on my team, to girls, to the Olympians.

Two months later that December, after several months of being stuck on the plateau of a 1:03 100 free SCY, I finally broke the minute barrier with a time of 58.93. At the time, I talked about technique and being ever so slightly tapered, but I knew it then and I know it now, it was mental, it was the willingness to step back, be subjective instead of struggling in vain to be objective, and say I'm a fast swimmer and nobody's gonna change my mind.

jaadams1
June 14th, 2011, 09:29 PM
my gauge, for the same age group i am in (30-34)

>30 = beginner
<30 and >26 = average
<26 = above average
<24 = elite

... all subjective.


By this scale (assuming its LCM) I would be average with a 27.40 at age 33. I wouldn't consider myself to be average by any means either. (If its SCY then I'm elite).
I don't think the 50 free is THE event to judge the speediness of a swimmer, and either is any other event for that matter. We're all different though.

fmracing
June 14th, 2011, 10:44 PM
By this scale (assuming its LCM) I would be average with a 27.40 at age 33. I wouldn't consider myself to be average by any means either. (If its SCY then I'm elite).
I don't think the 50 free is THE event to judge the speediness of a swimmer, and either is any other event for that matter. We're all different though.

My answers were to the OP, who asked about meters, so that was meter times. Scm or lcm. Not really much difference as far as this conversation is concerned. I too, fall into my own 'average' category :)

On absolute speed, I'm not sure how else you'd judge "speedy" than a 50 free? 25 free? 10 free?

philoswimmer
June 15th, 2011, 11:40 AM
Two months later that December, after several months of being stuck on the plateau of a 1:03 100 free SCY, I finally broke the minute barrier with a time of 58.93. At the time, I talked about technique and being ever so slightly tapered, but I knew it then and I know it now, it was mental, it was the willingness to step back, be subjective instead of struggling in vain to be objective, and say I'm a fast swimmer and nobody's gonna change my mind.


:applaud:

Herb
June 16th, 2011, 07:52 PM
Two months later that December, after several months of being stuck on the plateau of a 1:03 100 free SCY, I finally broke the minute barrier with a time of 58.93. At the time, I talked about technique and being ever so slightly tapered, but I knew it then and I know it now, it was mental, it was the willingness to step back, be subjective instead of struggling in vain to be objective, and say I'm a fast swimmer and nobody's gonna change my mind.

Word.

When I finally break 1:00 in SCY 100 free at 40+ I am elite. I'll challenge anyone that says otherwise to a fistfight.

fmracing
June 17th, 2011, 03:47 PM
I'll challenge anyone that says otherwise to a fistfight.

Wouldn't that be better saved for a boxing forum? lol

jzissu
August 2nd, 2017, 10:13 PM
I realize these posts are fairly dated, but I was curious also whether I have a decent sprint time for a casual swimmer who is 41. I have only swam for fun in small pools and never raced against others or took lessons. Now I finally got to swim in a 50M (I guess it's called a long course by swimmers) for the 1st time. I swam in 29.5 without diving in to start (wasn't my best lap, just my wife happened to be there to time me), but was comparing it to the world record of under 21 seconds and thought it was a terrible time. Then, I looked up some top meet times for my age and read that a dive takes 2 seconds off the time. I figured I could pretty easily get to a 27 time . Is that unusual for no training or racing ever at my age? I know I have no olympic hopes, but I was wondering if I could do ok if I decide to try meets, with some training. Thank you!

knelson
August 3rd, 2017, 11:06 AM
That's a phenomenal time if you've never swum competitively before. Are you 100% sure it was actually a 50 meter pool?

robertsrobson
August 3rd, 2017, 12:24 PM
Here's how to gauge progression: are you getting faster?

Absolutely.

The great thing about masters swimming is that it gives the opportunity of racing to people that haven't necessarily swum their whole life. If you measure yourself against people that spent their entire lives in a pool from 5 to college and even beyond, you are on a hiding to nothing. The advice to focus on getting faster is good advice whether you are a beginner or a world-class swimmer.

fmracing
August 4th, 2017, 04:03 PM
whether you are a beginner

Be careful, use of the 'beginner' buzzword might get you scolded for 3 more pages. lol.

Pakman30
August 11th, 2017, 11:11 AM
Hi!
I definitely agree with @knelson... Your time is VERY good. I am 40, I train regularly and it is really hard for me to go below my current time of 30.00.00 without diving.
Just start training and participating in meets; you'll do great!


I realize these posts are fairly dated, but I was curious also whether I have a decent sprint time for a casual swimmer who is 41. I have only swam for fun in small pools and never raced against others or took lessons. Now I finally got to swim in a 50M (I guess it's called a long course by swimmers) for the 1st time. I swam in 29.5 without diving in to start (wasn't my best lap, just my wife happened to be there to time me), but was comparing it to the world record of under 21 seconds and thought it was a terrible time. Then, I looked up some top meet times for my age and read that a dive takes 2 seconds off the time. I figured I could pretty easily get to a 27 time . Is that unusual for no training or racing ever at my age? I know I have no olympic hopes, but I was wondering if I could do ok if I decide to try meets, with some training. Thank you!