That reminds me of a remark my then 13 year old made.
" I don’t understand people who don’t understand math!"
But then again they hated swimming.
Thanks for that. I’ll give it a read. Obviously success in any sport is a mutifactorial combination of potentials plus how they are nurtured.
Just a general comment on this thread: when I first posted it, I figured I’d get maybe 15 responses but here we are with 142. That’s basically an order of magnitude higher than I expected. Seems like I hit a nerve here. 
2 Likes
That’s a really depressing approach to read. I’d hope coaches are a bit more open minded these days, at least in the UK.
That’s a good book and you are spot on. Triathlon is focused on the wrong areas for training.
There isn’t a coach in any sport who can look at a kid when they are first starting and say they are going to be great.
I’ll give you an example, I swam with a guy in high school who started swimming when he was 12. By the time he was 13, the coach (who had medaled in the 1968 Olympics) told his parents that he should find another sport. The kid left the team and went with another and by the time he was 18 he was the top recruit in the US. In college, he was an NCAA champion in his event, set an American record in a relay and then made 2 Olympic teams, 5 medals and one American record.
Swimming, like most sports, is about focus, consistency and hard work. Talent really only accounts for the last little bit.
Tim
3 Likes
Why is Amazon telling me that this is “to be released in March 2025”…?
My local library has it plus it’s available on my Amazon.
TBF I think they were saying the opposite, that you can sometimes look at a kid first starting out and say they have no chance to be great in that sport.
I think for land based sports by age 12 we can take one look and know if they have “no chance” and at the exteme at the other end if you take 12 year olds take them to the track with a stopwatch you can just see natural form and speed and know if that kid has a chance. Other learned sports (tennis for example) its not clear who can make it, but it tends to be clear who won’t
And do you suppose that happened with DeGrasse?
Who’s high school sport was basketball.
Can you use the quote function so we can tell which post you are responding to? Andre was always naturally fast as a sprinter. He PROBABLY never tried it for real because he was interested in basketball…well until he tried sprinting and then it was instant. And for basketball you don’t totally know who will grow to 6’6" to 7’ (I read somewhere that one in 7 people in the USA who are over 7 ft are in the NBA !!!)…I suppose you can tell looking at the parents who WON’T get close to blowing past 6’5" and Andre is no where near that zip code (but you may not know at 12!!!)
[quote=“devashish_paul, post:152, topic:1283457, full:true”]
Can you use the quote function so we can tell which post you are responding to?
To be honest Dev as my reply was directly below your post I sort of thought it was obvious. But I will mind my P & Qs in the future.
My point, usually is that every time anyone makes a pronouncement about how to tell a future “star” there’s an example of who wouldn’t have been considered. After a while the argument sounds like Lilliput and Blefuscu arguing about eggs.
ps Andre might have thought he was the next Muggsy Bogues, who after all, played for his home team the Raptors
Agreed that you can tell for certain that some kids don’t have it (general athleticism), but there’s so many changes in the body between 12 and adulthood that trying to pick a star is quite random.
Two of the most statistically significant correlations with sport success is early puberty and a birthday in Jan/Feb.
As is the case with anything in text based communication of any topic for sure not everything is covered in one line. What I have seen is the kids who were good at 12 are the superset from which you get the best at 18. Someone who is really bad at 12 no matter what the growth spurt doesn’t usually take a sudden jump (at least in sports that require skill and running DOES require a lot of skill). If they have skill and coordination and athletcism at 12, the puberty driven growth spurt will multiply everything at least for boys (for women in some sports like gymnastics or figure skating it may not exactly shake out that way and make some of the physics of the balance with increased momentum a bit worse).
On being born in Jan/Feb, they have more development and can win more easily so the system turns kids away late year birthday kids because they don’t have the positive reinforcement of winning against peers of the same age bracket (until everyone is 19 they you’re competing with all the studs 19-34 and those kids who have the inside the year development advantage get the full competitive world in front of them, not just their current year peers).
Anyway, the good thing is in swimming with it being a sport where you don’t know in the first year or so if someone has aptitude, there is a lot of time for kids to ease in without feeling instantly “left behind”. But pretty soon, the ones who are ahead are clearly ahead and they have a positive reinforcement in EVERY PRACTICE and those who end up in the medium and slower lanes, just don’t have the reinforcement neither do the parents. By definition swimming becomes a FOP sport from the earliest day.
Today when I race in masters swim meets, almost everyone is a fast former age group swimmer. Where I live, few adult onset swimmers in masters swimming (and we could recruit a ton of triathletes and very very few come to swim meets as they don’t want to finish last versus “real swimmers”)
That depends on the swimmer and the stroke. There are some gifted swimmer that can tailor their speed to the race. Kiddo swam 1st or 2nd at state in the 50, 100, 200, and 500. Her older girl friends can do the same from 50-1000 depending. It really depends on a lot of things, but most of it is just being really gifted when it comes to swimming.
1 Like
Say whatever you want, but I’ve seen Olympic gold medalists turned swim coach trying to get some of these kids interested in their University swim programs. Ever seen an Olympic gold and silver medalists saying “wow that is fast,” when talking about kids? I have. I’ve also seen these kids swim. Fast is fast, and it doesn’t really matter how old you are.
The reality is that when it comes to swimming, some people are just way better at it, and it isn’t because they are stronger.
Kiddo and her bestie have November birthdays 3 days apart. That didn’t stop the pair of them from placing 1 to 3 in most of the events they swam last year. This year they are 11 and 11-12 is a bit rougher. They will both likely be in the A finals at the state swim meet again in a few events (but it is a small state). They do better in long course which is in the summer because it gives them 6-7 more months and older girls age up. That’s age group swimming.
If you go buy state short course meets in MS, a March birthday would be idea, and for long course, August would be ideal.
I think the 11-12 year times are worst for girls and 13-14 year old times for the boys.
I know a few things about fast 12 year olds.
I’ve never heard of them being recruited except in jest.
My comment was really more about the poster claiming expertise because his 12 years old had some fast times.
I do agree, though, it is crazy how it fast they can get at that age…
I don’t think this was in jest. Of course some of the 17-18 year olds at this swimposium were already committed to universities.
Surely you understand that a correlation with early birthdays doesn’t exclude late birthdays from success?
