New Jersey is the king of 10 & under backstrokers right now, as the state is home to two of the best we’ve ever seen at that age, now with a second swimmer taking down National Age Group Records.
Just a day before Destin Lasco swam a 32.58 on May 5th, Vincent MarcianoĀ of the Morris County Swim Club snuck in first and took the record down first to a 32.53 in prelims, and then to a 32.07 in finals. Those swims both took down the old Michael Andrew standard of 32.72 that was set in 2010.
So what’s in the water in New Jersey? Whatever it is, it seems to be a widespread problem – the pair has not yet had a chance to race head-to-head. That’s partially due to Lasco’sĀ Atlantic City Aquatic Club is located in the southern end of the state and swims in the Middle Atlantic LSC, whereas Marciano’s club is in the northern end of the state, nearĀ New York, and swims in the New Jersey LSC.
We may not get to see one either, at least as 10 & unders. Lasco ages up on August 7th, the day before the Eastern Zone Age Group Championships.
In that same meet, Marciano also swam a 1:11.06 in the 100 back, which makes him the third-fastest in that race in the age group’sĀ history, behind only Lasco and Ryan Murphy.
He might not be an Olympian yet, but he’s on the right track. He broke multiple state records this year as an 11 year old, and at the recent LCM Zones meet swam a 26.00 50 Free, 2:15.71 200 Back, 1:02.18 100 Back, etc.
Need I say more?
while its nice to see a 10/under break a record, it would sure be great if usa-s would drop the 10/under records the same way usa-s dropped the 10/under nrp standards (formerly national reportable times).
i was at the convention meeting in 2006 (?) when usa-s presented the new recognition program. at that meeting, the coaches unanimously agreed usa-s should drop the 10/unders and they did.
the argument was coaches did not see the importance of this level of recognition for 10/unders. and in fact, there were some coaches and many parents who would needlessly push these young swimmers to achieve at levels they most likely would not repeat… being a nag holder.
so, let the kids be 10/under.… Read more Ā»
If the kids are having fun and doing their best, and they break records, there is nothing wrong with that. Perhaps USA Swimming should reach out to the coaches and parents of these kids that swim so fast at a young age, or pair them up with parents of current National Team Athletes who were also very good at a young age. There are so many parents (and coaches) of athletes who are going to be at Trials that would be excited to give back to the sport by mentoring parents of these very fast little ones. These little kids, their coaches, and their parents could use some guidance and some mentoring. Perhaps, with that healthy dose of perspective and… Read more Ā»
Good grief. Are these “what’s the big deal” comments going to pop up on every article written about a NAG record?
You have my word as a gentleman I won’t bring this up again in another post, but if you fail to see the “ho-hum” in a fast 10 year old, you haven’t been around the sport long enough.
I just feel that these articles are relevant, because the following 9-10 NAG record-holders (scy/lcm) have been reported on by this website in other capacities: Adam Hinshaw, Ryan Murphy, Phelps, Lia Neal, Biesel, Annie Zhu, Chelsea Nauta, Cindy Tran, and Ella Eastin.
I realize you were specifically referencing the Olympics, but they only happen once in 4 years.
I think the point is – do you want to be a phenom at 10 and have a NAG record or do you to steadily improve and not burn out and have your success later in life? All of us in the world of swimming see kids who either grow early or swim way too much yardage early or for whatever reasons are phenoms at an early age. Somebody has to have the NAG record š But it doesn’t seem to necessarily be a predictor of future stardom. In fact it may be a predictor of future lack of success. But in and of itself, breaking a national record is very cool no matter how old you are!
Also, very few 10 and unders go on to make the Olympic team. What exactly are you trying to argue?
I’m trying to point out that history has demonstrated that 10&U phenoms rarely succeed as they age in the sport. I feel it is an important footnote.
I’m sure these kids arn’t trying for a spot on the Olympic team , but awsome times for a 10 year old .exciting to see two such good backstrokers come up together . Hopefully their parents get them to a meet together so we can see what competition does to make them even faster
I think, and someone correct me if I’m wrong, only three swimmers have been NAG record holders at 10 and gone on to make an Olympic team; and Phelps is one of them. I’m not sure if Natalie C is also on that list. Can anyone back me up here?
ChestRockwell – I have no idea. The guy who held the records before this trio – Ryan Murphy – looks pretty good though by 2016.
Beisel did as well.
I think Chris makes a good point. I’d bet the percent of NAG Record holders who make the Olympic Team is higher than the % of non-NAG Record holders who make the Olympic Team.
Pretty sure that, before Phelps, the number was 0.
Actually – it might have been Botsford that was first.
“Iād bet the percent of NAG Record holders who make the Olympic Team is higher than the % of non-NAG Record holders who make the Olympic Team.”
Interesting statement. If my recollection about the last of 10 year old NAG record holders is true though, the fact is, if a swimmer breaks a NAG record at 10, the chances of that same swimmer making the Olympic team is virtually zilch. I think the percentage goes through the roof as you enter the teens/mid-teens. But it is statistically significant to note that the faster an athlete is as a 10&U, the less likely they are to be successful as they age.
The problem is you’re only looking at the #1 compared to the #1. If the only definitions of success at age 10 is a NAG Record, and the only definition of success as a senior swimmer is the Olympics…
Regardless, if we can name 4 10 & under NAG Record holders who have made an Olympic Team in the last 20 years…that’s out of 100? That’s still a drastically higher percentage than non-NAG Record holders who make the Olympic Team. 4/100? Even 4/1,000. That’s still makes holding a NAG Record a statistically significant correlation as compared to the whole of the 10 & under population.