Questions on FastSkin suits

This is a better article with less scientific jargon... coachsci.sdsu.edu/.../knowsuit.htm There does not appear to be any benefit to wearing these suits. Any benefits will be restricted to the peculiarities of some individuals. For every swimmer that derives a benefit, there will be a least one, and probably more, who slows because of their invasiveness on the swimming experience. Too many swimmers recorded inconsistent results at the Australian Olympic trials to justify any attribution of benefit to full-body suits. Grant Hackett was slower in all events, despite wearing several variations of Speedo's suits. He opted for a waist-to-knee suit in the 1500m). His disappointing performances came after his "best ever" preparation for this meet. Suzie O'Neill achieved her biggest improvement in personal best times wearing a modified Aquablade (neck-to-knee) suit in her 200-m world record butterfly swim, while she wore the full "fastskin" suit to get the 100-m crawl stroke Commonwealth record. Keiren Perkins did his best time since Atlanta in a full "Fastskin." While wearing the full Adidas suit, Ian Thorpe improved two of his world records by small amounts. The size of those improvements should be attributed to his physical and mental maturation. His suit appears to have had no impact. This was certainly so in the 100 meters, where he was slower in the final (49.74) than the semi-final of the Pan Pacific Championships of 1999 (49.71).There was no universal 3% improvement in performance derived from these items as Speedo claimed in its advertising hype. The magnitude of any effect they and Adidas Body Equipment might have, is grossly inflated, and then it only occurs in isolated cases. The improvement in "overall depth" of swimming performances at these trials was what should be expected of Australian swimmers competing for selection in "their" Games. No performance improvement impact of a general nature at these trials can be attributed to the advent of these suits. As hypothesized in September, 1999 , these full-body-arms-leg suits fail because they interfere with, and cause a loss of, "feel" of the water, due to the skin being covered. The full versions have been rejected by most swimmers. It is important for swimmers to sense the water for propulsion, particularly when the forearm and part of the upper arm contribute to more of it than the always-exposed hand. As well, the position of the torso indicates to the swimmer the streamlining of the major load in the propulsive task. Pressure on the shoulders and flow over the chest and sides, are the senses that serve as the "speedometer" used by most swimmers. To cover these sensitive areas, is to take the swimmer out of the aquatic interface. To not understand this, demonstrates the incompetence of the designers of these suits and the marketing "whizzes" who seem to have pushed this idea. One is set to opine that improvements in swimming will come from practitioners and scientists, not corporate marketing offices. The "feel" hypothesis is supported by breaststrokers. It is the stroke that requires as much feel in the legs as it does in the arms and upper body. Even though the US swimmer Ed Moses, uses a sleeveless neck-to-ankle Speedo, the overwhelming majority of breaststrokers prefer the true skin-to-water interface to its removal by an artificial covering. TO TAKE THE FEEL OUT OF SWIMMING IS NOT AN AVENUE FOR IMPROVING PERFORMANCE!

This is a better article with less scientific jargon... coachsci.sdsu.edu/.../knowsuit.htm There does not appear to be any benefit to wearing these suits. Any benefits will be restricted to the peculiarities of some individuals. For every swimmer that derives a benefit, there will be a least one, and probably more, who slows because of their invasiveness on the swimming experience. Too many swimmers recorded inconsistent results at the Australian Olympic trials to justify any attribution of benefit to full-body suits. Grant Hackett was slower in all events, despite wearing several variations of Speedo's suits. He opted for a waist-to-knee suit in the 1500m). His disappointing performances came after his "best ever" preparation for this meet. Suzie O'Neill achieved her biggest improvement in personal best times wearing a modified Aquablade (neck-to-knee) suit in her 200-m world record butterfly swim, while she wore the full "fastskin" suit to get the 100-m crawl stroke Commonwealth record. Keiren Perkins did his best time since Atlanta in a full "Fastskin." While wearing the full Adidas suit, Ian Thorpe improved two of his world records by small amounts. The size of those improvements should be attributed to his physical and mental maturation. His suit appears to have had no impact. This was certainly so in the 100 meters, where he was slower in the final (49.74) than the semi-final of the Pan Pacific Championships of 1999 (49.71).There was no universal 3% improvement in performance derived from these items as Speedo claimed in its advertising hype. The magnitude of any effect they and Adidas Body Equipment might have, is grossly inflated, and then it only occurs in isolated cases. The improvement in "overall depth" of swimming performances at these trials was what should be expected of Australian swimmers competing for selection in "their" Games. No performance improvement impact of a general nature at these trials can be attributed to the advent of these suits. As hypothesized in September, 1999 , these full-body-arms-leg suits fail because they interfere with, and cause a loss of, "feel" of the water, due to the skin being covered. The full versions have been rejected by most swimmers. It is important for swimmers to sense the water for propulsion, particularly when the forearm and part of the upper arm contribute to more of it than the always-exposed hand. As well, the position of the torso indicates to the swimmer the streamlining of the major load in the propulsive task. Pressure on the shoulders and flow over the chest and sides, are the senses that serve as the "speedometer" used by most swimmers. To cover these sensitive areas, is to take the swimmer out of the aquatic interface. To not understand this, demonstrates the incompetence of the designers of these suits and the marketing "whizzes" who seem to have pushed this idea. One is set to opine that improvements in swimming will come from practitioners and scientists, not corporate marketing offices. The "feel" hypothesis is supported by breaststrokers. It is the stroke that requires as much feel in the legs as it does in the arms and upper body. Even though the US swimmer Ed Moses, uses a sleeveless neck-to-ankle Speedo, the overwhelming majority of breaststrokers prefer the true skin-to-water interface to its removal by an artificial covering. TO TAKE THE FEEL OUT OF SWIMMING IS NOT AN AVENUE FOR IMPROVING PERFORMANCE!