I swam in a 3-day USS meet this past weekend, prelims and finals, and did a small little experiment to test the effectiveness of wearing a FS II kneeskin on my swimming.
First an exercise. The following are SCY swims I performed in the past year when fully rested. Can you pick out which were done WITHOUT a fastskin? Answers appear towards the end of message.
100 fly: 51.35, 51.43, 51.52, 51.96, 51.99
200 fly: 1:56.38, 1:56.90, 1:57.43
100 back: 51.41, 51.72, 51.77, 52.05, 52.26
200 back: 1:53.99, 1:54.02, 1:54.23, 1:54.33, 1:54.87
Some background. Last year I began training swimming more seriously (changed coaches, did less cross-training, did lots of quality sets, started weights again) and dropped quite a bit of time. I also purchased an FSII kneeskin suit and wore it at all my rested meets. So naturally the question occured to me: how much of my improvement was "real" and how much was a result of the suit? I also very much disliked losing the feel for the water when wearing the suit, as well as the hassle of putting it on before races.
There have been numerous studies but very few (I didn't find any) under true meet race conditions, comparing a swim with the suit against a swim without it but still fully rested and shaved and with something significant at stake. It is a hard thing to ask a swimmer to do, to play around after months of training; as it turns out, I didn't complete my intended experiment either.
I have been swimming at the Virginia Senior Championships the last three seasons (SCY07, LCM07, SCY08). The following were my prelim/final swims in the past two seasons, all with the FSII (I swam other events too but scratched some at night for more rest).
200 free SCY07: 1:45.52p, 1:45.70f (+0.18)
100 fly SCY07: 51.35p, 51.99f (+0.64)
100 fly LCM07: 59.12p, 59.47f (+0.35)
100 back SCY07: 51.72p, 51.77f (+0.05)
100 back LCM07: 1:01.35p, 1:01.77f (+0.42)
200 back SCY07: 1:53.99p, 1:54.02f (+0.03)
200 back LCM07: 2:16.21p, 2:16.07f (-.14)
P/F difference: avg +0.22, std error 0.10
I'm a morning person and the difference in prelims and finals has grown greater with age. As a 43-year-old, I have a harder time swimming fast at 8pm than at 10am.
I swam 5 events at the meet this past weekend; the full results are here
www.virginiaswimming.org/.../index.htm
Taking them in the order that I swam them:
-- Fri: the 200 free I swam in the morning with the FSII and scratched at night. The time (1:44.40) was a 1 second improvement over my best time last year.
-- Fri: the 100 fly I swam in the prelims with Aquablade jammers and went 51.43. At night I put on the FSII and went 51.96 (+0.53).
-- Sat: the 200 fly I swam in the prelims with Aquablade jammers and went 1:56.38, half a second faster than my best time last year.
-- Sat: the 100 back I swam in the prelims with jammers and went 52.05. At night I put on the FSII and went 52.26 (+0.21).
-- Sun: the 200 back I swam with jammers both morning -- 1:54.33 -- and night -- 1:54.87 (+0.54).
A few notes:
(1) On the second evening, I swam the fly leg of the 'A' medley relay, spliting 51.13. I did this wearing the jammers. Add about 0.5 sec for the relay start and you get a time pretty consistent with the others.
(2) The difference in the 100 back was actually greater than it appeared. In the morning swim I slipped badly on the push off the first wall. I offer no excuses -- I was the one who misjudged and jammed the turn -- but I estimate I lost roughly 0.5 sec. I say this because my splits were 25.7/26.3, and I usually take out the 100 back in about 25.2 when rested. At night I took it out in 25.3 but faded more.
(3) The difference in the 100 fly may be slightly less than it appeared. In the evening my foot cramped off the first wall (it lasted only a 25) and it may have slowed me down some. Comparing splits for P/F somewhat confirms this. Again, I am not a person who likes to offer excuses for swims, but I am just adding it in the context of this experiment.
(4) I didn't wear the FSII in the 200 fly on the second morning on the basis of the apparent lack of effect on the 100 fly on the previous day. I really need oxygen on the last 50 and have never liked that the FSII somewhat constricts my breathing (I only notice it at the end of the 200 fly race). It didn't take much to convince me not to wear it in the 200 fly.
(5) I didn't wear the FSII in the 200 back finals on the third evening, although I had intended to at the beginning. In retrospect, I wish I had, but by this point in the meet I was convinced it didn't help much, and I was tired of mucking around with my swims at a rested meet. (Heck, I was just plain tired!)
Here is the answer to the exercise posed at the beginning of the message. The bolded swims were sans fastskin:
100 fly: 51.35, 51.43, 51.52, 51.96, 51.99
200 fly: 1:56.38, 1:56.90, 1:57.43
100 back: 51.41, 51.72, 51.77, 52.05, 52.26
200 back: 1:53.99, 1:54.02, 1:54.23, 1:54.33, 1:54.87
I do not pretend that this was a definitive experiment that will settle this question for all. BUT I do think this kind of experiment -- done "in the field,'' as it were -- is much to be preferred over ones that are done "in the lab.'' (They are also preferred to experiments done by Speedo, who obviously have a vested interest in the outcome.)
My general conclusion is that the FSII is not significantly more effective than the Aquablade jammers FOR ME. If they made a difference of 0.5 - 1 second per hundred, even this limited experiment would have shown it.
I also think that the effects of technical suits is dependent on body type. I am 5'10'' and weigh 170lbs, somewhat muscular with a long torso and short legs. I am about 10 pounds heavier than college when I trained 5 hours a day and had little excess fat. Some of the mass I've gained since then is muscle but after spending 3 days with teenagers who have no fat I am under no illusions: I am not as skinny as I once was.
I also think that the situation is much different for females than males. They HAVE to wear a full body suit and I can readily believe that a poorly made suit will add significant time to their swims. Whether a technical suit helps them significantly more than a good "regular" race suit, I cannot say.
Sorry for the long post and thanks for your patience.
Thanks for the results, Chris!
It is hard to control all variables, including the placebo effect. But probably not as much difference from one race suit to another. I've noticed that FS I - FS Pro doesn't seem to make much difference in a sprint for me. I still think, without solid concrete evidence, that bodyskins are preferable to regular recordbreakers.
Were your fastskins wet when you jumped in from warming up? Could make a slight difference.
I'm way too old to swim prelim-final meets. You must be exhausted! But great job!!
Thanks, Fort. Yes, quite tired! Thanksfully today is the first day of Spring Break and my son is home from school with a fever, so I get to recover and do some leisurely grading.
Even the kids were showing the effects of the meet by the end, I think: I moved up 2 places in the 200 back even though I added time. On the plus side, it makes timed final meets seem like a breeze by comparison.
The first meet I used the FSII (Sr Champs one year ago) I did not wear it during warmup. The first time I EVER wore one was in a race, diving in for the 200 free. It was incredibly disconcerting but I did a good time.
Ever since that meet, I wear them during warmups and then dry them as best I could. "Feel for the water" is very important for me and I need to establish it with the suit during warmup so it isn't a distraction in the race. I also like to warm up as long as possible before swimming without having to worry about putting on a suit while wet. (I heard Mark Gill's story about Duffy Dillon hurting his back attempting it...I can believe it!)
Of course, the point is largely moot for backstroke and I think the effect is minor, at best. In my mind, a suit that makes you change your pre-race routine and has minimal if any effect isn't worth the effort.
I'm not sure if you are referring to the Aquablade jammers as a "race" suit, but it is a marginal one at best. I like them because they are fairly cheap and I don't notice them when I swim. I bought some briefs for the meet but chickened out when I saw the psych sheet; I almost dropped the expt altogether. I figured the jammers were a good compromise.
Interesting that you say that "without solid evidence" the bodyskins are preferable to the "record breakers" (I'm not sure what those are). I would say that the burden of proof should be upon those who introduce these new, expensive suits...but that's just me.
Thanks for the results, Chris!
It is hard to control all variables, including the placebo effect. But probably not as much difference from one race suit to another. I've noticed that FS I - FS Pro doesn't seem to make much difference in a sprint for me. I still think, without solid concrete evidence, that bodyskins are preferable to regular recordbreakers.
Were your fastskins wet when you jumped in from warming up? Could make a slight difference.
I'm way too old to swim prelim-final meets. You must be exhausted! But great job!!
Thanks, Fort. Yes, quite tired! Thanksfully today is the first day of Spring Break and my son is home from school with a fever, so I get to recover and do some leisurely grading.
Even the kids were showing the effects of the meet by the end, I think: I moved up 2 places in the 200 back even though I added time. On the plus side, it makes timed final meets seem like a breeze by comparison.
The first meet I used the FSII (Sr Champs one year ago) I did not wear it during warmup. The first time I EVER wore one was in a race, diving in for the 200 free. It was incredibly disconcerting but I did a good time.
Ever since that meet, I wear them during warmups and then dry them as best I could. "Feel for the water" is very important for me and I need to establish it with the suit during warmup so it isn't a distraction in the race. I also like to warm up as long as possible before swimming without having to worry about putting on a suit while wet. (I heard Mark Gill's story about Duffy Dillon hurting his back attempting it...I can believe it!)
Of course, the point is largely moot for backstroke and I think the effect is minor, at best. In my mind, a suit that makes you change your pre-race routine and has minimal if any effect isn't worth the effort.
I'm not sure if you are referring to the Aquablade jammers as a "race" suit, but it is a marginal one at best. I like them because they are fairly cheap and I don't notice them when I swim. I bought some briefs for the meet but chickened out when I saw the psych sheet; I almost dropped the expt altogether. I figured the jammers were a good compromise.
Interesting that you say that "without solid evidence" the bodyskins are preferable to the "record breakers" (I'm not sure what those are). I would say that the burden of proof should be upon those who introduce these new, expensive suits...but that's just me.
