After seeing a woman break 24 seconds and I think we can stop the discussion of "IF" the LZR suit is faster and start thinking "how much faster".
The previous line of suits (Fastskin and so on) were pretty similiar to a shaved swimmer. Sure - they do feel like they make you float, but overall the times seemed to move along "in line" with what I would expect to see in terms of improvements in the sport. If the previous suits would have been that much faster than shaving, you would have never seen people just using the legskins. By the way - for us Masters swimmers there was always the added benefit of keeping in all the "extra layers of skin".
So how much faster are the LZR suits ?
If I had to guess based on the results so far, I would say 0.25 to 0.30 per 50 and double that for the 100. I can see the Bernard going 48 low in the 100 and I can see Sullivan getting close or just breaking the 50 record. It makes sense that Libby Lenton would swim a 24.2 or so in the 50.
I think one of the top regular teams out there should do a test - you need a good amount of world class swimmers training together to be able to do a test. Here is the test I would propose:
8-10 swimmers
2 days of testing
4x50 on 10 minutes all out
Day 1 - swim 2 with a Fastskin2 followed by 2 with the LZR
Day 2 - swim 2 with the LZR followed by 2 with the Fastskin2
Get the averages of all 10 swimmers - maybe drop the high and low and there you go.
Why do the test ? I would HAVE to know. Swimming is a big part of your life and you just set a massive PR using this new technology - my very first question would be " How much was me and how much was the suit?"?
Plus, despite the fact that one suit is legal, I see no reason why multiple suits couldn't have a collectively illegal effect. Line drawing is a fact of life. And how hard is it here? One swimmer, one suit.
I think Fina would first have to find that the second suit was a "device" within the meaning of 10.7, then have to find that the second suit aided a swimmer's:
Speed;
Buoyancy; or
Endurance
I hate my FS Pro man-girdle enough that I can't imagine imagine wearing 2 of them would help my endurance.
Buoyancy? I happen to believe my tech suits float me like a cork, but Fina ruled otherwise. So unless there is some synergistic effect resulting from adding a second non-buoyant suit to the first non-buoyant suit which magically creates buoyancy where once was none, Fina can't go here. I'd like to see the scientific testing showing that 0+0=more than 0.
Speed? Of course they increase speed, but Fina has already blown past this issue, I believe by distinguishing the "swim costume" from a "device." I suppose Fina could argue that the second suit is a device, but that seems less than persuasive.
I think Fina will likely address the issue with an amendment to the General Rule . . . but Fina better anticipate the response of the manufacturers and specify a maximum number of layers, thickness, and everything else it can think of. I'm thinking of ski jumping here; I believe the rules eventually had to address the surface area of the suits which were beginning to look like small hang gliders.
Plus, despite the fact that one suit is legal, I see no reason why multiple suits couldn't have a collectively illegal effect. Line drawing is a fact of life. And how hard is it here? One swimmer, one suit.
I think Fina would first have to find that the second suit was a "device" within the meaning of 10.7, then have to find that the second suit aided a swimmer's:
Speed;
Buoyancy; or
Endurance
I hate my FS Pro man-girdle enough that I can't imagine imagine wearing 2 of them would help my endurance.
Buoyancy? I happen to believe my tech suits float me like a cork, but Fina ruled otherwise. So unless there is some synergistic effect resulting from adding a second non-buoyant suit to the first non-buoyant suit which magically creates buoyancy where once was none, Fina can't go here. I'd like to see the scientific testing showing that 0+0=more than 0.
Speed? Of course they increase speed, but Fina has already blown past this issue, I believe by distinguishing the "swim costume" from a "device." I suppose Fina could argue that the second suit is a device, but that seems less than persuasive.
I think Fina will likely address the issue with an amendment to the General Rule . . . but Fina better anticipate the response of the manufacturers and specify a maximum number of layers, thickness, and everything else it can think of. I'm thinking of ski jumping here; I believe the rules eventually had to address the surface area of the suits which were beginning to look like small hang gliders.
