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?"?
Parents
Former Member
I don't need to google anything. Yes, it is possible that the changes are not attributable to the LZR, but this is still unlikely even in light of other variables whos contributions ARE more or less known (training methods/etc which are always changing and yet their contributions have never led to close to the drops seen recently, the shuffle of older competitors out and newer competitors in which has also generally "normalized", etc. etc... again, the effect of many of these variables can and has been observed in historical time drops prior to the release of the LZR). Furthermore, Speedo claims the LZR reduces drag in tests, competitors claim it increases bouyancy etc, virtually every world record broken within months of its release, and almost every record was broken with the LZR,etc. etc. etc. it doesn't take a degree in statistics, only common sense to see that the LZR almost certaintly has an impact. It almost seems like some here are trying to convince themselves the LZR doesn't have an impact to avoid purchasing it. I wouldn't spend $550 on a swim suit either. But I'm not going to pretend that I don't believe the LZR has a positive impact on performance simply because it has not been proven in a rigorous manner.
You are missing the point. I have very little doubt that the drops are statistically significant, but the data are simply insufficient to attribute that cause to the LZR no matter how many virtual coins you feel like tossing.
Please google or read up on "confounding variables." Any textbook in Epidemiology has a good description. Also check out the Bradford-Hill criteria for assessing the evidence of causation.
I don't need to google anything. Yes, it is possible that the changes are not attributable to the LZR, but this is still unlikely even in light of other variables whos contributions ARE more or less known (training methods/etc which are always changing and yet their contributions have never led to close to the drops seen recently, the shuffle of older competitors out and newer competitors in which has also generally "normalized", etc. etc... again, the effect of many of these variables can and has been observed in historical time drops prior to the release of the LZR). Furthermore, Speedo claims the LZR reduces drag in tests, competitors claim it increases bouyancy etc, virtually every world record broken within months of its release, and almost every record was broken with the LZR,etc. etc. etc. it doesn't take a degree in statistics, only common sense to see that the LZR almost certaintly has an impact. It almost seems like some here are trying to convince themselves the LZR doesn't have an impact to avoid purchasing it. I wouldn't spend $550 on a swim suit either. But I'm not going to pretend that I don't believe the LZR has a positive impact on performance simply because it has not been proven in a rigorous manner.
You are missing the point. I have very little doubt that the drops are statistically significant, but the data are simply insufficient to attribute that cause to the LZR no matter how many virtual coins you feel like tossing.
Please google or read up on "confounding variables." Any textbook in Epidemiology has a good description. Also check out the Bradford-Hill criteria for assessing the evidence of causation.
