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?"?
I suggest you listen to Diana Nyad's take on this. I'm sure NPR has a replay on their website. Nyad is also an elite swimmer from the 60s/70s but isn't so hung up on changing technology or holding on to fading glory. But, you guys don't stop thinking about yesterday, as Fleetwood Mac would say.
I think we should all advocate taking swimming back to the 70s to lose what little mass appeal we will gain this summer. We could get rid of title IX and dump all female swimmers, ban all suits made of anything but nylon, use wooden starting blocks and no goggles. That way the Smiths could stand proud for eternity! Of course, then my pathetic current breastroke would be fashionable again.
A futher benefit of regressing the sport to the point of obscurity would be no more discussions about the demise of boys swimming or how terrible all the females are to the sport. We could just argue about swimming going totally away. All in favor, stand up and say "I want to relive my glory days!"
Says the man with the $7000 bike....we know where you stand on technology don't we!
Sell that piece of crap, get a PeeWee Herman cruiser and buy your with some Victoria Secret.
I suggest you listen to Diana Nyad's take on this. I'm sure NPR has a replay on their website. Nyad is also an elite swimmer from the 60s/70s but isn't so hung up on changing technology or holding on to fading glory. But, you guys don't stop thinking about yesterday, as Fleetwood Mac would say.
I think we should all advocate taking swimming back to the 70s to lose what little mass appeal we will gain this summer. We could get rid of title IX and dump all female swimmers, ban all suits made of anything but nylon, use wooden starting blocks and no goggles. That way the Smiths could stand proud for eternity! Of course, then my pathetic current breastroke would be fashionable again.
A futher benefit of regressing the sport to the point of obscurity would be no more discussions about the demise of boys swimming or how terrible all the females are to the sport. We could just argue about swimming going totally away. All in favor, stand up and say "I want to relive my glory days!"
Says the man with the $7000 bike....we know where you stand on technology don't we!
Sell that piece of crap, get a PeeWee Herman cruiser and buy your with some Victoria Secret.
