LZR - Enough is enough

Dolphin - I won't be as scolding as aquageek is. But really - technology (or science perhaps) is a critical factor in developing our bodies. Without pioneering research by Doc Counsilman and continued by many - swimming speed might have advanced only via trial and error. Example: sculling was widely believed to be a major factor in swimming efficiency. But research showed it was not - it was more efficient to simply push water backwards as straight as possible. Those science driven improvements are still all about the body moving through the water. What about the science with diets? Lactate tolerance? The technology of goggles - which caused the single most significant improvement in swimming in the last 50 years? I think the new suits are an unnerving development. But I most dislike its likely impact on non-elite age group swimming, not the suits themselves. The suit is still a passive component of swimming. Maybe they create flotation by trapping air under rubber-like panels even though the suits don't actually float.

Maybe the makers of BIC Pens should come up with a gimick of their own by developing a faster pencil and then solicit top science, engineering, and mathematics students to promote it by claiming it helped them solve physics problems in record time. OOOhhh I can see it now -Joe Schmoe set a new world's record for completing the SAT. :doh: However, if you really want to apply technology to swimming, just have someone develop a video game where the players control virtual swimmers and Intel can take some of the credit for setting a new world's record. As a plus, the Olympics can be held entirely on line (without regard to whether the host country is run by a bunch of Communists). :shakeshead: Dolphin 2

What we need is golf ball dimpled technology applied to swim wear. It can also be applied to bic pens to make the little ball write faster.

I think the new suits are an unnerving development. But I most dislike its likely impact on non-elite age group swimming, not the suits themselves. The suit is still a passive component of swimming. Maybe they create flotation by trapping air under rubber-like panels even though the suits don't actually float. In another thread, and I've forgotten which one or I would go back to it, I asked whether it would be a good thing if FINA allowed fins to be used in competition. Hulk drew a distinction between suits and fins that I didn't really understand but seemed arbitrary to my mind. Perhaps an even better question would be, would it be a good thing if FINA were to remove the no buoyancy rule. There's a lot of debate about whether the new suits increase buoyancy by trapping air either inside the suit or on the surface, or whether swimmers just feel "like" they are more buoyant. In any case, buoyant suits are just one possible technological advancement that could help swimmers swim faster, just like the current suits. Is there some distinction why it is good to approve the current suits but it wouldn't be good to approve more buoyant suits?

I have lots of natural "golf ball dimples" on my legs, but it doesn't seem to make me swim any faster. :D

I've talked about this subject 'til I'm blue in the face and I'm glad there even more people out there who agree with me. :blah: :oldman: Dolphin 2 That article is bunk, along with any theories that put Phelp's remarkable achievements in doubt. Everyone at the Olympics is in a hot suit so it's a totally level playing field. The guy in the article swam for the US almost 50 years ago, you have no competitive swimming experience so these statements are meaningless. There always has to be one black-cloud over every great accomplishment, I guess you can be proud of your role in that. Sports evolve, technology advances, either get with the program or become/continue to be a noodler.

Bah! The same can be said for full body suits generally. Or the "paper suits" of yore, or even basic speedos. What about caps and goggles? Then there are wave dampening lane lines (I think they even double the lane lines in elite-level swimming, don't they) and starting blocks. All these things allowed dramatic improvements over the times people swam before them. As Ande said in another thread, the genie is out of the bottle and it will be well-near impossible to stuff it back in. Also, some of your comparisons just aren't fair. For example, aluminum bats are prohibited in MLB because they give the hitters an unfair advantage over the pitchers. No such concern with swimming (edit--I guess there is the "haves" and the "have nots" which is a legitimate gripe but not one I agree with). I would guess that golf clubs and balls are regulated (at least in part--I'm just speculating here) because certain clubs and balls can correct for deficiencies in players strokes that takes some of the skill out of the game. Unlike neoprene wetsuits, I'm pretty sure that the LZR does not do the swimming for you... I personally don't want to go back to the stone ages of swimming. I'm very happy with the technological progress our sport has made over the years. By the way, in the interests of full disclosure, all I own is a pair of FS Pro Jammers. I don't have any present plans to buy a full bodysuit and I don't care if others do or don't. Ah, but I would argue that a buoyancy aiding swimsuit does correct deficiencies for some swimmers. Isn't maintaining balance part of swimming skill? It stands to reason that some swimmers are better at keeping the hips up than others. Not much different than allowing some swimmers to use hand paddles the size of Phelps' hands.

The LZR is now a political debate as The American Spectator chimes in. In the forthcoming Presidential debates, will the candidates be asked if there for or against the LZR? Hey I'd like to know. www.theamericanprowler.com/dsp_article.asp I've talked about this subject 'til I'm blue in the face and I'm glad there even more people out there who agree with me. :blah: :oldman: Dolphin 2