Yes - one more time it's about the suit:
Here is a comparison to 2004 and what it took to make top 16 (top 8 for the 400) over the first 7 events:
2004 listed first then 2008 then the approx. % drop
400 IM - 4:24.8 to 4:21.0 1.5%
100 Fly - 1:01.29 to 59.97 2%
400 Free - 3:55.0 to 3:51.4 1.6%
400 IM - 4:49.57 to 4:43.2 2.3%
100 Br - 1:04.0 to 1:02.36 2.5%
100 Bk - 1:04.12 to 1:02.31 2.6%
200 Free - 1:51.1 to 1:48.76 2.2%
Ok - to be fair, people are getting faster, but I would guess at least a 1.5% drop across the board for the suit -- that is net time !
Fort, EVERYONE knows why your pull was stronger...!:weightlifter:
Thinking some more about this...last year at World Champs, Phelps had a remarkable drop in the 200 fly (1:53.7 to 1:52.0) wearing the FS-Pro. Nowadays, of course, everyone would nod knowingly and assert that, without question, the improvement was mostly due to the LZR. At the time, I seem to recall that a lot of people attributed it to an improved strength program. (Hey, Fort, maybe YOU can start swimming the 2-fly now!!)
But it occurs to me that perhaps it was the FS-Pro that was really a leap forward and the LZR was just an incremental improvement. I know that the U of Richmond coach believes that might be the case (or maybe he just doesn't want to blow his entire budget to outfit the team with LZRs). This conjecture maybe explains much of the data as well as the LZR explanation (eg, why Piersol didn't beat his WR by more, why Phelps didn't improve on his fly time to 1:49.9, as Erik once speculated, etc).
Just thinking out loud, we are all really just whistling in the dark here...
Gah. I guess I deserve all the public and private mocking after declaring myself a tank and announcing I was quitting weight lifting. lol. I think since I train alone mostly, I'm more apt to try out theories and see how they work. I'm not willing to try out the 200 fly though. I don't think "less is more" works for that.
I think you're onto something with the Pro being the key innovation. I noticed a big difference between the FS II and the Pro. Had the sensation of zipping through the water faster, especially in and out of turns. Don't have any clue about the LZR. Like you, I had no intention of ordering it.
Didn't Phelps wear a full body LZR in the 200 free?
Fort, EVERYONE knows why your pull was stronger...!:weightlifter:
Thinking some more about this...last year at World Champs, Phelps had a remarkable drop in the 200 fly (1:53.7 to 1:52.0) wearing the FS-Pro. Nowadays, of course, everyone would nod knowingly and assert that, without question, the improvement was mostly due to the LZR. At the time, I seem to recall that a lot of people attributed it to an improved strength program. (Hey, Fort, maybe YOU can start swimming the 2-fly now!!)
But it occurs to me that perhaps it was the FS-Pro that was really a leap forward and the LZR was just an incremental improvement. I know that the U of Richmond coach believes that might be the case (or maybe he just doesn't want to blow his entire budget to outfit the team with LZRs). This conjecture maybe explains much of the data as well as the LZR explanation (eg, why Piersol didn't beat his WR by more, why Phelps didn't improve on his fly time to 1:49.9, as Erik once speculated, etc).
Just thinking out loud, we are all really just whistling in the dark here...
Gah. I guess I deserve all the public and private mocking after declaring myself a tank and announcing I was quitting weight lifting. lol. I think since I train alone mostly, I'm more apt to try out theories and see how they work. I'm not willing to try out the 200 fly though. I don't think "less is more" works for that.
I think you're onto something with the Pro being the key innovation. I noticed a big difference between the FS II and the Pro. Had the sensation of zipping through the water faster, especially in and out of turns. Don't have any clue about the LZR. Like you, I had no intention of ordering it.
Didn't Phelps wear a full body LZR in the 200 free?
