I am just back from the SPMA meet where all the top finisher were wearing the latest generation tech suits,mostly B-70s(or were named Jeff Commings.)I have here to for been in favor of the suits,but now I am not so sure.First,they eliminate the old bench marks.I went my fastest 100m BR in 5 yr in my LZR,but it was only .3 sec faster than I did untapered 5 wk earlier in my first swim in the LZR.So was my swim good or not,I'm not sure.Also,instead of focusing on technique or pace I found myself ruminating over aspects of the suits,how many more swims did the suit have,is it the right size,was the reason I didn't get better results from my B-70 because it was too big?etc.The B-70 has somewhat mitigated the "too expensive,not durable" problem,but for how long.
Lets say a company comes up with a suit that is much faster,say 4 sec/100.Further that it is very expensive(say $1000) lasts 4 swims and is very hard to make so that quantities are always limited and the fastest way to get one is to bid up to $3000 on ebay. Now lets say your nemesis has one,or that getting one is your best chance to get TT or AA or a ZR or WR,or that your child is close to making JO cuts,or finally beating his/her nemesis etc. Is it worth it and where does it stop?
Parents
Former Member
This really makes no sense. Since skiing and cycling have already been brought up, that would be like saying FIS should allow skiers to wear jet packs and whatever the cycling federation is should allow motorized bikes. There's a difference between reducing weight of equipment, reducing rolling and aerodynamic friction, etc. and increasing propulsion.
Knelson
The two examples you cite (jet packs and motorized bikes) involve an external source of power -not just more efficient utilization of the individual athlete's own biological energy.
In addition to reducing drag, using paddles and flippers would also enable a swimmer to convert more of his/her muscle effort into more efficient propulsion -which is in fact the most effective way to increase swimming speed. So why not allow them too?
As I've said in my other posts, if FINA allows the use of so called drag reducing suits, why don't they just adopt a "Lazie Faire" approach and fling the door open to any other kind of "personally applied component" that can improve a swimmer's efficiency also?
Dolphin 2
This really makes no sense. Since skiing and cycling have already been brought up, that would be like saying FIS should allow skiers to wear jet packs and whatever the cycling federation is should allow motorized bikes. There's a difference between reducing weight of equipment, reducing rolling and aerodynamic friction, etc. and increasing propulsion.
Knelson
The two examples you cite (jet packs and motorized bikes) involve an external source of power -not just more efficient utilization of the individual athlete's own biological energy.
In addition to reducing drag, using paddles and flippers would also enable a swimmer to convert more of his/her muscle effort into more efficient propulsion -which is in fact the most effective way to increase swimming speed. So why not allow them too?
As I've said in my other posts, if FINA allows the use of so called drag reducing suits, why don't they just adopt a "Lazie Faire" approach and fling the door open to any other kind of "personally applied component" that can improve a swimmer's efficiency also?
Dolphin 2
