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?
Some might argue that the tech suits are simply making a level playing field for those who otherwise couldn't say read close or far items. Certainly some swimmers are at a disadvantage because of their body type/shape (some within their control, some not), and the tech suits can correct that, similar to how glasses correct vision.
Of course, the "purpose" of the tech suits was nothing of the sort (ie, making a level playing field), but I'll play along.
I don't like the analogy of swimming vs reading -- they are vastly different things -- but aside from this I also don't like the effect.
IF the suits have this disproportionate effect (a big assumption), I think it is a bad thing. So you have (for example) someone who is 6'8" and has some undeniable advantages associated with that. Fine.
But one DIS-advantage of being that tall is the increased weight, and you are saying here that you think it okay to negate that to some degree. Doesn't seem like it would be levelling the playing field at all.
It is akin to making the best climbers in cycling wear extra weight so that the heavier sprinters would have a sporting chance in the mountains. Ridiculous.
I think that, to the extent that the tech suits affect body types differently, that is a strong argument against them.
Some might argue that the tech suits are simply making a level playing field for those who otherwise couldn't say read close or far items. Certainly some swimmers are at a disadvantage because of their body type/shape (some within their control, some not), and the tech suits can correct that, similar to how glasses correct vision.
Of course, the "purpose" of the tech suits was nothing of the sort (ie, making a level playing field), but I'll play along.
I don't like the analogy of swimming vs reading -- they are vastly different things -- but aside from this I also don't like the effect.
IF the suits have this disproportionate effect (a big assumption), I think it is a bad thing. So you have (for example) someone who is 6'8" and has some undeniable advantages associated with that. Fine.
But one DIS-advantage of being that tall is the increased weight, and you are saying here that you think it okay to negate that to some degree. Doesn't seem like it would be levelling the playing field at all.
It is akin to making the best climbers in cycling wear extra weight so that the heavier sprinters would have a sporting chance in the mountains. Ridiculous.
I think that, to the extent that the tech suits affect body types differently, that is a strong argument against them.
