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
I'll give up my relatively inexpensive tech suit when I go to a triathlon and don't see a fat dude riding an all carbon bike with carbon soled shoes in a $200 helmet and a $500 wet suit. Until then, no cyclist is allowed to ever speak to a swimmer about gear again and no whiney swimmers are allowed to tell me how to spend my money.
When cyclists go back to steel framed bikes I'll ditch my suit. Until then, zip it. February 14th, 2009 06:47 AM
I like the way you compare cycling and swimming. I wonder if a carbon fiber bike gives a one second advantage per 100 yards over a steel bike.
I also know that to a sucessful capitalist as yourself, 200 dollars is a mere drop in the bucket (in the great and ethical sport of cycling). I can only hope that your crutch doesn't become cost prohibitive to you. I'm worried that we might be hearing some real whinning.
"When the training becomes secondary."
Two swimmers have the same abilities and training. One wears the expensive and questionably legal suit. The other wears Joe Speedo. It seems that Mr. Tech Suit wins. Not due to training but due to the one second advantage per 100 yards created by the expensive and questionably legal suit.
I'll give up my relatively inexpensive tech suit when I go to a triathlon and don't see a fat dude riding an all carbon bike with carbon soled shoes in a $200 helmet and a $500 wet suit. Until then, no cyclist is allowed to ever speak to a swimmer about gear again and no whiney swimmers are allowed to tell me how to spend my money.
When cyclists go back to steel framed bikes I'll ditch my suit. Until then, zip it. February 14th, 2009 06:47 AM
I like the way you compare cycling and swimming. I wonder if a carbon fiber bike gives a one second advantage per 100 yards over a steel bike.
I also know that to a sucessful capitalist as yourself, 200 dollars is a mere drop in the bucket (in the great and ethical sport of cycling). I can only hope that your crutch doesn't become cost prohibitive to you. I'm worried that we might be hearing some real whinning.
"When the training becomes secondary."
Two swimmers have the same abilities and training. One wears the expensive and questionably legal suit. The other wears Joe Speedo. It seems that Mr. Tech Suit wins. Not due to training but due to the one second advantage per 100 yards created by the expensive and questionably legal suit.
