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?
Do the new suits help male swimmers more than females? Take a look at this.
www.floswimming.org/.../6033-part-iii-predictive-modeling-of-swim-performances-at-the-us-olympic-trials
Interesting, thanks for finding this. The table is slightly misleading b/c the confidence intervals for the predictions of the women's times tend to be larger than those of the men's times (and the actual time is labelled "faster" only if it is statistically significant...ie, if faster than the lower bound of the CI). So the difference between genders might not be as great as suggested.
In reality all the men's times are faster than predicted and all but one of the women's times is faster (the exception being the 800 free).
If you assume that the predicted times are completely accurate, then the tech suit enhancement was 1.56% for the men (std error 0.10%) and 1.02% for the women (std error 0.20%). The difference between the two is probably significant, depending on the test you choose (ie on what assumptions you are willing to make about the data).
The numbers also give some idea of the impact of the suits on performance compared to the suits of 4 years ago, roughly 0.75 sec per minute of racing. This obviously applies to elite swimmers in LCM competition, but even with them there seems to be some suggestion of differences depending on even. On a relative basis: the distance frees seem least effected; backstroke appear more improved than breaststroke for both genders (contradicting Fort's statement above); etc.
From what I can see, the predictions of the 2000 and 2004 trials were pretty much accurate, implying that the suits of those meets didn't have a significant impact (if present it was less than the uncertainty of the predictions).
If the suits help men more than women, I wonder why? I would expect these suits -- any version, including previous years' (which did not have a measurable effect) -- would more significantly affect the hydrodynamics of women swimmers. So perhaps something else -- such as changing the body position -- is a more dominant factor.
Do the new suits help male swimmers more than females? Take a look at this.
www.floswimming.org/.../6033-part-iii-predictive-modeling-of-swim-performances-at-the-us-olympic-trials
Interesting, thanks for finding this. The table is slightly misleading b/c the confidence intervals for the predictions of the women's times tend to be larger than those of the men's times (and the actual time is labelled "faster" only if it is statistically significant...ie, if faster than the lower bound of the CI). So the difference between genders might not be as great as suggested.
In reality all the men's times are faster than predicted and all but one of the women's times is faster (the exception being the 800 free).
If you assume that the predicted times are completely accurate, then the tech suit enhancement was 1.56% for the men (std error 0.10%) and 1.02% for the women (std error 0.20%). The difference between the two is probably significant, depending on the test you choose (ie on what assumptions you are willing to make about the data).
The numbers also give some idea of the impact of the suits on performance compared to the suits of 4 years ago, roughly 0.75 sec per minute of racing. This obviously applies to elite swimmers in LCM competition, but even with them there seems to be some suggestion of differences depending on even. On a relative basis: the distance frees seem least effected; backstroke appear more improved than breaststroke for both genders (contradicting Fort's statement above); etc.
From what I can see, the predictions of the 2000 and 2004 trials were pretty much accurate, implying that the suits of those meets didn't have a significant impact (if present it was less than the uncertainty of the predictions).
If the suits help men more than women, I wonder why? I would expect these suits -- any version, including previous years' (which did not have a measurable effect) -- would more significantly affect the hydrodynamics of women swimmers. So perhaps something else -- such as changing the body position -- is a more dominant factor.
