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?
Former Member
I wore the stars and stripes suit. I could never grow the mustache.
For me the problem is this; Because you bought something you are now faster than me. You bought a crutch that gives you a one to two percent drop in time immediately. That drop in time isn't something to sneeze at. Your training didn't give you this. You bought it.
It took time for you to learn how to dive with your cheap goggles. It took time to practice in your fancy pool with high rent. It took time and effort for you to be as fast of a swimmer as you are.
It took no time to wear the cheatin' suit. (except to put the silly baggies over your feet) (( Isn't that enough right there?))
I think that training, skill, and my bad habits should be the factors in my defeat. Not your bankroll.
1. at what point do the tech suits become unreasonable?
a- $500 suit = (-).5 sec pre 100 yds
b- $1,000 suit = (-)1 second per 100 yds
c- $5,000 suit = (-) 2 seconds per 100 yards
I'm wondering if you have ever tried a bodysuit?
I wear one for competition and the time advantages you mention here are way out.
Up until a few years ago I'd never won a major competition or set records. Since wearing a bodysuit I have won medals at World and European events, and set 9 national and 5 European records.
My 'bodysuit' 100 time has reduced by 4 seconds (as compared to swimming in trunks) and my 200 time has dropped by 8 seconds. My 1500 time is a minute faster with a suit.
I wouldn't compete without a suit again.
An analogy from the cycling world might be aerobars. They improve speed instantly, but learning to ride well with them takes some practice.
guys with aerobars were always forbidden to participate in any pace-line training sessions back when i was racing. don't know about now?
This past week I was able to attend both our local College Conference meet as well as the HS district meets.
At the college meet it was 80%+ tech suits, overwhelmingly LZR's. Seeing the level of performance from these swimmers I felt their use was justified in particular sice the schools tend to pay for them. Also, the swimmers seemed to respect the fact that these suits only last so long and were only wearing them for their races.
At the HS meet it was maybe 5%, 2-3 teams and only a couple of swimmers each. But the kids that wore them overwhelmingly came in 1st, 2nd or 3rd and breaking records as well. To drop over 1 second in the 50 free is huge and don't tell me the suit did not help! What bothered me more than anything else thought was the fact that these kids wore their LZR's during warm up, their race and medal ceremonies-so about 4-5 hours. I thought it is not the frequency of use but the extent of the use that deteriorates the suit, so why do that to a $500 suit?
Anyhow, I felt really bad for those kids whose mom and dad could "only" cough up enough for a fast skin or the team suit. When a suit is so out of reach for the average HS swimmer then maybe it should not be permitted at a district or even state meet.
guys with aerobars were always forbidden to participate in any pace-line training sessions back when i was racing. don't know about now?
Same thing now. They are allowed in time trial races only, and in triathlons. No road races, nor crits.
As far as training...it depends. True cyclists don't like it and sometimes they won't allow you to ride with them in training even if you promise not to use them. Groups of triathletes -- at least the ones I know -- don't have that problem, and I have been in pacelines where many of them are on the aeros. That makes me nervous, though: I have them attached to my "regular" (drop) handlebars but in a paceline will always use the drops instead.
I'm sure you know the following story, but for the benefit of those who do not: Greg LeMond won the 1989 Tour de France by a mere 8 seconds. He was down 50 seconds to Laurent Fignon before the last day...a time trial in which LeMond used aerobars and Fignon did not. The aerobars are widely credited with being the deciding factor in the win.
Did the equipment win the race? Or did LeMond show foresight and dedication in adopting the best legal equipment and learning how to use it?
Hmmm, I don't think I'll ever agree with that statement.
By the way, I do not find that the suits are quite as "plug-in" as you seem to think. It has taken me quite a long time to get used to how they feel, and to alter my pre-race routine to accomodate them. In fact, people wear them during training or less-important meets largely so that they can get used to any alterations in their stroke mechanics.
Me neither.
And I concur with the lack of "plug in." I wear/wore my B70 and other tech suits at in season meets for this reason. It changes my turns/breakouts somewhat from a poly tank.
I just don't think this is a "bankroll" issue either. Yes, the newest ones are very pricey. But if someone can afford to pay for pools, training time, gym memberships, etc., they can purchase a tech suit. Or forego something else to save for it perhaps, if it's that important to them?
Up until a few years ago I'd never won a major competition or set records. Since wearing a bodysuit I have won medals at World and European events, and set 9 national and 5 European records.
But aren't most of your present-day competitors wearing them too?
You all have a similar advantage over your historical competitors, which is why some people object to, or at least hesitate about, the "record-setting" aspects of any new technology. But as to the medals, you are all operating within the same present-day rule set. So you must have done something else as well, besides buy a special suit, to surpass people today that you had not surpassed before.
The purchase of speed is a tired argument. In virtually any sport that we can play as adults (and there are many), you can buy better equipment that WILL improve your game or performance. At higher levels of any of these sports, most, if not all, participants will be using the better/lighter/stronger/faster equipment, so the playing field levels. At lower levels, performance is far more closely tied to training and talent.
Because you bought something you are now faster than me.
Hmmm, I don't think I'll ever agree with that statement.
By the way, I do not find that the suits are quite as "plug-in" as you seem to think. It has taken me quite a long time to get used to how they feel, and to alter my pre-race routine to accomodate them. In fact, people wear them during training or less-important meets largely so that they can get used to any alterations in their stroke mechanics.
I'm sure this is one big reason that Australian swimmer from the article -- I forget her name -- wasn't willing to go with an untried suit. It wasn't that she couldn't afford it.
An analogy from the cycling world might be aerobars. They improve speed instantly, but learning to ride well with them takes some practice.
For me, this is all much harder than learning to dive with goggles on. Others may differ, of course.
So, you guys are saying that these suits should be banned because YOU don't want to have to spend that much money to feel competitive! I don't find that to be a compelling argument to ban them.
