Ban the tech suits?

shriveled and dessicated beyond recognition. And I felt better. What is this world coming to when a beautiful male swimming body of the sort that I possess must be cloaked in not one, not two, but three full body suits, then left to rot for 100 years, moldering away to skeleton and dust, in order for my manifold rivals to sleep? One might imagine the keening laments of the womenfolk alone might undo whatever repose such Salieri's of the Water can find in the vanishing of my Staff of Vengeance! For more on me:

here's an article on the 2 suit topic www.collegeswimming.com/.../ www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/.../19828.asp Ande, I heard the Texas women's team (not the men's as it sounds like Eddie is very much against it)...and the Arizona team (men and women) had quite a few swimmers doing this?

here's an article on the 2 suit topic www.collegeswimming.com/.../ www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/.../19828.asp

OK...first off if someone already posted about this I apologize as i have only read a few posts on this subject. Yesterday i was talking with a Div. I college coach who's team swam at the Texas invite a few weeks back...according to him there were a lot of swimmers wearing a B70 over a LZR....he said it was across a number of teams and a fair amount of these swimmers made their "A" & "B" NCAA cuts. Fast forward to just the last two weeks and the NCAA issues a statement which bans the use of two suits like this...but grants an exemption of sorts to swimmers who used them prior to the announcement. It sounds like a number of coaches have written/complained to the NCAA saying it offered an unfair advantage to swimmers who were allowed to do it up until this point and that in fact to be fair the practice should be allowed thru this season...with a possible exception being to not allow it at NCAA's. It appears they (The NCAA) agreed with the observation...but refused to reverse its decision. Nice.

Jeff, I can see your point. However, what about what might be called the "Scissors Effect"? One of the very, very few swimming advantages I have is baldness. I also have an appendage that is extraordinarily reactive to cold water and the shrinkage factor. Then we have, on the other blocks, hirsute fellows like yourself, gifted with (what I can only assume from the female smiles you leave in your wake) the kind of apparatus that would make adult industry stars jealous. I think you will agree that wearing any kind of binding suit whatsoever, such as a conventional Speedo brief, gives you stallion-like fellows an unnatural advantage in the water. Moreover, if you were forced to swim completely swim-cap-less and au naturelle, those raven Aztec locks untrimmed for years and pointing towards the heavens like the quills on an enraged porcupine, well--I think you see where I am going with this. Here is the challenge: Throw away your scissors, razor, and other shearing apparatus. No hair cuts or shaving for the next four years. No suits of any sort whatsoever. A 100 meter freestyle sprint in early 2103. Just the hairball big-gonaded youngster vs. the bald impotent 60 year old. To give you one advantage, I will personally ask CreamPuff to administer a pre-race massage to loosen any muscles that may be tight at the humiliating prospect of losing to an old wreck. CreamPuff: spare no warming unguents! I insist! This will settle the question once and for all. And the footage of such a completely natural state of swimming competition, unaided by any form of technology or even, for that matter, modicum of decency, might actually even help drive viewers to my five-star rated VLOG! forums.usms.org/blog.php PS The loser gets to race CreamPuff under similar conditions. I was about to poke out my mind's eye in an effort to eradicate the image seared into it by Jim's challenge. But then I realized that by 2103, which is after all roughly 94 years from now, depending I suppose on Jim's meaning in specifying "early" 2103, you would both be skinless skeletal remains (or ashes, if cremation is your wont) with your organs (both male and those shared with the fairer sex as well (I suppose it's possible that one or even, although it seems most unlikely, both of you, could say that you have on occasion shared some organ of yours with the fairer sex, but that's not what I meant)) shriveled and dessicated beyond recognition. And I felt better.

Jim, the phenomenon you allude to here is EXACTLY why I think these suits are harmful. A person can't swim a certain time on their own, so they go out and buy a suit and suddenly they're a stud. I think that is just plain wrong. A similar example: You're a teacher with a kid who can't read at all. At the end of the year, they're promoted to the next grade. It is really fun to lower a basketball hoop a foot so I can dunk more than a tennis ball. But you don't see the NCAA lowering their hoop so I can play for Maryland. Don't get me wrong - it is nice to go fast in the pool. I'd love to go under 5:00 in a 500. But if someone is physically unable to perform an activity within the specified rules, we shouldn't bend those rules just so I can go 4:50. That is just plain wrong. I second that, Jeff.

Jeff? Jeff? I am still waiting to see if you have accepted my swimming challenge. I am in negotiations with CreamPuff about the unguents, too.

Jeff, I can see your point. However, what about what might be called the "Scissors Effect"? One of the very, very few swimming advantages I have is baldness. I also have an appendage that is extraordinarily reactive to cold water and the shrinkage factor. Then we have, on the other blocks, hirsute fellows like yourself, gifted with (what I can only assume from the female smiles you leave in your wake) the kind of apparatus that would make adult industry stars jealous. I think you will agree that wearing any kind of binding suit whatsoever, such as a conventional Speedo brief, gives you stallion-like fellows an unnatural advantage in the water. Moreover, if you were forced to swim completely swim-cap-less and au naturelle, those raven Aztec locks untrimmed for years and pointing towards the heavens like the quills on an enraged porcupine, well--I think you see where I am going with this. Here is the challenge: Throw away your scissors, razor, and other shearing apparatus. No hair cuts or shaving for the next four years. No suits of any sort whatsoever. A 100 meter freestyle sprint in early 2103. Just the hairball big-gonaded youngster vs. the bald impotent 60 year old. To give you one advantage, I will personally ask CreamPuff to administer a pre-race massage to loosen any muscles that may be tight at the humiliating prospect of losing to an old wreck. CreamPuff: spare no warming unguents! I insist! This will settle the question once and for all. And the footage of such a completely natural state of swimming competition, unaided by any form of technology or even, for that matter, modicum of decency, might actually even help drive viewers to my five-star rated VLOG! forums.usms.org/blog.php PS The loser gets to race CreamPuff under similar conditions.

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.

I voted that they should be banned because of the potential for... If I really think about it everyone should be required to have them-in response the comment that you can't ban new technology... then I think, what about the small groups that just have enough money to be involved as it is now-will it come to a point that only a select well funded groups will dominate... All these questions are going to have to be addressed. I still think a good swimmer in a fast (non tech0 suit) is the way to go. It seems to me that is how to best level the playing field for all involved.