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?
.....I think the suits are good for the sport in general. ......
Tim
I know you've posted about not using one etc.... but why would you make the above comment?
I see no good from the suits and the people who wear them don't have a reason why they are good for swimming either. When everyone drops a similar percentage of their time at the same time for the same reason that is not training related what's the good coming from it? You aren't swimming any better than you would without the suit although your times might be faster. One of the nice things about swimming is (was) being able to have a level playing field without expensive equipment playing a factor.
Hopefully FINA will go along with the suggestions of USA swimming, AU swimming and their European counterparts and the current generation of suits will be banned and the hopefully USMS will follow.
I know you've posted about not using one etc.... but why would you make the above comment?
I see no good from the suits and the people who wear them don't have a reason why they are good for swimming either. When everyone drops a similar percentage of their time at the same time for the same reason that is not training related what's the good coming from it? You aren't swimming any better than you would without the suit although your times might be faster. One of the nice things about swimming is (was) being able to have a level playing field without expensive equipment playing a factor.
Hopefully FINA will go along with the suggestions of USA swimming, AU swimming and their European counterparts and the current generation of suits will be banned and the hopefully USMS will follow.
I think this is ridiculous. Why stop there? Riders in the Tour de France should have to go back to riding steel bikes with no helmets. Tennis players should have to go back to using wooden rackets. Golfers should have to go back to using wooden drivers. Oh yeah, and basketball players should all be required to wear Chuck Taylors and short shorts!
I see no good from the suits and the people who wear them don't have a reason why they are good for swimming either. When everyone drops a similar percentage of their time at the same time for the same reason that is not training related what's the good coming from it? You aren't swimming any better than you would without the suit although your times might be faster. One of the nice things about swimming is (was) being able to have a level playing field without expensive equipment playing a factor.
Hopefully FINA will go along with the suggestions of USA swimming, AU swimming and their European counterparts and the current generation of suits will be banned and the hopefully USMS will follow.
Huh?
Tech suits have brought a lot of attention to and publicity for swimming. It's in the news more as a result. And new technology is exciting. Why should swimming be staid and dull? And how do you know all of the improvements were exactly the same and purely reflected tech suit use? I think not, and I know in my lowly masters case that's not true.
What "level playing field" is it that you speak of? Don't see it. They're dozens of other inequalities in terms of coaching, training, time, injuries, pool availability, massage/chiro money, etc. They've been listed before on another anti-tech suit thread.
And what ban are you speaking of? USA Swimming is not seeking to ban the current generation of tech suits. They're seeking to limit the use for kids under 12 and to ban wearing more than one suit. So I've no idea what "ban" you refer to. These suits are here to stay. There will just be some reasonable limits put on them for growing kiddies and to prevent people going hog wild with B210s. Most tech suit fans seem to agree that one suit is enough. Better stick to the bike.
The vitrol spewed here by people who need so desperately to spend extra money to enjoy the sport amazes me. The slight extra speed is probably a fact, but right now, God only knows (or maybe Santa). Spend your money. Swim fast (relatively speaking). Brag. Call people names. Whine when the ban comes.
I am starting to rember why I enjoyed the company of water polo players. None of those suit mops for them.
And what ban are you speaking of? USA Swimming is not seeking to ban the current generation of tech suits. They're seeking to limit the use for kids under 12 and to ban wearing more than one suit. So I've no idea what "ban" you refer to. These suits are here to stay. There will just be some reasonable limits put on them for growing kiddies and to prevent people going hog wild with B210s. Most tech suit fans seem to agree that one suit is enough. Better stick to the bike.
www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/.../19679.asp
Fortress,
I don't think it has anything to do with moral superiority or cheapened performances. Most people that I have seen don't think they are worth the cost for the performance gain. I personally think they are primarily uncomfortable and a hassle for the performance gain. Secondarily, I see no reason to pay more to make myself uncomfortable much less spend money and time to test multiple suits to see which one gives me my ultimate performance. If I had a college scholarship or something of substance on the line, then maybe I would feel differently. However, at this time in my life, it doesn't matter to me if my 50 free or 100 free would be a few tenths faster in a tech suit. For others that want to squeeze out every tenth of a second whether they are breaking records or not, then go for it and I will never criticize you or your times.
Calling people idiots for not wearing them so they can minimize their times is silly. Let's remember that Phelps (in his IM and fly events) and Park only wore legskins in the Olympics and they had a lot more on the line than any masters swimmer. Under the "techie" reasoning, I guess they are idiots. Did Ande really call Michael Phelps an idiot because he didn't use technology to his fullest advantage?
Like I said previously, I am all for people wearing tech suits because I think it is good for masters swimming. I think it helps keep people in the sport, they put swimming in the national media more, and they probably enhance sponsorship. However, it is a personal decision and not one that should be ridiculed whether you wear them or not. Non-tech suit wearing swimmers can be just as serious competitors as their techie friends. I seriously doubt that the masters rankings would change much if tech suits were banned. Perhaps, a few less records would be broken, but the same people would be breaking the records.
I have participated in other sports where technology is important as well like cycling and golf and use some of the latest technology. It is difficult to stay up with all the improvements. However, I don't think it is uncomfortable and a hassle to use the technology in those sports like it is in swimming. I also think the technology gains related to those sports are greater than what the tech suits provide. I can drive a tee shot much more consistently and noticably further with my "techie" driver and it is just as easy to swing as a conventional driver (maybe easier). Carbon fiber and aero bars are great too and personally make cycling more enjoyable for me. I like the new skis as well. Blackberries are great. I am hardly a non-techie in the rest of my life, I just don't like the comfort/hassle/cost versus performance trade-off related to the tech suits as I do for other technology. Now if they create a suit that is easy to put on, isn't uncomfortable, costs less or lasts longer, and produces larger time drops maybe I would be all over that suit.
Anyway, I don't think anyone's records produced in a tech suit are cheapened by the suit and I don't think that is the most common reason for people not wearing them (that would be cost and comfort in relation to the individual's desire for a performance gain).
Tim
Most people that I have seen don't think they are worth the cost for the performance gain.
Have you been to a well attended USMS meet in the last 5 years? I would hazard a guess that at least 50% of the participants think they are worth the cost for the performance gain. Nationals meets, well over 75% I'd say.
Your reference to these suits being more time consuming than say golf of biking is bologna. It takes forever to pack up the bike, the gear, mount the thing, drive to the starting point. In that time even the slowest amongst us can put in 3 or 4 heavy swim workouts and take on and off the tech suits 3 or 4 times. Golf is even worse. I have to have a checklist for biking and golf.
If you take your competing and training seriously you buy a nice suit, end of story, stop the whining.
