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?
would those who support a complete separate division for wetsuit wearers in open water also support a complete separate division for old school speedo wearers in pool competition?
thats the question i would like to know the answer to.
(guess how i voted)
Possibly, though there are differences. In OW competition people wear wetsuits also as protection from cold and because they lack confidence in their swimming ability.
IMO the main argument to allow a wetsuit division in national championships (remember that they are already allowed in all other competitions) is to broaden the appeal to triathletes and OW-novices; that argument doesn't apply here since I very much doubt that allowing tech suits increases participation.
But maybe I'm wrong. Does anyone know someone who would stop competing if tech suits were banned? This is all very abstract since I don't think it will happen, but who knows? There definitely seems to be a little backlash...but I suspect that the rules will just be refined to regulate it better, not resulting in an outright ban for all competitors.
Thanks for the encouragement, Jim. You did some absolutely blistering times this year. Do you think the B70 helped?
You mean besides the training six days a week, a million plus yards, getting up unreasonably early, swimming in the cold and dark mornings, dropping about eight pounds, watching my diet, trying to get enuf rest, sprinting in meets more to get speed work in :blah: ?
Absolutely...the B70 helped at least a little bit.:bliss:
about wearing tech suits in unrested meets
I really believe that besides the obvious difference the suits have made, there is a secondary performance boost -- people can go very fast in season.
Old-school thinking was that you can simply not swim fast times unless you are shaved and tapered. This philosophy was almost a self-fullfilling phrophecy. We used to keep rankings for shaved and unshaved. The suits have changed that -- you can "shave" or put on a suit at any time. You can see the difference in some of college in season meets - people go amazing in season times. Different way of thinking -- swimming fast at any time -- all you want is more ...
This really makes no sense. Since skiing and cycling have already been brought up, that would be like saying FIS should allow skiers to wear jet packs and whatever the cycling federation is should allow motorized bikes. There's a difference between reducing weight of equipment, reducing rolling and aerodynamic friction, etc. and increasing propulsion.
Knelson
The two examples you cite (jet packs and motorized bikes) involve an external source of power -not just more efficient utilization of the individual athlete's own biological energy.
In addition to reducing drag, using paddles and flippers would also enable a swimmer to convert more of his/her muscle effort into more efficient propulsion -which is in fact the most effective way to increase swimming speed. So why not allow them too?
As I've said in my other posts, if FINA allows the use of so called drag reducing suits, why don't they just adopt a "Lazie Faire" approach and fling the door open to any other kind of "personally applied component" that can improve a swimmer's efficiency also?
Dolphin 2
Jim, it sounds like you didn't build in any time for Creepy Old Man activities here. Heather will be disappointed.
In terms of the 8 lb. wt loss, do you think THAT made a significant difference? The reason I ask is that one of my friends here in Pittsburgh, Glen Battle--he's had No. 1 times twice in the 200 back, SCM--told me he's experimented with this and found he swims pretty much the same times regardless of whether he's a added or lost pounds. He's convinced that it doesn't make much difference.
The yards, however, I am sure make a big difference. I saw you in the well over 500 mile level in Go the Distance.
Do you know what has happened to Jim McConica and Paul Trevisan? It seems that JM hasn't raced since the 25k, and Paul has been missing since last spring. You and Phil Dodson have leapt with ferocity into the evacuated power vacuum of our age group.
You mean besides the training six days a week, a million plus yards, getting up unreasonably early, swimming in the cold and dark mornings, dropping about eight pounds, watching my diet, trying to get enuf rest, sprinting in meets more to get speed work in :blah:
Yeah, it's not like this stuff comes about out of thin air!
In terms of the 8 lb. wt loss, do you think THAT made a significant difference? The reason I ask is that one of my friends here in Pittsburgh, Glen Battle--he's had No. 1 times twice in the 200 back, SCM--told me he's experimented with this and found he swims pretty much the same times regardless of whether he's a added or lost pounds. He's convinced that it doesn't make much difference.
Fat floats, fortunately. I agree that it doesn't make much difference but maybe enough? It's only about 4% of my bodyweight - I went from ~202 to ~194. Certainly my drops in time didn't equate to 4%, actually less than1% under previous PB. But I think I feel better overall after losing the few lbs for whatever reason. Maybe just psychological.
Do you know what has happened to Jim McConica and Paul Trevisan? It seems that JM hasn't raced since the 25k, and Paul has been missing since last spring. You and Phil Dodson have leapt with ferocity into the evacuated power vacuum of our age group.
I don't know about Paul but I saw Jim this weekend in LB. Said he was a little "out of shape". He swam leadoff on the VCM Men's 800 Free Relay, went 2:09 :confused: somethinerother but that's just like him. He looked good and about this point in the AG he tends to backoff a bit.
Phil and I had a great run at the 200 free - me, him, me, him. He eventually won 2:06.x to 2:07.x, but I got a PB out of it. Thanks Phil.
Jokes aside though TJ how would you feel if our narrow, narrow, 200 BR had been decided with me in a FS1...it wouldn't be the same.
I can honestly say that it would not have bothered me. I may be in the minority there, but that's how I feel. If I lose to you by a narrow margin, even if you are wearing a technical suit, I will probably chalk it up to not enough training. Now, if I'm training 12+ hours a week and tapering for a championship meet and you beat me by hundredths of a second, then maybe it becomes a bigger deal. Perhaps that's because I have only been swimming for a couple of years and did not have a competitive swimming background.
Yeah, but remember the good old days when if you won a race you knew it was because you were the fastest swimmer rather than you spent the most on a suit?
From what I can tell, virtually all my competitors are wearing B70s, so I'd say the playing field -- at least with respect to tech suits -- is even.
