Ban the tech suits?

I was asking Debbie Santos last night about when the B70s might be available. She said we would have them for our Pac Champs. We then were talking, w/my hubby there too, about "age-groupers" wearing them. We all concluded that we didn't want our age groupers wearing them as we were more concerned that they have fun. Pat pointed out that working out they get faster year to year, anyway, b/c of physical growth. He also pointed out that the cost was an issue b/c they do grow so fast!! Debbie said that a 12 yo kid she gave lessons to wore a B70 last year a few times and then outgrew it. She told the mom that it wasn't a good idea etc, but the mom bought it anyway. Debbie did bring up a good point though: what about the 13, 14 or 15 yo that makes their Oly Trial cuts? They should get to wear a full length tech suit. So with that argument, the elite age groupers would get to wear them. I mentioned then, what if an age grouper would GET their cuts if they wore one? Pfffft, another can of worms to open up. :D

Lane lines, pools, blocks etc... are the same for everyone, atleast pool to pool. To me it would be much more akin to someone bringing their own starting block to the meet and only getting to use it themselves. I assume you would have a problem with that? Paying more to train with an elite squad indirectly makes you faster. You cannot, I don't know, pay for dues for an elite club on the way to a swimmeet and suddenly drop 1-2% (or whatever amount you choose to believe). Better googles, better cap? Yeah, I suppose that is the same thing as a better suit, but the expenses are smaller and the improvements less dramatic. I won't pretend that these are leak proof arguments. But there they are... Training with an elite squad directly makes you faster. There's no indirectness about it. It may not instantaneously make you faster, but it has a direct effect on the results you will see.

I'm surprised that you techies can't see the difference between a $5 pair of goggles and a $500 wetsuit... I got to see a rack full of tech suits up close over Christmas, and they aren't anything like wetsuits. The fabric in a tech suit is incredibly thin. I can see why people compare them to "paper" suits, which I believe were made of a thin stretch woven polyester? I find it hard to believe you'd get much added buoyancy from them for more than 50 meters or so. (Actually, the last time I was in Fabricland buying interfacing, I found a stretch woven water repellant nylon that looks and feels remarkably like the Tyr Aquapel fabric. Hmmmm.... where to find a suitable pattern...:D ) Wetsuits are made from closed cell foam and definitely improve one's time - and yet, even I manage to pass a couple of wetsuit wearers in an open water race last summer. Several people have compared them to carbon fiber bikes. Well, in the 1999 Pan Am games, a Cuban on an old steel Colnago track bike took the "Kilo" time trial over a competitor on a high-tech carbon fiber time trial track bike. Go figure - all that extra money didn't buy the competitor any speed.

I got to see a rack full of tech suits up close over Christmas, and they aren't anything like wetsuits. The fabric in a tech suit is incredibly thin. I can see why people compare them to "paper" suits, which I believe were made of a thin stretch woven polyester? I find it hard to believe you'd get much added buoyancy from them for more than 50 meters or so. (Actually, the last time I was in Fabricland buying interfacing, I found a stretch woven water repellant nylon that looks and feels remarkably like the Tyr Aquapel fabric. Hmmmm.... where to find a suitable pattern...:D ) Wetsuits are made from closed cell foam and definitely improve one's time - and yet, even I manage to pass a couple of wetsuit wearers in an open water race last summer. Several people have compared them to carbon fiber bikes. Well, in the 1999 Pan Am games, a Cuban on an old steel Colnago track bike took the "Kilo" time trial over a competitor on a high-tech carbon fiber time trial track bike. Go figure - all that extra money didn't buy the competitor any speed. I'm not so sure about that. It does seem safe to say, however, that all of that extra money did not buy him the win.

I have heard here two arguments against tech suits. One is based on the issue of "buying time" and I have yet to hear a reason why this is any different than using better pools, lane lines, blocks, goggles, etc. Not to mention paying more to train with an elite program, perhaps even leaving or relocating the familiy to do so. This happens all the time in swimming and you are in effect "buying time." Why should these things be allowed but not tech suits? I've never heard an answer. The other argument is about the impact of the added expense of tech suits on the sport. I have some sympathy with this view and am concerned about it also. But even though going to briefs for men may sound like the simplest solution, that doesn't mean that it is the best one. It may not even be the simplest solution either (eg, where does that leave women?). Lane lines, pools, blocks etc... are the same for everyone, atleast pool to pool. To me it would be much more akin to someone bringing their own starting block to the meet and only getting to use it themselves. I assume you would have a problem with that? Paying more to train with an elite squad indirectly makes you faster. You cannot, I don't know, pay for dues for an elite club on the way to a swimmeet and suddenly drop 1-2% (or whatever amount you choose to believe). Better googles, better cap? Yeah, I suppose that is the same thing as a better suit, but the expenses are smaller and the improvements less dramatic. I won't pretend that these are leak proof arguments. But there they are...

Lefty's post did make me think The biggest lie ever told on this forum...

So, to put it right out there, I don’t like the tech suits. Since I’ve never worn one and I don’t compete anymore, that point is probably moot. What I don’t understand though is, if there’s nothing wrong with the suits, and they’re good for the sport, and the costs aren’t really a big deal, then why ban them for kids? By saying they are only okay for certain swimmers (whether it's based on age, time standards, meets, etc.) are people then admitting there’s “something” wrong with them without really admitting it? I was 9 years old in 1972 and had been swimming for about a year when Spitz won his 7 gold medals. As well as I can remember, he wasn’t wearing a suit that I couldn’t also wear as a kid. In fact, I have a picture of me wearing that same iconic Stars and Stripes suit that he wore in the famous photo. There were no discussions about the "have’s and have not’s", "are you old enough or not", "are you good enough or not", regarding swimsuits. I guess I just have this general uneasiness with the suits that I can’t quite express. That somehow it’s not the “pure” sport that it was, and I don't think that's good. I guess I’m now officially old. :cane: Other sports do this as well. Some ski leagues, for example, ban speed suits for kids under a certain age. It's a gesture to help keep costs down initially, thereby attracting more folks to try the sport. As a parent, I appreciate the effort to keep equipment costs under control for kids who may be dabbling or growing so quickly that the life of a piece of equipment can be measured in weeks. I don't think an age limitation in any way implies a swimmer isn't "good enough," and I support the rule.

Perhaps in the form of some actual data, rather than mere conjecture. Guilty as charged! Now if everyone would get in-line behind me... (how I would normally respond) -OR- This is really the fault of title 9 (how a Smith would respond) -OR- You holier-than-though Liberals are so dim you cannot catch hypocracy when it stares you in the face. (Geek) -OR- In 1956 I was swimming against Bert O'Connor in a cash race accross the Amazon when an Aligator tore off my suit. I won the race, but was afraid I would be disqualified for failure to compete in the required uniform. An exception was made considering the circumstances but the event organizers left everyone stranded in Sao Palo without planetickets and without delivering my prize money because they had some financial issues. (G Park)

So, to put it right out there, I don’t like the tech suits. Since I’ve never worn one and I don’t compete anymore, that point is probably moot. What I don’t understand though is, if there’s nothing wrong with the suits, and they’re good for the sport, and the costs aren’t really a big deal, then why ban them for kids? By saying they are only okay for certain swimmers (whether it's based on age, time standards, meets, etc.) are people then admitting there’s “something” wrong with them without really admitting it? I was 9 years old in 1972 and had been swimming for about a year when Spitz won his 7 gold medals. As well as I can remember, he wasn’t wearing a suit that I couldn’t also wear as a kid. In fact, I have a picture of me wearing that same iconic Stars and Stripes suit that he wore in the famous photo. There were no discussions about the "have’s and have not’s", "are you old enough or not", "are you good enough or not", regarding swimsuits. I guess I just have this general uneasiness with the suits that I can’t quite express. That somehow it’s not the “pure” sport that it was, and I don't think that's good. I guess I’m now officially old. :cane:

Guilty as charged! Now if everyone would get in-line behind me... (how I would normally respond) -OR- This is really the fault of title 9 (how a Smith would respond) -OR- You holier-than-though Liberals are so dim you cannot catch hypocracy when it stares you in the face. (Geek) -OR- In 1956 I was swimming against Bert O'Connor in a cash race accross the Amazon when an Aligator tore off my suit. I won the race, but was afraid I would be disqualified for failure to compete in the required uniform. An exception was made considering the circumstances but the event organizers left everyone stranded in Sao Palo without planetickets and without delivering my prize money because they had some financial issues. (G Park) as one who excelled in class-clownery i can tell you most sincerely: this post is a comedic gem!