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 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:
We are about the same age, but I never DID like that suit...
Nostalgia is great, but not necessarily as a basis for policy. Because I am sure there are people out there who would prefer we emulate Johnny Weismuller, or do the old backstroke turns of John Nabor, or think we should use wooden blocks or lane ropes.
And I'm sure there are little kids today who are vowing to train hard and are visualizing themselves on the blocks wearing the same suit as Michael Phelps. Times change.
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.
What does this prove? Maybe the fact that swimming was one of the exceptions to this rule was one of things some of us liked about the sport.
I certainly don't think the tech suits are somehow "ruining" the sport. I just don't think they are adding anything other than additional expense for swimmers. In a time when, for example, college athletic departments are looking for ways to trim budgets, tacking on thousands of extra dollars to buy suits isn't helping.
What does this prove? Maybe the fact that swimming was one of the exceptions to this rule was one of things some of us liked about the sport.
I'm really happy I don't have to suffer with this elitist mentality with anyone on my team. There's nothing quite as boring as sport that is mired in the past.
What does this prove? Maybe the fact that swimming was one of the exceptions to this rule was one of things some of us liked about the sport.
It doesn't prove anything. But just because people don't like change is no reason to ban a technological improvement from the sport! Look, chances are pretty good that I'll never buy one of these suits, so I don't really have a vested interest in whether or not they are banned. But we're not getting paid to swim, so beyond a little bit of pride, what do I care whether or not I get beat by somebody wearing a $300 suit. If you're wearing one and you beat me by just a slim margin, I know that chances are good I can compete with you sans suit or if we both have a suit. And I do know how good it feels to beat somebody with far superior equipment. It feels good. So, I'll continue to work hard and if I keep improving, I'll beat somebody one of these days!
What does this prove? Maybe the fact that swimming was one of the exceptions to this rule was one of things some of us liked about the sport.
I certainly don't think the tech suits are somehow "ruining" the sport. I just don't think they are adding anything other than additional expense for swimmers. In a time when, for example, college athletic departments are looking for ways to trim budgets, tacking on thousands of extra dollars to buy suits isn't helping.
I completely agree with this statement. I enjoyed it when I could buy a suit to race in that cost less than my running shoes.
Buying a tech suit is starting to remind me of a girl buying an expensive prom dress. How much wear are you going to get out of it for the money you put into it?
It is, however, a matter of priorities. Tech suits really aren't that expensive if you cut in other places. My priority right now would be to buy some racing wheels for my bike instead. I'm hoping to buy a Renn disc (if he still is making them) and a tri-spoke. I can probably get these new for about a total of $650. I guess this is about $100 more than a LZR, but in the past, I've gotten more mileage out of these things than I could ever hope to get out of the LZR.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
