President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Chris Stevenson — Tue, 26 May 2009 11:52:32 GMT

I figured that Craig Lord would have a lot to say about the tech suits lists, etc, and I finally got around to reading it last night. There are a lot of entries, so allow a little time: http://www.swimnews.com/news I do want to point out a couple things. First there is this In a letter to FINA, Prof Jan-Anders Manson, of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, states: "During our testing procedures, we have observed a number of swimsuits which are constructed exclusively or predominantly from solid (non-textile fabrics) non-permeable material. "While these swimsuits comply with the buoyancy value when tested in accordance with the defined procedure, we note that this kind of construction may cause significant air trapping effects when worn by the swimmers." (emphasis added) "We note that construction resulting in air trapping is in principle prohibited under your regulations. "As measure to counteract those effects in the case of swimsuits which do not already include significant areas allowing air release, our recommendation would be to request modifications ensuring that air does not remain trapped. This is to ensure air release in particular from chest/abdomen area, lower back area and groin area. "The measure could consist in applying areas of permeable material/regions (textile or hole perforation). If the measure consists in perforation, we suggest as recommendation: a minimum diameter of 2mm and a maximum distance between holes of 10mm." So was this why B70 and some other suits were rejected, b/c the testers noted in passing that air could get trapped? Was a specific, repeatable measurement used to determine this? Who knows, but I can certainly see why B70 was upset. It also cracks me up that the team was so specific in their recommendation (diameter, spacing, and regions of modification). How was this determined? I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if Manson just picked them mostly arbitrarily. I also wouldn't be surprised if the numbers get enshrined in stone at some point in the future. Which brings us to this recent Lord posting that I just noticed today: "Just when the LZR-crew thought it was safe to get back in the water, blueseventy suits, the Jaked01, the arena X-Glide and other apparel that pumps performance past the natural state of the swimmer may yet be resurrected - unmodified. After complaints from blueseventy that tests conducted by Prof Jan-Anders Manson and team in Lausanne were not sufficient to judge a suit under the terms of the Dubai Charter, new tests are being carried out and by Friday this week the world of swimming and the Rome 2009 form guide may have shifted once more." In the meantime, are B70s legal for WRs and FINA Top Ten? Again, who knows. I get that there will be uncertainty in the transition, but what mess. I just want to know what is legal (for FINA, not just USMS) and what isn't.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

orca1946 — Tue, 26 May 2009 11:30:12 GMT

They had to start somewhere. I think that the list will change as input grows!

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

swoomer — Tue, 26 May 2009 01:20:11 GMT

Thanks for sharing this, Chris - an enormous plate of food for thought. It is a complex issue which will require complex consideration, not just an up or down vote on a particular suit. Our beloved sport is indeed at a crossroads.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Former Member — Mon, 25 May 2009 10:48:34 GMT

Adding to my earlier post, doesn't major league baseball regulate bats? Aren't bats to baseball what suits are to swimming?Personally, I would see a better correlation to be “Swimsuits are to swimming as uniforms are to baseball” In theory you could conduct a swim meet or baseball game without suits/uniforms. You can’t have a baseball game without bats. Major league baseball regulates uniforms like swimming does suits, but the athlete in either sport does need to perform.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

pwolf66 — Mon, 25 May 2009 08:26:55 GMT

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Paul Smith — Mon, 25 May 2009 08:24:09 GMT

Paul, In a dual sanctioned meet, entrants must be registered with USA Swimming OR with U.S. Masters Swimming; AND USA Swimming rules will be followed. Either this meet is only being sanctioned by USA Swimming or the meet referee is confused about the policies that govern dual sanctioned events. Rob, the Cactus Classic this past weekend also required both...I will look into it a bit further but it brings up again the point that many have made that USMS & USA Swimming should try to work together more in aligning our organizations. Case in point is our requiments for world record verification...our policies are so out of whack that I think it discourages USA meet hosts from wanting to add a USMS sanction.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Rob Copeland — Mon, 25 May 2009 07:29:13 GMT

This just in from Jim Stites (the meet he is refering to is dual sanctioned just like the Cactus Classic). "All swimmers entered in the Southwest Classic in Tucson must be registered with USA Swimming and must follow all USA Swimming rules."Paul, In a dual sanctioned meet, entrants must be registered with USA Swimming OR with U.S. Masters Swimming; AND USA Swimming rules will be followed. Either this meet is only being sanctioned by USA Swimming or the meet referee is confused about the policies that govern dual sanctioned events.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Allen Stark — Mon, 25 May 2009 06:06:50 GMT

I am fine if USMS says we want to wait and see about the 136 suits under review or for the USA-S ruling and until then all previously approved suits are OK,or all previously approved suits are OK until the end of the year and then we will follow FINA but a middle of the year change is unfair.If we do either then I think we will need a form for officials to certify swims in FINA approved suits for FINA WRs and TTs. I am not fine with the"if it's not banned it's legal"ruling as that seems a cop out. We have a relay that is a real threat for the WR and will go for it in July,I'd REALLY like to have this cleared by then.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Former Member — Thu, 21 May 2009 16:26:56 GMT

I don't think a "BANNED LIST" would work. Simply because you might get a banned list now, but what would stop adidas/speedo/jaked/et al from just making a completely new rubber suit that we can go buy and wear? Well hey, it isn't banned, right? Then they add that one, then it just goes on and on. I think an "Approved List" as there is now is the only way it can work. Good on ya, FINA

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Former Member — Thu, 21 May 2009 16:00:32 GMT

...however we recognize that there is much confusion with interrupting and applying the FINA release. I could have sworn I read 'interpreting' the first time round but I guess some folks will see this as a rude interruption to racing plans.:bolt:

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Former Member — Thu, 21 May 2009 15:42:21 GMT

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Former Member — Thu, 21 May 2009 14:55:26 GMT

* Call me crazy, but I much prefer the $6 suit I picked up for my daughter on sale at Sports Authority versus getting her even a Speedo Aquablade (one of the "cheaper" suits on the approved list). now we're getting somewhere...........

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Former Member — Thu, 21 May 2009 14:51:21 GMT

Masters isn't the only organization that has taken issue with FINA's actions. Japan is going to ratify all records set this year whether they were in currently approved suits or not. I've also read that Italy, the host of the world championships, is going to allow swimmers to wear the unapproved version of the Jaked suit in their national championships.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Former Member — Thu, 21 May 2009 14:26:29 GMT

Here is my question: will swims done in a B70 (or any other non-approved suit) and in a USMS-sanctioned event count towards FINA top ten and FINA world records? If FINA doesn't approve the suit for competition, I don't see why they would. I think USMS is not serving its members (or some of them, at any rate) if that is indeed the case. Copout list, incomplete list, vague list, maybe so: but I just don't like USMS having a different set of rules than FINA. Yeah most of us won't care is Mary-Beth Speedyswimmer goes fast in a non approved suit but if you're trying for a record you want it to count if you make it! Onus might be on the swimmer to pick an approved suit in this case.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Former Member — Thu, 21 May 2009 14:21:00 GMT

I disagree. If it is not approved, it is not approved. What does it matter if it was rejected or needs modification? Either way the suit as it is has been deemed inappropriate. This seems like a copout. I agree with this statement. If it ain't there...it ain't there. Now, Kirk is right that FINA does need to provide some clarification on older suits but some_girl has it right about approved and not approved.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Paul Smith — Thu, 21 May 2009 12:54:02 GMT

I was wondering the same thing, as I'm tentatively planning on a few events at USA-S meets this summer. Right now, the B70 is apparently legal. The USA-S statements says it will issue a formal ruling on the FINA approved list after its meeting at the end of this month. Definitely an astounding lack of clarity all around. This just in from Jim Stites (the meet he is refering to is dual sanctioned just like the Cactus Classic). "All swimmers entered in the Southwest Classic in Tucson must be registered with USA Swimming and must follow all USA Swimming rules." Jim Stites Ford Aquatics Masters Hillenbrand Aquatic Center University of Arizona Tucson, AZ

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

The Fortress — Thu, 21 May 2009 12:30:00 GMT

At this point in time no suits should be listed as banned by U.S. Masters Swimming for pool or open water swimming. Ok, so now what if your one of those masters swimmers that mainly competes in USS meets? Im assuming you would have to follow their guidelines and not be able to wear a B70? If I wore one in USS meet, but got dq'd after race for illegal suit but submitted times that could get me a top 10 or whatever, would it count? I was wondering the same thing, as I'm tentatively planning on a few events at USA-S meets this summer. Right now, the B70 is apparently legal. The USA-S statements says it will issue a formal ruling on the FINA approved list after its meeting at the end of this month. Definitely an astounding lack of clarity all around.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

some_girl — Thu, 21 May 2009 12:28:48 GMT

Does it though? I assume there was some reasoning behind FINA's coy "approved list" but no "banned list." Surely, FINA anticipated/was informed of/approved this reaction? I still think the list itself is BS because of the ridiculous, gotcha on a technicality, discrimination against B70. Two other inequities: (1) assuming times don't count, and this is a big assumption, some people will have times in non-approved suits and others will have times in possibly slower "approved" suits for purposes of SCM, and (2) I think it will be difficult to purchase "approved" suits to replace non-approved suits. Some already appear to be unavailable and I would bet Pros are flying off the racks. I think the lack of a banned list has more to do with not proving a negative, and it strikes me as unreasonable to expect an exhaustive list of every single thing you can't wear. I can just see people yelling about some newly-invented suit: "It wasn't on the banned list so it is not banned!!" I understand that people think something fishy is going on with the B70, and I am reserving my judgment (I don't particularly find either side in that argument more trustworthy than the other). I understand that the question of older suits / practice suits needs to be clarified. But I do not think this is the right answer. I wish if USMS were to ignore the ruling for other reasons, such as SCM fairness, they just came out and said so, but as presented it seems like whining and not any more logical than FINA. That said, I also wish people would stop claiming FINA is like OMG THE WORST THING EVA!!!! because they disagree. USMS does plenty I don't love, but hell, they also run an organization that serves me pretty well in lots of other capacities.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

BillS — Thu, 21 May 2009 11:44:06 GMT

This is the right call, in my view. The FINA decision, based as it is on non-objective, unmeasurable criteria, seems on its face to be arbitrary and capricious (B70 submitted tights and jammers. How on earth can a jammer capture enough air to be significantly more buoyant than any full suit?). My hope is that enough local sanctioning bodies will go the way of Japan, USMS, and apparently Italy (essentially telling FINA to piss off until it clarifies what the hell is going on) that the FINA decision ultimately falls of its own weight. From what I've seen of FINA, if it happened to take FINA down in the process, it would be no great loss to the swimming world.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Tim L — Thu, 21 May 2009 11:20:22 GMT

This topic doesn't really impact me, but I always find it interesting how the various swimming organizations as well as swimmers handle the tech suit situation. It seems entirely clear at this point that FINA is the most incompetent sports organizations on earth (and they have lots of competition). I don't know how to change FINA, but something should be done because FINA is not a steward of our sport. USMS' decision seems a bit silly, but I guess if you are out to set a world record just make sure you do it in a FINA approved suit. For those not out to set world records it seems like USMS' decision probably saves it members some money and grief for now. When USMS does go with the FINA list is there going to be a referee looking at each person's tech suit to see if it is on the banned list or is it going to be policed by swimmers or only when a record/top ten is set? I can see why USMS doesn't want this debate going on at meets right now given the lack of clarity. I can't wait to see someone being pulled off the blocks or DQed for wearing a banned suit or some similar incident even if it is totally innocent by the wearer - I think that will be great for the sport. Tim

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Chris Stevenson — Thu, 21 May 2009 10:53:43 GMT

Does it though? I assume there was some reasoning behind FINA's coy "approved list" but no "banned list." Surely, FINA anticipated/was informed of/approved this reaction? True, I am assuming that "approved" basically means "only swims done in these suits will count in FINA's eyes."

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

The Fortress — Thu, 21 May 2009 10:47:18 GMT

but I just don't like USMS having a different set of rules than FINA. Does it though? I assume there was some reasoning behind FINA's coy "approved list" but no "banned list." Surely, FINA anticipated/was informed of/approved this reaction? I still think the list itself is BS because of the ridiculous, gotcha on a technicality, discrimination against B70. Two other inequities: (1) assuming times don't count, and this is a big assumption, some people will have times in non-approved suits and others will have times in possibly slower "approved" suits for purposes of SCM, and (2) I think it will be difficult to purchase "approved" suits to replace non-approved suits. Some already appear to be unavailable and I would bet Pros are flying off the racks.

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Chris Stevenson — Thu, 21 May 2009 10:42:59 GMT

Onus might be on the swimmer to pick an approved suit in this case. Well, I know that I plan on doing so...but if USMS officials essentially don't care, then FINA would have no way of knowing if the swim was done legally (according to their criteria) or not. Worst case scenario: FINA rejects them all out of hand if USMS decides not to enforce their rules. And -- much as I disagree with their reasoning in the B70 case -- I can't really blame them. Rules are rules. (At this point FINA undoubtedly is thinking about "mainstream" swimming rather than masters, but still.)

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Paul Smith — Thu, 21 May 2009 10:26:40 GMT

RE: President Rob Copeland statement on FINA Release

Patrick W. Brundage — Thu, 21 May 2009 10:21:41 GMT

My opinion is that FINA's list is a copout. They've come out with a list of approved suits, but with no guidance on what this list means. Are suits NOT on the list automatically out? What about older suits? Who will enforce this? I think the onus is on FINA to answer these basic questions. I'm with you, Kirk. FINA has not been exhaustive and clear on their new rules. An implication of this list as being the only list of approved suits is that every swimmer, from my 6 year old* swimming a USAS No Time Standard meet up to the likes of Phelps and Knutson, can ONLY compete in one of these suits. * Call me crazy, but I much prefer the $6 suit I picked up for my daughter on sale at Sports Authority versus getting her even a Speedo Aquablade (one of the "cheaper" suits on the approved list).