I don't want to get into the tech suit debate because I really just want to wear a traditional suit and compete. I dont have a moral stand on the issue, I just grew up in normal suits and that is what I am comfortable in.
My question is wether there are any high-level swimmers that dont wear tech suits, but still setting records and winning events? I am curious both about Masters meets, but also USA Swimming and international swim meets.
Parents
Former Member
I found this interesting.
www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/.../21308.asp
Interesting article. The assumption of cause and effect between times and technology is very questionable. Has no one considered the amazing changes in training techniques, stroke technical prowess and the rules that have allowed substantial time gaines?
Consider the training. In my day we routinely logged 20 to 30 thousand meters per DAY. Mindless repetition which destroyed shoulders and ambition but rarely contributed to success. Sports science has since proved the law of diminishing returns from this training.
Consider the technical expertise these days: just about any age group swimmer has a better, more effecient stroke as compared to Olympic stars of yesteryear. Just watch old tapes of Mark Spitz. Fast guy, but his strokes were far from pretty. We now understand that swimming is a technical sport first, a fitness sport second.
Consider the rule changes. Can we even compare the backstroke times of the eightees and early nineties to the times of today? How many swimmers remember the old "bucket turn" or the "suicide turn"? I certainly do and I still do those turns when I race once I get tired and stupid towards the end. The breaststroke is another good example: we were not allowed to completely submerge our heads and the idea of doing a butterfly kick off the wall was nothing short of cheating.
The suits are just part of the equation.
I might decide to buy one when I am satisfied that my times are good enough to prove me more than just a wannabe pretender, until then I will hammer my natural body into a better torpedo.
Reply
Former Member
I found this interesting.
www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/.../21308.asp
Interesting article. The assumption of cause and effect between times and technology is very questionable. Has no one considered the amazing changes in training techniques, stroke technical prowess and the rules that have allowed substantial time gaines?
Consider the training. In my day we routinely logged 20 to 30 thousand meters per DAY. Mindless repetition which destroyed shoulders and ambition but rarely contributed to success. Sports science has since proved the law of diminishing returns from this training.
Consider the technical expertise these days: just about any age group swimmer has a better, more effecient stroke as compared to Olympic stars of yesteryear. Just watch old tapes of Mark Spitz. Fast guy, but his strokes were far from pretty. We now understand that swimming is a technical sport first, a fitness sport second.
Consider the rule changes. Can we even compare the backstroke times of the eightees and early nineties to the times of today? How many swimmers remember the old "bucket turn" or the "suicide turn"? I certainly do and I still do those turns when I race once I get tired and stupid towards the end. The breaststroke is another good example: we were not allowed to completely submerge our heads and the idea of doing a butterfly kick off the wall was nothing short of cheating.
The suits are just part of the equation.
I might decide to buy one when I am satisfied that my times are good enough to prove me more than just a wannabe pretender, until then I will hammer my natural body into a better torpedo.
