Read the article "What's Up with the Suits?" by John Leonard at the following site:
http://www.swimmingcoach.org/
Now note that he sat on the FINA "Commission for Swimwear Approval" that produced the current fiasco:
www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/.../21315.asp
My prediction, FWIW, is that post 01-01-2010, men will be back into FS Pro Jammers (read" paper suits), and women into traditional tanks. Isn't that the only way to be "pure" and eliminate compression, buoyancy, air-trapping, drag reduction, etc?
Perhaps we should also get rid of goggles and silicone caps, since they also represent technological breaks with the past.
While I am happy to race in any type of suit, as long as it is a level playing field (and I consider LZR, B70, Jaked, AquaZone, Tracer Rise, Powerskin, etc to be level enough), I am nauseated by the "purist" argument that swimming has become all about the suits. It has not. Everyone has access to a LZR, or a B70, or ... So it is still racing, only in different equipment. Yes, a less-fit swimmer with poor technique may be aided more by the suits than a fit swimmer with good technique. But certainly not enough to beat the latter.
The purist argument is based on the dramatic drops in times achieved with the new suits. So what? Does the fact that Bousquet and cohorts are setting records minimize Biondi's accmplishments; or Popov's/Jager's/Thorpe's/Salinkov's/Spitz's? Of course not.:bitching:
Somebody find a way to get rid of FINA, please. And mute Craig Lord, while you're at it...:bitching:
No, it's not all about the suits. www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/.../21308.asp
Here's a good quote:
"Times are supposed to get faster, but apparently, only at some preconceived rate established through the sport's own brief history. Whatever that gradual rate is supposed to be, according to whomever it is who gets to decide, the improvements over the past year exceeded it. But is this kind of evolutionary acceleration really unprecedented? Or is it just our misperception of our own history? "
And I've repeatedly made this comment, and people tell me I'm deluded every time:
"Another revealing statistic is the sustained rate of improvement by the same swimmers one year after the latest generation of suits was introduced. Many elite swimmers are smashing their own personal records set a year ago wearing the same suits. How do the suit critics account for this widespread, sustained improvement?"
If we're going back to tanks and jammers, that's pre-2000. Ridiculous. A different century.
That article also makes it sound like the B70 will not be on the FINA list to be issued on June 19 despite re-testing.
The thing is with the rash of new suits--that haven't necessarily been available to everyone--over the past year or two, we really have no idea how much is due to the suits and how much is due to other factors. When someone breaks a world record I'd rather the first thought that crosses most peoples' minds is "wow, what a great swim!" rather than "what suit were they wearing?" I think ideally we should eliminate tech suits, but I'm happy with clearly defined rules for suits.
Read the article "What's Up with the Suits?" by John Leonard at the following site:
http://www.swimmingcoach.org/
Now note that he sat on the FINA "Commission for Swimwear Approval" that produced the current fiasco:
www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/.../21315.asp
My prediction, FWIW, is that post 01-01-2010, men will be back into FS Pro Jammers (read" paper suits), and women into traditional tanks. Isn't that the only way to be "pure" and eliminate compression, buoyancy, air-trapping, drag reduction, etc?
Perhaps we should also get rid of goggles and silicone caps, since they also represent technological breaks with the past.
While I am happy to race in any type of suit, as long as it is a level playing field (and I consider LZR, B70, Jaked, AquaZone, Tracer Rise, Powerskin, etc to be level enough), I am nauseated by the "purist" argument that swimming has become all about the suits. It has not. Everyone has access to a LZR, or a B70, or ... So it is still racing, only in different equipment. Yes, a less-fit swimmer with poor technique may be aided more by the suits than a fit swimmer with good technique. But certainly not enough to beat the latter.
The purist argument is based on the dramatic drops in times achieved with the new suits. So what? Does the fact that Bousquet and cohorts are setting records minimize Biondi's accmplishments; or Popov's/Jager's/Thorpe's/Salinkov's/Spitz's? Of course not.:bitching:
Somebody find a way to get rid of FINA, please. And mute Craig Lord, while you're at it...:bitching:
Wow, what a potential opportunity for USMS . . . while FINA takes swimming back to the (relatively) dark ages, USMS opens its arms and embraces tech suits of all fabrics, stripes, and permeability (or lack thereof) . . . manufacturers use masters swimmers as unpaid test mules, developing ever faster suits . . . slowly, but inexorably, the fast crowd drifts over to USMS events for the sheer thrill of seeing times faster than Olympic standards on the boards . . . eventually, the Olympics are perceived by the public as a quaint anachronism, roughly on a level with the vintage motocross nuts racing 70's Maicos and CZs . . . USMS SCY Nats become the new Olympics, with 24/7 coverage and bong hit/stripper scandals by the bucketload . . .
No, it's not all about the suits. www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/.../21308.asp
Here's a good quote:
"Times are supposed to get faster, but apparently, only at some preconceived rate established through the sport's own brief history. Whatever that gradual rate is supposed to be, according to whomever it is who gets to decide, the improvements over the past year exceeded it. But is this kind of evolutionary acceleration really unprecedented? Or is it just our misperception of our own history? "
And I've repeatedly made this comment, and people tell me I'm deluded every time:
"Another revealing statistic is the sustained rate of improvement by the same swimmers one year after the latest generation of suits was introduced. Many elite swimmers are smashing their own person records set a year ago wearing the same suits. How do the suit critics account for this widespread, sustained improvement?"
If we're going back to tanks and jammers, that's pre-2000. Ridiculous.
That article also makes it sound like the B70 will not be on the FINA list to be issued on June 19 despite re-testing.
I agree 100%, and I thought Mr. Guthrie's article was well-written and quite convincing. My beef is with bureaucrats and journalists (and Speedo-compensated coaches) who are hell-bent on trying to stop the advancement of technology.
We can agree that the suits make you faster than a Lycra or paper jammer/tank. However, it is fair to assume they make EVERYONE faster (albeit the unfit fatties relatively more so). Therefore, training and talent still matter.
Wow, what a potential opportunity for USMS . . . while FINA takes swimming back to the (relatively) dark ages, USMS opens its arms and embraces tech suits of all fabrics, stripes, and permeability (or lack thereof) . . . manufacturers use masters swimmers as unpaid test mules, developing ever faster suits . . . slowly, but inexorably, the fast crowd drifts over to USMS events for the sheer thrill of seeing times faster than Olympic standards on the boards . . . eventually, the Olympics are perceived by the public as a quaint anachronism, roughly on a level with the vintage motocross nuts racing 70's Maicos and CZs . . . USMS SCY Nats become the new Olympics, with 24/7 coverage and bong hit/stripper scandals by the bucketload . . .
I was a little skeptical, until the last sentence. :cool:
Everyone I know in Masters has a "real life". I'm using that tongue in cheek from the other thread. But really, I think the most asked question besides the suit question, at meets, is how much has someone been training? B/c as it has been stated (too) many times, the suit cannot swim FOR you.
You often hear people say, "Jim hasn't been swimming much," or "Susie just had her appendix out." There are so many factors, obviously, that affect our performance at meets. I think we scout out this information on our competition b/c we care about them (heh-hem) but more probably b/c we know who we should/could beat and who we can't. And I think that's why people detest sandbaggers, b/c they are not honest.
So even if the writing is on the wall for tech suits, it's really the people in the suits that we should be asking about.
There is nothing wrong with suits with zippers, so I don't understand why they are thinking of elimanting them
This is an interesting one. My best guess is that suits with zippers make it much easier to get into a really tight suit. For one thing the entire suit then needs to be able to go past your hips. I think a suit with no zipper means much less possible compression. Would a full-body suit with no zipper even be practical? Maybe that's their goal: effectively eliminate full-body suits by making zippers on suits illegal.
I've wondered just how much profit there is in the tech suits for the big companies. I've often heard two things. First, tech suits are loss leaders for them due to their relatively low sales volume and higher production costs. Second, team suits (your summer teams, high schools, etc) are the bread and butter of their operations. I'll be at meets this Summer where 300 + kids will be wearing Speedo lycra suits at $50 a pop.
I wonder what the sales ratio is of traditional lycra/endurace suits to tech suit sales - 1:100, 1:500?
