OK - the "Suits" started the whole thing, so you can say that FINA and the manufacturers are responsible for the entire mess. But, there are ways to handle a situation without creating this silly mess. If you ever read Swimnews, the author Craig Lord, basically makes the suits out to be the devil and he is the Spanish inquisition. Why can't they just voice their opinion and then move on for the good of the sport.
Most main stream journallists have no idea about suits, records and all of that - they take their stories from the coaches and swimmers. The more the coaches and swimmers complain the worse the public, non-swimming perception will be - it's that simple. How about just saying - "I would prefer for the suits to changed - but Worlds are swimmer against swimmer - everybody can wear whatever suit they want and they are all available. In the end it comes down to the swimmer not the suit."
Michael Phelps was not world athlete of the year in 2008, not just because of the suits, but because of all the talk about them !
L'Equipe is now banning any record note in their newspaper and I am sure the coverage of Worlds will be terrible. Well - they are French, but it's still a big blow to the sport.
I don't read speed skaters complaining about a new track being the fastest in the world - they can only set records in certain places. I don't see the track cyclists making a huge affair out of a new faster cycling track that allows athletes to blow away all the records. I did not see the outrage when they changed the backstroke turn rule - how much is that in a 200 back ? About a second ? How much faster is allowing a dolphin kick off the wall in *** ? How much faster is allowing in regular Breaststroke to put your head underwater ??
I think there has to be a way to discuss it and not make it take over the sport -- by the way, I am actually against the suits, I would love for them to go back to regular suits. But at the same time, I also embrace new technology, I have a Blue 70 and a LZR.
The long, probably expensive "pseudo-scientific" screening method has been farcical. What they need are a small number of simple tests following well-established and public guidelines. (Personally I like the idea of testing thickness & buoyancy.) Then limit the suit coverage (knees to navel for men, pelvis-neck for women works for me) and step back. Suit makers would have simple and predictable guidelines to follow.
The whole "permeability" thing is a red herring. Are they worried about buoyancy? Then test for that. Are they worried instead about some vague "contact with the water" thing? Go contemplate your navel and stop wasting our time.
:applaud::applaud:This is spot on Chris. Like knelson I agree. FINA have created an approval minefield for themselves (no surprise there), an enforcement nightmare for officials and a suit choice/access conundrum for swimmers and coaches. As you say, we need (very) simple, objective criteria; (very) simple, robust testing method/process (that anyone can replicate in a high school lab); I would also add a clear timetable for new suit approval (preferably 12 months before each worlds/olympics). The battle against the suits is almost certainly lost, particularly as FINA's decision making is dominated by its commercial interests, but surely even they can follow good advice like yours. This is an opportunity for the prospective new leadership at FINA to restore some semblance of fairness and rationality, and perhaps even an interest in swimming! It will be good when (if?) the swim talk is again more about about technique, conditioning, etc - rather than the damn suit.
The long, probably expensive "pseudo-scientific" screening method has been farcical. What they need are a small number of simple tests following well-established and public guidelines. (Personally I like the idea of testing thickness & buoyancy.) Then limit the suit coverage (knees to navel for men, pelvis-neck for women works for me) and step back. Suit makers would have simple and predictable guidelines to follow.
The whole "permeability" thing is a red herring. Are they worried about buoyancy? Then test for that. Are they worried instead about some vague "contact with the water" thing? Go contemplate your navel and stop wasting our time.
:applaud::applaud:This is spot on Chris. Like knelson I agree. FINA have created an approval minefield for themselves (no surprise there), an enforcement nightmare for officials and a suit choice/access conundrum for swimmers and coaches. As you say, we need (very) simple, objective criteria; (very) simple, robust testing method/process (that anyone can replicate in a high school lab); I would also add a clear timetable for new suit approval (preferably 12 months before each worlds/olympics). The battle against the suits is almost certainly lost, particularly as FINA's decision making is dominated by its commercial interests, but surely even they can follow good advice like yours. This is an opportunity for the prospective new leadership at FINA to restore some semblance of fairness and rationality, and perhaps even an interest in swimming! It will be good when (if?) the swim talk is again more about about technique, conditioning, etc - rather than the damn suit.
