If the full body rubber suits do end up getting banned, why should USMS follow their lead on this issue? (i.e. assuming the suits would continue to be manufactured).
Isn't Masters mostly for each individual to pursue what they want and the level they want out of the sport?
If the full body suit is preferred by many USMS participants, why not satisfy the base by keeping it available?
What's really the point of forcing old USMS swimmers out of their girdles if FINA bans them?
John Smith
If the full body rubber suits do end up getting banned, why should USMS follow their lead on this issue? (i.e. assuming the suits would continue to be manufactured).
Isn't Masters mostly for each individual to pursue what they want and the level they want out of the sport?
If the full body suit is preferred by many USMS participants, why not satisfy the base by keeping it available?
What's really the point of forcing old USMS swimmers out of their girdles if FINA bans them?
John Smith
Should have had a poll for this one, John.
I agree. We should be left to our own "devices". I think USMS could come to terms with some guidelines that would allow existing technology. And just stop it at this point if that's desired by the majority. I think the few folks wanting to go back in time are few and far between.
I am not sure if John Smith is kidding or serious, but I was thinking along the same lines. Why should Masters swimmers not continue to use the tech suits?
Yes, I wasn't quite sure if he was being serious either. The "rubber suits" and "girdles" comments made me pause for a moment but I decided to consider the questions literally.
I have faith, however, in the girdle statement. I'd consider that to be a mandatory requirement for Masters. :)
I am not sure if John Smith is kidding or serious, but I was thinking along the same lines. Why should Masters swimmers not continue to use the tech suits? It might make Masters competitions stand out and be more attractive to younger swimmers who think the suits will help them swim faster. So, we might get more young elite competitors who want to compete in a Masters meet where they can use a tech suit. Fine with me.
Then there is the aesthetic element. We are older. Our bodies sag more. We are simply not the perfectly sculpted folks we see racing at the Olympics (sure, there are exceptions but...). Frankly, I think that people over 40 look significantly better in the full body suits. They look great AND help us swim more efficiently. We are not going to set Olympic records, so who cares if we decide to continue allowing the tech suits? I would be interested to see how a Jaked or an X-Glide feels in the water. It's fun. Masters is supposed to be fun.
There has been so much posturing in Rome; folks taking everything WAY too seriously and hypocritically (Bowman the prime example), but Masters do what we do because we love swimming, racing, and having fun; the tech suits ARE fun and they make us look and feel good. I say keep them.
Maybe we should take a page from the Bowman play book and refuse to swim internationally if FINA imposes their will on Masters. There was a time when Masters was not under FINA control, so maybe we should turn the clock back to BF (Before FINA).
I'm split on all of this. I do know that the tech suits are faster than "standard" suits. I also know that FINA isn't a great role model when it comes to rule-making or well-reasoned decisions. I also recognize that USMS doesn't have to follow FINA rules.
But USMS has rules for swimming equipment that blocks traditional wetsuits from being worn in open water and pool competitions--I always presumed that those rules were in place because the wetsuits gave an advantage to swimmers who were wearing them. Doesn't that same rationale argue for regulating other swim suits that give advantages? Isn't the logical extension of that to regulate the playing field so all competitors are wearing the same equipment--and keeping the costs down seems like another benefit as well. Shouldn't people swim faster because they are better swimmers who are in better shape(which does not include me in either category)as opposed to being able to purchase a better swim suit?
I don't want to over-emphasize the role of the suit. If I was wearing a Jaked, and a real world class swimmer was wearing a three-piece suit with cummerbund, top hat and shoes, I'm pretty sure I'd be getting whopped. So its not just the suit. But I do like the idea of the competitive advantage in USMS competition going to the better swimmer and not the better equipment.
It's the cost issue for me as well. My wife likes the way I look in the tech suits !! How about NO Floatation for starters ? To the knee textile suits for men & women with a cost of under $200 would have the suit makers rethink how much technology to put in them.
Simply a bunch of friends getting together to splash around in the pool. It just so happens that all of the Smith brothers' friends are elite/world class swimmers. Who own expensive tech suits. And shave down.
I can see the torches and pitch forks coming out now...string those elitist *** old swimmers up by their Jaked's!
Would there really be much impact if USMS said F-u to Fina and permitted bodysuits? The worst they can do is tell us that our swims won't count for Fina Top Ten - which affects a very small fraction of our membership.
I can see the torches and pitch forks coming out now...string those elitist *** old swimmers up by their Jaked's!
Well, what goes around comes around, Pablo from Pueblo. Maybe a few people didn't like being told from the "I'm not serious but I like breaking records" elite crowd how seriously the rest of us should take the sport and train.
