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
Jim...I was being sarcastic...time and time again Chris has tried to tell us there has never been a study done that proves the suits improve times...
Oh, I knew you were being sarcastic. Plenty of "studies" going on, what I suspect you mean is one in which variables are controlled carefully so that cause & effect are more clearly indicated. Even the link I provided is just a gussied-up correlative study and doesn't absolutely prove causal connection (as the author was careful to say: "does not identify what causes the bias") though it is obviously pretty suggestive.
And yes, I would love for more systematic studies done about how the suits work so that we can quantify their effects more easily and regulate them better, if that's what we want to do; determine the effects of coverage; identify what types of swimmers are aided the most; that sort of thing.
I'm "skeptical" or "open minded" about the suits because I try not to be unduly influenced by a few individual eye-popping swims. And it rubs me the wrong way when the community immediately assumes it is the suit based on such swims.
The fact that almost every WR has been broken in Rome is certainly pretty strong evidence that the suits are having an effect; I'm not mule-headed about it. But I will point out that, by their very nature, setting WRs is a biased way to look at the suits effects. We obviously do not see counter-examples, situations where a swimmer goes no faster, or even slower, with the suits. Because such a person is generally not going to be in the finals and isn't going to set a record. One obvious example of this is a "Berens-style" mishap, but I have definitely talked to swimmers who (for example) did not benefit from using a LZR.
Another thing that bugs me is lumping together suits of different types: legskins, body and jammers. So we might be told that Piersol broke the WR with an Arena but neglecting to mention that it was legs only; I have to think that makes a difference.
While I think there is some value in putting on the suits in practice and testing them, there are limits too. Ultimately I think they need to be tested in races where the outcome matters (and against shaved skin) and it is really hard to do that. I have done it twice in a shaved trials/finals meet and been surprised by the results both times, going as they did against prevailing wisdom (which, if I'd been less "skeptical" I would have just accepted as fact).
Jim...I was being sarcastic...time and time again Chris has tried to tell us there has never been a study done that proves the suits improve times...
Oh, I knew you were being sarcastic. Plenty of "studies" going on, what I suspect you mean is one in which variables are controlled carefully so that cause & effect are more clearly indicated. Even the link I provided is just a gussied-up correlative study and doesn't absolutely prove causal connection (as the author was careful to say: "does not identify what causes the bias") though it is obviously pretty suggestive.
And yes, I would love for more systematic studies done about how the suits work so that we can quantify their effects more easily and regulate them better, if that's what we want to do; determine the effects of coverage; identify what types of swimmers are aided the most; that sort of thing.
I'm "skeptical" or "open minded" about the suits because I try not to be unduly influenced by a few individual eye-popping swims. And it rubs me the wrong way when the community immediately assumes it is the suit based on such swims.
The fact that almost every WR has been broken in Rome is certainly pretty strong evidence that the suits are having an effect; I'm not mule-headed about it. But I will point out that, by their very nature, setting WRs is a biased way to look at the suits effects. We obviously do not see counter-examples, situations where a swimmer goes no faster, or even slower, with the suits. Because such a person is generally not going to be in the finals and isn't going to set a record. One obvious example of this is a "Berens-style" mishap, but I have definitely talked to swimmers who (for example) did not benefit from using a LZR.
Another thing that bugs me is lumping together suits of different types: legskins, body and jammers. So we might be told that Piersol broke the WR with an Arena but neglecting to mention that it was legs only; I have to think that makes a difference.
While I think there is some value in putting on the suits in practice and testing them, there are limits too. Ultimately I think they need to be tested in races where the outcome matters (and against shaved skin) and it is really hard to do that. I have done it twice in a shaved trials/finals meet and been surprised by the results both times, going as they did against prevailing wisdom (which, if I'd been less "skeptical" I would have just accepted as fact).
