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
Parents
Former Member
Auto manufacturers have been using special dummies to test crash-worthiness for decades. Maybe someone could create something similar to test suits for Fina. It could be designed with characteristics as close to a human body as possible for buoyancy, etc., then dressed in a suit and pushed off on a glide test down a pool with marks every meter. If the dummy glides more than X meters, or rises more than Y centimeters above the water line while wearing a particular suit, it's considered too performance enhancing.
Or, there could be two different levels of swim competition, "stock" and "super-modified".
Auto manufacturers have been using special dummies to test crash-worthiness for decades. Maybe someone could create something similar to test suits for Fina. It could be designed with characteristics as close to a human body as possible for buoyancy, etc., then dressed in a suit and pushed off on a glide test down a pool with marks every meter. If the dummy glides more than X meters, or rises more than Y centimeters above the water line while wearing a particular suit, it's considered too performance enhancing.
Or, there could be two different levels of swim competition, "stock" and "super-modified".
