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
I just don't think goggles are directly comparable. The primary purpose for using goggles is so you can see better and to protect your eyes from chlorine. The purpose of goggles isn't really to make you swim faster. This may be a consequence of these other factors, but it isn't their primary purpose. Full-body, rubberized suits, on the other hand, are clearly primarily intended to make you swim faster.
As I see it, suits increase ones aquadynamic efficiency (at least that is the intended purpose), goggles do not.
I just don't think goggles are directly comparable. The primary purpose for using goggles is so you can see better and to protect your eyes from chlorine. The purpose of goggles isn't really to make you swim faster. This may be a consequence of these other factors, but it isn't their primary purpose. Full-body, rubberized suits, on the other hand, are clearly primarily intended to make you swim faster.
As I see it, suits increase ones aquadynamic efficiency (at least that is the intended purpose), goggles do not.
