Should USMS follow "suit" ?

What would happen if USMS had the guts to tell FINA to "pound sand" on this rubber suit issue? John Smith guts? this is making the assumption that the majority of masters want to don rubber........ (i prefer hanging out with folks who are into leather)

I would like, as closely as possible, the rules that we swim under in USMS to mirror those that Phelps, Lochte and co. compete with both nationally and internationally. I'd like to feel like we are doing the same sport, though obviously at completely different levels. I simply see no great compelling reason to part ways on this issue, but obviously I am not as attached to the suits as others. Very well said.

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).

I find it interesting that so many who support the use of this new technology to "further the sport" the last year and a half are now thinking it is better to side with FINA (even though they have little respect for FINA's decision process) to ban the suits. I myself have opposed them from USA Swimming events day one, now feel they are no big deal for use in USMS events. Amusing that a piece of clothing can divide opinions so easily. John Smith I support the suits only to the extent that FINA creates a logical, consistent and comprehendable standard for thier construction. Has FINA done this? No so far. Instead FINA has come out with, by my count, seven different rulings over the last 12 months, each ruling countermanding the previous one in scope or timeline. Has this suit escalation gotten completely out of hand? yes, it surely has. But let's look at other sports where this has happened and the governing bodies have managed to come up with enforcable standards. Tennis and golf are the first two that come to my mind. Both sports experienced a rush of technological advancement. Both had a crisis as a result but both managed to overcome this by creating a standard and not by burying thier heads and pretending it never happened, as FINA appears to be doing. IMO, what FINA should have (and still can) is establish a line in the sand where all racing suits that were legal for World Champs in 2007 can be used for competition. Then FINA has to, not should, but HAS to come up with enforceable standards for composition, coverage and bouyancy. Compression is going to be nearly impossible to create a unifying standard as compression relies heavily on the physiology of the swimmer wearing the suit. But compression can be controlled thru the composition and coverage standards. To address concerns at the age-group level, perhaps a 2 tiered rule for what can be worn in competition? Limit swim apparel for non-National/International level meets to no more than standard tanks and jammers that meet composition and bouyancy guidelines and then break out the 'good' stuff that meets FINA established guidelines for elite level competitions.

Nothing good comes when the rocket scientists start mucking around in pool water. or anywhere out side of space -that's how we got Tang and freeze dried ice cream. Nothing good comes of either of those. I just wish they (FINA) would make rational decision - I know that would be the first time. I can't afford a full body of any of them (TYR, Speedo, Arena) even the first or secong gen suits - plus I'm simply not fast enough to warrant using one. But I think they shoula allow legs versions of whatever permeable textile suit they come up with - maybe something in a worsted wool.

Disclaimer: I've never worn a tech suit, but someday I will be fast enough that it matters to me. Pro's and con's: Swim faster (probably) Don't need to shave Look better (girdle effect) Costs more $$ Agonizing over which suit (More an elite thing) Apples and oranges: Baseball; doesn't allow metal bats;, shoes, gloves, glasses matter but not much of an issue. Golf - all about tech, hell they even rebuild the courses to accomodate longer drives... Track; They don't run barefoot, some kind of jammer may help, not an issue that I've heard of. Football; Slippery jerseys, helmets and neck injuries Basketball; Ask Nike if it matters what shoe a player wears Rocket scientists need to eat too, better they design swimsuits than nukes!

"Call it nostalgia if you want, but I really miss the days when the choice of suit -- like the choice of goggles or cap -- was a matter of personal preference and was not likely to have any measureable influence on the race." This and everything else Chris posted is exactly how I feel...great job Chris....I am so glad I am so slow it doesnt matter much to me, I just swim because it feels great. Open water events= glad I was able to finish. I am waiting for the new suit that covers the foot, with a little fin over toes... ..oh and for the "data" that proves the point....have you not looked at the results from the "worlds"? I wonder how hollow a new WR must be if you realize that without a special suit, that the record holder didnt have, was the difference? I say lets go back to swimming in the nude, then we are all on equal ground equipment wise, and my pace would improve in the coed events. (although me in the nude may cause USMS to loose membership)

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". Rhoda, you may not be aware that the crash-test dummies are now serving on the board of governors for FINA. They must have undergone at least 10 crash tests and survived to qualify. The dead ones have all gone to USAS.

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. Love this post. People (e.g., Craig Lord) have been selective in the examples they use to support their argument. The evidence that the suits help is so strong, but even this strong argument gets eroded when people conveniently ignore evidence to the contrary. The other point that has been making me crazy is "the suit helps different body types/techniques/events/strokes more than others." This may be true, but it's just being used by those with vitriolic hate for the suits as a plug to make whatever case they want when the evidence doesn't quite support their stance. And your point about suit type is spot-on. If the times progression became statistically anomalous once the LZR, Jaked, X-Glide, etc. were introduced, why are we banning suits used when times were projecting as expected based on historical evidence? Why is the FSII getting lumped in with the Jaked? Legs? if air-trapping and girdling are the issues, why are full legs going to be banned? Not that I'm expecting FINA to act rationally at this point (bunch of damn goldilocks-es: this suit is too small, this one's too long...this one's just right!). But there has to be a solution that is fair to the athletes, doesn't produce silly results, and allows the manufacturers to innovate, make money, and support our sport. How about approving a short list of raw materials that can be used to make suits? The manufacturers can only choose from a short list of approved textiles from certified suppliers, but can then innovate on how to put it together, make pretty colors, or whatever. I agree that the swimmers should not be in a position where suit choice is as important as how many sdk's to take off each wall, but if the alternative is eliminating choice altogether, that's not any better, IMO.