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
A hell of a lot less than he did when he was at Texas and went 1:35 for 2nd place in the 200 free at NCAA's.
So maybe 3 times a week say around 1800 yards?
One sport=one set of rules.
What about boxing? - what are there 3 or 4 (WBC, WBA, IBC, IBA, WWE) and they have differing rules in some fashion (# of rounds, glove weight, IQ of announcer, who side God is on) - but the core rules are similar - hit the other guy as hard as possible. Even Olypic rules have a scoring component that the professional don't have. So you can have one sport, but modified rules that make each level complementary to the other levels.
I guess FINA has been such a cluster that people are frustrated and couldn't care less if they are the "main governing body" for swimming's universe.
Personally if USMS allows the suits - fine - if they don't - also fine. Just tell us what types of suits are in and which ones are out so the suits companies can spend their marketing dollars telling me which suit I absolutely need to buy, must have and will set the most records in - if I ever get fast enough to set them.
boxing is a pretty crummy example.
who is the world champ? who knows?
Boxing is crummy - period, but look at other sports
Look at basketball - three point line, size of the lane paint area.
baseball - aluminum bats vs wood bats, home run champs (Oh vs Aron vs Bonds).
Canadian Footbal vs American Football - size of field, players in motion, etc
many examples but they all have their records and championships and "world champions".
i saw lots of point zeros in CA. i would like to see the same ban for open water competition, but there hasn't been much talk one way or the other about it.
You are losing me a bit on the logic. You seem to say that you want parallels with FINA and USA swimming on one hand for these rules, but you don't think personal motivational difference by participants between the organizations is relevant.
I mean..... why do you really care if you get beat by a guy in the lane next to you at masters nationals if he is wearing a rubber space suit and you are not? You know very well the approximate benefit of the suit. Isn't knowing enough? My son is 14 and swimming at the Western Zone championships this week in Hawaii in regular Fastkin Pro leggins against kids in full-body rubber wonder suits. He knows the value of his swims, and so does everyone else at the meet.
Let me put it this way. Because you only train 10,000 a week, should we allow you to do one-handed turns -- or flipturns -- in *** and fly because you aren't "serious?" It would enable you to go faster, after all. Who cares if it isn't exactly what Phelps & co are doing; it's only masters and has only some resemblence to "real" swimming.
As far as "why do I care if I get beat by a guy who wears X"...well, I don't like to get beat. Period. I'm sure you are the same way, protestations of "seriousness" to the contrary. But this is not a major reason for my position. I can always wear a suit if the thought of losing b/c I didn't wear one is too much to bear. Right now I'm fine with jammers.
We all have some thinking to do about what serves our members best, depending how circumstances unfold. I'll enjoy the result no matter what happens.
To reiterate my original reason for posting in this thread: I guess I am somewhat alarmed at how many people seem ready to say "screw FINA" if they decide that their new rules apply entirely or in part to masters swimming. The suits are certainly addicting, I guess.
But I think all of this noise is really addressing the question, "what should FINA do about the suits for masters?"
An honest question form me, which I believe is more in line with the OP, is: what do you think would serve USMS best if FINA decides the suits should go? Keep the suits and maybe no US swimmer is eligible for WRs and FINA Top Ten? The majority of masters swimmers do not set WRs or get FINA TTs, after all. Or should we comply with FINA?
I find it a little interesting that USMS hasn't taken a parallel stance as USS with FINA wrt the suits. Think about it: the organization could strongly recommend to FINA that the identical rules be adopted for masters swimming on an international scale. We haven't done so and I'm pretty sure we won't, at least anytime soon. Does that reveal anything? I don't know.
Blueseventy sponsorship anyone? People (me included) about corporate buyoffs by Speedo, but everyone plays the same game to a different degree.
To reiterate my original reason for posting in this thread: I guess I am somewhat alarmed at how many people seem ready to say "screw FINA" if they decide that their new rules apply entirely or in part to masters swimming. The suits are certainly addicting, I guess.
I hold these possibly contradictory opinions in my mind:
I think USMS and masters' federations around the world should follow FINA, but ...
... on this issue I think FINA's about the most bumbling political body out there (our Congress included!)
I like the full body suits and, despite many elite swimmers and coaches protestations, I think they love them too ... AND
... I think the tune might change next year to "bring back the rubber" if there are virtually no world records set and you have a whole season of disappointed swimmers who aren't lowering their times.
I'll race in whatever is the fastest legal suit appropriate for my level of commitment to training. This means I'm still wearing a B70 through SCM season!
