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
two points:
In many open water competitions, there are two sets of results, one for regular suits and one for wetsuits.
I just told my wife that some masters swimmers like technical suits because it hides their bellies. she said, "yeah, but the downside it that it makes you look like a stuffed porpoise."
The reason to ban tech suits from any form of competition, I believe, is simple. Use of high tech suits probably affects fairness.
I suspect and have heard many theorize that certain body types benefit more from these suits than others. In a sport that is already dominated by taller people, have the suits widened the gap between the taller (or bigger) swimmers vs. their smaller foes by exacerbating the advantages of having a large frame and by alleviating some of the penalties of having a large frame?
I am certainly no scientist, but I would be interested in hearing how wearing the suit affects a 5"6" 150 lb swimmer contrasted with a 6"6" 235 lb swimmer. What studies are out there (if any) that relate to the suits and one's body mass, height, weight, etc.?
In addition, the suit no doubt helps remove the profound effects of poor stroke mechanics by providing buoyancy. A swimmer with excellent form loses much of the advantage that they have EARNED through practice and dedication.
I'm not sure that I understand the argument in favor of high tech suits and this is coming from a slow, overweight, novice swimmer that has more to gain in terms of performance by using one than most. While it won't help me to catch the John Smiths of the swimming world, it just may help me to beat somebody in my age group who is a better swimmer and has worked harder.
Most people wearing these suits train pretty hard. (Well, not Hulk, ;), but most others
Nice.
This one's going up on the 'fridge. Right below this:
May, 2010. Atlanta, Ga.
What are you? Man or Geek?
neither
but I ain't crazy.
I don't do 2 consecutive lengths of Fly in practice. I'm sure as heck not gonna go EIGHT in a ROW.
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.
Kirk, you are right. Goggles are not a good comparison. What made me think of them was entirely personal. When I was introduced to racing for the first time with goggles I was also introduced to my first Arena Powerskin. So, I suppose I was lost in my private world there. I agree with you.
Bottom line. I like swimming fast and don't want to go slower. I also get a kick out of putting on a kind of superman or spiderman suit as a part of that. Maybe a theatrical streak.
Wow this thread went south in a hurry. :)
To address Jim's question about post-suit letdown: yes, as in giving up any expensive, unhealthy addiction cold turkey, there will be some pain. Pull the band-aid right off, say I! Then you can join me and former smokers in the ranks of the righteously (annoying) smug holier-than-thous.
Pull the band-aid right off, say I!
No way, man. The slow transition for me: I just got a decently priced (I think) pair of B70 legskins in the mail today (All American Swim) and will compete in those this fall. I'll then switch to jammers for SCY. Unless, of course, FINA reneges again; then I'll try to quickly scoop up a full body suit for SCY season.:)
