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
That's kind of the issue here. For me and big ugly Paul, Masters is a "beer" league and it is for fun.
Well, actions speak louder than words, much much louder. As I recall a certain "team" was assembled of ultra fast elite level USMS swimmers solely for the purpose of breaking a record. This completely nullifies any "beer" league statements or "we don't take it seriously" comments. Further, no beer league I know has participants who regularly get up before 5 am to practice.
I do agree it is fun, especially when I can mock Paul from afar and he can't chase me down and sit on me.
I'm not a tennis player and am not really familiar at all with it's rules, but I think to make an accurate comparison between swimming/suits and another sport you really need both sports to be timed events that take place within the confines of a controlled environment.
Wow - Mr. Negasmith you sure got very serious in a very serious hurry about defending your lack of seriousness when it comes to breaking records with fellow "teammates."
We should also institute the following measures:
1. Drug testing at major competitions
2. Proof of QTs when registering for nationals
3. Fly swum with a legitimate dolphin kick only
4. All starts from the blocks, no exceptions
5. Teams defined as swimmers who train together in the same pool
I can think of valid reason for each of these. The only reason I can think of to allow tech suits when every other organization has banned them is because "people like them" and, sorry, I just don't think that's a good enough reason.
I'll go along with whatever decision FINA finally decides to make regarding the suits, but I feel USMS should also adhere to this ruling.
Okay, I was partly right. The study was done by Joel Stager. I may have screwed up some of the details.
You can read a much better explanation here:
www.scienceblog.com/.../research-examines-elite-swim-times-youth-sports-age-groups-21796.html
An excerpt:
The study does not identify what caused the bias but describes the statistical modeling that has successfully predicted swim times during the previous Olympics, aside from the Olympic Games in 1996, when times were slower than predicted. The average error in predictions for 2008 Olympic swim times was three to six times greater than the errors in previous Olympics, said Joel Stager, professor in the Department of Kinesiology and director of the Counsilman Center for the Science of Swimming....
...No new advances in swimming techniques or training can account for the improved time, Stager said, so technology, such as swimsuits, or pharmacology could be responsible.
"Do we, as a community, want 'assisted performance?'" he asked.
---------
Jim's answer to Joel's rhetorical question:
No, we, as a community, do not want 'assisted performance.' But I, as an individual, sure as hell do.
But really, Kirk,........ it's just masters swimming. Perhaps you need to join Paul and I for a beer next nationals.
You're on. But which one am I? Obama, Gates or Crowley? :)
And by the way, what's your take John? You've hinted that you think masters swimmers should be able to do whatever they want, but you also said you'd like the whole rubber suit chapter eliminated from the sport. Let's hear your definitive answer to your own question.
Back to the topic Mr. Geek. What would happen if USMS had the guts to tell FINA to "pound sand" on this rubber suit issue?
I don't know the fallout but I'm sure there would be some with the more serious competitors but at the top level, not sure. Maybe Rob Butcher could weigh in on this option, that would be interesting. I assume there are some politics involved with our organization and FINA, as with any organization.
Are we self sustaining without FINA?
Why? So that we will be seen as a serious swimming organization? NQTs are a joke. If we are just a beer league, then anything goes.
Yes, that is exactly why. Sports without rules cease to be sports. I hate to use the slippery slope argument, but really, if we go a different direction than FINA on the suit issue why not allow one-handed touches in fly and ***, allow false starts, etc.? As things stand now there is no masters rule that gives us an advantage over non-masters--OK, assuming you're not doping, that is.
Well, FINA has already stated that it's previous ban did not apply to masters and that it never intended to regulate masters.
Well clearly they "regulate" masters in some senses. If USMS allowed stroke modifications that other national bodies did not (eg, you could do a forward start in backstroke, kick as far underwater as you want, do flipturns in butterfly, two pull-outs in breaststroke, etc), I doubt any of our times would be accepted for inclusion in FINA Top Ten or as WRs.
I think what they said is that, just as they do not enforce PED prohibitions through a drug-testing program in masters, they don't intend to regulate swimsuits in masters. I got the impression that it was partly a logistical thing, they didn't want to worry about suit inspections at the masters levels (like they do at the top international meets).
That was then, of course; I don't think it beyond the realm of possibility that they may change their mind... :)
But getting back to my questions....... what are the rammifications of ignoring FINA on this issue? Other than refusing to allow World records set in the rubber suits, what can they do to force USMS to comply or otherwise retaliate?
I wonder if other country's masters swimmers want to leave them as an option or not.
Ramifications that I can think of:
-- FINA might not accept any times from USMS meets for inclusion in Top Ten lists or as WRs. I suppose we could have some sort of verification that a "FINA legal" suit was used but that would be a hassle to do for all possible TT swims or WRs, and FINA might decide not accept it anyway.
-- USA-S may decide not to accept any USMS times into the SWIMS database. Right now you can give prior notification for your intention to do so, but going against USA-S on the suit issue (especially since they initiated the current proposal) might be pushing it.
These two ramifications do indeed affect many of our members.
Like John, I am thoroughly sick of the new suits and all the associated baggage. Unlike him, it would bother me just a little to swim in jammers next to a competitor who was wearing cellophane (oops, I meant Jaked).
But it would bother me more than a little to basically have USMS strike out on our own. 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.
Anyway, I think it is mostly a moot point. I don't think the suit manufacturers are going to make these suits just for masters swimmers. If/when FINA gets rid of them (and unlike Tim L, I think the rubber suits will soon be gone for good), I think that for all practical purposes they will be gone from masters competitions once the current stock gets used up, though that may take some time.
The point is that most other sports have incorporated new technology and have done so without compromising the spirit or integrity of the sport, and their respective federations/governing bodies have managed to regulate said technology without turning back the clock twenty years.
