Except swimsuits is what we're actually discussing! That's good for the sport.
Why? Much of the swimsuit coverage was not complimentary. And even the ones that were neutral just focused on the technology, not the sport of swimming. (I guess I'm not at the point where I equate the two.)
But fear not, I'm sure there will be continued coverage about how the absence of the suits has resulted in a dearth of new WRs. Any exposure is good, right?
But all that doesn't help us decide what to do about masters. The suits are already banned in "mainstream" swimming so Rowdy's argument for why they were a good thing is interesting but moot.
Except swimsuits is what we're actually discussing! That's good for the sport.
Why? Much of the swimsuit coverage was not complimentary. And even the ones that were neutral just focused on the technology, not the sport of swimming. (I guess I'm not at the point where I equate the two.)
But fear not, I'm sure there will be continued coverage about how the absence of the suits has resulted in a dearth of new WRs. Any exposure is good, right?
But all that doesn't help us decide what to do about masters. The suits are already banned in "mainstream" swimming so Rowdy's argument for why they were a good thing is interesting but moot.
