What should USMS do about the suits?

Despite your interpretation, Counselor, "suit stacking" was perfectly legal. Why else would they need to institute a separate rule prohibiting it? I remember the conversation well, and what I questioned then (and now) is the seeming inconsistency in your position. If you favor one suit, then why not two? Or a single wetsuit? Sure, both are currently against the rules. But for non-masters (after Jan 1, anyway), so is the LZR and Jaked, etc. You and others have argued that such rules shouldn't apply to masters because...well, I don't know exactly why. Something to do with shaving and "it's only masters" and swimming fast. But why stop there? Why not allow wetsuits? My conclusion then (as now) is that a person who has no problem with performance-enhancing suits should have no qualms wearing a wetsuit in pool competition (other than the small fact that, right now, that would be cheating). Blueseventy makes them too, right? Much more durable than FS-Pros or even swimskins. Chris, you well know that something may be not be permissible in a rule without a direct explicit ban; it's all in interpreting the language. The intent of the USMS rule, and the use of the singular, means that only one suit was contemplated. The fact that some folks seized on the absence of an outright prohibition to find a loophole and wear two performance enhancing speed suits doesn't mean that it was "perfectly legal" or contemplated by the drafters (perhaps "dubiously" or "marginally" legal is more accurate). Indeed, this is confirmed by the fact that the vast majority of competitive masters swimmers have been wearing one tech suit forever. As Mike notes, though, finding loopholes is quite clever and also in the nature of human innovation. Thus, the so-called loophole was closed, and appropriately so in my view, when USMS and FINA said -- duh -- one suit was it. I don't see any inconsistency in my position. I told you my rationale -- one swimmer, one suit. This is probably the easiest "line" one could ever draw in the sand. Perfectly logical. And, in fact, I have been relatively silent until recently on whether I thought the FINA rules for elites should apply to masters. I didn't get on the bandwagon that masters were different right away. Nor have I ever given the reasons stated above -- shaving, "it's only masters," etc. I certainly have never said we should have the suits just because they're "cool," as Midas attributed to me. I've consistently said I think swimming, like other sports, should progress technologically. (Though I do like the speed, I admit. I'm a sprinter ... :)) My only recent comment on the matter was to agree with Patrick's post earlier in this and another thread. I would like there to be symmetry, but I would most prefer an international masters consensus. If Europe and other masters federations are competing in B70s, that would be my preference as well. I will admit that I'm not overly troubled by competing in a different suit than Michael Phelps. If the USMS compromise rule were adopted, that's what I'd be doing anyway. And if I'm doing that anyway, I'd rather have my B70 than some cobbled together "compromise" suit. More broadly, I've always believed (as many have stated) that regulation was the way to go. Regulation, line drawing, making distinctions are just part of the job of a regulatory/governing body. Total bans and sending the sport back in time is just punting. Since you've endorsed the USMS "compromise," you must agree that lines can be draw too (though you would prefer they not be). And speaking of being bored (as Mike did), I am beyond bored with the comparisons of B70 swim skins to wetsuits. And I would certainly have a "qualm" about wearing a wetsuit in a pool competition. I recently had a chance to wear a wetsuit for the first time. There is no similarity whatsoever between my 2XU wetsuit and my B70. One weighs about 50 pounds more than the other, is dramatically thicker, and is designed for warmth. B70s are NOT wetsuits. Just like OW swimming is not pool swimming. I guess the bottom line is that I don't accept the slippery slope argument, nor the proposition that swimming can only be basic or "pure" with an old fashioned suit. And I am likewise weary of the "cheating" allegations, or the fact that some think people wear these suits to avoid/reduce training. As anyone who reads my blog knows, this is certainly not the case for me. I embrace training and technology.

Despite your interpretation, Counselor, "suit stacking" was perfectly legal. Why else would they need to institute a separate rule prohibiting it? I remember the conversation well, and what I questioned then (and now) is the seeming inconsistency in your position. If you favor one suit, then why not two? Or a single wetsuit? Sure, both are currently against the rules. But for non-masters (after Jan 1, anyway), so is the LZR and Jaked, etc. You and others have argued that such rules shouldn't apply to masters because...well, I don't know exactly why. Something to do with shaving and "it's only masters" and swimming fast. But why stop there? Why not allow wetsuits? My conclusion then (as now) is that a person who has no problem with performance-enhancing suits should have no qualms wearing a wetsuit in pool competition (other than the small fact that, right now, that would be cheating). Blueseventy makes them too, right? Much more durable than FS-Pros or even swimskins. Chris, you well know that something may be not be permissible in a rule without a direct explicit ban; it's all in interpreting the language. The intent of the USMS rule, and the use of the singular, means that only one suit was contemplated. The fact that some folks seized on the absence of an outright prohibition to find a loophole and wear two performance enhancing speed suits doesn't mean that it was "perfectly legal" or contemplated by the drafters (perhaps "dubiously" or "marginally" legal is more accurate). Indeed, this is confirmed by the fact that the vast majority of competitive masters swimmers have been wearing one tech suit forever. As Mike notes, though, finding loopholes is quite clever and also in the nature of human innovation. Thus, the so-called loophole was closed, and appropriately so in my view, when USMS and FINA said -- duh -- one suit was it. I don't see any inconsistency in my position. I told you my rationale -- one swimmer, one suit. This is probably the easiest "line" one could ever draw in the sand. Perfectly logical. And, in fact, I have been relatively silent until recently on whether I thought the FINA rules for elites should apply to masters. I didn't get on the bandwagon that masters were different right away. Nor have I ever given the reasons stated above -- shaving, "it's only masters," etc. I certainly have never said we should have the suits just because they're "cool," as Midas attributed to me. I've consistently said I think swimming, like other sports, should progress technologically. (Though I do like the speed, I admit. I'm a sprinter ... :)) My only recent comment on the matter was to agree with Patrick's post earlier in this and another thread. I would like there to be symmetry, but I would most prefer an international masters consensus. If Europe and other masters federations are competing in B70s, that would be my preference as well. I will admit that I'm not overly troubled by competing in a different suit than Michael Phelps. If the USMS compromise rule were adopted, that's what I'd be doing anyway. And if I'm doing that anyway, I'd rather have my B70 than some cobbled together "compromise" suit. More broadly, I've always believed (as many have stated) that regulation was the way to go. Regulation, line drawing, making distinctions are just part of the job of a regulatory/governing body. Total bans and sending the sport back in time is just punting. Since you've endorsed the USMS "compromise," you must agree that lines can be draw too (though you would prefer they not be). And speaking of being bored (as Mike did), I am beyond bored with the comparisons of B70 swim skins to wetsuits. And I would certainly have a "qualm" about wearing a wetsuit in a pool competition. I recently had a chance to wear a wetsuit for the first time. There is no similarity whatsoever between my 2XU wetsuit and my B70. One weighs about 50 pounds more than the other, is dramatically thicker, and is designed for warmth. B70s are NOT wetsuits. Just like OW swimming is not pool swimming. I guess the bottom line is that I don't accept the slippery slope argument, nor the proposition that swimming can only be basic or "pure" with an old fashioned suit. And I am likewise weary of the "cheating" allegations, or the fact that some think people wear these suits to avoid/reduce training. As anyone who reads my blog knows, this is certainly not the case for me. I embrace training and technology.