I started a similar poll before,but time has changed things and I thought since USMS is going to have to do something definitive so they should have some input from the forumites
2. The tech suit wasn't an unwritten legally dubious loophole. They were worn after they were explicitly approved by FINA.
I believe what Midas is referring to is that, when the suits were approved, there was a rule prohibiting the use of devices to increase buoyancy and speed. Since the suits were clearly designed to improve speed and are a little buoyant, FINA got around this by declaring that they were "costumes" and not "devices."
At least, this is my understanding; I leave it to others to debate whether this was a loophole or not. (Done is done, as far as I'm concerned; I just want to know what to do from here on out.)
2. The tech suit wasn't an unwritten legally dubious loophole. They were worn after they were explicitly approved by FINA.
I believe what Midas is referring to is that, when the suits were approved, there was a rule prohibiting the use of devices to increase buoyancy and speed. Since the suits were clearly designed to improve speed and are a little buoyant, FINA got around this by declaring that they were "costumes" and not "devices."
At least, this is my understanding; I leave it to others to debate whether this was a loophole or not. (Done is done, as far as I'm concerned; I just want to know what to do from here on out.)
