What should USMS do about the suits?

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

ande — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 03:12:31 GMT

Any USMS reps are going to FINA's meeting in Mid January 2010? ande

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Chris Stevenson — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 01:28:00 GMT

Watching the World Cup races - all tech suits across the board (Well until Phelps shows up at least ) - People can tell me whatever they want. Swimmers like the Tech suits - if it was up to the swimmers, they would keep all current suits. Since Masters swimming is really run by the actual swimmers and not officials and coaches ..... I am not completely sure how USA-S works at the convention; I do know that there are many swimmers there who are delegates. I presume they have voting rights and some input into legislation? If the swimmers are so pro-suit, why did USA-S vote for an early implementation? I guess to have the whole season in the same suits, but they didn't need to use FINA-approved suits in SCY. Going only by the reactions of the swimmers I know personally around this area, I don't see nearly the same level of emotion -- one way or another -- about the suits as I do in masters. Maybe it is just a characteristic of the age bracket -- the quintessential shoulder-shrug of the teen -- but the swimmers mostly seem interested in clarity and fairness and could take or leave the suits themselves. There are some exceptions of course: the early adopters who liked the suits, and those who didn't like having to mess around with them. (There weren't many of either.) Coaches are different, most I know are fairly strongly against the suits. Probably understandable: the suits represent an element over which they have less control than training & meets, and many coaches are control freaks. Parents are different, too. Some will not like the expense, while others will like the opportunity to buy their child an advantage over the competition. I suspect the latter outnumber the former.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Former Member — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 05:24:24 GMT

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Midas — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:41:46 GMT

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Former Member — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:22:33 GMT

Desyphers Your post just reinforces why FINA should issue an all out ban on so called tech suits and why they should have never been allowed in the first place. In fact, it’s been quite well known for over 100 years that people can swim faster by using some kind of “technology” like simple flippers and paddles and new suit materials are just another form of mechanization. Accordingly any “new superhydrophobic textiles and the surface shape at the all-important viscous boundary layer” and their application to faster suits is nothing but an academic exercise in hydrodynamics and nothing of any real virtue for athletic swimming. Furthermore, setting new records through the use of "technologically assisted" swimming is viewed as being pretty "Hooo Huuum" and considered as more of a cheat sheet approach rather than a reflection of the actual skill of the swimmer. In fact, many question whether the new records should even be counted as legitimate times. The whole tech suit issue has become an utter monstrosity (and getting even worse with every new product that comes out) and grotesquely side tracking the whole objective of the sport. As I’ve said many times, FINA should just TIVO back to the rules for suits in effect in the 1970s and 80s -and leave them that way. Case closed. D2

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Former Member — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:27:36 GMT

The thing to think about when considering the votes of the international masters community is that I believe (not 100% sure but pretty sure) that USMS is the only major masters governing body that is independent of the elite national governing body. We tend to go the same direction as USA-S but we don't have to hence the discussion we're having here. So basically the same organizations that voted for the elite suit ban from other parts of the world are voting the same way on masters because, well, the boss told them to.That's how I read the situation anyways.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Chris Stevenson — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:19:59 GMT

Fans of tech suits: Don't despair, just be patient. I did a little literature search on the current state of research on superhydrophobic textiles. There is a lot happening there! Some is exactly what I thought might be involved - the use of nanaoparticles that end up on the surface of textile fibers, drastically reducing the coefficient of friction. There is a lot of research being done on this, and eventually I expect it will lead to suits that are just as good as the ones being banned, and virtually indistinguishable from today's textiles used for allowed suits. There was research reported in this month's Physics Today about modifications to the surface shape at the all-important viscous boundary layer that can reduce the friction even further. There are a lot of steps between today's research and tomorrow's ultra fast suits, but I have no doubt they will occur. Buoyancy may be a different matter, but I suspect there's a way there too. I will maintain again that once the technology cat is let out of the bag, you can't get it back in (unless we stop wearing suits altogether :afraid:). Today's suits being banned are just the fruits of the first wave of technology being applied to the fabrics. There will be more waves, and the current research base makes it obvious to me that they will succeed. It's not an un-natural thing either, as there are superhydrophobic plant surfaces, where the plant has evolved the property as part of its natural evolutionary process. I sincerely expect there to be a time when people look back and wonder why we bothered to ban today's suit technology, when it will come back anyway. It is not just the materials used that determines how low the friction is, it is the shape of the fibers, the structure of their surfaces, etc. The use of polyurethane and neoprene are just the simple, first order, techniques available to make suits faster. This area of research is important to more fields than just swimming (which is probably the least important), and I have no doubt it will bear fruit. I firmly believe fast suits will be back. It will just take a little while for the research to transfer all the way to production. Good for women -- though the current FS-Pro technology is actually pretty good IMO -- but not so important to men since there isn't much material left to modify. Of course, any "superhydrophobic" treatment you describe would most likely cause even a textile to fail the permeability requirement. Who says the suits work due to reduced coefficient of friction? I always understood that to be one of the least important factors. I believe buoyancy and compression are more important, but that's just my opinion. Buoyancy is out, the requirements become more strict, but I think the materials research you describe may be misplaced wrt to swimming faster. Rather than decrease friction, increase "stretchiness" and durability. Or, rather than waiting for faster suits, one could just try training harder/smarter...:)

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

dsyphers — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:36:25 GMT

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Former Member — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 08:00:59 GMT

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Former Member — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 07:27:31 GMT

I guess, but in my view that would be to do what the Masters Committee (the swimmers) recommends. Their only other criterion for deciding is cow-towing to the suit manufacturers. Even tech suit enthusiasts should be embarrassed by that. Weren't we all complaining about how Speedo's influence over the suit rules was abhorrent? Speedo got pistol whipped this by this last ruling, which was only fair. All the suit companies should play by the same rules. If B70, arena, tyr can't have their full body suits, then speedo shouldn't either.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Midas — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 07:06:31 GMT

How do you know? I was under the impression that the current international masters consensus was pro-suit. Do you know what the other federations recommended? (Or was your "they" meant to refer to FINA?) Midas, I meant the delegates did not vote on the compromise proposal that was submitted to FINA. That just came out of committee and went directly to FINA. I agree with Jim that those swimmer that never compete shouldn't really care or vote on what we wear. I understand Chris' point about potential competitors or theoretical "barriers to entry." But the idea that a workout-only swimmer with a purist bent could conceivably dictate what I compete in bugs the hell out of me. My guess is that most workout only swimmers don't care one way or another, so maybe you can take comfort in that. Obviously even occasional competitors should have a say. As far as the international consensus, here's what we know: (1) We (USMS) wanted a compromise, (2) at least a majority voted in favor of an outright suit ban. From that we can infer that somebody else proposed/favored an outright ban over a compromise or "anything goes." And I would suspect that at least a few of the other major international masters federations were represented at that meeting. I don't know how voting works, though (do we get a larger vote based on our relative size, or is every federation, regardless of size, on equal footing). I wish this information was made public and frankly its unacceptable that it isn't. This is our organization, isn't it? In any event, I think we can infer that there is not a pro-suit consensus in the international masters community. The FINA Bureau, I understand, is not made up of member federations but is instead made up of (you guessed it) bureaucrats (and ones with a terrible conflict of interest since they are paid in part by sponsorships by the suit manufacturers). We are not going to get more of a consensus view of the swimming community than what came out of the FINA committee. Having said that, I think despite the wording of the choice, many people probably believed it to mean that they would abide by the FINA decision. So even among the hard core we are about 40/30 split in favor of a suit ban with a large possible undecided contingent.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Former Member — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 06:55:04 GMT

I surely hope FINA does the right thing here. The "right thing" is only in the opinion of the beholder.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

ande — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 06:34:39 GMT

Essentially, the FINA Masters committee "punted." The USMS has more than 50,000 swimmers belonging to the organization, but only a small percentage of the members compete at the elite level. Statistically, roughly 10 percent will have a chance at being a top-10 swimmer in their age group. The actual number is probably closer to 5 percent-or-less since champions within the USMS such as Erik Hochstein, Rowdy Gaines, Jenny Cook and Ahelee Sue Olsen, generally dominate more than one event. Masters swimming is intended to be both a sport and a recreational activity. The majority of Masters swimmers are not there for record-book acknowledgment. Therefore, any FINA restrictions should take into account their particular goals and purposes for swimming. writer makes some great points ande

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Jim Clemmons — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 06:14:59 GMT

Quote: Originally Posted by jim clemmons What I have a challenge with is the fact that if you don't compete, I believe you should not get any kind of vote. Disagree strongly with this statement. Delegates are not supposed to vote for themselves but for the interests of their home LMSC, including current and potential competitors. (Whether they do this is another matter.) Heck, I even voted against my personal preference in that particular case. I agree that the voting needs to be in response to the overall interest of the majority, I just don't think we have a process of actually determining what that desire is so everybody's guessing. I believe if you throw out the non-competitors opinions though, we'd have a different result. At least that's my guess.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

ourswimmer — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 06:08:16 GMT

and 27% haven't decided since int'l masters hasn't decided - yet. And that is not really a decision on their (the respondents) part. Well, the poll question is "what should USMS do." So if you favor an international standard (as I do, because I like the idea of international Top Tens and WRs), then what USMS should do is whatever FINA eventually says FINA-member masters federations should do. FINA isn't perfect, but it's what we have. If the poll question had been, "what should FINA do" for masters, some of those 27% might have had an opinion. There again, though, some of those opinions might have been more about the value of uniformity between masters and open rules than about what suit rule would actually have been ideal.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

The Fortress — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:57:24 GMT

The remainder will do whatever FINA Masters decides, and they are leaning against the suits at the moment. How do you know? I was under the impression that the current international masters consensus was pro-suit. Do you know what the other federations recommended? (Or was your "they" meant to refer to FINA?) Midas, I meant the delegates did not vote on the compromise proposal that was submitted to FINA. That just came out of committee and went directly to FINA. I agree with Jim that those swimmer that never compete shouldn't really care or vote on what we wear. I understand Chris' point about potential competitors or theoretical "barriers to entry." But the idea that a workout-only swimmer with a purist bent could conceivably dictate what I compete in bugs the hell out of me.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Chris Stevenson — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:49:35 GMT

(And our informal poll shows the opposite.) It does? If you are referring to the poll in this thread, the 'against suit' vote is split between 2 or 3 responses. The first two (FINA or USA-S) are to all intents and purposes identical and clearly represent a vote against the suits; right now that is 41-42% of the vote, compared to 31-32% for the suits. The remainder will do whatever FINA Masters decides, and they are leaning against the suits at the moment. So you could even argue that it is roughly 70-30 against the suits. What I have a challenge with is the fact that if you don't compete, I believe you should not get any kind of vote. Disagree strongly with this statement. Delegates are not supposed to vote for themselves but for the interests of their home LMSC, including current and potential competitors. (Whether they do this is another matter.) Heck, I even voted against my personal preference in that particular case. But I do agree that there should have been some legit polling of the USMS membership, and that one of the questions should have been about whether a person had competed or was likely to do so in the future. For all the good it would have done, since FINA clearly is doing what it wants on this matter, regardless of USMS' position.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Jim Clemmons — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:46:47 GMT

Looking at said informal poll above (and acknowledging that it is not in any way scientific), about 70% of the respondents seem to favor a suit ban in one form or another. FINA, USA-S and the "Masters Consensus" all favor the ban... I read the poll differently. I read it as 41% favor the ban (at least by way of following the elite and USA-S decisions), 31% say leave it as is, and 27% haven't decided since int'l masters hasn't decided - yet. And that is not really a decision on their (the respondents) part. What if int'l decides to leave it as is?

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Midas — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:59:11 GMT

Our representatives/delegates didn't vote. (And our informal poll shows the opposite.) I didn't really understand the DQ point either. Just because a swimmer is not Top Ten or "elite," doesn't mean they don't want to have official times. Was it the "masters committee" that made the recommendation? I seem to recall it was some other committee, but am probably misremembering. Sure we voted. The FINA Masters committee is comprised of representatives of various masters organizations from around the world, including USMS. USMS definitely had a voice (and representation) at that meeting. In fact, USMS proposed "the compromise" to the FINA Masters committee. It seems that didn't fly and at least the majority of represented organizations voted for the suit ban. I'm sure you don't mean to imply that an informal poll on a website frequented primarily by hard core masters swimmers is in any way representative of general USMS membership views or even the views of those USMS members who compete.... or were you talking about the informal poll that Jim mentioned? In any case that one was about when the ban should take place, not whether, right? Looking at said informal poll above (and acknowledging that it is not in any way scientific), about 70% of the respondents seem to favor a suit ban in one form or another. FINA, USA-S and the "Masters Consensus" all favor the ban... And DQ'ing doesn't work. We all seem to agree on that. Maybe having a separate scoring division for technical suits would work? That would split up the competition, though, and maybe make it less fun for everybody.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Jim Clemmons — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:49:10 GMT

There was an informal vote taken at one of the House of Delegates meetings during convention. Wasn't really whether or not should tech suits should be allowed or not - just when implementation would take effect following adoption from another legislative body, USA-S or FINA - I don't recall. What I have a challenge with is the fact that if you don't compete, I believe you should not get any kind of vote. If all you're doing is working out, regularily or otherwise, and never competing in pool events why would you even care what others wear while they compete? I also believe that the vote taken at convention was influenced by non-competitors and that if their votes were eliminated (both sides - yay and nay) the vote would have gone closely the other direction.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

The Fortress — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:21:20 GMT

What WE may (and should) get is what our representatives voted for--parity with the elites and age groupers on this particular issue. Our representatives/delegates didn't vote. (And our informal poll shows the opposite.) I didn't really understand the DQ point either. Just because a swimmer is not Top Ten or "elite," doesn't mean they don't want to have official times. Was it the "masters committee" that made the recommendation? I seem to recall it was some other committee, but am probably misremembering.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Midas — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:11:56 GMT

I'm certain Midas agrees with this part. It isn't what he was alluding to, however. Speedo, if I remember right ('cause it's been a long time now) was complaining about the polyurethane suits coming into vogue and they were standing there with their mostly "woven" suit, behind the blocks, trying to figure out how to slow down the competition. :violin: Because of Speedo's attempts to control the rules, (to affect other suit makers), now look what we may get - nuttin honey. I didn't want them controlling the rules to their sole benefit and I don't want them controlling the rules to the mutual benefit of swimsuit manufacturers when the committee representing the actual swimmers has definitively come down on the other side of the issue. What they may (and should) get is nuttin. What WE may (and should) get is what our representatives voted for--parity with the elites and age groupers on this particular issue.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Chris Stevenson — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:02:08 GMT

I wonder if the article is right about the FINA Masters Committee "punting" or whether they essentially had no power but to make a recommendation to the FINA Bureau. I *think* -- but do not know for a fact -- that all they could do was recommend. While I do think the masters world seems more divided on the suit issue than other swimmers, I didn't think the article made much sense. What exactly was he recommending, that slower swimmers should be allowed to use the suits but not (say) Top Ten swimmers? But more questionable (in my mind) was the assumption that new or less competitive swimmers would be the most eager to use the suits. Really? I've always felt that the majority of enthusiasm for the suits came from among the 10% that go to nationals and chase TT listings and records.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Jim Clemmons — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 03:55:22 GMT

Speedo got pistol whipped this by this last ruling, which was only fair. All the suit companies should play by the same rules. If B70, arena, tyr can't have their full body suits, then speedo shouldn't either. I'm certain Midas agrees with this part. It isn't what he was alluding to, however. Speedo, if I remember right ('cause it's been a long time now) was complaining about the polyurethane suits coming into vogue and they were standing there with their mostly "woven" suit, behind the blocks, trying to figure out how to slow down the competition. :violin: Because of Speedo's attempts to control the rules, (to affect other suit makers), now look what we may get - nuttin honey.

RE: What should USMS do about the suits?

Midas — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 03:00:29 GMT

The "right thing" is only in the opinion of the beholder. I guess, but in my view that would be to do what the Masters Committee (the swimmers) recommends. Their only other criterion for deciding is cow-towing to the suit manufacturers. Even tech suit enthusiasts should be embarrassed by that. Weren't we all complaining about how Speedo's influence over the suit rules was abhorrent?