What should USMS do about the suits?

I'm not surprised at the knee-to-shoulder part for both men and women. After all, why should women be the only ones who get to have some compression of that ubiquitous stomach flab? (Did I hear someone say "speak for yourself"?) In the end it's probably an equity issue which has staying power. And then I'm back to the role of technology -- it may be taking a temporary vacation until the materials specialists re-tool, but it's not going away unless the specifications are unimaginably detailed (which I doubt). If you can improve performance and be within the rules, then there is money to be made, so people will probably try, and probably succeed.

I voted for international consensus because that seems fairest,but I really hope the rules go to jammers for men.I'd not vote that way because the reason I'd like it because it is to my advantage.Swimming in a techsuit is like swimming in a shorter pool.I do better relative to my main competition in LCM than SCY and anything that "lengthens" the pool is to my benefit.I bring this up because the suits are not neutral in that they benefit some more than others.That said if they remain legal I will buy the fastest one I can.

Thanks Chris S for the update. Very interesting. My two cents: Masters swimming has a different constitutency and distinct considerations from elite or age group swimming and therefore should not necessarily follow FINA/USAS rules for elite swimming. :oldman: Encouraging participation and having fun are key goals – suit policy could (and arguably should) reflect, inter alia, these goals. If the policies turn out to be different, as per the recommendation, the purists and "elites" of masters will remain free to compete in suits which conform to the FINA rules for elites (if they want time comparability with "real" swimming) or in masters rules suits if they want competitive parity. (Many already compete in USAS.) It would be good to have an understanding of the views across masters swimming (and competing) community as a basis for the recommended policy. Net, I am in favor of the "compromise" rules as put forward by USMS (notwithstanding the "purity" of the Luddite counter - revolutionaries.;) ) As far as defining the textile materials, I am inclined to think a simpler set of parameters would lead to better regulation. I would suggest weight and dry displacement be limited.

Any mention of legskins for guys?

As masters swimmers we have a major issue with FINA and many other swimming federations where masters are represented as a small part of aquatic sports generally - as a result, masters are an afterthought, and not taken very seriously in comparison,eg, with elite. In contrast USMS is a very large and exclusively masters organization. Therefore I believe it is important that USMS takes a strong lead internationally representing masters swimmers' views on the suits, perhaps starting with a survey to strengthen the case being made.

Rob Butcher came to the Swimming World.TV studio here at the USAS convention and told us about the recommendation USMS (via USAS) is giving to FINA. What Chris detailed is exactly what Rob said. The interview with Rob will be part of "The Morning Swim Show" Saturday morning on www.swimmingworld.com and also available on Swimming World.TV.

Here is the process. The FINA committee might accept this, might amend it, might disregard it, or whatever. Then somebody in USMS (I think the Board of Directors and the Rules Committee, but I might have that wrong) will decide whether to accept FINA's ruling and when to implement it. Implementation will probably be sooner rather than later (ie, certainly before SCY nationals, perhaps even before the end of the year). They won't wait until next Convention, for example. One of the Rules Committee members I talked to had an interesting comment about FINA. He said that they regard masters swimming as a completely different sport from "regular" swimming, just like diving and water polo and synchro swimming (and yes, open water swimming) are different sports. This is their mentality in approaching regulations for masters and OW swimming. Their timeline is so vague ... How soon after the Sept 25-26 meeting will FINA make its announcement of masters rules? Will USMS then convene a meeting and make their own announcement? What do you mean by implement precisely? That the "suit rule" will be effective at the time of announcement? So the suits may NOT be legal through the end of the year for masters even though they are for USS swimmers? I have to admit I'll be pissed if I can't wear/wear out my tech suit through the end of the year and SCM season while the rest of Europe does ... Interesting "process" ... I'm not terrifically impressed with the"compromise" proposal ... So we ideally want to be a kinda like a USS swimmer but not really?

I voted for international consensus because that seems fairest,but I really hope the rules go to jammers for men.I'd not vote that way because the reason I'd like it because it is to my advantage.Swimming in a techsuit is like swimming in a shorter pool.I do better relative to my main competition in LCM than SCY and anything that "lengthens" the pool is to my benefit.I bring this up because the suits are not neutral in that they benefit some more than others.That said if they remain legal I will buy the fastest one I can. I believe you own every tech suit ever made!:)

And what about Bob Bowman, also paid by Speedo, who had this to say: “Everything in the world evolves. You just can’t go back to that simpler time.” This is the problem I have with trying to put this particular genie back in the bottle. Unless your rules on fabrics are going to stipulate which materials the suits can be made of, AND the fabrication process by which they are assembled, AND the fabrication process by which the materials are made, AND the exact stoichiometry for the material, etc., etc., then you will have a rule that stipulates only part of the picture. Technological innovation is incredible when it comes to finding a way around rules that are not completely defined in the way described above. Example: When is nylon not nylon? I see no reason why I couldn't (in principle) come up with a process that makes nylon with a small impurity in it ('s just nylon with a small impurity - possibly more pure than the nylon used to make "regular" suits. My point is that once technology is let out of the bag, it's here to stay. The only way to stuff it back into the bag is to have the kind of specificity in the rules governing suits that any organization is highly unlikely to make, and probably doesn't have the technical background to conceive of in the first place. They can go ahead and make the rules, but technology is very adept at finding a way around the rules.

This is the problem I have with trying to put this particular genie back in the bottle. Unless your rules on fabrics are going to stipulate which materials the suits can be made of, AND the fabrication process by which they are assembled, AND the fabrication process by which the materials are made, AND the exact stoichiometry for the material, etc., etc., then you will have a rule that stipulates only part of the picture. Technological innovation is incredible when it comes to finding a way around rules that are not completely defined in the way described above. Example: When is nylon not nylon? I see no reason why I couldn't (in principle) come up with a process that makes nylon with a small impurity in it ('s just nylon with a small impurity - possibly more pure than the nylon used to make "regular" suits. My point is that once technology is let out of the bag, it's here to stay. The only way to stuff it back into the bag is to have the kind of specificity in the rules governing suits that any organization is highly unlikely to make, and probably doesn't have the technical background to conceive of in the first place. They can go ahead and make the rules, but technology is very adept at finding a way around the rules. True,thats why the size restrictions are important as long as they want to limit technology.For men there is just not that much difference that a Jammer can make.