I Can't Use My Suit?

Well, I'm coming back to swim at Master's meets after a 5 year hiatus (surgeries, etc) and find that I cannot wear my "Farmer John" suit bought in 2000 and worn in 4 previous national meets (except this spring). Not a "tech" suit by any means but a hell of a beer-gut bra! Not sure I would get on the blocks without it so the hiatus may continue. Is it worth alienating us "plus-sized" guys over this silly rule? I suppose it will give me yet another reason to dump some weight. Looks like those other 50+ breaststrokers won't get beat by this fat guy any time soon. Anyone else out there feel the same? I know most of you out there don't have this problem but to have a rule that reduces participation seems counterproductive. Lee Rider Fort Bragg, CA Seems like most people are missing Lee's original question. We might disagree over whether the rule against tech suits is silly or not, but does it make sense to have a rule against non-tech "farmer john" suits, especially if the rule discourages some from participating?

does it make sense to have a rule against non-tech "farmer john" suits, especially if the rule discourages some from participating? I suppose one way that it makes sense is if it is difficult to distinguish a "non-tech" from a "tech" suit. For men, anyway, the rule as written is relatively easy to enforce. You can also argue that even non-tech body suits provide a competitive advantage by making a flabby person more streamlined through compression. As far as discouraging participation, based on the heated arguments from both camps I think you can argue that any rule regulating or allowing swim suits will do that one way or another. To be blunt (and I'll probably catch grief about this) I'm just not that impressed by this statement from someone who hasn't competed in five years. Just saying. Most people who suffer from "modesty" issues (or whatever you want to call it) don't seem to have a problem wearing much more revealing suits in practice; few of them wear full-coverage suits in practice. So why is it an issue for meets? The strangers who are present? This is an honest question, not a put-down. There are definitely times where I'm not always proud of my physique, but the bottom line is that swimming is simply not the sport of choice for those who are ashamed of their bodies. I think the other issue of fairness for "equal coverage" for men and women is silly. Life isn't fair, and I think generally women get the short end of the stick more than men, so I don't mind a reversal here. Aside from the issue of modesty (which requires upper body coverage for women), it is harder for most fit women to be streamlined than fit men, for obvious reasons, so unequal coverage seems warranted.

Lee, Come on out to nats and race just for fun. We can compare beer guts:D I'm right next to you in the 50 ***, heat 16, lane 7. Wish I could Mark. I'm swimming pretty well and think I could beat my seed times, but I have to attend a college graduation for a family member. Have fun and good luck.

Not according to my dictionary: cheat v. intr. 2. To violate rules deliberately, as in a game or 5. to violate rules or regulations Proof that there are people who have a rules based sense of morality. (and) Indication that you are confused about what that even means.

Allen, I would agree that if you had permission to swim as an exhibition race it would be allowed and you would likely get a time. It still would not count for place in the event or for team points. What would the USMS stance be if a meet included an exhibition race or races allowing tech suits as a separate event(s)? Would this meet be sanctioned? At the B.C. Provincial Championships masters meet a week and a half ago there was a pink flamingo relay: web.mac.com/.../_DSC9295.png

To be blunt (and I'll probably catch grief about this) I'm just not that impressed by this statement from someone who hasn't competed in five years. Just saying. Really? Don't a lot of people come to Masters after a number of years of not competing? Most people who suffer from "modesty" issues (or whatever you want to call it) don't seem to have a problem wearing much more revealing suits in practice; few of them wear full-coverage suits in practice. So why is it an issue for meets? The strangers who are present? This is an honest question, not a put-down. What makes you so sure it's not an issue for practice? I recently was trying to talk a friend of mine to coming to a workout, but he didn't want to wear one of those "little suits."

I suspect you would be able to swim if you went to the Clerk of the Course and requested to swim an exhibition race and let the others in the heat know what you were doing. To the best of my knowledge, I don't believe the USMS rules make any accommodation for exhibition swims. -Rick

It is only "cheating" because someone wrote a rule that outlawed a $575 suit that I only got to wear once and was not consulted with in the matter. Let me translate your statement. It is ... cheating because ... a rule ... outlawed a ... suit .... Besides, there is a difference between breaking a rule, which leads to disqualification, and cheating. I agree that there is a difference between a disqualification and cheating. In my book, they are both due to breaking the rules. If you break the rules and get caught, it's a disqualification. If you break the rules and don't get caught, it's cheating. Either way, you broke the rules. Here's the deal. If you want to play in this sandbox, then you have to abide by the rules of this sandbox. If you don't like the rules of this sandbox, then go find your own sandbox, and you can play by yourself. -Rick

What would the USMS stance be if a meet included an exhibition race or races allowing tech suits as a separate event(s)? Would this meet be sanctioned? This is allowed. It is covered in rule 202.1.1(F)(3). Sanctioned events may include nonconforming swimming events so long as they are conducted in a safe manner. Nonconforming swimming events are events not defined in article 102.5 or that would typically result in the disqualification of participants as defined in article 102.15. USMS records and Top 10 times shall not be maintained in nonconforming events except for initial distances and relay leadoff split times for distances that are also events defined in article 102.5. So you could certainly have a 'tech suit shootout' event. I think you could even allow it to score points for team awards, etc. (I don't see a rule to prohibit that.) But the times don't count for anything. -Rick

To the best of my knowledge, I don't believe the USMS rules make any accommodation for exhibition swims. To clarify this statement in contrast to what I said right after that.... I don't believe USMS rules allows for an exhibition swim within an otherwise official swimming event. It does allow for a meet to setup fully exhibition events, where the entire event is either unscored, or "non-conforming", or both. For example, we do an unscored 800 free relay at the New England SCY meet. This is because USMS rules also don't allow for time trials, so we have to have an official 800 free relay so that people can swim it officially for a time/record/etc. But we don't score it so that we don't get 4 hours of 800 free relays trying to score team points. Technically speaking, you could take advantage of the discretion of the Referee to swim multiple events in the same heat to save time. So you could have: Event #1: Mixed 100 free ("official") Event #2: Mixed 100 free with tech suits ("non-conforming") Technically speaking, you could have swimmers in both of those events swim in the same heat, as long as everyone in Event #1 were in adjacent lanes, and everyone in Event #2 were in adjacent lanes, and there was an empty lane between the swimmers. -Rick