I Can't Use My Suit?

Really? Don't a lot of people come to Masters after a number of years of not competing? Sure. So? I am all for increasing participation. But I suppose I am not willing to endure tech suits so that someone might compete in two meets every decade. I am also not at all convinced that the suits increase participation, anyway; there is anecdotal information both ways. 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 said "most people," one exception doesn't disprove my point. I have been to many, many masters practices. I can count on one hand the number of times I've been to a practice where a male wore a full body suit. Every once in awhile I'll see someone in swim trunks, though not in the faster lanes. I'm not saying there aren't people with modesty issues. Those people usually find sports other than swimming to participate in.

Sure. So? I am all for increasing participation. But I suppose I am not willing to endure tech suits so that someone might compete in two meets every decade. I am also not at all convinced that the suits increase participation, anyway; there is anecdotal information both ways. Again, I'm not discussing tech suits; I'm discussing non-tech suits that have more body coverage (the original question). I guess I have more sympathy for a person who is uncomfortable revealing a lot of skin than I do for a person who wants to go faster in a suit. I said "most people," one exception doesn't disprove my point. I have been to many, many masters practices. I can count on one hand the number of times I've been to a practice where a male wore a full body suit. Every once in awhile I'll see someone in swim trunks, though not in the faster lanes. I'm not saying there aren't people with modesty issues. Those people usually find sports other than swimming to participate in. Sure, one example doesn't disprove your point. But maybe more would show up if they knew they didn't have to wear a tiny suit. I guess I'd rather encourage more participation by everyone, including those that are overweight or are in the slower lanes. I don't think it's necessary to say "find another sport" when we could just allow people to wear suits with more coverage.

But maybe more would show up if they knew they didn't have to wear a tiny suit. when we could just allow people to wear suits with more coverage. Um, I'm confused. This seems to be a circular argument. If they don't know what is allowed, then why is what being allowed even relevant?

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. Hi Lee - I was looking forward to seeing you again in Atlanta. I'm glad your back is better and that your swimming is coming along. Puerto Rico is around the corner and I hope you can make that meet. Best wishes, Philipp

Again, I'm not discussing tech suits; I'm discussing non-tech suits that have more body coverage (the original question). I guess I have more sympathy for a person who is uncomfortable revealing a lot of skin than I do for a person who wants to go faster in a suit. Sure, one example doesn't disprove your point. But maybe more would show up if they knew they didn't have to wear a tiny suit. I guess I'd rather encourage more participation by everyone, including those that are overweight or are in the slower lanes. I don't think it's necessary to say "find another sport" when we could just allow people to wear suits with more coverage. I'm not seeing it. If this group of people is so modest that they need to cover their bodies in practice, where are they? I haven't seen them. There are no rules against wearing any body suit you want in practice, no barriers to participation in that manner. So I guess you are talking about people who are okay with jammers or briefs in practice but not in meets. Again I ask: why would that be? It seems inconsistent to me. I am not trying to be callous in saying "find another sport." I just think that people who participate in swimming tend to be those who are less embarrassed to be seen in (brace yourself) swim suits. Allowing woolen or cotton body suits would do little to broaden participation in swim meets, IMHO. And I am happy to report that I see plenty of overweight people or people from the "slow lanes" in meets.

What is a "farmer john" suit? :confused:

Calling someone a cheater is a moral judgment. The only way one can conclude that asking if it is okay to swim a race in a LZR expecting to be DQ'd is the moral equivalent of hiding and denying steroid use is if you defer to authority and "rules" as your moral guide. I am not saying you are right or wrong about those being equivalent, I am just illuminating where you stand on moral guidance. The reason that I view things differently than you is because I do not defer to rules as my moral guide. I think there are plenty of times when an individual can use their own judgment to determine what is right and wrong even if society or the "rules" disagree with them. Agree. Theoretically, if you wear a LZR expecting a DQ, have alerted and/or cleared it with a ref and having informed swimmers adjacent to you, what is the problem exactly? That person is a "cheater"?! Many people use meets as training tools, as Craig pointed out above. And there is no need to be pilloried if you get a 50 fly split in a 200 IM, though some people seem to object to this. Why? I have no clue .. it seems like nit picking.

Proof that there are people who have a rules based sense of morality. (and) Indication that you are confused about what that even means. Wrong on both counts. Fortress is, too. I was merely pointing out that an accusation of cheating is not (necessarily) a statement about your morality, as you claim. It can be merely a statement of fact, if you intentionally dive in with an illegal suit, or intentionally convert your 100 IM to a 100 fly. I haven't said anything about the ethics of it.

The reason that I view things differently than you is because I do not defer to rules as my moral guide. I think there are plenty of times when an individual can use their own judgment to determine what is right and wrong even if society or the "rules" disagree with them. Next time you get DQ'd for a 1-hand-touch, tell the official that you shouldn't be DQ'd because your moral guide said it was OK for you to do a 1-hand-touch and that your moral guide supersedes their "rule book". Let me know how that goes. -Rick

Of course, this pre-supposes that officials actually know and follow the rule book ... (This has not always been my experience.)