Isn't it a little silly to urge people to wear socks in the pool? Body suits have been around for a decade and are perfectly normal competition attire.
Yeah, I agree with you that swimmers are not generally in a position to be modest given the nature of our sport. I guess I've just heard enough swimmers raise it as an issue now, that I can't dismiss it as bogus.
I didn't mean to suggest that marketing USMS was the only reasoning behind Rob's "stirring it up" suggestion. But do you think, as you suggest, that popularity should be the driving force behind setting competitive rules? Purists wouldn't like that!
Would it be legal for a person with modesty concerns to wear a super compressive waterproof t-shirt? Or are t-shirts of any sort banned by the rule that goes into effect in June? I thought they were ...
Yes it is silly; that was tongue-in-cheek. And my way of saying that "coverage" should not affect women swimsuits at all. I don't see how anything that Rob says is argument that women swimsuits should change from the current FINA-legal standard. (I also notice that there were only male "superstars" in attendance in Atlanta.)
Yes, t-shirts are illegal right now. But if modesty is truly the issue, than people who are embarrassed should be satisfied by a solution that does not provide a competitive advantage.
For the most part I do not hold with the "purity" argument, though I do think there should be one set of rules. As long as FINA said the suits were okay, I bit my tongue. I do not think much of the "masters are different" argument at all.
I've always thought masters swimmers were psychologically addicted to their suits. Rob is fanning the dying embers of that addiction, IMO. As far as I can tell, I don't believe it is in USMS' best interest. Time to move on.
Isn't it a little silly to urge people to wear socks in the pool? Body suits have been around for a decade and are perfectly normal competition attire.
Yeah, I agree with you that swimmers are not generally in a position to be modest given the nature of our sport. I guess I've just heard enough swimmers raise it as an issue now, that I can't dismiss it as bogus.
I didn't mean to suggest that marketing USMS was the only reasoning behind Rob's "stirring it up" suggestion. But do you think, as you suggest, that popularity should be the driving force behind setting competitive rules? Purists wouldn't like that!
Would it be legal for a person with modesty concerns to wear a super compressive waterproof t-shirt? Or are t-shirts of any sort banned by the rule that goes into effect in June? I thought they were ...
Yes it is silly; that was tongue-in-cheek. And my way of saying that "coverage" should not affect women swimsuits at all. I don't see how anything that Rob says is argument that women swimsuits should change from the current FINA-legal standard. (I also notice that there were only male "superstars" in attendance in Atlanta.)
Yes, t-shirts are illegal right now. But if modesty is truly the issue, than people who are embarrassed should be satisfied by a solution that does not provide a competitive advantage.
For the most part I do not hold with the "purity" argument, though I do think there should be one set of rules. As long as FINA said the suits were okay, I bit my tongue. I do not think much of the "masters are different" argument at all.
I've always thought masters swimmers were psychologically addicted to their suits. Rob is fanning the dying embers of that addiction, IMO. As far as I can tell, I don't believe it is in USMS' best interest. Time to move on.
