No decision is written in stone or cut and dry. I don't understand why it has to be a "dead issue" if there is support for or a valid reason for change. Just my viewpoint; uniformity for the sake of uniformity holds no appeal for me. And I find it kinda compelling that SCY could be unique and feature a different jazzy set of rules than the other courses. Those who hate SCY and tech suits (e.g., Tom) could swim FINA distances and those who love tech suits can concentrate on SCY if they are so inclined. Or everyone can do both without whining. Could be the best of both worlds and offer the most options.
One thing that makes me laugh is that, when *FINA* was the one doing the waffling, everyone (esp the tech suit lovers) was all over their case, how they couldn't make a decision and stick with it, etc. But now "nothing should be set in stone."
At convention there will probably be all sorts of claims about how tech suits increase participation (or not). A good example is that in the interview Rob implies that attendance at nationals was high because of the suits.
What I would love to see is a broad, professionally designed survey that attempts to answer that question. The majority of our members have no plans to compete and could care less. So I would like answers to the following questions:
-- for "newbies" (ie, those who are thinking of competing but haven't done so), would the tech suits be a draw or a deterrent?
-- for those who compete regularly or semi-regularly, would the tech suits increase their enjoyment of the sport and/or make them more or less likely to continue to compete?
I think the whole "FINA doesn't care about SCY" argument is flimsy, though. No other rules are different, that I know about. (I sure would love to get rid of the 15m rule, for example.)
For the same reason I've always loved the suits: they're fun, they're fast, I love to swim in them, and I prefer max coverage & max technology.
EXACTLY!
Plus... I went to a LC masters meet the weekend before Atlanta and didn't have a new suit to wear. I didn't care about the times or lack of a tech suit since I was off to nationals.
But - it was such a weird - no horrible feeling getting up on the blocks in a regular suit, with it all hanging out, after all this time in a full coverage suit!
There were plenty of other athletes doing their best to suck it up too.
Not that we have to look pretty in masters, but we should feel comfortable.
I do like coverage at meets and am at least happy the girls get to wear a knee to shoulder suit with the new rules.
Wish our guys could as well - its only fair.
With supplies certain to dwindle, if USMS decides to allow them back for SCY season I will have to seriously decide if every meet I attend is "suitworthy."
Thinking about this, the cost is going to be a concern. The manufacturers, unless they're complete idiots, have figured out that adult masters swimmers are willing to pay up to $500 for a swim suit. (Granted it is a limited market.) Even the "new" legal suits are $200 for jammers! That is insanity. You know they make them for about $30, right?
I think we shot ourselves in the foot cost-wise. And unless they're prepared to keep replacing ripped and torn suits, like B70 did, I'm not going to be real happy.
:2cents: (towards a $500 suit!)
With supplies certain to dwindle, if USMS decides to allow them back for SCY season I will have to seriously decide if every meet I attend is "suitworthy."Presumably, if USMS does allow them back, some suit maker might try to corner the masters market and still supply bodysuits.
I think the whole "FINA doesn't care about SCY" argument is flimsy, though.
Also the argument that tech suits encourage elite swimmers (Jones, Gangloff, etc.) to attend USMS Nationals. OK, I'll buy the argument that it did this time, but will this trend continue? It's sort of a novelty this year since the suits were banned for everyone recently. Not only that, but do we really need to change the rules so a handful of Olympians might show up at Nationals? I love seeing these guys/gals at Nationals as much as the next person, but I don't think we should be changing rules to encourage this.
One thing that makes me laugh is that, when *FINA* was the one doing the waffling, everyone (esp the tech suit lovers) was all over their case, how they couldn't make a decision and stick with it, etc.
I think the whole "FINA doesn't care about SCY" argument is flimsy, though. No other rules are different, that I know about. (I sure would love to get rid of the 15m rule, for example.)
Are you sure about that? I seem to recall the biggest caterwauling came from the purists when FINA switched its position from "tech suits allowed if they meet XYZ standards" to "tech suits are allowed, no holds barred." That's when the Jaked/Arena flood began.
USMS has already deviated from FINA once. Continuing the deviation in this respect is not necessarily flip flopping. From what I have gleaned, coverage is simply a huge issue for masters for various reasons (see Wookie's recent comment), whether you agree with that fact or not.
And I don't see, logically, how the fact that the rules generally have been the same supports the the notion that FINA cares about masters SCY competition in the US. From what I recall, they barely cared about SCM and LCM FINA masters competition ...
Those who think tech suits benefited them more than they did their competitors will be sad to see them go.
Those who think their relative performance will improve against their competitors when the suits are banned (that is, absolutely, stake-through-the-heart killed for the last time, no sequels contemplated) will be glad to see them go.
Those who compete only against themselves, or claim to, will probably be sad to see them go, or claim to.
I think we all know what category we think we are in. But we could be wrong.
It will take some time, and a few more years of TT results, before we know if the suits helped us, or our competitors, more.
I do find it interesting that on Chris's age-graded scale, I got my all-time highest ranking (around a 96) this year in the 200 freestyle. That time (1:54.89) is currently hovering by the most tenuous of threads in the 10th spot in the "event rankings" in the 55-59 age group.
It's made me think, perhaps wishfully, that the suits are helping others more than they are helping me (and I acknowledge they are helping me tremendously.)
As a Masters swimmer, I'm definitely looking forward to 2012. I'll already be there, and not sure what shape I'll be in physically after a week of working for Swimming World at Trials. But having taken a couple of dips in the pool in 2008, I can tell you it's a very nice experience that should not be missed. And with 13,000 seats available, there won't be any shortage of space!
I was looking at the photo gallery from 2008 Trials and the competition pool was a ten-lane pool with only eight lanes used, even in preliminaries. The two end lanes did not even have blocks. For USMS Nationals, we should use all ten lanes, like at Atlanta nationals last week. I'm putting this out there early, so that we don't end up with those two extra blocks not being installed in the temporary venue :)
Edit: four extra blocks. It's a long course pool, there are blocks at each end....
