With all due respect to Ande, who tried to get me to buy a tech suit at Nationals (Ande, thanks for the compliment when you guessed my size, but I would wear a 36 in a tech suit, not a 26.), I respectfully submit my top ten reasons for hating tech suits:
1. $$$ Too expensive. I feel my money was better spent at The Athlete Village, having a video analysis done of my breaststroke. Implementing the tips I picked up from the online coach will help me to swim faster faster than a tech suit.
2. Struggle to put on. In the time it took a couple of gals in the locker room at Nationals to get their suit half-way on, I was out of my street clothes, into my Speedo Endurance suit, and had my bag unpacked and into the locker. And, I had expended a lot less energy than they did. I would rather spend my energy in the pool… :D
3. Too fragile. See Allen Stark’s post about his tech suit blowout- right before his event. I would be steaming big time if I had spent a heap of $ on a tech suit, then have it rip on me. :bitching:
Speaking of steaming…
4. The heat factor. I have heat intolerance medical issues (I love the heat mentally; my body hates it in a serious way), so being encased in a tech suit would exasperate the situation and possibly negate any gain I had made wearing the suit anyway. I was in Sunday’s last event (200 breaststroke) and was wasted by that point, after spending three days in the heat and humidity. :badday:
5. I want an apples-to-apples comparison of my times. I (barely) beat my seed times in two of my events and dropped my time about 2 seconds in another. If I had worn a tech suit and improved my times even more, would that have been a fair comparison- or would it have been the suit? I think a tech suit would have provided a false sense of success and an inaccurate indication as to my level of improvement since my previous meet. Then, post-tech suit, if my times got worse how would I feel then? I wonder how many of the swimmers will feel when they see (possibly) seconds being added back on to their times, post-tech suit? A false sense of success followed by huge disappointment is going to play on many minds, I’m sure. :confused:
6. Wearing a tech suit only exposes the arms and feet. I like to FEEL of the water with more than that. :agree:
7. Claustrophobic; too confining. I love summer, because I get to live in shorts and t-shirts. The less on me the better; it's more comfortable. :)
8. My current ranking #130 of 266 in the 50 breaststroke doesn’t put me in a position to be winning any medals or awards. Where would a tech suit put me in the rankings? #125? #120?? Even #100? Big deal! :rolleyes:
9. Personally, modesty isn’t an issue. At 48, I’m comfortable in my 5’71/2, 123lb. frame. And, I was comfortable in my not-as-fit 150lb pound frame, when I spent six months in Australia, back in 1984, where I spent some of the time relaxing on their nude beaches. Why? Because Aussies are comfortable in their skin and not hung up on their bodies like Americans are. Nude and topless beaches are common in Australia and you will see bodies of all shapes and sizes there. And, nobody cares. :)
Speaking of bodies…
10. Visualize Mark Spitz…1972 Olympics… in a Speedo… :D I was only 10 years old, but, believe me, my eyes were GLUED to the TV- and not necessarily only while he was swimming. Need I say more? Not all Masters swimmers look as good as Mark Spitz in a Speedo, but I saw PLENTY of AARP eligible swimmers out of their tech suits at Nationals that had absolutely stunning bodies- male and female! And, for those who weren’t? So what???
That concludes my :2cents: on the subject!
Beats the false sense of moral superiority exhibited by those who rail against the suits.
I only "rail against the suits" for ME. See my response to Fort. But, playing devil's advocate, I believe there WILL be some disappointed swimmers out there...
ElaineK, about your #4: a couple summers ago I wear the suit to an sunny outdoor nationals (Portland) and was absolutely AMAZED at how much heat these things soak up from the sun when they are dry. I was wearing a B70. (It is much more tolerable when the suit is wet, but they also dry quickly.) This is a real factor to consider when wearing the "rubber-style" tech suits in an outdoor meet.
And it made me think that one of the use for "dead" suits would be for solar panels...
That reason along makes tech suits a no-go for me, even in an INDOOR meet. Rubber-style or ANYstyle, the less of me encased the better to keep cool. I made the mistake of not taking my cap off right away after I finished my last event on Sunday and I payed for it the next couple of days... :bitching:
P.S. I like your "dead" suit idea! :D
I don't think anyone actually read the list. We've been over this before, and that's a lot of bright blue Comic Sans.
Hey, I'm a newbie; I joined in February. I missed out on (and unaware of) most of the tech suit discussion, so, sheeeesh, give me a break.
AND, I LIKE BRIGHT BLUE COMIC SANS!
:D
No, not purist; just PRACTICAL, for me. Leslie, I know you're addicted to your tech suit and that's cool with me. You're a Top 10 swimmer so you have valid reasons for wanting to be as competitive as possible; especially if your competition is wearing a tech suit. If I had been in a tech suit it would have started a wave of :laugh2::laugh2::laugh2: throughout the Aquatic Center! :blush:
You go girl! :cheerleader:
P.S. Sorry if my "drivel" offended you. :)
There's another dirty word anti-technies like to throw out: addict.
Tech suits are not the province of top ten. They're for all.
I only "rail against the suits" for ME. See my response to Fort. But, playing devil's advocate, I believe there WILL be some disappointed swimmers out there...
If you only rail for you, then why tell the rest of us how disappointed we might be after the suits? Have you ever raced in a suit?
And, I take great exception with the use of the word "addict." I think we are addicted to fast swimming.
There's another dirty word anti-technies like to throw out: addict.
Tech suits are not the province of top ten. They're for all.
I thought I was quoting you- sorry. I remember you writing somewhere that you were "semi-addicted" to your tech suit. Oooops; sorry if I misquoted you. And, I am not against tech suits; I'm against them just for ME.
Sure, tech suits are/were for anyone who chose to wear them; no problems there. I'm just saying I don't feel like I should be in a tech suit, given my (low) skill level. I have a long way to go to improve my stroke and gain all I can from that, before even considering a tech suit. But, even then, because of health issues, I would have to take a pass...
If you only rail for you, then why tell the rest of us how disappointed we might be after the suits? Have you ever raced in a suit?
And, I take great exception with the use of the word "addict." I think we are addicted to fast swimming.
Oh, pleeeezzzz. You can't deny that SOME swimmers MAY feel disappointed. I was playing devil's advocate; exploring the issue from all sides. No, I have not raced in a tech suit; I just joined Masters in February. And, for all the other reasons I stated, I haven't (and won't) race in a tech suit. The heat intolerance issue kills the deal.
Sorry if I offended you, but I used the word "addict" quoting from previous posts. I thought I rememberd Fort saying she was semi-addicted to her tech suit. I picked it up from there...
Remember, Geek, these are MY top ten reasons; not reasons for anybody else. I am pro-choice, in more ways than one... :D If you, Fort, or anybody else want to wear tech suits, that's fine by me. Go for it! :cheerleader: You have valid reasons for wanting to wear them and I have valid reasons for taking a pass...
Didn't we already see the leaders decide not to follow H.O.D votes? Didn't the leaders of usms decide to not follow the rest of the aquatic nations by allowing suits to stay, even after our delegates said the suits rules should follow FINA rulings?
Not exactly, no. The Executive Committee and the Rules Committee can act on changes that occur between meetings. I believe (but would have to look it up) that the Rules Committee has to approve such "emergency" rule changes by a supermajority.
The HOD never voted on a motion involving technical suits. There was a straw poll of the HOD (I'm going from memory here) on when/whether to implement a tech suit ban if FINA decided to implement one. It was not a binding vote; the Rules Committee wanted to get a sense of the will of the HOD. At the time it was thought that FINA would act fairly soon (October) on the tech suit issue and the HOD voted by a fairly narrow majority to implement a ban immediately (across all courses) if FINA did so. (The next largest vote total wanted to wait until June 1 for SCY; that's how I voted, by the way.)
But as you know, FINA waited until mid-January and by that time the SCY season was more than half over. The Rules committee was still divided on the issue, a minority wanting to implement a ban (in SCY) immediately but a majority thinking that it would be unfair to implement the ban so far into the season. The Executive Committee agreed with their recommendation of a June 1 implementation.
Sometimes things come up between HOD sessions that need to be acted upon; that's why it was called an "emergency" rule change. (BTW, if they had done nothing, the FINA rules would have ruled all our competitions, including SCY; that's the "default" option.) The people on the Executive Committee are elected by the HOD to represent (all of) us in those circumstances.
So it seems reasonably democratic to me. Limiting votes to "competitors" is problematic at best. It isn't as if we have only physicians voting on health care policy and climatologists voting on global warming policy, though there are undoubtedly some who think that should be the case.
I'm pretty sure that this qualifies a a whine.
I think I'll just agree with this statement by stumpwanker and be done with this thread.
Former Member
Mr. Wolf,
I have never called myself a purist. I was branded that by those who disagree with my stance. I have called myself a Luddite, semi in jest.
Also, I'm highly certain that competitors in the 1960's would have a different one from yours and mine.
Interesting, since we seem to be at opposite side of the equation, I guess you feel that swimmers in the 60's would fall in the middle. My guess is that they would poo-poo times done in tech suits. It is apples and oranges.
Purity can only be defined (if it even can be) in the moment of the definition and changes as soon as you define it.
The Great Wookster must have helped you with that one.
It is my fault for not expressing my point clearly.
I am not a purist about anything. I don't give a hoot about what you wear when you swim. Just don't compare times that are done with a tech suit.
An asterisk is a simple and elegant solution.
