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!
A fun way for me to avoid other chores, is to compare times across the decades. Can you honestly say that your times are a faster than a swimmer who didn't wear a tech suit?
I can't. To me it is a shallow victory, and degrades the history (purity) of our sport. Wear what you want just don't claim it.
I call BS on this. Having swum since the early 1970s, I can guarantee you that many, many, many technologies have changed, most notably pools themselves. Going down this rathole again, you ready to throw out Ian Thorpe's records?
For the record, I liked the tech suits; I wore the tech suits and I would wear them again. I'm fine wearing jammers again, but this purity/history of the sport argument with respect to one technology is bogus.
Fortress*,
With all due respect, it seems like you feel that purity of the sport is a bad thing.
A fun way for me to avoid other chores, is to compare times across the decades. Can you honestly say that your times are a faster than a swimmer who didn't wear a tech suit?
I can't. To me it is a shallow victory, and degrades the history (purity) of our sport. Wear what you want just don't claim it.
An asterick would resolve the issue, but you don't like my solution.
An arbitrary line in the sand on sports technology doesn't work, in any sport. All sports evolve and gear changes. It's part of sports. To your point, many sports have recognized "eras" that stand alone, for either their dubiousness (steroid era) or achievement (golden era).
It certainly is possible to honor the achievement of folks without insulting them by suggesting their accomplishments deserve some sort of footnote.
To aztimm, your argument about the tech suits discouraging participation might be semi legit if, over the past 9 years, I hadn't attended a dozen or so meets (including a few in the past year) where over 50% of the swimmers were unclad in the suits.
I wonder who said things recently like "They're for all", "Purist drivel". Maybe you don't knock on your friends doors to get them to convert because you know better, but you clearly evangelicalize about them and ridicule any reason someone has for not wearing them (at least on these boards). Elaine is new to masters swimming and has little to gain by wearing a suit that is good enough reason for me, yet you had no troubles bashing her like she was an extremist like Dolphin. Elaine wasn't trying to take your suits away and has no power to do so, so why are you being so hostile to her? Maybe the pro-techies have a false sense of moral superiority as well. Why would a pro-techie be in a defensive posture? The rules allow them at least for one more weekend.
Elaine started a thread about all her reasons to hate tech suits and proceeded, as she herself asserts, to play devil's advocate. She's 48 years and can defend herself. Sheesh.
Evangelizing? :) Hmm ... well, I certainly make no secret about liking them and thinking they are fun and speedy. I'm not alone in this respect. And I don't believe I do "ridicule every reason" swimmers have for not wearing them; I understand and respect some (but not all) of the underpinnings of their preference. I do confess that constantly being called a cheater has become somewhat tedious and I think the purity argument is BS. Sports advance, technologies advance, let's advance.
Elaine, I don't recall making that statement. I am certainly fond of my tech suits, as I've competed exclusively in body suits in every single meet for 5+ years. But do you notice how the anti-tech contingent always uses pejorative words (such as addiction, cheating, lack of "purity") to describe the pro-techies? Indeed, Muppet just lambasted tech suit wearers as unhealthy "fatties." Honestly, most people at Nats looked fit and, I suspect, train hard. I know very few people who strap on a tech suit to compensate for lack of training.
I had the wrong thread, sorry! :blush: You said it on the Rob Butcher thread, post #51, on May 27th: "I am somewhat addicted..." So, all I was doing was quoting you when I used the word, "addicted".
I had the wrong thread, sorry! :blush: You said it on the Rob Butcher thread, post #51, on May 27th: "I am somewhat addicted..." So, all I was doing was quoting you when I used the word, "addicted".
No worries, Elaine, and my apologies. I'm fine with loving the tech suits. However, I have also gone out and competed in kneeskins without complaint -- though they are damn ugly.
Fortress*,
With all due respect, it seems like you feel that purity of the sport is a bad thing.
A fun way for me to avoid other chores, is to compare times across the decades. Can you honestly say that your times are a faster than a swimmer who didn't wear a tech suit?
I can't. To me it is a shallow victory, and degrades the history (purity) of our sport. Wear what you want just don't claim it.
No idea what you're nattering on about.
You would be ok having about 85% of the membership that does not compete have an equal voice with about the 15% of members that do compete, when it comes to deciding how competition should be run?
That would be like letting a blind guy drive an 18 wheeler through city streets.
Who says those people aren't going to compete in the future? So why shouldn't they get a voice now?
You can always pray for our souls and ask for us to see the error of our ways in expressing our opinions.
Oh please save me for I have sinned by rejoicing in my right of freedom of speech. Oh I beg thee for grace and salvation
Yeah, I don't think any of Tracy's reasons are that valid. People don't attend Nationals or other meets because they are busy with other aspects of their lives or don't care to compete. And masters swimmers, on the whole, are a welcoming bunch even if we like to talk trash on line.
I'm still wondering why devoted non-competitors care that much about what competitors wear.
Maybe you should take the time to actually talk to some of those who don't compete and see what they say...I have talked to several that have stated exactly what I put above...that's where I got them from...so to say those are invalid reasons is flat out wrong..
Uh, I talk to those people all the time. They typically give the reasons I suggested. And mention the word "divorce" occasionally.
BAD example...would spend more on fresh air than men if there was s trip to the mall involved...
:bolt:
Talk about pot stirring, fat boy ... :rolleyes:
