Like them or hate them, tech suits have damages the reputation of swimming in the mind of the John or Jane Q. Public. For the good of the sport, I'm glad they're going away.
I think a study should be done to see the impact more swimsuit coverage has on participation. For example, silly as it may sound, if jammers were outlawed, lots of the little guys (12 and unders) might be reluctant to swim on summer teams. In the same vein, have more masters swimmers participated in meets because the tech suits have afforded more coverage? An interesting thought.
Banning the tech suits makes about as much sense to me as banning the new helmets in cycling that are supposed to be as advantageous as racing wheels. A helmet is as necessary in cycling as a swimsuit is for swimming. You don't need either to perform the activity, but it sure is a good idea for obvious reasons to wear one.;)
Why is swimming going backwards while other sports like cycling don't seem to have a problem with new technology?
Like them or hate them, tech suits have damages the reputation of swimming in the mind of the John or Jane Q. Public. For the good of the sport, I'm glad they're going away.
On what facts do you base that statement?
I take this as another "shut up," which I will happily ignore if I choose.
:)
Excellent work here. Leslie. I am confident the Snooty will soon prove to be yours for the asking!
I take this as another "shut up," which I will happily ignore if I choose.
:)
I agree!
And besides, the war is not over. Perhaps the purists won a battle, but I don't think this war is over yet. Word is that the suits will be back in time for the next Olympics.
Battle on!
Excellent work here. Leslie. I am confident the Snooty will soon prove to be yours for the asking!
Could be, but I am not underestimating the competition.
Remember, Google is your friend! Here's a sample of what you might find:
online.wsj.com/.../SB125721159786824325.html
But this article, which we have seen before, samples competitors, not "Jane and John Q. Public" -- who you suggest are members of the general public and not competitors.
Remember, Google is your friend! Here's a sample of what you might find:
online.wsj.com/.../SB125721159786824325.html
This article does nothing to support your statement that tech suits "have damage the reputation of swimming in the mind of the John or Jane Q. Public." Keep on Googlin'.
Does the average John or Jane Q. Public even have an opinion on the suits? Does anybody outside the sport really care?
Probably not, but other masters athletes I've spoken with seem puzzled by the extreme technology reversal.
Probably not, but other masters athletes I've spoken with seem puzzled by the extreme technology reversal.
Ask them if they would be okay with someone using a Harley at the Tour de France, or someone using a Segway at the Boston Marathon... That is an absurd exaggeration, but I think that is the point, a concern about how far things can be pushed before the sport becomes grotesque. Fins and flotation devices are not allowed, but some of these tech suits were close to doing the same things as those devices.
If they don't like that answer, remind them that (male) body suits were how the sport started (wool in the '20s), and briefs are the modern invention.
Geek said it best -- false sense of moral superiority.
Geek has said many things. I thought it was moral sense of false superiority.
Or was it a superior moral of false senses? :confused:
