SUIT EQUALITY

OH OOO Here come the flames from those with no sense of humor !! :worms:

I am currently looking to develop the Jim Thornton FINA-Legal Jammers-'n-Pasties Suit for Wet Chicks (TM) and hope to post pictorial updates as they happen on my vlog. Also currently looking for women, preferably in the 19-24 age group, though select members of the 25-29 age group will be considered, to test the prototype adhesives I am developing in my lab. Mr. Thornton, you are a very offensive, sick little man. Oh, what I would give to get you in a room with a pair of garden shears. --Sybil

Ultimately, I think it is an aesthetic choice: those who feel it is 'pure' to eschew the suits and those who enjoy the beauty and speed. Neither is better morally or otherwise. It's a matter of taste. .... Given how much time and money we invest in this sport the cost, while irksome, would not prevent most of us from buying one. Agreed that it isn't an ethical decision for most people. I don't know that it is completely aesthetic, though; I thought they were a nuisance to deal with, myself. When I looked thru the comments of those who voted against the suits in the VA survey, many gave some version of the "purity" argument that you describe (eg, training/talent alone should dictate the outcome, not training/talent+swimwear). As you say, a personal preference. But some anti-suit comments did cite "cost and fairness" or "level playing field." Agree with them or not, those are ethical arguments. While cost would not prevent "most" from buying one, as you say, one could offer an ethical argument to protect the rights of the minority for whom it is an issue. Whether this is a valid or strong point is a matter of disagreement, of course. Do all masters want to ignore FINA Rules?? Are you all ready for the consequences?? I believe the suits should be allowed, however they (FINA) have a list of approved suits. Is USMS going to follow the approved list or are they going to go the other way. Then will any swims in illegal suits be recognized?? The proposal is only to allow "FINA-forbidden" suits for the SCY season. No one has proposed (formally) that USMS disregard FINA rules for meters courses, so I don't think there would be any "consequences" of the type you imply. Actually there are two proposals for SCY meets, what might be called the "wetsuit" proposal and the "zipper & coverage" proposal. The first proposal would be "anything goes" (including wetsuits, though they aren't explicitly mentioned) in SCY meets. I'm scratching my head over what Pacific thought they would accomplish with that one. The 2nd proposal is for equal coverage, and zippers would be allowed (again, zippers aren't explicitly mentioned, but they aren't forbidden either). This is basically the one Ande is asking about.

The banning of the bodysuit for masters was the most ridiculous decision ever made. Old and overweight masters swimmers are hardly going to be a threat to Phelps's world records! Okay, a bit hyperbolic, but I agree that it made no sense. I think this has to do with mindsets. Those who oppose the suits seem to feel that it is "cheating" to add the technology of the suits. We do swim faster in them, at least I think I do. Ask any track athlete if he thought it would be a good idea to get rid of spikes since they clearly increase the speed of the runners. There actually might be a few. "Yeah, we should get back to the way it was before all those 'cheatin' spikes." We have quite a few among us who think this way in Masters swimmming. Ultimately, I think it is an aesthetic choice: those who feel it is 'pure' to eschew the suits and those who enjoy the beauty and speed. Neither is better morally or otherwise. It's a matter of taste. I vote for speed and beauty. So, in answer to Ande's question I say "yes." I think it would be more fun to feel more glide. Given how much time and money we invest in this sport the cost, while irksome, would not prevent most of us from buying one.

How can you be legal if you wear an illegal suit?? Do all masters want to ignore FINA Rules?? Are you all ready for the consequences?? I believe the suits should be allowed, however they (FINA) have a list of approved suits. Is USMS going to follow the approved list or are they going to go the other way. Then will any swims in illegal suits be recognized??

Kirk is just noting the rule. Caps and goggles are specifically allowed Exactly. I can certainly see how people want to use tech suits, but the notion that banning them was "the most ridiculous decision ever made" as GGS5T said is crazy since even he admits they aided his speed, which is against the rules.

I for one agree. Its a modesty issue for me. As a man I don't feel comfortable without my top covered when swimming. I train in fastskin kneeskins always. They do make you faster which helps me improve, but I also swim better because I don't feel uncomfortable in the pool with out my top covered. It does seem fair to let men wear an equal type coverage suit. I really want to enter some open water long distance events but the ones I have reviewed in warmer climes don't allow wet suits or full suit swim suits. That is a tough one for me as I don't want to be in public with out a shirt or something on.

So then you're saying this rule needs to be removed: Quote: Swimmers are not permitted to wear or use any device or substance to help their speed, pace, buoyancy or endurance during a race because you've clearly admitted that a bodysuit helps your speed. You are being selective here. Goggles are a device which aids speed and buoyancy during a race. So you now want goggles banned too? I admire your desire to see absolute purity in our sport.

I will give ya the first part, they do aid speed. But how do they aid buoyance? I have never worn a pair that have helped me float. Well - technically they should. They trap air... granted - its such a small amount it may be difficult to measure empirically.

You are being selective here. Goggles are a device which aids speed and buoyancy during a race. So you now want goggles banned too? I admire your desire to see absolute purity in our sport. Bad example. They aren't buoyant (at least, mine always sink, sometimes to my chagrin) and their biggest effect is in training, not racing. Caps would be a better example. Kirk is just noting the rule. Caps and goggles are specifically allowed (as are "FINA-approved" swimsuits, actually). Unlike the cheating super-suits, the type of goggle or cap one chooses is not likely to make a significant difference in the outcome. Certainly not the 5-6 seconds per 100 that you claim. Not as much flotation as rectal air injection. You've tested this? Data, please!