PDA

View Full Version : Why I swim and why I don't want a bodysuit



Jazz Hands
June 30th, 2008, 03:32 PM
We have a lot of threads about the new magic suits. People are asking, do they work? How do they work? Is it cheating? Are they ruining our sport? Is it fair? What size do I get? Will I become sweaty?

So, my apologies for starting a new thread about bodysuits in the context of masters swimming. Most of this is my personal opinion and experience, but I hope other people have similar ideas.

We have to admit that masters swimming is more laid-back than elite swimming. It's competitive, sure, but I've always seen it as a social organization above all else. There's less on the line, here. We aren't going for endorsement money, Olympic berths, or anything like that. If we want to go to the big meet, we just sign up for it. There's no need to do everything possible to qualify.

Maybe this is where I differ from other masters swimmers, but I swim for myself. I compare my performance to what I've done before and what I know I can do. I don't seriously compare my performance to other people, although I'm always down for a good gridge.

With these things in mind, I've thought about what I would gain from buying, say, a nero comp. The anecdotal evidence suggests that I could drop some time in my events. But if I only compete with myself, I really wouldn't be gaining anything at all. With a time drop comes an uncertainty: did that happen because of me, or because of the suit? If the suit makes me faster, eventually I would be able to establish a new standard of fast for myself, and compete against that. But there's no net gain for me.

My current personal scale of fast times involves wearing a first-generation jammer or legskin, and shaving. I've been on this scale since high school. Thinking about why I don't want a bodysuit has also made me think about whether I should even bother shaving for big meets. This might be where I make a personal distinction about the bodysuits that has been discussed here before in an integrity-of-the-sport context.

I experience swimming as the relationship of my body to the water. When I shave down for a meet, I'm not disrupting that relationship. I'm adapting my body to be better suited for the water, which is exactly what I'm doing when I'm training. Swimming shaved is still just swimming, to me. Swimming with a bodysuit is something else. I don't expect everyone to agree with this, and maybe it's something I could even get used to with enough time. But my current feeling is this: a suit that constricts the form of my body, makes me float, and separates me from the flow of the water is a technological intrusion into my swimming experience. It's not something I want.

I can't assume anything about why you swim, but if your reasons are like mine, it might be worthwhile to ask if the latest technology in our sport will benefit you in the same way it benefits a professional athlete.

ande
June 30th, 2008, 03:55 PM
jazz

if you throw an empty suit in the water, it goes nowhere.

I don't mind suits because I want to discover what I am capable of, test my limits, and attempt to improve my times. Part of this is making good choices in training and with equipment.

If you want to be a purist, good for you.
I've heard of a cycling race where people compete using 1972 bike technology.

Which era of swimming technology are you going to allow yourself to use?
There's 1896 - 2008
you could go head to head vs
Johnny Weissmuller, Mark Spitz, Rowdy Gaines

If you want to be a purist make sure you the meet uses the right kind of blocks, pool, lane lines, and timing system

aquageek
June 30th, 2008, 03:56 PM
We have to admit that masters swimming is more laid-back than elite swimming. It's competitive, sure, but I've always seen it as a social organization above all else.

I completely dispute this assertion and think it depends on your personality and the team you train with. I promise you I'm not getting up at 4:30 am to go socialize. Find yourself a serious USMS team and report back. You are fast but aren't as fast as most sprinters on my team twice your age and they put in about 4-5X your yardage a week. Don't confuse your intentions with those of all adult competitive swimmers.

I think characterizing it as a social organization is pretty darn insulting. Sure there's a great social aspect but there are a lot of social groups that don't revolve around physical fitness.

Wear a bodysuit or not, I could care less. It's your money, spend it as you wish.

Jazz Hands
June 30th, 2008, 04:04 PM
I completely dispute this assertion and think it depends on your personality and the team you train with. I promise you I'm not getting up at 4:30 am to go socialize. Find yourself a serious USMS team and report back. You are fast but aren't as fast as most sprinters on my team twice your age and they put in about 4-5X your yardage a week. Don't confuse your intentions with those of all adult competitive swimmers.

I think characterizing it as a social organization is pretty darn insulting. Sure there's a great social aspect but there are a lot of social groups that don't revolve around physical fitness.

Wear a bodysuit or not, I could care less. It's your money, spend it as you wish.

Glad to see we are disagreeing again, geek.

I am very serious about swimming fast, and although I don't put in a lot of yardage, I do spend something in the neighborhood of 10 to 15 hours a week training.

aquageek
June 30th, 2008, 04:19 PM
I am very serious about swimming fast, and although I don't put in a lot of yardage, I do spend something in the neighborhood of 10 to 15 hours a week training.

Whether this 10-15 training hours a week is pool or otherwise, that's definitely much more than a social endeavor, unless you are a noodler, which I know you are not.

Jazz Hands
June 30th, 2008, 04:20 PM
Which era of swimming technology are you going to allow yourself to use?
There's 1896 - 2008
you could go head to head vs
Johnny Weissmuller, Mark Spitz, Rowdy Gaines

If you want to be a purist make sure you the meet uses the right kind of blocks, pool, lane lines, and timing system

Ande, this isn't about going retro. I swim in the current era, and I like the new pool technology. You can do all sorts of fancy things to a swimming pool to make it calmer and easier to swim in, but it's still going to be just a tank of water.

That Guy
June 30th, 2008, 04:27 PM
I think this debate is actually about body suit versus jammer/legskin, not current versus older technology.

Jazz Hands
June 30th, 2008, 04:29 PM
Whether this 10-15 training hours a week is pool or otherwise, that's definitely much more than a social endeavor, unless you are a noodler, which I know you are not.

I might qualify as a noodler during my cool-down sets.

You're right, swimming is more than a social endeavor for me and for other serious masters swimmers. It's a personal challenge for each of us. Ande keeps track of his performance now versus when he first started masters. He does everything he can to get a fast time, and to him it makes sense to seek the latest technology. I'm presenting a different way to approach the idea of a personal athletic challenge.

When I say masters is social, I mean that we get together to cheer each other on, not to beat each other for medals and national team spots.

Jazz Hands
June 30th, 2008, 04:33 PM
I think this debate is actually about body suit versus jammer/legskin, not current versus older technology.

Funny. I think I'm switching to briefs for LC Nationals.

knelson
June 30th, 2008, 04:44 PM
Maybe this is where I differ from other masters swimmers, but I swim for myself. I compare my performance to what I've done before and what I know I can do. I don't seriously compare my performance to other people

Do you really believe this? I swim for myself, too, but I can't deny I love beating the guy next to me or my friend in a different heat. And if they are wearing the LZR or Nero and I'm wearing a nylon training suit they've got the advantage.

The Fortress
June 30th, 2008, 04:53 PM
Maybe this is where I differ from other masters swimmers, but I swim for myself. I compare my performance to what I've done before and what I know I can do. I don't seriously compare my performance to other people, although I'm always down for a good gridge.

With these things in mind, I've thought about what I would gain from buying, say, a nero comp. The anecdotal evidence suggests that I could drop some time in my events. But if I only compete with myself, I really wouldn't be gaining anything at all. With a time drop comes an uncertainty: did that happen because of me, or because of the suit? If the suit makes me faster, eventually I would be able to establish a new standard of fast for myself, and compete against that. But there's no net gain for me.


Who can ever tell precisely what times drops are due to unless you always have a taper in your pocket and life goes exactly as planned? I usually can't, there are too many variables: have I been sprinting enough, have I been training too much/too little, have I been sleeping well, have I been lifting, did I hit my turn, did I do a lawn chair start, am I broken down, did I run too much, what pool am I swimming in, is there a flippin bulkhead, are the events too close together, am I injured, am I swimming relays, do I have bronchitis, is there a gridge, am I psyched for the particular event ... How can all that crap be calibrated?!

In general, I think the racing suits definitely make some difference. I don't know how much. Looking back over the last couple years, I can say I've done my fastest 50 free in the FS I, my fastest 50 fly in the Pro and my fastest 50 back in the nero comp. I'm not sure of the difference between the nero comp and the FS Pro because, when I debuted the nero comp, I had been lifting heavy for 5 weeks and I KNOW that made a difference. It also made a difference, for example, that I scratched my 100 IM and just swam my 50 back. (Although I disagree with Tall Paul about the nero comp helping SDK. Not for me.) So I'm not going to throw out swims I've done with technicals suits. So many other factors seem equally or more important. For me, I think "feel" of the water is overrated. I'm a speed freak, not a feel freak. So I think the technical suits rock! You feel freaks can all stick with your briefs.

Think I'm a mixture of Jazz and Geek. :eek: :dunno: I swim because I like it, because I want to be fit and healthy, because I love to race and love meets, because I'm very competitive, because I love the social aspect and because it is fantastic to have a hobby/identity outside of my usual life. But I would not get up at 4:30 to swim. No way. Blech. (I tried getting up at 4:00 am for awhile to take my kid to practice and I was an uber byatch.) I would also note that most of my fastest swims have been swum in the afternoon!

That Guy
June 30th, 2008, 04:56 PM
Funny. I think I'm switching to briefs for LC Nationals.

I'll be there in an AquaBlade jammer, partying like it's 1996.

aquageek
June 30th, 2008, 04:56 PM
The only place where I really dig beating other people is in OW where you can not only beat their time but also swim over top of them. After the butt whooping (S)he-Man put on me I no longer am concerned about what goes on around me in a pool meet. And, there was little glory in my showdown with gull since he's about 35 years older than me, and a super nice guy.

Oh, and 4:30 am will make a byatch out of anyone, man or fegirl-just ask my family.

I'm off to judge a meet and not dq anyone, get some of that HULK!

Jazz Hands
June 30th, 2008, 04:59 PM
Do you really believe this? I swim for myself, too, but I can't deny I love beating the guy next to me or my friend in a different heat. And if they are wearing the LZR or Nero and I'm wearing a nylon training suit they've got the advantage.

There's a series of photos somewhere of me wildly celebrating a second-place finish at Nationals :)

mazzy
June 30th, 2008, 05:00 PM
Hi Jazz, I agree fully on your thought.
Just like you I swim for myself, yes I can talks about fitness, wellness, but the truth is that I've a goal, a stupid ones, and it's the reason because I swim and not miss any workouts : I want to reach it 100% from myself without any "tech" help.
just like for you the bodysuit is for me = cheating to myself, it'a a shortcut, just like steroids.
The Day that I'll change the reason to swim and I'll swim to compete, at that time I'll use whatever (is legal) to beat my opponent, because the right gear is part of competition, so Bodysuit, legsuit, whatever, but for the near future I'll swim in my speedoo, a cap, and a google.

P.S.
I use a cap to protect my hairs from clorine and because it's mandatory in all the pools in my country.
I use the googles because my eyes don't like the clorine at all and I don't want to became blind due at swimming.

Paul Smith
June 30th, 2008, 05:03 PM
My wife and I spend way to much time in the car as our work requires it...we also drive for "social" reasons.

Given the amount of time spent in this endeavor when we bought a new car we looked at a Prius and settled on the new VW Tiguon which were in the same price range. The Prius gets better gas mileage but the VW is cool, fast...and a LOT more fun to drive.

The Fortress
June 30th, 2008, 05:04 PM
just like for you the bodysuit is for me = cheating, it'a a shortcut, just like steroids.

So are competitors at the Trials are cheaters or just masters swimmers?

Geek, I think my Monday officiating is getting rained out. I always let the one hand touches go. But the blatant scissor kicks?

aquageek
June 30th, 2008, 05:13 PM
I really think that people who have some moral objection to tech suits probably just can't afford them, bottom line. There, I said it, someone had to.

Iwannafly
June 30th, 2008, 05:18 PM
I'll start with a disclaimer. I'm slow and don't beat too many people.
But how cool is it to jump in with a cheesy brief or jammer and beat people in expensive suits? It's like getting on you old(er) steel road bike and beating the pants off of people on their $5000 carbon bikes. Plus, I'm a cheapskate. I have a hard time shelling out cash for a new training suit, much less a tech suit!

SwimStud
June 30th, 2008, 05:25 PM
I'll start with a disclaimer. I'm slow and don't beat too many people.
But how cool is it to jump in with a cheesy brief or jammer and beat people in expensive suits? It's like getting on you old(er) steel road bike and beating the pants off of people on their $5000 carbon bikes. Plus, I'm a cheapskate. I have a hard time shelling out cash for a new training suit, much less a tech suit!

You want cheesy briefs... just wait until zones!

SwimStud
June 30th, 2008, 05:29 PM
I really think that people who have some moral objection to tech suits probably just can't afford them, bottom line. There, I said it, someone had to.

That's fair. Provided you accept that two identically talented swimmers are still identically talented even if one wears the funny gimp outfit. One just has more money to throw on an artificial aid... it didn't make them a better swimmer. Just the one with a record gained by a suit.

There I said it...I had to.

It's a bit like when Arnie said about steroid use, he felt the top body builders would still have been the winners without the use of steroids...

The Fortress
June 30th, 2008, 05:38 PM
That's fair. Provided you accept that two identically talented swimmers are still identically talented even if one wears the funny gimp outfit. One just has more money to throw on an artificial aid... it didn't make them a better swimmer. Just the one with a record gained by a suit.

There I said it...I had to.

It's a bit like when Arnie said about steroid use, he felt the top body builders would still have been the winners without the use of steroids...

Were there any swimmers setting national or world records recently that were NOT wearing technical suits?

There I said it ... I had to.

Perhaps the majority of more talented swimmers affirmatively choose to wear technical suits. The only ones I can conceivably think of that might accomplish this without fancy suits are the younger masters swimmers recently out of college. And of course SwimmieAvsFan always has to rag on me because she's a feel freak.

Daaaave
June 30th, 2008, 05:42 PM
Maybe this is where I differ from other masters swimmers, but I swim for myself. I compare my performance to what I've done before and what I know I can do. I don't seriously compare my performance to other people, although I'm always down for a good gridge.

I swim because I love to race. I love winning and hate losing. I still have fun either way though, because I love racing people. Because of that, I do seriously compare my performance to other people. Especially if they're in lanes next to me...in bodysuits.


I experience swimming as the relationship of my body to the water. When I shave down for a meet, I'm not disrupting that relationship.

Me and water might need a divorce, because I am cool with "disrupting" this relationship. I'm pretty hairy. I shaved just once as a masters swimmer (recently); it was a bloodbath during and in the weeks after. Clients stared at my bare arms and my excessive scratching. I worked hard to have disposable income to spend on my few extracurriculars. I have no problem buying a fancy suit (on sale). I experience swimming as moving as quickly through water as possible (while minding the rules).

scyfreestyler
June 30th, 2008, 05:43 PM
Were there any swimmers setting national or world records recently that were NOT wearing technical suits?

There I said it ... I had to.

Perhaps the majority of more talented swimmers affirmatively choose to wear technical suits. The only ones I can conceivably think of that might accomplish this are the younger masters swimmers recently out of college. And of course SwimmieAvsFan always has to rag on me because she's a feel freak.

I don't think so. However, Phelps and Lochte both went under WR pace in the 400IM last night with a measly legskin suit. I've heard a lot about the benefits of the bodysuits-acting as a corset- but how much of that WR pace can be attributed to the legskins last night?

mazzy
June 30th, 2008, 05:48 PM
So are competitors at the Trials are cheaters or just masters swimmers?

Geek, I think my Monday officiating is getting rained out. I always let the one hand touches go. But the blatant scissor kicks?

I've said that I agree with Jazz, I swim for myself, and if I use a bodysuit it'll lower my time so I'm cheating myself, it's a shortcut to reach my goal. i don't want that my money will buy my little dream, I want my passion, my hard works carry me to reach it.

The bodysuit for olimpians is legal just like for master, and swimmers that compete in any race at any level is better that use it because anybody else will do it.
Nothing more nothing else.

david.margrave
June 30th, 2008, 05:48 PM
I see the point. There are enough variables as it is, such as whether you are tapered, comparing meters and yards, and let's say for the sake of discussion that you attended a meet where the outdoor air temperature was 110 degrees. I started wearing the FS2 for meets and that is just one more variable, comparing pre-FS2 and post-FS2 times. So I don't really have any idea how well I'm swimming now. It's frustrating, but I still plan to keep the FS2 for meets!

SwimStud
June 30th, 2008, 05:49 PM
Were there any swimmers setting national or world records recently that were NOT wearing technical suits?

There I said it ... I had to.

Perhaps the majority of more talented swimmers affirmatively choose to wear technical suits. The only ones I can conceivably think of that might accomplish this without fancy suits are the younger masters swimmers recently out of college. And of course SwimmieAvsFan always has to rag on me because she's a feel freak.


I agree. if everyone has one provided to them if they wish, then the field is level and fair. Soon it will be with rebreathers.

Midas
June 30th, 2008, 06:08 PM
I really think that people who have some moral objection to tech suits probably just can't afford them, bottom line. There, I said it, someone had to.

I think about the fact that, growing up, there is no way my parents could have afforded a $300 suit, let alone a $550 suit. But they would have gone into (even more) debt to get me one. I'm sure of that. And I was (and am) no better than an average swimmer. That bums me out a little bit. I'm actually glad these suits didn't exist back then because of the difficult position it would have put my parents in. Now that I think of it, I worry about all of the parents of age groupers out there who will need to make this difficult decision too. It's pretty much a lose/lose situation.

As an adult, I can decide how to spend my money how I want. And I think most people will agree that there, as competitive as it is, there just isn't as much riding on our performances as when we were younger (forget the Olympics and sponsorship dollars--swimming gets a lot of kids into better colleges than they could have were they to stand strictly on academic merit (it did for me)). If I can't afford a nero comp or a lzr racer I can go with older technology (including VERY old technology) and just say "it's only Masters!". That'll be tougher for the youngsters...

Full disclosure, I've never swum in a body suit but bought FS Pro Jammers for local SCY championships and am seriously considering buying a blueseventy pointzero3+ for the local LCM championships (and beyond).

Daaaave
June 30th, 2008, 06:09 PM
just like for you the bodysuit is for me = cheating to myself, it'a a shortcut, just like steroids.

Last time I checked (just now!) bodysuits don't cause ball cancer. The steroid analogy doesn't hold in this case.




P.S.
I use a cap to protect my hairs from clorine and because it's mandatory in all the pools in my country.
I use the googles because my eyes don't like the clorine at all and I don't want to became blind due at swimming.

Okay, I'll try: I use a body suit because I'm too coarse and hairy to shave without getting skin infections. Or, my religion requires me to cover up...but if you use the suit for reasons other than your beliefs or your personal health, you're a cheat.

LindsayNB
June 30th, 2008, 08:08 PM
I thought Mirko was pretty clear, he has set a goal for himself and set his own "rules" for attaining that goal. He didn't say that anyone else had to abide by his "rules". In his case he wants to attain his performance goal without the aid of a bodysuit, seems fair enough to me.

aquageek
June 30th, 2008, 08:46 PM
So, there's an entirely opposite side of this argument. If you take the sport seriously, train as hard as you can given life's constraints and want to be your best, you should buy the best equipment out there to maximize your potential. Not doing so is simply cheating yourself and squandering your hard work.

When I see a really good swimmer in a some ratty grab bag suit I think "what a shame he/she won't pony up the money to really make the most of that obvious hard training."

LindsayNB
June 30th, 2008, 09:09 PM
So, there's an entirely opposite side of this argument. If you take the sport seriously, train as hard as you can given life's constraints and want to be your best, you should buy the best equipment out there to maximize your potential. Not doing so is simply cheating yourself and squandering your hard work.

The word "best" requires a definition to be meaningful. One can separate best swimmer from best swimmer/suit combination. Am I a "better" swimmer if I put fins on? One can aim to be the fastest possible under FINA/USMS rules, or aim to be the fastest they can be under some other set of constraints, whether that means a monofin and air tank for monofin racing or racing without a technical suit. I don't see any moral high ground, just different choices.

aquageek
June 30th, 2008, 09:48 PM
The word "best" requires a definition to be meaningful.

OK, the US is the best, has the best swimmers wearing the best suits. That should suffice for best.

The Fortress
June 30th, 2008, 09:55 PM
The word "best" requires a definition to be meaningful. One can separate best swimmer from best swimmer/suit combination.

You are over intellectualizing. The word "best" in masters swimming is already clearly defined as the person with the fastest time competing with a legal stroke and legal suit in your age group (FINA rules). And separating the two categories described above in masters? Nonsensical. There are no two such divisions in the sport. Although I'd love to compete in the best swimmer/best SDK competition in my age group -- even without fins and a monofin -- or in the best swimmer/least yardage competition. But, hey, those aren't categories yet. Why are people so hung up on suits when so many other training things or lifestyle choices make such a difference?!

LindsayNB
June 30th, 2008, 10:32 PM
You are over intellectualizing. The word "best" in masters swimming is already clearly defined as the person with the fastest time competing with a legal stroke and legal suit in your age group (FINA rules).

Perhaps. But Jazz and Mazzy, and many others, have defined their goals in terms of time goals not ranking goals, and they have place an additional constraint on how they want to achieve their goal. In that context "buying" a time drop doesn't meet their objectives. How one achieves one's goals can legitimately be as important as the goal itself. The FINA rules are just one of many possible sets of rules to operate under. USMS has no doping rules but not many people would critically say that someone is failing to achieve their potential and be the best that they can be if they choose not to use performance enhancing drugs.
:roids:

As you have pointed out there are many many trade-offs one can make, swimming without a technical suit is no less valid than spending less than six hours per day training or not hiring a personal trainer. Why not let everyone do what suits them and not worry about what others are doing, whether that is wearing a technical suit or not wearing a technical suit?

Daaaave
June 30th, 2008, 10:33 PM
The word "best" requires a definition to be meaningful.

Ha! How about this:

best: adjective, superl. of good with better as compar. 1.of the highest quality, excellence, or standing
2. in swimming: the fastest. the swimmer who touches the wall first while competing within the established rules; ain't nobody faster; the individual who traversed an aquatic distance in the shortest time

One of the great things about swimming is that it's among the least subjective sports. Let's not introduce any relativism to swimming. But if we are, I'd like everyone to know that I am the BEST SWIMMER! And by "best," I mean the fastest male, premature-balding, hairy-shouldered, wore-a-legskin, had-too-many-beers-night-before, 50yd backstroker. Medal, please!

LindsayNB
June 30th, 2008, 11:04 PM
You have illustrated my point exactly. If your idea of "best" is defined by USMS rules then that is perfectly valid. If someone else defines best according to some other set of rules that is also valid.

If one doesn't get any cognitive dissonance from the assertion that a person becomes a better swimmer when they don a technical suit then the thread has run its course. Using the USMS rules provides one definition of best, the fact that not everyone believes that you become a better swimmer by using better equipment is the basis for some people objecting to the way the rules are evolving.

The rules are arbitrary and one can disagree about whether a rule is good enough. If USMS decided that fins were legal in races then most people would have little difficulty understanding an argument that a swimmer with fins wasn't necessarily "a better swimmer" than another without. It's only a matter of degree.

The Fortress
June 30th, 2008, 11:04 PM
Ha! How about this:

best: adjective, superl. of good with better as compar. 1.of the highest quality, excellence, or standing
2. in swimming: the fastest. the swimmer who touches the wall first while competing within the established rules; ain't nobody faster; the individual who traversed an aquatic distance in the shortest time

One of the great things about swimming is that it's among the least subjective sports. Let's not introduce any relativism to swimming. But if we are, I'd like everyone to know that I am the BEST SWIMMER! And by "best," I mean the fastest male, premature-balding, hairy-shouldered, wore-a-legskin, had-too-many-beers-night-before, 50yd backstroker. Medal, please!

Awesome!

Lindsay:

First off, as someone who works out and does speed work with fins regularly, I am uniquely qualified to tell you that NO WAY ARE TECHNICAL SUITS EQUIVALENT TO FINS. FINS ARE WAY, WAY FASTER. I can hardly believe you'd compare them. In fact, I encourage people with fins. Save your shoulders and works out, dudes!

Swimming in a technical suit and using PEDs are not even remotely comparable. One is legal and one isn't. Wearing a technical suit and "buying" a time are likewise not remotely comparable. Where did you get that idea exactly, from Dolphin2?

I'm all for people setting personal goals, have stated as much many times, and count myself in that category. But that doesn't mean you have to be sans technical suit. I haven't worn a tank in a meet since 2006. Wear one or not, excellent. Race yourself as the highest goal, excellent. Masters must define themselves and not let others define them. That's why, if I choose to wear a technical suit, I won't let others define me as "illegal," "cheating" or whatever. I'm just pursuing what I think is fun and challenging and doable. If others choose differently, so be it and I will definitely cheer for them to do their PBs. I have never understood the "I'm morally superior, I'm swimming in a brief or tank" faction.

LindsayNB
June 30th, 2008, 11:15 PM
Swimming in a technical suit and using PEDs are not even remotely comparable. One is legal and one isn't. Wearing a technical suit and "buying" a time are likewise not remotely comparable. Where did you get that idea exactly, from Dolphin2?


Leslie, I'm not sure we disagree, I have no problem with you wearing a suit, I don't consider it cheating, I may have qualms about the rules but unless the rules are changed I'm not going to make any judgments.

In this thread however Jazz gave his reasons for not using the latest suits, and I think his reasons are reasonable and valid.

As for PEDs, my understanding is that they are legal under USMS rules, am I wrong?

When I say "buying" a time I am referring to a comparison between the same swimmer with and without a suit, if the suit makes the swimmer faster then they have "bought" a time improvement. No?

aquageek
July 1st, 2008, 07:05 AM
I think the notions that you are buying a victory, there's some moral problem with tech suits or trying to define best are ludicrous. Defining "best" - give me a break. If you want to achieve your maximum potential you do the things necessary to do that, whether it be switch teams, train differently or invest in the technology that enables you to swim your BEST. I'm not getting into the nuances of best, that's loco mcstupid.

I also don't buy this total bunk that "purists" don't endorse tech advancements in the sport. If you claim to be a purist then you know that the most pure and truthful thing about sports is that they change over time, improvements and advancements are made. I think anyone who calls themself a purist and then fails to recognized the fluid nature of sports is probably more likely termed a foolist. The purist crowd also seems to selectively choose what items they find pure, generally the items that they don't want to buy I always find.

geochuck
July 1st, 2008, 07:26 AM
Hate to be brief. Wait til you see me in Gresham in August. It takes me a few minutes to pry myself into my new size 34 Speedo briefs. Chuckie thought my size 36 suit was too exposing.

The Fortress
July 1st, 2008, 09:13 AM
When I say "buying" a time I am referring to a comparison between the same swimmer with and without a suit, if the suit makes the swimmer faster then they have "bought" a time improvement. No?

No, I don't agree. Wearing a legal suit is not buying time. It's racing.

"Loco mcstupid" -- that is outstanding verbiage!

geochuck
July 1st, 2008, 09:20 AM
Lindsay would you pay $550 to drop your time 2 seconds on a hundred.

I will save you money - train harder, improve your technique.

LindsayNB
July 1st, 2008, 10:00 AM
Lindsay would you pay $550 to drop your time 2 seconds on a hundred.

I will save you money - train harder, improve your technique.

If I wanted to drop 2 seconds on a hundred by using better equipment I would just put on my fins, I already have a pair so it wouldn't cost me anything (I only spent $40 on them and they have lasted a few years now).

I will allow that I enjoy swimming with fins or a pull buoy so if others get similar enjoyment swimming with a technical suit then more power to them.

SwimStud
July 1st, 2008, 10:02 AM
Why not let everyone do what suits them and not worry about what others are doing, whether that is wearing a technical suit or not wearing a technical suit?

Agreed: I'm not a purist, I drink accelerade and would take creatine if I felt interested enough, but I am not.

hofffam
July 1st, 2008, 10:09 AM
As for PEDs, my understanding is that they are legal under USMS rules, am I wrong?

I think they are illegal as per the rules - but there is no testing to detect them. I'll admit I didn't look it up.

SwimStud
July 1st, 2008, 10:14 AM
I think they are illegal as per the rules - but there is no testing to detect them. I'll admit I didn't look it up.

Then it may as well be legal....c'mon, we all suspect someone within USMS must be doing it...

..anyway steroids without training efficiently and agressively enough won't do anything except shring your testicles adn give you a "Strahan Gap," right Geek?

LindsayNB
July 1st, 2008, 10:28 AM
I think they are illegal as per the rules - but there is no testing to detect them. I'll admit I didn't look it up.

The only occurrences of drug or drugs in the USMS rule book are:


102.14.2 Advertising—Products involving tobacco, alcohol or pharmaceuticals containing drugs banned under IOC or FINA rules may not be advertised, but the advertiser’s name only may be used. Offenders may be barred from competition until they comply with this rule.
and

305.7.6 Assistance During the Race
A Feeding is permissible, but use of alcohol or illegal drugs is forbidden.