PDA

View Full Version : Female "pups": Why mostly non-tech suits?



isobel
May 12th, 2009, 02:41 AM
Since there has been observation on this forum that most younger female (not male) swimmers at Nationals wore non-tech suits (the 18-24 and 25-29 groups), I'm curious as to why.

Anyone of that younger group look at this board and care to post reasons? Cost? Controversy over "authenticity" of times when fastest suits are banned? Desire to look hot for guys, as one poster suggests?

Charge
May 12th, 2009, 07:31 AM
I wold guess its a shortage of $$, when I was 23 I could barely afford to fill my car up with gas much less buy $500 suit. Hell I'm 33 now and it's hard justify that for a stinkin suit that may be illegal in 6 months!

ViveBene
May 12th, 2009, 08:04 AM
Also, the flesh is firmer at that age. Cosmesis counts in the Great Race to pass on one's genes. Maybe they feel better in pretty, sparkly suits. I'm not of that age group but think I probably wouldn't wear a tech suit if I were, and were swimming a meet.
:)

lefty
May 12th, 2009, 11:26 AM
The best swimmers age 18-29 do not swim masters.

SLOmmafan
May 12th, 2009, 11:34 AM
I would start out by insinuating that the younger age groups (both male and female) do not take USMS Nationals quite as seriously as some of the older age groups. Not to say that this is true in all instances, but I found that a lot of the younger swimmers tended to be recently returned to swimming (post college) or otherwise new to swimming masters. They might tend to feel that the situation does not warrant purchasing an expensive high tech suit - especially if they are coming from events like college championships, Senior Nationals or US Open.

There is also the fact that the 18-24 age group represents a very small fraction of the diverse age range at Nationals. I would assume that the median age at Nationals was somewhere in the early to mid 40's - with an average age around the same - just off observation in Clovis.

Karen Duggan
May 12th, 2009, 11:37 AM
Lefty- I flat out disagree with that statement. There were a few 18-29 yo women that went 23/24s for their 50s free and 27/28s for their 50s back on my team. IMHO, that's pretty quick!

That being said I know I was 22 for my first masters meet and DID NOT take it seriously (it was Pacific Champs, followed 3 weeks later by Nationals). There is no way I would have shelled out money for a suit for "masters".

Were my eyes opened! Perhaps for many who are new to masters they don't know yet that it is still some fast swimming.

hnatkin
May 12th, 2009, 11:41 AM
I'm 5 years removed, but in my 20s I certainly would not have had budget to cover a high tech suit between grad school and low paying jobs. By the way, also fewer women in the lower age groups because they're busy having babies. (which might actually apply to the new fathers, too). I found very few women competing in 30-34 group. Now that I've aged up, the competition pool has increased significantly.

SLOmmafan
May 12th, 2009, 11:44 AM
I would think lefty meant that the truly elite swimmers (especially under 25) tend to still be either competing in college or in USA swimming meets (US Open, etc). I would agree that their are some very fast swimmers (especially in the 25-29 group) that put up very respectable times. When it gets right down to it, nearly all the swimmers competing at an event like USMS Nationals are very good swimmers (for their respective ages, or even stacked against all the different ages).

some_girl
May 12th, 2009, 12:40 PM
I am wondering if it is a question of cost and if those girls were all relatively local. It looked like it on the psychs, but I don't know all the abbreviations, so...

In contrast to the hypothesis, my team has a *lot* of girls in 25-29, and we all have tech suits, though mostly Pros, which we break out for New Englands and Nationals only. We also didn't go this year because the travel was expensive (a lot more than a Pro). Which is to say, I am going to guess it is cost and that it a lot less prevalent than people here suggest, and may have looked so at this meet due to outside influences. I can say with certainty there are plenty of younguns in the techs at Harvard.

ande
May 12th, 2009, 12:53 PM
probably because tech suits are expensive & they are single & broke.


Since there has been observation on this forum that most younger female (not male) swimmers at Nationals wore non-tech suits (the 18-24 and 25-29 groups), I'm curious as to why.

Anyone of that younger group look at this board and care to post reasons? Cost? Controversy over "authenticity" of times when fastest suits are banned? Desire to look hot for guys, as one poster suggests?

mctrusty
May 12th, 2009, 01:56 PM
I don't know that I buy the "broke" argument necessarily. Maybe it's just the women I've been surrounded by.

My wife is 24. She has a solid job as a teacher and worked in finance before that. She doesn't swim so she doesn't have to think about whether to drop money on a suit. She does, however, spend at least $150 every few months to get her hair done and get all the attendant special shampoos, etc that goes with that. She also likes to buy shoes. We joke about it because she easily spends as much on those things as I spend on pool fees and swimming equipment.

My sister has had a good job since she got out of college at 22. She doesn't swim either, but she has always had a fair amount of discretionary income that she spends on gym fees, concerts, hair appointments, that sort of thing. Heck, she even managed to save a bundle and just put %20 down on their first house.

Both of these gals I know from the 18-29 demographic have not been broke, they just chose to spend their money elsewhere.

Ahelee Sue Osborn
May 12th, 2009, 02:05 PM
I made a nearly 5 hour drive home from Nationals with one of those Female "pups" yesterday.

She is and was formerly fast... sub 50 in the 100 and 1:47 in the 200 free.

We got on the suit topic and she told me her viewpoint and also all about her various conversations with older members of our club in regard to "needing a suit" for Nationals.

She chose not to buy or wear a tech suit because she had only been back in training for about 7-8 months. She didn't feel she had worked long or hard enough to deserve it yet.
But the plan is to save her pennies to have a suit for LC Championships. By then she will have been back in regular training almost a year.

On another note, her gripe about masters swimmers in expensive tech suits is that they have not done or are unwilling to do the stroke technique work in the pool with dedication.
Buying speed instead of making all the possible corrections and then swimming in the tech suit as a reward for hard work and progress.

She was shaking her head over one guy who can't focus enough to consistently streamline well off the walls, but is all about buying a $390. suit to swim fast.

I loved her attitude.

We agreed that the philosophy applies to any speed athlete in masters swimming.
I've seen novices in my "cruiser lanes" execute consistent perfect streamlines far better than most swimmers in the faster lanes. They even showup to lap swimming to practice stroke correction drills on weekends.

That committment deserves a reward.
Why not a great tech suit?

tjrpatt
May 12th, 2009, 02:10 PM
I made a nearly 5 hour drive home from Nationals with one of those Female "pups" yesterday.

She is and was formerly fast... sub 50 in the 100 and 1:47 in the 200 free.

We got on the suit topic and she told me her viewpoint and also all about her various conversations with older members of our club in regard to "needing a suit" for Nationals.

She chose not to buy or wear a tech suit because she had only been back in training for about 7-8 months. She didn't feel she had worked long or hard enough to deserve it yet.
But the plan is to save her pennies to have a suit for LC Championships. By then she will have been back in regular training almost a year.

On another note, her gripe about masters swimmers in expensive tech suits is that they have not done or are unwilling to do the stroke technique work in the pool with dedication.
Buying speed instead of making all the possible corrections and then swimming in the tech suit as a reward for hard work and progress.

She was shaking her head over one guy who can't focus enough to consistently streamline well off the walls, but is all about buying a $390. suit to swim fast.

I loved her attitude.

We agreed that the philosophy applies to any speed athlete in masters swimming.
I've seen novices in my "cruiser lanes" execute consistent perfect streamlines far better than most swimmers in the faster lanes. They even showup to lap swimming to practice stroke correction drills on weekends.

That committment deserves a reward.
Why not a great tech suit?

:applaud: I like her style. I know people that bought the suits with 3 months of training and they were just training a few times a week!!!

Karen Duggan
May 12th, 2009, 03:14 PM
Ahelee- Playing devil's advocate here.

With part of that theory then she is in effect saying that you need to already be technically proficient to wear a tech suit? That's like saying unless you're a pro golfer then you shouldn't buy Ping golf clubs. Or if you are a triathlete you shouldn't buy a fast bike (I don't know a brand for that one anymore, Kestrel?) unless you will finish TT in your age group. (Albeit, I know if I were starting out as a beginner anything I wouldn't be buying top of the line gear!)

I do get that she is insinuating that the suit buys you speed. However, almost everyone has argued that it can't buy you enough speed to be something you're not. You either have the strokes and turns or you don't. If a person is less than proficient but the suit makes them feel better, so what?

I know a lot of people on my team who finally did buy a B70 and there strokes are less than proficient. They didn't miraculously win nationals, or even place, but I know that they felt like they had done everything they could, at that point, to prepare including having the best suit available.

I hope this makes sense. My mind kept going off on different tangents. I did a lot of backspacing!

Ahelee Sue Osborn
May 12th, 2009, 03:32 PM
Ahelee- Playing devil's advocate here.

With part of that theory then she is in effect saying that you need to already be technically proficient to wear a tech suit?

Right... I could see everyone finding a different direction to take this.

My little "pup" did not describe a level of technical proficiency that should be required.
What she was describing was the work ethic - willingness - determination among other things to swim correctly - legally - and efficiently before throwing on a tech suit for a short cut to speed.

There was no reference to the tech suit providing speed.
In fact I would venture to say that my "pup" does not believe the suit offers speed.

I personally believe - and to a certain extent agree with Jim T's philosophy that many of the young "pups" do not want their gorgeous bods to be covered over in black compression/flotation devices!
:)

330Scott
May 12th, 2009, 04:05 PM
Some has to say it.

Where is the "This thread is worthless without pics" smilie?

;)

:bolt:

pwolf66
May 12th, 2009, 04:21 PM
She was shaking her head over one guy who can't focus enough to consistently streamline well off the walls, but is all about buying a $390. suit to swim fast.

I sucked water on the start, that's why!!!!!! :afraid:

thewookiee
May 12th, 2009, 04:34 PM
I sucked water on the start, that's why!!!!!! :afraid:

Your starts and sucking seem to be a constant theme for you. I think I need to talk to Beth about developing your starts.

The Fortress
May 12th, 2009, 05:04 PM
Ahelee- Playing devil's advocate here.

With part of that theory then she is in effect saying that you need to already be technically proficient to wear a tech suit? That's like saying unless you're a pro golfer then you shouldn't buy Ping golf clubs. Or if you are a triathlete you shouldn't buy a fast bike (I don't know a brand for that one anymore, Kestrel?) unless you will finish TT in your age group. (Albeit, I know if I were starting out as a beginner anything I wouldn't be buying top of the line gear!)

I do get that she is insinuating that the suit buys you speed. However, almost everyone has argued that it can't buy you enough speed to be something you're not. You either have the strokes and turns or you don't. If a person is less than proficient but the suit makes them feel better, so what?

I know a lot of people on my team who finally did buy a B70 and there strokes are less than proficient. They didn't miraculously win nationals, or even place, but I know that they felt like they had done everything they could, at that point, to prepare including having the best suit available.

I hope this makes sense. My mind kept going off on different tangents. I did a lot of backspacing!

I have to agree with Karen. Perfect stroke proficiency should not be a requirement to own a tech suit. And, contrary to what trpatt says, I don't think training a few times a week disqualifies you either. For some, that's all they can train. Very few swim 6x a week. Let the geezers have their gear.

However, I can also see where it would be easy to have a pet peeve about someone who buys a tech suit but refuses to work on stroke technique or doesn't put in any real training.

And I definitely agree with Ahelee and Jim that many of those hot babes could be rocking their great bods. Or just not that interested in the edge a B70 or LZR could give them.

Karen Duggan
May 12th, 2009, 05:14 PM
Eh-hem, Barbie. I never said, "Let the geezers have their gear."

A little editing, hmm?

The Fortress
May 12th, 2009, 05:16 PM
Eh-hem, Barbie. I never said, "Let the geezers have their gear."

A little editing, hmm?

Sorry those were my words. I tried to edit my post. Must have stuck it in the wrong place; I'll edit. lol. Yep, I think the geezers can have their gear.

Ahelee Sue Osborn
May 12th, 2009, 06:02 PM
I have to agree with Karen. Perfect stroke proficiency should not be a requirement to own a tech suit. And, contrary to what trpatt says, I don't think training a few times a week disqualifies you either. For some, that's all they can train. Very few swim 6x a week.

However, I can also see where it would be easy to have a pet peeve about someone who buys a tech suit but refuses to work on stroke technique or doesn't put in any real training.


This was my attempt to present a recent conversation where an actual "Female Pup" gave me her MO / opinion in regard to buying/wearing a tech suit at Nationals.

I admired her because I'm a coach and a swimmer interested in improving and getting faster. She had been in this "technique first" conversation on and off throughout the meet with the older members of the club.

I agreed with her that this could be accomplished with effort, concentration and attention to technique details.
Even with only 2-3 practices attended a week.

If we all waited to be perfect before buying a tech suit - no one in masters swimming would have one... no one.

That said, I'm really all for everyone having a tech suit if they take the steps to actually enter a swim meet.

I would never swim in a meet in a poly suit any longer.
It is slower to swim in a non-tech suit.
At least wear an older tech suit - or last year's discounted model.
But no poly or standard style lycra for me.
Why would I purposely add time onto a swim when I am giving my best effort? Even if its' not the season ending championships?

I take responsibility as the coach, to present stroke technique in a way that my swimmer will be inspired and, willing to work on it together.
And that they can be as fit as possible in their current life situation.

If I can accomplish this, I am full steam ahead in trying to convince the Pup or anyone else to see the light and get into any kind of a tech suit!

Sorry guys… I looked through all of my Clovis photos and I can’t find one that suits the discussion topic!

The Fortress
May 12th, 2009, 06:20 PM
This was my attempt to present a recent conversation where an actual "Female Pup" gave me her MO / opinion in regard to buying/wearing a tech suit at Nationals.

I admired her because I'm a coach and a swimmer interested in improving and getting faster. She had been in this "technique first" conversation on and off throughout the meet with the older members of the club.

I agreed with her that this could be accomplished with effort, concentration and attention to technique details.
Even with only 2-3 practices attended a week.

If we all waited to be perfect before buying a tech suit - no one in masters swimming would have one... no one.

That said, I'm really all for everyone having a tech suit if they take the steps to actually enter a swim meet.

I would never swim in a meet in a poly suit any longer.
It is slower to swim in a non-tech suit.
At least wear an older tech suit - or last year's discounted model.
But no poly or standard style lycra for me.
Why would I purposely add time onto a swim when I am giving my best effort? Even if its' not the season ending championships?

I take responsibility as the coach, to present stroke technique in a way that my swimmer will be inspired and, willing to work on it together.
And that they can be as fit as possible in their current life situation.

If I can accomplish this, I am full steam ahead in trying to convince the Pup or anyone else to see the light and get into any kind of a tech suit!

Sorry guys… I looked through all of my Clovis photos and I can’t find one that suits the discussion topic!

Well said. It would behoove us all to constantly think about improving our stroke technique, racing strategy, etc. I think your MVN charges are very, very lucky to have you! Wish I did. :)

I wonder if this young pup's reward analysis is more characteristic of talented young pups? Geezers often, not always of course, seem to have a different approach. Except ehoch of course.

ehoch
May 12th, 2009, 06:46 PM
I would never swim in a meet in a poly suit any longer.
It is slower to swim in a non-tech suit.
At least wear an older tech suit - or last year's discounted model.
But no poly or standard style lycra for me.
Why would I purposely add time onto a swim when I am giving my best effort? Even if its' not the season ending championships?


It's a good point - I think some of us still live with the "old way of thinking". You trained hard all season - most in season races did not really matter, because you can't swim fast unshaved and untapered. I remember doing long workouts right before big dual meets. You often see kids wear drag suits in small meets.

I am still on the fence - I probably lost the 50 by going with an older suit, but wore a Blue 70 for an off event. I think I may go really old school this summer.

Mswimming
May 12th, 2009, 06:49 PM
Ahelee, are you coaching at MVN with Mark now? What work out times?

Ahelee Sue Osborn
May 12th, 2009, 07:46 PM
It's a good point - I think some of us still live with the "old way of thinking".

I am still on the fence - I probably lost the 50 by going with an older suit, but wore a Blue 70 for an off event. I think I may go really old school this summer.

I'm a bit of a geek swim meet swimmer.
I love meets and swim the max number of events always as "training".
Love the social aspect being there with everyone and watching their progress as well.
This is a philosophy I try to represent as a coach. I take any swimmer along for any part of the ride they want to join.

These in season meets are definitely high quality training because I swim with max effort even when I'm tired.
I have surprised myself swimming best times at 1-day meets even on the last event!
It gives me the chance to work on different strokes and distances. Sometimes even the opportunity to make TT times in my "off events".

I also realize that things can happen.
Well laid plans have been disrupted!

Last Summer at the very last moment, I was not able to attend LC Nationals. Super frustrating, but at least I had swum in all the LC meets in the months leading up so it was not a complete loss.

Who knows if everything will go as planned and the "big meet" is all I hope for? Ever fallen sick for the big meet?

It takes so much pressure off at the championships to know I have already posted some decent times going into the meet. I like to be seeded in the right place according to my current level of fitness. No guessing entry times.

So, I always wear a tech-suit and am ready to swim fast every time!
:)

The pups can go along for any part of the ride.
I try to be an example of my own coaching philosophy.

some_girl
May 12th, 2009, 09:41 PM
It gives me the chance to work on different strokes and distances. Sometimes even the opportunity to make TT times in my "off events".

...

It takes so much pressure off at the championships to know I have already posted some decent times going into the meet. I like to be seeded in the right place according to my current level of fitness. No guessing entry times.

So, I always wear a tech-suit and am ready to swim fast every time!
:)


That's so interesting. I don't wear a suit for in-season meets for a few reasons:

* I taper well and I am not going to do crazy good times suit or no suit, and being moderately thrifty, I am going to save my suit for when I will be fast and up for it.

* New Englands (aka best meet ever if I haven't sold it hard enough) lets you swim almost every event (4/5 per day), and we rest for that meet, so I do have a chance to swim off events fast.

* I only started swimming competitively a few years ago and need practice racing more than everything else. Since I am not going to be going best times anyway (seriously, I can't imagine how resting helps so much), I may as well use the meet to practice racing and only worry about times for comparison.

I certainly don't begrudge people suits in any meet though -- that's just how I roll. (I would be lying if I said I didn't try extra hard to beat the person next to me when they are suited-up. Heh.)

SwimStud
May 12th, 2009, 10:33 PM
I'm no pup but I turned down a loaner of a B70 for my next meet today.
I don't want to put a suit on when someone else's "boys" have been in there first!

Bobinator
May 12th, 2009, 11:33 PM
I don't blame you...I wouldn't want to wear someone elses underwear and I think a swimsuit is just like underwear!:agree:

lefty
May 13th, 2009, 11:32 AM
I don't blame you...I wouldn't want to wear someone elses underwear and I think a swimsuit is just like underwear!:agree:

Yeah and I haven't peed in my underware in 30 years...

stillwater
May 13th, 2009, 08:07 PM
What happened thirty years ago?

lefty
May 13th, 2009, 09:36 PM
What happened thirty years ago?


I was 3 and drank too much water. Or perhaps I just didnt care!

jim thornton
May 13th, 2009, 09:46 PM
The male preoccupation/fear of somehow being contaminated by another guy's "boys" is amusing to me. Especially in a suit that spends all its time in chlorinated water.

What exactly is the nature of "boys"phobia?

Rich, if Natalie Coughlin or Amanda Beard offered you the opportunity, totally in the privacy of your own home, to put on their thoroughly chlorinated bikini brief bottoms--assuming these would fit--would you be tempted to do so, or be disgusted by the prospect? Or Pamela Lee Anderson, assuming she is being treated with penicillin for whatever Tommy Lee gave her? Would you be even remotely tempted to don her hip huggers?

Be honest here.

I personally would love to wear Amanda Beard's suit, though I know I couldn't fit into it. But perhaps "girls"philia is a different form of illness from "boys"phobia.

PS When I interviewed Dara Torres, I begged her to give me one of her old LZRs, but she wouldn't claiming I wouldn't fit. Probably some weird contractual arrangement with Speedo.

SwimStud
May 13th, 2009, 09:49 PM
Rich, if Natalie Coughlin or Amanda Beard offered you the opportunity, totally in the privacy of your own home, to put on their thoroughly chlorinated bikini brief bottoms--assuming these would fit--would you be tempted to do so, or be disgusted by the prospect? Or Pamela Lee Anderson, assuming she is being treated with penicillin for whatever Tommy Lee gave her? Would you be even remotely tempted to don her hip huggers?



Well beauties that they are, a very comely female swimmer tried to get me to put on their FS Pro last year...I had to say no...

tjrpatt
May 13th, 2009, 10:01 PM
Well beauties that they are, a very comely female swimmer tried to get me to put on their FS Pro last year...I had to say no...


Someone told me that they won't watching swimming on tv anymore because of the full bodies suits that the young women wore at NCAAs and the Olympics. When this person watches swimming on tv, this person prefers the regular female suit.

stillwater
May 13th, 2009, 10:08 PM
When this person watches swimming on tv, this person prefers the regular female suit.

So do I.

fanstone
May 13th, 2009, 10:18 PM
You want to see hot bodies, watch beach volleyball, preferably Brazilian style. They are using bikinis nowadays. Jim, this is a family forum, so I won't tell you what I would do with Amanda's suit...better than putting them on....ever see how they make an Arabian horse lift its head and look good?

The Fortress
May 13th, 2009, 10:27 PM
Someone told me that they won't watching swimming on tv anymore because of the full bodies suits that the young women wore at NCAAs and the Olympics. When this person watches swimming on tv, this person prefers the regular female suit.

It's a race, not a modeling contest. I guess that guy isn't that interested in the swimming.

stillwater
May 13th, 2009, 10:35 PM
It's a race, not a modeling contest. I guess that guy isn't that interested in the swimming.

I can multi-task.

The Fortress
May 13th, 2009, 10:38 PM
I can multi-task.

Multi-tasking good. Turning the TV off for lack of interest in swimming bad. I'll still watch the guys in full body suits.

Karen Duggan
May 13th, 2009, 10:39 PM
Men CANNOT multi-task. Because if they could I wouldn't have to: do the laundry, clean the house, do the shopping, raise the kids, and work full time. Someone I know can do one of these at a time, and usually only after I've gotten so pissed... but I digress. :bolt:

Peter Cruise
May 14th, 2009, 01:58 AM
Karen- you just don't get it...we can multi-non-task, cheerfully ignoring our various tasks while basking in our testosterone induced fog while we go on doing whatever we feel like doing. Women are envious of our ability to be oblivious of that which is needful to be done, so they seek to shatter our serenity.
They are very good at that.

gobears
May 14th, 2009, 07:53 AM
Why would I purposely add time onto a swim when I am giving my best effort? Even if its' not the season ending championships?



Your post makes sense (and who can argue with a speedster like you!). I'm no "pup" but I'm too thrifty for a tech suit at this point. I'd rather spend that money on many other things. That said, I don't think of wearing a regular suit as "adding" time to my swims. I think I'm choosing not to subtract as much time by wearing a tech suit. There's a difference.

SwimStud
May 14th, 2009, 08:26 AM
Men CANNOT multi-task. Because if they could I wouldn't have to: do the laundry, clean the house, do the shopping, raise the kids, and work full time. Someone I know can do one of these at a time, and usually only after I've gotten so pissed... but I digress. :bolt:
We multi-task; you think ignoring a nagging wife, drinking a beer and watching the game happens without effort? :bolt:

poolraat
May 14th, 2009, 12:59 PM
We multi-task; you think ignoring a nagging wife, drinking a beer and watching the game happens without effort? :bolt:


It has become somewhat effortless now. But it took 20 years to get to that point.:bolt:

Ahelee Sue Osborn
May 14th, 2009, 03:42 PM
Your post makes sense I'm no "pup" but I'm too thrifty for a tech suit at this point. I'd rather spend that money on many other things. That said, I don't think of wearing a regular suit as "adding" time to my swims. I think I'm choosing not to subtract as much time by wearing a tech suit. There's a difference.

Thanks Amy -

I respect your choice and am happy that at least you have a choice.
And all the young pups in their decisions regarding purchasing a costly tech-suit or in choosing not to wear one at all as well.

As far as adding vs. subtracting time?
I don't have a column on my best times list to show what suit I was wearing at the time.
These are simply my best times.
Next year, when the approved suits are listed, I'll wear whatever I have that is legal or change it up.
But the best times I will try to improve on are already set. My goal will be to transcend my swimming from 2009.

It took me quite awhile to get myself into a tech-suit.

When I did, it was only because I was given an extra, unused, last year's model from our senior age-group team stash.
At World's in Perth, a girlfriend of mine shared her FSPro with me since it no longer fit her.
Fort kept encouraging me to buy a B70, but I had to really save up for that one!

I have to laugh WITH the young pups who are denied because of the cost of a tech suit... Because seriously?
As a swim coach, life is very similar to going to college and being a struggling starving student!
But its' totally worth it :)

Contrary to what many believe, most coaches buy their equipment and suits.

Also had to laugh about the earlier thread discussing sharing suits.
I always bring my extra suits to the big meets in case there is a swimmer I find who might enjoy trying one out.
I think an old tech-suit is better than no tech suit.
And it is the only opportunity many of these girls have had to try one out.

Every single girl I have loaned a suit to or convinced to buy one has said, "Why did I wait so long?"

Kind of like the words you hear when someone gets glasses and improves their eyesight.
Ha Ha... I know - I know,
"There's a difference"
:)

Karen Duggan
May 14th, 2009, 03:59 PM
You see gentlemen, it's those "cute and charming" little comments that just make me smile, and not get divorced!

I contend that if men COULD multi-task in a productive way (which does NOT include ignoring your wife, you weenie!) that our society could probably evolve another 200 years in just a day!

jim thornton
May 14th, 2009, 04:13 PM
Karen, alas I think our respective genders are somewhat the product of our respective hormonal milieu in the womb. A greater proportion of testosterone during critical periods of development seems to lengthen and thin the corpus collosum, which serves as the major connecting cable of sorts, between the two brain hemispheres in men. Women tend to have shorter, fatter corpus collosi. Thus the theory is that you can better integrate your thinking, multiprocess, and benefit from "intuition"--which is really a kind of global processing of information that comes up with the right answser but can sometimes be hard to explain logically where that right answer came from.

We males, on the other hand, are (or so the theory goes) able to focus a lot of attention, almost obsessively so, on one thing at a time. Your husband may not be great at doing all kinds of projects simultaneously, but I am willing to bet that if he starts something, he probably will stay at it much longer than you would feel comfortable doing so, and keep at it till it's done.

One of the theories for why autism strikes so many more boys than girls is actually that the brains of people with the disorder are supermasculinized, cognitively speaking. Asperger's kids, for instance, get so obsessed by a single topic they learn everything there is to learn about it, while ignoring everything else.

Women are very good at reading people's faces and emotions; men much less so; autistic people not at all.

Interestingly, the psychiatrist who came up with this testosterone in the womb theory of autism is the brother of the guy who played Borat. Can't remember the doctor's first name, but he is a Baron-Cohen, too.

In summary: if you have sons, and feel sympathy for how their brains are constructed, try to see that your husband's brain is constructed similarly, and cut him some slack!

Karen Duggan
May 14th, 2009, 04:26 PM
Interesting.

I do get the whole "we're different" thing, however I do think man has a pretty good grasp on free choice. I've noted that usually when something is important, and multi-tasking is indeed involved, it does get done (again, only using my hubby as an example).

Guys CAN multi-task if it's important enough to them, I guess is my point. The problem lies, therein, are the same things important to men and women?
(Perhaps we should take this to the NSR thread?)

BillS
May 14th, 2009, 04:35 PM
Back at least somewhat toward the topic . . . at Clovis, like-minded lascivious Cro-Magnon cave dwellers and I voted Nike tanks as the best suit cut for young pups. I'm guessing the suits are as fast as any other non-tech tank, but the cuts were superior -- at least in the criteria that mattered to us.

B70s can be quite flattering as well, especially when the viewer of the B70-clad subject is lost in the fog of a good endorphin buzz.

jim thornton
May 14th, 2009, 05:01 PM
http://www.swimtowin.com/images/n74220.jpg

vs.

http://assets.sella.co.nz/images/thumb/9/f/f/4mf9ff-330x256-bg.jpg


I am losing my train of thought.

What was that you said, Karen?

SwimStud
May 14th, 2009, 05:03 PM
You see gentlemen, it's those "cute and charming" little comments that just make me smile, and not get divorced!

I contend that if men COULD multi-task in a productive way (which does NOT include ignoring your wife, you weenie!) that our society could probably evolve another 200 years in just a day!

I keep asking my wife if I can multi-task but she says she wants to keep it monogamous...:bump:

Karen Duggan
May 14th, 2009, 05:16 PM
I said productive, not reproductive!

Now be a good weenie and just rest quietly on this little bun. Can I get you some ketchup?

(I guess we all know that Phelps can multi task)
:lmao:

geochuck
May 14th, 2009, 05:23 PM
Just a thought here, some suits that the younger swimmers are wearing look like they are not hitech. They just look like a regular suit but are made of hiteck fabrics. Several suits even though they just look regular are also teflon coated and have great compression for the inner core. Just don't believe because they look like a regular suit they are not hitech, they are...

knelson
May 14th, 2009, 07:09 PM
It's a good point - I think some of us still live with the "old way of thinking". You trained hard all season - most in season races did not really matter, because you can't swim fast unshaved and untapered. I remember doing long workouts right before big dual meets. You often see kids wear drag suits in small meets.

I agree, and I think we still have a tendency to almost not want to swim too fast in season. It's sort of like we've let the genie out of the bottle too soon! It's sort of a silly way of thinking, but I know I expect to swim much faster at my taper meet and if I don't it's sort of a letdown even if the time is good.

KEWebb18
May 14th, 2009, 07:15 PM
I think that as a "pup" you are trained to go fast no matter what. I remember some of my best high school in-season meets were done not ONLY wearing lycra suits but also after some tough workouts (for some reason, my coach thought that we were slacking off....)
I, personally, would much rather see a tech suit than a non-tech suit. As my mom would say, "it leaves more to the imagination" :D

Michael Heather
May 16th, 2009, 02:09 PM
Now be a good weenie and just rest quietly on this little bun. Can I get you some ketchup?
:lmao:



Did you even think about what you wrote?


?

That Guy
May 17th, 2009, 01:02 AM
It's a race, not a modeling contest. I guess that guy isn't that interested in the swimming.

WHA-WHA-WHAT??!??? :confused::confused::confused:

What did I ever do to... oh right... I did post that other thing about the thing with the stuff. Never mind, carry on with making fun of me.