So my wife’s 11 year old college swimming records 800 and 400 were broken last night. She says she doesn’t care but I have heartache at how they were broken, with the new suits (the Speedo LZRs and Australian BlueSeventy) these new suits seemed to have created quite a stir because they give so much buoyancy that kids are posting times they would never have dreamed of doing. Additionally the record was broken with a 5th place finish. That really just sucks to me.
Records are made to be broken but I’m sort of disappointed that it will be with a swim suit that provides such an advantage. The NCAA and FINA are having a tough time figuring out what to do about all the records that have been broken since these suits that add between 3 and 5 points of buoyancy have been allowed.
Kids were even swimming with two suits this year for extra-extra buoyancy.
My wife seems to think coaches made mistake to open up the door to this kind of technology. Suits that reduce drag by being thin, lightweight, or tight - sure. But suits that create positive buoyancy in a swimmer - no.
Hope this doesn’t sound like sour grapes coming from a person who’s wife is about to have her last two, 11-year old athletic records broken tonight. It was cool going back every year to look at the board to see if they were still standing. They stood to long, a good progressing team should have beat them years ago. But a 5th place finish?
Its a bummer, but technology has changed almost every sport. Beyond the equipment (the LZR’s, Golf clubs, tri-bikes etc., more advanced diets (GNC, Powerbar, Gatorade), heart rate monitors, power meters. etc, its very hard to compare any records from one generation to another.
11 years is 11 years more than most held the record.
The worst thing about the new suits is the retarded pricing and short lifespan of the suits. I remember paper suits from back in the day costing like $50 for men and my parents giving me endless grief about that cost. So more than eliminating records, I think the real effect of these suits they aggressively take swimming out of the hands of most middle class Americans and firmly place it in the upper-middle to upper class.
I’ve been watching the Patriot League Championship, and most of the swimmers are wearing one of these two suits. A lot of records have been broken here too. Part of me wants to say, “well it’s still the engine that counts,” but think about the team that couldn’t afford $500/suit x 50 swimmers and the disadvantage they’re at!
To the comment about the coaches being wrong ethically in allowing the technology: what do they care? Their swimmers are breaking records and winning meets! The only one’s who are going to care are the teams without the suits.
This is really no different than tri bikes… The properties of water just make the suits more advantageous in water than aero equipment is on the bike.
Kids were even swimming with two suits this year for extra-extra buoyancy.
Technically, the suits themselves can’t be bouyant. However, if when worn, they are trapping air bubbles which seems to be the case, then they may indeed be making the whole package of the swimmer and the suit more buoyant. Add that to the hydrodynamic benefits of the SCS coating and you have a total package that is potentially faster.
Kids were even swimming with two suits this year for extra-extra buoyancy.
Technically, the suits themselves can’t be bouyant. However, if when worn, they are trapping air bubbles which seems to be the case, then they may indeed be making the whole package of the swimmer and the suit more buoyant. Add that to the hydrodynamic benefits of the SCS coating and you have a total package that is potentially faster.
thats true, but this thread is ridiculous.
could it be that the competition is steeper today because of the growing field in swimming? no. could it be that stroke technique has gotten better of the years? no. do butterfliers today find it impossible to set records because of the lack of the rule that allowed swimmers to streamline as long as they wanted to? no.
sounds to me like its not the swimmer, its the suit.
oh wait, “the suit doesn’t get up at 6 am” for swim practice.
This is an ongoing story that crosses generations. My dad swam in the 50’s. I swam in the late 70’s. He used to tell me how lucky I was to be able to train in a 25 yd pool instead of the 20 yd one he trained in, we had fat wave stopping lane markers and they had ropes with a few floats back in his day. We had lycra suits (the LZR of its day) he swam in cotton because he couldn’t afford the newfangled nylon suits. . . .
Its a bummer, but technology has changed almost every sport. Beyond the equipment (the LZR’s, Golf clubs, tri-bikes etc., more advanced diets (GNC, Powerbar, Gatorade), heart rate monitors, power meters. etc, its very hard to compare any records from one generation to another.
Is this the case with triathlon? I'm not being snarky ... I'm honestly just curious. It seems to me that there are plenty of pre-2009 technology course and event records that still stand, aren't there?
I think equipment does come into play in triathlon. A lot of the bigger races seem to be fairly new (10 years or less, so hard data is not really there), but here are some stats for 2 older races:
Mens Kona record, 1996 Luc Van Lierde, he also won in 1999, His 1999 time was slower than 2005, 2006 & 2007 winners. Doesn’t prove much since I hear the course is very weather dependent. Wonens Kona record is 1992, Paula Newby-Fraiser who is also the only woman to break the 9 hour mark. Of course, this tells me its the person, not the equipment.
Eagleman 70.3 (started in 1981) the record was set in 2002, with the last 7 winners being under 4:00. The 1’st 10 races, the winner was over 4:00. Not sure this proves anything, but I would think equipment had something to do with it.
On a personal note, when I upgraded by bike from a very good road bike, to a tri-bike, I picked up over 1/mph.
In the end, its the engine, not the equipment, but 2 equal engines, I’ll take the one with the newest and best equipment.
Well, think about cycling. People are racing on 15-lb bikes today. When Lance was racing in 1995, his bike was one of the lightest around at 18.5 pounds. And then look at wheels! A friend built a 1051g Zipp 202. Imagine what Coppi or Hinault or Pantani would be pushing if their wheels had been 2-3 pounds lighter.
This doesn’t even take aero into account. A Zipp today would make the most aero wheel from 1995 look pathetic, and people in 1985 would say “What’s aero?”
I think that as long as there is competition, there will be legal ways to buy more speed. Or you could switch to running, which the only equipment you need are shoes and cajones of steel. But then you’ll say, “Pros can afford altitude tents and daily massages and the best sports nutrition.” It never ends.
A Zipp today would make the most aero wheel from 1995 look pathetic, and people in 1985 would say “What’s aero?” \
We had disc wheels back then, they were just heavier. Front wheels were flat spoked, radial laced, with as few as 14 spokes. So the aero factor is not that much different, but the weight is a big factor…Of course we were still riding road bikes back then, so that accounts for just all about the time differences in equipment from today…
Local High School anecdotal evidence of the Blueseventy advantage - Backstroker season best in the 100 was 1:02, went :58 in the suit. Freestyler state champion (female) went :22 in the suit at the END of a 6000 yard practice - no taper, no shave - this time was equal to her State Championship time. 500 Free swimmer season best 5:08, went 4:58 with the suit.
This technology is an absolute advantage for those who can afford the purchase. Those who can’t are at more of a disadvantage today than ever before. Case and point - that 500 Free swimmer has a sibling who is a coach and can get a ‘good deal’ on the suit. His team mate, who’s season best is 5:10, is from a large family that have priorities that supercede the $300 plus investment in swim wear.
The international swim community is too far down this path to turn back at this point. There is no way these suits will be deemed illegal anytime soon. Speedo is too big a player in the funding of swim programs world wide to piss off at this point.
Full Disclosure: My daughter, who has never broken :31 in her 100 Breast opening split, tried out her Blueseventy the other night at the end of practice…:28 seconds.
Technically, the suits themselves can’t be bouyant. However, if when worn, they are trapping air bubbles which seems to be the case, then they may indeed be making the whole package of the swimmer and the suit more buoyant.
So you’re saying i need to fart more while swimming and ill go faster?
I think swimming has gone down a road swimming did not need to go down. Technology does change, and I think gradual advancements are fine, and a fact of life, and to be expected. New pools that are faster, training tools/advancements are fine. I feel that swimming and running are quite pure sports, and it can be kept quite pure. Cycling and triathlon rely quite heavily on equipment, so are going to be affected by technology. If you like playing with gear - you will probably be attracted to sports that embrace technology.
I like the idea of being able to compare performances between generations - but the new swim suits have taken that away to a significant degree. It has added, quite unnecessarily, another layer of expense, to a sport that really does not need that.
I vote for simplicity where simplicity works just fine!
This technology is an absolute advantage for those who can afford the purchase.
The Blue-Seventy suit is far less money than the Speedo Lazer. I also note our new Nineteen Frequency SS is even less money - $250 MSRP!!
I keep hearing the money argument from the swim crowd, but I was talking to a top swim coach recently and she said that, it was a bit of a red herring. By and large the people that progress to this level of swimming, where wearing a suit like this really matters, most often come from a modest to a decent amount of money. Not saying this is the case with every swimmer, but my guess is that if you surveyed the kids in the finals of the state championships and asked what their family income was, and if they could give that information to you, my guess is that it would be mostly upper-middle class. Bottom line - these kids/families can afford $300 odd for a swim suit.
That’s the point…
Kid A) goes x in the 200 free…say 1.5 seconds slower than the state cut
Kid B) also goes x in the 200 free
Kid A is rich and buys a suit…bam goes to state
Kid B is poor and no suit…bam no state
My girlfriend is a HS swim coach and noted that at this years state finals, the majority of the LZR/B70 suits were not the state champions, but those who were barely good enough to get to state…hmm I wonder what got them there?
Its stupid shit and won’t change because FINA and USA Swimming is too afraid to lose those almighty dollars. Its creating far too much separation.
That’s my point and the point this top ranking coach in Canada was making - it’s rare to see a “poor” kid reach that level in the first place. Go the other way - how often do you see kids from really poor areas, excelling in swimming. I am not trying to be elitist here, just facing the reality of the way sport is in North America.
I spent a short time doing fund raising for an organization that was raising training funds for Olympic Bound Athletes. By and large we were handing over money to kids and families that were firmly upper middle class and beyond in Canada. The point is that to reach this level of competition in most sports, you need to come from a decent amount of money to begin with.
Unless they repeal the law of gravity, my HS record in the high jump will only be broken by athletic skill, not technology.
While 11 years is a long time for a record to stand, my record is now 32 years in the books. My brother’s record in the pole vault is now at 34 years, I believe. Says more about the high school than about us, unfortunately…
