Tech Suit Survey Comments

There was some minor editing to remove identifying information, and to fix a few errors in spelling/grammar. The comments are grouped according to the respondent’s answer to the first question, “should technical suits be allowed in SCY meets?”

Comments from respondents who voted to allow the suits  Allowing the suits for SCY meets gives swimmers the opportunity to get some utility out of their investment. I'd suggest a phase out date based on manufacture's production/availability.  Being an older swimmer the long technical suits with zipper are much more comfortable than the knee length. After going to the toilet, I literally cannot pull the present legal suit up. I have to go back to a short practice suit to compete. I think that we should be able to wear anything we want for SCY meets.  I only started swimming as an adult and am not fast enough to realize much of an advantage from these suits. I am not nearly as fast as my peers, so I tend to swim in meets against myself, trying to beat my personal bests. I don't think I will ever convince myself to buy one of these suits, but I don't see why that should not be a personal choice. We're all adults and we should be able to decide for ourselves whether or not we want to use a tech suit.  I personally would never compete in a tech suit, but it's always good for a chuckle to see an old fat guy wearing one.  I really would like the long suit.  I would suggest a compromise, let the men use farmer john to the knee suits, with a zippered back. We do not need the LZR or blue seventy, the older Speedo were just fine.  If the women can have neck‐to‐knee suits, so should the men, period.  It doesn't matter to me either way. I have no problem allowing suits of any kind either in yards or meters.  Just look at how many previous Olympians competed at Atlanta because they could again wear their tech‐suits. It does make a difference in how one swims and since SCY is a United States phenomenon (no FINA involvement) then the question is 'Why not allow us to wear them?'  Masters competition needs fewer prohibitions / restrictions, rather than more, to encourage participation.  My issue with the suits is expense, @ several 100$ a pop these suits disenfranchised young swimmers of less financial means. At the masters level this is not problem, so I feel suits should be allowed here, as long as times in the SUITS do not count outside USMS.  The objective is to get people swimming! Only bar the full body suits in national competitions. The majority of us just swim. We do not get hung up on times or could not compete on a national scale anyway.  The SCY record book has already seen ‐ to the extreme ‐ the effects of the high‐tech suits over the past few years. The 'contamination' if you will has already occurred. Since SCY is not a FINA‐recognized course, there's no downside politically to restricting use of the FINA‐banned suits to that course.

Comments from respondents who voted against allowing the suits  Allowing the tech suits for yards would require those of us who also swim meters to invest in two sets of competition suits, instead of a single suit for that we could use for both yards and meters.  At a time when non‐tech suits cost well more than $200, I can only imagine the cost of tech suits for a small market such as Masters. Before the ban, tech suits were well over $400 and more. With a small market, prices would soar. US Masters should not adopt a return to such suits which would only discourage swimmers from competing. In addition, those who advocate a return to the suits should just get over it and understand that their times are unlikely to ever return to the times of their youth. Our performances should be judged on a comparable basis to all other competitive swimmers in the world ‐‐ those who are limited to non‐tech suits.  Ban them. Quit making exceptions.  Thanks for doing all this. I don't know much about the suits. It seems like we should follow what the younger swimmers are allowed to do. We certainly don't need to have advantages that they don't get.  Do not 'make up' new rules. Follow FINA's lead. Put swimming on an even field for everyone, not just the elite who can afford a new $400 plus suit every year. Let's remember what swimming is all about. USS is not changing the rules to suit them!  Don't make things complicated. Stick with the FINA rules.  Down with the 'Tech suits!'  For what reason is this even considered? Tech suits give a distinct advantage to the 'serious' competitors because of their cost, among other things. It seems to me that 'recreational competitors are more likely to participate in short course meets than in others. Let's encourage them by making the opportunity as open as possible without loading in favor of the select swimmers.  Good riddance!  Great survey. We need to be on the same page with USS and FINA. As much good as they did for me, they have caused more problems than they are worth! And they are worth a lot! (cost prohibitive for many swimmers).  I am generally not in favor of allowing competitors to use 'advanced technology' fabric suites, which may provide a competitive advantage and that may not be reasonably available to all competitors. Let's keep things simple and on a level playing field.  I am inalterably opposed to the continued use of technical suits of any kind (that includes wetsuits). I swam the Chesapeake Bay Swim (4.4) three times, once in 64 degree water without a wetsuit. Technical suits demean the sport, providing an artificial aid to the swimmer and skewing the competition. FINA, finally, has banned the use of these suits, and I think Masters Swimming needs to stay in line. I am also a high school coach and write for Swimming World Magazine among other aquatic publications. I see zero benefit for the sport to going back to technical suits. Please enlighten the convention that tech suits no longer have a place in the sport.  I believe the tech suits are a huge benefit to swimmers, but do not portray the true amount of talent or hard work. If everyone were to have access to the suits, then maybe the playing field would be level. However, I think only a couple individuals will have access to them and it is clear to me, through past events with the tech suits, that they make the playing field unequal. The fact that swimming is based on talent, hard work and heart are some of its greatest assets. Tech suits would wreak havoc on that.  I do mostly open water swimming and triathlons. 'Technical suits' have been rampant in triathlon this summer because they are still legal and many triathletes are trying to get all the advantage they can. Swimming and triathlon need to level the playing field and allow swimming to return to the sport it once was. I think all technical suits should be banned in competition.  I don't like the thought of losing a race to a swimmer that I would normally beat, because he spent $200+ on a tech suit and I didn't.  I don't think a product that makes you artificially faster should be allowed, thus the FINA ruling, plus mainly those willing to dish out a lot of money have the suit and not those swimmers across the board.  I feel although advances in technology in athletics are inevitable, I don't feel it should be allowed. Either way, I still love Masters swimming. Even though it does take away from my swim placement at meets, I compete to beat my own time. So if I wear the tech suits, I will not get real results.  I feel there should be consistency across all meets regardless of distance. Why would SCY need an exception?  I feel we need to be consistent with the FINA ruling to preserve the integrity of our organization. If the LMSC in question desires to wear the 'suits' I would suggest for them to sponser and host a non‐USMS sanctioned meet and swim away...maybe I can wear my wetsuit!  I gave away my $400 tech suit because it was 'finished', NOW they want to bring them back? How frustrating! I am adamantly against the return of the tech suit.  I guess I prefer a level playing field and don't want to have to spend 100's of dollars on a suit to be on the same field as everyone else. I'd still train, compete, enjoy meets but it seems the amount of money you can spend doing this just gets out of control.  I have used the suits in the past & I agree that they are faster. At the long course in P.R. I felt like I had been liberated, I felt free from $ costs & loved the level playing field.  I just think it is best to be in compliance with FINA guidelines.  I see no point in allowing them any more than allowing wetsuits or fins. They artificially improve your times. Their use depends more on your pocketbook than your skill.  I think if the suit cannot be worn at long course meets it should not be worn at short course meets.  I think rules should be consistent across courses and levels of competition. I also think that allowing an escalating 'arms race' of suit technology doesn't really benefit anyone but the swimsuit industry in the long run. I have generally resisted the peer pressure to buy technical suits so I am looking forward to competing without that pressure.  I think tech suits give their wearers an unfair advantage. Their use was diminished in Masters competition by FINA and I think that to overturn their decision is unfair. Records, whether they are local, state, national, or world, should reflect the swimming ability of the individual rather than the fact that they were wearing a tech suit. I compete in Masters because I enjoy the competition and I enjoy swimming. I feel that allowing tech suits for SCY competition is not a good idea. FINA ruled to not allow tech suits and I think this ruling should stand for SCY, SCM, and LCM competition.  I think that all meets should have the same swim suits. If SCY gets a 'suit break' it cheapens the records and the times attained at the event. This is, in a way, like using senior tees, or ladies tees, on the golf course; the impact of the score, or the swimming times, is lessened.  I think the suits give people who can afford them an unfair advantage. We're master's swimmers, not Olympians.  I think we should follow the rules that FINA has put out. This way, we are in line with the rest of the swimming world. It is the fairest way to do it.  I will wear the standard Jammer no matter if the rules change or not...just happy to compete.  I would be in favor of keeping track which records have been broken with technical suits and without.  I would not be in favor of allowing the use of the suits.  If it is good enough for Olympians to use a regular swim suit then so should us lesser mortals not use them  If swimmers want to improve, they should train harder and or smarter, not 'purchase' their improvements.  If the technical suits are not allowed, keep it for all meets. I have been competing in more meets each year. To continue and encourage others and make times meaningful, the rules need to be consistent. What the proposal is saying is we don't care about SCY times, so to be competitive you need to spend a lot of money. At least more than is currently needed. I have competed in other sports continuously for over 45 years. AS I tell people, swimming is an expensive sport.  If they are legal they should be allowed for use. If not legal then no.  If you can't swim fast, you're not swimming fast. If you let people use suits like this, then let them wear water wings and flippers...  I'm a triathlete that thinks wetsuits (and the like) are for cold water ONLY. I'm for the techical and wetsuits for those that can't swim but they should not be eligible for awards. Otherwise, I'd like to choose between a pull buoy and swim fins in my next triathlon. And if I ever compete in the pool I definitely want to wear fins! What's the difference?!?!?  It is my opinion that the decision to use tech suits should be consistent. Either allow them or don't. I vote 'NO'. For those of you who have already invested money in them here is a suggestion. Take up ocean swimming and use it the ocean as a practice suit to guard against stinging nettles. Better than letting it dryrot.  It is not in the best interest of our organization to have different rules for different courses unless there is an overwhelming consensus for us to deviate from FINA. Further, the rest of the world has decided that technical suits provide an unfair advantage and are not in the best interest of the sport. Being the only federation in the world that allows them would impact the integrity of our organization and the times generated in competition would not be taken seriously.  Keep it simple and consistent ‐ adopt FINA rules  Keep the rules consistent regardless of short course, long course, yards, meters, open water etc. If they aren't allowed then drop the issue.. .you consider this, you are opening up a big can of worms  Let the swimmer win ‐ not a suit!  Masters swimmers truly need to move past the notion that swimming fast in a suit is the same as improving one's ability. Even though I'm a younger swimmer in USMS, I've been involved in Masters swimming for about 10 years‐ I strongly oppose the use of technical suits in all swimming venues, whether it be NCAA, USA‐Swimming, or USMS.  Maybe I'm 'old school' but competition shoulf focus on swimming ability and less on 'technology' behind the suit. That being said; I compete in triathlons where I get passed by riders who have invested more in their bike technology. What can you do?  My focus is on short course meets  My thought is that the new suits should never have been allowed by FINA in the first placed. What they do is greatly cheapen the records set by the wearers. They are grossly unfair to the people whose records have been broken by science, not by the individual swimmer. A hearty thumbs down on this one.  People should just swim harder.  Rules need to be consistent across all events. Allowing skinsuits in certain events and not others creates confusion. Either allow them at all events or not.  Speedo (briefs or one‐piece), swim cap, googles. End of discussion. Let those who want swimskins go elsewhere.  Swimmers should have an equal playing field and I was very happy to see FINA take a stand. Times should be a true reflection of a person's ability.  Swimming is about training, not clothing.  Tech suits had evolved into swimming equipment, much like pull buoys, paddles, and fins. When I was in college I could swim a faster 500 free with a pull buoy in practice than I could in a meet without one. Tech suits can enhance body position and therefore should not be allowed in meets.  Technical suits are an unfair advantage. That's why FINA banned them. If people want to use them, that's fine, but their results shouldn't count...  Technical suits take away what people can actually bring to the sport when they start relying on other means to shave off time. I would love people to train and achieve the results they are seeking. The old fashioned way!  Techsuits only demonstrate technical advances by the companies and the depth of swimmers pockets. They do not demonstrate improvement in a swimmer's skills or conditioning  The absence of definitive suit regulations by FINA during the 'Suit Era' allowed swimmers to wear expensive buoyant materials to float higher on the water than any natural position would allow in a swimming pool. Swimmers even took further advantage of this by wearing two of these suits on top of each other. The marketing and success of these suits provided increasing amounts of revenue for the top swim suit manufacturerers while hurting the integrity of the sport. Furthermore, the necessary equipment required to compete in swimming events has historically been inexpensive; however, the newer suits made swimmers feel that they needed hundreds of dollars to compete at top levels, or just do the best they can do. While participating in the April 2010 Zones competition, I was shocked to see so many swimmers where the full body suits, for I was unaware that USMS did not initiate their ban the same time as FINA. I believe that these and all swimmers should focus on improving the most important accessory, their body, rather than equipment.  The modified 'legal' suits are good enough ‐ we don't need to buck the decision that applies to the rest of the swimming world just because some of us need a lot of support. Making an exception for the masters makes it seem like we are less capable swimmers in my view. The hi‐tech suits are too expensive and too gimmicky for me. Let's keep it simple.  The technical suits are essentially wetsuits that give swimmers an unfair advantage and compromise the integrity of our sport. FINA made the right decision in banning them and USMS should follow the same precedent in all competitions. I'd like to see our LMSC delegation voice a strong vote of 'no thanks' when this issue is being debated at convention.  The question of multiple suits should be revisited. The use of a second swimsuit or swim 'bra top' should be allowed for Masters women swimmers. This would not give swimmers an unfair advantage in any way, but it would allow for modest coverage and comfort.  The rules should be consistent for all meets, events, classes of swimmers, etc.  The rules should remain the same throughout for all.  The Tech suits make it much easier to go faster especially if you are a larger person. As shown by most of the results at the top level of swimming, the times are much faster with them than without them. Lets keep tech suits out of a sport where true work is the reason for swimming fast times.  These suits make the competition more about the gear than the swimmer.  These suits represent a mechanical advantage over swimmers who don’t use them. Our sport is based on strength, fitness, and mental ability, not mechanics.  They are no longer manufacturing these suits, therefore the people who already have them would have an unfair advantage over those who did not previously purchase them$ Swimming should not allow for some competitors to have an unfair advantage over others because they chose to buy an expensive suit.  This question has been asked and answered. Why are we still talking about it?  Two different sets of rules (one for meters and one for yards) will just cause confusion. Seems if these technical suits are not allowed for international competition, we should just let them disappear from use period.  USMS is one of the last vestiges of 'the level playing field'. Compared to triathlons, tennis, even softball, it is the one sport that has ducked the influence of dollars to substitute for hard work and talent. LZR, etc., to set world records...fine but so one 52 y.o. can beat another in a local race just plain silly.  USMS should follow FINA rules.  USMS should mirror FINA in this instance to maintain competitive integrity across these levels of competition.  USMS should not operate differently than the rest of the world with regard to how we compete. Technical suits make a swimmer's success partly dependent upon how much money he or she has to spend. That shouldn't be part of our sport. Let the triathletes outspend each other on bicycles. We should depend upon our training, not the suits some are able to outspend others on.  Very expensive, makes sport to open to controversy and loses those who perceive the suits as voiding the purity of swimming.  We need to be fair across the board if we are posting times and records.  What possible rationale could there be to make an exception for SCY? It is inequitable to permit some swimmers who can afford these more expensive suits to gain an advantage because of their economic status. A BAD idea!  Winning should not be about what material is used in the suit or how much of the body is covered and where zippers are located. It is about swimming and working to achieve. Be the best you can be, not be the best you can buy. Comments from respondents who had No Opinion on allowing the suits  As long as they do not create an unfair advantage use them  I don't have a strong opinion about the suits. I'm generally against them and wish they were never allowed in the first place, but I recognize that there may be legitimate reasons (e.g., increased participation) for allowing the suits. I guess I still, in part, question how much allowing suits could really increase participation, but that gut reaction may be biased by my personal feeling that people are stupid if they say, 'Well, I would have participated if I could have worn a suit that helps me go faster . . .' My guess is that there will be some set of people that will claim they will be more inclined to be involved if we allow tech suits, but a small portion of that set will actually change their participation level if/when a change is made ‐ the thought of allowing them just sounds nice. Perhaps it is too early to tell, but is there any data that suggests there has been a decrease in participation since the suits have been banned?  COST has to be an unfair advantage to those that do have the disposable income to afford the suits. So then without the suit a person would be at a competitive disadvantage.  I am an age grouper, not concerned about times other than my own  It appears the suits provide an advantage for the serious competitor. If I competed regularly I might have a stronger opinion. I would probably either not like them or would buy one myself. Good Luck with the decision.  Tough. If these give a real advantage then it should be a separate option of award disqualifier such as wetsuit use in USAT sanctioned events. I am new so have little information for a solid opinion.  While I'm extremely opposed to the use of wetsuits in outdoor competition (because they increase buoyancy significantly), I'm not opposed (nor strongly in favor) of the full‐body suits for indoor yard‐pools. One of the reasons people make against the suits is that only the well‐off will wear them. In age‐group swimming, that may be a problem, because there are a LOT of kids, and some certainly will be limited by their income. That might not seem right for developing swimmers and when promising swimmers are eliminated from higher competitions. But most Masters swimmers are at least able to pay their own bills, and therefore economics don't come into play in the discussion. Work harder, make more money...? We're not a Socialist organization, trying to level every playing field. If we're going to do that, perhaps we should also limit the amount of time a swimmer may spend practicing? Most Masters swimmers also compete against their own times, and against the Ghosts of Age‐groups Past.