Proposed Amendment to USMS Rules

While considering the thought and structure put into this request, note the lack of a similar undertaking within the National body itself (i.e., USMS).

The issue is worthy of consideration; however, in a broader context, how does USMS undertake and come to conclusions on other topics of interest?

:). Here we go. You know I love you Steve... But actually the "worst thing ever for the sport" is for people to not participate. Just saying... It's doom and gloom talk rather than rational discussion that makes this such a touchy subject. Let's not forget, the "suit era" WAS the hey day of the sport. Let's hope the powers that be have used some foresight in their decisions that benefit all of us who love, and make our living in the sport. Which means you too. :)

:) just think about it. Here we work together and are on different sides of the fence on this. The way I see it, either way... We win. :)

Let me offer a contrarian perspective. We have been swimming with technical suits for almost 20 years - they were just not quite so technical. Speedo's P-2000 fo women was polyurethane and fast. I was wearing a women's aquablade jammer n the early 90s and dropping 1.5 seconds per 100. It wasn't cheating in my mind - I was wearing a women's suit which must be slower. Ha.

Besides - what is not "technical"? Wool full body suits like they worn many years ago?

Here is my point though. Swimmers want to go fast and the fans want to see fast swimming. The months of the "suit" were exciting for many swimmers to see how fast they could go. It motivated them to race. Fans liked it. The media loved it AND the controversy.

So, maybe, we should just ban the suits for the little kids, so they have something to look forward to. maybe we just ban the suits for meets below junior nationals or US Open or Nationals. Or, maybe we should just have the suits for the Olympics when nobody is paying for their own suit anyway. Then, everone has a reason to watch - How fast can they go?

The sport missed a huge marketing opportunity.

One last thought for the purists out there. If you want to ban two technical advances that really changed the sport, perhaps we should eliminate the wave-eating lane lines and goggles. If you were not a competitive swimmer before 1972, try training without goggles and with ropes for lane dividers before you tell me I'm all wet....

Ready-set-go...

And that is just where it hurts Glenn,.......who is to admit his fault?????
and who is to admit that they took advantage of that fault for a long time and proffited from it????
I think also to take steps and let the techniek advance as it comes....as example....in USA some sports are judged by revieuwibg images....and in Europe we don't....uh...as goes for soccer...hahahhaa.....but what about revieuwing stars and turns with underwater cameras????

Steve, so are you saying that you have been against the use of suits since before 1996? Bodysuits have been in use in competition since that time and it's taken 14 YEARS for the angry mob to reach the castle? Am I a fan of bdysuits? Yes. Am a I fan of the post-2008 suit materials? No. IMHO, FINA should have come out with a ruling banning any competition suit that was not legal for for Worlds2007.

Bring them back... reasons:

Financial: Many Masters swimmers have invested heavily in these suits. With the ban, that investment is lost.
Clean data: The suits were in use for quite awhile. For those who keep detailed records year-to-year of training and competition, having the same suits in competition makes result comparisons meaningful, which in turn helps correlate training w/performance.
Fast is fast: The fastest swimmers are still the fastest swimmers, regardless of the suit.

Going forward, if the ban is rescinded, it's unlikely that suit manufacturers will hop back into the market w/new suits. The Masters market is not big enough to warrant that kind of manufacturing and marketing investment, especially given limitation to short course yards competition. So... eventually, the suits that are out there now will wear out. Whatever leftover inventory exists will be sold. And, there will be a de facto "ban." Even w/rescission, it will be a short-lived last hurrah for the tech suits.

Here's the problem Steve, "Masters swimming should be about fitness..."

Who are we, you, to decide what masters swimming "should" be about. This is simply opinion, and obviously from the responses here, not necessarily in the majority. Masters swimming should be about whatever that individual wants it to be about. This is nothing but enjoyment, in reality, it simply doesn't matter. The times don't matter, the places don't matter, the competition doesn't really matter, except what each of those things means to the individual. If we're going to monitor masters swimming as we monitor all other aspects of competitive swimming, then I have to say, we need drug testing as well. What's to stop me from juicing up on steroids next year, swimming as fast as I did when I was 22, admitting it, but as long as I didn't wear a "tech suit"... it's legal?

No matter how you slice it, the fastest swimmers are going to be the fastest swimmers. Suits or no suits, and remember, this post is about masters swimming. Throwing in the other arguments about colleges takes away from your opinions... it's not applicable here.

I think this is the crux of this movement... the decision to ban these suits was made by a few, whereas there are many more people who want them back, and enjoy them. As I stated, performance in masters swimming ONLY matters to the individual, and if the rules take away the enjoyment of the sport for those individuals, they'll simply not take part. Then who wins?

Finally, the argument about what coaches make is also a personal choice to participate by that coach. At this point, I coach for free... and until this post, that never sounded like a complaint. It's my choice.

Great discussion with many interesting points. Here’s my 2 cents. I understand the post is about Masters, but I may have to sprinkle in some references to other levels of swimming.
The rewriting of the rules was a knee jerk reaction, not much to argue about there. There have been changes in suits and technology as long as swimming has been around, but this one really hit a nerve with a few well placed people in the sport. The manufactures looked at the rules and found a way to get an advantage, they took it to FINA who blessed it, if you have a bone to pick with anyone it should be FINA.
The purists came out in force denouncing the suits and claiming irreparable harm or as I like to say…”the sky is falling.” In every sport there are 2 sides to this argument. The group who believe change is better and the purists who what to keep the sport the same as when they competed.
Glenn made an excellent point...Swimming is about different things to different people. If putting on a tech suit feels good and keeps you in the sport is that bad? What person of any age who has a bit more in the mid section wants to hop in the pool in brief? I’ve seen people swimming for a variety of different reasons, very few of them have the goal of getting the lane next to Michael Phelps.
I am going to go off Master Swimming topic here - Now reality is setting in –Manufactures are not going to be making as much product, so they won’t have as much money to spend on sponsoring athletes. Has all the money that was going to be spent on swimsuits now gone to coaches salaries? That’s what we were led to believe. Let’s look at other sports, Soccer, $150 for a pair of soccer shoes and you have to buy a couple pair per season. Golf, $500 for a set of clubs plus golf balls, shoes etc. Baseball, cleats, glove and bat each year, around $200 if we go cheap. I don’t hear a hue and cry about the amount of money being spent on equipment there. Now back to swimming. Was this really about keep the cost down for the swimmers? An actual accounting of the cost of swimming would look like this. Swim club dues $1,000.00 per year plus fund raising or working meets. Meet entry fees & costs to attend meets, let’s say 2 per month $100 per meet (these are local, I didn’t figure any travel meets) $2,400. Practice suits, goggles, warm ups, shirts, etc $400. A Blue Seventy that you can wear for the entire year $500 divided by 20 swim meets, $25/meet on a suit. There are a lot of other costs I have left out, I know I have had 2 kids go through this in the last 10 years. Needless to say a swimmer can spend around $5,000 per year, but a $500 suit will kill the sport, really?
History is going to be the true judge of the impact that this will have on the sport. No governing body is going to want to take this argument up for a long time, so get used to the status quo. My opinion is instead of saving swimming this will do the opposite. Watch the number of people registering for different organizations and the number of high schools/colleges that drop swimming due to a lack of interest.