Technology vs. Hard Work: Why competitive swimming got it right by going back to grassroots swimsuits.
Technology vs. Hard
Work:
Why competitive swimming got it right by going back to grassroots swimsuits.
Why competitive swimming got it right by going back to grassroots swimsuits.
The
sport of competitive swimming has long been coveted for instilling pride in the
effort and results of hard work. Our sport, with the exception of the East
Germans in the 1980's, has not been tainted with the use of
performance-enhancing drugs, especially in the United States. Our sport thrives
on the concept of those who work the hardest, achieve. The introduction of the
technical suit in 2008 (Speedo LZR, amongst others) threatened to change the
very essence of our sport.
The
swimsuits, which were introduced to the swimming world in 2008, have led to
over 102 World Records set in 2008, in the Olympics and other internationally recognized
meets.(Cazeneuve, 2009)
“At one point in the Olympics, 42 of the 48
swimming medals awarded had been won by athletes wearing Speedo's LZR.” (Five
Reasons, 2009) Overall, 158 World Records were set by athletes from February
2008 until December of 2009. (Leonard, 2009)
The
innovation of the technical suits by major swimsuit manufacturers was creative
and well within the rules and laws established by FINA to create a new,
technologically advanced suit that would be far superior. The suit would be designed to “enhance the ability for athletes to swim
faster…Some of these changes included incorporating plastic, rubberized
material and new design criteria, to enhance the ability of the athlete to be
buoyant in the suits (riding higher [in the water] makes you faster), wrapped
more tightly (compressing the “jiggly parts” makes you MUCH faster) and shred
water from the plastics and rubber materials much more effectively, thereby
reducing the drag of the suits remarkably.” (Leonard, 2009)
With
the introduction of the technical competitive suit, winners of our most elite
to novice levels were now threatened to be determined, not by the most talent,
but by the ability to buy the most top-of-the-line suit. The fairness of the
competition is lost.
In the elite level of competitions, those
athletes sponsored by top brands would receive the top-of-the-line suits for
free, while athletes from poorer countries might not be able to afford a
technical suit. Additionally, some suits
were tailor made to specific athletes, ensuring that they had a suit that fit
them the best. The rest of the
competition was forced to wear the new suits straight off the shelf, and race
in a suit that fit ‘good enough.’ (Leonard, 2008)
At
the youth level of competition, parents would have to purchase the suits for
their swimmers. The suits cost roughly
$500 each, were not guaranteed not to rip, and were only good for 10-12
races. The cost alone, to put novice to
national level swimmers in these suits was astronomical. It made the sport unfair for those athletes
whose parents could not afford the fancy suit, and a great concern was that
youth would be leaving the sport because it became unaffordable. (Leonard, 2008) Another concern was that the suit does not
affect everyone the same way. The suit
had greater “magical” results on youth that were more overweight, however, thin,
fit swimmers will see less “magic” results.
The final concern was that as coaches and parents, we are teaching them
that there is an easy solution to be faster, instead of hard work, which goes
against the essence of our sport.
John
Leonard, president of ASCA –The American Swim Coaches Association-was one of
the most vocally outspoken against the changing technology. In a 2008 article
posted on swimmingcoach.org (The ASCA’s website), Leonard argues that the
changing technology is not positive, but negative for the sport of swimming,
since it becomes about the suit, not the athlete or the hard work athletes put
into our sport. He compares our sport to
Olympic sailing, where every sailor sails the same boat, and the most skilled
sailor wins. He also discusses ski
jumping and the fact that the sport’s governing body decided not to accept
jumping suits that acted like sails.
In
the article titled “What’s up with suits?” (2009), Leonard also addresses the
issue of “compression” with the new suits.
“Compression is very effective in limiting and reducing the amount of
body fatigue and body line failure in the last ¼ of races,” states
Leonard.
A
simple study of the 110 world record splits in 2008, shows over 70% with dramatic improvements in
the 4th quarter of the race in contrast with previous (non-tech suits) world
records. Simply put, the suits are holding the body line together and reducing
resistance when the normal body fatigues, “sags” and loses its ability to hold
the correct low resistance position in the latter stages of the race. (Leonard,
2009)
Following
the Speedo LZR suit, other companies invested millions of dollars to create
faster suits. The suits started to be
made of polyurethane materials, which actually repel the water instead of
absorb it. (Think rubber suits). The
suits were also designed to “improve speed, buoyancy and endurance” (Barra,
2009). The issue then becomes, instead
of maximizing hard work and effort, the suits were designed to enhance the
performance. The suits were now dubbed
PES-or Performance Enhancing Suits, and swimming purists argued vehemently
against the suits and changing technology.
Following
the 2008 Beijing Olympics, and the 2009 World Championships in Rome, the
swimming community came together to fight against the new suits. USA-Swimming took a proactive stance by
banning the use of the technical suits in 2009 for all age group swimmers aged
12 and under. They even established that
“swimsuits for men may not extend above the navel or below the knee and for
women may not cover the neck or extend past the shoulders or below the knee” for
all athletes in meets under a certain “A” time standard. The technical suits were still allowed in
high levels of competition. (Stratton,
2009).
In
March of 2009, FINA decided to moderate the rules regarding swimsuits in three phases. The first phase was from March-December of
2009. In phase one, FINA hired an
independent lab to test each suit prior to its use in competition. The technical aspects of the suits to be
approved are:
·
maximum of 1 millimeter thick
·
suits produce one newton (100 grams) of
flotation force or less.
·
All designs that trap air are banned
·
Suits were designed from shoulders to
ankles, no arms. (Leonard, 2009)
According
to an article released in March of 2009, in phase two, several other changes
were to be addressed:
- Reduction in thickness to .8mm
- Limiting the amount of non-permeable
materials used in the suit to 50%
- Possible bans on zippers as a
fastening system
- Possible reduction in the newtons of
flotation (Leonard, 2009)
The
third phase was created to evaluate the changes made in phases one and
two. There were no deadlines or
timelines, but re-evaluation was expected after the 2010 World Championships in
July. (Leonard, 2009)
In
actuality, FINA ended up releasing its decision to change more than just the
anticipated original decisions of phase two.
In July of 2009, FINA voted to ban the use of “suits made of
polyurethane-based materials—and suits made of any material extending below the
knee and above the navel for men and above the shoulder and below the knee for
women” (Barra, 2009). The only fastening systems that are allowed are
drawstrings on the male suits. The ban
took effect on January 1, 2010.
On
the day of the decision by FINA, Speedo, the world’s leading swimsuit
manufacturer, released a statement discussing the decisions of the FINA
board. “As the world’s leading swimwear
brand, which has been responsible for every major legal innovation in swimming
for 80 years, we support FINA’s role in setting and managing the rules for the
sport of swimming…Despite today’s decision to return to jammers for men and
open back knee-skin suits for women, Speedo will continue to work with the
world’s leading athletes, coaches and experts to develop the most innovative
swimwear and equipment. As a forward thinking company, Speedo remains committed
to growing the sport of swimming at every level.” (Speedo Statement, 2009)
Overall,
I feel that the swimming community responded in a timely manner to preserve the
integrity of the sport. The leaders of
our sport remained outspoken and firm in their stance on the suits. With the support of our leaders and the FINA
board, our sport can return to its essence: hard work and dedication produce
the best results, not how much money you can afford to pay for a suit.
A table showing the amount
of world records set before and after the swimsuit ban
Year
|
Meet
(Suits)
|
World
Records
|
Source
|
2000
|
Olympics
(Textile)
|
15
|
|
2004
|
Olympics
(Textile)
|
8
|
|
2008
|
Entire Year
(PES)
|
102 (almost one every 3 days)
|
|
2009
|
World Championhips
(PES)
|
43
|
|
2010
|
WR Set to Date
(Textile)
|
None to date
|
References
FINA
rules to ban polyurethane-based materials in swimsuits - WSJ.com Retrieved
10/4/2010, 2010, from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204313604574328372762265260.html
Five
reasons FINA needs to ban high-tech swimsuits - fourth-place medal - olympics -
yahoo! sports Retrieved 10/4/2010, 2010, from http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/blog/fourth_place_medal/post/Five-reasons-FINA-needs-to-ban-high-tech-swimsui?urn=oly-175276
High-tech
suits, michael phelps reign at swimming worlds - brian cazeneuve - SI.com Retrieved
10/4/2010, 2010, from http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/brian_cazeneuve/08/02/swimming.worlds.five.things/index.html?eref=sihp
Leonard,
J. (2008). Why an elite athlete in swimming should want the focus on
themselves and not on technology.
. Retrieved October 4, 2010, from http://www.swimmingcoach.org/articles/2008articles.asp
. Retrieved October 4, 2010, from http://www.swimmingcoach.org/articles/2008articles.asp
Leonard,
J. (2009). For swim parents-the big deal about swimsuits. Retrieved
October 4, 2010, from http://www.swimmingcoach.org/
Leonard,
J. (2009). What's up with the suits? Retrieved October 4, 2010, from www.swimmingcoach.org
Peirsol
hopes FINA ruling will get focus off suits - USATODAY.com Retrieved
10/4/2010, 2010, from http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/2009-05-19-4059312456_x.htm
Speedo
statement about 2010 FINA swimsuit ruling « swimming blog Retrieved
10/4/2010, 2010, from http://blog.djsports.com/2009/07/28/speedo-statement-about-2010-fina-swimsuit-ruling/
Stratton, B. (2009). Swimsuit clarification.
Retrieved October/4, 2010, from http://www.usaswimming.org/_Rainbow/Documents/d8d43ef2-e429-428e-bbea-4dea38f49b45/Swimsuit%20Clarification.pdf
Comments
Post a Comment