Just how much faster are those controversial swimsuits?
Karen Pickering & I decided to test just how fast the new crop of controversial swimsuits really are - Karen's wearing the full neoprene suit Jo Jackson wore when she won her silver medal in the 400m freestyle, and I'm wearing a 50% neoprene/50% textile suit from last year. See how we got on, and our verdict on how they enhanced our times...
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.
Though, they aren't the easiest things to get in to...
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.
I'm Steve Parry. I won an Olympic bronze medal in Athens and I'll be aiming to give you an insight into the world of swimming as well as all the other Olympic sports.
© 2012~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~07~RS~)
Comments
why dont they just let them wear trunks?
Complain about this comment
It would seem an easy solution Smog-Tastic, and one that would cost absolutely nothing to implement. But unfortunately those swimsuit manufacturers contribute a lot of money to the sport.
Might boost the popularity of women's racing too ;-)
Complain about this comment
or alternatively why doesnt everyone wear the same swim suit, i read this week that grant hacketts record is still the only WR thats stands that is without these fancy dan suits
Complain about this comment
What is the objection to a new development in equipment technology? Presumably anyone can buy them and so no one need have an 'unfair' advantage.
Are golfers expected to go back to all wood carved clubs and old-style balls, tennis player to gut-strung racquets, runners to cinder tracks, &c. &c. Seems a bit silly to me.
Or - and I may be a touch cynical thinking this - but has some unknown manufacturer invented them and left the big boys (with all their sponsorships and investments) with the noses a tad out of joint?
Complain about this comment
Smog-Tastic: I presume you mean the 1500m record, as the 800m one was destroyed on Wednesday. If Mellouli, Zhang, Cochrane and Davies swim like they did in the 800, I think that one is under threat too. Mellouli is only about 3 seconds off it anyway. At least he showed he could do it before, as he beat Hackett in Beijing.
All of these records will need a little Asterisk alongside to make sure we all know they were "swimsuit assisted".
Everyone in the same suit was where we were last year, with the Speedo LZR, because it was clearly ahead of any others. Those not wearing that (including some countries, like Japan, until they rescinded and let their swimmers go with it) were disadvantaged, but since all the contenders were in the same suit, it all evened out in Beijing. Since then, we've had the reaction from other swimsuit manufacturers, so now we have a wide range of suits, with differing effects. There's no going back to a single suit now.
It's either all or none of them. I'm glad FINA have finally bitten the bullet and gone for none of them. The bodysuits have been providing an advantage for some time (including the whole body suit that Ian Thorpe used to wear). We need to get it all back to basics and back to just being about the swimmers. The simpler the better, as they are all "swimming aid devices", really.
Of course, the next thing will be genetic modification, with webbed feet and fingers a distinct possibility, along with side-flaps on the arms for breaststroke and backstroke ;)
Complain about this comment
At the very least they should be banned for youth competition. It's unfair on parents to be asked to fork out £hundreds for sports equipment that tears if you so much as look at it funny.
I think equipment in sports should be regulated to prevent unfair advantage but if a guy can run with springs instead of legs then why can't swimmers wear fancy suits?
Complain about this comment
I think the concern is when technology ruins the essence of the sport. There's a decent case these suits do, because of the 'buoyancy' effect you effectively get, and the suggestions that technical flaws are masked by the suits; the counter-argument is well-expressed by alphaMarrer above, though.
Complain about this comment
AlphaMarrer: The problem is that it becomes a "tech war", not a swimming competition. Cycling made the mistake of not reining in the technology some time back - as a result it's more to do with the equipment you have than it should be. It's not as extreme, because it's all settled down and doesn't involve such things as bouyancy. Imagine if the cycling equipment reduced drag through the air by a significant amount, or allowed the cyclists to fly/stick to the road better (whichever produced the best performance). It's why F1 has such tight rules (and even then those rules become the problem).
The comparison with improvements in athletic tracks or golf balls is spurious. The track is common to all competitors, so has an equal effect on all and golf competitions already restrict the types of balls that can be used. The issue is the differential benefit of a material that changes water resistance and assists the muscles in arm recovery. In order to control that, they have to set simple, restrictive rules that avoids the differential competition between manufacturers, as it will just take over completely otherwise.
It's not that there is an unknown manufacturer involved (I cannot imagine what an "unknown" manufacturer is, but never mind). It's that it's now getting out of hand, with innovations from competing companies creating a huge mess. It shouldn't be about the suit, anymore than it should be about the shoes a runner has on. If the shoes made a massive difference (in the way a reduction of 6% in drag in the water does) then the same issue would arise. Once more, there are limitations on what shoe manufacturers can do as well - no springs, for a start. That's why the whole issue with Pistorious became so important.
Complain about this comment
Going back to the old form of swimwear will at least give the swimmers more time to prepare before races than worrying about how long it takes to put this new suit on!
Looks painful...guess if you win and get a World record they don't care though.
Complain about this comment
Agree with ShinyDavidHowell about technology having the potential to ruin the essence of a sport. Athletics (the track events anyway) is similar in the way they have gradually produced faster tracks and more advanced running shoes etc but I don't remember a time when the technology leapt forward so much that most world records were broken at the rate swimming records have tumbled in recent years. One of the great things about sports like swimming and athletics are those records which stand the test of time (I seem to remember Seb Coe's 800m record standing for ages) and it takes something and someone special to beat them.
Complain about this comment
RHJones004, thank you for the excellent explanation and rationale.
It still seems a touch finger in the dyke-ish though. But your points are well taken, I'll shut up and go back to worrying about Bell's batting at Edgbaston.
Complain about this comment
Before the arrival of all this hi-tech suits swimming was a simple, pure sport where success was achieved through athletic ability and talent in the water.
The introduction of suits has totally ruined that concept and the sports has been reduced to a technological arms race between swimsuit manufacturers and wealthy sporting nations. Why does swimming need these suits when for years and years its has been competitive and exciting?
There is already talk of another generation of suits made from
"intelligent" fabrics that can anticipate muscle fatigue, flush away lactic acid and stimulate blood flow when the body becomes fatigued. The rules might as well be changed to allow the use of flippers.
This is not just a case of technology and equipment advancing, like it has in tennis or golf. This is technology that is fundamentally changing the entire ethos and meaning of a sport.
Thank goodness Fina has finally put a stop to this madness. A pity that we had to endure a circus world swimsuit championships in Rome first.
Complain about this comment
why not just make the rule - if it sinks its legal and if it floats its illegal.
SIMPLE!!!!!!!!
Complain about this comment
Just how far will it go? The new suits are already bouyant, why not develop them to include flippers for feet and hands as well?
How about a javelin with wings and possibly a motor driven propellor? No, this suit has created a new sport - swimming with it. Such a shame.
Complain about this comment
I may have a better idea.
If the swimming pools are all filled with salt solution (like the Dead Sea is), then won't all swimmers float without any need for buoyancy assistance (no, not Beyonce assistance)?
Do you think I could patent this idea?
Complain about this comment
I remember that twenty years ago, with these armour-plated swimming cozzies not even dreamt of, there was serious talk among the swimming fraternity about ditching costumes altogether, on the grounds that the had weght, absorbed water, and created drag that prevented further tenths and hundredths of seconds being shaved off world records. Therre was, in fact, serious talk about Olympic-level swimmers biting the bullet, so to speak, and going completely naked so as to negate these factors! (Don't get excited: again in the interest of shaving those miniscule fragments of a second off world records, all competitors would also have been required to go Duncan Goodhew and have every last suspicion of ALL bodily hair shaved/Immaced off, lest the drag factor cost them an all-important thousandth of a second. It would probably have been like looking at a line-up of life-size Action Man dolls at the poolside - oddly sexless and nonhuman.... (And how would notoriously prudish American TV have covered this...)
Icidentally, those modern cozzies, the ones that look like scuba-divers' wetsuits. I've heard they're murder to get on and take ages to get on and off. What happens if the swimmer needs a pee, then?
Complain about this comment
rpcutts: somone can't run with springs instead of legs, that's the whole point Oscar Pretorius has been fighting against. He is not allowed to run in able-bodied Championships because the springs are an artificial aid. Harsh on him of course but there you go. In the case of these swimming suits, technology has clearly crossed the line. The new suits are now effectively flotation devices which is not the same as a suit which simply seeks to provide less friction through the water. I think they are right to ban these new suits but wrong to allow them to be used now to set records which may never be broken.
Complain about this comment
As I can't view the first video - because I live outside of the UK - could someone please describe the "verdict" in writing?
Complain about this comment
Yeah, I got, "not available in your area" too (Italy). I can understand it with certain copyrighted material, but this is surely inexplicable given that it's part of a blog!
Complain about this comment
He He! But you are right Steve. Putting the suits on means you don't have to warm-up before your race!
Complain about this comment
I'm in Dublin and I can access very little on here (boo hiss!)... common travel area doesn't apply to proprietary media then?
Complain about this comment
I have just watched hilights and the problem with the new suits is that Fina did not ban them before the world champs. These new suits are supplied by the manufacturers but then the top swimmers go back to the National champs and compete against up and coming swimmers with no sponsorship and hi tec costumes. That is not fair. A list of approved suits should be set up.
Slightly off topic but Adrian Moorhouse and Andy Jameson commented that a swimmer who had just won the 200breast final could be disqualified for getting out of the pool as soon as he finished. Sorry both you dont know the latest rules. It is allowed under Fina as long as he doesnt disadvantage another swimmer!
Complain about this comment
I honestly cannot see the issue- its the natural engineering evolution of sports equipment and can only benefit sport as a spectacle and the principle of pushing the boundaries. other examples of sports that wouldn't be what they are today without the allowance to develop the athletes equipment are easy to see. take pole vault- records shot up with the invent of composite poles around 50 years ago, but records then increased further and continue to be broken. running trainer technology I'm sure has helped athletes in their pursuit of victory and the sport of professional road cycling would be very boring if technological developments were halted 40 years ago. its part of the beauty of sport as a competition and should never be halted or stalled.
Complain about this comment
I also get a bit irritated by the "video not available in your area", especially as I usually don't want to watch the video.
My main complaint is that video often seems to add a significant delay to the time taken to download the webpage, even if it can't be viewed. So I simply give up and find something else.
OK, I currently live in the US, and maybe don't deserve the same level of service as people in the UK (who also may not be licence-payers).
...But I DO have to see, and wait for, the BBC commercial adverts which, I presume, the BBC can't foist on UK readers (and I'm a "reader", not a "viewer").
Complain about this comment
Surely faster personal equipment, be it suits or bikes or running shoes, etc is only one of the unfair advantages in sport.
The main inequity in swimming is access to high tech swimming pools rather than suits. 3m deep pools with the correct temperature for racing and splash supression features are what really should be looked at. Prehaps they should all be made to swim in open water ?
Complain about this comment
Like many others the caption "Not available in your area" prohibited me from enjoying Steve Parry's blog. Although I am a BBC licence payer, albeit on holiday in Spain this month.
And, since there is no text either, millions of avid overseas BBC readers still have no idea how much faster these swimsuits are. So now there is little incentive to read and browse the BBC site whilst on holiday since adverts abound whilst the most interesting content is withdrawn.
Shame on you, BBC.
Complain about this comment
The answer's obvious ... everyone swims naked.
Complain about this comment
Yes, let me clarify my previous point: I understand that there are complicated reasons why the BBC cannot show us certain footage, which I am sure they find as regrettable as we all do. The problem with this particular blog post is that there is ::no text:: at all, so without being able to watch the video, it is basically empty.
It shouldn't be too hard to include the results in text form too, should it? As well as overseas readers (including UK citizens and license payers who happen to be abroad), this would also cater for people who don't have the Flash plugin installed in their browser, people who used text browsers, people browsing on their mobile phones... it's about accessibility. Come on BBC, get your act together.
Complain about this comment
I understand the frustration of those who can't see the videos, but the BBC is a business, which just happens to have an arrangement for funding (the licence fee) that applies in the UK. Unless it is agreed that it can provide the world with quality broadcasting (and the world contributes to the production costs) there has to be some restriction, otherwise a lot of people get a free ride. People confuse a Public Service Organisation with a charity, it seems to me.
The content of the videos, for those of you who can't access them, show that there is a very clear and distinct advantage. Karen Pickering stated that it felt immediately like she was floating on top of the water. She was wearing an Adidas all-poly suit. Parry was too fat (!) to get into one of those (second video) - it ripped on him, so he swam in the Speedo LZR of last year. His time was only 1.3 seconds less than at his peak (when he beat Phelps in a semi at the Olympics). He's now out of shape and 10 kg heavier, so go figure it out for yourselves.
The biggest issue here, for those who still don't see the issue, is that there is a marked difference in a short time, which is causing a huge impact. Any other technological improvement mentioned here for other sports has taken place over a longer period and has not been so clearly an advantage for some over others. If it is more incremental and less of a sudden change, a sport can accommodate the process of change easier. The use of composites in pole vaulting was like that, it eventually meant a wholesale change in equipment, without the interim chaotic period. However, there are limits even there - you can't have a "spring" in the pole, for example. FINA rules ban "swimming aids" for good reason. These suits are swimming aids, there's little doubt.
There has also been talk that the taller swimmers benefit more than the sleeker, shorter swimmers, as the reduction in drag is of more benefit to them, since their extra strength is otherwise counterbalanced by the increased water resistance a larger frame generates.
Any change that has an equal effect on all swimmers, like deeper pools or chemicals that subtly alter the viscosity of water (or pools with no splash-back because of the design of the sides), are less objectionable, since they do not result in a competitive fight between manufacturers of equipment. They are generally incremental and result in a replacement across the board, so it has a more general effect of improving everyone's performance.
It's not about halting technological improvements, but about not allowing the competitions to be essentially competitions between alternative commercial products.
Complain about this comment
Thanks, rhjones004, that was brilliant, exactly what I was hoping for.
Complain about this comment
Quick sidenote for rhjones004 the BBC is decidely *not* a business in the traditional sense. See here: "http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/purpose/what.shtml", and the reason why certain content can't be shown globally is not always the BBC's doing. Especially where global sporting events are concerned, it purchases the right to broadcast said event in the UK, while at the same time it has to make sure that these contents are not made available outside of its traditional broadcast area.
Complain about this comment
Exactly effinger.
Me, you or anyone for that matter could purchase the rights to broadcast any sporting event in a certain country. If we then placed those broadcasts on the internet for anyone anywhere in the world to see you would probably be breaching your broadcasting agreement with the rights issuer as it would be damaging the potential business/revenue of others who have purchased the rights to broadcast in other countries.
A good example is when the BBC were simultaneously broadcasting live Football World Cup games in 2006 on the internet as well as on BBC One/Three, but this was only available to UK users. I don't suppose the networks in France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Japan, USA etc would be very happy if they had paid millions for those rights and now people in their catchment area could watch it on the BBC website.
However I do have to say in a blog I think video's should be an addition to the article rather than just a "take a look at this". If you have a look at Jake Humprhries blog (The F1 presenter) I think it is an excellent example of how to write an informative blog and use videos to help explain what he is writing about. However not being able to view the video does not exclude you from the blog.
Complain about this comment
Although Effinger and mattraybould are correct, that a broadcaster purchases the rights to broadcast sporting events in a defined geographical area, that isn't entirely relevant here. Neither of those videos falls into that category. They are original material, recorded for the purpose of illustrating the benefits of the new suits. There's very little of the BBC's broadcasting output that is freely available over the internet outside the UK. The BBC iPlayer is a good example of how that is restricted for non-UK residents.
Actually Effinger, you're using a rather narrow definition of "business" if you think the link you provided showed that the BBC is not a business. I don't know what you mean by the traditional sense, unless you mean a commercial enterprise generating profit for shareholders (or its owners). That isn't a definition of a business, it's a definition of profit-oriented private enterprise. It's a public service broadcaster, governed by a Royal Charter, but still a business, in that it has to generate enough money to undertake its activities and is accountable for ensuring it stays within its budgets. Worth a look, if you're really interested:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/purpose/charter/index.shtml
There are sometimes restrictions on the re-broadcasting of purchased material (such as for an international sporting event or certain drama programmes that are purchased from the USA, for example) that means that the BBC can only show it live. As a result, it isn't available even in the UK for playback later, other than in form of highlights. That's an entirely different issue, though. It's usually the commercial interests of others that cause that sort of issue, just like the displeasure caused by the free-to-air broadcasting by the BBC if that was accessible by others outside the UK. It's been relatively easy to pick up the UK broadcasts outside the UK for some time, since it is on Satellite as well and online is not that hard either.
Complain about this comment
>Cycling made the mistake of not reining in the technology some time back
completely untrue.. although expensive, most of the bikes are pretty even at pro level..the fact that riders regularly shift teams (and as a result bike brands) whilst still remaining competitive proves this.. noone has mentioned equipment advantage for years..
they did outlaw the 'superman' position a few years ago for time trialling but this was more due to bike angles and safety than anything else
Complain about this comment
there'll be a lot of long standing world records once the rules are changed that's for sure.
Complain about this comment
Perfomance enhancing drugs, Performance enhancing suits. The difference?
Complain about this comment
Super_pig, you obviously didn't listen to the same commentary as I did during the Beijing Olympics. The technological advantages that the British team had was mentioned several times. They also disposed of a lot of it after the Olympics, to minimise the chances of others copying it and are working on the next lot for 2012.
The point was that "Cycling made the mistake of not reining in the technology some time back - as a result it's more to do with the equipment you have than it should be". The last part of that sentence is very important to the meaning. My opinion is that the equipment makes more of a difference than it ought. Not as much of an issue on the road in pro races (since there is less of a difference between alternatives), but on the track, I think it does.
I did add that it's not as extreme, it's all settled down a bit and it doesn't make as much of a difference as something like buoyancy. It's rare that it would result in the lesser cyclist winning, just because of the technology, though I think some other nations might have that view after Beijing.
Why Graeme Obree's riding position was banned is as much a political question as anything else, including the technical issue of it being a forward "recumbent" position. I doubt that safety (for a single rider on the track at any time) was at the forefront of the decision, though.
Complain about this comment
I think the key part of the argument against having these suits has been glossed over. While the suits no doubt allow all swimmers to swim faster, the fact that they also designed to 'strengthen' core stability and prevent muscles from fatiguing as quickly as they normally would only benefits bigger and more muscular swimmers. I'll be interested to see what times Paul Biedermann posts next year...
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS