“The Big Deal About SwimSuits”

by John Leonard,
Executive Director, American Swimming Coaches Association.

Posted: 7th August 2009

Over the past 18 months, the swimming world has been a frenzy of controversy
over the emergence of technology in swimsuits.  At the recent World
Championships in Rome, the constant and overwhelming refrain about suits,
echoed the volume and intensity of the last time we were in Rome for a World
Championships, when the topic was doping....drugs distorting our sport...in
1994.  Fifteen years later, the emotional topic was the new high tech suits
that have swept through the sport from the World Championship level down to
the local park district championships in the summer league. The parallels
were impossible to miss.

FINA (the international governing body of swimming), in an unprecedented
move at its Congress in Rome, banned the use of all “non-textile” materials
from suits beginning in 2010, and limited the coverage of the body to “knees
to navel for men” and “knees to shoulder straps” for women.  168 nations
voted in favor of the restrictions, against a mere 6 in opposition (who
apparently did not understand the word “textile”.)  This in the face of
strong opposition to the move by the sitting President and Executive
Director of the FINA organization.  Amazing and never seen before.  The USA
delegation initiated the restrictions and led the opposition.  Why such a
strong reaction in opposition to the existing plastic and rubber suits?

A parent new to the sport, from a middle class background, might well say
“hey, why not? Technology marches on! Equipment gets better. Why not let my
son/daughter wear one of the fancy new suits and swim faster?”

It's a valid question that requires a thoughtful answer. Here it is.

The answer revolves around two words, with of course, a considerable amount
of “side data” that adds to the intensity of the discussion and the strength
of the resolution to end the problem worldwide.

Those two words are “Maximizing” and “Enhancing”.

Quality lane lines “maximize” the opportunity of the athlete to swim fast,
with minimum turbulence in the lane. (you should have seen the waves in the
pool back in the 60’s and 70’s.)

Good goggles allow the athlete to see the turns, see their competitors, and
comfortably compete -- to say nothing of allowing them to train hard for
hours which was impossible in the chlorine pool without goggles and in the
old days, yardage and performance was a fraction of what it is today.
Goggles Maximize the opportunity of the athlete to work hard.

Evolution in coaching techniques in training and biomechanics allow the
athletes to Maximize their ability to benefit from their time in the sport.

Swimsuits, up until approximately the year 2000, and certainly until early
2008, were designed to maximize the opportunity of the athletes to go fast.
The manufacturers designed suits to “get out of the way of the water”. Less
suit, less friction with the water, less drag, tighter fit, and better
materials MAXIMIZED the ability of the athlete to perform to their highest
earned level.

Beginning in 2008, manufacturers took advantage (and must be applauded for
doing so, within the existing rules, which were close to non-existent) of
the idea of designing suits to ENHANCE the ability of the athlete to swim
faster.  A line had been crossed. Designed suits incorporated plastics,
rubberized material and new design criteria, to enhance the ability of the
athlete to be buoyant in the suits (riding higher makes you faster), wrapped
more tightly (compressing the “jiggly parts” makes you MUCH faster) and shed
water from the plastics and rubber materials much more effectively, thereby
reducing the drag of the suits remarkably.

Since February 2008, 158 world records have been set by elite athletes.
Their ability to perform has moved from being “maximized” by their
swimsuits, to being “enhanced” by their swimsuits.  This rate of improvement
is absolutely farcical in the historical context of over 100 years of our
sport.  At the world championships, new world records were receiving polite
applause akin to the “golf clap” for a good shot, rather than the historical
roars of appreciation that a swimming crowd used to provide when a human
barrier went down, as it infrequently did, by great athletes at the peak of
their power.

How does this translate down to the local pool?

Pretty simple.  The manufacturers don’t make any money by selling suits to
the elite athlete.  They give the suits away to them.  They count on age
group swimmers watching the “big guys” and wanting the same suits and
equipment.

And lo and behold, the same miraculous benefits accrue to 12 year old Sam
and Samantha when they put on the “magic suits” in their local
championships.  The time drops are miraculous, the smiles are, literally,
“priceless” and child, mom and dad are all happy.

“Wait a second.  That suit just ripped.  Wow.  How did that happen?  How
much did it cost? Wow! You paid $500 for a suit that Sam just put his foot
through, rendering it a $500 broken garbage bag? Uh-oh., well, honey, get
him another one.  We can’t have Joe Jones’s son Pete beat him in the 200
free tomorrow.”  Teeth Grit.  “This is a kids sport?  We now have $1000 in
suits so far”.

And of course, all those magic benefits only last 7-15 swims, so good for
maybe 2-3 meets, unless it’s a championship and your child swims 6 events
and makes finals in all events, in which case its $500 a meet.

“Let’s see, $500 a meet, we go to 2 meets a month, 10 months of the
year....Honey, it’s gonna cost us $10,000 Just for Samantha’s suits this
year!”

Well, the solution is simple....just wear the suits for the championship
meet and wear your regular suit the rest of the time. OK. Good.

But, Samantha’s 58.5 100 free with the magic suit on, just became a 1:02 100
free with the old suit on.  Smiles gone.  Gone.  From Samantha, from Mom.
From Dad.  Oh well.

And of course, there are some other objections as well.

First, the magic suit deal is like paying for your child to have instant
improvement.  Is that what you want your child to learn from the sport?  Or
do you want them to learn to persevere, EARN improvement with hard work,
attention to detail, paying attention to the coach and, shall we say it
again...”Working Hard?”  Or do you want them to learn that you can always
“pay your way” with cash to what you want?

“Earn it, or buy it.”  Which do you want to teach?  Answer carefully,
parents.

Second, the suit does not affect everyone the same.  The thin, fit swimmer
will benefit marginally by it.  The overweight swimmer will swim like a
young seal in it.  Spending the same $500 on two children will yield
radically different results.  Not a fair competition at all.  Is that what
anyone wants?

Third, and it seems unnecessary to say this, but if you just buy 3 suits a
year, that’s $1500 or MORE.  (Today, purchasing one of the great European
suits online from the US will cost you $900...with no guarantee of fit,
durability or return-ability, and about 30% of them RIP on the first attempt
to put them on...no refund, folks.)  Do we really want age group and high
school swimmers to have to spend that kind of money to BUY success rather
than work for it?  It doesn’t make our sport a middle class sport, it makes
it a sport for wealthy families.

Are you pooh-poohing that?  Wait till your son or daughter gets beat the
first time by someone whose mommie or daddie could afford a more expensive
piece of plastic and rubber than you can.  The bitter taste in your mouth is
not fun.  Not much in the way of “sport” there.

So, in answer to the local official who asked, “Why are “they” [FINA
officials] wasting time with worrying about THAT? Don’t they have better
things to do?”

The answer is “NO.”  The suit debacle is the most important thing that any
of us can attend to. It preserves the heart and soul of our sport....which
is reverence and appreciation for the hard work, attention to detail,
courage and teamwork required to be a fine competitive swimmer and to learn
to succeed with those life-skills instead of with your Daddy’s wallet.

The Congress (not the Ruling Bureau) of FINA took the rules into their own
hands after the Bureau had time and again failed to establish the rules
necessary to keep our sport vital, credible and important.  Bravo for them.

All the Best,
John Leonard
jleonard@swimmingcoach.org