ATLANTA, Georgia, September 30. BUCKING the trend by most of swimming's governing bodies to accept the new high-tech swim suits, the board of directors of the College Swimming Coaches Association of America (CSCAA) voted to oppose the NCAA's recent decision not to extend the moratorium it had imposed on the use of these suits in collegiate competition.
It is the position of the board of the College Swimming Coaches Association of America that the moratorium that was in place for the NCAA Championships for 2008 should be sustained.
The moratorium prohibited the use of any suit not commercially available prior to January 1, 2008, primarily because the suits were not readily available to all schools and their athletes.
It is the opinion of the CSCAA Board of Directors that those conditions have not changed significantly and that the moratorium should be sustained at least through the 2008-9 NCAA competitive collegiate season.
In addition to the factor of availability, ending this moratorium after operational budgets for the 2008-09 season have already been implemented, may have a similar effect on availability for qualifying and competing at the 2009 NCAA Championships. Given that there has been a major increase in the cost of the new suits when compared with the previous generation of suits, many schools will not be able to purchase them this season thereby limiting availability. One additional year of the moratorium will allow schools to build the new cost into their budgets for 2009-10.
The CSCAA also expressed concern that the suits may, in fact, aid in flotation and enhance performance -- both explicitly prohibited by FINA and NCAA rules. Independent scientific testing, currently under way, should resolve that issue within the next few months.
To date, other than the CSCAA, the only other major swimming body in the USA to take the position that the suits should not be allowed is the American Swimming Coaches Association (ASCA). Last weekend, USA Swimming banned the suits from age group competition only.
Special thanks to the CSCAA for contributing this report.
Reaction Time Comments
Reaction Time responses do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions
of Swimming World Magazine or SwimmingWorldMagazine.com.
Reaction Time is provided as a service to our readers.
September 30, 2008 Can we please end the gripe about these new suits??? There was not this amount of interest generated when the FS1 came out. Maybe Gary Hall was right, maybe the suits are a convenient scape-goat for another underlying problem. Maybe the drops in time are related to increased competition throughout the world, which leads to improved training techniques. I'm so sick and tired of the "old school" thought that all swimmers should train and compete in briefs. It DOESN'T matter if Phelps wears a brief or an FS Pro, he's going to beat your kid.
I know I'll probably catch flak for this comment, but hopefully it will stimulate some conversation. Submitted by: Kevin Swander
September 30, 2008 No prob Kevin. I can tell you're being provocative, game on ;-). I just think it's very interesting that it was the two national coaches groups who came out against it. Coaches are among the main purveyors of new technique, and if anything, maybe inherently biased toward thinking coaching/swimming techniques were primary agents of change.
So, I doubt they'd vote the way they did if they thought it were only advances in technique and competition that were responsible for time drops. I also doubt they are all completely anti-tech or want to go back to briefs; I think they are acting so as to slow things down a little and allow for reflection about the big picture when things are changing so fast and a little murky. And in case you're wondering, I think it's possible to simultaneously acknowlege swimmers' diligence to their work as the primary factor while having questions about swimsuit technology. In fact, coaches are likely in the best position to worry about this, as they surely don't want the technology to undermine the efforts of both them and their swimmers.
U.S. Swimming is still moving forward with the new suits, other than for age groupers, wisely, so its a system of checks and balances right now. A couple more points: Phelps is a statistical outlier, to say the least, so using him as an example isn't representative of the larger swimming population. Finally, I think that the FS1 didn't get this much reaction because the time drops/# of records weren't as sudden or dramatic, even after adjusting for the Olympic year. The only other year that had more records was '76, which benefitted both from both relatively recent changes in suits along with doping, as we suspected and all know now.
I'm interested to see how much the record-breaking (all categories of records from simple PR's to world) slows down within the next year; if the rate is much different than other post-Olympic years that will be telling, as competition as a variable will be factored out when compared with other post-Olympic years, and its unlikely that changes in coaching/swimming technique would stall suddenly just because it's post-Olympic year.
I'm guessing that the coaches just want to make sure that we don't cross the line where the technology advances to the point where it 1) becomes cost-prohibitive and hinders equality in starting point for participation and 2) changes the nature of the sport by making the technology too important relative to other factors. We may not have crossed those lines yet, but if not, we're close to them, like it or not.
As an elite swimmer you may wish you didn't have to worry about all this on top of terrorism, wars, 401K's and mortgage crises, but it's probably worth the debate now since the stakes for the sport, while not in the category of those other stressors, are relatively high for the sport of swimming. If you're tired of the debate, you could always just tune out and let your coach worry about it while you focus on your swimming.
Submitted by: liquidassets
September 30, 2008 Again, the USA Swimming rule doesn't ban the suit. It only prevent 12 Submitted by: goober
September 30, 2008 I think it would be so interesting if we could hold a meet, invite as many world class athletes as you could get to accept and make it clear right up front that the meet would be "pre-99".
No bodysuits....period.
Highest tech level you could wear was an aquablade type level of suit for men and women.
Of course to do a meet of this sort, you would have to have a couple of really heavy hitting sponsors (and I am betting the swim suit companies wouldn't be too interested).
These sponsors would be needed because you would have to pay these swimmer's a lot to have any interest in attending this meet. In effect what interest would you have in finding out you weren't as fast as you thought you were? Money would help ease that sting. Hopefully some of these athletes would show up because of their competitive nature to prove they are as good or better than the people who came before them.
A sort of "calling out" on a personal pride basis if you will for some elite athletes to come and end the debate and prove it's more them than a suit. Because a large number of people don't really think it's the athlete at this point. The athletes have the answer if you think about it.
And the sponsors would be for heavy hitting prize money for World Records....sans suits.
The meet has the swimmers shave and taper seriously then put themselves up against the pre-suit era world records.
If they crush the records, they collect the cash, all the rest of us shut up and we go along our merry high-tech clad swim suit way. If they can in fact break a current World Record, then you give them a huge payoff for such a great achievement.
But! If the records survive, the athletes still make an appearance fee, but the swimming world (swimmers included) get some real information to reflect on regarding this issue and maybe a reality check for all of us.
I really do think that pretty much every pre-suit World Record would in fact fall. But my curiosty is by how much. (Remember, Ian Thorpe's first WR's were all done with NO body suit....3:41....in a tiny Speedo, same with Popov in the 50, no body suit). Be very interested to see about current records and how many could be taken down.
Now before you reply and rip me for how ludicrous this is in reality, I KNOW this meet will never take place.
But I can dream can't I? Submitted by: rcoach
October 1, 2008 It's not ludicrous, and while I wasn't at any of this season's conventions I'm sure similar wishes have been verbalized by others.
Because, in truth, on balance, what has been gained by these new suits in the last dozen years? Some would say the novelty got the public interested in our sport, and that's all for the good. But has that been worth the economic costs for swimmers and teams and all the squabbling over various records' integrity, particularly this year?
The only people who have benefited from these suits are the swimsuit manufacturers and their stockholders. Period. There is nothing old school about being able to admit a mistake was made. Our governing bodies should stop fearing lawsuits and show some confidence in the existing rules. That would be leadership.
Otherwise, heck, let's start putting springs under the starting block platforms. Let the swimmers who can master diving halfway across the pool be applauded that it's "all in the name of advancing the sport." Submitted by: Charlie
October 1, 2008 Forgot.
Also in my "fantasy" meet, there would be mandatory blood doping which would be screened in the nearest hospital laboratories. Our doping methods are 30 years out of date, but in a hospital, when they wheel you out of the ambulance, they need to know exactly what is in your system and how much in order to save your life.
So this would make sure to eliminate the spectre out there that some are suggesting is looming behind the suits.
And yet another reason I would need heavy hitting sponsors (maybe a medical corporation?). Pretty sure that would cost quite a bit.
How about a $200,000 payout per real world record and $100,000 per "old school" record. Appearance fee $50,000.
Hey apparently Wall Street doesn't seem to have a problem spending and blowing money that isn't real, so why should I???
Maybe I could get Congress to back my proposal?
Submitted by: rcoach
October 2, 2008 I'm pretty sure you meant mandatory blood testing, not doping! The latter is when the cyclists stored their own blood and then transfused it back to get extra oxygen capacity right before the competition, instead of taking EPO. As for your fantasy, sounds great. Submitted by: liquidassets
October 2, 2008 No,no...I meant doping. Everyone off to the hospital for a good dose of horse steroids. Then we can really have a meet!!!
Haha! Nice catch there liquid on my little "oops". Yes, meant "testing". Submitted by: rcoach
Reaction Time responses do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions
of Swimming World Magazine or SwimmingWorldMagazine.com.
Reaction Time is provided as a service to our readers.
|
Subscribe Now!
|
.jpg)
