By John Lohn
CRANBURY, New Jersey. APRIL 27. WHAT the heck does fast mean anymore? Do we really have any idea? Is something fast because the time is a world record, or buzzes in the vicinity of a global standard? Or, does fast have to be measured – as in, can you please describe the garment used for the in-question performance?
Unfortunately, I don't have a darn clue, not even the slightest idea. To be honest, I haven't had a clue for more than a year, since this high-tech suit phenomenon took root, then became an out-of-control brush fire. Oh yeah, there were times I thought I had this topic figured out. Turns out, that's never been the case.
There was a point during this whole suit saga where I adopted the following thought process: Technology is part of life, and we need to accept change and the dropping times that will accompany the developing swimwear available from the United States to Europe to Australia. No sense in bitching about progress.
That was then. Now? Well, my viewpoint has changed – to say the least. As we see more and more records fall – world and national – it's increasingly obvious that the sport has become, to a degree, farcical. It used to be that it was easy to identify the studs of the aquatic world, a deep appreciation evident for the likes of Michael Phelps, Aaron Peirsol and Kosuke Kitajima, to name a few. These days, do we really know the skill level of, say, Spain's Rafael Munoz?
Over the weekend, while competing at the French Nationals, Munoz nearly took down the world record of 50.40 in the 100 butterfly. The Spaniard touched the wall in 50.46, just off the world mark of Ian Crocker, set at the 2005 World Championships in Montreal. No doubt Munoz is a talented man, but how gifted? To drop nearly three seconds in two years just doesn't happen without help, obviously from the suit.
When Crocker sped to that 50.40 effort, I was fortunate enough to be present for the performance. To this day, it is the most breathtaking swim I've witnessed in person, the thought of a 49-second showing briefly providing goosebumps as Crocker neared the wall. To see Munoz almost take down that legendary standard sent a sinking feeling through the body, knowing full well he only challenged the mark because he was clad in apparel that far outweighed what Crocker was wearing.
The joke became funnier Sunday, when Fred Bousquet became the first man under 21 seconds in the 50 free, long-course mind you. The American record for short-course is 21.18. Yes, what a laugh this whole thing has become.
Amazingly, there are some folks out there who continue to argue that the suits are not playing as big a role as some are claiming. They say hard work and advancements in training methods account for the drops in time. How this belief is possible is beyond me. Yes, developments in training are surely occurring, but athletes hacking two and three seconds off their best times in a matter of months goes well beyond solely a physical gain. And, it could be conceivable that these drastic time drops brought on by the suits are masking drops also aided by performance-enhancing drug use.
FINA is expected to release the results of its testing process soon, and some of these weapons (face it, that's what they are) will be banned, Jaked hopefully among them. Unfortunately, some will probably pass through the FINA gauntlet and a return to what the sport was in the dawn of 2008 will probably never happen. If nothing else, though, it will be a start.
Until then, I'll continue to ask myself the question: What is fast? As athletes continue to bring the digits on the stopwatch lower, I'll have to sit back and first ask, "What was he/she wearing." Then, I'll start to contemplate how to compare it to the times of the past. Sadly, I don't have a conversion chart to sift through the mess, leaving me lost and disappointed.
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.
April 26, 2009 I'm with you, John. It's also getting too expensive to compete.
I borrowed a TYR Tracer Rise suit and tried it in practice last week. I swam a 50 yard free off the wall in workout faster than I swam the same event in a meet from the starting block one week ago. Clearly the suit is what made the difference. I will be swimming in a championship meet in a few weeks and I doubt that I would lose any money by betting that everyone in the fast heats will be wearing a "technical" suit.
The suits have now become a necessity, which will price some high schools, colleges, families with several children and various swimmers who do not have funding out of the sport, or at least out of the higher echelons of competition.
I don't advocate returning to woolen suits and swimming in pools with no lane lines, but the swim suit wars are getting ridiculous. Submitted by: flutterby
April 26, 2009 I understand that these suits have watered down(no pun intended)the meaning to fast swimming to many. But to state Fred's accomplishment as a "funny joke" is disrespectful to an athlete that back in 2005, the same time Ian Crocker went 50.4 in what most would claim as an inferior suit, Fred did the same for the short course 50 to be the first under 19 seconds. Fred also was the scm world record holder back in 2004. People have to come to the realization that all records are meant to be broken and due to the suits the timeline in between such accomplishments has become shorter, but regardless these feats are nothing short of spectacular. Congratulations to Freddy, WDE!! Submitted by: johns49
April 26, 2009 Come on John, join the dark side! They are really fun too and fun trumps old school, aquatic, morality! Submitted by: Groovydoo
April 26, 2009 John, thank you for putting into words some thoughts I've been having for the last 5-6 months.
At least it seemed like as times dropped precipitously in 2008, the people who had been established before as the best athletes still generally came out with the best times after they all had access to the same suits. You mentioned a few of them, all who had been multiple gold winners in the previous Olympics came out again on top in 2008 -- Phelps, Peirsol, Kitajima. On the women's side there were a few more folks that went from good to the top in Soni and Adlington, though Soni was already a WC Silver winner. This really isn't that many more new folks that have a breakout in Olympic years, maybe even less. This was somewhat comforting; even with the time drops, the right athletes generally ended up with the best times and won. While this was happening, I had the same "Well, I its just technology I guess" sort of response you mentioned.
I agree, also, with your observation that it seems different now. I'm not really that bothered by Bousquet's swim. This isn't the first time he's made such a breakthrough, separating himself by a significant stretch from all other high end competition. Even though he's not won Olympic gold, its fair to say that when he hits a taper right he has earned the right to be considered one of "those" people.
But so many of these other things are happening in the last several months seem contrary to standard pattern, and I can't figure them out. The LZR was available early in 2008 and by Beijing, it had "almost" become a level playing field, hence champions being champions as noted above. But since then, while in a post-Olympic period where historically time patterns tend to slow and truly elite athletes take a break (that's still the same to some degree so far this year - Phelps, Peirsol, Kitajima, Coughlin, etc.) the pattern of many others has accelerated hugely SINCE Beijing, not just since the suits came out. And it's not even at end of main training cycle summer meets. I know many of these times have been done in meets being used as qualification for Rome, but it is still hard to put the pieces together. Many of these national records and near world-record swims are swims way under records just set in Beijing, already in LZRs. Possibly the most glaring example is the French Men's 100 Back. Through Beijing, the French national record was :54.62, after there had already been a rennaissance (sp?) of French men's swimming arising in Auburn, Alabama and then spreading back to the homeland and continuing with substantial home production. Yet despite having a(several) great sprinters in each stroke for several years, they couldn't produce better than :54.62 in the 100 back. Now, barely half a year after Beijing, they produce 4 swims under :54 in one meet, with one within smelling distance of :53.0. Based on the results seen in the last month, this is not limited to France and unless there have been suit advances since LZR that dwarf the advances to LZR, this is not just about suits. And the problem, sorry Mr. Munoz, is that its not just a matter of champions staying champions but just faster because of better suits. How do the pieces fit? Do they fit? Submitted by: dunc1952
April 27, 2009 One factor which hasn't been mentioned is the discomfort of the suits. I competed in a B70 recently, my first foray into the world of high tech suits, and it made the meet much less enjoyable simply by virtue of having had to spend several hours squeezed into a corset-like garment which kept me from ever completely drying off, which pinched at the groin area, and which made the usual last minute trip to the bathroom a major chore. And swimming meets are supposed to be fun. In the long run, this cannot be good for the sport. I won't bother to mention all the other arguments which have been made so eloquently by Craig Lord and others; I just want to introduce the discomfort aspect, which ultimately makes the sport less fun. That in itself can't be good for our sport in the long run either. Submitted by: halfbreed
April 27, 2009 I would like to see a major championship swim meet or even better a world tour that would attract all the great world class swimmers. The catch: Everyone competing would be required to swim in a nylon, polyester, or lycra swim suit.
Offer big prize money to attract the big names. Then let's see how fast these swimmers really are. Let's see how much interest it generates. Let's compare their times with the best World Records of the past and present.
Then we will have generated some very useful information that can help us determine where we want the sport to go from here. Submitted by: Texas Masters Coach
April 27, 2009 So, what exactly is going to happen at world trials here in the USA? Will the American brazenly thumb their noses at the so-called "rules and regulations" and find the floatiest (my word) suits available and smash the records set by the French and the Japanese just to show who is boss? While we are at it, are there any left over steroids from the bad old East German days that someone could pass around as well as the suits? If we are going to go all the way, then GO ALL THE WAY and throw out every rule of fairness and cheat like the little buggers breaking records right and left. Meagher...Biondi....Popov....Caulkins....Egerzegi....Darnyi....Where are these great champions who proved that being the best meant by BEING THE BEST without any medical or technological doping?????? God help us if those days are dead and gone. Welcome to the world of smug and clueless rationalization. A pig is a pig no matter how much makeup you put on it. Submitted by: paddles
April 27, 2009 I remember discussing the price of these suits with some of the parents of my daughter's swim team. The consensus was that "no way would they spend that kind of money for a suit". Well months later all those same parents DID indeed purchse one of those suits for their kids. This places me and my wife in the uncomfortable position of sticking to our guns and saying "no way would I spend that kind of money for a suit". Not that we couldn't afford it, but its sort of out of principle. Submitted by:
April 27, 2009 Pandora's Box - opened in 2000:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3883/is_200008/ai_n8926075/?tag=content;col1
Submitted by: swimmer bill
April 27, 2009 Affordability is going to be huge challenge for those who cannot afford - the age group swimmer's parents. I believe, 14 & under should not be allowed to use these advanced suits. It is time for the swimmer to develop skills. Submitted by: slowsnail
April 27, 2009 My opinion only here, I have no real concrete evidence to support my conjecture...but I have a feeling I am on the right track.
I woke up the other morning to find the world once again changed. 20.9 in the 50 Free was the a knife in the heart.
I found that after 30 years of being an athlete, a coach at all levels including of the very elite and most of all, a fan of this sport that something had changed.
In years past having big smiles on my face when world records were broken (remember when that was a BIG deal??). Then I read the news flash about the 50 and found absolutely no joy in it at all. In fact it was depressing. I actually questioned if I really wanted to be part of this sport any more. A sport I absolutely have loved to be a part of over most of my life.
My first thought was, as a coach, how the hell do I get my athletes there from here? I have coached Olympians in the past and I am wondering what is going on. Imagine what a coach who has never had an athlete at that level is thinking. Lost in the wilderness.
We are in the age that unless we are willing shell out thousands of dollars to have multiple sized suits from every company on hand at our clubs to have our athletes try on and figure out which 'floats their boat' the best for the right race, at the right distance, with the right body type and then have their parents buy the 2-3 different suits which work for their kids in those specific races we are not going to be competitive. Then to keep up we will need to figure out which synthetic hormone, EPO, HGH, or whatever else is being commonly utilized -- and we are STUPID to think it's not at this point-- is necessary to make the next step possible -- thanks Mr.Balco for such an easy to use manual you so generously provided the world when you got popped for how to dope and not get caught through synthetics -- for making men and women into super-mortals, capable of things we didn't think were going to be possible for a human to do for another 20-30 years. And I will not sell my soul and ever even suggest such a path for an athlete of mine. Yet, there will be some who look and find this path. And our gap becomes bigger.
FINA has allowed this. The darker spectre of what really is probably going on is being veiled by the these suits. But the suits are the final cover, the last part in the equation that calculates the erosion of our sport.
Someone will post on here that I am being over dramatic and the suits are not that bad and that doping does not exist under the guise of suits. Go ahead, hit me with it. Like I said, these are my feelings and I will stick with them, you can have yours.
But when I say erosion of our sport, I am looking long term. I am looking at the cost of what it takes to get a kid from there to here. I am looking at the big gap that WILL be emerging as the current world of pro's, college level swimmers and elites start to wane out and retire. I am talking about the kids right now that are 11-15 that will/could be quitting the sport in droves (may make it through high school but un-interested in the level of training it will take to reach this next level--or be content with being mediocre college swimmers riding out a scholarship) because they become un-interested when they can't make a meet larger than Sectionals because the qualifying times have been so affected by this generation. Quitting might not mean being entirely gone from the sport. It may just mean quitting on elite swimming. Or it might mean gone.
We are not long for a 19 mid cut for Nationals in the 50 Free for "boys". How many "boys" in the past 40 years up until recently are physically mature enough to go those speeds? Remember when 19 at any high school meet across the country was a BIG deal?
I coached one of the fastest 18 and under boys in the U.S. last summer at Trials (top 5) in both the sprints. When it was all said and done this fall when the new cuts came out, not only had he lost his Trials cut for the 50 after posting best times last summer, but he had lost his nationals cut in the 50 and barely had his 100 national cut. And yes, he was wearing a LZR.
This is how we bring around the next generation? And he was one of the very top!!! What about the rest of the boys in this country?
Someone will come on here and tell me that "the kids will respond...they will adapt". Maybe. But I am not seeing it right now. I see the very vast majority of them already starting to slip off the radar. They and their parents simply don't have the resources or finances to keep up with what is going on. Simple economics in a a hard economic world.
The future of our sport (these kids) are not being funded by their National Teams or rich European sports clubs or sponsors or colleges which finance all that is being needed to reach these levels that we are seeing now.
For shame FINA! You have put us all in a tenous position because of your inaction and lack of vision. You have allowed two major issues in our sport to go un-checked and they now run rampant, regardless if you want to believe that or not. And what has that given you? Nothing. You allow this with the all mighty dollar firmly in your gaze with the idea that your money making events (Rome for example) will be helped by a more exciting "product". How did that work out in Melbourne? Exactly. It was so poorly attended you had to give tickets to school kids to fill the seats.
Stand up FINA! Come out of the shadows. Have a backbone!
We need to get this figured out.
I am going to go to workout and have fun watching my kids work hard to be better. That's what I have fun doing and I will ignore international swimming for awhile and get to go back and immerse myself in the sport I remember -- which hopefully never is allowed to go away.
Hopefully we can go back to a time when what the majority of us are still doing daily matters. Submitted by: rcoach
April 27, 2009 rcoach, you brought tears to my eyes with your letter. It couldn't be said any better than what you wrote. Bravo! Submitted by: paddles
April 27, 2009 It looks like he wore a TYR (probably Titan) in Irvine (at least on Friday). Submitted by: SwimDER94
April 27, 2009 Great editorial. I am also disappointed by the huge time drops we are seeing around the world. I offer a baseball analogy as food for thought. The major league should allow the use of ALUMINUM BASEBALL BATS. Can you imagine how thrilling each game would be with every hitter now able to hit substantial numbers of homeruns! How exciting! 100+ years of home run records would be utterly destroyed. Electrifying! The fans would love it, but think about what it would do for the athletes and teams. Poor fielding power hitters would no longer have to be relegated to DH as they would no longer even be needed. A traditional singles and doubles hitter with a good swing would now have the potential to win the homerun title and break all of Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron's records. Exhilarating! Tradition? Safety? Economics? Future ramifications? WHO CARES! Think about all the personal records average athletes could set and profits the new bat makers could generate. Maybe FINA should see if MLB needs some help bringing baseball into the modern era. Submitted by: onebigdog
April 27, 2009 Great analogy onbigdog...I enjoyed your idea.
What about the idea that if they continue to allow performance enhancing drugs in baseball, the next goal is not only to see who can win the home run title with 100+ but also to see who can hit the first 1000 foot home run?
Exhilarating indeed! Submitted by: rcoach
April 27, 2009 One big dog --
Love you analogy, if it happens maybe some of the baseball players will use the same justification some of the pro-new suit people are: "Hey, I put the bat by home plate, and it didn't hit the ball by itself."
(Even though I have to confess to using one myself, I think they should be banned.) Submitted by: halfbreed
April 27, 2009 LOL!!! halfbreed, I LOVED what you said! "Hey, I put the bat by home plate, and it didn't hit the ball by itself." Classic. So, to quote Rafael Munoz after his near world record 100 meter butterfly time, "My times don't depend on the suit because if you throw it into the water it doesn't move by itself." Can we please come up with something different and more original now? Some of the readers here are extremely witty and can come up with something to fit the "crime". How about it? LOL Submitted by: paddles
April 27, 2009 i would like to nominate yannick agnel 16 years old as the more couragous swimmer at the french championship , he swam in a brief the 200 free and almost made the final . i also give the best line of the weekend . when a official ask in the call up chamber when was he going to put his suit on and as the official reminded him the no 2 suit rule : he answers " no i am not wearing anything under my suit. he also said in an interview that as a junior he wants to know exactly what time he is doing and what progress he is doing with just his swimming and training , he doesn't need the suit to pollute that for him. he says that when you are a junior , a suit can make you become lazy and not want to progress in your technique. Submitted by: maly
April 27, 2009 Response to rcoach:
Don't worry you are not alone. If we keep up the pressure surely things will be corrected.
To ALL if you beieve the suits are bad, please place reaction time comments. Your voice is needed.
To Swimming World: Jason, could we please run an opinion poll on the issue of suits.
Lets see what the feeling really is.
The questions are simple:
Should the suit have an impact on the result of a race?
A) YES
B) NO
Sould the best swimmer on the day win the race:
A) YES
B) NO
ETC ETC
Broken down into simple terms it appears clear, at least to me! These PERFORMANCE enhancing suits have no place in our sport.
Submitted by: scotswim
April 28, 2009 FINA need to clean up this mess now, or risk being left as being pathetically redundant. If they fail to restore a fair playing field then FINA's legacy will be that of a spineless sporting body that not only failed the sport of swimming in the fight against drugs, but also single-handedly plunged the sport we love into a quagmire of technological doping.
Get it done FINA, get it done now. Submitted by: poseidon
April 28, 2009 so how far back do we go? Wool suits, paper suits, nylon suits, birthday suits.
If Swimming World believes they are bad for the sport, why do they advertise the suit? Submitted by: pwindrath
April 28, 2009 Swimming World believes in free speech, both in advertisements and in editorial. Submitted by: swimming world
April 28, 2009 Thank you, poseidon. Well said. Submitted by: paddles
April 28, 2009 One word. Opportunists. Submitted by: paddles
April 28, 2009 First, where I do agree...
I agree that the new body suits are "too much". I would have prefered if FINA had not allowed the suits to go beyond the knee... And the fact that it takes a very long time to put them on, shows that there is a problem, especially when these suits can tear easily ( one of the french swimmers in backstroke beat the french national record in the semis, and then tear his body suit 5 minutes before the finals , ended up with a very bad time, a 5th place, and no qualification ticket to Rome . That is absurd )
Now , where I don't agree...
Comparing the french and their "italian" body suits to the germans and chinese doping is not right. In one case you are dealing with cheating, in the other , just a case of using loopholes and shortcomings from FINA rules.
I read , in a few places that basically these french ( and one spanish ) cannot do these times without these suits as if these new suits can lower your times by seconds... I don't think so... if that was the case , how come Magnini and the italians who were using the exact same suits a couple weeks ago in their qualifiers for Rome were not able to go below 48.12 s on the 100m and 21.82s on the 50m . Saying that the french cannot do these times is condescending at best, as if all exceptional swimmers could only be anglo-saxons. No, the "latin" swimmers are now as "big", as strong, and train as hard as anybody here in the US. And Bousquet, Bernard and Leveaux doing these times is not exactly a surprise ( passing on the fact that Bousquet had once the best 50 yard time on american soil, and the fact that he was one of the best relay swimmers in the world, you just have to pay attention to the times they did this winter on 50m short course: Leveaux time in less than 45s on the 100m SC is incredible, and maybe even more so their time on the 4x50m SC relay, a time I believe is not going to be beaten for a long time , while the incredible 4x100m LC time of the americans in Beijing might be beaten sooner than I thought it would be, if I add the 4 best times of the french... the top 6 french sprinters all improved on their 2008 time except for Leveaux who had the same time as in Beijing).
And then this issue of buyancy of the new body suit... Let's not exagerate. People seem to forget that FINA put a rule that the buoyancy cannot be above 1 Newton. 1 Newton is not much: 102 gr. No matter what the material, the manufacturers know that rule and the people at Jaked are not that stupid that their new suit would not follow that rule... 102 gr is not completely negligeable, but it is rather trivial when compared to the weight of some of these french giants ( Leveaux is 6 ft 8 , and 210 lbs, Bernard is 6ft 5 , 200 lbs ). For Leveaux the maximum lift he can ever hope from a body suit corresponds to 0.1% of his body weight.
And in my opinion, it is even very likely that these suits when streched loose a little volume, and therefore loose some buoyancy. In any case it doesn't matter if the material contains neoprene or whatever, the buoyancy will be limited by the 102 grams rule. So no worry, swimming will still be swimming.
As somebody said, it is not the buoyancy, but the reduced friction that these suits try to achieve... What is wrong with that ? ( except for the fact that the suit cover the legs) Do we want to go back to the swim suits they had 100 years ago, in whatever "natural" fiber they had ?. Do we want to go back to dirt tracks in athletics , because we want to be "fair" to Owens performance on the 100m in 1936 ? or should I have high-jumped on the sand to be fair to my father who didn't have the luxury to land on his back on a smooth mat when he was learning to become a sport teacher?
Why do we want to compare ? You cannot compare the 51.22s of Mark spitz to the 46.94s of Bernard... Spitz had 7 gold medals, Bernard got 3 medals, one of which was a gold. No comparaison. No need to have Bernard swim without body-suit. Are there any doubt that any of the present top 5 french sprinters would leave Spitz lengths behind, even swimming naked ? Modern swimmers are bigger, and probably beneficiate from tougher training, and are quite better at underwater swimming ( because they had the advantage of being told how to )...
My son who is 15 in junior varsity trains 3 hours a day, that is probably as much as what the french national champion was training 50 years ago.
Last thing: I keep reading, that there are too many records in swimming, as if the only explanation was the "suit". Well the bodysuit might explain for a little, but I believe that there are other factors that are more important, which are very often overlooked. The main one being just the fact that swimming is maturing as an international sport. Gone are the days when the US was alone, with some australians and maybe some germans. In effect, 50 years ago the 100m freestyle champion was coming from a pool of about 200 million people, and probably much less as the access to a swimming pool in the US was not the same as it is today. Let's look at what happens today, the french, the italians, the brazilians, the chinese etc etc are also swimming... The law of great numbers itself, even if the equipment, the training method etc didn't change, would be enough to ensure a certain number of world records per year ( and wait until China really tries. No doubt for me, that just due to the shear numbers the future Michael Phelps will be chinese not american). That is in my opinion why swimming still sees lots of records , while track and field doesn't . The number of people to draw from, in swimming is still very small compared to sprinting in track & field, or soccer. Today it would be hard to believe that a kid in the streets of Dakar in Senegal or Santiago in Chile who had the potential to become a superstar in running or in soccer wouldn't be "discovered", while a potential new Michael Phelps has all the chance to be "missed" if not born in some specific parts of the world with good access to swimming ( still today, lots of parts of western Europe don't have good access to swimming, with 100 000 inhabitant cities without a single swimming club, but every day that goes by, gives more opportunity to swim to more people , so I predict that we will see more records no matter what suit we will end up with) Submitted by: flamin
April 28, 2009 John
I just had to come to Rafael Munoz's defense and speak up. It's not right to write such disparaging things about a swimmer. What makes you so sure Munoz isn't worthy of your respect or of owning a world record? So you believe Munoz's improvement can only be explained by a suit? (He had the suit in 2008.) He has no business flirting with Ian's record? When you discredit one swimmer so easily, thoughtlessly, without any real basis, you discredit all of us. I think you owe Mr. Munoz an apology.
Here's a comparison you should be interested in.
100 M FLY
MUNOZ PEREZ Rafael ESP b1988
2008 52.09
2009 50.46
CROCKER Ian USA b1982
2002 52.21
2003 50.98
Submitted by: fluidg
April 29, 2009 Fluidg. If you go back a couple more years...
Munoz
2009 50.46
2008 52.09
2007 53.24
2006 54.45
2005 >55 (not in FINA's top 150)
Dropping >1s every year is pretty impressive no? And Dropping 1.5s after 4 straight years of dropping 1s?
Crocker was at 52 at least since Sydney. So no, I don't think you're one year comparison is a valid one to make. Besides, Crocker has had a lot of personal issues in his life and he did not exactly train twice a day every day... Submitted by: Sphere
April 29, 2009 Sphere
So you support discrediting Munoz? And is there anyone who doesn't have "personal issues"? If the suits are such a huge factor, why didn't Ian get faster when they were introduced? Your statistics only support my point. Compare the progression of the two swimmers at the same age, not the same years, and you'll see the striking parallel.
There's no justification for insulting anyone the way this article and many commentors have attacked this swimmer. I can't help but notice that the outcry from this forum only ignites when foreign swimmers break WRs. What does that say about us? Submitted by: fluidg
April 29, 2009 Sphere
Crocker Munoz
2003 50.98 2009 50.46
2002 52.21 2008 52.09
2001 52.25 2007 53.24
2000 52.44 2006 54.45
1999 54.31 2005 55+
1998 54.94
Your statistics only support my point. Compare the progression of the two swimmers at the same age, not the same years, and you'll see the striking parallel. They both dropped from 52 to 50 at the same age even though Ian was a prodigy. Based on this time progression, how can you possibly agree with discrediting Munoz? And if the suits are such a huge factor, why didn't Ian get faster when they were introduced?
There's no justification for insulting anyone the way this article and many commentors have attacked this swimmer. I can't help but notice that the outcry from this forum only ignites when foreign swimmers break WRs. What does that say about credibility, fair-handedness, and journalistic integrity?
Submitted by: fluidg
April 29, 2009 And I suppose insinuating that someone has a "Taliban" mentality is fairness? I have yet to hear an apology for such a "fair-handed", "credible" and "journalistic" statement filled with integrity. Submitted by: paddles
April 29, 2009 thanks, fluidg.
My feeling exactly... (about Munoz). The swimmers should have the benefit of the doubt , and should get credit for their performances. Just saying that their progression is impossible, doesn't get us anywhere, otherwise, I am sure we can look at Phelps progression, and find something "inhuman" about it.
I still remember when Bernard broke the WRs at 47.50 and 21.50, and Gary Hall hinting that french swimmers couldn't possibly have these types of times, but all this outcry went down at the US trials and Olympics , when the US times became comparable. and I didn't hear the outcry when Lezak at 33 years old had this magical split time in the low 46 in the 4x100m relay ( I am just imagining the outcry, if a "spanish" swimmer had dared doing that ! )
Submitted by: flamin
April 29, 2009 paddles, et al
I wonder how many of the vocal opponents of suit evolution can even get into, much less have ever raced in, one of the suits they seem to know so much about. If anyone really wants to know about the suits' affect on performance, study the data and ask the swimmers, not the spectators. Submitted by: fluidg
April 29, 2009 I posted the first response. I am a 60 year old masters swimmer who has been competing for 50 years: age group, high school, Division I college and now masters. The Tracer Rise suit I have now is the third technical suit I have owned, and I expect to get one season out of it. That's a large expense.
I'll report back next week and let you know how I do in the USMS championships. At my age, it is unlikely that I will keep improving my swimming...it's a battle to not slow down. I swam 100 yards in 51.1 in 1967, last year I did 1:00.0. Let's see what kind of time I hit wearing the new suit...and if I am proud or embarrassed if I drop my time significantly.
Submitted by: flutterby
April 29, 2009 You never responded to my question. Where is the apology you owe me for such an attack? Submitted by: paddles
April 30, 2009 Hi paddles, I have been following these blogs over many weeks and I don't think you have a "Taliban" mentality at all. Just goes to show people who have a weak argument will say anything to deflect from the real topic!
However on another topic, I don't think it is fair to target Munoz if he is competing within the rules and suits approved at this time. This doesn't mean that we cannot question the improvement and many have. This is just the very reason that these suits should be banned. It is the suit that in fact discredits the performer, casting doubt on ability and deflecting the praise which may well be rightly deserved.
One last point, so fluidg's comments assume that we are all from the USA
"I can't help but notice that the outcry from this forum only ignites when foreign swimmers break WRs. What does that say about credibility, fair-handedness, and journalistic integrity?"
I'm not American and have been on reaction time on numerous occasions on the suit topic.
Also there have not been many records from the USA in the last few weeks to comment on.
Submitted by: scotswim
April 30, 2009 Hi paddles, I have been following these blogs over many weeks and I don't think you have a "Taliban" mentality at all. Just goes to show people who have a weak argument will say anything to deflect from the real topic!
However on another topic, I don't think it is fair to target Munoz if he is competing within the rules and suits approved at this time. This doesn't mean that we cannot question the improvement and many have. This is just the very reason that these suits should be banned. It is the suit that in fact discredits the performer, casting doubt on ability and deflecting the praise which may well be rightly deserved.
One last point, so fluidg's comments assume that we are all from the USA
"I can't help but notice that the outcry from this forum only ignites when foreign swimmers break WRs. What does that say about credibility, fair-handedness, and journalistic integrity?"
I'm not American and have been on reaction time on numerous occasions on the suit topic.
Also there have not been many records from the USA in the last few weeks to comment on.
Submitted by: scotswim
April 30, 2009 Thank you, Scotswim. I needed to read your clear rational. Makes perfect sense (at least to me). Submitted by: paddles
April 30, 2009 scotswim
I invite you to point out the weaknesses of my argument instead of just deflecting from the issue. I also suggest you go back and read my Taliban comment which was meant to suggest that people who claim sole ownership of TRUTH might want to reconsider. The suit/ technology controversy exists partially because the issues are complex and partially because there is a lot of money involved. And please show me one instance when the Swimming World writers discredited an American swimmer who broke a record wearing a LZR (or similar suit) the way they did Munoz. Submitted by: fluidg
April 30, 2009 Enough! EVERYONE has got an opinion. I have an opinion. Fluidg has an opinion. Scotswim has an opinion. Everyone who has ever posted in the Swimming World site has an opinion. Enough of the arguing. Enough of the name calling. Enough of the "I'm right and you are wrong" way of thinking. Like it or not we share a common ground and that is to protect our sport. I believe what I believe. Why it bothers some people so much is beyond me. It is just a stupid opinion. I am backing away. If anyone wants to continue trying to prove their point they are doing it to an empty arena. This telephone call is over with. Submitted by: paddles
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!
|
