If you hadn't heard by now, Speedo's new LZR Racer swimsuit has caused a respectable amount of controversy for itself in the run-up to the Olympics. The innovative, NASA-aided design cinches up on a swimmer and reduces drag by as much as 10 percent, and detractors claim Speedo has thrown a bit of buoyancy in there for good measure. FINA, who has the last word on such matters, has approved the suit, says that buoyancy claims are unproven, and has pointed out that all major manufacturers have suits available to all athletes free of charge, removing any concerns that the $500 suits -- which only last for 10 uses -- will pose an obstacle to poorer countries. Unsurprisingly, some of the biggest criticism of the suit has come from countries tied up in sponsorships with other suit manufacturers, while a good many countries and athletes have broken from lucrative deals to swim Speedo. So, what's the actual damage? 48 world records were set this year before the olympics, 44 of those wearing the suit. Since the olympics have started, 8 records have fallen, and that number is certain to grow. A large number, to be sure, but we'd say the time for crying over Speedo's
awesmazingness is over, and the time to watch really muscular people with large feet break world records is upon us.
Read - DailyTech
Read - Sports Illustrated
posted August 12th 2008 10:40AM
ITA!
The suit is definitely responsible for all the record breaking. But if all swimmers are wearing it, then they're all equally capable of winning the gold, right?
Stop complaining, put on the suit, and win the gold. It's that easy... ;)
$500 and it only gets 10 uses...that's ...wow, impressive.
As has already been pointed out, equipment advances - including clothing - have affected outcomes for a long time. Take a look at archery and the crazy bows they use, or any of the shooting games, or sailing. It's up to the governing bodies of the various sports to determine if the equipment advances make things "unfair". When they are first introduced, I'm sure they do for those that do/can not adopt the new tech, but the field is leveled again quickly when everyone starts using the latest hotness.
Such is the march of progress.
I've read that for the first time the olympic swimming pool is 3m deep (as opposed to the standard 2m), which gives them another advantage over previous Olympics and greater chances of beating old records...
i read that too and its a little misleading. the pool used for the olympic trials up until 2004 (the IU Natatorium at IUPUI in Indianapolis) is about 3 meters deep and dates back to the 80s. they made it that deep for the explicit reason of making it a "fast" pool. i dont know about the pools used in Athens or Sydney, but i would be surprised if they were the "standard" 6 feet.
Am I the only one that thinks the Speedo corporation hired staff from the Motorola corporation for the naming scheme?
Where did you find the 10 uses information? I'd like to read more about that.
I don't doubt that the LZR suit is fast as seen by all the world records being broken, but I believe some of it is mental. Everyone that wears the suit thinks that they are going to be faster and they are. It wouldn't surprise me if we gave someone a placebo LZR suit that wasn't really faster, but they still broke a record or two.
Are you saying that swimmers that don't use LZR suits think "dang, those swimmers have better suits than me; I should just quit now."
These athletes are probably coming in with the mentality "I'm going to swim my heart out while on the world stage." A suit that's deemed better isn't going to improve on that mentality.
NO PLACEBO EFFECT CAN BE HAD.
Lemme see here...
Advanced swimsuit, albeit available to all athletes, is OK because it is a technological advance.
Anabolic steroids, albeit available to all athletes, are bad bacause it is an unfair advantage.
Gear, be it technical or injectible, does not make you world class.
\m/ metalheaddoc \m/
You're wrong. You can take the suit off, and its effects end, which is not the same as with injections that modify peoples' body makeup and chemistry. Also part of the objection to doping is that it puts the athlete at long-term health risks, not JUST because it improves performance. Sports in general are viewed as a way to improve overall health, and the use of chemicals put that view at risk (you need only look at the public opinions on weightlifting to see the PR damage drug use can do to a sport).
This is in sharp contrast to better equipment, which tends to protect the athlete, and helps them to achieve the maximum from their regular bodies potential.
By your terrible logic, all athletes should have to compete completely naked.
Reading your msg again, I'm unclear actually on what you are trying to say. Your last statement is certainly true, but what I got from your first two statements was that you are equating equipment and drugs. If that wasn't your intention, sorry.
What I am trying to say, Don, is that trying to gain an advantage is common in sports. Back in the day, baseball players were told not to weight train for fear of making them "musclebound". Some guys did it anyway and gained advantage.
If you want to compare pure skill, then maybe athletes should compete naked.
The risks associated with high level sports are significant themselves. A lot of wear and tear occurs at the elite level. That is why anabolics are so prevalent. No so much to add muscle, but to enhance recovery.
Whether an athlete takes steroids is their choice. If it banned by their organization, then they risk the consequences. But anabolics are not as risky as the scaremongering media makes them seem. Their "risk" to the athletes health may be outweighed in their mind by the bigger paycheck and bigger prestige.
My point was that we celebrate some types of performance enhancement but not others. They are but tools to enhance natural skill honed by proper practice. I don't like how anabolic steroids are demonized when we as fans want bigger, faster stronger. To use your better equpment analogy, anabolics allow the body to fully develop so the athlete can achieve their maximum potential. But it is not a replacement for skill.
Free for the olympics, good for 10 uses then you need another one and you pay.
I love the crack-dealer methodology of marketing where "the first hit is free"
woah i gotta get one of those!! 10% less drag would knock soooo much time off of my... times. Hmmm maybe it could help me in ELA too... :P
I don't think it's the suit that causes this many world records to be broken, I think the fact that SPEEDO knows these swimmers are a head's and shoulders above the rest BEFORE going into the race, and offer them a sponsorship. So they win (as most people predicted) and just happen to be wearing a SPEEDO suit because SPEEDO sponsored them.
Wouldn't buoyancy also mean more drag?
No buoyancy would mean lift. Meaning less lost energy - energy would be focused on propulsion, rather than lift (combating sinking).
Similar to, say, bike shoes. Harder soled shoes exert more energy on the pedal, where softer soled shoes lose some in the shoe flex. Minimal I'm sure, but at that level, every smallest fraction of second adds up.
It is the water there. As you watch the races and the NBC "World Record Line" moving along with them, you can see just how many of them are almost at world record pace. I think the water in that pool has a slightly altered molecular structure that is allowing the faster times.
Oh, and I am being serious here. Most of the swimmers are setting personal bests there. That just does not happen this much.
But Fred does.
The suit is BS. This is like the amputee with the artificial legs that wanted to race in the olympics. If we're going to allow athletes to be assisted by these devices, then at what point do you draw the line?
Personally, I think this suit is acceptable even if it gives certain athletes an advantage over others. I guess I see it as similar to students who prepare for an IQ test vs those who don't. The test is meant to judge aptitude, but that doesn't mean the correct preparation (sleep, good food, study) and equipment (comfortable writing utensil, correct calculator, etc) won't improve scores.
On a more practical note, the Olympics is an awesome way to encourage innovation in the sports technology arena. The money is there, and so companies make better swimsuits, better bikes, better everything. And those technologies/concepts eventually trickle down to the things that you and I own and use.
Bikes, I mean, or shoes. Probably not swim suits.
How about letting the sporters do it on their own, and not being helped by this kind of tech.. IMHO this is just as doubtfull as using dope.... But then again, sports these days aren't about sports anymore....
But don't you think ALL athletes should be using exactly the same equipment? that way it is the only way to make sure everybody has the same advantage and it comes mostly at the athlete themselves and not because of their equipment.. let's not forget that some countries can't afford this kind of tech...
I wanted one of these until it was $50 everytime i got in the water. In that case I'll just keep one handy in case I am in a sinking boat and need it.
Too bad an unfortunate side effect is shark attraction.
It's funny because Phelps is breaking world Record, and it seems he only wears half the suit, also people forget that he was already setting himself up to break the same World Records he broke, as for the relay, Phelps did good but it was Layzack that broke the split time and beat the French swimmer that was visibly slowing down at the end
To make it even I think all competition swimmers should swim should be in the nude.
I think the audience should be neekid too
Not to mention the seduction of DOPING, with all this hype over a suit making a perfect smoke curtain...
The drug scientists surely work their way to circumvent (?) rules and tests like Speedo, F1 teams know best...
48 records in 8 months, 8 just in Olympics... this speedo suit seems like the white rabbit.
I was watching the 4x100m freestyle relay and was amazed. The team placed 5th broke the former world record! Every single of the 8 teams racing the finals made it below the 2004, Athens gold medal record.!
Seems to me that everybody's high nowadays...
Good day Mr. Phelps. Your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to win multiple gold medals for your country. This wetsuit will self-destruct in 10 uses. Good luck.
The title of this "article/blog" makes no sense and is a god damn mouthful.
Uh, if they're indifferent they don't give a fuck. I think whoever titled this should know what words mean before using them.
Here I'll give you a translation:
Apathetic swimmers break 8 world records while whining about Speedo's LZR Racer Continues...
I for one welcome our new Speedo aquamen overlords.
My concern is for the health of the female breast tendons.
Either Michael Phelps is also a "NASA-aided design" or we have just discovered the secret identity of Aquaman.
Personnally, I think there should be a separate official set of records where each record is set unaided. So basically the person has to be naked to set things like running, swimming, etc. For things like bicycling for example though, there needs to be standards for the equipment. That way people break records based on what they can do, not what technology can let them do.
I'm not saying that there would need to be standards for things like fastest car or plane. That's based completely on what technology is available; however, whenever the record is suppose to be based on what a person can do, it should be based SOLEY on what the person can do.