So, here’s an article about the latest sports controversy. Bathing suits that may very well give swimmers a speed advantage (18 of the 19 world records broken recently were done by swimmers wearing this type of suit). Apparently, there are naysayers…”no fair; that’s a competitive advantage.”
Huh? Competitive advantage? Is a technology that is available to anybody (I suppose there are issues of cost and equity, but do you really think any world-class athlete is concerned with those sorts of issues?) a competitive advantage? This reminds me of the push against, and the eventual illegalization (is that a word?) of squared grooves for golf clubs. “No fair; it makes players too good.”
I’m going to have to add this to my lexicon and thinking about education and technology. Certainly, part of the resistance, at least unconsciously, must be adults who don’t want kids to have it easier than they did (“kid, we used to have to walk 3 miles in the snow up hills to get to school!“). Learning is not supposed to be easy, so we must resist technological doping in education.
There was a similar article in Wired a few months back about a woman who was a double amputee, that had special prosthetics built for her so she could still run. Because of the design/material of the “legs”, she was considered to have an unfair advantage to other competing runners. The sad thing is, she was allowed to compete in the ParaOlympics because of her “disability”, yet her race times were equal or faster than regular Olympic runners.
If they can wear suits that help them float, why not allow swim fins, too?
The old records were set by people using their unaided bodies, and they should either stand or be broken by the same. The Olympics should consider being true to the old greeks, with athletes competing naked.
Tom – But then they would be unable to televise any events and would lose all the advertisement money.
I say let them use whatever technology has to offer, as long as it’s available to everyone.
I would have liked a better explanation on how an ultra thin material that provides greater compression of the body (and reduces the apparent volume of the swimmer) increases flotation. As it is swimming will now join those sports where the marriage of the athletes and their equipment have to be considered instead on an individual’s athletic ability. Pole vaulting, bob sledding, bicycling, sailing, golf, crew, skiing (downhill, slalom and jumping), and others all have some technology that helps the athletes performance. I think everyone should wear the same type suits; leave the technology for the professional contests.
Tom – There is a very large difference between giving users access to a fairly passive advantage versus an active one (ie: suit vs fin), which I’m sure you’re aware of.
I’m sure if we look back, many of the old records in swimming where made by men wearing swim trunks and women wearing far more elaborate suits, either of which would have made for more drag. People were generally smaller in the past too. So perhaps we should insure that only people of a certain height, weight, and properly equipped with the most drag inducing swim wear be allowed to compete.
Of course this is ridiculous. Training methods alone have changed so much since the beginning that there will never be any way we can have a level athletic playing field from generation to generation. There will always be progress. But insuring everyone access to the same tools to work with must be a requisite.
Call it what you like, its is just another way to gain advantage, a second or just plain cheating the system. It would be fair if the competitors were nude and just had to rely on strength and skill
Thanks all for your comments. This, obviously, is not a new discussion, particularly in the world of sports. From my perspective, though, what is interesting is how some professionals (athletes?) will do virtually anything/everything they can to enhance their performance. Professional educators, on the other hand, don’t always act the same way. Even when we hang accountability provisions over their head, they’d rather (mostly, not all) resort to old-fashioned methods than seek out “technological doping.” Hmmmmm…
It’s swimming, people… Swimming! How much can you possibly care about this?
Please read the Wiki on Speed Skating and the section on technical developments and the clap skate vs. fixed stake. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_skating
This comparison should put the swimsuit controversy to rest. It’s already been done before the media has just given you something, you think is new, to talk about on forums. :p
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_skating
I agree that this LZR suit should be allowed in sports. One of the key things aspects that I see has to do with what some of the critics of the new suit call it: “technology doping,” of course referring to performance enhancing drugs. Except the key thing here is that wearing this swim suit does not ruin your body the way that drugs such as steroids do. The reason why I agree that things like steroids should be illegal is not because they make you go faster, but because they are harmful and ruin you in the process. They are an unfair advantage only because other athletes realize this, and do not want to unneccesarily put their bodies through this punishment.
As long as there is no risk though, there are tons of ways that an athlete may get ahead, whether its shaving before a swim meet, or wearing spikes for track, and there’s no one [seriously] saying they should be banned. I personally think that anything should be allowed, as long as all competitors have a realistic opprotunity for using the strategy or equipment, and it does not pose a risk to the athletes health and safety. Anything short of this eventually because a “Harrison Bergeron” sort of scenario.
No, I don’t see the difference between fins and a suit. They’re both passive, by which I mean they don’t give the swimmer extra energy.
Holy cow, I have heard it all. A swimsuit that gives a competitive advantage??? This despite the fact that (a) it is an article of clothing (b) contains no means of propulsion and (c) is available to any swimmer who wants one…
Unbelievable. Its an Olympic year, everyone’s game is on fire right now. It the athletes not the swimsuits.
And for gods sake, anything that replaces the grape-holder speedo is welcome in this heterosexual’s book.
I actually find these fancy new swimsuits on the pathetically sad side of things. What swimmers cannot use or wear their normal swimsuits, the standard swimsuit so they have to wear these things now? Why? I don’t the athletes as breaking these records, I see the new suits doing it. What is the point, just have the suits race.
The swimmers are breaking these records based on technology, not talent. I’d rather see the swimmers race in the normal, standard Speedo then it shows it is talent over technology. The suits to me are cutting corners providing a cheap win.
So based on your opinion of “using technology is cheating”, how is a standard Speedo not cheating? Obviously Speedos were the standard in the first “Modern” Olympics. )I added modern so people don’t say “Well why don’t we all just swim naked like the Greeks”, cause realistically that will never happen.) And the standard Speedos have been improving on its own throughout the years so how is that fair then? The new suit is just a big sudden jump in swim suit technology. So how can you say some technology is Ok and others aren’t. Its called PROGRESS. Just like how runners moved from 70s shorts to spandex running suits or how the design of shoes change every month. Do you want to enforce standard shoes for every sport as well?
In regards to comment 12:
If you don’t believe materials science and fluid dynamics influence performance, that’s crazy. They’re designing better shaped cars today to lower drag; they’re using teflon and other low-friction materials in everything to reduce friction with air and other fluids. It’s the same thing applied to these atheletes. It’s part of our society, and it is part of this sport, plain and simple. I completely agree with James.
Swimmers loved switching from nylon to lycra suits, because it reduced drag in the water. Swimmers shave their heads, legs, arms, etc. to reduce drag in the water. Swimmers stopped shaving their heads and started wearing caps because that turned out to have a lower coefficient of drag. “Wear at normal swimsuit”?? Normal as of 1950, 1960, 1990, or today? The only way to resist technological doping is to require all athletes (swimmers, runners, etc) to compete buck naked and with a months worth of hair growth.
I must quickly agree that the “naked swimming” is not the answer, and the Speedo doesn’t help me sleep much better at night either. The part that really does make me quiver is the concept that we are arguing about LEGAL apparel as defined by the sport (even if it is swimming – point taken, Michaelb). However, let’s compare it to actual “doping” as in the MLB insanity. Mark McGuire used creatin – a legal diet supplement – during his run for the homer record. Compare that with the legislative parade of illegal users today. No comparison – allowed and prohibited, legal and illegal, appropriate and inappropriate, need I go on? Protein is quite a positive when looking to create muscle mass, can be found in red meat, and therefore is enjoyable to consume. Does this give an unfair advantage over a vegetarian? Absurd, isn’t it? I understand the desire of the “old guard” to want to feel they are on equal playing fields, but that would mean we shouldn’t enhance diet, fuels, design, etc. Sorry to Mark Spitz, but progress is progress, and it is good.
A new term for this form of technological assist. “Wearoids”