The Great Debate: Should Swimming Turn Back Time?

March 31 -

Now that the collegiate swim season is behind the NCAA, perhaps the biggest decision to come this off-season pertains to suit technology and its role in the sport. Simply put, should these suits be allowed or should they be banned? Those who are within the swimming world know the trinity of big name, high-tech swim suits exists: the Blue Seventy Nero, the Speedo LZR, and soon to be TYR Titan Tracer. TYR and Speedo are the veterans of this trio; both have been in the competition suit business for decades. Blue Seventy is the new comer to the party, and for lack of a better metaphor, fashionably late to the party so that everyone takes notice of their entrance.

To be fair, this argument is long overdue, as the boom in high-tech competition suit research has been occurring in front of our very eyes since the turn of the century. In 2000, Speedo hired a group of engineers to design a low drag material resembling the skin of a shark. This suit released later in the year in time for the Sydney Olympics, and was cleverly named the FastSkin. Engineers continued to work on the fluid dynamics of drag, specifically focusing on areas of high drag using 3D computer imaging. Speedo eventually released the FastSkinII (prior to the Athens Olympics), the FastSkin Pro, and now the FastSkin LZR (just before the Beijing Olympics). Speedo has always been known as the ultimate in competition swimwear with hundreds of world records to boast.

It was only a matter of time that other companies caught on to the science behind competitive swimming. For a long time, Speedo had essentially held a monopoly over the sport – the fastest suits were made by Speedo. Prices rose hundreds of dollars for the advantage of reducing the drag coefficient (a completely different argument in itself). Clearly, science-driven suit technology was a money-making business.

So why blame Blue Seventy? I would argue that if Blue Seventy did not release the Nero, the Speedo LZR would be an accepted form of competition suit. This whole debate would be laughable. Competition between companies to produce the best product is not only healthy, it is essential for the growth of sport. It has become obvious that both the Nero and the LZR have produced their overly-abundant share of NCAA cuts, national records and world records. The argument among swimming circles is solely about the Nero; very few agree that FINA and the NCAA should ban Speedo as well. If technology has been taken too far, companies cannot be selectively banned.

The next argument would be the boundaries of science in swimming. The inclusion of technology in the sport has been overwhelming in the past decade, but has been an ongoing process over the last century. Is it acceptable to just stop all progression in the sport, and leave everything where it is? Would the sport have to take a step back in its progress and return to paper suits? Once suits get banned, lines will get cloudier and it will be less clear to firmly create a new line. At the 2008 Olympics, 25 world records were set. In 2004, 14 world records were set. And in 2000, 15 world records were set. These numbers are staggering; but where is the line of acceptable technology in swimming?

As of now, there is no testing by the NCAA to prove that a suit is a performance enhancer. And it would be essentially impossible to compare suits and say one suit enhances performance more than another. I will concede the argument that FINA and the NCAA should set standards for competition suits. I agree there should be limitations to the material and benefits of a swimsuit. But it is simply too late to turn back the clock and tell the swimming world that their governing bodies were sleeping while allowing these products to market. Limits must be created around the current technologies, while still leaving room for progression to occur. Progression is never a negative, and it is essential for the survivability of any sport.