By Eamonn Keenan, Swimming World College Intern.
In August of 2017, USA Swimming announced that they hired an outside consulting firm to evaluate technical racing suit regulations. This research initiative follows the banning of the use of tech suits in competitions among the 12 & Under age groups in LSCs such as Southern California, Arkansas and Maine.
On May 13 of this year, USA Swimming’s board of directors voted to send the proposal that would ban the use of technical racing suits for athletes under the age of 13 directly to the House of Delegates (HOD). The HOD will vote on whether to enact the tech suit ban in September.
With similar bans being implemented in LSCs such as New England, Iowa and New Jersey, it seems that an age group tech suit ban is a plausible reality.
First of all, what exactly is a “tech suit”?
Photo Courtesy: Annie Grevers
A technical racing swimsuit, or tech suit, is a specialized swimsuit designed with bonded/meshed seams or kinetic tape. In simpler terms, tech suits don’t even appear to have seams – coaches often tell swimmers that if they can pinch the side of their tech suit, it isn’t tight enough.
On top of that, tech suits have water-repellent properties that add little textile weight and help the swimmer cut right through the water. The conforming carbon fiber cage (and other approved textiles) gives the biggest performance benefit: compression. Extreme muscle compression streamlines the body in order to reduce drag, thus leading to greater improvements in performance.
The cost of tech suits can range anywhere from $90-500. In contrast to most standard nylon or polyester swimsuits that remain functional each and every practice throughout multiple seasons, a tech suit’s compression and water-repellent properties begin to noticeably deteriorate after one or two big meets, depending on how many times it’s worn. The more times the suit is worn, the more it stretches out and the repellent properties degrade. Rather than being worn for every meet of the season, tech suits are often saved for big championship meets or when trying to qualify for one.
Potential Rationales Behind the Ban
Photo Courtesy: Taylor Brien
Purchasing a tech suit is undoubtedly a serious financial investment, especially for age group swimmers who attend a championship meet in both the winter and the summer. Not only will kids want a fresh suit for each meet, but also a swimmer at that age could easily grow out of a tech suit bought in the winter by the time it’s summer. It’s very possible that many swim parents are spending $1,000 per year on tech suits.
Although it’s easy to say that swimmers could just not wear one, a young swimmer stepping up for his or her first state meet at 10 years old would likely feel at an inherent disadvantage if everyone else was wearing the same suit that the Olympians wear on TV.
At the same time, however, it’s not even clear how much of a difference wearing a tech suit makes at that young of an age. The majority of studies on the drag reduction of tech suits were done using post-adolescents whose physically mature bodies likely found greater benefits from the compression the suits provide. This ambiguity makes the $300-500 entry-level fee for championship meet competition seem even more ludicrous at those ages.
Purchasing a tech suit also sets a significant precedent. If swim parents buy a tech suit for their 10-year-old who just made state for the first time, then they’ll be obligated to buy one when the swimmer makes state at age 11. Doesn’t the state meet become more important the older the swimmer gets? Buying your first tech suit can become a long-term investment – a precarious one, given the fact that little correlation exists between success at the age group level and success at the senior level.
The universality of tech suits at championship meets stems in part from the connotations surrounding the suits. Much of racing success lies in mental attitude, and most swimmers pridefully accept and internalize this. The structure of the typical swim season – getting beaten up for the whole season in preparation for one final meet – renders the end of the season a period of extreme emotional intensity.
Photo Courtesy: Taylor Brien
In response to this stress, swimmers cling on to three things for solace: taper, shaving and tech suits. These factors are ultimately out of the swimmer’s control and don’t have nearly as large of an impact on their end-of-season performance as the training leading up to taper. Despite this, swimmers still tend to put tech suits on a pedestal as if they are integral to their success.
Swimmers place such an emphasis on the benefits of tech suits to the point that wearing them has become a necessity for their own individual performance rather than a way to level with the playing field.
Coach Charlie McCanless, head coach of Asheville Swim Club, said: “The feeling that young swimmers get when they dive in the pool with a tech suit for the first time makes them feel unstoppable; they think that there’s no way they aren’t dropping time.” What swimmer wouldn’t want to do everything in their power to swim as fast as they can?
The value attributed to these suits can oftentimes result in the belief that the tech suit can become a substitute to hard work in training, as putting one on will instantly make you faster. This is not the way the paradigm should be shifted at the age group level, as swimming has always been one of the most premier platforms for self-improvement: you get out what you put in. Improvements in swimming should stem from a child’s physical developments and his or her habits in training, not from how much money their parents are willing to spend on a swimsuit.
In an interview with USA Today, the former executive director of USA Swimming Chuck Wielgus said, “We want the performance on the athletes to be gauged on their hard work, on what they’re able to accomplish without technological aids, specifically swimsuits.”
Possible Cons of the Ban
Photo Courtesy: Taylor Brien
An ostensible reason behind USA Swimming’s decision to hire consultation on this issue is to determine whether tech suit sales outweigh the potential long-term loss of investment in the sport from athletes deterred by the entry-level costs that tech suit culture necessitates.
Partnerships with swimsuit manufacturers likely contribute to a significant portion of USA Swimming’s revenue. If USA Swimming determined that banning tech suits for the 12 & Under age groups would end up saving them more money, then they will draw that line in the sand.
That line, however, is by nature completely arbitrary. Why do swimmers need to suddenly spend $300-500 to compete at the state meet when they turn 13? If USA Swimming were to sanction 12 & Under state meets without tech suits, then that would beg to question why tech suits should be used at all at the state meets for the older age groups. Moreover, why would we even need tech suits in the first place?
Additionally, the next generation of swimmers who pass through the 9-10 age group all the way to the 13-14 age group may not have the same fantastical attitude towards tech suits that affects swimmers today. This could end up transforming tech suit culture entirely, which would presumably make USA Swimming less money in the long run.
Furthermore, the problems with these arbitrary divisions are exponential. For instance, what if a company decides to make the fastest nylon suit and marks it up for $50 more than a standard nylon suit? Will that suit end up being prohibited at 12 & Under meets as well? Will we get to the point where only a few select suits that are comparable in speed and fair in price are approved at the state level?
Prospects for the Future
Photo Courtesy: Taylor Brien
When considering this controversial issue, it’s important to focus on why the discussion is happening in the first place. We need to remember that the heart behind this controversy is to make sure that athletes are continually encouraged to pursue their swimming goals and to assure that the resources put into swimming are allocated to services that directly aid in the development of the swimmers as both athletes and human beings.
It’s also important to remember that elitism exists in every sport, i.e. soccer players wearing the nicest cleats, baseball players with the nicest bats, and so on. Whereas lavishness can sometimes be a good thing – the money spent on tech suits will inevitably be put back into the money that funds the sport in of itself – it shouldn’t cause widespread controversy or become the standard for competition.
Although it seems inevitable that an age group tech suit ban is the future of swimming, the logistics still remain undetermined. Where would you draw the line?
Commentary: All commentaries are the opinion of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Swimming World Magazine nor its staff.
No!! It seems we banned suits simply because of price and burden on families. They can say what they wants but it comes down to $$ and how every kids needs a participation trophy. Kids play hockey and have to wear pads , has anyone ever seen the price of those?? Should USA hockey ban those because it’s expensive?
I hockey, it’s a safety issue. No practical comparison.
Kathy Neville Lemay it is when the ban on tech suits is about cost to make it fair
Hockey pads prevent injury. Tech suits do not.
Sharon Chocko Gallagher no shit! You missed the point
Hedley definitely imo
Agreed
why does it need to be regulated in the first place? A mediocre swimmer will stay mediocre with or without a tech suit… a great swimmer will be great with or without the latest tech suit…. I have two Age groupers that happen to be very good… but not because of their suits… lol… but because they train hard regularly and enjoy the sport!
If as a parent you feel like your kid needs a tech suit to be competitive then you don’t really understand what makes an athlete successful, it sure is not the suit!??I think it should remain up to the individuals choice if they want to invest now or invest at a later point of their athletes career. Even young athletes will understand this rationale I think. I mean we are not talking about performance enhancing drugs here…
Agreed, why was this ever an issue? Every aspect of life is developing with new technology. It’s a fabric on a suit. It won’t make you an Olympian. You still need hard work and dedication.
What’s the point? At that age I doubt there is much of a difference.
No let people wear them. The negligible differences these make only matter at the elite level. At age group level training harder and a better technique are the only difference makers. If people can’t see that it’s there problem to waste money or buy suits in reality the can’t afford or don’t need.
I have to admit that to Masters swimmers like me the racing suits seem to make a fairly big difference, especially compared to wearing a pair of training jammers in a race. I agree that talent/technique etc. will be the main difference.
Neil Morgan I wore race suits from a young age (11/12) when I swam to a fairly high level to when I quit (16) and I’ll be the first one to admit it felt fast and seemed to make a difference from the start. However unless all other things are perfected i.e body position in the water starts turns transitions down to things such as body hair you are negating the performance of the suit to the point where it is effectively a waste of time. I have no doubt that I would’ve swam to within 1/10ths of a second to a second over longer races of my best times in normal suits. The suits were designed for the elite, Dressel Ledecky Chalmers Sjostrom Peaty, where 1/100ths are important and where they are reaching the absolute peak of what they can do physically to swim the best times. So as much as I respect your point I have to disagree that the fairly big difference is all psychological rather than physical.
I believe that the introduction of these high tech suits have ruined the sport of swimming. All the records were set with brief swimwear and should only be broken with them. Bring back the SPEEDO !!
Ban them for 10’& Unders. It’s ridiculous they are making those super suits for kids that small / that young.
Well they’re only supplying a demand. If people were educated and realised that there kids didn’t need them to perform then there wouldn’t be a market and manufacturers wouldn’t make them.
If the manufacturers are not able to be ethical about it then rules should be made to regulate their lack of ethics.
Donald P. Spellman what ethics are they to regulate? If people want to buy them let them. No one is being forced to buy them. There’s absolutely ZERO evidence that they make any difference for age groupers competing. So if people want to still buy them what is the issue? At the end of the day what else do you want to start placing regulations on, Speedo FastSkin 3 goggles or Speedsockets they’re expensive and don’t have any impact on performance. You can’t regulate something that isn’t mandatory or providing and unfair advantage to a group or person. Unlike the full body polyurethane suits circa 2008/9 where they were clearly providing an unnatural advantage in terms of aqua planing and added buoyancy hence why they were banned outright from the top down.
James Lane : It becomes an arms race for the best suits between parents and drives up the participating costs of the sport. Keeping costs down for entry level participation should be a factor.
Donald P. Spellman in what way does it do that. There’s no competitive advantage to be gained by wearing them so the ‘arms race’ and the problem is created by naive parents who are all sheep. There’s no barrier for entry level racing it’s only an implied barrier that parents place on themselves for no reason. If you step back and think does my child need a £500 suit to be competitive aged 11 and think yes that’s the problem of the parents not the system or the companies.
I had daughters that swam age-group and one who still swims. Why make families shell out lots of money each season (since the suits don’t last too long) so early on? Would have saved me around $2K.
James Lane : Do you coach or have any kids?
Donald P. Spellman no but I used to compete. I wore race suits and they cost a lot money but I didn’t feel at all pressured into asking my parents for a new suit or for one in the first place. And equally they didn’t feel obligated to get me one at a young age until I asked for one just because my friend had one. If they had said no and explained why, yeah big deal I didn’t get one . But no one is making people shell out money for them just because peers do the same. Like if someone jumped off a bridge would you follow? No. As a parent you use your own judgement you could have easily turned round and said no as mine could have when I first got one.
Donald P. Spellman I know of several people who didn’t get a suit until the age 16/17 not at 10/11 like I did.
Good for you. Nice attempt at false equivalence.
The free market is perfectly able to handle this without intervention.
USA swimming can ban these suits from age group swimmers as long as they take 50% less money from any and all suit companies in the future. If they keep asking suit companies for sponsorships then no ban!
Age group meets become fashion shows instead of swim meets when tech suits are worn-no tech suits under fourteen, learn to swim fast instead.
As a mom of age groupers who are very good, it doesn’t matter what suit kids where!! If parents want to waste money, let them. I only allow tech suits at states and zones. Practice suits for all other meets!!!
I love watching my age-grouper (with a normal suit) beat other kids that have the latest tech-suits. I think she gets a kick out of it as well. She realizes it’s the hard work and training that makes the difference at this stage and not the equipment.
My kids train extremely hard at one of the best clubs in the country. They only wear suits at championship meets but yes I buy them for my 11 year old. Have since she was nine. She is a technically correct swimmer and busts her ass day in day out in the pool. To those who say they make no difference to age groupers maybe to your toothpick child they don’t. But mine was born with bigger boned genetics and compression Slimming her down 5% plus makes a difference. Just like everything else in this country quit shoving your opinions in my face. You don’t know everything.
No!
This sucks I only let my 11 and overs have them for big meets they work so hard to get to the big meet and I reward the ones who Deserve them. So I think the age should be 10 and under swimmers. Along with that I think the company’s that are making them should do a better job at making the other suits less money.
Ban Until teenagers.
1. They have no NEED for the tech suits.
2. Many young families cannot afford the high cost.
USA Swimming should educate more on the subject and let the parents decide if they still want to spend money on a suit that will hardly make a difference.
Ban for everybody (even pros) or don’t ban at all. What is so magical about the day you turn 13? Sounds like a communist central party planning idiotic make everything equal ideology. Let free market dictate, and don’t ruin the sport with mandates.
Oh, and as an official, I’d love to see the rules of enforcement. How will I determine what is legal? Are we going to ask for kids to give us samples of their swim suits? Idiotic even to entertain the idea.
what does the free market have to do with a private swimming organization you moron? You’re a clown using big words. USA swimming can do whatever they want in terms of regulating what gear is legal, just like every other sports organization that does just that. They can determine what is legal just like they determine what is legal now.
As an official, you should already be applying several suit rules (only one suit, can’t go below the knees, no tieback suits for females and whether they have a FINA stamp). And, this can’t be harder to enforce than the rules regarding entry into the backstroke turn or the double-modified Lochte breast to free IM turn rules.
You can’t tell which swimmers, just by looking at them, attended swim camp, ate the best meals, trained the hardest, have the best physiology or have the best family support.
You can tell which swimmers, however, are wearing a tech suit.
Get over it.
I think it’s absurd to spend $350 on a tech suit for a 10 year old, but it’s not nearly as harmful as having 10 year olds swim 5 or 6 days a week, 10 or even 11 months a year, and there are plenty of kids doing that. Or having 12 & unders wearing paddles. If USA Swimming wanted to pass a rule that was likely to increase the chances of more kids staying in the sport, it should limit both weekly practice time for all 12 & unders and also limit the number of weeks a year that kids can swim. Then, maybe more of the 10 and 12 year old stars would make it to high school swimming.
I agree. Personally I don’t really think you need a tech suit until you’ve stopped growing. My coach when I was younger strongly discouraged kids under 13 or 14 wearing them. I don’t think you need one until you’ve stopped growing. As you’re still growing and working hard you’re going to continue dropping time regardles. For many of the people I know, tech suits have been a way to get past “the wall” that we all inevitably hit at some point. Overall they’re really just a huge mental thing especially for an older swimmer.
Yes
As the AG chair of NJ Swimming and someone who spearheaded the ban for our on LSC, I can assure you all we still had some extremely fast swimming. Every single 10&U relay record was broken. Countless other best times and new qualifying cuts made for bigger meets. If you disagree, do yourself a favor and look at the bigger picture…long term, progressive development is the way to go, not the glory of the here and now.
Alison
I don’t have a dog in this fight since my child is 17. But this doesn’t make any sense. It sounds like Social engineering. The suits are already regulated by FEMA.
If a child (of any age) is wearing a legal FEMA APPROVED suit, why would you ban it?? The parents are the ones who are paying for the suits. They don’t make that much difference. Some kids wear their sister or brother’s hand-me-downs; or they get the suits on sales (which you can do).
Tech suits don’t replace good technique and practice.
I’m more concerned about the number of age groupers taking PEDS like Testosterone.