The 2010 suits regime is well underway and myriad heartening words from hundreds of world-class swimmers can be found in the databases of the world media - mostly 'happy that we're back to fairness' and 'glad I won't have to spend 40mins and more squeezing into a suit before a race'. But not all is well in this period of transition.
The pendulum having been allowed to swing so wildly one way in 2008 and 2009 has now swung back with a vigour that has left little room for common sense to thrive, particularly at a time when suspicious remains that shiny suit forces are still plotting to make a comeback, with the assistance of FINA insiders who wish to impose their minority view on the majority who are glad to see the back of the circus.
Key concerns of swimmers and coaches in early 2010 boil down to this: we have textile suits from 2007, 08 and 09 cut to the 2010 profile but we cannot wear them. The concern of suit makers is this: we have textile suits from 2007, 08 and 09 cut to the 2010 profile but we cannot sell them, for no-one is allowed to wear them.
Dirk Reinicke, head coach and technical director to Switzerland's Limmat Sharks in Zürich, summed matters up in these words: "The Arena R-Evolution, 100% textile, is not admissible in the pre 2010 version (the one with the blue-yellow lines on the front). The new R-Evos are plain black. Also, the old Powerskins for women with the quite extensive grey-white print are not on the list, due to that [same problem]."
Similar situations exist for all the main traditional players in the swim suit market, the biggest players having accepted their lot. Galling indeed for the likes of adidas and arena, firms that issued FINA with a warning in April 2008 not to allow suit wars to develop. FINA's reply and that of teams linked to Speedo was "do more R&D ... catch up". They did - and the rest is history. Now this side of a decision to right a wrong, those same victims of early 2008 find themselves victims, on a financial level, once more in early 2010.
At deck level, identifying what may be worn is clearly still a problem for many. As one suit maker put it: "At a time when everyone is so uncertain, federations and meet managers are simply saying 'if it has a FINA 2010 label, fine, but if it has an approval label of 2009, take it out'. But we had textile suits on the 2009 list and cut to 2010 profile but those can't be worn anymore at some events. At some events, they are being worn.
Reinicke noted: "Trouble is, from the looks of the approved-list, it is not to be seen that there is a new version of the R-Evolution."
FINA is clear on that one: all 2010 approved suits carry a label (albeit one that looks like something a local seamstress could replicate with not much more trouble than it takes to darn a pair of socks) and only suits with a "FINA approved" label can be worn.
Reinicke describes the need to dump suits with prints but 2010 compliant in every other way as "ridiculous ... because that print only slows you down, if anything". He nails another matter on the head in adding: "... but in these strange times, it is also a matter of principle, and getting the rules right so that nobody can come up with some fancy print idea that brings back those fast suits."
In between those thoughts is this one doing the rounds: by installing a regime that requires everyone to buy new suits, not just this season but in any to follow as new products and new approved lists make their way into the world, FINA is effectively helping to create a market that could be even more sizeable than it already is. Two main directions in that market: create suits that truly could never be said to enhance performance and allow value for money, endorsement from stars, brand recognition and such things to drive sales; or allow some enhancement in suits that keeps alive the ability of suit makers to sell their products on the basis of "buy me, improve your chance of a gold medal".
The latter is the model at the helm of the race right now. Which takes us back to suspicion, labels and folk with a bent to cheat a system that has no provision for imposing a penalty on any apparel maker (or anyone else who may harness the skills of an old aunt and her sewing machine) who deliberately tries to break the rules.
The job of the FINA panel of experts, the four scientists on the suit approvals commission, is not only to adhere to the guidelines laid down by FINA for 2010 suits in recognition of an overwhelming rejection of the 2008-09 suits circus at FINA Congress in July last year, but is also to issue storm warnings, to be vigilant for techniques and engineering of "textiles" that seek to boost performance. And that in the face of a rule that now rules out any suit that "may aid speed, buoyancy or endurance".
On that notes, Reinicke raises a problematic issue for the experts panel and FINA, one that has been flagged up with a passion and punch Down Under by veteran coach and father of the taper and pace clock, Forbes Carlile. Echoing the Australian's concerns, Reinicke said: "Even the textile jammers like the old Powerskin or the newer R-Evo produce a significant amount of lift, ask any swimmer who ever wore one to compare the feeling with that of swimming in briefs." Speedo swimmers say similar things about the FS-Pro and other models, though none of the above can be compared to the shiny boosters of the seasons just past, statistics scream.
According to the Swiss coach "the measurement procedure for lift is just not designed to measure this ... the air-bubbles on the surface of the suit are clearly visible as that silvery shine once the swimmers enter the water, and probably this is what produces the lift".
The key to that may rest in porosity and permeability. The work of the panel of experts is in its infancy. Meanwhile, many a good suit will never know another race, mainly because there are cheats in the world who would use the ability to have a print on a suit as a way of finding loopholes back to a time of buoyancy and booster suits.
As such, the need to read the small print on the label of your suit has never been more pressing.
