Most swimmers competing in the Bejing Olympics this summer believe they will fail without a new $600 swimsuit, The Economist reports.
In February Speedo introduced its LZR swimsuit and 38 of the 42 world swimming records broken since then were by swimmers wearing the suit — which has no seams and takes 20 minutes to get into.
Do good swimmers just wear better bathing suits or does the suit make you a good swimmer?
The Economist opts for the latter:
Indeed, some of those records have been claimed by less-than-notable racers, suggesting that the difference lies in the apparel, not the athlete.
As does the Japan Swimming Federation, which changed its domestic sponsorship regulations so swimmers can wear LZRs. Even Nike is allowing its athletes to switch to Speedos.
TYR, another suit maker is suing Speedo’s parent company on antitrust grounds and some call the LZR “doping on a hanger,” reports The Economist.
The International Olympic Committee has already approved rival high-tech swimsuits, but — by some reports — Speedo still has the psychological edge.
and 
. You can also watch it on 
In response to #2, without wrist wraps and back belts, the weight lifted in weightlifting competitions would be significantly diminished. Thus, I think something close to what you’re thinking about is allowed.
they should let ‘em wear flippers, too
All this talk about equalizing equipment ignores the fact that record performances are economically important to sports.
People like to watch records being set. People buy stuff that helped to set records (or looks like the stuff that helped to set records).
Sure, it would be purer sport if we competed like the cyclists in the movie “Breaking Away” and all rode the same model of Roadmaster bike. But “pure Olympic sport” is an oxymoron.
Regulatory agencies should first focus on the stuff that is dangerous to the athlete — like high levels of EPO.
@ #9
I consider wrist wraps and back belts safety equipment. They keep the body aligned for safety – not for power or strength.
dfingberg, if it’s priced much higher they probably wouldn’t reach their target market of younger swimmers (and their parents’ pocketbooks). many of the elite swimmers get their suits for free, after all.
“Sport should not be about the equipment.
Swim naked.”
Well, for some of us, the equipment would get in the way if we were naked…unless they keep the pool pretty cold.
Ben, you’re a little off base and i’m not sure why you turned this into a political argument regarding free market economy.
Its not silly to ban technology from most sports. Running, swimming, wrestling, etc are sports that do not need any equipment whatsoever in order to have a competition. A sport like cycling or sailing obviously needs a piece of equipment, so in those sports, technological advances will come with the territory. Not the case with the most basic of sports. You’re forgetting how the Olympics started and how its about the competition and who is better, faster, stronger. If they could perform the event in Ancient Greece and its still an Olympic sport, there is no need for technology to dictate the winner.
As a college swimmer I have to say that I am completely turned off by the full body suit. If you can change the equipment why not just wear fins?