London Marathon and Speedo LZR news

London Marathon review. And in the pool, Arena's Revenge against the Speedo LZR Racer!

Now that the dust has settled on yesterday's magnificent London Marathon, I thought I'd follow up with some more analysis of the race, and why it developed the way it did. And then of course, there is the latest installment in what is rapidly becoming an epic saga of swimsuits, technology and controversy.

London Marathon - Magnificent Martin Lel

Martin Lel, as we noted yesterday, must now surely be recognized as the pre-eminent marathon racer in the world. There are those who will argue that Haile Gebrselassie is number 1, and certainly, when it comes to racing the clock, no one has matched him. He's also the greatest runner of the range of distances ever, no question. That title is not in doubt. But right now, Lel is the greatest marathon runner, and his list of titles gives him a huge claim for greatest ever marathoner - 3 x London (and 2nd once), 2 x New York, and two 3rd places at Boston in the last five years represents a CV no one can match. There's also a world half-marathon title, plus two victories in the PeachTree race, and the Great North Run title.

And then Gebrselassie has never won a marathon RACE - his wins have all come with a group of five pace-makers to 30km and the nearest competition two minutes behind. Martin Lel, for the last 12 months, seems unable to LOSE races - three major Marathons, plus the Great North Run - a remarkable sequence of world class performance.

There are those who felt that had Gebrselassie been in yesterday's race, he would have won it and broken the record. Who knows? I doubt it - the record most definitely would not happen, as the tactics cost the athletes at least 30 seconds. But based on the evidence from previous races where he has been somewhat exposed in the final 5km when the racing is on, I'd be hard pressed to see him matching Lel and Wanjiru. Yesterday, Martin Lel showed the world how to race a marathon.

He ended up running the 4th fastest time in history, despite losing time to the tactical games being played from 30km. If you look at the race splits, you'll see that the elite men slowed quite substantially between 30 and 40km. That happened just after the pace-makers dropped out, and the elite men began gearing up for the finish, looking at each other, getting cagey, as so often happens in this kind of race. There was also the rain, which lashed the course during this time, and may have contributed to a slowing in pace. It's difficult to know how much time was lost - 30 seconds, perhaps? Maybe more?

Extra-ordinary finishing ability - Lel finishes like a track runner

In any event, I went back to the race and tried to pull some splits from the final kilometer. Admittedly, there's a second or two of error in these times, but this is what I measured:

• Final 600m covered in 1:36 (64 seconds/400m pace)
• Final 385 yards covered in 52 seconds (60 seconds/400m pace)
• Final 200m run in 28 seconds (56 seconds/400m pace)

Absolutely astonishing speed, and at the end of a race run in 2:05:16. Given also that Lel was completely in control of all this, I really do believe that given the right race (that is, 5 pacemakers and no competition from 30km onwards), Lel has the world record in him. Because when you can control the best runners in the world, slow down and lose time due to tactics, run a poorly paced race thanks to a suicidal pace in the first 5km, then you have capacity to run at least a minute faster with the right race. That point is arguable, but I believe time will bear it out. That is, if Lel ever has his shot - I get the impression that Lel is a pure-racer - he won't stay away from London and other big races to pursue times, and that will ultimately count against him.

The other runners - a post-mortem of the top three

As for the rest, no one can be unhappy with their performances. Sammy Wanjiru, only 21, and in only his second marathon, should be pleased, and should now get on with the business of running shorter distances. His very early jump up to the marathon is not, from a physiological point of view, the most advisable one. I know his coach is also reluctant to have him race too many marathons, and with good reason. I fear that he will over-race and by the age of 24, might be stuck in the 2:07 range, with no chance of improvement. He's certainly a great talent, and could well go on to break Martin Lel's world record (I'm using creative licence here, by the way!).

But before that, Wanjiru will line up in Beijing as a joint favourite with Lel. It is difficult too see Lel being beaten, but Beijing is Wanjiru's best shot. The reason? He is based in the Far East for much of the year, and so the humidity and temperatures will be familiar for Wanjiru. Not so much for Lel, though he has said the heat doesn't worry him. What is interesting to note about the East Africans is that many of them don't enjoy the heat and humidity - remember that they train at altitude, where it's generally cooler and less humid. Also, unlike the Europeans and Americans, they don't go to special training camps for the heat, because they like to be based at home, working a formula that has always brought them success. So Beijing may really be more of a challenge for the Kenyans than we think. So Lel might have his work cut out. Wanjiru, however, is a name to look out for.

In third yesterday was Goumri, who ran a massive PB by over 2 minutes. It was his third marathon, and so he's on the up. He'll be disappointed that he couldn't challenge in the final 400m, but still, 2 minutes PB is not a bad day out. The problem for Goumri is that he is in danger of becoming Lel's bridesmaid. He's run 3 marathons, and three times, he's been starting at the back of Lel with 1km to go. Three times, he's been absolutely buried by Lel's kick. So his only experience of the marathon is a 41km race with a 1km mismatch at the end! He'll have to figure out how to overcome that. Yesterday, he simply wasn't strong enough - he tried, with about 2km to go, to push on, but the two Kenyans were clearly in great shape and they answered his very short surge, and then put him into difficulty. Goumri will be back, and he'll be hoping Lel is not in the same race!

One other honourable mention goes to Ryan Hall. He also set a PB by two minutes, and was one of the main drivers of the race strategy, according to this great interview with Martin Lel. Hall, the great hope of non-East Africans, is a really promising athlete. Having exploded into the global scene by breaking 60minutes for a half marathon last year, he then did a 2:08 on debut in London last year, won the US Olympic Trials in great style and now has done himself proud in this race.

The problem for Hall, as it is for anyone else, is where to now? Three Kenyans finished ahead of him in London, and one of them (Emmanuel Mutai) probably won't even make the Olympic Games. At the same time, another Kenyan ran sub 2:06 in Rotterdam, and then there is a host lining up in Boston next Monday to stake their claim. And that doesn't even mention the Ethiopians, who have always produced great finishers. The final 2%, as it is in most sports, is often the most difficult to achieve, and so what Hall needs to aspire to is that last little bit to complete the package - he's 98% there, and can certainly go all the way, but more often than not, this is where the barrier exists.

Time will tell whether Hall has what it takes - it's certainly great to see a fresh face to add some variety to the usual phalanx of remarkable Africans, so hopefully he features for a while. He's also seems incredibly level headed and grounded, which will help, from what I have seen and read about him. Just a word of caution, however, is that the temptation will exist to race often, and for success, which often comes at the expense of quality. So Hall, who is still young, needs to be cautious about his own development, and then time will tell whether that last 2% is achievable for him.

Wrap up of London

I'm sure we'll return to London in some form over the next couple of days - you don't put that kind of race out of the memory so quickly! But for now, to sum London up, it was Lel's coronation as the King of the Marathon, and London retained its own crown as the greatest of marathons. To produce 6 times under 2:07, and three under 2:06, makes this the greatest marathon ever, and it was won by perhaps the greatest marathoner ever - bring on the world record.

Speedo LZR Racer vs. Arena's Revenge

Now, for a change in medium, we move from land to water, and the latest installment in a drama that is taking on epic proportions!

FINA approves the Speedo LZR Racer swimsuit - and opens the can of worms

The world short-course swimming championships in Manchester have drawn to a close, and saw 18 world records broken in the five days of competition! That is added to the 19 long course world records already broken this year!

However, the championships may well be more significant for the fact that FINA, swimming's governing body, has announced that the Speedo LZR Racer Swimsuit, the center of the controversy about technology and performance, is legal and meets all FINA's stipulated specifications for swimsuits.

In case you've missed it, Speedo brought out its latest suit, the LZR Racer, earlier this year, and it's been an absolute sensation in the pools. Of the 19 long course and 18 short course world records set in the pool this year, 18 and 17 were set in the LZR Racer, respectively! That's 35 out of 37, the only other manufacturer getting a look in is Arena, which has been worn in the other 2 records.

For the record, someone has analysed swimming records in Olympic years and found that in every Olympic year since 1988, the average number of world records broken before the Olympic Games is....FIVE. 2008 has delivered 37 in total! It is clearly an anomaly, leading to names for the LZR of "drugs on a hanger"!

So that introduces something of a conflict for the swimmers, and a difficult decision. Do you wear the Speedo LZR and go for gold, or do you remain loyal to your sponsors if you happen to be unlucky enough to be sponsored by anyone other than Speedo?

Gerhard Zandberg of South Africa has made his mind up. According to this report, he will wear the LZR Racer even though he faces a fine of $3000 if he does. His words: "I'm going to wear the Speedo at the Olympics. I'm not going to sacrifice performance. I'll be fined $5000, but what's $5000?"

Other "non-Speedo" swimmers are equally disgruntled. Fillipo Magnini, world long course champ, feels at a disadvantage when racing against Speedo swimmers, and has expressed his displeasure. All in all, not a very pleasant situation for swimmers or manufacturers (other than Speedo, that is)

Help may be at hand - FINA legalizes the suit and so Arena responds

But, help may be at hand. Because at a summit held to discuss the suits at the Manchester championships, FINA cleared up what had apparently been some confusion around the design of the suits. According to reports from the meeting, the confusion, particularly on the part of Arena (who had asked FINA to review ALL suits and then ban those that were illegal), involved the specifications of what materials could be used in the suits.

That is, according to FINA rules, swimsuits should be made of "regular flat fabrics" and "no outside applications shall be added" (art. 3.1 b).

Arena interpreted this to mean that the panels of polyurethane, drag-free material that Speedo had incorporated into its LZR Racer at hydronamically beneficial locations were illegal. Not so, according to FINA officials and the meeting held in Manchester this weekend. FINA have instead clarified that the rules do not limit the fabrics, and that other materials could be used.

This has opened the door (or a can of worms, if you wish) for other manufacturers to step in. And first through that door, unsurprisingly, are Arena. According to the Arena CEO, Cristiano Portas, Arena are ready with their ultra-new swimsuit. You'll recall from our previous posts that Arena first introduced the Powerskin R-Evolution. Well, they are now talking about the Powerskin R-Evolution Mark II, which is basically a prototype very similar to Speedo's LZR Racer - it has polyurethane panels to reduce drag, and compress the muscles, to apparently create a sensation of buoyancy.

Portas' own words: "Now we know the interpretation of the material is free, we have something ready," Portas told reporters. "It's the very first prototype, but the feeling of the suit is special."

Where does this leave swimming?

Also unsurprisingly, all the other manufacturers, TYR, Diana, Nike, Adidas and Mizuno are now free to do the same thing, and they presumably will. So expect more records to fall before the Olympics (the USA National trials are on the horizon, and I shudder to think how many records will fall there), and then of course, at the Games, the combination of swimsuits and peaking means records will be obliterated.

I would in fact not be surprised if the number of world records broken in
2008 reaches the 100 mark. If Speedo would like a slogan for their LZR Racer, they might consider "Speedo - wiping out 20 years of swimming history with one splash", or something similar, because while technology is great, this unprecedented spike in performance is effectively pushing the "Reset" button for swimming, and in five years time, we'll look at world records, and classify them as either PRE or POST "Material changes".

Is that good for swimming? Difficult to say. Personally, I'd love to see swimmers racing on an equal playing field (or pool), where the winner is the guy who has produced the higher force and the more efficient swim. The idea of a medal lost thanks to a suit seems to detract from performance a little to me. Having said that, in a perverse way, this latest development might at least ensure that we have some competition in the Olympics, because at least now, swimmers wearing anything but Speedo might have their own 2% performance advantages. So from a competitive point of view, this is a good thing. But for the sport, I'm not so sure. FINA have a problem on their hands.

Ross

Swimming update

The swimsuit that is causing major controversy - Speedo winning hands down

I could scarcely believe my eyes last night, when I tuned into the World Short-course swimming championships in Manchester. This was the first opportunity I have had to see, first-hand, the results of the swimsuit wars we've been covering here in the last few weeks.

"Irrelevant world records" - the proof is in the pools

What I saw was the fulfilment of a prophecy made by the coach of the US swimming team, Mark Schubert, which we reported in our very first post on the issue some three weeks ago. He said then that the new swimsuits would one day make world records "irrelevant", and sure enough, "one day" has arrived, as records are being broken by more than two body lengths!

There are some coaches who are in denial, they say this is normal for an Olympic year. And as a physiologist, I will concede that the focus on the Olympics, the training peaks designed around it, is guaranteed to drive swimming records lower.

But last night, as I watched the Dutch Women's 4 x 200m relay team OBLITERATE a world record that had stood for six years by EIGHT SECONDS, I found it difficult to believe that coaches still feel this. That's right - EIGHT SECONDS. In fact, had it not been for a "relatively slow" final leg by the young Dutch swimmer, the record would have been destroyed by more than ten seconds.

At the time when the third swimmer touched the wall and ended 600m, the Dutch team was 8.5 seconds ahead of the record pace, set by China six years ago.

Now, I'm prepared to acknowledge that short-course records may be "softer" because they're swum a little less frequently at the national level, and that this record, in the 4 x 200m event is one that might have been up for revision. But seriously, when four teams are able to beat the old world record (which had, incidentally, survived the Athens 2004 build-up, which sort of negates the argument of some coaches), then you have to wonder about the suit and just how different it is.

A conflict for swimmers - medals or sponsors?

And on that note, Speedo's LZR has done more than just damage old world records - it's also dominated the swimsuit war that has been raging between Speedo, Arena, TYR and Adidas, and created a real dilemma for swimmers who are not in the LZR Racer.

Now admittedly, it's too early to make a call, but reports earlier this week that Arena's CEO was pushing to have the LZR Racer banned on the grounds that it was illegal were suggestive that other companies are very concerned. For the record, FINA are saying that the LZR Racer is perfectly legal, and that Speedo met every criteria they laid down in the manufacturing and development phase. FINA will still be meeting the manufacturers on Saturday to discuss matters further, so nothing is official yet, but they are in a very tightly painted corner, it seems.

Not only are the manufacturers concerned, but newer reports suggest that coaches of swimmers who are NOT wearing the Speedo LZR are also worried. This article reports the US head coach Schubert suggesting that swimmers would be faced with a "black and white" decision over which swimsuit to wear, or face losing Olympic medals as a result.

The conflict that arises with sponsors then becomes a major factor. The same article goes on to say that certain manufacturers (Arena and Adidas, in this case), are saying to their swimmers that they can, if desired, swim in the Speedo suit, and face no consequences. However, it also reports that some swimmers have been threatened with loss of sponsorship support if they go this way.

This suggests two things:

First, swimmers are looking likely to be faced with a choice between medals and sponsorship support. That clearly cannot be healthy for the sport - eight finalists per event in Beijing, and one would hope the best swimmer wins. To lose any medal by 1/100th of a second because a suit might be inferior is a shame for the athlete.

Second, the fact that Arena and Adidas are going public with the statement that they don't mind a switch in swimsuit is another example of just how Speedo has gained the upper hand. They have 18 of 19 world records (before last night in Manchester) and already, it seems that the suit has an aura of invincibility around it!

This might, of course, be premature, because the confounder in all this is that so far, not many swimmers have had the chance to race in the Arena, Adidas and TYR suits (to name a few). Speedo got into the "market" well before they did, and so the competition hasn't exactly been "field-tested" yet. Time may reveal that they are even better...? That makes the apparent concession of defeat by these companies all the more surprising.

Whether or not the differences it makes are genuinely that large, one thing that is for sure, is that if I was a Speedo LZR swimmer, I'd have a whole lot more confidence knowing I was wearing what is rapidly becoming the "Ferrari of swimsuits"!

Last word to Ryan Lochte, one of the stars of the USA swimming team, a man who is expected to pick up a share of golds in Beijing. He is one of the lucky ones...

"It basically helps you float and makes you feel like you are swimming downhill."

Ross

Further swimsuit developments

Arena threatens legal action if Speedo's swimsuit is not proven to legal

Yesterday's post looked very briefly at the latest development in the ongoing swimsuit battles between the major manufacturers - in case you've missed it, 19 world records have been set in 2008, 18 of them using one suit - the Speedo LZR Racer. The only exception a record by Federica Pellegrini of Italy, wearing the Powerskin R-Evolution by Arena

And yesterday, I wrote that there were reports from Australia that Arena was actually pushing the governing body of the sport, FINA, to ban the Speedo suit on the grounds that it was illegal, and Arena did not believe its own suit would produce the same performance improvements that Speedo's did!

I could scarcely believe that this could be true, so amazing is the apparent reason for the ban - as I wrote, it seemed as though Arena, having entered a "competition" to develop a faster swimsuit, having hired scientists who previously worked on the America's Cup boat Alinghi, were now turning around and citing the "credibility" of the sport as a reason to have the competitor banned.

It seemed unbelievable, but sure enough, more reports have followed. The article below, which I was sent by Adam, one of our readers, was published in The Australian, and it contains some remarkable quotes from the CEO of Arena. It's in green, my comments in black below.

SWIMWEAR manufacturer Arena has called for a moratorium on the use of all new swimsuits, including its own.

Arena has made the move so the suits "can be properly analysed'' to ensure they do not illegally enhance performance. Italian-based Arena's CEO Cristiano Portas sent an open letter to the International Swimming Federation saying that a "firestorm of public concern has ensued about the alleged buoyancy advantage provided by Speedo LZR Racer and Tyr Tracer Light suits''.

Since the Speedo suit was launched on February 12, 19 world records have been broken, 18 by swimmers wearing the LZR Racer. The 19th record was set in Arena's new suit.

Portas said FINA needed to "scrutinise and reaffirm the effectiveness of its policies'' in approving new swimsuits. He said FINA faced an "irrecoverable loss of credibility for swimming sports, just a few months before the Olympic Games'' if it did not conduct urgently a "reliable and transparent analysis'' of the fabrics used in the suits. He hinted that his company would take legal action if FINA did not satisfy it that its' rivals suits were legal.

FINA responded with a statement saying that it was always willing to examine the issue of swimsuit approval. "However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no objective scientific evidence on the alleged buoyancy advantage provided by the Speedo LZR Racer or any other swimsuit approved by FINA,'' the statement said.

FINA will meet with all the manufacturers on Sunday during the world short-course swimming championships in Manchester to discuss the issue. The governing body said it would "review and update, if considered necessary, the procedure and requirements for swimwear approval''.

Both the Italian and Canadian swimming federations banned their athletes from wearing the suit during their separate recent Olympic trials.

A few things jump out at me here. Firstly, there is no problem at all in wanting to analyse the suits so that they do not illegally enhance performance. That, I'm sure, is something we'll all agree on. But surely that should have come long before 19 world records were broken wearing it - if FINA has policies and regulations, then you cannot review them after the fact - they should have been watertight (pardon the pun) when the process of suit development began.

But more than this, it's amazing that the CEO is questioning the "credibility" of the sport as a whole! This quote:

FINA faced an "irrecoverable loss of credibility for swimming sports, just a few months before the Olympic Games''

must surely be one of the more dramatic quotes made about this whole issue, especially when you consider that it comes from the CEO of one of the companies who has been at the forefront of the technological innovation that affects that credibility!

I wonder whether Arena, Speedo, or any of the other manufacturers considered this as a potential fall-out when they began the expensive process of teaming up with NASA, hiring America's cup scientists, using mathematical equations, swimming flumes and hydrodynamic testing? I doubt it...

But, now that we have some indication of the fact that one suit is performing better than another, we have a situation where there is suddenly a need to "scrutinise and reaffirm the effectiveness of its policies''. Would that have happened if five more world records had been set in the Arena suit?

Of course, Arena may well be correct. Despite the apparently lax FINA regulation and policies over equipment, there is a rule that the suit cannot alter the buoyancy of the swimmer. And so if Arena are correct, and the LZR is able to change buoyancy, then by all means, it should be banned.

But, if the manufacturers have all played by the "rules" set out by FINA, then I'm afraid it's back to the labs and drawing board for Arena, because they've been outplayed.

Ultimately, however, all this serves to do is detract from the swimming performances. It's telling that we're talking about one suit "performing better than another". I always thought that the swimmer was performing...? And while I appreciate that the suit is a signifcant part of the equation, this latest development does certainly prove that the swimming world is being divided into the 'Haves' and the 'Have nots'.

Your thoughts welcome!
Ross

Build-up to Beijing: Controversy reigns

Beijing's torch relay - a sign of the future? And the swimsuit wars hot up

The swimsuit wars hot up - rumours that Arena will seek to have Speedo's LZR banned

Olympic controversy is the name of the game today, unfortunately. Starting with the less sedate of those stories, below is a very short article I was sent yesterday evening concerning the latest news around the ongoing swimsuit debate. This debate, which we have tried to cover for you in the last few weeks, revolves around the legality of the new swimsuit by Speedo. According to the article below, Arena (a rival manufacturer), is moving to have the Speedo LZR Racer banned, on the grounds that Arena's suit is not as fast! Here is the article (in green):

Andrew Webster
April 7, 2008

THE BIG WRAP

DON'T be surprised if the controversial swimsuit responsible for helping our swimmers go faster than the Manly JetCat is banned this week. We have been told that swimwear manufacturer Arena is putting plenty of pressure on swimming's governing body, FINA, to stamp out the suits because of a belief its Powerskin suit cannot produce faster times than the Speedo LZR Racer and adidas's soon-to-be-released suit. At the recent national titles, where eight world records were obliterated, only Craig Stevens wore an Arena suit. And don't be surprised if Arena gets its way: the company is one of FINA's major sponsors. Swimming officials will meet at the world shortcourse championships in Manchester this week to discuss whether the suits will be allowed at the Beijing Olympics.

Honestly, had this article been sent to me a week ago, I would have passed it off as an April Fool's joke, so ludicrous is the idea that one manufacturer would cite this as the reason. There are plenty of reasons to look at banning the suit, but this surely cannot be one of them! Imagine if in Formula 1, the Renault team tried to have Ferrari's new engines banned because theirs was not "powerful enough"!

The point is, Arena themselves recently launched their own suit, the Powerskin R-Evolution, and it would seem that the "battle lines" had clearly been drawn. Speedo went to NASA to test fabrics, and New Zealand to test the suit. Arena, for their part, hired the same scientist who had worked on the America's Cup boat Alinghi. There are clearly no "rules" in this particular war - do what it takes to improve the costume, so to now reportedly seek a ban because you lost the battle smacks of anything but competition.

We'll see where it goes - this may well be a rumour that has caught on and spread - it was in an Australian paper, and Australia are sponsored by ---- you guessed it, Speedo. So if anyone is threatened by impending bans, it's them. So it may be a false report, born of paranoia. But what is interesting to me to see is how this issue seems to be polarizing the swimming community. We wrote in one of our posts on this topic that the technology in swimsuits threatened to create a situation with the "haves" and the "have-nots". Whether or not this story is true, it certainly suggests that this may happen! At the very least, we have a situation of "us" vs. "them", and all over swimsuits! It will be fascinating to see how FINA rule at the upcoming meetings at the World Champs in Manchester.

We'll keep you posted!

The Flame of Discord - public relations disasters start now...

Moving onto a slightly more serious, but out of scope topic (for us, anyway), the Olympic torch, a symbol of peace and unity, had no sooner begun its journey around the world than it found itself the centre of global controversy. We wrote a few weeks ago that it was bound to be a relay stalked at every turn by ugly scenes, thanks to protests against China's human rights record. Well, two stops, and two public relations nightmares for the Chinese Olympic Organizing committee, the host cities, the IOC - in fact, anyone who is even remotely linked to China's spectacle in August must be dreading the next 80,000 miles.

It was London yesterday, and Paris today, that provided 48 km and 28km of exposure for the protesters and the Olympic torch that can only be described as the "Flame of Discord", according to the French press. Much like an open flame attracts insects at night (particularly in SA where we often have no power - as I write this, for example), so too this flame is destined to attract protesters wherever it goes. Today in Paris, for the first time in many years (perhaps ever - anyone know this?), the flame was extinguished, put out by protesters. It had to be relit using the backup flames that accompany it all the way through its journey.

This is obviously not our key focus here at The Science of Sport, so political insights and comments are left to the experts and the news sites of the world. But the Olympic Games most certainly are a key focus, and if the rest of the Olympics are going to be as fraught with problems as the Olympic Torch relay, then it will indeed be a shame for the athletes who work for four years to be the deserving centre of attention.

Spare a thought, for example, for all the athletes and dignitaries who yesterday and today had to carry the Olympic Flame in London and Paris - what might have been a glorius celebration and moment of achievement for them instead turned out to be a gauntlet of terror, with threats of violence stalking their run. Surrounded by three levels of security, including a very ominous "inner circle" of Chinese guards dressed in blue, their relay leg was anything but a celebration. If they were lucky, they got to finish their leg. If they were not so fortunate, they were ushered into a bus where the flame could at least be "protected" from the upcoming trouble...this is certainly no way to launch an Olympics under the pretense of bringing the world's nations together.

And I read this afternoon that the IOC Chief is "very concerned" about the issues, including the current situation in Tibet. Well, the reality is that these events, and the protests, were identified as risks long ago, yet people have not intervened. The current protests, which threaten the Olympic celebration, are likely the symptom of a deeper problem and should not bear sole responsibility for the current controversy - the cause has been ignored and unfortunately, the Olympics are the catalyst that bring the symptoms to the surface. The irony is that the current relay concept owes much to the German regime in 1936 who felt the torch would glorify the ruling party - this particular version, the 2008 relay, is doing anything but glorifying China.

But let's just hope that this issue does become a sidebar over time, a minor issue, and that maybe the Olympics can serve as a catalyst to resolve those political problems. And then, just maybe, we can actually get on with the business of the sports, the athletes and the performances, which is of course our main focus here.

Ross

The swimsuit debate

Technology in sport: The swimsuit debate continues, as Adidas enters the fray

Welcome to the Science of Sport!
Be sure to visit our main page where we have daily analysis
and comment of the swimming and other events at Beijing 2008!

Those of you who have been following our swimming posts over the last few weeks will have read a series of articles looking at the Speedo LZR swimsuit and the controversy it has caused.

In the third post of that series, we mentioned that the other swimsuit makers would soon be unleashing their own high-tech designs onto the swimming world. That began with Arena and their Powerskin R-Evolution (right), which has the distinction (for the meantime) of being the only suit other than a Speedo in which a world record has been set this year (by Pelligrini of Italy!).

The Adidas "entry" - The Powerweb

The latest suit to hit the waters is the Adidas TechFit Powerweb suit, shown in the picture below right. The suit was first used in the ongoing British swimming trials in Sheffield.

What makes this suit "unique" are the Thermoplastic Urethane (TPU) "powerbands" which are placed at strategic positions on the suit. These bands, made of an elastic material that compress the muscle beneath them, are supposed to improve blood flow and explosive power. This will, according to Adidas, provide a "slingshot that helps to propel the swimmer from the blocks and off the wall at turns".

Note that Adidas are emphasizing quite a different strategy from that adopted by Speedo and Arena, which have reported how they have altered the hydrodynamics and movement through the water - body shape and drag, particularly. Adidas no doubt does the same (they'd be foolish not to, given the large effect this clearly has on performance), but they have emphasized the Powerbands as a distinctive feature, which I find interesting.

I don't know whether their claims can be verified, but if they are that effective, we might be able to see swimmers shooting off the walls of Beijing and gaining places over their not so fortunate Adidas-clad rivals! Or is it that simple? I stress again, my expertise lies in running and cycling, not swimming, and so I am certainly not the best person to answer my own question. However, I would love to see a study in Beijing of swimmers and just how much time is gained (or lost) in the turns, and at the start. This would of course not prove that the suit is to blame (or credit), since numerous other factors are involved in these technique-oriented variables, but it would make for interesting reading if swimmers in one suit all happened to demonstrate superior turn ability.

The other difference that Adidas brings to the pool is the world's first breaststroke specific suit. According to reports, breaststroke specialists were complaining that the generic suit had the Powerweb bands in the wrong places, restricting their stroke. And so a breaststroke suit was designed specially for that event. Again, it interests me to know just how large the advantage may be, if any exists at all? Do Adidas-wearing breaststrokers derive so much benefit that we might notice a difference? Are we talking tenths-of-a-second, or milliseconds?

The suit makers are all claiming "revolutionary" improvements in performance - they even named the suit R-evolution in the case of Arena - and so if true, then simple observation and description of performance may well throw up some interesting observations. I'm really hopeful that come Beijing, the manufacturers will have all developed their suits to the point where the margins between them are so tiny as to be insignificant. We might then see world records falling like tenpins, but in competitive races, which is the least that can be hoped for!

The debate continues - are they swimmers or muscle-powered yachts?

In any event, we've already had the debate over whether the technology is good or bad for the sport, and whether it should be legal. And as has been pointed out, one can only paint oneself into the proverbial corner by doing that! Because of course, equipment is as much part of the sport as training and so one can hardly return to the good old days of Alexander Popov (right), who amazingly didn't ever bother with either a swim cap or a full length suit (they weren't around yet) when he was in his prime! It was his 50 m freestyle record that was being swopped between Sullivan and Bernard this year, and I wonder if he'd still be smiling had he been wearing an LZR or a R-evolution?

On a more serious note, I read an interesting thing on this blog on the Arena research and development of their latest swimsuit...

It turns out that one of the lead researchers in the development of this suit is a scientist named Alfio Quarteroni. He was one of the scientists who was responsible for computer models and simulations on Alinghi, which is the Swiss yacht that won the America's cup in 2003 and 2007. As most will know, yachting is not dissimilar to Formula 1 racing when it comes to innovation and technology, and no stone is left unturned to design boats that have minimal drag in the water.

And so, the scientist's job with Arena was presumably to do very much the same thing - work out how to reduce drag and improve speed by altering shape and water flow over the "yacht/body". Now, we clearly are not going to resolve this issue, but it's worth discussing - at what point does swimming move over into the realm of yachting? At the risk of sound absurd, does the advance in technology narrow the gap between swimming and yachting, to the point where the swimmer is analogous to a human-powered (as opposed to wind-powered) yacht?

I'm not against technology, and as I've said before, I have no problem with these suits, provided the playing field (or water, in this case!) is level and all have equal access. I'm not 100% convinced this will happen, but nevertheless, I don't see the swimsuits as a bad thing. But it just struck me the other day that when swimmers look for milliseconds, they seem to search in the same place as engineers on America's Cup yachts. Is that sport? Of course, the cost of innovation is vastly different - $700 for a swimsuit hardly compares to millions for a yacht.

And then, they are still powered by physiology, of course, which is a big difference. And swimmers can (and should be) spending hours a day working on their starts, turns and body position in the water. Then there is propulsion from muscle contraction that can't be discounted, however low the drag is. And no suit is going to turn me, a regular splasher, into anything like an Olympic hopeful. But if it makes 5% difference, would that be revolutionary enough to move a semi-final hopeful onto the podium? Just some random thoughts...

Ross

Speedo Swimsuit debate

Speedo's LZR swimsuit: Approved by FINA and improving world records, except in one case...

Welcome to the Science of Sport!
Be sure to visit our main page where we have daily analysis
and comment of the swimming and other events at Beijing 2008!

Yesterday, towards the end of the post, I mentioned that we'd leave the Speedo Swimsuit issue for a while, and pick it up again in a few weeks when the sport's governing body, FINA, meets with Speedo and other manufacturers to discuss the issue of new swimsuits. However, I received some interesting new information on the topic, so I thought I'd do a very short post on that, and then leave the footstrike one to tomorrow morning (SA time) instead.

Some more discussion on the Speedo LZR Racer

For those who've missed the story, in the last 39 days, 14 world records have been set in the pool, and 13 of them have been in the newly designed swimsuit by Speedo. Claims of 5% less drag, water repellant fabric, an "internal core stabilizer" which helps the swimmer maintain form towards the end of the race, and what are called "low-drag" panels where the flow of water is greatest have been made to explain what must be one of the more remarkable periods of record setting in the sport. Are there any swimming enthusiasts who know of similar periods where so many world records have been set in so short a time?

In any event, all these innovations add up to more efficient movement through the water. And this, of course, is the critical aspect in swimming, as has been discussed in the comments section to previous posts on the topic.

Earlier today, I received an article from Jim Ferstle, a journalist in the States who seems to be something of a "Maven" (read "The Tipping Point" by Malcolm Gladwell for the explanation!) when it comes to these stories. You can read that article here.

It provides a really fascinating summary of the issues, and presents facts in a logical way, so it's worth a read. What I find most interesting is the testing procedures that were followed. According to the report, over the last three years, testing involved:

• Wind tunnel testing at NASA to evaluate drag and stability in more than 60 candidate fabrics, including at a "microscopic" level.
  
• Over 1000 "flume" testing sessions in Otago, New Zealand, where dummy swimmers and real swimmers are placed in a flow of water to evaluate hydrodynamics
• Months of testing at the Australian Institute of Sport

What is more interesting, however is that during the development, Speedo apparently met with FINA and adhered to all the regulations for swim-suit design. If that is true, there is little chance of any action being taken now (not that there ever was), but it's interesting to note that many people within the sport (including FINA, amazingly!) are now raising concerns, when FINA (apparently) approved the development. One should not read too much into things, but this doesn't suggest equal access for all swimmers, federations and officials, either to information or to the actual swimsuit. For if FINA officials are now questioning the legality of the suit, then what process was followed to approve it to begin with? Clearly, they missed certain aspects which are only now being questioned - given the extent of the testing done, one would have thought that issues like buoyancy (which seems to be the big issue now) would have been resolved?

Is access to equipment going to be a problem?

One of the big fears is that some swimmers will be disadvantaged as a result of not having great equipment. For example, Canada's swimmers are going to have to do without the suit for a while. Despite being sponsored by Speedo, there are only a handful of the LZR Racers in Canada, and they are being passed around for trial use. They are promised the suit at a later stage, after the Canadian national trials, however. According to the coach of one of Canada's best swimmers, Brent Hayden, it's not a massive issue until Beijing, when it really will count, but there is without question concern. His quote, from this article:

"The only thing we don't want to be is to be feeling like we're being treated any less fairly than any of the countries in the world that have access to this suit," said Johnson. "But we were told that the suit wasn't available. The question now is: If it's not available, how come everybody has it?"

In their defence, Speedo Canada have said that they did not wish to have a situation where certain swimmers at the upcoming Canadian trials had the suit, but not others. That's fine, but those swimmers might well be asking why they are receiving suits months after rivals in Europe and Australia, having to settle instead for a few trial suits?

All this does not do much for the fear that the suit will divide the swimming world into "the haves" and the "have nots". This is a quote by Kieren Perkins, former 1500m legend and Olympic champion, which you can read the article described above.

Arena launches its new suit - the Powerskin R-Evolution: let the games begin

No sooner than this concern was raised, and another big player on the swimming stage entered the fray. I mentioned earlier that 14 records had been set, 13 of them in the Speedo LZR Racer. Well, the single record NOT set in the Speedo was set yesterday evening by Italy's Federica Pellegrini. She was wearing Arena's new swimsuit - the Powerskin R-Evolution. The name says it all, I guess! This is definitely a good thing - at least the competition in the market will achieve the goal of getting the best swimmers into SIMILAR suits. The playing field may yet be level, but only at the top end with the elite swimmers. The worst thing that could have happened is that Speedo was the only company innovating, and then nations with other sponsors would be handicapped from the start. Nike and Adidas are to launch their product soon, so there is hope yet for an "even" Olympic Final.

So it certainly seems we're heading for a technological battle come Beijing. Every second weekend, for six months of the year, I follow a sport where the technological battles rage and winning and losing is often a function of tyre choice, never mind the other $400 million dollars that goes into technological advancements - it's called Formula 1. Not to take anything away from the drivers, but with so much of the battle won OFF the track, the sport has a very different character/personality than swimming and running, where it's one athlete against another. Is swimming headed that way? One thing is for sure, I would hate to be the only guy in the Olympic Final not wearing a Powerskin or an LZR with "internal core stabliser" functions!

Then again, maybe it's not all positive...

Unless of course, you're Jess Schipper. The Australian butterfly swimmer, is actually blaming her Speedo LZR Racer for her failure to break the world record in the 200m butterfly event. Her reason? The suit apparently filled with water when she dived in, and forced her to slow down so much in the final 50m that she was almost caught by two rivals. Of course, given that she went out 1.34 seconds FASTER than the world record pace, there is a chance that she simply "blew" coming home and physiology explains the slow down. But for a great quote from this article:

"Schipper had started like a speedboat to be 1.34 seconds under world record pace at the 100m mark with an opening split of 58.77s. But she finished like a submarine to clock 2mins:06.82secs and finish over a second off her best (2:05.40)".

I'm not sure whether the "speed boat" first half is more a concern than the "submarine" second, but it's an interesting story of how sometimes, the most advanced technology in the world can undermine your efforts - imagine, a swimmer sunk by a "leak"! Or should that be a speedboat?

Ross

Speedo's LZR swimsuit

The Speedo LZR racer: feedback on a developing debate, and the value of technique

Welcome to the Science of Sport!
Be sure to visit our main page where we have daily analysis
and comment of the swimming and other events at Beijing 2008!

Thanks to all who have commented on yesterday's post, which focused mainly on the newly developed swimsuit by Speedo, the LZR Racer. This suit is making waves in the swimming world, since it has been worn for 9 out of 9 world records in the pool this year! Some coaches believe the issue of fairness needs to be debated, with calls for ethics debates around it.

Your comments have been very insightful, none more so than Jamie's, as he wrote in response to yesterday's post. I had not even thought of rowing as an example of a sport with similar equipment "advantages" possible. But his email gives a great example:

In rowing we also have an interaction with water and this aspect of the technique/training generally has a bigger impact than the physiology. FISA (our international federation) dealt with similar issues as swimming is going through in the 70's and 80's when some countries started using riblets running the length of the boats hull and also applied what was called "fish slime" which changed the properties of the hull/water interface and made significant difference in time (10 sec in a 6 min race).

The riblets were banned because of the expense as they were very easily damaged and had to be replaced often and the "fish slime" was banned as it was deemed a pollutant in the water

Our rules now say the following:
Bye-Law to Rule 31 - Boats and Equipment

1.4 No substances or structures (including riblets) capable of modifying the natural properties of water or of the boundary layer of the hull/water interface shall be used.

It would seem that the claims of Speedo/NASA indicate that with the new suits this boundary layer between the body/suit and the water is definitely modified. Whether FINA consider this unfair or not will be the deciding factor in the debate.

Input from an expert on swimming hydrodynamics

In addition, as I began writing the post yesterday, I contacted Prof Raul Arellano, who is based at the University of Granada in Spain. Arellano has spent years studying fluid movements during swimming, and has published numerous papers looking at propulsion and biomechanics of swimming, so he contributes to the specific debate around swimming with a far more experienced and educated eye than I can!

And his input is very interesting. I've pasted some of his response below, with my comments immediately following them.

The problem with the new swimsuits is that they improve the body shape much more than skin friction. And this improvement is very individual... the percentage improvement depends on the person's body shape. I have observed a master swimmer with a lot of fat around her abdominals reduce her time in 100m butterfly by 6 seconds to break the Master's world record. The changes in the body shape underwater using a smaller size full body swimsuit were clearly evident (the fat position was fixed and the perimeter reduced).

In yesterday's post, and in the news reports, a great deal was made of the reduced drag as a result of the LZR suit being seamless and consisting of new materials tested by NASA. This insight suggests that in fact, the suit's ability to reduce friction and drag may be minor compared to the improvement in body shape as a result of wearing the swimsuit. Is this analogous to the compression garments now being touted for team sports and explosive sport in particular? That came up in one of the comments to the previous post - of course, the effect would be substantially larger in the water, and the mechanism is different, but it's still intriguing.

In addition, Prof Arellano noted the following:

These changes [in performance] are much smaller in well trained top athletes, but enough to improve the performance some tenths of second. But you need to add some more things related to HiTech doping; for example, is the use of biomechanics HighTech doping? This tool is far less accessible than a swimsuit and so very few swimming teams use this kind of enhancing tool. We have observed changes in the start technique, changes in the underwater phase of the start and turns, changes in the stroke synchronization, changes in the body position, and so on.

In our experience testing top level swimmers at the end of one feedback and training workout to improve the swimming start, we obtained improvements of half a second in the 10m start time. Is this improvement doping? You can see the videos of Olympic champions during Munich 1972 or Seoul 1998 and you can observe very bad start and turn techniques, these changes can affect to the top performers much more than the use of new swimsuits.

For example, if you observe Michael Phelps' start and turns, he can obtain more than two seconds' advantage in 400m IM. The rest of competitors and their coaches can use the same turn technique as Phelps but they don't ? Why? ...Who knows?

Fascinating insight - what is being referred to here is that we may dwell on the swimsuit and its potential advantages, but there may be even bigger advantages gained through the use of biomechanical studies/methods and training to improve the technique of the swimmer, not during the stroke only, but also the start and turns. Of course, the debate still exists that two swimmers may be very closely matched in terms of physiology, biomechanics and technique, but the one in the faster swimsuit will win. And it is unfortunately a reality that not all swimmers will have equal access to the "possibly faster" swimsuit. As I mentioned yesterday, sponsorship agreements often dictate that swimmer cannot wear a Speedo, and that means the playing field may not necessarily be equal. Many individuals (including Alain Bernard, world record holder) have obatined individual sponsorships that opposed that of their federation (Bernard is a Speedo LZR man, the French team is sponsorsed by Arena). One thing that is for sure is that I would hate to be the sole swimmer not wearing the suit that is possibly worth one second in my Olympic final...

Why leave any stone unturned?

In any event, one thing that never ceases to amaze me is that there are, as Prof Arellano has pointed out, world class athletes who miss out on opportunities for improvement that they could use to gain seconds on their performance. And who knows why they would not? The case of the Speedo LZR once again highlights the fact that there are people who naturally embrace technology and innovation, and some who do not (or cannot, as the case may be). I know if I was swimming, I'd be embracing every single opportunity for improvement, even if it was unproven!

And then finally, Prof Arellano has noted the following with regards to Alain Bernard, the French swimmer who recently broke the 50m and 100m freestyle records. This is in the context of talking about the recently set world records and whether they are solely due to the new swimsuit:

At least I can observe clearly some technical aspects improved by some record holders before their impressive performances. Bernard, for his 50m and 100 m World record, significantly improved his start technique, getting the 1st place immediately from the start (this point improved more than half a second [from his France record in 100m free performed last season in France]. This is critical to be winner in the 50m or 100m events, where the waves generated by the rest of competitors can affect you in a magnitude (increasing your total drag) that is impossible to overcome keep up with the more quicker starters. You do not have enough energy to surpass the increased wave drag.

Interesting then that training, even in the day and age of superior technology can still make such a large difference. I recall that Roland Schoeman, South Africa's best swimmer at the Athens Olympics, stood out for his incredibly fast starts, that often had him a body length clear within the first 30 m of a 100m freestyle event. I find it astonishing that the other seven guys in the Olympic Final could be that comprehensively "outstarted", considering the importance of that aspect of the race. There are analogies and comparisons with many sports; I can think of a few cases where athletes have made very basic errors in preparation that would be easily resolved through simply listening.

And so like Prof Arellano, I have no answer for why more athletes would not develop these obviously crucial areas a little more than they have, and work on technique when it's apparently available to those who really want it. I suspect that part of the problem is that elite atheltes (and their management team) become quite insulated from the "voices" beneath them. And so they fail to hear or listen to anyone but the select few in direct contact with them. Thus, they often won't even perceive the possible benefits they might gain simply by listening to others.

Regardless, the swimsuit debate rages on, with a discussion between FINA and Speedo scheduled for the World Short Course Championships in a few weeks. Difficult to see how anything can be done now, unless they're prepared to scrap the world records set so far this year?

Looking ahead to the rest of the week...

That's it for the swimming for now - thanks to all who have commented and written in, feel free to throw your hat in the ring on this latest one.

But speaking of technique, it's back to running tomorrow, when I'll take a look at running technique, and specifically, the landing of the foot. Should you land on the forefoot? Or is heel striking the better option? We'll have a crack at that then.

As for the rest of the week, a big event on the weekend - World Cross Country championships in Edinburgh. The first big Championship clash of the year between Kenenisa Bekele and Zersenay Tadese. I'm sure that will warrant a post or two!

But for tomorrow, it's foot strike in running. Join us then!

Ross

For more discussion and analysis of the Speedo Swimsuit issue, click on the following links:

1. The Speedo LZR Racer: Introduction and debate: Does Speedo's "supersuit" make world records irrelevant? The line between "tech-doping" and innovation
2. Speedo's LZR: The role of swimming technique in progress - the suit or the style?
3. The swimsuit wars begin: Arena enters the fray, and what goes into suit design
4. Adidas launches its swimsuit: Are we watching swimmers or "human-powered boats"?
5. Arena attack Speedo: Arena seeks to have the Speedo LZR Racer banned
6. Arena's threat of legal action: Suddenly the integrity of the sport is at stake
7. World records disappear by EIGHT seconds: The swimming crisis
   

Beijing Olympic Torch lit

The lighting of the flame; but politics, and Speedo's "Supersuit" are making waves instead

Olympia was today the site of one sport's most fascinating and ancient traditions, the lighting of the Olympic flame. Dating back to the Ancient Olympics, where a flame was kept burning during the course of the Games, the current tradition of the lighting of the Olympic flame was re-introduced for the 1928 Games of Amsterdam.

The actual process of lighting the torch is remarkable - the sun's rays are concentrated by a parabolic mirror (right), during a ceremony performed by eleven women representing priestesses. This followed by an elaborate ceremony that ultimately lights the official Olympic torch. A short (4 minutes) highlight video of some moments from the ceremony is shown below, for those wishing to view it (I apologize for the music in the background - not my choice! You might want to go with your imagination and watch with the sound off...!).



Following the lighting of the torch, the journey begins, with a torch relay that crosses, in this case, 20 different countries before arriving in Beijing at the climax of the Olympic Opening Ceremony later this year. The first torch bearer this year was Alexandros Nikolaidis, Greece's Taekwondo silver medallist from the Athens Games four years ago. He begins a relay consisting of thousands of carriers, ultimately ending in a yet-unknown final carrier who will light the Olympic flame in Beijing's Olympic stadium on August 8.

Controversy from start to finish - will the Olympics be remembered for controversy?

The Beijing Olympic torch relay may well turn out to be the most controversial one in history. Ironically, the concept of the torch relay has political origins, having begun in 1936 when the Berlin Games Organizing Committee conceived the idea as a means of glorifying the Third Reich. For China, however, the opposite may be true, with protests and potentially violent demonstrations against China's controversial human rights record set to shadow the torch on its 5 month long journey.

Those demonstrations began today, even before the flame had been lit, as the ceremony was disrupted by protestors who managed to unfurl a banner protesting the current situation in Tibet. This is happening amidst growing concern within the journalistic world that freedom of press is going to be non-existent in China - the latest story suggests that China will ban outside broadcasts from Tiananmen Square during the Games, out of fear that the visuals beamed across the world will highlight China's alleged human rights violations.

However, these stories are inevitable (which may be a good or a bad thing, depending on your perspective), and the news media will bring you all you need to know, as well as things you didn't, in the buildup to Beijing. And besides, this is the Science of Sport, not the politics, so we'll turn instead to a Beijing-related story of another kind - Speedo's Super Swimsuit and the "waves" it is causing!

Making waves - Speedo's Supersuit

In recent weeks, we've focused on the possible impact of Beijing's pollution on endurance performance. That debate has a long way to run, and I'm sure that as we get closer to August, it will feature again. But for today, it's performances in the swimming pool that dominate and in particular, the impact of a new swimsuit by Speedo on performance. I was sent this article by a colleague in the USA this morning, and I must confess I had missed this fascinating story of how a new swimsuit threatens to move the sport forward by seconds in the next few months.

Speedo's LZR racer swimsuit, developed earlier this year, is the common denominator in all NINE world record performances in the pool so far this year! Most recently, Alain Bernard, a French freestyle swimmer (shown right), broke both the 50m and 100m freestyle world records during the European Championships.

This flurry of world records has driven a lively debate, which even seems to be polarizing former swimmers, administrators and coaches of the elite athletes who stand to benefit through the use of the swimsuit. For example, Mark Schubert, who is the head coach of the US swimming team, has predicted that this kind of technological advancement will one day render world records "irrelevant". The French swimming technical director has called for an ethical debate on the swimsuits, despite the fact that one of his men, Bernard, is a big "winner" as a result of the suit.

The Australian head coach, Alan Thompson, sits in the opposite corner, saying that he has no issue with the suits. He is supported by a number of former swimmers, who acknowledge that the suit is definitely a major contributing factor to performance, while at the same time suggesting that it's merely the price of progress and that we should not resist the inevitable change. For every person who supports innovation in sport, you will find another who warns against the potentially rampant effects of technology on performance.

What is the deal with the suit? How does it work?

Hydrodynamic and swimsuits are not exactly my speciality, and so to get a bit more insight on this one, I've emailed a colleague who is an expert in the field. However, from what I've been able to piece together from websites and news articles (amidst the usual marketing hype) is that the suit (shown on Michael Phelps to the left) has three innovations:

• A tighter, corset-like midsection that is reported to reduce fatigue at the end of races.
• A new material that is water repellant and reduces drag by 5% compared to older, slower swmsuits
• They are seamless, consisting of special panels of the repellant material that further reduces drag

I can't vouch for any of these claims, and I'll wait on the feedback from an expert before commenting. One sure way to test the first claim is to look at how races are paced, however. Pacing strategies, as I'll describe in our upcoming series on Fatigue and performance (starting next week), are of crucial physiological performance, and if the suit works, then you'll find that world records will be set with SLOWER starts and FASTER finishes. As for the other two innovations, I won't argue with a team of scientists from NASA, who reportedly developed the suit.

The ethical debate - fair or unfair? Your views welcome...

But now for the more intersting question: Should this be allowed? The issue of technology in sport has come up before, most notably with the debate around Oscar Pistorius, though that is a little different, being an advantage that others cannot copy. In this instance, access to the new equipment and technology is a little easier, provided you can afford to pay $700 (or $325, or R5200) for the suit, you too can benefit from it (research and development from NASA clearly does not come cheap!) However, it's still within reach of most competitive swimming nations, particularly if it's the small price to pay for Olympic success.

In that Pistorius debate, some have even called for all athletes to run barefoot to eliminate any role for technology being the difference between gold and silver. I'd hate to think what that means for swimming...the barefoot equivalent would be...

Seriously though, the debate is a very tricky one, because as the Australian head coach points out, "We can't still be swimming in wool suits". No, we can't. Yet the situation we now find ourselves in poses some challenging questions, hence the call from the French technical director for an ethical debate.

I'll stop short of professing anything dogmatic here, but I will say that I personally think it something of a shame that a world record, the fastest performance ever by a human being, can be achieved without training harder or smarter. In other words, there are swimmers in 2008 with exactly the same level of performance ability as they had in 2007, yet they will be seconds faster in some cases. One Australian swimmer claims a six-second improvement in performance in a 400m medley. How much of that is training and hard work? How much is the suit? Three seconds each, perhaps? Six and none? Who knows, and that's difficult to get around. In a sport where 1 second is the difference between first and eighth, the impact of technology on the outcome can't be ignored.

Of course, progress is natural, and some may be thinking this is a futile argument. Perhaps it is. We could very well start debating whether athletes from the 1950's were better than those from the 2000's. The best one could do with that debate is a "peaceful disagreement". But when the technology makes such an obvious difference, in so short a time, then I do believe it's a relevant one. In 2007, pre-Speedo's LZR Racer and NASA testing, would Alain Bernard be a world record breaker? Perhaps. And perhaps in Beijing, he'll prove it by beating other swimmers in the same equipment.

And therein lies the crux - provided the same equipment is made available to all swimmers, the argument never moves beyond world records. Because then, ultimately, it's still man on man, woman vs. woman. And the best swimmer wins. But if, as is possible according to reports, some have access and others do not, then the level playing field that is required no longer exists, and that is a problem. The same argument and head-crunching debate exists for just about any sport - cycling, yachting, motorsport - may the best equipment win. The alternative, the Ancient Olympics where competitors took part sans clothing, is the other extreme, and probably not a viable one!

The other problem is whether or not FINA, swimming's governing body, can regulate equipment. Again, I won't profess to know enough to even answer this question. Certainly, in cycling, it's possible, though complicated, to regulate equipment (weights, dimensions, ratios, shape etc.). Similarly, it's easy enough for athletics to regulate javelins (mass, centre of mass, etc.), but whether this can be done for swimsuits, I don't know. As one commentor has noted below, authorities meet regularly to discuss new equipment, as they will in this instance, at the World Short Course championships in Manchester. At that meeting, FINA will meet with Speedo, though at this stage, it's difficult to know if anything can be changed. The suit is legal, and to suddenly scrap performances would cause some controversy.

"Techno-doping" - an issue for WADA?

Earlier this evening, I was reminded by Jim Ferstle, a reader of the site and journalist who often sends interesting articles this way (including the Speedo debate), that WADA, who everyone knows as anti-doping watchdog, tried a few years ago to ban altitude tents, on the grounds that they provided an unnatural advantage similar to doping. Fortunately, that effort fizzled, but it does seem that this is one where they may well have more of a role to play. Is this an example of "techno-doping", with devices having no purpose other than to enhance performance? Should they be banned? Does technology unbalance the playing field? Do athletes gain unfair advantages from technology? At what point does innovation become "unnatural" and discriminatory?

All questions for which I don't have a conclusive answer. Your thoughts are welcome on the topic, please let us know!

Ross