Competition equipment: do we ban technological innovation or embrace it?

sross · May 24, 2012

Something Dave Mullins said in another thread got me thinking about different attitudes toward equipment. Here it is, from http://forums.deeperblue.com/wetsuits/94990-hydrodynamic-suit.html#post881880

Concerning specialhydrodynamic suits that would reduce drag and improve Dynamic performances:

Mullins said:
Noah - it's been raised in the past and would have a huge effect on efficiency. Thing is, nobody has bothered to go to all the effort while records have remained beatable using simple gear. Might change in the future and governing bodies will presumably have to legislate against it. Otherwise all DYN swimmers will end up wearing torpedo suits and big pointy hats.

I have a number of questions coming to mind that prompted me to start a thread.

So, should we automatically assume that competition governing bodies would, or should, ban certain performance-enhancing technologies, FINA-style? Or would a somewhat more laissez-faire attitude like the triathletes have taken be better?

Should which technologies get banned be determined by how 'dorky' they look?

Will banning performance-enhancing technologies retard the development of innovations that could provide real-world enhancements for other groups of freedivers, like the spearos and recreational divers?

I remember the hugely controversial thread that developed around the question of whether sled diving was a 'real' sport because it used a gravity-assisted vehicle, with a surprisingly large number (to me) of people arguing in favour of banning the discipline.

The competition swimmers tended to regard pool-based competitive swimming as a heroic, effort-based discipline in which all athletes should compete without equipment that could enhance their times separately from training.

Is that the way we want freediving to go?

Enhancing technologies have been few thus far, but Elios is already offering an external suit coating which it claims will significantly reduce drag.

The fullbody swimsuits that FINA banned are still legal for dynamic events, but I've seen kinesiology studies showing that most of them don't deliver consistently measurable hydrodynamic improvements. The one exception to the rule was the class of PU rubber-coated suits like the original Jaked model, which produced small, but consistent improvements.

What about more extreme development, like a shaped hood, or seal-shaped suit?

Mullins · May 28, 2012

I just have zero interest in watching or participating in an arms race (like NLT). I think AIDA just need to start out with few or no restrictions and see what happens. If the other disciplines start being dominated by gear that is either exclusive to a few competitors or changes those disciplines in a fundamental way (a pedal powered submarine for DYN, anybody?) they should act.

efattah · May 29, 2012

If the gear introduced to beat records has a practical use for 'fun' diving and spearfishing, then it is a great addition to the sport, and should be encouraged.

In my mind, it is quite possible to have two categories, for example
1. Dynamic apnea, innovative gear
2. Dynamic apnea, restricted equipment

Those who have no interest or access to innovative gear can focus on the restricted category.

In my mind, for example, even allowing wetsuits changes things, because you can use a 7mm wetsuit in DNF with huge ballast, and push off the wall and your momentum carries you to the other end of the pool. Thus it ceases to be swimming at all. I have always pushed for DNF in a 50m pool with no wetsuits allowed, at least for the 'restricted/pure category.'

In my case, I spent thousands and thousands of dollars developing the first fluid goggles in 1998-1999, and I had hoped that I could sell them to freedivers for competitions. This idea was bankrupted by AIDA when the goggles were banned all the way until 2005. Even neck weights were banned until 2005.

Simos · May 29, 2012

I think too that some reasonable rules should be in place to avoid ridiculous situations (eg a mask with an internal volume of 2l in static) but things should be left reasonably unrestricted and any issues that arise can be dealt with as they come up.

We have to all accept that whether we like it or not, freediving (like most sports these days) is enabled by equipment. We have suits, masks, fins etc - it's important to allow and encourage innovation in these, as long as the end result still resembles freediving

pingshui · May 29, 2012

Simos said:
... as long as the end result still resembles freediving

This is exactly the point. But we will need to define then from what point on it is not freediving anymore. If people wish freediving to become an Olympic sport there need to be clear rules or we will get the conehat/conehead freakshow.

Of course there needs to be room for improvement, but that should be limited to equipment that is widely used for freediving, like masks, fins, weights and wetsuits. But a torpedo swimcap would definitly not be part of it. For the allowed equipement you could narrow it down to 5mm suits max. for dynamics. Anyway, I think in a sport that in some disciplines relies on equipment, there should be clear rules for it.

As an example, in track running you can have shoes with spikes, but no springs. And in cycling you can have different frame and tire sizes, but within certain limits.

Simos · May 29, 2012

pingshui said:
As an example, in track running you can have shoes with spikes, but no springs. And in cycling you can have different frame and tire sizes, but within certain limits.

True but if they had decided from the beginning of track running that only shoes with flat soles were allowed for example, there would be no shoes with spikes today at all.

I feel that freediving equipment is still at a fairly early stage - there are lots of materials out there, designs and so on and there are some interesting products (e.g. hydrofoils etc) that are now just being developed so I feel it's important not to stiffle that innovation (see also Eric's example about fluid goggles).

There will be always the temptation to regulate freediving heavily, especially by those who compete at the highest level as it certainly sucks training hard and then competing against others that you feel are not on a level playing field but my opinion is that we also need to balance this with encouraging innovation by allowing sufficient room for it and regulating 'after' issues arise.

There are still 'pure' disciplines for those who don't want to use much equipment and perhaps these should be more strictly regulated. Personally I would even find interesting a depth discipline where no equipment at all was allowed apart from speedos (i.e DNF, no mask, no noseclip, no wet suit) but the issue is that now that we've gotten used to seeing 'big' numbers in depth, it will be hard to go to smaller number for a 'purer' discipline.

Anyway just some thoughts - haven't thought about this much to be honest until now...

sross · May 29, 2012

efattah said:
In my mind, for example, even allowing wetsuits changes things, because you can use a 7mm wetsuit in DNF with huge ballast, and push off the wall and your momentum carries you to the other end of the pool.

Holy cow! I never thought of an idea like that. You have a creative brain, Eric. Then you combine the wetsuit and weights with Elios' "freedown" coating that they claim reduces water drag?

The only issue I think I would have is that I might get heat prostration from a 7 or even a 5 mm suit in the pools here in Toronto. They tend to be warmer here than other olympic pools I've been in.

I have always pushed for DNF in a 50m pool with no wetsuits allowed, at least for the 'restricted/pure category.

Speaking of which, apart from the issue of advantages or disadvantages of suits, weights, etc., I've always wondered how different pool lengths affect dynamic swims, because of the different numbers of turns & pushoffs required to do a distance. I'm of the opinion that 50m pools would be best, because they would reduce the influence of wall pushoffs, but that's probably because there are two 50 m pools in Toronto. I realize there are many places with no olympic-sized pools availanble.

Kars · May 29, 2012

Very nice topic S Ross.

I think it touches on our personal values.

Do we value athletic abilities, most certainly yes.
Do we value creativity, yes.

What objections do we have?
The diving starting to look alien?
The diving equipment that is unattainable to competitors.

I find it hard to define limits, but in a way I like Eric's idea of a 'pure' category, which I might call 'classic'.

The question also is what is the main goal of our competitions?
Is it to have a nice get together amongst friendly spirited amateurs? Do we want a pro league? Are we aiming for media exposure, sponsor and audiences?

If I were AIDA and want to keep the worlds attention with new WR's from time to time I could choose to pace the growth of the numbers by limiting the equipment allowed, wait for a year of NO WR's and then allow a new tool giving AIDA another record. On the other hand it feel rather unnatural for a freediving governing body to put so much control over a sports development.

Actually when I think of regulations, we had a good experience with the samba rule.
Together with the help of amongst others the Deeperblue forum we worked out a practical solution that was acceptable to the vast majority. All we need is patience, and great discussions like these to find a satisfying intelligent solution.

I love how philosophy of freedom and voluntarism shows it's beauty.

chrismar · May 30, 2012

efattah said:
...In my mind, for example, even allowing wetsuits changes things, because you can use a 7mm wetsuit in DNF with huge ballast, and push off the wall and your momentum carries you to the other end of the pool. Thus it ceases to be swimming at all. I have always pushed for DNF in a 50m pool with no wetsuits allowed, at least for the 'restricted/pure category.'

It's a lovely idea, but it just doesn't work. You see, the thicker wetsuit restricts your movement - forcing you to use far more muscle to hold the same streamline. Not only that, but the extra neoprene on the arms means there's a big buoyancy difference between arms in front and arms by your side. Also, using thick pants makes it almost impossible to get your legs neutral in the water. Basically, you can't maintain a proper horizontal profile in the water. What's more, the actual benefit is pretty minor. The glide off the wall is just not that much better and restarting your momentum with a stroke is harder. Best of all, swimming actual laps, I spent more energy and took the same amount of time as doing the same thing in a good tri suit.

I even went to the trouble of getting a custom-made Elios suit to test this to it's fullest. a 2mm vest and a 3mm suit with 2mm hood and arms. End result: I went back to my tri suit. By all means, I encourage all my competitors to use this approach!

watts · May 30, 2012

If you weight up with a suit you can do 25 in no strokes. Not quite swimming.

Kars · May 30, 2012

Well my pb DNF was done in a 3mm soft cell lined suit with lots of weight in a open air 50m pool of about 24 c. But rotation friction is definitely something to keep in mind.

About the 50m pool vs the 25m records. I'm in favor of only 50m pool records. Though I'll add that organizers still can have competitions in 25m pools off cause.

Also in respect to record attempts, I would like to see some statistics on those, numbers of how many records are from competition vs from individual attempts.

About 'weird' looking innovations. I recall Herbert wanted to do a dynamic with his legs sealed together, packaged with foil. But the jury in Eindhoven did not allow for that because (if I recall correctly) it was "too far out of the ordinary". A Clearly arbitrary decision. :blackeye

And in the light of minimalistic freediving, I think Sebastian's UFC (noseclip only) rules are very attractive and really focuses on the natural freedive athletics. And it does not look too kinky on camera. :mute

maui400 · May 30, 2012

I think it's just fine as it is - so far. In my eyes there aren't any devices yet, which would require restriction, because of noteworthy distortion of competition.
On the contrary. In competitions we can still see a great variety of different swimming styles and gear. I actually like the colorfulness of different approaches.

sross · May 30, 2012

Kars said:
And in the light of minimalistic freediving, I think Sebastian's UFC (noseclip only) rules are very attractive and really focuses on the natural freedive athletics. And it does not look too kinky on camera.

You mean the atletes swim wearing nothing but a noseclip? Sounds nice and kinky to me! Freediving au naturel, woo hoo!

Kars · May 30, 2012

it's also called constant weight unashamed

Simos · May 30, 2012

Kars said:
it's also called constant weight unashamed

I think there's already a pretty decent depth record for this category lol

Kars · May 31, 2012

A happy Swede did a really nice CNF Unashamed @ the blue hole of 50m!

I cannot find the video at the moment.

trux · May 31, 2012

sross said:
Speaking of which, apart from the issue of advantages or disadvantages of suits, weights, etc., I've always wondered how different pool lengths affect dynamic swims, because of the different numbers of turns & pushoffs required to do a distance. I'm of the opinion that 50m pools would be best, because they would reduce the influence of wall pushoffs, but that's probably because there are two 50 m pools in Toronto. I realize there are many places with no olympic-sized pools availanble.

There was a big discussion about it before the WC in Italy this year, because it was the first WC with DNF in a 50m pool. Many feared degradation of performances of more than 30%, but it finally turned void. I did a more detailed statistical comparation demonstrating that there seem to be quite little difference in fact: APNEA.cz - Blog - you can see there plenty of national records and PB's despite the longer pool.

H.Balázs · May 31, 2012

trux said:
There was a big discussion about it before the WC in Italy this year, because it was the first WC with DNF in a 50m pool.

Hi Trux,

The first WC was in Switzerland, where the DNF was in 50m pool.

Regards,
Balazs

Kars · Jun 1, 2012

Yeah I was there, 2005, and did a nice PB DNF (+ 11 %)

sross · Jun 1, 2012

trux said:
I did a more detailed statistical comparation demonstrating that there seem to be quite little difference in fact: APNEA.cz - Blog - you can see there plenty of national records and PB's despite the longer pool.

Thank you, Trux, that's very interesting to know!

Competition equipment: do we ban technological innovation or embrace it?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

small wins

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

~~~~~

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency