From WSJ.com:
Competition was fierce at a July swimming meet in Thousand Oaks, Calif. At the starting buzzer, Clay Evans, 56 years old, dived into the pool, dressed in a get-up like the one he wore in the 1976 Olympics: a flimsy nylon Speedo bikini.
[He didn't wear goggles either - tony]
It took less than 2½ minutes for the Los Angeles athlete to fall hopelessly behind the times.
Michael Mann of Centennial, Colo., flew past his opponents, swaddled shoulder-to-ankle in a black neoprene bodysuit. Mr. Mann, 55, won the 400-meter individual medley race and set a world record for his age group, 55 to 59. Mr. Mann set new world marks in the 200-, 400- and 800-meter freestyle while Mr. Evans steamed. ..."
[Link]
I was there, I swam with him and just to explain he's suit position further... he's wrong! ;-)
UPDATE: I am going to add some thoughts and criticisms here. Being The Wall Street Journal, I am very surprised that the business end of tech suits was not discussed. There was a lot of money connected to tech suits and I would like to have read about the the business aftermath.
Another glaring point is that there was no rebuttal argument as to why suits should stay. When I was interviewed, the author was having problems finding swimmers who were passionately negative or positive about tech suits for most swimmers were sanguine; so I gave the writer Clay's phone number.
Another issue: As a USMS swimmer, I want to vote those people out that in my estimation did not have my best interests or the sport's best interests in mind when they suggested tech suits in masters swimming should conform to the FINA international standard.
Now, with that said, I don't want to get on an airplane and fly somewhere to go vote either. I think the USMS voting policy should be a membership vote by way of a mail-in ballot not a delegate vote.
Multi-billion dollar companies allow tiny shareholders who may only control 10-shares of stock or less out of tens-of-millions of shares to vote on serious issues like mergers, acquisitions, and board members, The USMS should do the same. A "blow card" could easily be inserted into the USMS magazine and the average USMS member could put on a stamp to mail it back.
If that is too complicated, There is always Internet voting through Club Assistant.
UPDATE II: Q-Swim sent me this in regards to "cheating" as defined in the article:
It would be useful if the writers on the subject, and the opinionated commentary, would keep in mind the definition of "cheating": Cheating is an act of lying, deception, fraud, trickery, imposture, or imposition. Cheating characteristically is employed to create an unfair advantage, usually in one's own interest, and often at the expense of others, [1] Cheating implies the breaking of rules.
1) There is no trickery,
2) There is no deception, i.e., the suits are visually observable,
3) The rules - currently - allow the use of the suits
4) Even Tiger uses a wood that is more metal than wood with a head twice the size of the woods Ben Hogan used; is he cheating?
8 comments:
Michael Mann can tell you, he is probably in the best shape of his life - and swimming better technically than ever.
He has positioned himself to access the latest and greatest information in the sport of swimming since he actively coaches and competes at a high level.
Clay Evans was in the same position not so long ago. He killed his competition left and right on every stage. And built an unequaled masters swimming dynasty at SCAQ.
But still, it takes passion and dedication - in the water and out to swim these fast times. It is not only the tech-suit.
If Clay had worn the tightest B70 he could wiggle into in Thousand Oaks... he would not have beaten Michael Mann in the 400 IM this past Summer.
I love Clay... Tony, you know I do.
But no way would he have beaten Michael.
I'm pretty stoked to see him quoted in the NY Times though!
:)
Do you think that will get hime in the water more often? Ha Ha!
While I can understand Clay's thing, and your opinion toward him (isn't he going to make you work harder when you disagree?)... what I don't get is Carolyn Boak...
"Boak says added speed from special swimwear is not unlike extra home runs from baseball players using steroids."
HUH? This is who we have representing us? Someone who doesn't know the difference between something that was LEGAL, and something that has been clearly ILLEGAL for decades? I can't believe this is in this article? That's the most idiotic comparison I've heard.
That kind of logic, which ultimately lumps anyone who's worn any of the suits, into the same league as those who purposefully CHEAT to gain an advantage. The whole cheating angle really pisses me off. It's obviously a way for those who don't like the suits, to start throwing a snippet around to help justify their opposition to the suits. Let's look at the definition of "Cheat"
–verb (used with object)
2. to deceive; influence by fraud: He cheated us into believing him a hero.
–verb (used without object)
4. to practice fraud or deceit: She cheats without regrets.
5. to violate rules or regulations: He cheats at cards.
–noun
8. a person who acts dishonestly, deceives, or defrauds: He is a cheat and a liar.
These were the ones I thought could be used to define how "cheat" is being used in regards to the suits.
Those who wore the suits didn't try to walk onto deck hiding the fact that they were wearing the suits. We didn't sneak around, hoping nobody noticed that we had one on. We weren't taken to a room after the race, and have someone inspect whether we were wearing a "suit". Nobody "cheated" while wearing a one of these suits. So people like Boak should watch how they illustrate their dislike of the suits.
Like I said in other posts, if they want to continue to compare the suits to steroids, then lets start drug testing in masters. I think in doing so, we may find some pretty amazing things.
I can agree to disagree with guys like Clay, but Boak's comment is simply ignorant.
Clay will be at Long Beach - I do wish he would swim more.
What really surprised me about the article was the lack of business info. It is the Wall Street Journal and I was hoping to hear about how the industry benefited.
Also, as to Carolyn Boak, I countered what she said when they interviewed, (She forgot that they lowered the pitchers mound and I did not include players cheating part like you said.)
I think we need new USMS ninjas - we should figure out how to vote people who don't represent our best interests or the direction of the sport out!
I have been a member for about 4-years or more, I don't remember getting a ballot at any time.
Clay is Clay, outspoken and very talented, BUT, get in shape before you throw out your opinions on speed suits. I guarantee there will be some great swims next year without them. This whole thing is a little over blown. As far as Boak is concerned most of her opinions should just be ignored!!!
Long Beach is going to be one FAST meet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The article mentions Michael Mann of Colorado, who has crushed a whole bunch of world records in the 55-59 age group. In fact, he spends more time in the pool today than I did when I was swimming in college. The real unfair advantage is that he has that kind of time. I can afford a suit - it's only a few hundred dollars - but I can't afford that kind of time: the opportunity cost would be in the range of many tens of thousands of dollars a year. NCAA rules limit swim teams to something like 20 hours a week of time in organized workouts, amd Masters' Swimming should impose a limit of 7 hours a week - and they should declare people like Mann to be cheaters to discourage him from unfairly using his economic advantage to beat people like me ...
I hate those damm suits and I am sooo glad they're gone.
The "fat lady" hasn't sung yet, Ted!
Hopefully an "act of God" or a "burning bush" convinces FINA Masters to allow them.
Post a Comment