Brent S. Rushall [07/12/2000]

The bodysuit problem that has recently entered the swimming arena has been misconstrued by officialdom. As evidenced by the decision to ban full bodysuits by the US Swimming Board, there is a belief that it is the shape of the suit that needs to be controlled/limited. Nothing could be further from the truth.

It is the new generation of fabrics that causes the problem. These fabrics are designed to make a swimmer more slippery than natural skin or the "old" Lycra/nylon/etc. fabrics. When the fabrics are dry (they are slow to "wet"), they also increase a swimmer's buoyancy. The greater the amount of these fabrics that cover the non-propulsive surfaces of the body, the greater will be the benefit to the swimmer. Swimmers will be more slippery and float higher because their resistance will be reduced significantly.

What needs to be done to halt this technological invasion into what was a natural contest of aquatic locomotion, is to define parameters for fabrics so that they:

1. Do not improve on human skin's texture. Manufacturers would have to prove this through public scientific analysis for acceptance by the appropriate FINA committee (not the FINA Bureau or Executive).
2. Have an open weave that allows the fabric to wet very quickly. The fabric would have to pass impedance tests of a defined level when tested for permeability. A test similar to that performed on ski-jumping outfits would be acceptable.
3. The material would have to have a certain amount of elasticity (deformation index). The material would not be strong enough to distort a swimmer's natural shape. Its elasticity would be such that it would give before it compressed tissues to any appreciable degree.
4. Two flotation tests would need to be passed.
• When a dry suit is rolled in a ball and thrown a distance of 15 feet into a competitive swimming pool, it should sink completely below the surface within 10 seconds.
• When a dry suit is worn and subjected to an underwater weighing protocol, there will be no discernable improvement in a swimmer's natural (nude) specific gravity.

If these conditions for fabric were met, then wearing more fabric than the minimum that meets the "Modesty Rule" would only have a detrimental effect upon a swimmer's performance. Thus, the "fuller" a bodysuit, the greater would be a swimmer's resistance. There would be no benefit to covering natural skin. There would be no need to restrict the size or shape of a swimmer's suit/costume, except for modesty. Only fools would wear a bodysuit that made them more resistive.

Testing, certifying, and controlling fabrics used in suits would not be difficult. Every suit would have to be made of "certified" material and so income could still be derived through a certification fee.

The solution to the bodysuit dilemma is simple. Swimmers' suits should only be made of fabrics that do not improve upon natural human skin resistance. If this condition were met, increasing skin coverage with a bodysuit/costume would hinder rather than assist an athlete.

The message here is that the shape of a suit is a red-herring. Swimmers are still able to gain assistance, although slightly reduced, by wearing the new materials in a torso-thigh configuration. The fabric is the problem. Acceptable fabrics have to be defined and determined.

Return to Table of Contents for The Bodysuit Problem.