On Saturday, the USA Swimming House of Delegates will vote on a number of regulations, including a proposal to limit tech suits for 12 * under swimmers. Breandan Gibbons, a member of the USA Swimming Age Group Development Committee, which led a study into the matter and ultimately favored a ban of some sort, has made a last-minute appeal for voting members of the House of Delegates to vote in favor of the ban.
The regulation as written would outlaw technical suits except for meets in USA Swimming’s Championship Series (Sectionals, Futures, Jr Nationals, Pro Swim Series, US Open, Nationals, Olympic Trials) or YMCA Nationals.
The working definition would count suits as technical suits if they have:
- bonded or taped seams regardless of its fabric or silhouette, or
- any male or female suit with “woven fabric extending to the knee or mid-thigh” regardless of the type of seams.
Breandan Gibbons is a lifelong swimmer, starting at age 7 with the Star Swim Team in St. Paul, MN, who is on the age group development committee of USA Swimming. He is currently a freshman on the swim team at Fordham University in New York City.
The following represents the opinion of its author Breandan Gibbons and does not necessarily reflect the views of SwimSwam.
I am one of the Athlete members of USA Swimming’s Age Group Development Committee and here’s why I want to ban tech suits for 12 & under swimmers:
Youth sports are too damn expensive and everyone knows it. Swimming is no exception. But with a concerted effort from those in all levels of the sport, it can be the exception. Change can happen starting this week at USA Swimming’s annual convention if the House of Delegates restricts the use of tech suits for 12 & under competition.
Many other pieces of legislation are required to solidify the change, but next week the House of Delegates can send a message to parents, athletes, coaches, and all involved in swimming that the sport is not open for business for those trying to make the most money possible.
My goal is to make swimming as easy for anyone to swim as possible. This is the first step.
Further, restricting high level tech suits removes alleviates pressure from kids who have barely started middle school to succeed at a high level. As a study from Amanda Visik and George Washington University shows, winning and competing is not fun for kids in youth sports. Removing some of that pressure can help refocus the sport on other parts of athletics kids find more fun like “trying their best,” “working as a team,” and other far more valuable characteristics that go beyond a fast 50 freestyle time.
Swimming is just the means to an end for most athletes involved in the sport and the level of financial commitment should reflect that. Only the top six athletes in each event make the National Team and only two athletes from each event make the Olympic team every four years. That compared to the 354,627 year round athletes registered with USA Swimming show that the priority should be placed on making the sport as positive and as accessible for those 354,627 athletes as possible.
USA Swimming needs to give families flexibility that other youth sports organizations do not afford to their members. Financial strangling from youth sports brought about by lack of regulation created the “Income Disparity” Linda Flanagan wrote about in her article for The Atlantic.
If USA Swimming can create space for those who cannot afford any other youth sports options, it will be a boon for membership and a triumph for the sport. A triumph that no other sports organization accomplished.
Of course there is not currently a rule requiring athletes to wear high level suits, but in the current climate of the sport, it seems that swimmers need to have tech suits to compete with others. It is basic group psychology, if a child sees that their friend has something, they want it. This became clear to me when surveying 12 & under athletes. I gave one survey to one athlete on one team and although these surveys looked like math homework, everyone on that team saw their friend had a survey and wanted one.
Similar mentality comes to play with technical suits. Dr. Stacy Nelson of VitalSmarts has an example in his book Influencers of a shipping company that struggled with their efficiency because employees would not fill their shipping containers. The solution was not to incentivize filling the boxes, it was simply putting a “Fill Line” on the boxes.
Tech suits are that “Fill Line” for age group swimmers. They see their competition decked out and that influences every age group swimmer to want one of those suits.
I spent the summer surveying athletes and parents about the proposed legislation and there is a majority in both demographics that support the legislation. In addition to showing support for the legislation, they also showed how USA Swimming has failed its membership in providing an affordable sporting opportunity where athletes can learn values that apply outside the 25 yards or 50 meters of a swimming pool.
Many parents complained that the suits were just one part of the overall cost of youth sports in America. These anecdotes are corroborated by Mark Hyman in his book Most Expensive Game in Town: The Rising Cost of Youth Sports in America. Hyman finds example after example of corporations pushing kids and parents closer and closer to the edge until they fall over and leave the sport.
Delegates have a choice: make a change to address what is clearly a problem or leave USA Swimming in a scenario in which it cannot win.
Corporations are the only ones who in the current scenario. Athletes don’t win, parents don’t win, USA Swimming doesn’t win.
Ridiculous opinion based on observations from la-la land California and rich East Coast LSC’s. Everywhere else, nobody lets their kid wear their tech suit in meets where the competition is not going to require every edge. Those kids being described in this article as the poor widdle intimidated kiddies who are afraid to swim next to the big-bad-baddies (who, by the way, work their butt’s off and keep US Swimming relevant in terms of international competition) … those kids don’t even make it into the heats with the kids who are in the tech suits, if they bother to go to those meets at all.
We know how Californian’s are stuck on conspicuous consumption (or, when it’s eco-trendy, conspicuous… Read more »
Another issue that discriminates against one group (12 and Under) of swimmers under a false pretense. Anyone think about body image, adolescence and the coverage that these tech suits provide? Many parents favor these suits for the “modesty” they provide and Smart shoppers can find tech suits at comparable prices to high quality standard suits that offer less coverage.
This ruling is discriminatory and USA Swimming shouldn’t be deciding using income disparity as the argument. Youth sports are expensive and swimming isn’t an exception given the LSC charges, meet fees and expenses related to travel. Stay out of these parent/adult responsible decisions.
The part that lost me is that “competing and winning is not fun for kids”. Who’s kids? The ones who dunk each other after mom and dad drop off for practice? The ones who show up to half of the practices? The ones who have never actually watched their kids practice but complain that “Timmy” is faster than their kid??? Some of these kids take this sport very serious. They sacrifice a lot to perfect their craft. We don’t need to turn this sport into soccer where everyone wins a trophy. Swimming takes a lot and to say that kids don’t like competition is way off base. This must be coming from a kid that used to tug on lane… Read more »
Watch for companies to counter with higher prices… smooth move
“Seams,” not “seems,” correct?
That’s not what the study commissioned by USA Swimming says. Shift the age to 10 and under and this is a home run.
Just seems crazy to me that we need this kind of legislation. I read the “white paper” from the committee on the topic and found it almost internally inconsistent. It seems to suggest that tech suits aren’t really beneficial to young swimmers, but then also seems to suggest that we need a uniform ban so no one has an unfair advantage. .
Oddly, in this move to supposedly make the sport more affordable and “level the playing field,” I don’t hear anyone from the LSC’s or USA Swimming suggesting that there be a ban on private lessons from $200/hour Olympic coaches.
While I agree in concept with the analogy to Private Lessons however, when further detailing out the opposition to a Tech suit ban with private lessons as a corollary, the athlete (regardless of age) is indeed learning better technique etc., which cannot be argued for the purchase of a Tech Suit. Meaning, extra effort, extra time in the pool, listening to your coaches, making an effort to improve themselves as an athlete… this SHOULD be the intent of a private lesson (with an Olympic level coach or otherwise). While the purchase of a Tech Suit does not require anything more than money.
The heart of the argument being financial does not hold water for me at all (I won’t… Read more »
The cost of a parents monthly Starbucks, Smoking, or drinking habit is more than the cost of an an entry level tech suit. Its all about choices folks. Nanny state politics and policies are not needed.