4 ms·
I think this is a good idea. It reminds me of the "sharkskin" suits used in swimming that were expensive, single use, very effective and allowed enormous improv
by LatteLazy 6y ago
I think this is a good idea. It reminds me of the "sharkskin" suits used in swimming that were expensive, single use, very effective and allowed enormous improvements in performance. Then had to be banned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-technology_swimwear_fabric https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-technology_swimwear_fabri...
- wging 6y agoMentioned in the article, FWIW: > Swimming? Who can forget what happened between 2008 and 2009...
- neolog 6y agoThey didn't have to be banned. They were banned unnecessarily, hindering the development of fabric tech.
- brokenmachine 6y agoThey were banned fairly because they were so expensive that many competitors couldn't afford to use them, putting them at a huge, probably insurmountable, disadvantage. The cost was mentioned in that wikipedia page, but I believe they didn't mention that they need to be individually fitted and are single-use only.
- neolog 6y ago> so expensive that many competitors couldn't afford to use them Olympic athletes don't buy their own equipment, do they?
- Doxin 6y agoPeople competing below Olympic levels probably do.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> Olympic athletes don’t buy their own equipment, do they? That doesn’t mean that there are no cost constraints on their equipment. Also, AIUI, the governing bodies of individual sports which happen to be included in the olympics also govern lower-level competitions, under generally the same rules – because the Olympic competition is supposed to be the pinnacle of the sport, not a different sport with a confusingly-similar name.
- LatteLazy 6y agoIs it that much of a hindrance? Or rather, if you're only market is helping people win at the Olympics then there isn't really a market for your product...