4 ms·

I agree with you about letting people choose what they want, but I've seen very aggressive arguments erupt about it. I'm really not sure why. I think the questi

I agree with you about letting people choose what they want, but I've seen very aggressive arguments erupt about it. I'm really not sure why. I think the question is why is this happening? The article mentions people having their wetsuits stolen, for example. Maybe it's a simple matter of people trying to impose some kind of code of behavior on others, like so much else in life. But I'm not sure in this case what the resentment is about. With some things it makes sense. For example, in triathlon and some open water swim meets, wearing a wetsuit does give someone a speed advantage, and people kind of abuse it (for lack of a better word) to improve times when it's not necessary to wear them from a temperature perspective. But defining those boundaries where it makes sense from a safety perspective is difficult. So maybe in some cases people are worried at some level about having to purchase and use an item they don't see as necessary for themselves? Like they're worried they'll eventually become required for whatever reason? In any event, arguments about it can get surprisingly heated.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y ago
> But I'm not sure in this case what the resentment is about. I believe these are all of the relevant statements from the article, in the order in which they appear: > And yet, some Bay swimmers refuse to wear these potentially lifesaving devices because they consider them a form of cheating. > Tom Linthicum, a swimmer called “Reptile,” has made the mile-and-a-quarter water trek from Alcatraz to San Francisco more than 200 times, but never in a wetsuit. With a wetsuit, he says, “you’re not really enjoying the cold.” > “The land brain wants to go home, take a nap, forget about it,” he says. During times like this, he instead channels his “reptile brain,” which he believes to be an evolutionary vestige. “The reptile brain just comes out and says, ‘enjoy the water; enjoy the cold,’ ” he says. “Our ancestors may never have had a warm shower in their entire life.” The first one isn't really backed up from what I could see. Regardless, it seems people are stealing things and throwing them away or causing damage to them[0] because they have a personal preference to not use those things. Suddenly I'm completely on the side of the outraged wetsuiters. [0] > Over the years, in actual cold cases, wetsuits have mysteriously vanished from the changing room ... Later, the suits turned up in garbage cans or, in one case, hanging outdoors from a nail on the second floor of the building
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- derbOac 4y ago
  I guess the issue is why is "cheating" relevant if there's no competition? Or are most of the Bay area swimmers also doing races?
  - Doxin 4y ago
    Probably because not everyone agrees whether or not there is competition. You can have competition without it being an organized race. There are two variables in play, whether a specific person wears a wetsuit, and whether a specific person feels like there is competition. This leads to roughly four groups: A) non-competitive wetsuit wearers B) competitive wetsuit wearers C) non-competitive non-wetsuit wearers D) competitive non-wetsuit wearers It's not hard to see how you could get strife between group D and groups A and B. People in group A wear a wetsuit and don't see any harm because they aren't competing anyways. People in group B probably figure wearing a wetsuit is a valid way to improve your times. People in group D probably figure wearing a wetsuit is a cheaty way to improve your times and get upset. Having this strife between groups B and D makes some amount of sense, but since this is not an official competition there's no centralized authority to decide on the issue. Group A just gets caught in the crossfire.
Kon-Peki 4y ago
> For example, in triathlon and some open water swim meets, wearing a wetsuit does give someone a speed advantage Is that because of the distance? An extended family member is an elite swimmer (competes in USA Swimming national meets, NCAA D1 times while still in middle school, etc) and the idea that wearing 3+ mils of neoprene makes you faster is ludicrous to them.
- tedunangst 4y ago
  Also, triathletes aren't always the best swimmers. A modest +5% buoyancy for them is probably more meaningful than a top swimmer.
- dredmorbius 4y ago
  Conservation of body heat is a huge factor alone. Not only does the competitor expend less energy in keeping warm, but muscles function more efficiently when warm. Buoyancy is another consideration --- the wetsuit helps float the swimmer higher in the water, again, requiring less energy than would be required for a non-suited swimmer. As cons, the wetsuit does somewhat restrict movement, though on balance that seems outweighed by other factors. Suits designed for swimming are far less thick than diving or surfing suits generally, and may be vest-and-leg designs.
  - petre 4y ago
    Buoyancy is negligible, at least on 3 mm shorties. It's the added insulation from the cold that does the trick and makes open water swimming easier and more enjoyable. Why take that away from people?
  - Kon-Peki 4y ago
    That does sound like a primarily distance-based thing, thanks :) Pool swimmers rarely exceed a few hundred meters. I think the longest individual race might be 1800 meters, and few swimmers compete at that. The negatives are going to completely dominate when you are only swimming those kind of distances.
    - 4y ago

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y ago

> But I'm not sure in this case what the resentment is about. I believe these are all of the relevant statements from the article, in the order in which they appear: > And yet, some Bay swimmers refuse to wear these potentially lifesaving devices because they consider them a form of cheating. > Tom Linthicum, a swimmer called “Reptile,” has made the mile-and-a-quarter water trek from Alcatraz to San Francisco more than 200 times, but never in a wetsuit. With a wetsuit, he says, “you’re not really enjoying the cold.” > “The land brain wants to go home, take a nap, forget about it,” he says. During times like this, he instead channels his “reptile brain,” which he believes to be an evolutionary vestige. “The reptile brain just comes out and says, ‘enjoy the water; enjoy the cold,’ ” he says. “Our ancestors may never have had a warm shower in their entire life.” The first one isn't really backed up from what I could see. Regardless, it seems people are stealing things and throwing them away or causing damage to them[0] because they have a personal preference to not use those things. Suddenly I'm completely on the side of the outraged wetsuiters. [0] > Over the years, in actual cold cases, wetsuits have mysteriously vanished from the changing room ... Later, the suits turned up in garbage cans or, in one case, hanging outdoors from a nail on the second floor of the building

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
derbOac 4y ago
I guess the issue is why is "cheating" relevant if there's no competition? Or are most of the Bay area swimmers also doing races?
- Doxin 4y ago
  Probably because not everyone agrees whether or not there is competition. You can have competition without it being an organized race. There are two variables in play, whether a specific person wears a wetsuit, and whether a specific person feels like there is competition. This leads to roughly four groups: A) non-competitive wetsuit wearers B) competitive wetsuit wearers C) non-competitive non-wetsuit wearers D) competitive non-wetsuit wearers It's not hard to see how you could get strife between group D and groups A and B. People in group A wear a wetsuit and don't see any harm because they aren't competing anyways. People in group B probably figure wearing a wetsuit is a valid way to improve your times. People in group D probably figure wearing a wetsuit is a cheaty way to improve your times and get upset. Having this strife between groups B and D makes some amount of sense, but since this is not an official competition there's no centralized authority to decide on the issue. Group A just gets caught in the crossfire.

Kon-Peki 4y ago

> For example, in triathlon and some open water swim meets, wearing a wetsuit does give someone a speed advantage Is that because of the distance? An extended family member is an elite swimmer (competes in USA Swimming national meets, NCAA D1 times while still in middle school, etc) and the idea that wearing 3+ mils of neoprene makes you faster is ludicrous to them.

tedunangst 4y ago
Also, triathletes aren't always the best swimmers. A modest +5% buoyancy for them is probably more meaningful than a top swimmer.
dredmorbius 4y ago
Conservation of body heat is a huge factor alone. Not only does the competitor expend less energy in keeping warm, but muscles function more efficiently when warm. Buoyancy is another consideration --- the wetsuit helps float the swimmer higher in the water, again, requiring less energy than would be required for a non-suited swimmer. As cons, the wetsuit does somewhat restrict movement, though on balance that seems outweighed by other factors. Suits designed for swimming are far less thick than diving or surfing suits generally, and may be vest-and-leg designs.
- petre 4y ago
  Buoyancy is negligible, at least on 3 mm shorties. It's the added insulation from the cold that does the trick and makes open water swimming easier and more enjoyable. Why take that away from people?
- Kon-Peki 4y ago
  That does sound like a primarily distance-based thing, thanks :) Pool swimmers rarely exceed a few hundred meters. I think the longest individual race might be 1800 meters, and few swimmers compete at that. The negatives are going to completely dominate when you are only swimming those kind of distances.
  - 4y ago