On Course Goggles
timsroot
Spring, TXCharter Member
Saw this today. I think similar ideas have been brought up and discussed here before, but I'm curious as to what people think about it.
Comments
http://marathonswimmers.org/forum/discussion/946/the-frankengoggles-are-here/p1
I don't wear a wetsuit; it gives the ocean a sporting chance.
Cheating.
It's always a bad hair day when you work at a pool.
@malinaka - Thanks, didn't look for that thread, out know about it. Sorry for the duplication.
@wendyv34 - Why learn to sight when you can have a crutch do that for you?
A buddy of mine refers to excessive swim gear (other than your standard suit, goggles, cap) as "strap-ons". He suggests that we designate a lane at the pool as "no strap-ons". I can't help but giggle every time he goes into a tirade about it.
It's always a bad hair day when you work at a pool.
@wendyv34 life in plastic, it's fantastic! #somanyjokessolittletime
What about using them as a training aid? I'm rubbish at swimming in a straight line and my only sighting point is a rock 1km away
OUTTA THE BALLPARK!
...anything worth doing is worth overdoing.
I can sympathize with @gnome4766 as I have the same problem. But I can also see the wisdom of what @Niek is saying here. I don't own a wetsuit for similar reasons (well, and also, having borrowed one once, discovered they seem to require you to be a contortionist put them on).
But I know if I trained with something like the goggles mentioned here, it would be all too easy for me to get dependent on them.
Interestingly, I just saw a photo of Mark Spitz on FB recently, and he won seven swimming gold medals w/out goggles (of any kind). I was an on-again/ off-again lap swimmer in the 1970s/1980s and for quite a long time, didn't use goggles. Then a friend lent me a pair and with them I could see so much better that I immediately bought myself a pair.
Which makes me wonder: at what point does advanced technology become unacceptable. Goggles made it much easier to see while swimming. Could one argue that they should not have been allowed in the Olympics when they first came out?
I'm always a bit leery anyway about getting the latest electronic gizmo, thinking one gets dependent on something that can break or get lost--although I do have a gps watch for running (the basic model not recommended for swimming). While running, I can see my pace and adjust it during a race (unfortunately, I can only go so far w/ pace adjustment, given my lack of speed).
What is the dividing line, I wonder, between allowable and non-allowable technology?
Tagging in on @dpm50 comments.. and noting that I am at heart the antithesis of a "first adaptor". WHY am I SOO anti gizmos such as these goggles? I mean, using a kayak or a boat to help you swim straight is also a "tech gizmo".. right?
I think I know the answer but just curious as to what others think as well. Silicone caps are a technological advancement, as are goggles right? We all remember the days of staggering home after practice with rings around the streetlights from hours in the water, suits made of nylon that weighed a ton,fins were not even thought of as a practice tool.
So why are these goggles creating such a fuss?
Besides the fact that practically speaking I think they are useless... :-*