Probably. It would slow down the results overall. And competition level suits are essentially an equalizer; they streamline all the swimmers into an ideal shape. Without the suits, it would be an issue of whose natural body shape is closest to the ideal.
For the men, I doubt there would be a huge difference. For the women I would guess there would be. There are a few women who have had children on the Olympic teams and don’t women’s bodies and skin change after that? I’d also say that women with bigger breasts would be slower without the suits on.
But that’s just MHO based upon my own swimming experience.
From what I remember from my swimming days, the racing suits for women tend to have a sort of spandex-effect and sort of pull the boobs and everything together and smooth it out, probably more than offsetting any disadvantages of the suit material vs. bare skin.
The mens suits do the same for the junk; a uniform Ken-doll style bulge and smooth ass is certainly more hydrodynamic than the nude equivalent. Not sure about the leg part vs. an old-school Speedo racing suit though.
(ultimately what Little Nemo said, just elaborated a bit more)
We’re all forgetting about the other way that nude swimming would slow down the activities: Given the rumors about downtime in the Olympic Villages, the athletes would probably all find better uses for their time than finishing the race.
Without any real data there’s no way to know who benefits the most from a suit. I suspect it might even vary depending on what type of suit and which stroke they were using.
Well, that certainly might affect the ticket sales to the audience.
And the great increase in prize money that enables could have an effect.