Shoes had a similar issue when Nike released their first modern super-shoe (Vaporfly, IIRC). The track and field body had to limit shoe sole height and the other brands had a lot of catch-up to do.

Same for swimming with high tech, low drag, bouyant swimsuits. Again, the international body had to step in and ban some materials/designs to prevent domination by nations that could sink resources into the engineering.

same thing happens in cycling all the time too. the UCI bans new equipment all the time, and the rules for what is allowed are very strict, to the point where there's a limit on sock height. there is a limited list of frames that can be used in UCI races, including the olympics

but rules around the type of equipment you can use, and the race host supplying specific equipment to all riders, is a very different thing.

I don't think the Olympics were ever about equal footing or decreasing variables. To really level the playing field you'd have to have a clone army of athletes with the same genes, diet, lifestyle, training, coach, sleep, etc. Equipment is just one variable among dozens, and eventually the rules can change to limit their contribution (like with swimsuits).

Or it would benefit those participants who are best suited to the chosen gear.

Taking an extreme example - imagine if we said “everyone must wear size 9 shoes so everybody’s on equal footing”.

Especially in the context of the original olympics, which were largely conducted nude. The idea that a rich country can field better equipment is absurd.

If you have been training in different gear than is supplied to you by host of the event then you are at disadvantage.

Take a look at the variety of weightlifting shoes, as an example of gear for a specific sport.

Would you expand that to nutrition, training regime, traing location (altitude), etc? Then limit the amount each country/athlete can spend, make everyone get paid the same by different sponsors?