Swimmers Body, Runners Body

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Former Member — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 16:12:04 GMT

You can't imagine how jealous I was when I heard recently from one breaststroker (100m under 1:07) that they never swam more than 3000m a day. Alow me to bebug this. I don't know the swimmer, but I am 99% they weren't telling the truth. What they probably meant is they rarely swam more than 3000M and that they focused on quality, not quantity.

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

joshua — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:38:09 GMT

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Debugger — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 02:48:52 GMT

That's a 10K in under 30 minutes. That would have put you in the top 20 in the NCAAs last year. Impressive! :bolt: I always thought I'm a bad runner and even worse stayer. Without controlling HR I tend to start too fast and then faint after 1-2 miles :D When I was a swimmer at school my main distance was 100m breaststroke and I was thinking that smth wrong is with our coaches head who was making us swim 5 - 7 km a day. Vacations at school meant doubled meterage. That was making me sick of swimming though still I liked swimming a lot. You can't imagine how jealous I was when I heard recently from one breaststroker (100m under 1:07) that they never swam more than 3000m a day. So that was quite a revelation that in my 35 I can run more than 10K without gasping. Still my results in distance swimming are far from being impressive 1.5K free in 27 min.

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Debugger — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 02:28:05 GMT

Those tables compare vigorous running with noodling. However, you are the most awesome runner ever. 120 heart rate holding a 4:44/ mile pace?? That's what heart rate monitor was showing. Anyway by feelings it is easier than swimming 1.5K - after that my heart rate is 135-140.

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Former Member — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 13:56:21 GMT

According to calorie usage tables it isn't so. I'm masters swimmer and I daily do about 3200-4000 yards in the pool. When I don't swim because of some reasons I do running as well though I'm far from being competitive runner. In general I run about 9.5 miles in 45 minutes without any gasping with average heart rate 120. Swimming seems to be harder activity but I noticed that I lose more weight from running than from swimming. Those tables compare vigorous running with noodling. However, you are the most awesome runner ever. 120 heart rate holding a 4:44/ mile pace??

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Former Member — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 09:25:35 GMT

Another runner media.lawrence.com/.../Shawn_Crawford_RELAYS_vert.jpg Shawn Crawford IMO it still depends on person. Both in running and swimming there are guys like Alan Bernard or Shawn Crawford as well as extremely slim guys. In general running uses more calories than swimming that's why runners have less fat but that doesn't mean that all of them are dystrophic looking. More runners cdn.simplyshredded.com/.../va.jpg Swimming uses a LOT more calories than running when both are at the same intensity. Because you can float and glide, many masters can do lots of yardage in the pool without really doing a lot of work. Successful distance runners have less fat because of the huge penalty gravity makes you pay for extra weight on land, especially over longer races. That's why good marathoners always look like emaciated twerps. I have run regularly for years (1:25 1/2 marathon). When I race, I strive to be one of the first finishers who definitely does not look like a runner. i32.photobucket.com/.../31065678-IMG_3355.jpg

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

aquageek — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 09:19:23 GMT

According to calorie usage tables it isn't so. I'm masters swimmer and I daily do about 3200-4000 yards in the pool. When I don't swim because of some reasons I do running as well though I'm far from being competitive runner. In general I run about 9.5 miles in 45 minutes without any gasping with average heart rate 120. That's a 10K in under 30 minutes. That would have put you in the top 20 in the NCAAs last year. Impressive!

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Allen Stark — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 06:37:53 GMT

The tables of calorie burning for swimming generally don't refer to the race pace or other high intensity work.Evidently it is harder to lose weight swimming because swimming increases appetite.

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Debugger — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 05:28:12 GMT

Swimming uses a LOT more calories than running when both are at the same intensity. Because you can float and glide, many masters can do lots of yardage in the pool without really doing a lot of work. Successful distance runners have less fat because of the huge penalty gravity makes you pay for extra weight on land, especially over longer races. That's why good marathoners always look like emaciated twerps. I have run regularly for years (1:25 1/2 marathon). When I race, I strive to be one of the first finishers who definitely does not look like a runner. i32.photobucket.com/.../31065678-IMG_3355.jpg According to calorie usage tables it isn't so. I'm masters swimmer and I daily do about 3200-4000 yards in the pool. When I don't swim because of some reasons I do running as well though I'm far from being competitive runner. In general I run about 9.5 miles in 45 minutes without any gasping with average heart rate 120. Swimming seems to be harder activity but I noticed that I lose more weight from running than from swimming.

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Debugger — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:20:44 GMT

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

joshua — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 01:46:26 GMT

As a general and totally subjective stereotype I'd say that women swimmers are more attractive than women runners and much more attractive than sedentary women. I've been carefully studying this subject for years (for scientific reasons, of course) and have not as yet reached a conclusion. I guess that the only thing to do is to continue my research:bliss:

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

joshua — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 01:36:47 GMT

I find myself in a strange position - seemingly defending obesity! As a 58 year old life time recreational athlete, I find this weird. Personally I am 1.88m. tall and weigh around 93 kg. (6"2, about 205lbs.) with about 18% bf and muscular. About a year ago I consulted with a nutritionist who specializes in working with athletes. I wanted to get under 90kg. and drop to 15% bf. I was swimming and strength training 5-6 days a week before work so there was no way to add more exercise (my recovery ability, as well as my career, do not enable me to train twice a day). The nutritionist said that running would be more effective for weight loss than swimming but he realized that this was a non issue for an avid swimmer. So all the effort had to be directed to nutrition. I improved for a bit, fell off the wagon (damn those 5 star resort hotels) and am trying to get back on. Still, the nutritionist said that he can't remember seeing a more muscular guy my age. That was definitely a feel good moment. My point is that to look like the cover guy it is not enough to exercise. You have to have the right genes and follow a strict nutritional regime. Also, it is probably not sustainable year round. It's like boxers or weightlifters dropping bw to meet weigh ins. And it is not a realistic goal for guys my age (although I'm sure that somewhere there are a few exceptions) to get ripped. I personally don't even think that it is a worthy goal, but that is only my opinion. Peyton Manning is right !

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

knelson — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 01:33:23 GMT

And it is not a realistic goal for guys my age (although I'm sure that somewhere there are a few exceptions) to get ripped. One of the exceptions is our friend Rich Abrahams www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/.../Abrahams_RichA.jpg This photo appears to be from Worlds when they were at Stanford in 2006, so Rich was around 60 at the time. But I totally agree. I'm sure it's exceptionally rare for someone your age to look anything like the magazine cover guy. If you are very muscular than 93 kg for your height doesn't seem that high.

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Former Member — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 16:38:55 GMT

This thread reminded me of this funny Commercial with Peyton Manning. Priceless Peptalk - YouTube

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Redbird Alum — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 11:46:21 GMT

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Sojerz — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 03:40:15 GMT

Okay, so wouldn't it seem that a runner is going to pound the living cr%p out of their knees, ankles and feet if they run with too much weight? Whereas, a swimmer has water helping to displace their weight, making it a bit easier on the key joints? Exactly, it's almost natural selection - you won't last long running if you are carrying excess weight. Visualize or try this: Step 1: Get two bowling balls Step 2: Secure one in a back-pack and the other in a front baby-pack Step 3: Run and see how it feels after maybe .5 miles Two bowling balls weigh about 32 pounds and that's probably less than many are over an ideal weight for running. To run you have to get rid of extra weight or self-destruct, as in carrying bowling balls. Those distance Kenyan runners are bean poles for a reason. Probably not a good idea to swim with bowling balls strapped on, but your weight in a pool due to bouyancy is about 1/5, so the two bowling balls weigh only 6 pounds, and at 190 pounds, I'm like 38 pounds in the water. Additionally, running encounters comparativley little resistance. Drag or resistance in the water to swimming is much greater; it's directly related to the streamlined form and exposed surface area, thus the emphasis on streamling and reducing resistance with shark skin like new suits.

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

aztimm — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:44:39 GMT

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

knelson — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:12:28 GMT

The parallel is that--to borrow your words--Michael Phelps' accomplishments are "not realistic" to most swimmers, either, but that doesn't make us pooh-pooh them. Besides, who are we to say that achieving six-pack abs is somehow a less worthy achievement than swimming up and down a pool really fast? The bottom line is I can't understand why you consider this to be an unhealthy look.

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

joshua — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:06:19 GMT

I'm probably not going to swim as fast as Michael Phelps, either, but that doesn't make me demean his accomplishments. I don't think it's fair to compare this to a female supermodel, either. Supermodels are almost always underweight and not necessarily even fit. This guy is definitely fit and does not appear underweight to me. He had to work hard to look like that. I can't see the parallel. Phelps is the greatest swimmer of all time and his accomplishments are fully documented. The cover guy may or may not be an accomplished athlete and his greatest proven attribute is his 6 pack. If that's what you mean by an "accomplishment" then I guess your'e right.

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

swimr4life — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 10:42:45 GMT

As a general and totally subjective stereotype I'd say that women swimmers are more attractive than women runners and much more attractive than sedentary women. You are a very, very wise man! ;) :D

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Former Member — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 06:39:54 GMT

I don't think I've seen that issue of Runner's World yet, but they usually rotate their covers between profiling elite athletes and everyday athletes. I think they provide directions on how to nominate yourself or someone else for a cover shot. For both they have a story on the athlete, their favorite run, a snapshot of their training plan, diet, etc. Have you looked at the profile of this guy? That said, I certainly don't think a body like that is totally unrealistic. But as others have said, we've gotten used to seeing 40 year old guys who are 6 foot tall weighing 225 or more here in the US. With a little structure and discipline, plus a dose of good genes, nearly anyone is capable of looking like that. Agreed. Years ago I had a lifeguard working for me, college kid who wrestled during the school year. He had a six pack that was the envy of every guy at the pool, and he did little to maintain it during the summer, he wasn't a glutton by any means but he'd eat pizza and drink beer... and still had amazing abs. I never understood it until his dad came in for a swim, 44 years old with gorgeous abs. Good genes indeed. :D

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

Former Member — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 14:53:01 GMT

So what I'm getting out of this is: It's ok to be a fat swimmer?? :D Who knows maybe it helps cause fat floats :P

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

knelson — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 12:49:42 GMT

that type of body is not realistic and certainly not sustainable for almost all adult men who are not full time athletes and who live in the real (job, family) world. I'm probably not going to swim as fast as Michael Phelps, either, but that doesn't make me demean his accomplishments. I don't think it's fair to compare this to a female supermodel, either. Supermodels are almost always underweight and not necessarily even fit. This guy is definitely fit and does not appear underweight to me. He had to work hard to look like that.

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

joshua — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 12:31:39 GMT

I realize that there is a great element of subjectivity and opinion in what I wrote but I stand by it. IMHO, that type of body is not even attractive or desirable. But maybe I can frame my thoughts in this way: that type of body is not realistic and certainly not sustainable for almost all adult men who are not full time athletes and who live in the real (job, family) world. As one ages, it becomes even less realistic. It's like a middle aged career woman yearning for the body of a super model. Unless she's Madonna, it's not going to happen. That is not to say that we shouldn't strive to keep trim and fit. That's why I get up early and swim before work.

RE: Swimmers Body, Runners Body

That Guy — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 12:04:27 GMT

you're just that good.:) thanks man