Ultra Short Training Rushall

A week ago: "It's important in reading and making our own sense out of such a text to better understand who Brent Rushall is. His texts aren't always easy to accept among coaches, because he's been consistent over the decades in questioning how *we* (since I'm a coach) train our swimmers. And he's right I believe. As time goes by, stuff he's written a long time ago hasn't made as much sense as it does now. . . . My opinion (which is worth nothing compared to Rushall's) is that they're still a need to fully train the anaerobic capacity. On a more philosophical note, I don't think US swimming world needs Rushall as much as the Canadian swimming world does." Today: "No but seriously, he really lost all his credibility now, as far as I'm concerned. . . . How can you could claim yourself a *scientist* poluting the web with your works full of flaws, and miss such a crucial aspect of his performance, especially that you have 60 lengths of the pool to notice it!!! And yet, you take a position in regards to drills or swim technique in general? Come on.... Swimming is too complex for you I believe.... First learn, then teach!" “He keeps questioning our works, our relevance, our ability to apply evidence based practices, he can't even count up to 4. So put yourself in my shoes...” * * * Quite a turnaround! Quick? I've been bugged by his theories and often ending up defending them since 2004. I was just waiting for a clear, clear example of his incompetency. 2bk vs 4bk, over 60 laps of the pool is one clear example, irrefutable. I couldn't find an irrefutable example in his crappy paper on institutionalized over training. Some in this thread have raised to my attention that he's been consistent in questioning the importance of drilling! (I learned about it here in this thread). But again there, I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. But again, 2b vs 4bk, that's a Level 1 beginner coach mistake! You can't find any more basic mistake than not being able to count up to 4. At one point, it's time to pull the plug. Here's a post made by a *swimmer* not a coach, in his 50s, having began swimming no more than 2 years ago. www.swimsmoothforum.com/viewtopic.php How can a not certified person, enthusiast, 2min / 100m swimmer can clearly see it, and Rushall, phd, miss it? www.swimsmoothforum.com/viewtopic.php I'll try to find him, send him the link to this particular thread, and see if he agrees for a 3 round against a coach that did not even study science. We'll see... *edit* Done, email sent. *edit 2* He answered.

A week ago: "It's important in reading and making our own sense out of such a text to better understand who Brent Rushall is. His texts aren't always easy to accept among coaches, because he's been consistent over the decades in questioning how *we* (since I'm a coach) train our swimmers. And he's right I believe. As time goes by, stuff he's written a long time ago hasn't made as much sense as it does now. . . . My opinion (which is worth nothing compared to Rushall's) is that they're still a need to fully train the anaerobic capacity. On a more philosophical note, I don't think US swimming world needs Rushall as much as the Canadian swimming world does." Today: "No but seriously, he really lost all his credibility now, as far as I'm concerned. . . . How can you could claim yourself a *scientist* poluting the web with your works full of flaws, and miss such a crucial aspect of his performance, especially that you have 60 lengths of the pool to notice it!!! And yet, you take a position in regards to drills or swim technique in general? Come on.... Swimming is too complex for you I believe.... First learn, then teach!" “He keeps questioning our works, our relevance, our ability to apply evidence based practices, he can't even count up to 4. So put yourself in my shoes...” * * * Quite a turnaround! Quick? I've been bugged by his theories and often ending up defending them since 2004. I was just waiting for a clear, clear example of his incompetency. 2bk vs 4bk, over 60 laps of the pool is one clear example, irrefutable. I couldn't find an irrefutable example in his crappy paper on institutionalized over training. Some in this thread have raised to my attention that he's been consistent in questioning the importance of drilling! (I learned about it here in this thread). But again there, I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. But again, 2b vs 4bk, that's a Level 1 beginner coach mistake! You can't find any more basic mistake than not being able to count up to 4. At one point, it's time to pull the plug. Here's a post made by a *swimmer* not a coach, in his 50s, having began swimming no more than 2 years ago. www.swimsmoothforum.com/viewtopic.php How can a not certified person, enthusiast, 2min / 100m swimmer can clearly see it, and Rushall, phd, miss it? www.swimsmoothforum.com/viewtopic.php I'll try to find him, send him the link to this particular thread, and see if he agrees for a 3 round against a coach that did not even study science. We'll see... *edit* Done, email sent. *edit 2* He answered.