There has been a renewed interest in Ultra-Short Race Pace Training in light of the success of a very successful age group swimmer, Michael Andrew. (If you have not heard of him, here are his times from a recent article. He has multiple 11-12 National Age Group Records. Michael trains exclusively with Ultra-Short Race Pace training.
Andrew swam a 1:50.54 in the 200 IM at the Jenks Sectional Championship meet last weekend to hit his first Winter Senior Nationals qualifying time....
...In other races, Andrew this weekend nearly matched his best time in the 50 free with a 20.96, and also swam best times in the 100 free (46.06), 100 back (51.05), 100 *** (57.03), and 100 fly (49.72), all of which rank him very high on the National Age Group All-Time lists.
If you’d like to interact with other coaches and swimmers exploring USRP, or have any general questions, I’m setting up a discussion group. I've corresponded with Dr. Rushall extensively, and have been personally utilizing forms of USRP for almost a year now. Send an email to info (at) swimmingscience.net with “Cam USRP Group” in the subject line, and I’ll be in touch.
I know this is an old thread, but I'd like to address a few of the concerns expressed previously.
I came quite late in this discussion, not sure this particular point's been correctly addressed later, but work duration must be short, as one of the key principle in this form of training, well, I'd say are:
- Avoiding glycogen depletion
- Avoiding severe acidosis
- Therefore relying on ATP-CP (Creatine Phosphate, sorry I wrote it in french)
So any interpretation to the effect that one could swim bouts of 75 or 100y is undoubtedly a misinterpretation, as it would violate all these principles.
The first two premises are on point as reasons why the work and rest durations have been kept short. However, 75y/100y are very well suited to training for the 500/1000/1500. It's not "isolating/relying on ATP-CP" (alactacid energy system) that matters so much as stimulating whatever energy systems are relevant to the race.
It's interesting how swim training seems as subject to fashion trends as, well, fashion.
Not too long ago, the disciples of Alexander Popov were following an approach that, it seemed to me, boiled down to this: Swim with perfect form but in relatively slow motion. No need to exert yourself!
Now, courtesy of Mr. or Dr. Rushall, a new view has emerged: swim super fast, but only for short bursts. No need to build up muscle-pain-inducing compounds (I know lactic acid is off the hook now, but not sure what the new villain is that causes swimming pain. I know something does!).
To be sure, I doubt whether Popov or Rushall intended their respective approaches to be ways to avoid, well, hurting during practice! But I think there are more than a few swimmers anxious to find something that 100 percent kiboshes the old chestnut: No pain no gain.
Popovian super easy or Rushallian super short, I can see the seduction of both. I just don't think any extreme approaches are likely to pan out as the panaceas their devotees are hoping for. Both probably have some benefits, and I am not one to advocate suffering for suffering's sake.
But some degree of significant suffering from training is likely to be inescapable for those hoping to achieve their own peak performance. To think otherwise, in this layman's opinion, is wishful thinking.
To be precise, Rushall's "Super fast" advocacy is to match what you'd be expected to deliver during a race. In fact, if you aren't able to operate at your race pace (say, 1.5 m/s for your 50) for the duration of a USRP set, swimming at 2.0 m/s for reps of 7.5 m wouldn't be useful. Swum properly, a USRP set is very much "full of pain"... but at least that pain was induced by patterns that the brain will actually use during competition.
And likewise, I don't think Rushall is recommending the abandon of what will forever constitute the majority of any swimmer's menu, ie the relatively low level work.
Even if an elite did spend 4-5 hours booking ultra short intervals, you're still left with at last double this time doing something else.
The USRP sets are divided by super-easy recovery sets of at least equal duration, as explained in the paper... this is pretty much the only "low level work". To reap the full benefits of USRP, the other stuff (hypoxic, aerobic "threshold pace" sets, "lactate threshhold sets") will have to be cut. It was hard for me to cut this stuff out, but it has been worthwhile.
There are a lot more comments I'd like to address, but I'm not sure how many of them have been resolved by you guys already, so I'll just put a few more things out there
USRP does not apply to drills or "kicking sets" unless you have drill-races or "kicking races" at local meets. Technique does not "stack"
For people who have gotten used to it, USRP can be performed more than once per day (eg Michael).
Tabata is a totally different animal that involves training at 170% of your VO2 max when hooked up to special lab equipment. Not "HIIT" or "USRP" at all.
There has been a renewed interest in Ultra-Short Race Pace Training in light of the success of a very successful age group swimmer, Michael Andrew. (If you have not heard of him, here are his times from a recent article. He has multiple 11-12 National Age Group Records. Michael trains exclusively with Ultra-Short Race Pace training.
Andrew swam a 1:50.54 in the 200 IM at the Jenks Sectional Championship meet last weekend to hit his first Winter Senior Nationals qualifying time....
...In other races, Andrew this weekend nearly matched his best time in the 50 free with a 20.96, and also swam best times in the 100 free (46.06), 100 back (51.05), 100 *** (57.03), and 100 fly (49.72), all of which rank him very high on the National Age Group All-Time lists.
If you’d like to interact with other coaches and swimmers exploring USRP, or have any general questions, I’m setting up a discussion group. I've corresponded with Dr. Rushall extensively, and have been personally utilizing forms of USRP for almost a year now. Send an email to info (at) swimmingscience.net with “Cam USRP Group” in the subject line, and I’ll be in touch.
I know this is an old thread, but I'd like to address a few of the concerns expressed previously.
I came quite late in this discussion, not sure this particular point's been correctly addressed later, but work duration must be short, as one of the key principle in this form of training, well, I'd say are:
- Avoiding glycogen depletion
- Avoiding severe acidosis
- Therefore relying on ATP-CP (Creatine Phosphate, sorry I wrote it in french)
So any interpretation to the effect that one could swim bouts of 75 or 100y is undoubtedly a misinterpretation, as it would violate all these principles.
The first two premises are on point as reasons why the work and rest durations have been kept short. However, 75y/100y are very well suited to training for the 500/1000/1500. It's not "isolating/relying on ATP-CP" (alactacid energy system) that matters so much as stimulating whatever energy systems are relevant to the race.
It's interesting how swim training seems as subject to fashion trends as, well, fashion.
Not too long ago, the disciples of Alexander Popov were following an approach that, it seemed to me, boiled down to this: Swim with perfect form but in relatively slow motion. No need to exert yourself!
Now, courtesy of Mr. or Dr. Rushall, a new view has emerged: swim super fast, but only for short bursts. No need to build up muscle-pain-inducing compounds (I know lactic acid is off the hook now, but not sure what the new villain is that causes swimming pain. I know something does!).
To be sure, I doubt whether Popov or Rushall intended their respective approaches to be ways to avoid, well, hurting during practice! But I think there are more than a few swimmers anxious to find something that 100 percent kiboshes the old chestnut: No pain no gain.
Popovian super easy or Rushallian super short, I can see the seduction of both. I just don't think any extreme approaches are likely to pan out as the panaceas their devotees are hoping for. Both probably have some benefits, and I am not one to advocate suffering for suffering's sake.
But some degree of significant suffering from training is likely to be inescapable for those hoping to achieve their own peak performance. To think otherwise, in this layman's opinion, is wishful thinking.
To be precise, Rushall's "Super fast" advocacy is to match what you'd be expected to deliver during a race. In fact, if you aren't able to operate at your race pace (say, 1.5 m/s for your 50) for the duration of a USRP set, swimming at 2.0 m/s for reps of 7.5 m wouldn't be useful. Swum properly, a USRP set is very much "full of pain"... but at least that pain was induced by patterns that the brain will actually use during competition.
And likewise, I don't think Rushall is recommending the abandon of what will forever constitute the majority of any swimmer's menu, ie the relatively low level work.
Even if an elite did spend 4-5 hours booking ultra short intervals, you're still left with at last double this time doing something else.
The USRP sets are divided by super-easy recovery sets of at least equal duration, as explained in the paper... this is pretty much the only "low level work". To reap the full benefits of USRP, the other stuff (hypoxic, aerobic "threshold pace" sets, "lactate threshhold sets") will have to be cut. It was hard for me to cut this stuff out, but it has been worthwhile.
There are a lot more comments I'd like to address, but I'm not sure how many of them have been resolved by you guys already, so I'll just put a few more things out there
USRP does not apply to drills or "kicking sets" unless you have drill-races or "kicking races" at local meets. Technique does not "stack"
For people who have gotten used to it, USRP can be performed more than once per day (eg Michael).
Tabata is a totally different animal that involves training at 170% of your VO2 max when hooked up to special lab equipment. Not "HIIT" or "USRP" at all.
