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.
I wouldn't be surprised if he declines that invitation.
...I left aside my opinion on his final conclusion, although I made a quick allusion to it: His take is that D.Swimmers overglide, and that because of that they fail at improving the world records as much as other swimmers in other distances. The only main problem with this position, is that an overglider did beat a swinger in London 2012, the proof remains in the pudding in my opinion.
I have affiliation with Swim Smooth, not with TI, so normally I should be pleased with his conclusion. Unfortunately his conclusion can't even be used, because it's based on a flawed analysis. Sad. Not sure if Paul Newsome will be tempted to use this analysis or not, but I'd recommend that he doesn't since it's flawed.
You can't call Sun Yang an overglider. The pause at his catch is about 0.1 seconds.
What I'd like to see is a well thought out analysis of Sun's London 1500 swim and why he was able to swim so much faster over that distance than anyone has before. He does some things very unconventionally, like breathing into and out of the turns, but he's clearly doing lots of things right. What are these things? That's what interests me.
Swim Smooth did a fun and relevant one. I'll try to find it.
But Knelson, you asked a very good question. I'd like to complete my previous answer.
Reason why my standard toward science is so high, is that there remain a lot of mysteries in swimming. Effectively applying weight shifts to the task, is only one example. These things are hidden. Extremely hard to quantify (therefore out of science's reach).
Yet we often read that coaching should be evidence based. All right. I buy this. Coaching should be evidence based. But for that, we need evidence right?
I wish science could really help unfolding as many of these mysteries as possible. But again, these are very hardcore topics for most of these mysteries, requiring very hot skills. If you can not identify that a swimmer is issuing 4 leg kick per arm cycle, when this is NO mystery at all. It's there, you see it, you just can not miss it. If you can't even see this, how on earth could you help coaches with more complex stuff? When they start talking in words I don't understand, about things that are new to me, I have to find a way to know if they're reliable or not. Well Rushall isn't. So whenever he talks stuff I don't understand, I can't believe him. Not if he overlooks things (which I do understand) that are extremely basic and simple, and irrefutable. "Some would rather be known, than be right" (A. Coggan).
Here, 2 blog entries. Not a complete analysis though. Swim Smooth's main interest in regards to Sun was to analyze how much time is spent not applying propulsive forces. Swim Smooth did not comment on his leg kicking pattern, they really focused on the overgliding (or not) aspect. Swim Smooth position on leg kick is a pragmatic one. 2bk is great, but if you can not get it done perfectly, you're probably faster with a mild 6bk. Since they strongly insist on bilateral breathing, they can not recommend the 4bk, as this is more typical of unilateral breathers.
www.feelforthewater.com/.../our-review-strokes-of-london-2012.htmlwww.feelforthewater.com/.../our-stroke-analysis-two-best-1500m.html
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.
1500 LCM is 30 lengths of the pool. If you can't even count, all credibility lost, etc :)
:blush:
(can you tell that in the town where I learned my job, there was only 1 50m pool?)
But 1500m in a 1 50m pool would be only 10 lengths. :confused: Where's the mathematician (Mike)?
LOL, I mean 1 50m pool as in one 50m pool in the whole town. Hard to believe I know. That town being the second largest town in a province that is the biggest one in the whole country.
Things have improved now, they count 2 50m pools, as in two 50m pools.
Funny as I was coming here to post the same link. Good? Hmmm I donno.
"Sun Yang swam the first 1,400 meters of the race with a two-beat kick."
I'd rather call this dead wrong. Any time of the day I'd say, since I've never seen Sun relying on a 2bk.
If you can't even count up to 4....
"Overtaking strokes are relatively common in male distance freestylers. The inherent errors of motion and undesirable limitations of that stroking format could be argued as being the principal reason why the men's 1,500 m race has improved the least of all swimming races and strokes over the past decade (even despite the introduction of the performance-enhancing super suits)."
Yeah except that the second position at this race was won by a swimmer displaying an elevated stroke rate (no overtaking).
I should have said that the videos and still pictures are great and that the commentary is pure Rushell.
No but seriously, he really lost all his credibility now, as far as I'm concerned.
Because he misspoke about Sun Yang's kick? This seems a little severe to me.
What I'd like to see is a well thought out analysis of Sun's London 1500 swim and why he was able to swim so much faster over that distance than anyone has before. He does some things very unconventionally, like breathing into and out of the turns, but he's clearly doing lots of things right. What are these things? That's what interests me. Same goes for Katie Ledecky. Again, a very interesting race.
