I was looking at the longer paper and he does specifically address drill in that one:
(see coachsci.sdsu.edu/.../energy39.pdf, p 43)
So I think you can now officially put Rushall on your black list, Charles! :)
He's already very close to this list, as you may have guessed already. But like I said, he's more of a waste of time than a jerk I think.
I don't think (even if I may surprise you a lot here) that he's dismissing drill work, but rather warning people that technique alone won't get you to the top.
But as I mention qbrain, as soon as you find a mention that he recommends schedules like 6x4k = 24k for beating Sun Yang, or even Ryan Cochrane, then I promise to put him on my black list.
One has to live on an other planet to dismiss the importance of improving economy in swimming. Phelps did publish a small paper recently I believe in which he re-confirms the importance of drilling. That's obvious, it's obvious to all of us.
My attempt to defend Rushall's position (can't believe I am still defending him....) is simply driven by the fact that I assume he knows how swimmers, ie the successful ones, are trained still today.
The thing that changed ever since I started coaching at a high level, is that now the net of elite swimmers tend to resemble more and more like the net of a triathlete, with Zommers, Front Snorkel, etc...
Is it possible to imagine swimming without the Single Arm Drill? The Snorkel (like Phelps smartly mentions) allows you to better focus on the pulling action itself, etc etc etc etc.....
Ref: www.details.com/.../gold-medalist-olympian-swimmer-michael-phelps-training-secrets-interview
Who are you going to believe? Brent Rushall or Michael Phelps? Brent Who? No brainer....
I do many more drills than I used to in an attempt to improve my technique, but I'm also open to at least try out race pace training of various kinds, including UST and elements of Leslie's HIT workouts.
Stick to this, sounds like a good plan. Obviously Rushall may think that drilling is supperficial and not relevant but Rushall is Rushall.
(If he googles his own name which I think he does, who knows, maybe some day he'll come down here to defend his works?)
Look at what you'd be missing...
Phelps Single Arm.avi - YouTube
Things don't need to be exaggerated to dangerous limits, in order to be efficient. There's still room for balance in a swimming program, even that of a sprinter. Not sure a pure 50m specialist can abandon work on sculling neither. Anyway, we could go on and on and on, and that's what Rushall publishes for. He's an activist. Can you name one single swimmer this guy could take to the top?
For what it's worth - though I haven't kept track (Ande probably did though) - I think that some O.Records and W.Records still got beaten in London this year, and that in spite of a drastic change in term of swim suits (especially for males).
This, objectively speaking, is a fair indication that the Swimming World, at least for those nations that perform well (US, Great Britain, China, Australia etc) don't need that much of a drastic change after all.
He's an activist.
For what it's worth - though I haven't kept track (Ande probably did though) - I think that some O.Records and W.Records still got beaten in London this year, and that in spite of a drastic change in term of swim suits (especially for males).
This, objectively speaking, is a fair indication that the Swimming World, at least for those nations that perform well (US, Great Britain, China, Australia etc) don't need that much of a drastic change after all. If Rushall is born and based in the US, considering that the US outperformed China once again in spite of having only a fraction of China's population, I find it a bit ironic to raise flags and ring alarms like he usually does.
He's an activist.
Or, perhaps more records would fall, and possibly by greater margins, with different training methods? I don't have the answers, but I don't think that a continuation of records falling is reason to accept that our current training methods are the best to be had.
Or, perhaps more records would fall, and possibly by greater margins, with different training methods? I don't have the answers, but I don't think that a continuation of records falling is reason to accept that our current training methods are the best to be had.
Ahh maybe, maybe. It'll take someone to try, ie spend the time of 30 athletes for a few years trying to qualify. Because before getting there scoring records, you first need to qualify.
So picture yourself in the shoes of a head coach, think for 1 second about the responsibility that this represents, and you probably have your answer as to why, Rushall remains an activist for most.
Would "UST" be more effective with drop-dead distances?
I doubt it. Just curious why you think it would be? To me "drop dead" people only know one speed--all out. The longer the race, the worse they do because they inherently slow down more and can't pace well. UST is very much about pacing. If you try to go all out on these sets you'll pay the price very quickly.
If you're taxing the aerobic system, you're not doing an AFAP sprint.
By this you mean that your rest does not allow for the aerobic system to fully recover right? Because anaerobic work pretty much requires the aerobic system to be at 100%.
However, (1) I can't imagine doing UST every single day -- boredom; (2) I am not giving up equipment that helps make me fast (fins, chute) -- why does he dislike equipment? because it takes away from race pace efforts? (3) I don't think a steady diet of UST is a substitute for pure speed training for sprinters; and (4) if you don't do rehearsal swims, how will you know how to pace yourself in a race? I also disagree with his quoted statement that "single-energy specific training sets are irrelevant activities for influencing racing in a positive manner."
1. Rushall is a professor, not a swim coach. He doesn't have to deal with boredom... or um... he is the producer of bor... :bolt:
2. He dislikes equipment because it has been show statistically to not improve performance, and thus a waste of time. He is not a coach and he has not studied non-elite swimmers. He doesn't have to keep swimmers engaged (the primary driver to toys) and he hasn't studied swimmers who can't achieve near competition speed at near competition distance.
3. I agree.
4. He is not against rehearsal swims. I would have to dig through his 8 million papers to find the details but he is pro racing and pro frequent shave and taper meets or the equivalent and anti trainForOneMeetAYear.
Since he is not a coach, he does not have to worry about keeping swimming interesting
If I understand well why Rushall published this paper, I don't think it is to motivate people to abandon a balanced approach in favor of too much focus on UST.
Not so sure about that. I'd summarize his position as "too many people are training to be really good trainers, when the goal should be to be the best racer." Rushall's opinion seems to be that anything other than race-paced training is suboptimal. You might not be truly "wasting your time" by doing long aerobic sets, but you could get more bang for the buck by doing a race-paced set instead.
edit: I think this quote sums it up
This presentation justifies ultra-short training at race-pace as being the best and only avenue for
physical work to significantly improve race performances in serious pool swimmers. While other
forms of training are possible, the more those forms deviate from replicating the energy supply
and biomechanics demanded of every swimmer's racing intentions, the less beneficial they will
be. Ultra-short training at race-pace is deemed to be relevant physical training while all other
training forms contain varying degrees of irrelevancy.
Do I understand your assumption correct that this type of training is easy to do and something for a training minimalist? I got pretty exhausted from it.
I'm with you. These workouts look brutal to me if you're really doing them the way they are meant to be done.
I've done it a couple times, once 25bk and once 25 kick (back without the arms - sdk+flutter), both with a target of 100bk. It was not a walk in the park either time.
