So many swimmers classify themselves as a "sprinter", "breaststroker", "middle distance", "IMer", etc.
Since training can affect the outcome, how can you tell if your talent matches what you're training?
To clarify with an example: How can you tell if you're really meant to be a distance swimmer vs. you like distance and you've trained yourself into it?
There's definitely something to be said for just doing what you like and going with it. Or to just take an all around approach similar to what is recommended for age groupers.
But what if you want to pick something to really throw your focus into?
Is there an objective way to decide what distance a person should focus on or what stroke a person should focus on?
If you have a specialty, how did you decide?
As an age grouper, though, my coach had us swimming every event at some point during every season - and we trained for everything also.
My coaches did not do this and I wish they had. We all trained for "everything" but we were not put in everything. And by "everything" I mean mostly freestyle. I was put in the same two events for almost every meet forever and ever. And our meets never had 200s of the strokes, so hard to know how that would have panned out. And when we got older, sadly the 50s disappeared as well. When I did go to USA meets (rarely because my parents couldn't afford it), I swam in one of those already tested events - not something completely new.
I had a pretty short college experience because of illness that was too much to keep swimming & working. I recall my college coach actually having me train for the events I was racing, which was a nice change. But still, the same events. One meet we actually did have the 200 ***. I don't remember my time at all. I don't remember how I placed. I just remember the look of "ugh" and general disgust afterwards. But I don't remember if the "ugh" was because it was so much better than my 100 or because it was so much worse. My mind is playing tricks on me and I truly can't recall. But I know one was significantly better than the other. But even after an adult season dedicated to the 200/400 and a season dedicated to the 50/100, I can't figure out which.
As an age grouper, though, my coach had us swimming every event at some point during every season - and we trained for everything also.
My coaches did not do this and I wish they had. We all trained for "everything" but we were not put in everything. And by "everything" I mean mostly freestyle. I was put in the same two events for almost every meet forever and ever. And our meets never had 200s of the strokes, so hard to know how that would have panned out. And when we got older, sadly the 50s disappeared as well. When I did go to USA meets (rarely because my parents couldn't afford it), I swam in one of those already tested events - not something completely new.
I had a pretty short college experience because of illness that was too much to keep swimming & working. I recall my college coach actually having me train for the events I was racing, which was a nice change. But still, the same events. One meet we actually did have the 200 ***. I don't remember my time at all. I don't remember how I placed. I just remember the look of "ugh" and general disgust afterwards. But I don't remember if the "ugh" was because it was so much better than my 100 or because it was so much worse. My mind is playing tricks on me and I truly can't recall. But I know one was significantly better than the other. But even after an adult season dedicated to the 200/400 and a season dedicated to the 50/100, I can't figure out which.
