Medical Question to a Doctor regarding Supplements.

Hey, this could become a convention resultion... "be it resolved that Ion should not breathe upon emerging from his turn, but if he feels it really necessary, he may sneak a breath prior to commencing the reversal of directions normally associated with that turn. He should streamline in an approved manner in departing that wall, kick in an economical fashion and strive for balance in his stroke. Furthermore, he should pack his workouts with purposeful drillwork & scientific progressions rather than empty yardage; having done so, he may approach, nay, even surpass his younger self (all without artificial aids)- all so in favor- vote aye..."

~~ My despair is not really technique, my despair is that with the same technique I swam 2:13.66 in May 2002, and 2:09.54 in May 1994. This reflects to me a worrisome physical decline. ~~ My experience has been that the majority of people who train hard over a period of time without a similar strong emphasis on maintaining and improving technique in fact experience a degradation of technique. It is quite possible that what seems to you to be "the same technique" you used 8 years ago, is actually less effective technique than what you used back then. If your current technique in fact includes all the flaws mentioned by the several observers that have commented, you have a wealth of opportunity for speed improvement ahead of you - likely well in excess of the 4 seconds you gave up over the last 8 years.

Originally posted by emmett ~~ My despair is not really technique, my despair is that with the same technique I swam 2:13.66 in May 2002, and 2:09.54 in May 1994. This reflects to me a worrisome physical decline. ~~ My experience has been that the majority of people who train hard over a period of time without a similar strong emphasis on maintaining and improving technique in fact experience a degradation of technique. It is quite possible that what seems to you to be "the same technique" you used 8 years ago, is actually less effective technique than what you used back then. If your current technique in fact includes all the flaws mentioned by the several observers that have commented, you have a wealth of opportunity for speed improvement ahead of you - likely well in excess of the 4 seconds you gave up over the last 8 years. I was considering this possibility before posting a comparison in the 200s swam in May 1994 and May 2002. I don't know what percentage of the four seconds difference is due to decline and what percentage is due to technique degardation, if there is a technique degradation. I know that March 1st., 1992 I swam in a 25 meter pool, a 100 meter freestyle in 1:02.84, which is my lifetime best. Not bad for a late starter in the sport. Around that time I was getting criticism for poor diving, for breathing more than once per cycle, and for faulty flip turns, like I am getting now. After addressing this, over many attempts, in November 1993 I managed my best technical ever 100 meter free, with still a poor dive, but with breathing every three strokes all the way, and still faulty flip turns, in 1:03.66. I understand from it, that technical improvement doesn't give an instant, or even a short term benefit: one has to still gain power over a long period of time, while practicing the new technique. With about one hour per week of intense and closely monitored stroke work, I might be able to slice a little over half a second in the 200 on technique merits alone, between now and August's Cleveland. It's not going to happen, however: I still wait here for an interested coach to get back to me with passion and interest, even though I did offer to pay for these technique lessons.

If you have stroke counts from those races, it might tell you a lot. Your initial description of your races leads me to believe that your perceived turnover rate was either the same, or possibly a bit faster on average during the most recent race, owing to your improved conditioning level. Lets assume, for a moment, that you swam with precisely the same turnover rate in the two meets in question. Lets assume that all the non-swimming aspects - starts, turns finish are, at worst, unchanged technically from your earlier race to the most recent race. What's left as the big variable is the effectiveness of your stroke technique. Your 200m (I'm assuming long course) took you 133+ seconds compared to your earlier 129+ sec. We'll drop 6 seconds out for your start and another 8 seconds each out for three turns. That leaves roughly 100 seconds of pure swimming. If your strokes were 4% less effective (ie you traveled 4% less distance with each one) in your most recent swim over your earlier swim, that would account for your 4 seconds increase in time. I'll assume you have average stroke length for a person unschooled in TI type stroke efficiency - somewhere in the 50-70% of wingspan range - lets call it 60% in your case. Assuming you are a 6' tall person your palm to palm wingspan is likely around 5.5 feet or 1.66 meters and your stroke length is likely more like 1.0 meters. If we figure you are actually swimming 165 of those 200 meters (as opposed to turning and starting) then you are likely taking in the neighborhood of 165 strokes to cover those 165 meters (roughly equivalent to swimming 18 SPL in a 25yd pool). So if you took just 7 strokes more in the most recent 200 (remember we're assuming the same turnover rate you had during the earlier swim) then that's where your four extra seconds came from. Here's the good news: if you can figure out how to trim just 7 strokes OFF your most recent swim without losing any turnover rate then you can get your 4 seconds back. And you are actually likely to be able to trim a lot more than 7 strokes off without losing turnover rate. Will it take time? Yup. But it'll take less time than simply working harder to get there. And, perhaps, working hard will NEVER get you there. Assuming you expect to be doing this sport a few years from now, don't let short-term goals get in the way of your long-term improvement goals and strategy. Of course any or all of the assumptions I made above might be wrong, but you should be able to fill in some of the numbers more accurately and do the math. If you do not get a response from your coach, don't discount the self-teaching opportunities available - videos, clinics, books etc. More than a few Masters swimmers have improved their technique without much help from coaches. Yes, it is a tougher row to hoe, but you don't impess me as one to shy away from a challenge.

Hey, Emmett. Life is impressive if one deals with professionals of passion, like it happens when you after Sally are voluntarily offering professional advice. If you have stroke counts from those races, it might tell you a lot. Your initial description of your races leads me to believe that your perceived turnover rate was either the same, or possibly a bit faster on average during the most recent race, owing to your improved conditioning level. ... I believe, this refers to my post where I wrote that I swam a 25 yards free in 15 strokes and 12.00 seconds. When I did this it was in a warm up in Hawaii, not in a race. I don't know my stroke counts for my races. I remember though that in May 1994 when I swam 2:09.54 for the 200, in a warm up I swam 25 yards free in 11.8x. If however this refers to my post where I wrote that in 200 and 500 in Hawaii, when I was trying to match shadows beside me, I felt my heart rate sky-rocketing, my Hawaii splits show however a slower start of races than in 1994. It might be that I race best at a lighter weight than 167 pounds, which surprisingly I was at, in Hawaii, and still am now. In 1994 I was 154 pounds, and two weeks before Hawaii I was 162, and thought I was stable at 162 since five years ago until forever. ... Lets assume, for a moment, that you swam with precisely the same turnover rate in the two meets in question. Lets assume that all the non-swimming aspects - starts, turns finish are, at worst, unchanged technically from your earlier race to the most recent race. What's left as the big variable is the effectiveness of your stroke technique. Your 200m (I'm assuming long course) ... It's 200 yards. (In 200 meters long course, I have 2:27.37 from 1987, and 2:27.67 from 1994, against 2:34.xx last year). ... took you 133+ seconds compared to your earlier 129+ sec. We'll drop 6 seconds out for your start and another 8 seconds each out for three turns. That leaves roughly 100 seconds of pure swimming. If your strokes were 4% less effective (ie you traveled 4% less distance with each one) in your most recent swim over your earlier swim, that would account for your 4 seconds increase in time. I'll assume you have average stroke length for a person unschooled in TI type stroke efficiency - somewhere in the 50-70% of wingspan range - lets call it 60% in your case. Assuming you are a 6' tall person your palm to palm wingspan is likely around 5.5 feet or 1.66 meters and your stroke length is likely more like 1.0 meters. If we figure you are actually swimming 165 of those 200 meters (as opposed to turning and starting) then you are likely taking in the neighborhood of 165 strokes to cover those 165 meters (roughly equivalent to swimming 18 SPL in a 25yd pool). So if you took just 7 strokes more in the most recent 200 (remember we're assuming the same turnover rate you had during the earlier swim) then that's where your four extra seconds came from. ... I don't know my stroke count during races. Indeed, it might be more than in 1994, partially due maybe to my extra body weight now, or due to possible stroke degradation. ... Here's the good news: if you can figure out how to trim just 7 strokes OFF your most recent swim without losing any turnover rate then you can get your 4 seconds back. And you are actually likely to be able to trim a lot more than 7 strokes off without losing turnover rate. Will it take time? Yup. But it'll take less time than simply working harder to get there. And, perhaps, working hard will NEVER get you there. Assuming you expect to be doing this sport a few years from now, don't let short-term goals get in the way of your long-term improvement goals and strategy. ... An on-deck coach in Hawaii, who is based in Atlanta, told me I might improve in distance per stroke by better rotating the hips thus getting more arm power, as opposed to now rotating just the upper body. ... If you do not get a response from your coach, ... ... I got a reply today, to go forward. I don't see with a good eye me writting an e-mail May 28 asking for information, then work out almost every day under the coach, and get a reply June 3. I pursue this coach, because he was himself a good NCAA division 1 distance freestyler in Massachusetts from 1994 until 1998, and that at UCSD he trains two sub 16 minutes per 1,650 yards free freestylers who race in NCAA division 2. ... ... but you don't impess me as one to shy away from a challenge. That's a compliment that I want.

Hey- I sense a Convention resolution..."Be it resolved that all present are concerned about Ion's stroke improvement, therefore the following steps are required: he shall not breathe upon emergence from his turn, but he shall be permitted to sneak a breath prior to the commencement of that turn should he deem it absolutely necessary. Balance between arm strokes is mandatory, while a noticeable trunk rotation is recommended. A kick that is propulsive, but not excessive and extension of each arm stroke must be present. Those conditions being met (with the further stipulation of no unnatural stimulants or enhancements being employed), then we agree that said Ion may approach the time standards of his younger self & perhaps even surpass them. All those in favor say Aye..."

Whoops!

This discussion should have ended about 20 posts ago. There is nothing more than can be stated that is not de facto repetition ad nauseum. Swim hard, focus in practice, enjoy competition, go for seasonal bests. Arretes, compris?

I am sorry that my previous post has a sloppy use of quotes. Below is a better version. Hey, Emmett. Life is impressive if one deals with professionals of passion, like it happens when you after Sally are voluntarily offering professional advice. Originally posted by emmett If you have stroke counts from those races, it might tell you a lot. Your initial description of your races leads me to believe that your perceived turnover rate was either the same, or possibly a bit faster on average during the most recent race, owing to your improved conditioning level. ... I believe, this refers to my post where I wrote that I swam a 25 yards free in 15 strokes and 12.00 seconds. When I did this it was in a warm up in Hawaii, not in a race. I don't know my stroke counts for my races. I remember though that in May 1994 when I swam 2:09.54 for the 200, in a warm up I swam 25 yards free in 11.8x. If however this refers to my post where I wrote that in 200 and 500 in Hawaii, when I was trying to match shadows beside me, I felt my heart rate sky-rocketing, my Hawaii splits show however a slower start of races than in 1994. It might be that I race best at a lighter weight than 167 pounds, which surprisingly I was at, in Hawaii, and still am now. In 1994 I was 154 pounds, and two weeks before Hawaii I was 162, and thought I was stable at 162 since five years ago until forever. Originally posted by emmett ... Lets assume, for a moment, that you swam with precisely the same turnover rate in the two meets in question. Lets assume that all the non-swimming aspects - starts, turns finish are, at worst, unchanged technically from your earlier race to the most recent race. What's left as the big variable is the effectiveness of your stroke technique. Your 200m (I'm assuming long course) ... It's 200 yards. (In 200 meters long course, I have 2:27.37 from 1987, and 2:27.67 from 1994, against 2:34.xx last year). Originally posted by emmett ... took you 133+ seconds compared to your earlier 129+ sec. We'll drop 6 seconds out for your start and another 8 seconds each out for three turns. That leaves roughly 100 seconds of pure swimming. If your strokes were 4% less effective (ie you traveled 4% less distance with each one) in your most recent swim over your earlier swim, that would account for your 4 seconds increase in time. I'll assume you have average stroke length for a person unschooled in TI type stroke efficiency - somewhere in the 50-70% of wingspan range - lets call it 60% in your case. Assuming you are a 6' tall person your palm to palm wingspan is likely around 5.5 feet or 1.66 meters and your stroke length is likely more like 1.0 meters. If we figure you are actually swimming 165 of those 200 meters (as opposed to turning and starting) then you are likely taking in the neighborhood of 165 strokes to cover those 165 meters (roughly equivalent to swimming 18 SPL in a 25yd pool). So if you took just 7 strokes more in the most recent 200 (remember we're assuming the same turnover rate you had during the earlier swim) then that's where your four extra seconds came from. ... I don't know my stroke count during races. Indeed, it might be more than in 1994, partially due maybe to my extra body weight now, or due to possible stroke degradation. Originally posted by emmett ... Here's the good news: if you can figure out how to trim just 7 strokes OFF your most recent swim without losing any turnover rate then you can get your 4 seconds back. And you are actually likely to be able to trim a lot more than 7 strokes off without losing turnover rate. Will it take time? Yup. But it'll take less time than simply working harder to get there. And, perhaps, working hard will NEVER get you there. Assuming you expect to be doing this sport a few years from now, don't let short-term goals get in the way of your long-term improvement goals and strategy. ... An on-deck coach in Hawaii, who is based in Atlanta, told me I might improve in distance per stroke by better rotating the hips and getting more arm power, as opposed to now rotating just the upper body. Originally posted by emmett ... If you do not get a response from your coach, ... ... I got a reply today, to go forward. I don't see with a good eye me writting an e-mail May 28 asking for information, then work out almost every day under the coach, and get a reply June 3. I pursue this coach, because he was himself a good NCAA division 1 distance freestyler in Massachusetts from 1994 until 1998, and that at UCSD he trains two sub 16 minutes per 1,650 yards free freestylers who race in NCAA division 2. Originally posted by emmett ... ... but you don't impess me as one to shy away from a challenge. That's a compliment that I want.

~~ I don't see with a good eye me writting an e-mail May 28 asking for information, then work out almost every day under the coach, and get a reply June 3. ~~ Not everybody checks their email every day. If I'm gone (or just not near my email) for a couple days then I have a couple hundred messages piled up when I check my IN box - and it'll be another few days before I get to them all. Unless you know all the inside details of your coach's life and business, you are likely not in a position to judge whether or not he answered your email in due course. If you are not pleased with the business relationship (or the coach/athlete relationship) you have with him then you should first talk it over with him, instead of airing it here - and though you don't name him you gave enough details so that many (most?) of the readers here know precisely who you are talking about. If he's reading this, your words won't be helping to win his undying support.