Now that I've gone through the hassle of signing up as a member of this dicussion group, this gets more and more fun. Maybe I'll get fired from my job :)
Anyway... I'm sure that ALL Masters level swimmers have heard of Total Immersion (from now on referred to as TI) swimming, correct? What are everyone's opinions about TI swimming? I am most curious because as a coach of age group swimmers, I was looking for training videos for our kids. I happened upon TI and liked what I saw... at first.
Here's some background for my experience with TI... very well put together, most of what they teach has been in existence for some time anyway, and they certainly are good for teaching novice/beginner swimmers the basic technique for swimming.
However, when looking to swim fast, and I mean fast, not lap swim quality, but truly competitively, I thing TI has missed to boat completely. Yes, smooth and efficient swimming is nice, but did anyone see the NCAA's? There are 20 year old men swimming 9 strokes per length in breaststroke! We have a number of age group coaches in my area teaching their kids how to swim breaststroke at 6 or 7 strokes a length!!! What gives? Extended glide is one thing, but when you slow down your stroke to such an extent just to achieve long and fluid strokes you sacrifice speed tremendously.
Hey, if you can swim 9 strokes a length at 1 second per stroke that is WAY better than 6 strokes a length at 2 seconds per stroke. Simple math.
Anthony Ervin of Cal swam the 100 free in the follwing SPL... 12 (start)/15/16/16. I could be off but that's what I was able to get from the (ahem- PALTRY) ESPN coverage. Now TI has goal SPL's of 12/13! Hello, if the BEST sprinter in history takes 8 cycles, shouldn't that tell us something? Turnover is very important. Same with streamlining, yes streamlines are nice and quite important but A.E. pops up after 5 yards MAX out of each turn. You only serve yourself well if your streamline is faster than you can swim, most age group swimmers would be well-served to explode out of the turn and swim within 3-4 yards.
Alas, it's been a slow day finishing my work for the week. Just looking to start a nice discussion. It's been my experience that a lot of Masters level swimmers are also engaged in coaching age group swimming at some level, and therefore I feel we can get some good dialogue going on this issue.
Now I've just used TI as an example because that's what I've had my experience with, but more general is what keys do you all stress when trying to mold competitive swimmers?
Au revoir,
-Rain Man
Parents
Former Member
Originally posted by Phil Arcuni
...
I would have assumed that the 'quirky' styles of Hoogenbrand and Bennett would have been analyzed to death. I can only assume that the answers are not known, or even claimed to be known. And if they are not, the field of swimming science has a long way to go.
...
I believe that their swimming styles are found in many swimmers, but the difference is not understood:
47.84 swam in the year 2000, and 47.86 swam in the year 2002 by Pieter van den Hoogenband (Ned) in 100 meter free, is simply not explained so far by better known technique (for example by Total Immersion -"The Revolutionary Way to Swim Better, Faster, and Easier" like Terry Laughlin writes proudly in order to 'justify' swimmers who are fast but slower than van den Hoogenband-, the success goes far beyond this booklet), and is not explained by better theory of conditioning so far.
In interviews, when van den Hoogenband swims slower than his potential, like he did in the 2001 World Championships, he emphasizes his need for getting back in shape through conditioning, he doesn't mention technique. It's like if he feels that his technique stays ingrained by practicing his usual drills in workouts.
Likewise applying fish dynamics to humans, is not clear.
The future will uncover more...
Originally posted by Phil Arcuni
...
I would have assumed that the 'quirky' styles of Hoogenbrand and Bennett would have been analyzed to death. I can only assume that the answers are not known, or even claimed to be known. And if they are not, the field of swimming science has a long way to go.
...
I believe that their swimming styles are found in many swimmers, but the difference is not understood:
47.84 swam in the year 2000, and 47.86 swam in the year 2002 by Pieter van den Hoogenband (Ned) in 100 meter free, is simply not explained so far by better known technique (for example by Total Immersion -"The Revolutionary Way to Swim Better, Faster, and Easier" like Terry Laughlin writes proudly in order to 'justify' swimmers who are fast but slower than van den Hoogenband-, the success goes far beyond this booklet), and is not explained by better theory of conditioning so far.
In interviews, when van den Hoogenband swims slower than his potential, like he did in the 2001 World Championships, he emphasizes his need for getting back in shape through conditioning, he doesn't mention technique. It's like if he feels that his technique stays ingrained by practicing his usual drills in workouts.
Likewise applying fish dynamics to humans, is not clear.
The future will uncover more...
