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
Ion, I used the rolling eyes, because I thought it would be overkill to use my next choice. I'll use it now. :mad:
(If you want the last word, I promise not to respond further. I think we would agree that this side-thread is dying out.)
Originally posted by Ion Beza
There is no mistake in the TI book, in page 48, about what 'pause' is:
"Leave your hand extended before starting to pull back."
Yeah, but there is a problem when you take it out of context. Reread that section. He is talking to Rear-Quadrant swimmers, who do not know how it feels to be a FQS. He is describing a drill. He mentions "pause" as part of a mantra to think of, only if the person starts pulling back before having a grip on the water.
That is why I included the quote, later in the lessons, about anchoring your hands. Presumably, the swimmer is now comfortable with FQS, and is informed what to do while the arm is extended.
"Catching" the water is sculling with the hand to build a vortex of water around the hand. The sensation is pressure on the palm of the hand. It is a common enough expression on these boards, it did not occur to me that you did not understand the reference.
You keep bringing up Ervin. His stroke length in the 100 Free is consistent with the field. In the 50, his stroke frequency is slower than the average college swimmer back in 1982. I don't see how he supports your argument. (His stoke length is much longer that the "average" swimmer, but he has a comparable SR.)
You mention a single swim that you had. Way to give something different a fair chance. And as I mentioned, if you are pausing as long as I suspect, then you are not doing it right.
I have found other studies, besides Laughlin and Colwin, that support SL being more important than SR for getting faster, in general. If that doesn't work for you, or some people, fine. It is nice to know that your technique doesn't need any more improvement. But that doesn't discount the fact that it is true for most people. (Most people, as it shows up in the studies.)
Originally posted by Ion Beza
The sections discrediting cross training benefits of kicking with a board, pulling with paddles, dry land training -for example on an inclined bench-, are naive.
Let's take these in order:
So lot's of people use boards. So what! (Didn't your mother ever ask you if everyone was going to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge, would you?) The question was not whether kicking with boards is better than not kicking at all. Laughlin mentioned a disadvantage to using boards, and suggested kicking without. You have yet to mention a reason why the use of a board is better than the alternative. (Laughlin likes fist gloves, I don't. So what! He is not forcing me to use them. I'm not forcing him not to.)
You said that L. discredits using paddles. I gave you a quote showing that he supports using paddles. Why did you go off on a tangent about tubes, when we were talking about paddles?
You said that L. discredits dryland training, including the incline bench. I gave you a quote showing that he supports dryland training, free weights, and presumably the incline (bench) press. You then fail to admit your error, and go off about swim benches.
Why do you keep using someone's swimming speed as a measure of the quality of their ideas? Does that mean that anyone less than the world record holder should be discounted as a quack? The best swimmers don't necessarily make the best coaches, and vice versa. The only question is how well the method maximizes your potential. I'm sure you have read enough quotes about people in their middle years swimming faster than they did in high school, after trying TI. (That didn't work for you or people you know, fine. Just don't discount that it does work for a lot of people.)
You talked about someone's race-speed workout being necessary 1+ times a week. (Sorry, I don't have the quote handy.) That's somewhere around 15-20% of the weekly swimming, right? I look back to the TI section on workouts, and lo and behold, he suggests between 0-30% of the workout should be sprint/race speed. There is nothing in TI that contradicts swimming with fast speed (as long as you are not letting your stroke go to hell).
In closing, the problem I have had with your arguments is that when I go back to the source material, the "problems" are not there. If you want to argue that some/many people are misinterpreting TI, or not following all of the steps (like increasing the SR after working on SL, like Laughlin *explicitly* states), I'm all in agreement. If you want to point out which key steps they are missing, great. But make sure you have the right reasons!
Ion, I used the rolling eyes, because I thought it would be overkill to use my next choice. I'll use it now. :mad:
(If you want the last word, I promise not to respond further. I think we would agree that this side-thread is dying out.)
Originally posted by Ion Beza
There is no mistake in the TI book, in page 48, about what 'pause' is:
"Leave your hand extended before starting to pull back."
Yeah, but there is a problem when you take it out of context. Reread that section. He is talking to Rear-Quadrant swimmers, who do not know how it feels to be a FQS. He is describing a drill. He mentions "pause" as part of a mantra to think of, only if the person starts pulling back before having a grip on the water.
That is why I included the quote, later in the lessons, about anchoring your hands. Presumably, the swimmer is now comfortable with FQS, and is informed what to do while the arm is extended.
"Catching" the water is sculling with the hand to build a vortex of water around the hand. The sensation is pressure on the palm of the hand. It is a common enough expression on these boards, it did not occur to me that you did not understand the reference.
You keep bringing up Ervin. His stroke length in the 100 Free is consistent with the field. In the 50, his stroke frequency is slower than the average college swimmer back in 1982. I don't see how he supports your argument. (His stoke length is much longer that the "average" swimmer, but he has a comparable SR.)
You mention a single swim that you had. Way to give something different a fair chance. And as I mentioned, if you are pausing as long as I suspect, then you are not doing it right.
I have found other studies, besides Laughlin and Colwin, that support SL being more important than SR for getting faster, in general. If that doesn't work for you, or some people, fine. It is nice to know that your technique doesn't need any more improvement. But that doesn't discount the fact that it is true for most people. (Most people, as it shows up in the studies.)
Originally posted by Ion Beza
The sections discrediting cross training benefits of kicking with a board, pulling with paddles, dry land training -for example on an inclined bench-, are naive.
Let's take these in order:
So lot's of people use boards. So what! (Didn't your mother ever ask you if everyone was going to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge, would you?) The question was not whether kicking with boards is better than not kicking at all. Laughlin mentioned a disadvantage to using boards, and suggested kicking without. You have yet to mention a reason why the use of a board is better than the alternative. (Laughlin likes fist gloves, I don't. So what! He is not forcing me to use them. I'm not forcing him not to.)
You said that L. discredits using paddles. I gave you a quote showing that he supports using paddles. Why did you go off on a tangent about tubes, when we were talking about paddles?
You said that L. discredits dryland training, including the incline bench. I gave you a quote showing that he supports dryland training, free weights, and presumably the incline (bench) press. You then fail to admit your error, and go off about swim benches.
Why do you keep using someone's swimming speed as a measure of the quality of their ideas? Does that mean that anyone less than the world record holder should be discounted as a quack? The best swimmers don't necessarily make the best coaches, and vice versa. The only question is how well the method maximizes your potential. I'm sure you have read enough quotes about people in their middle years swimming faster than they did in high school, after trying TI. (That didn't work for you or people you know, fine. Just don't discount that it does work for a lot of people.)
You talked about someone's race-speed workout being necessary 1+ times a week. (Sorry, I don't have the quote handy.) That's somewhere around 15-20% of the weekly swimming, right? I look back to the TI section on workouts, and lo and behold, he suggests between 0-30% of the workout should be sprint/race speed. There is nothing in TI that contradicts swimming with fast speed (as long as you are not letting your stroke go to hell).
In closing, the problem I have had with your arguments is that when I go back to the source material, the "problems" are not there. If you want to argue that some/many people are misinterpreting TI, or not following all of the steps (like increasing the SR after working on SL, like Laughlin *explicitly* states), I'm all in agreement. If you want to point out which key steps they are missing, great. But make sure you have the right reasons!
