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
Let's see Mark, your last post.
1. "He is describing a drill.".
No, he is not describing a drill.
The page 48 reads at the top "Done right, FQS is...", and goes on with the "Enter, e-x-t-e-n-d, pause, and pull.", as this being the quintessence of the FQS to do it right.
It is how one practices that one races.
2. "Catching the water is sculling with the hand to build a vortex
of water around the hand.".
and
"...it did not occur to me that you did not understand the reference.".
Catching the water well extended and with the least pause, does increase the rate.
and
Pseudo science, style "...the arm should be in front to reduce extra drag." by you -alike to the statement that I am making up now of 'This function reduces friction by minimizing the extra wake' which I can coin in order to 'explain' a practice-, is a pedant 'explanation', and needs to be de-bunked by common sense and physics.
3. "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...".
Lets look at this link:
www.usswim.org/.../template.pl
It compares Hall (US) and Ervin (US), winners of the 50 free in the 2000 Olympics.
Under "Break it Down: By the Numbers" there are two charts with their race statistics, correct?
Hall has a breakout of 2.03 seconds, while Ervin has a breakout of 2.39 seconds.
This means that Ervin stayed underwater after the dive an extra 0.36 seconds compared to Hall, and more than that compared to "...several others in the race." as claimed in the article.
This means that Ervin had to swim freestyle less distance out of the 50 meter (i.e. 50 - 7.75), than Hall (50 - 7.5) and "...several others...".
How is he swimming the smaller distance?
In 39 strokes like Hall, so with a higher arm turnover rate than Hall, in order to squeeze the same 39 strokes into a smaller space.
In 2.17 Distance per Cycle, a smaller length than 2.18 by Hall.
Conclusion: Ervin's stroke was more rushed than Hall's, to tie him.
However, the stats are close for both of them, since Mike Bottom is coaching the two with similar workouts.
4. "It is nice to know that your technique doesn't need any more improvement.".
This is your claim, not mine.
Good luck with your claim.
My claim is that TI doesn't know what I need.
5. "You have yet to mention a reason why kicking with a board is better than the alternative."
and
"I gave ou a quote showing that he supports..." "...presumably the inclined (bench) press...".
I did, remember?
Originally posted by Ion Beza
This claim is from the Total Immersion book and can go back to the book, to stay in there:
there is training of calf, hamstring and quadriceps muscles by kicking with a board, an imperfect simulation since swimming uses kicking in a slightily different position, but a cross training nonetheless;
of course kicking without a board and with your "...head in line with your spine and looking down...", simulates kicking for swimming better, but it can be practiced less;
my own kick is leg muscles developed with a board;
coaches who see me swimming long distance, praise my strong kicking all the way;
for the reason of strenghtening leg muscles, US Swimming programs are doing lots of kicking with a board;
in the 'Coaching' section of this Forum, there is a thread about positives from kicking with a board.
and
again, I re-post TI page 201, "Swim Benches" "My advice is, save your money.".
Just a selective memory for you Mark?
6. Achievements as a former swimmer or as a current coach are a yardstick to determine the quality of 'what works'.
7. Race-pace recommended in the thread 'TI advice: length vs rate' to be at least one workout per week, gives you only the flavor.
For a stronger flavor of this, I already wrote that Jochums, coach of the 2002 US Team at the Pan Pacific Games, states more drastically than I do the meaning of drills.
"In workout, we fix technique at race speed, not in drills. I don't believe in drills.".
This is mostly all race pace.
8) You superficially jump on stating that I make unsupported claims, without enough studying and recalling the posts.
I reiterate my opinion:
technique goes beyond TI's belief of stroke length, and stroke length itself goes beyond TI's belief of how stroke length is obtained;
it seems to me that stroke length is not a goal for fast swimming, rather is a consequence of fast swimming, with the cause of fast swimming yet to be determined.
Let's see Mark, your last post.
1. "He is describing a drill.".
No, he is not describing a drill.
The page 48 reads at the top "Done right, FQS is...", and goes on with the "Enter, e-x-t-e-n-d, pause, and pull.", as this being the quintessence of the FQS to do it right.
It is how one practices that one races.
2. "Catching the water is sculling with the hand to build a vortex
of water around the hand.".
and
"...it did not occur to me that you did not understand the reference.".
Catching the water well extended and with the least pause, does increase the rate.
and
Pseudo science, style "...the arm should be in front to reduce extra drag." by you -alike to the statement that I am making up now of 'This function reduces friction by minimizing the extra wake' which I can coin in order to 'explain' a practice-, is a pedant 'explanation', and needs to be de-bunked by common sense and physics.
3. "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...".
Lets look at this link:
www.usswim.org/.../template.pl
It compares Hall (US) and Ervin (US), winners of the 50 free in the 2000 Olympics.
Under "Break it Down: By the Numbers" there are two charts with their race statistics, correct?
Hall has a breakout of 2.03 seconds, while Ervin has a breakout of 2.39 seconds.
This means that Ervin stayed underwater after the dive an extra 0.36 seconds compared to Hall, and more than that compared to "...several others in the race." as claimed in the article.
This means that Ervin had to swim freestyle less distance out of the 50 meter (i.e. 50 - 7.75), than Hall (50 - 7.5) and "...several others...".
How is he swimming the smaller distance?
In 39 strokes like Hall, so with a higher arm turnover rate than Hall, in order to squeeze the same 39 strokes into a smaller space.
In 2.17 Distance per Cycle, a smaller length than 2.18 by Hall.
Conclusion: Ervin's stroke was more rushed than Hall's, to tie him.
However, the stats are close for both of them, since Mike Bottom is coaching the two with similar workouts.
4. "It is nice to know that your technique doesn't need any more improvement.".
This is your claim, not mine.
Good luck with your claim.
My claim is that TI doesn't know what I need.
5. "You have yet to mention a reason why kicking with a board is better than the alternative."
and
"I gave ou a quote showing that he supports..." "...presumably the inclined (bench) press...".
I did, remember?
Originally posted by Ion Beza
This claim is from the Total Immersion book and can go back to the book, to stay in there:
there is training of calf, hamstring and quadriceps muscles by kicking with a board, an imperfect simulation since swimming uses kicking in a slightily different position, but a cross training nonetheless;
of course kicking without a board and with your "...head in line with your spine and looking down...", simulates kicking for swimming better, but it can be practiced less;
my own kick is leg muscles developed with a board;
coaches who see me swimming long distance, praise my strong kicking all the way;
for the reason of strenghtening leg muscles, US Swimming programs are doing lots of kicking with a board;
in the 'Coaching' section of this Forum, there is a thread about positives from kicking with a board.
and
again, I re-post TI page 201, "Swim Benches" "My advice is, save your money.".
Just a selective memory for you Mark?
6. Achievements as a former swimmer or as a current coach are a yardstick to determine the quality of 'what works'.
7. Race-pace recommended in the thread 'TI advice: length vs rate' to be at least one workout per week, gives you only the flavor.
For a stronger flavor of this, I already wrote that Jochums, coach of the 2002 US Team at the Pan Pacific Games, states more drastically than I do the meaning of drills.
"In workout, we fix technique at race speed, not in drills. I don't believe in drills.".
This is mostly all race pace.
8) You superficially jump on stating that I make unsupported claims, without enough studying and recalling the posts.
I reiterate my opinion:
technique goes beyond TI's belief of stroke length, and stroke length itself goes beyond TI's belief of how stroke length is obtained;
it seems to me that stroke length is not a goal for fast swimming, rather is a consequence of fast swimming, with the cause of fast swimming yet to be determined.
