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,
There are two kinds of coaches.
The first coach is one who expects the swimmer to work up to that swimmer's potential and encourages the swimmer through the moments when the swimmer does not want to do something or is behaving in an immature manner and needs a push. These coach's nuture all ages of swimmers.
The second coach is brutal and uses unethical methods to make the swimmer swim fast. These coach's coach for their own personal power and gratification.
Most age group coachs fall into the first category. Some elite coachs fall into the second.
There are also two kinds of swimmers (athletes):
The first is coachable, asks how they can be better swimmers, challenges themselves, finds ways to improve.
The second swimmer (athlete) always has an answer to why they are right and everyone else (including the coach) is wrong.
No body likes to coach the second kind of swimmer. Everyone likes to coach the first kind of swimmer.
Paul
My final post on this issue:
Wow, that generated a lot more discussion than expected. We've established many points and I like to hear what other people are thinking, and their reasoning behind such thought.
Not everyone fits the same mold, we have to be sure to cater to the individual swimmers as they progress.
TI is a nice package to use to teach beginning and novice swimmers, but we must be sure as coaches not to get tied into "TI is swimming gospel" mentality. As someone so well pointed out, truly quality coaches know they don't know everything and are constantly looking for information to absorb and pass on, no matter the source.
Some of the best coaches in the nation are coaches of 6-10 year olds who pass them on to the "more experienced" junior and senior level coaches. Surely they have yet to experience coaching an actual at-the-time Olympic-level swimmer. Does that reduce their credibility? Absolutely not. And they would probably be more than capable of coaching anyone at any other level as well.
Take care everyone.
-RM
Paul writes:
" In my opinion, the best coaches are often the coaches of beginner swimmers. These coaches have to mold completely raw talent into swimmers, fix mistakes that are common to every beginner swimmers, "
Paul hit the nail on the head with that statement. I've sat on the sideline here...regarding the different techniques used to teach swimming because I am not knowledgeable or qualified to address myself to this issue. Having said that, I do know from experience that MANY GREAT coaches live and work everyday all over this great nation of ours...quietly teaching our kids (and Masters) how to swim, compete, goal setting, discipline and most improtantly..how to be winners both in and out of the pool.
So, when we talk and write of coaching...I believe we need to understand how much we...as swimmers...are in debt to these silent coaches who work among us each day utilizing many diverse methods of instruction...teaching our children life’s lessons….along with stroke mechanics...of one method or another.
It has been my experience in life that very few absolutes exist. What works for one swimmer may NEVER work for another...Perhaps no one is right…or wrong…
Lastly, most of these swim coaches who silently work among us each day… doing a superb job..do so with very little monetary compensation. They have my profound respect!
In the quote by Wayne I wasn't really thinking about mistakes such as lifting the head up on the finish. Those can obviously be improved. I was thinking more about swimming styles that are not according to the currently accepted wisdom. In the past, one of the best examples is the criticism of Mark Spitz - "he would be faster if he kept is body steady and did not roll so much."
In the recent past is the style of Janet Evans, which has been criticized. Now there are many swimmers that have divergent styles, Brooke Bennett is one. Another is Hoogie (I can't remember how to spell his name) who has an extreme non-symmetry in his stroke from left to right. At least naively, these strokes are not "TI approved" but I think criticism of them is foolish and biased. Obviously, these strokes are quite fast, and something is being done that is right.
The issue of coming up to early after the turn is in between these two extremes. I can imagine body shapes and skill sets that make surfacing early the best (fastest) way to swim. Whether that is true or not for Ervin I don't know.
Ion, I don't see any harm using a kickboard in breastroke. Its never made my kick worst. My weakness in *** has been more of the armpull. Back in the 1970's most teams kick with kickboards for all the strokes. Ed Moses only swims a 100 meter about 3 seconds faster than John Hencken. Granted there has been a bigger drop in lady times since Cathy Carr did a 1:13 and M Quinn swam a 1:06 in the 2,000 olympics, but I doubt it has to done with using a kickboard in workouts,maybe I'm wrong.
Hi, guys and gals.........
I'm retired and all done with coaching now, but I still have a brain (of sorts). T/I, and almost all other technique guides, are very valuable. The problem arises in trying to fit everyone into one shoe size.(so to speak). Variations in age, height and physical limitations require a lot of experimentation to find the right techniques for different individuals. Coaches have fallen into the trap of teaching only one way to do things for a long, long time.
There are, of course, certain basic skills that all swimmers must possess. After that, stroke technique should be tailored to the individual.
Just my opinion....................:)
Anyways, I read Terry's book. I think he has a biases against breastroke. He tells beginning swimmers that should not swim breastroke in a meet. The first meet I swam as a kid with the best time was breastroke and as a masters swimmer the first meet I just did two breastroke events. Not everyone is a freestyler. As for the methods its mainly aim at freestyle.
One thing that I do agree with the it people is that sometimes swimming a series of shorter distances is better for beginners and master swimmers particularly those of us over 40 years since are stroke is not as likely to breakdown and its helps us to recover better. Yesterday, after swimming 5 x 200 and these where not all freestyle. I switch on the next set tp 25 at either 20 or 22 of them. Some modernate pace and some fast. I also agree for many of us masters that are middle age and older that we can not sprint a lot of the workout like we use to. The It people emphasis stroke ability over doing all short distances at high speed. This may help the stroke and prevents injuries which a lot of sprinting in workout can sometimes cause.
After reviewing my posts on this thread, I don't think I can be accused of spreading misinformation - I am generally supportive of the stroke mechanics that the TI system teaches, and never accused it of taking credit for things that are not unique to it. To ask questions is not to spread misinformation.
While I have nothing but the highest respect for Emmett, I am disappointed by his post. To refute misinformation by simply calling it wrong is of little utility. Of even less value is the implied claim that only those who are fully experienced and trained in the TI method are capable of criticizing it. If that were true it would require a near total commitment to decide if the whole program was worthwhile to commit to. A person must decide that a program is worthwhile to learn before learning it! It also implies that only the most experienced trainers have the knowledge to support the method - I don't think Terry or Emmett would agree with that!
One refuted claim is that TI teaches only one method. I don't believe that it does, but I would be interested in a discussion about some of the better swimmers with 'odd' strokes and how their strokes are not contrary to TI principles. For example, where does 'lope' (strong left-right asymmetry, many olympic or world record holders have it) fit into the TI principles? Would a learning swimmer be discouraged from this technique, or for some swimmers would it be recommended, and how would the instructor know to recommend it?
Other swimmers, particularly female distance swimmers, do not have the extended glide that seems to be recommended in TI. An example would be Brooke Bennett. Since this kind of stroke seems to be typical of certain physiologies, why is that? When should it be taught?
I still have problems with the 'rotation initiated from the hip' TI paradigm. Contrary to this theory, others have made the observation that certain good swimmers - Thorp and DeBruin are examples, have minimum hip rotation, but quite a lot of shoulder rotation. In addition, careful examination of tapes shows me, at least, that often the shoulders rotate before the hips. It looks like the shoulder rotation drags the hips around because of limited rotational flexibility between the hips and the shoulders. Am I wrong? Why? Why is it that when fins are put on good swimmers have even less hip rotation than they do with no fins? Isn't the kick stronger with fins, causing more rotation?
Is cause being confused with effect? That is, hips rotate in good swimmers, so it must be the cause of good swimming? Perhaps they rotate because of the limited flexibility - if the swimmers were to keep the hips flat, the shoulders could not rotate as far? That would mean that the hips should just 'get out of the way' rather than starting the rotation.
I would like a clear distinction between things taught as learning aids, and what is really happening physiologically. If hips should be free to rotate to allow sufficient shoulder rotation, it may be useful to teach learners to rotate from the hip, because it helps them let the hips rotate. But it does not make it true that rotation is really initiated from the hips. When I took ballet, we were told a lot of things that may have been useful for visualization, but had little physical validity. They were good for training, but what really happens?
Given the history of 'swimming style' instruction, we should all be skeptical of the latest theories (before my generation, they taught that the most force was transferred to the water with straight arms (more distance for the hands to travel through (and thus push) the water), in my generation we were taught the 'S' pull, and now they teach . . ). Even more important, the people that sell the theories (literally and figuratively) should be willing to back up their claims and theories with extensive scientific and case studies.
And especially not get defensive about criticism and questions from both the knowledgeable and less knowledgeable.
I'm done now - for the moment.
