A question about technique vs strength

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Former Member — Tue, 05 Nov 2019 17:11:29 GMT

It's technique in my honest opinion. But it would be better if you have mid level strength.

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Former Member — Fri, 25 Oct 2019 16:26:39 GMT

At one point there had been 19 deaths during triathlons (not awful considering how many triathlons there were). 18 had happened during the swimming portion of the events. So, yeah, you can lose big-time with the swimming. Big OOOOPS! As our president says "FAKE NEWS." I just checked my numbers. There's a wikipedia page about this en.wikipedia.org/.../List_of_triathlon_fatalities I did a very quick hand count - after sorting by event - and got 117 swimming deaths out of 164 total deaths. So 1) a lot more deaths than I reported. 2) A lot lower percentage from swimming. (Perhaps my earlier figures were about the Ironman race in Oahu,Hawaii, where they have, like, real waves.) Still, swimming is the shortest event, and accounts for 71% of the deaths. It's dangerous. Still "lose big time."

RE: A question about technique vs strength

ForceDJ — Fri, 25 Oct 2019 09:30:33 GMT

Just because we're alway on the water, Mike, doesn't mean we all (sailors) can swim. Seriously though...to this day it baffles me when active duty sailors show up at the pool who can't swim to save their life. When I went to boot camp...you didn't get out of boot camp until you could swim. I did the Air Force bike-computer test once when I was stationed at an USAF installation. My score was off the chart. Literally. In the Navy 500yd swims for the PRT...my best ever was 6:02. Usually I was around 6:15-6:30. I always max'd out the test score with a perfect 300. Dan

RE: A question about technique vs strength

mjtyson — Fri, 25 Oct 2019 09:02:03 GMT

During my Navy career I frequently held the collateral duty of my command/department's fitness coordinator. The main part of that duty is to administer the periodic Physical Readiness Test (PRT). The physical portion(s) of the test are (or were when I was in) push-up, sit-ups, and choice of either a 1.5 mile run, or a 500 yd/450m swim. At one duty station there were a couple guys in my department that were generally in very good physical condition. They were 'muscle heads'...concentrated on lifting weights. But they always passed the PRT with above average scores doing the 1.5 mile run. But one test cycle they decided they were going to do the swim instead. They could "swim" but weren't swimmers. They actually said to me that they figured they could "muscle their way through the 500 yards." They wanted to prove something. I tried to talk them out of it. They had too much muscle to keep themselves afloat with their lack of technique. I couldn't get through to them. So, they waited until the last day of the test cycle. They showed up at the pool ready to swim. After just one lap it was OBVIOUS they weren't going to make the 500 yards in the allotted time...if they were going to finish at all (without drowning). Of course they failed. I, as the fitness coordinator, authorized one additional test...for the 1.5 mile run...just for these to knuckleheads...so that I wouldn't end up with two otherwise physically fit sailors on the remedial fitness program. Dan This is so funny to me. While stationed with a unit that included all four services, during a time when the Air Force "PT test" was sitting on a bike hooked up to a computer, I decided to take all the other services' PT tests. Mostly to shut them up with their "haha, Air Force "PT". You gonna go sit on a bike for 10 minutes, Mike?" For the Navy test, I decided to do the 500y swim. I was 30 years old and hadn't started masters swimming yet (that was still 5 years off), but I knew how to swim, and would swim "for exercise" every once in a while. I did okay on the push-ups (55) and sit-ups (my worst event, 45), and prepared to swim. The Navy Chief in charge of the test made a big public showing of explaining to "the Air Force guy" what 500 yards meant in the SCY pool, giving me good-natured intra-service joshing about not being able to fly between the walls or walking the lane instead of swimming. I just smiled. Nine minutes and 33 seconds later, I hopped out of the pool, the fastest swimmer that day. (Turned out the fastest swimmer that year, and for two years beyond that.) The Navy Chief was incredulous, asking the lap counter, in front of me, if she had counted wrong. She (and I) assured him that yes, the "Air Force guy" had swum the 500 yards. A Navy Senior Chief I had been working out with since being stationed there, a former Special Boat Unit guy, proposed to the Commander of the unit to put my name on the unit's "best times" board, to guilt the sailors in to working out and trying to beat the Air Force guy who held the record for the unit. The Commander refused. ;) Fast forward many years and many masters teams and different units later, and at 45 I swam 500 meters in 6:53. Very good for me and very happy. Still can't believe 9:33 was any sort of record among a bunch of sailors!

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Former Member — Fri, 25 Oct 2019 07:40:08 GMT

Big OOOOPS! As our president says "FAKE NEWS." I just checked my numbers. There's a wikipedia page about this en.wikipedia.org/.../List_of_triathlon_fatalities I did a very quick hand count - after sorting by event - and got 117 swimming deaths out of 164 total deaths. So 1) a lot more deaths than I reported. 2) A lot lower percentage from swimming. (Perhaps my earlier figures were about the Ironman race in Oahu,Hawaii, where they have, like, real waves.) Still, swimming is the shortest event, and accounts for 71% of the deaths. It's dangerous. Still "lose big time." In fairness, while a high rate (nearly 3/4 of deaths!), it's also a lot harder for EMS to get to a distressed or drowning swimmer than a runner or cyclist who's collapsed, even in a well organized race with plenty of support. A triathlete goes down on land, you find them, start CPR/treatment, etc. Different story in the water. But I'd bet that technique and familiarity with the water does help keep folks out of distress - or able to plan in case of emergency - in the first place.

RE: A question about technique vs strength

__steve__ — Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:45:24 GMT

Wow, that is surprising. I know the Army's perfect score was an 11:54 for 2 miles, which makes 10.5 for 1.5 miles seem like a walk in the park. NO swim option there, either. This is for the younger crowd, though, so maybe the ages we are discussing are different.I was referring to the time standards in an age group (50-59), well beyond average retirement age, with a minimum standard of like 16 minutes. For an experienced swimmer 500 yds in 8 min is just 9 solid solid turns with good breathing rhythm. Another 30 seconds faster with a shavedown and tech suit.

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Former Member — Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:51:43 GMT

RE: A question about technique vs strength

67King — Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:38:41 GMT

being in the AFR I somewhat envy the Navy’s fitness test option to swim instead of running. In my age group it takes 10.5 min 1.5 mile run to get a perfect score on the aerobic part (I did that once but it was not worth the effort and trauma). The navy standard for perfect score with a swim is about 8 min for a 500m swim. Wow, that is surprising. I know the Army's perfect score was an 11:54 for 2 miles, which makes 10.5 for 1.5 miles seem like a walk in the park. NO swim option there, either. This is for the younger crowd, though, so maybe the ages we are discussing are different.

RE: A question about technique vs strength

orca1946 — Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:26:29 GMT

So true! In H S gyn class, almost all of my swimmers will lap the football and wrestlers in the water after ridicule from them as skinny girls!

RE: A question about technique vs strength

ForceDJ — Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:41:08 GMT

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Former Member — Wed, 23 Oct 2019 06:19:25 GMT

RE: A question about technique vs strength

__steve__ — Wed, 23 Oct 2019 01:50:09 GMT

choice of either a 1.5 mile run, or a 500 yd/450m swim. being in the AFR I somewhat envy the Navy’s fitness test option to swim instead of running. In my age group (50 -54) it takes 10.5 min 1.5 mile run to get a perfect score on the aerobic part (I did that once but it was not worth the effort and trauma). The navy standard for perfect score with a swim is about *8 min for a 500m swim. edited for accuracy: *500 yds (or 450m) in 7:15 (or 7:05)

RE: A question about technique vs strength

__steve__ — Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:33:28 GMT

Another aspect of technique but different to form (I guess) is the feel of water An interesting insight from experience. Thanks My experience is still developing, it dates back just a decade.

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Glenn — Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:20:44 GMT

While an overwhelming number of coached workouts portray conditioning as the most important aspect of swimming, technique is by far the most important. In fact technique is number one, the mental aspect of swimming i.e., race strategy, race plan, visualization, etc is the second most important and conditioning is third in importance. This according to Dr. Brent Rushall, the guru of ULtra Short Race Pace Training.

RE: A question about technique vs strength

orca1946 — Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:16:59 GMT

Definitely technique over sheer strength.Change the sport to pole vaulting and think about it!

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Former Member — Tue, 22 Oct 2019 08:42:44 GMT

. "you may not win with the swim, but you sure can lose with a bad one!" They say that 52.537% of all statistics quoted are made up on the spot.

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Former Member — Tue, 22 Oct 2019 07:25:32 GMT

I really think technique. My strength is terrible, I'm fairly lazy at masters workouts (often get out at 2500 yds to get to work or because I'm beat) and yet I will always have a base speed that comes from technique. Not even great technique, just the basic muscle memory of decades of swimming. I'm sure strength would help me improve but it's easier to work on technique ;)

RE: A question about technique vs strength

smiley92407 — Tue, 22 Oct 2019 04:33:51 GMT

Technique first and always. You will be faster than those with poor technique who muscle their way through the water. Good technique will help you avoid injuries. By having good technique it will be easier to improve.

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Former Member — Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:59:50 GMT

Agree, work on technique and conditioning will happen. Work on conditioning without working on technique and you just get bad habits. Good technique is just much faster than bad. Make sense!

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Former Member — Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:49:01 GMT

I'm 100% in the technique camp. OK, well, maybe 95%, but I have swum competitively for the last ~47 years and spent maybe a max of 5% of my training time focused on strength outside of the pool. If you're looking to swim more efficiently and effectively, focus on technique in the pool, training in the pool ... get that right as the #1 priority. Now, there are other reasons to do "dryland" work for overall health and functional fitness, but don't sacrifice pool technique and swimming as your primary form of training if swimming fast is your primary goal. Patrick Brundage Admittedly, my inner desire is to go your route, as it's more fun :D

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Former Member — Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:44:35 GMT

I tend to agree with 67 above. Some people just don't care much about technique and just want to be moving in order to burn the calories and/or gain the health benefits of exercise. Or, in other words, they are swimming ("moving") for the health benefits and not necessarily to get faster, or more efficient. ... Dan I perfectly understand your point, and those exercisers truly get abundance of health benefits. However, most of the many that I mentioned were practicing for triathlon. They were "training", but with a mindset that all they need to do is to swim continuously without stoping for more and more miles. A few of them earn pretty good 1k PB training this way diligently, although I think that they can go faster if improve technique.

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Former Member — Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:16:03 GMT

When I was in my 40’s lifting weights helped me swim faster. Now that I’m in my 50’s I lift weights to rehabilitate injuries I had in my 40’s from all the trauma I caused neglecting technique. Form is always first and foremost An interesting insight from experience. Definitely something to be aware of.

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Former Member — Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:58:21 GMT

Are you swimming with a team, or solo? ... I find that the two will come together. A good efficient technique absolutely requires good strength. Maintaining it requires stamina. Be patient, it will come, but it will take a couple of years. I swim solo, but mostly not alone in the pool. So I observe and chat with a few others. However, I rarely see them specifically work on technique. I personally feel that I shouldn't ingrain my flawed technique by repeating it over and over. But I also want to get fitter, so a little dilemma. Your conclusion is interesting, and I agree.

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Allen Stark — Mon, 21 Oct 2019 10:47:12 GMT

I'm 100% in the technique camp. OK, well, maybe 95%, but I have swum competitively for the last ~47 years and spent maybe a max of 5% of my training time focused on strength outside of the pool. If you're looking to swim more efficiently and effectively, focus on technique in the pool, training in the pool ... get that right as the #1 priority. Now, there are other reasons to do "dryland" work for overall health and functional fitness, but don't sacrifice pool technique and swimming as your primary form of training if swimming fast is your primary goal. Patrick Brundage Agree, work on technique and conditioning will happen. Work on conditioning without working on technique and you just get bad habits. Good technique is just much faster than bad.

RE: A question about technique vs strength

Patrick W. Brundage — Mon, 21 Oct 2019 10:17:45 GMT