I suspect many people (myself included) view the arm
recovery in freestyle as time to give the recovering arm
muscles a little rest.
But consider the possible advantages of working the recovery
a bit harder. (This is at speeds less than sprinting)
(a) The recovering arm could be back in streamline sooner
so less form drag.
(b) The recovering arm will be more free of bubbles
when beginning the catch,
(c) The recovered arm can begin to catch as soon as
the pushing arm leaves the water.
(d) The energy cost of a fast recovery isn't that high.
The recovering arm moves through air not dense water.
(e) Front quadrant swimming is still achieved without introducing
any delay in the pulling arm i.e. you are not waiting
for the recovering arm to "catch-up" before staring the
pull.
Any Comments?!?
It seems like what you are describing is pretty standard FQS. Maybe I'm still not getting it, but to me it seems like any increase in recovery speed will actually increase the "catch-up" delay because your pulling speed is fixed. In other words, if the pull and recovery took exactly the same amount of time there would be no delay, and as the recovery becomes shorter relative to the pull the catch-up delay increases.
I don't know about the reduction in trapped air at the catch. It seems like when I speed up my turnover (and, thus, my recovery speed) I'm trapping more air.
Interesting link, George, but it doesn't really seem to address what you said. What I get out of it is that we propel ourselves in the water by applying a force against the water. To swim faster you need to maximize the force against the water while transferring as little kinetic energy to the water as possible since moving the water backward is "wasted energy." In swimmers or coaches terminology this would mean don't let your hand "slip" during the pull.
I think that the speed of your recovery should be directly proportional to your stroke turnover rate. As you increase your speed/stroke turnover your recovery will automatically adjust.
Originally posted by 330man
I think that the speed of your recovery should be directly proportional to your stroke turnover rate. As you increase your speed/stroke turnover your recovery will automatically adjust.
The point that I was trying to make was that at a given
stroke rate the speed of the above water recovery could be increased, the underwater propulsive part of the stroke would take the same time. The phase of the stroke that would see a time increase is the underwater reach foward or stretch of the recovering arm before the start of the next stroke.
Yes. I don't understand your A or B. Please clarify what you mean by these.
Sorry I think I could have phased A and B better, here
is what I'm trying to say:
Compare two arm recoveries, one slow, one fast.
Assume the underwater part of the stroke takes
the same time. In the fast recovery the recovering arm
can be returned to the water and placed in a
streamlined position for longer than with a slower easier
recovery. Placing the arm in a streamlined position for
longer has the benefits of (a) reducing form drag for longer.
(b) bubbles trapped by the hand entering the water
have more time to escape, leading to a stronger pull.
Originally posted by free142
Any Comments?!?
I think we doth try to complicate the arm movement, 40 years ago it was suggested to go directly to the catch and not extend the arm in front. Which would certanly pick up the speed of the stroke. It makes the stroke count go up and instead of going 60 strokes a minute the swimmers could go 85 strokes a minute, and the arms did not get tired with the high reves.
To me to pick up reves it is only necessary to roll your shoulders faster.
Have you attempted to implement this change in your stroke? It sounds to me like it would create a significant imbalance in your overall swimming. To me, body rotation is linked to recovery and the pull. Accelerating only one of these motions will affect the other two in ways that I am unsure of, although I predict the results will be less than stellar.
Yes I did do it but it was to rest the arms and take the reves up but was combined with the direct to catch, hand entered slightly above the head and directly to the catch. I swam past other swimmers and there coaches wondered how I was able to turnover so fast at the 20 mile mark on a 28 mile race. Buck Dawson www.ishof.org/86wdawson.html said I went by his swimmer doing 85 strokes a minute.
Originally posted by geochuck
Yes I did do it but it was to rest the arms and take the reves up but was combined with the direct to catch hand entered slightly above the head and directly to the catch. I swam past other swimmers and there coaches wondered how I was able to turnover so fast at the 20 mile mark on a 28 mile race. Buck Dawson said I went by his swimmer doing 85 strokes a minute. I can see what you are talking about here but the original poster is suggesting that the stroke rate remain the same. Only the recovery would be accelerated in his theoretical stroke modification. The stroke you are reffering to is actually quite common in sprinters, no?
