Are shoulder injuries due solely to improper stroke mechanics

This is a straw man question. No one - including me - has made this claim. Lindsay has framed the question properly: 1. Are there techniques that materially immunize you from shoulder problems while allowing maximum performance? OR 2. Is there a trade-off between sound technique and "high performance?" My reply is an emphatic YES to the first and NO to the second. Terry: You clearly stated on another thread that shoulder injuries were due "primarily" or "principally" or "mostly" to improper technique. I'd have to look back for the exact quote. I've seen this "straw man" accusation before. But it doesn't matter because I like the way Lindsay rephrased the questions and I withdraw the objectionable word "solely." I think you need to provide more than an "emphatic yes" to #1 though. I'm particularly curious why, when I already have sound technique in fly, it still hurts my shoulders. I don't think there's much I could do to "immunize" myself with better technique. It seems much more likely that fly simply is hard on shoulders and that, to continue doing it at a high level, I instead should concentrate even more on strenghtening my RC muscles and never get lazy. Or else I will be falling in the "trade off" category. I don't mean to be argumentative, but I just don't like the view that technique solves virtually everything. I did readily agree that it solves many shoulder problems. In fact, I myself have been called the drill queen for obsessively doing drills to ensure proper technique. But when you embrace the position that technique solves "almost all" problems, I get nervous and feel like I'm being offered the proverbial fountain of youth or snake oil or something.

This is a straw man question. No one - including me - has made this claim. Lindsay has framed the question properly: 1. Are there techniques that materially immunize you from shoulder problems while allowing maximum performance? OR 2. Is there a trade-off between sound technique and "high performance?" My reply is an emphatic YES to the first and NO to the second. Terry: You clearly stated on another thread that shoulder injuries were due "primarily" or "principally" or "mostly" to improper technique. I'd have to look back for the exact quote. I've seen this "straw man" accusation before. But it doesn't matter because I like the way Lindsay rephrased the questions and I withdraw the objectionable word "solely." I think you need to provide more than an "emphatic yes" to #1 though. I'm particularly curious why, when I already have sound technique in fly, it still hurts my shoulders. I don't think there's much I could do to "immunize" myself with better technique. It seems much more likely that fly simply is hard on shoulders and that, to continue doing it at a high level, I instead should concentrate even more on strenghtening my RC muscles and never get lazy. Or else I will be falling in the "trade off" category. I don't mean to be argumentative, but I just don't like the view that technique solves virtually everything. I did readily agree that it solves many shoulder problems. In fact, I myself have been called the drill queen for obsessively doing drills to ensure proper technique. But when you embrace the position that technique solves "almost all" problems, I get nervous and feel like I'm being offered the proverbial fountain of youth or snake oil or something.