I am interested in knowing what swimming theory you use and why you use it. I hear much about Total Immersion and not just from this forum. I hear much about swimming high on the water slightly looking forward, and I hear much about people developing their own swimming theory best suited for them but using guidelines that help them maintain a technical stroke.
Given all these different theories, it is no wonder that swimmers new to the sport are confused as to whom to listen to.
I borrowed the TI book from a friend a year or so ago, and found several things I agreed with, but more that I didn’t. I am not close-minded, I just cannot find a reason to swim so low in the water with the head looking down. The rolling of the shoulders really concerned me and the fact that so much of the body is low-parallel to the water, this has to increase drag, especially on the shoulders. One thing I will say is most people who swim using TI have beautiful strokes. But, and there is a but, they just don’t swim fast. Maybe I have just been so isolated here on this island that I have not heard of any, but are there any Olympians using TI? Or, will the young-uns using it be our next generation?
There is a USMS club in Fort Worth who advocated TI. Sadly, now they are deconstructing all those methods because no matter what the workout and intensity, their swimmers’ speeds could never develop. I get to speak to many triathlete swimmers here every March. The Elite (professional) swimmers swim high on top of the water looking forward and they use hip rotation, not shoulder rolling. Many of the age-groupers in this event just don’t understand why they are not swimming faster using TI. Now, we all know that most of the triathletes who were swimmers first, and runners and bikers second, always fare better in the swim portion.
I have said this before and I will say it again, there is more than one way to swim. I swim higher on top of the water looking forward, about a yard or two and use hip rotation. The reason for this is picture a person throwing a rock that skims the lake. The rock is flying on top of the water and not in it, so it moves much faster until its momentum ceases. Now, I know people are not rocks, but the principle is founded. Swimming on top of the water generates power and the swimmer can truly feel it. I swim slightly “planed” outward and upward and skim over the water, not in it.
Nowadays, because I am older and carry more weight, I swim not quite as high on the water and this has evolved over the last ten years or so. So even though I started out swimming “high” on the water looking forward, my stroke has become my own personal one that suits me very well. I also want to mention that I am referring to only freestyle here even though with all of my backstroke days, I, again, swam rather “planed” upward because I could get more rotation on top of the water rather than “in” the water.
I am not trying to cause a brou-ha-ha. I am just curious about the swimming theories and why people select them. And after swimming with any specific theory, are you happy with it?
Donna
Leslie, what I took away from the shoulder injury thread was that what was at issue was more than just technique in the sense of the mechanics of swimming a length, there is how one goes about training in general. If shoulder issues are being caused by volume than one can argue that is too much volume for that swimmer at that time, if it being caused by using paddles then that swimmer should not use paddles, etc.. My take on Terry's point is that if the training regimen a swimmer is using causes injuries then it is the wrong training regimen for that swimmer and that "icing" and pain killers are not the way to solve the problem. In the current thread Terry didn't specify that those swimmers were in the injured lane because of bad technique, just training methods that weren't right for them.
To me it is self-evident that if 20% of your team is in the kick-only lane due to injuries that something is wrong with how they are training.
Wait, is this a straw man? ;) I think we've shifted from technique origins to training origins.
What I took away from the previous two shoulder threads was that Terry was fairly insistent that technique was the main/primary culprit. Now, here, you and and maybe Terry have broadened the initial inquiry by suggesting that perhaps both technique and training are the culprits. It is self-evident that such a position is eminently more defensible than the prior one.
Training is a very broad category. I was just focusing on the technique argument in my post, as I was in the two other threads. Obviously, training encompasses many things, including the things that I said could cause shoulder injuries. So some people in that group of 20% who were "sentenced" at the guillotine to kicking could, in addition to having lousy or sub-par technique, have been using paddles, swimming excessive volume, had anatomical issues, hurt themselves weight training, falling off a bike, sleeping wrong or whatever. :frustrated: :frustrated: :frustrated:
No doubt, that college coach was a bad guy while everyone in Terry's camp was a speed demon. I said it before: I'd like to be a speed demon too. :groovy: Since I'm doing a lot of TI-ing, I hope I can be.
Leslie, what I took away from the shoulder injury thread was that what was at issue was more than just technique in the sense of the mechanics of swimming a length, there is how one goes about training in general. If shoulder issues are being caused by volume than one can argue that is too much volume for that swimmer at that time, if it being caused by using paddles then that swimmer should not use paddles, etc.. My take on Terry's point is that if the training regimen a swimmer is using causes injuries then it is the wrong training regimen for that swimmer and that "icing" and pain killers are not the way to solve the problem. In the current thread Terry didn't specify that those swimmers were in the injured lane because of bad technique, just training methods that weren't right for them.
To me it is self-evident that if 20% of your team is in the kick-only lane due to injuries that something is wrong with how they are training.
Wait, is this a straw man? ;) I think we've shifted from technique origins to training origins.
What I took away from the previous two shoulder threads was that Terry was fairly insistent that technique was the main/primary culprit. Now, here, you and and maybe Terry have broadened the initial inquiry by suggesting that perhaps both technique and training are the culprits. It is self-evident that such a position is eminently more defensible than the prior one.
Training is a very broad category. I was just focusing on the technique argument in my post, as I was in the two other threads. Obviously, training encompasses many things, including the things that I said could cause shoulder injuries. So some people in that group of 20% who were "sentenced" at the guillotine to kicking could, in addition to having lousy or sub-par technique, have been using paddles, swimming excessive volume, had anatomical issues, hurt themselves weight training, falling off a bike, sleeping wrong or whatever. :frustrated: :frustrated: :frustrated:
No doubt, that college coach was a bad guy while everyone in Terry's camp was a speed demon. I said it before: I'd like to be a speed demon too. :groovy: Since I'm doing a lot of TI-ing, I hope I can be.
