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
Parents
Former Member
Okay, that's it.
Swimming high or low IS something that we have control over; maybe you can't do it so you convince others it is a waste of time. And hydroplaning does occur under speeds of 33mph. You are not telling the entire story here. A vessel has to be defined first for its length, width, height, volume, displacement and weight. You are completely categorizing because you think no one is listening closely enough. Swimming high on the water is not a waste of energy; it moves you forward faster than the TI method. You know this and you won't fess up. And let's suppose you are right about the extra energy thing here it takes to swim high on the water, are you saying your swimmers are not strong enough to swim on top of the water? I would suggest you train your swimmers to be stronger. Instead, are you putting thoughts into them that these things are not necessary? I think everyone would disagree with this including Michael Phelps.
And the experiments you run only give you the results you want to put in your book to make money and not in an honest way. And the human body composition rests with not 5%, but 19%. Who are you talking to? Yourself?
Now, I may give you some leadway on the swim aids, but I know for a fact that short Zoomer fins increased my leg strength for backstroke. And pull buoys do have a purpose for many. Maybe the problem is you have found no benefit from these things so you dispell them to everyone. But since you are against them, it would be of little value to even tell you why I think they are important. But just because you have never had any success with swim aids, doesn't mean they are without benefit. Give your swimmers options, Terry, not just what you think based on the fact that you could not make them successful for you. I have body balance with or without a buoy; most of the swimmers I know do also. You are speaking as if no one is an experienced swimmer and they are so much of a stepford-wife that they just go along with what you say.
Somebody is giving you really bad information.
The EVF thing is another problem I have. I also have a huge problem with the high intensity training. You are totally misleading people about these things because, for some reason, you couldn't do it yourself. This is the only thing I can think of as to why you would not encourage these two other things.
You can speak of West Point and the Army, and Novak, and whomever else you want to name-drop. But what I am listening to is what you are telling people now and you are misleading them. Stroke technique is crucial, but so is high-intensity training and some of the swim aids help with the inner-body training we all need. But if you want to swim slow, go for it.
I am really sorry that you have not been successful in your swimming career and I think because of this, you are trying to invent a revolutionary new way of swimming to get the pats on the back. You know, the something new thing.
And, you almost had me in your corner until you started quoting things that are absolutely untrue but figments of your imagination to be "different" and to try to sell it as so. Now, I totally disagree with you. But this will mean nothing to you because I am that "clydesdale" with no merit. Ha!
I'm done here. Your ego supersedes your talent.
The Clydesdale from Honduras
Okay, that's it.
Swimming high or low IS something that we have control over; maybe you can't do it so you convince others it is a waste of time. And hydroplaning does occur under speeds of 33mph. You are not telling the entire story here. A vessel has to be defined first for its length, width, height, volume, displacement and weight. You are completely categorizing because you think no one is listening closely enough. Swimming high on the water is not a waste of energy; it moves you forward faster than the TI method. You know this and you won't fess up. And let's suppose you are right about the extra energy thing here it takes to swim high on the water, are you saying your swimmers are not strong enough to swim on top of the water? I would suggest you train your swimmers to be stronger. Instead, are you putting thoughts into them that these things are not necessary? I think everyone would disagree with this including Michael Phelps.
And the experiments you run only give you the results you want to put in your book to make money and not in an honest way. And the human body composition rests with not 5%, but 19%. Who are you talking to? Yourself?
Now, I may give you some leadway on the swim aids, but I know for a fact that short Zoomer fins increased my leg strength for backstroke. And pull buoys do have a purpose for many. Maybe the problem is you have found no benefit from these things so you dispell them to everyone. But since you are against them, it would be of little value to even tell you why I think they are important. But just because you have never had any success with swim aids, doesn't mean they are without benefit. Give your swimmers options, Terry, not just what you think based on the fact that you could not make them successful for you. I have body balance with or without a buoy; most of the swimmers I know do also. You are speaking as if no one is an experienced swimmer and they are so much of a stepford-wife that they just go along with what you say.
Somebody is giving you really bad information.
The EVF thing is another problem I have. I also have a huge problem with the high intensity training. You are totally misleading people about these things because, for some reason, you couldn't do it yourself. This is the only thing I can think of as to why you would not encourage these two other things.
You can speak of West Point and the Army, and Novak, and whomever else you want to name-drop. But what I am listening to is what you are telling people now and you are misleading them. Stroke technique is crucial, but so is high-intensity training and some of the swim aids help with the inner-body training we all need. But if you want to swim slow, go for it.
I am really sorry that you have not been successful in your swimming career and I think because of this, you are trying to invent a revolutionary new way of swimming to get the pats on the back. You know, the something new thing.
And, you almost had me in your corner until you started quoting things that are absolutely untrue but figments of your imagination to be "different" and to try to sell it as so. Now, I totally disagree with you. But this will mean nothing to you because I am that "clydesdale" with no merit. Ha!
I'm done here. Your ego supersedes your talent.
The Clydesdale from Honduras
