Stroke Rate vs Stroke Length, which is more difficult?
Former Member
This topic may have been discussed in the past but a search gave too many hits. I am very interested by your comment and advices for the following real scenario. This is for kids but may be this could apply to masters. BTW, I am just a parent swimmer, very interested in swimming in general but unfortunately not a good enough swimmer.
Two age group swimmers (11-12 years old) coming from different swimming history have opposite swimming style:
Swimmer 1 (let's call the higher stroke rate swimmer) swims 50 meters freestyle, taking 60 strokes. Swimmer2 does it in 45 strokes, with a time 0.5 to 1 second slower.
In general, Swimmer1 beats Swimmer2 in all distances (freestyle and back). Including a 2000 meter freestyle test set, faster by about 20 seconds. In this particular 2000m, aside the time and stroke rate, Swimmer2 (slower stroke rate) did it with even splits while Swimmer1 positive splits toward the last 25% of the distance.
Q1. Assuming two swimmers have similar aerobic conditions, which one will have better margin of progression? More exactly, would it be "easier" for Swimmer1 to improve the technique or for Swimmer2 to improve the Stroke Rate?
Q2. What would you recommend to these swimmers to get better?
To these two swimmers, stroke rate seems to be the winning bet. Swimmer2 was taught with a focus on excellent technique (and indeed looks better in the water), but is confused as this skill doesn't translate into better performance.
Of course, we are talking about SL and SR relative to a context where the swimmers already know about swimming.
Thanks you in advance for your help.
Parents
Former Member
I want to thank you, Terry, for your analogies. I truly "get" what you are trying to say. But, and you know me, there is usually a "but" in there somewhere as I continue to search for answers to the ongoing debate about how to swim well and the most correct methods for achieving both speed and correctness of stroke.
We all know icebergs only float and the oceans take them where currents roam. I guess if they had propulsion other than a piece falling off causing them to move a little faster, I would better understand the 90% factor. The fish factor you used to describe minimizing drag is probably most true, but fish only swim underwater, not on the water. Sure, their design is very aerodynamic and ours isn't, so they would be faster because they are both underwater and very tapered so drag is probably not a factor.
I guess I have a question and that is why does swimming low in the water (TI) minimize drag? versus swimming higher in the water? If a swimmer swims low, the water rolls over the head onto the shoulders, so far-so good, but when they turn to breathe, the shoulder has to roll which causes turbulence. If a swimmer uses hip rotation and not shoulder roll, the rotation to turn to breathe is 50% less because the swimmer is on their side (aerodynamics here) but their shoulder stays in place out front. Because of this, how can a TI swimmer increase their stroke rate with shoulder roll and underwater turbulence? Excessive shoulder roll causes people to sway back and forth; I've seen it and it is not something that would aid them in swimming faster.
I know part of this may be for another thread, but it does have great impact on Stroke Rate vs. Stroke Length and so many people are trying to figure out which is best to use, a combination somehow of them, and how to accomplish a higher SR or great SL.
I'll take swimming high on the water any day of the week because it will at least allow for a higher stroke rate if I want to implement it. To me, there would be way too much drag swimming low the way you describe because there would be too much underwater turbulence from shoulder roll for me to have a faster recovery.
Donna
I want to thank you, Terry, for your analogies. I truly "get" what you are trying to say. But, and you know me, there is usually a "but" in there somewhere as I continue to search for answers to the ongoing debate about how to swim well and the most correct methods for achieving both speed and correctness of stroke.
We all know icebergs only float and the oceans take them where currents roam. I guess if they had propulsion other than a piece falling off causing them to move a little faster, I would better understand the 90% factor. The fish factor you used to describe minimizing drag is probably most true, but fish only swim underwater, not on the water. Sure, their design is very aerodynamic and ours isn't, so they would be faster because they are both underwater and very tapered so drag is probably not a factor.
I guess I have a question and that is why does swimming low in the water (TI) minimize drag? versus swimming higher in the water? If a swimmer swims low, the water rolls over the head onto the shoulders, so far-so good, but when they turn to breathe, the shoulder has to roll which causes turbulence. If a swimmer uses hip rotation and not shoulder roll, the rotation to turn to breathe is 50% less because the swimmer is on their side (aerodynamics here) but their shoulder stays in place out front. Because of this, how can a TI swimmer increase their stroke rate with shoulder roll and underwater turbulence? Excessive shoulder roll causes people to sway back and forth; I've seen it and it is not something that would aid them in swimming faster.
I know part of this may be for another thread, but it does have great impact on Stroke Rate vs. Stroke Length and so many people are trying to figure out which is best to use, a combination somehow of them, and how to accomplish a higher SR or great SL.
I'll take swimming high on the water any day of the week because it will at least allow for a higher stroke rate if I want to implement it. To me, there would be way too much drag swimming low the way you describe because there would be too much underwater turbulence from shoulder roll for me to have a faster recovery.
Donna
