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.
My next book, "Less is More: Endurance Swimming for Every Body" is under way, but I'll probably do a book on fast swimming later in 2007.
Terry:
This is great news. If you address swimming fast for sprint and endurance folks, maybe you'll conquer the world.
Do you have to call it "Less is More" though? That sounds like it's for the newbies. It also kinda sounds like "effortless," a word almost no one seems to like. What about "Efficiency is More?" I do understand that "Less is More" is a catchier marketing phrase. But how is "endurance" work "less" effort? I guess it's less effort if you do if "efficiently." But endurance work is hard work. Oh well, make sure you tell folks how to increase their SRs if they're sprinting. :)
Fish:
Very funny! I think everyone and their mother swims the 50 free. It's always got the most heats in every meet I've attended. I swim it quite a bit too, but, because it's so popular, I almost prefer to do something else on principle.
My next book, "Less is More: Endurance Swimming for Every Body" is under way, but I'll probably do a book on fast swimming later in 2007.
Terry:
This is great news. If you address swimming fast for sprint and endurance folks, maybe you'll conquer the world.
Do you have to call it "Less is More" though? That sounds like it's for the newbies. It also kinda sounds like "effortless," a word almost no one seems to like. What about "Efficiency is More?" I do understand that "Less is More" is a catchier marketing phrase. But how is "endurance" work "less" effort? I guess it's less effort if you do if "efficiently." But endurance work is hard work. Oh well, make sure you tell folks how to increase their SRs if they're sprinting. :)
Fish:
Very funny! I think everyone and their mother swims the 50 free. It's always got the most heats in every meet I've attended. I swim it quite a bit too, but, because it's so popular, I almost prefer to do something else on principle.
