How much endurance training?

Once I had a discussion with my meet director over a Masters meet. She was critiquing somebody saying to the effect that they should just lighten up, it was "just" Masters swimming. The individual in question was in fact in the swimming profession and his livelihood depended on having some respect as a competitor who could "walk the walk". So why should he "lighten up" when her decisions (which were breaking some USMS rules) could affect his status as an expert ? As serious as amateur competitors can be, it takes it up to an entire new level if swimming is how you support yourself & family. I don't understand your point. Was the coach asking him to do something illegal? Explain. It's also a different thing to lighten up on a discussion forum as opposed to lighten up on the job. And if lightening up means to stop criticizing others, isn't that a good thing? Or is someone making their living in swimming always right and given free rein to criticize with their own criticism beyond challenge? As for "walking the walk," no one's stopping Terry. We've heard about his workouts, his times, and his LD records often. The workouts in particular are pretty interesting. So we believe he is a successful masters swimmer. I believe there are other coaches and former coaches on this forum as well as Terry. Yet they don't seem to draw fire. I don't think it's only because of Terry's purportedly revolutionary theories (which a lot seem to like), I think it's because of the way he conveys them. So, whilst he is making his living, he should be more mindful of how he comes across in his profession. He also might wonder if this is the best place to go off on a shoulder or other "crusade" when he already knows that most people don't agree with him on this issue. (No one agreed with him on shoulders as I recall.) It makes one wonder if he is taking his profession seriously when he intentionally courts controversy and then acts defensely when it's at his door. He seems to almost like being the victim of frequent attacks, which makes one wonder again if he's provoking them. It's possible, also, that even though swimming is his profession, that sometimes he's right and sometimes he's wrong. Just saying it's possible now.

Congratulations on having achieved the perfect stroke. This is not what I meant by lighten up. Try some of these :thhbbb: :banana: :rofl: :joker: :groovy: :dedhorse: . Even Dave uses :thhbbb: to great effect. I don't mind getting a :thhbbb: once in awhile. No one would ever claim to have the perfect stroke. I know I don't. That's why I'm the drill queen. And that's why we're trying to decide how much time should be spent on perfecting the stroke and how much time should be focused on endurance training if one wants to do well at nationals. That was Gull's original question, which you very nicely said was "to the point." I guess Gull used to be one of the "usual suspects," but now he's "to the point." I have also seen Gull use humor on many occasions.

Sometimes, when dealing with disagreements it is helpful to completely cut out all references to one's "opponent" and just make one's point based purely on its merits. Getting personal just creates an unpleasant atmosphere that isn't fun for anyone. My :2cents: This is very true, Lindsay. Unfortunately, the ability to hit the quote button makes it readily apparent who you are referring to. So how much is solved? I think it was Terry, BTW, who first referred to the "usual suspects." So, I'm not sure who you're referring to in your post (perhaps it's all), but if you're defending him, some people find his manner the cause of unpleasantry. :2cents: Perhaps your comment about "opponents" refers to Fortress' post, but, if so, she seemed like she very much wanted not to be his "enemy" with all her numerous and repeated TI-loving posts.

I think Allen probably understood that I wasn't protesting his characterization but using it as an occasion to point up a useful distinction...if only to me and no one else. A revolutionary can simply be a bomb-thrower. It can also be someone who helps bring about positive change. I grasped that Allen meant more the latter than the former. But I also hoped to clarify that my object is not simply to bring about change for change's sake -- which is not unimportant, considering how often my posts are perceived as attacks on prevailing practice. In saying that my intent is more accurately to "rationalize" swimming I was saying that I try to provide a rational basis upon which any swimmer can base any decision or answer any question. Is that revolutionary? Depends on your point of view. My experience over 40 years of swimming, coaching and observing is that, while there have always been many good information sources, a good deal of the decision-making that goes on every day by millions of people in thousands of pools is heavily based on "folklore," custom, or imitating what others do. If I can seem humor-deprived, guilty as charged I suppose. I'm thought to have a decent sense of humor in "real life." But I don't write about swimming for self-amusement or as a hobby. It's my profession, even my "calling." Is it a fair assumption that you might post differently on a legal forum than you do here? Just because it's a Masters forum doesn't suggest to me that my approach should be any less serious. I and a good number of the people I swim with several evenings a week are far more purposeful and examined in our approach than the age groupers Dave and I also coach. So when the point of a thread gets muddled by unproductive semantical scraps I feel like its informational potential has been hurt. MASTERS implies fun ... If every single stroke I took was mindful and I was always building my engine and swimming neurally I'd go nuts. I swim now because well I am VERY competitive by nature I also love the team atmosphere and want to have fun swimming ... Leave the serious stuff for the elite USS swimmers ... RELAX a bit ... have fun, you'll find you have much more fun here if you don't take yourself so darn seriously!

I grasped that Allen meant more the latter than the former.... My experience over 40 years of swimming, coaching and observing is that, while there have always been many good information sources, a good deal of the decision-making that goes on every day by millions of people in thousands of pools is heavily based on "folklore," custom, or imitating what others do. So when the point of a thread gets muddled by unproductive semantical scraps I feel like its informational potential has been hurt. I'm glad you're so good with "grasping" and "intuiting" what others mean. If this was true, maybe you would realize that others are also competent enough to "grasp" things or hold valid opinions even without 40 years of coaching experience. As for the boo boos and scraps hurting "information potential," I'm not concerned. Sometimes humor and relaxation from "examination" can relieve stress too, as you know from reading Dave's article -- which you peevishly pointed out endorsed "mindfulness," thereby reducing the informational value of that thread. :thhbbb: To quote Tall Paul, "anyone who's swimming MASTERS should not be coping an elitist attitude." As to legal forums, I am sure they must exist, but I have no desire to go there. The law can be a dull profession at times. (I'm sure swim coach is more exciting and rewarding.) Or maybe they're all cattily discussing the recent scandal about the former Chief Justice Rhenquist's drug addiction, revealed through recent FOIA requests. I don't know. I'd rather pop on and off of my hobby website while working on my profession. Variety is the spice of life.

It's also a different thing to lighten up on a discussion forum as opposed to lighten up on the job. And if lightening up means to stop criticizing others, isn't that a good thing? Or is someone making their living in swimming always right? Discussion forum, book, clinic, swim meet -- it can still be all about somebody's expertise in their profession. If lightening up means to stop criticizing others, that's fine. I'm talking about the flip side where somebody's being attacked. What "isn't a big deal" to you can be a big deal to somebody whose professional expertise is attacked. Can we recognize the differences in what's at stake, follow the rules, and play nice ? We don't have to agree. The case I mentioned was a professional just asking for fair treatment per the rules and was insulted by a meet director who trivialized him while denying him his rights. She just did not understand that there is a big spectrum in Masters swimming between casual and committed people.

I don't think anyone will make any drastic changes to swimming until the new technology of the super fast torpedoes is developed, they are going to be surounded by air pockets so they will travel underwater at speeds faster than sound. So the transformers and revolutinizing folks better get working on making bigger pools so no one gets injured or get a faster moving endless pool. Breaststroke was revolutionized by the nose clip (nose plugs). Chet J www.ishof.org/.../77cjastremski.html I met Chet in the 50s and he was really unhappy he could not do the 56 Olympics.

Discussion forum, book, clinic, swim meet -- it can still be all about somebody's expertise in their profession. If lightening up means to stop criticizing others, that's fine. I'm talking about the flip side where somebody's being attacked. What "isn't a big deal" to you can be a big deal to somebody whose professional expertise is attacked. The case I mentioned was a professional just asking for fair treatment per the rules and was insulted by a meet director who trivialized him while denying him his rights. She just did not understand that there is a big spectrum in Masters swimming between casual and committed people. I still don't understand the gist of your post. Is Terry the only one being attacked here? It didn't seem so to me. He doesn't just "criticize" either. I've seen him with pistol in hand. And does it follow that the rest of us are of no moment and can therefore be attacked? I didn't say it "wasn't a big deal to me" not to get attacked. Although it isn't. I'm just a new OW swimmer. But it does seem like no one really wants to be attacked, even the joksters. It also seems like it might be a "big deal" to some people here who are personally, not professionally, attacked. Are personal attacks really any better or somehow more justified because someone's in a profession? Not following this line of thinking. I still think Terry sets himself up a revolutionary crusader with his self-professed "grandiosity" complex. Since this is a discussion forum (not a swim meet with a rules handbook), then he is open to comment and criticism and possible "attack" about his crusades if he launches them on this forum and derides other theories. It's better to be civil about it of course, but I don't see why Terry is immune just because he's a professional. Donna is a past Olmypian, teaches swimming and is undertaking a swim to raise money for charity. Is she entitled to less deference than Terry? And I still don't understand your point about the professoinal being insulted at his meet. What rights was he denied that trivialized him? Why was he trivialized? I agree that some masters swimmers are more committed than others. So what? Masters swimming is not a profession. It is a pasttime and passion and voluntary thing. But even if it were or if "walking the walk" were considered part of a "profession," does that make any difference in who attacks who? I don't believe so. This whole notion is odd to me. Sounds like you just got hot about the guy you knew who was apparently not treated right. But I still think everyone is entitled to equal treatment here, with special deference accorded no one.

Hey, George, Even though I have found my "perfect stroke", I may actually, during the very long swim, make some changes to survive what the ocean may throw at me. So, I will never say never. Not only may I have to roll more, I may even have the wonderful opportunity of skipping breaths!! What fun, can't wait.!! But overall, I am very comfortable with how I swim, it feels "good" and "natural" for now. But in a general way, I don't plan on any more technical changes; only changes when the ocean gets angry, if she gets angry, on my long one. I hope to raise monies for Alzheimers because my mom is in the last stage of this dreadful disease. I plan on building a website shortly for the contributions that some companies in the states have signed up for. So starting January 15th, right after my 59th birthday, training starts for the long swim and will continue up to 3 weeks before the swim as I will be tapering. This is probably going to be the most difficult thing I have ever done; the training will probably be more difficult (both physical and mental) for 18 months in duration, so the swim itself may actually be a relief. So I am going after mega-distance and intensity training and interval training for a very long time. But I have to do this; I just hope my mom is still alive before the swim takes place, but if not, it will be in her honor. And Terry, you have a lot to offer people in the way of knowledge but please remember, sometimes it is not as important to be right as it is to be happy. Being humble, to me, is what makes a champion. How about it folks? back to endurance training vs technique, or with one of my latest replies, how much endurance is enough? Of course that will depend on the distances....Let the discussion continue. Your friend, Donna

Back to Endurance Training - I just got out of the pool 8 x 100 at aerobic speed and 2 x 25 butterfly. Thats all the endurance I could muster today.