1-
One event that's purely and simply R.T. (Reaction times).
Men' and Women's, of course, with nothing but a start
off the blocks. Not even a race to the 15m mark or the 10m
mark. Just the electronic R.T. And the start would not be
influenced by a competitor thinking about SDKs, entry or
anything else. Do you think we might get to see anything
below the 0.65s (that occasionally happened in Melbourne 2007)?
2-
An 8x200 IM-Relay
Yes it seems self-contradictory but here's how I see it:
4 Women and 4 Men on each (National or Club-depending on the
event) team. Each of the eight swimmers swims a 200 I.M.
i.e., Fly (off the blocks, of course), Back, ***, Free (so the
hand-offs are always Free to Fly).
The order in which the eight team-members go, would be left to the
coaches (i.e., not W/M/W/M/W/M/W/M or any such like all Women followed by all Men) but purely strategic.
It would be interesting to follow this 1600m as the lead(s) will change,
quite a few times I surmise, during the course of those 15 plus minutes,
especially if done in a World or Olympic event.
Parents
Former Member
DanSad;86166
How does relay strategy really work? It's seem like it's only about peception during the course of the race. If you have four swimmers, (swimmer A swims a 50 sec 100, swimmer B swims a 52 sec 100, swimmer C swims a 48 sec 100, swimmer D swims a 50 sec 100 ), it would seem as though no matter how you rearrange the order they should still swim a 400 in 200 sec. Is it that if your order them so that you're losing during the first half you can hope to get a better time out of your last 2 swimmers because they're trying harder to catch up? Or that if you put your faster 2 swimmers first you demoralize the opposing teams?
'Xactly. Because of what you said in your last two sentences.
The total of 200 secs works on paper based on recorded PBs and estimates but not on the psychology of the individuals, but you -as the coach- know that if you put swimmer A as the starter you'll get 50secs 99% of the time, but if he jumps in trailing an opponent, he's such a fighter that you might be able to get a mid-to-low 49 out of him. In that sense, relays are a game of chess.
South Africa did not open with Schoeman and suffered, for example.
:2cents:
DanSad;86166
How does relay strategy really work? It's seem like it's only about peception during the course of the race. If you have four swimmers, (swimmer A swims a 50 sec 100, swimmer B swims a 52 sec 100, swimmer C swims a 48 sec 100, swimmer D swims a 50 sec 100 ), it would seem as though no matter how you rearrange the order they should still swim a 400 in 200 sec. Is it that if your order them so that you're losing during the first half you can hope to get a better time out of your last 2 swimmers because they're trying harder to catch up? Or that if you put your faster 2 swimmers first you demoralize the opposing teams?
'Xactly. Because of what you said in your last two sentences.
The total of 200 secs works on paper based on recorded PBs and estimates but not on the psychology of the individuals, but you -as the coach- know that if you put swimmer A as the starter you'll get 50secs 99% of the time, but if he jumps in trailing an opponent, he's such a fighter that you might be able to get a mid-to-low 49 out of him. In that sense, relays are a game of chess.
South Africa did not open with Schoeman and suffered, for example.
:2cents:
