Originally posted by Paul Smith
Here's the deal folks...forget about weights...if you REALLY want to make a significant break through in your swimming relative to competition stop swimming for 4-8 weeks and go to kick only workouts...as you ease back into swimming you will have the opportunity to "learn" how to integrate a new and powerful element to your stroke...something that 90% of the swimmers I see competing do not do well....
This really caught my attention. I seem to have been hearing this a lot lately: people coming back after a shoulder op, doing kick only workouts and then having their best seasons ever.
I don't doubt the authenticity of it either. I am just interested on what is actually going on. Why should this be the case?
Has anyone ever scientifically measured the amount the kick contributes to forward propulsion? I mean ratio wise, compared to the arms, what would it be? 80% arms : 20% legs?
What about the swimmers who are great kickers in workouts but can't translate it into faster swimming?
How do we actually integrate the kick into our swimming so that it becomes a new and powerful element to our stroke as Paul suggests?
Would it be fair to say that a big part of the improvement these (post op/ focus on kicking )swimmers achieve can be attributed to the strengthened core which is a result of the additional kicking. In other words more credit given to the strengthened core than increased forward propulsion.
I don't know. I just throw out these ideas for discussion.
Syd
Kirk, you are so out of my league I have to ask if you have been hitting the :drink::drink: 5:01?! :bow: What's your 1650 or 1000 time? I'm still thinking that you're out of my league here too. What does the winner get? Loser suffers public humiliation?
Think of it this way, if I lose I face the humiliation of being "beaten by a girl."
My fastest 1650 is a 17:48. That was at last year's Nationals and not the greatest swim. I haven't really swam a 1000, but my fastest 800 long course is a 9:24.
I could give you five seconds or something for the 500, but then it would be really embarrassing if I lost straight-up!
Kirk, you are so out of my league I have to ask if you have been hitting the :drink::drink: 5:01?! :bow: What's your 1650 or 1000 time? I'm still thinking that you're out of my league here too. What does the winner get? Loser suffers public humiliation?
Think of it this way, if I lose I face the humiliation of being "beaten by a girl."
My fastest 1650 is a 17:48. That was at last year's Nationals and not the greatest swim. I haven't really swam a 1000, but my fastest 800 long course is a 9:24.
I could give you five seconds or something for the 500, but then it would be really embarrassing if I lost straight-up!