Hypoxic Advice/Workouts--Not Your opinion of Hypox Efficacy

Google Scholar is Google, or more accurately a subset of Google. If you want an independent research search engine I’d recommend Scopus. But we have seemed to drift far a field of the threads request for advice on hypoxic sets. How about returning this hijacked thread. And if you must continue, start another thread.

I disagree this is any sort of hijacking, that's incorrect. First, JH stated his opinion (agree with Fort), and one that contradicts what most of us have been coached our whole lives, like it or hate it. When pressed on this, he quotes a partial article he got from a Google Scholar search (a service of google, owned by google). Then, he states he's done quite a bit of reading on the subject. To top it off he is now quoting other poster's quotes as his ammo. Where's the beef? I do not believe it is hijacking to press a person on such assertions, especially when that person consistently holds himself out as some sort of swimming maverick with a power lifting plan to improve your swimming. Therefore, if someone asks for hypoxic sets and JH says they are pointless, there is no hijacking to challenge that assertion in order to return the thread to its intended purpose.

Ah yes, weird. Weird like "that's weird he makes assertions and then tries to find proof afterwards by posting partial articles" or weird like "I'm right, most coaches are wrong, including most legendary coaches out there" or weird like "wow, someone is really stepping up and calling me out?" Lots of holes in your articles, most notably they refer to a short term study of bicyclists. Use your googling powers and show some swimming studies. Lots of weirdness out there, I agree totally, Capt. Google.

I'm presenting scholarly research articles. On biking, for 4 -7 weeks.

Geek, we've seen two articles in this thread supporting the point of view that hypoxic training doesn't cause additional adaptations. What I see here are articles (apparently) supporting the hypothesis that hypoxic training doesn't add anything to the oxygen-utilization capacity that swimmers are already training with other exercises. What I don't see here is any discussion of how hypoxic training as described early in the thread can, or cannot, serve the other purposes people have identified: (1) reinforcing breath control skills (which are oh-so-important in the last few turns of a 200 when your brain is screaming at you to surface before the flags and breathe already); (2) getting the heart rate up without taxing the muscles, as one might want to do during a taper; (3) focusing on stroke efficiency and highlighting the effects of inefficiency. I would tend to agree that any breath-control sets I do aren't contributing much or anything to my aerobic fitness, but they definitely help with my ability to stay underwater off turns. And although I work on that skill somewhat with every turn and even more in speed-focused sets, the occasional breath-control set helps me achieve that desperate sense of needing to breathe, and train myself to ignore it just a bit, without the muscular fatigue that speedwork or racing causes. So I don't think those sets are useless, even though they don't very much resemble what I do in a race, because they isolate a component of racing and work on that one component intensively. And seeing as how such sets do encourage stroke efficiency, I don't think that they reinforce bad habits either.

We had the following one in college, if anyone tries it, watch out for The Beast. 666 - 6 x 100 @ 1:20 100's to be done sub :60, @ :60 inhale for 6 seconds, @ 1:06 hold breath for 6 seconds, @ 1:12 exhale for 6 seconds, repeat at 1:20. Oh, what fun we had... Breathing is overrated! Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, NO! Holy Crabcakes! LOL Did you miss the part where I said "Starting Point?" :) That would be the "Ending Point" for me I think! hehehe

I really don't get the point of holding your breath for long sets. That's a completely useless skill for racing. A while ago I decided that I always wanted to swim the 50 free without breathing. All I had to do was swim a 50 without breathing every once in a while and I had the skill down. No need to do any long hypoxic sets.

What, other than your own personal observations and feelings, do you have to support this statement? I don't think anyone has identified a unique physiological response in the lungs or the muscles to hypoxic training. A quick search on Google Scholar found me an article titled Intermittent Hypoxic Training: Fact and Fancy, which has this to say: ... rather than intensifying the training stimulus, training at altitude or under hypoxia leads to the opposite effect - reduced speeds, reduced power output, reduced oxygen flux - and therefore is not likely to provide any advantage for a well-trained athlete. So really the only thing you would need hypoxic training for is to learn a specific breath-holding skill, which is to say that you want to create a nervous system adaptation rather than a lung/muscle adaptation. I can think of two important breath-holding skills for swimming: the 50 freestyle and underwater dolphin kicking. Neither one of these are very similar to the kinds of sets people usually do for their hypoxic training.

This might be of value... jap.physiology.org/.../733 ...but I have not had the time to read through it.

I really don't get the point of holding your breath for long sets.Which part don’t you get? Long sets or breath holding or both. “I don't think anyone has identified a unique physiological response in the lungs or the muscles to hypoxic training.” And if you would do a little more googling you will find quite a few articles providing specific benefit in the lungs or the muscles to hypoxic training. But obviously you are entitles to yor opinion on this subject so keep doing what works for you.