That sounds reasonable. You can muscle out the shorter races, but inefficiency starts to show in anything longer. If this is the case you obviously need to be working on better technique whenever possible. That should be your number one priority.
I don't think you need to do a lot of fast 200s. Just get that technique down, work on your aerobic base and your 200 speed will improve drastically.
Mr. Nelson...sorry to disagree because your point a bout "muscling shorter races" is a common misperception...but ultimately anyone who "muscles' any distance in our sport will never make it to the top of the rankings or maximize their potential.
I also think he really does need to swim a lot of race pace 200's both in practice (mixing broken and straight) and in meets. I'll get flack from folks on this but I firmly believe that the 200 in any stroke is hands down the most challenging to master....you need to do a LOT of them to get even remotely "comfortable" with the pacing needed.
but ultimately anyone who "muscles' any distance in our sport will never make it to the top of the rankings or maximize their potential.
I agree with this, but my point was his stroke inefficiency may not slow him down as much until he gets to longer distances than a 50. If you're fighting the water you're not going to be able to keep up a good pace for very long.
Mr. Nelson...sorry to disagree because your point a bout "muscling shorter races" is a common misperception...but ultimately anyone who "muscles' any distance in our sport will never make it to the top of the rankings or maximize their potential.
Yeah, I've heard that one a lot and it never made sense. You can muscle your way through a long race, too. That's the whole point of training 10,000 yards a day.
But isn't it the case that a relative newcomer to swimming like Robert or myself can achieve 50m free times in the 30s range by "muscling" our way through it while the same inefficient effort can't be extended out to the 200m range? That inefficient technique will result in bigger drop offs as distance increases?
I have been working on the assumption that my 50m fly wasn't going to get much faster without improving my technique, and that I would never do a decent 100 or 200 without big technique improvements. So I've been concentrating my limited pool time on technique, and concentrating on the 50 distance, am I on the wrong track?
...but ultimately anyone who "muscles' any distance in our sport will never make it to the top of the rankings or maximize their potential.
Does Alain Bernard fit that description? :weightlifter:
Does Alain Bernard fit that description? :weightlifter:
Bernard, despite whatever advantage he may have in "muscle," is an elite swimmer primarily because of his efficiency in the water.
Definite food for thought Ande and Mike, thanks.
I have been trying to work on speed for fly, in fact I'm finding it hard to swim it anything but fast! (relatively speaking) For the last while I've been swimming fly for the stroke parts of workout, skipping lengths as necessary to be able to swim it fast and with good technique.
Why is it that I can qualify for the 50m free, be 6 sec off in the 100, 25 sec off in the 200, and 65 sec off in the 400?
If it were only technique, I would think the percentage to be equal. Conclusions?
you're probably spending too much time on technique
I'd work on speed, SDK and conditioning
But isn't it the case that a relative newcomer to swimming like Robert or myself can achieve 50m free times in the 30s range by "muscling" our way through it while the same inefficient effort can't be extended out to the 200m range? That inefficient technique will result in bigger drop offs as distance increases?
I have been working on the assumption that my 50m fly wasn't going to get much faster without improving my technique, and that I would never do a decent 100 or 200 without big technique improvements. So I've been concentrating my limited pool time on technique, and concentrating on the 50 distance, am I on the wrong track?
you're a drop dead sprinter
Why is it that I can qualify for the 50m free, be 6 sec off in the 100, 25 sec off in the 200, and 65 sec off in the 400?
If it were only technique, I would think the percentage to be equal. Conclusions?
