Much has been discussed on this topic but i wanted to revisit it after watching the track & field championships and remembering debates about how much pool training time swimmers put in relative to a runner competing in the equivalent event (a 400m runner to 100m swimmer).
What got my attention on this again was a recent article in Men's Fitness about Jeremy Wariner, specifically his training week during mid-season:
M= 200's: 8 x 200's two minutes followed by 40 yd sprints w/20 seconds rest
T= 350m: 2 x 350's followed by 1 x 300, one minute rest then a 100m to simulate the end of the race
W= 450m: 2 x 450's each under 1:00 with 9 minutes rest between each
Th= 90m: Recovery day each run in an "X" pattern
F= 100m: last run of the week is multiple 100m sprints
That's an insanely lower amount of training time than even i put in....Ande & Jazz come to mind.
More of this in an excellent article:
"Elite coaching special - Clyde Hart coach to Michael Johnson and Jeremy Wariner"
Here's are a couple of excerpt:
Clyde believes the principles of training are the same for many events: "I trained Michael Johnson like I trained a four minute miler. A four minute miler was doing a lot of the same things Michael Johnson was - a lot of the same things in training but more of them.
"The longest workout we have ever done - not counting warm up and warm down - would be under 20min, I think we have never worked more than 20min. That's not counting the Fall phase.”
So here's my challenge...I'm going to pick one of the next seasons (either SCM this fall or SCY in the spring) and try and adapt to this regime...anyone else game?
I know the answer for myself...I train far less than the masters swimmers I know/train with. However I have never gone all the way so to speak to this level of "quality"...and the prospect of a 4 month test is very intriguing.
I hope that by train, you are referring to pure water work? Because I recall discussions at SCY Nats where you described all the activities you engage in and most of them would fall under, at least for me, the definition of training.
I hope that by train, you are referring to pure water work? Because I recall discussions at SCY Nats where you described all the activities you engage in and most of them would fall under, at least for me, the definition of training.
I put in a max of about 10,000m a week..usually closer to 6000-8000m. However I have not gone to this level of "quality" work...and this experiment would mean stopping weights/cycling.
I would do something like;
6 weeks of base training = more of the 10,000m weeks but lower intensity.
7 weeks low volume/high intensity training ala Wariner
3 week "taper"
Only cross-training/dry land would be yoga 3x a week
This is quite the interesting post. I like the thought of doing a workout similar to world class track and field sprinters. Unfortunately, doing a workout like that is not realistic in the swimming world for a few reasons. First, aerobic work has huge health benefits and should be done by everyone.
Second and more pertinent to this discussion, sprinters in swimming are not exclusively fast twitchers. The velocity of movement for swimmers is lower than for sprint runners. Sprinters in track and field move their legs so fast that slow twitch fibers can't make a contribution. There is no reason to put an emphasis on aerobic work. In swimming, the velocity of movement with the arms is much slower. The lats are by their very nature slow twitch fibers. Aerobic work needs to be done and contributes to each event, even 50’s and 100’s.
I can remember the fastest sprinters in my section when swimming high school were also the best 500 swimmers. Heck, the section record holder in the 500 averaged each 100 faster than many could sprint a single 100. The only event this guy could not win was the 50. He was beat out by a pure sprinter, who spent much less time getting in yards.
So for swimming, if you want to put in minimal yardage, you could be a great 50 swimmer, maybe an ok 100 swimmer, and mediocre at everything else. Or you can train huge amounts of yardage and be pretty damn good at every event, even the 50. You may not win the 50, but you can come pretty close.
I wouldn't think so, as in that case you're dividing both the distance (200 -> 50) and the number (10 -> 4) so you're reducing it by much more than a factor of 4.
Oops, I meant ten 50's. Still not alot of swimming. So let's see, that's 500 yds for the main set and 800 yard warmup for a grand total of 1300 yards for the day.
Others have gone down this road - consider the tale of Dr. George Schmidt, an optometric physician practicing in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida:
www.usms.org/.../index.php
His views on diet supplements also are interesting ...
Very inspirational! This guy is smokin' fast!
And for those of us who don't have a Div I swimming background to pull on?
Hofffam - Your opinion reeks of middle-distance/distance swimming snobbery. A high school boy is not mediocre if he swims a 23 or 24 in 50 free, especially considering that it may be his first year swimming and he may participate in other sports. Also, there are boys that are primarily 500 swimmers that do a high 21 or low 22 in 50 free. A 21 for a 15 year old is not mediocre. Also, there are boys that are pure sprinters that do a 21 in 50 free that will beat the 500 guy that does a high 21 or low 22. The 500 guy is still good in a 50.
Also, according to Dan Benardot in his book, Nutrition for Serious Athletes, in a swim lasting 25 seconds, up to 20% of the energy source is aerobic. Good luck convincing a swim coach that aerobic training for a guy specializing in a 50 has no value whatsoever.
That's funny. I am not a middle distance swimmer. I have been around high school swimming in Texas for years now. A 23-24 second 50 free is a solid time but common. An elite male high school 50 free is low 21 to low 20s. None of these swims are by 500 free swimmers. Yes a few good 500 swimmers will go 22 sec 50s, but not many. I suggest that a 500 swimmer who swims 21 secs is probably not a 500 swimmer but a 200 swimmer.
I am merely suggesting that the good 500 free swimmer that is also good at the 50 is probably good because of great stroke mechanics - not because their aerobic capacity helps them in the 50.
Many articles confirm the nearly pure anerobic nature of a 25 second race (whatever the sport). One good one:
www.brianmac.co.uk/energy.htm
And I never said nor do I believe aerobic training has no value to a sprinter. It is useful and probably required for the 100. It is also helpful in surviving workouts. Aerobic work also helps keep body fat down. But I agree with the original premise of this post - that if racing speed for sprints is a priority - then aerobic training has minimal value.
Interval training began with track - and swimming adopted it later. Elite track sprinters almost never run slow in practice except for warmup and warmdown. I have read that some of this is due to a fear by coaches that the number of short twitch fibers is fixed at a certain age and cannot be increased. So the training is optimized to develop the short twitch fibers. Longer training sets emphasize slow twitch fibers.
My splits on that 500 were absolutely terrible. I was holding great splits in practice, but I got excited at the meet and took it out way too fast.
Here's how one of the 19 year olds that I swim with at Swim Atlanta split his swims this summer (his dad emailed me the results). He went best times across the board. Beautiful splitting. He happens to really race in practice when it's time to do so. I'll never go that fast; however, I'd love to be able to swim/ split like this.
400 m free
4:26.9
Splits:
1:05.2
1:07.7
1:06.9
1:06.7
200 m free
2:07.2
Splits:
30.7
32.3
32.2
32.1
800 m free
9:21.1
Splits:
4:40.4
4:40.7
I hope that by train, you are referring to pure water work? Because I recall discussions at SCY Nats where you described all the activities you engage in and most of them would fall under, at least for me, the definition of training.
I was thinking about this before. What's training and what's not?
Swimming: Yes, obviously.
Hot tub: Yes, obviously.
Weights: Mostly yes, unless working on my guns for the ladies.
Bicycling: Commuting is great preparation for warmup at Nationals.
Walking: I walk with extreme intensity, so yes.
Arguing on USMS forums: Finger endurance is crucial.
LSD-enhanced race visualization: Maybe. Did I just admit to PED use?
Jazz, thanks for letting us know you did the 500. Out in :54 and back in 1:05+?
My splits on that 500 were absolutely terrible. I was holding great splits in practice, but I got excited at the meet and took it out way too fast.
This is quite the interesting post. I like the thought of doing a workout similar to world class track and field sprinters. Unfortunately, doing a workout like that is not realistic in the swimming world for a few reasons. First, aerobic work has huge health benefits and should be done by everyone.
Second and more pertinent to this discussion, sprinters in swimming are not exclusively fast twitchers. The velocity of movement for swimmers is lower than for sprint runners. Sprinters in track and field move their legs so fast that slow twitch fibers can't make a contribution. There is no reason to put an emphasis on aerobic work. In swimming, the velocity of movement with the arms is much slower. The lats are by their very nature slow twitch fibers. Aerobic work needs to be done and contributes to each event, even 50’s and 100’s.
I can remember the fastest sprinters in my section when swimming high school were also the best 500 swimmers. Heck, the section record holder in the 500 averaged each 100 faster than many could sprint a single 100. The only event this guy could not win was the 50. He was beat out by a pure sprinter, who spent much less time getting in yards.
So for swimming, if you want to put in minimal yardage, you could be a great 50 swimmer, maybe an ok 100 swimmer, and mediocre at everything else. Or you can train huge amounts of yardage and be pretty damn good at every event, even the 50. You may not win the 50, but you can come pretty close.
I think your post is mostly incorrect. A 50 yd race is about 25 secs long. Based on sources of energy - this race is completed using energy exclusively from stored glycogen. Aerobic training probably contributes near zero to the 50.
The 500 swimmers you mention were probably very good at the 50 relative to their peers because their peers weren't very good. These 500 swimmers were probably very fine swimmers they weren't REALLY that good in the 50. They had great stroke mechanics becuase they swam A LOT. Many high school sprinters are powerful and lightly trained. Lots of mediocre high school boys can swim a 23-24 sec 50 because they are strong and explosive.
