My great friend, the charming ignoramus Leslie "the Fortess" Livingston, and I recently had the opportunity to bandy about a debate topic in the November issue of Swimmer magazine.
Leslie has asked me to create a poll to see which of us had the more persuasive arguments vis a vis the usefulness of weight lifting to behoove swimming performance.
I tried to talk Leslie out of such a poll, because I wasn't sure her delicate albeit manly temperament could take the likely beat down she would get, vote wise.
After all, her teenage daughter had already proclaimed, in uncertain terms, that she was best off pleading Nolo contendere here (see en.wikipedia.org/.../Nolo_contendere if your legal skills are as atrophied as Leslie's). In her daughter's own words, "He totally owned you, Mom! Like totally! It was so awesome! He's so totally funny, and you are so totally uptight, Mom! I mean, it was like so totally embarrassing how much he owned you! Please tell me I'm adopted! Please tell me Jim Thornton is my real mother!"
Unfortunately, this kind of advanced rhetorical argument on my part fell on deaf ears, just as my advanced rhetorical argument--in which actual studies were cited!--also fell on deaf ears. Evidently, the dear girl has overdone the neck thickening machine, and in the process, mastoid muscle processes seem to have overgrown her ear canals!
I know that not everyone has received their copy of Swimmer yet. Rumor has it that those of us who live in the higher class zip codes get the extra virgin pressed copies, with the rest of you having to wait to the ink starts getting stale.
You will get your copies one day, I assure you! Just as you will get your H1N1 swine flu vaccines dosages when me and my friends at Goldman have had our third inoculations!
But I am getting a bit off the track here.
If you've read our Inane Point (Leslie) - Brilliant Counterpoint (Jim) *** for tat debate, Leslie asks that you vote in this poll for the person you think was RHETORICALLY superior.
Note: this does not mean which of us was right.
Hell, I have already conceded Leslie was right, and have begun weight lifting myself thrice weekly!
I am one bulked up monstrosity of a girly man at this point, and I don't plan to stop till you can bounce quarters off my moobs.
So. Forget all aspects of actual rational correctness here, and certainly forget all aspects of who is more popular.
And vote with your pitiless inner rhetoritician calling the shots.
Leslie, I warned you: Nolo contendere was the smart plea. But no, you just wouldn't hear of it!
Former Member
Besides a romantic fancy for being a purist, aren't I lifting weighs when I'm in the water, moving my hands underneath me?
No, you are not lifting weights when you swim through water, you are swimming through water. Your argument is akin to saying walking is the same thing as lifting weights, since you are over coming air resistance and gravity.
There's a photo of Phelps with six gold medals around his chest, and the Acropolis in the background, and if you look at this thighs... they're HUGE! So this was before the weight room, since he didn't start lifting until after Athens.
No one I have read is making the argument that lifting is a necessity for swimming fast. You can swim fast without lifting weights.
I happen to agree with the Pennsylvanian on this subject. Oh, yes, I do. As a matter of fact, earlier today, my mailman and I were discussing my swimming at length and I later found myself profoundly irritated that he thought I wasn't serious about improvement because I told him I don't lift weights. The nerve of the man!
I agree with your mailman.
I finally got my issue! No contest--Leslie wins. Jim's essay has a lot of bravado, but it needs to hit the gym because it's WEAK! Jim sounds as if All Science is behind him, when all he has is his cute "anecdotal proof" (beating Leslie's time in the 50 Fly), and he has Costill saying that weights "probably" don't help. That Costill's study counts as "well-designed" is debatable.
But I suspect that he only wrote his side to be funny--I don't think he seriously believes in it.
I am not a sprinter, only distance.
I think lifting could help my swimming performances by keeping my shoulders injury free and pain free.
I think lifting will help keep me healthier to0. Anytime you can increase (or maintain) your muscle mass you will have a healthier body composition. This is very important for females 40 and over!
Also............the more muscle mass your body can maintain the more readily it will burn calories during physical exertion. In otherwords you will become a better metabolic machine.
Okay, now I just need to start lifting. :chug: No not a chard glass, weight for heavens sake!
Air resistance and gravity can't hold a candle to water resistance. It's like comparing the speed of light to one of our rockets.
As for the necessity stuff... well, when people tell me I'm not serious because I don't lift, well, that's why I tend to bring up points like how I know my muscle mass has increased since I started swimming (and I haven't lifted a single weight) and the photo of Phelps' thighs. I brought up the point about the photo because I detect an undercurrent of necessity-based thinking and when a user comes along and agrees with my mailman that I'm not serious when I know I'm serious, it confirms my suspicions.
edit: btw, I actually voted Leslie on the poll, but there are points that Jim raises here in the thread that I agree very strongly with and I was referring to those in my previous post. Should've made a distinction earlier, instead of saying "the subject", lol.
Couroboros, I think your statement confounds the argument. No one is asserting that a swimmer will not gain muscle mass, nor is anyone saying the only way to gain muscle mass is through swimming.
The question, I think, is this: Is it possible to devise a weight-training program that will make a person swim faster?
Peer reviewed and current.
www.thefreelibrary.com/Combined strength and endurance training in competitive swimmers.-a0207644280
Being a true dullard, I read this article today. First, it's not an article about just strength training. It is also about the effects of high intensity training. The author's acknowledge that any conclusions are confounded - you can't tell whether improvements are from strength or high intensity training or the combination of the two. That also means the study is of greater interest to people who train that way.
That said . . .
In the 50, the test subjects improved 0.33 seconds. The control group improved 0.19.
In the 100, the test subjects improved 0.95 seconds. The control group improved 0.02.
In the 400, the test subjects improved 4.00 seconds. The control group slowed down by 0.32 seconds.
Which group would you rather be in?
The strength training seemed to be one exercise (after warmup) - a standing lateral pulldown with three sets of five reps at maximum rate, with two to five minutes rest between sets.
I would describe the interval training as 4 by 4 minutes at 90% - sounds basically like 100s at 90%+ of max heart rate, though the study is vague on that detail - followed by three minutes of easy swimming at 60% to 75% max heart rate.
Kind of interesting that the best improvement in times came at the distance closest to a four minute swim (the 400). There was one kid who saw a half-second drop in his or her time in the 50, but it was a couple of days after the study closed.
Finally, the study looks at teenage swimmers. Older swimmers may see a different result.
No one I have read is making the argument that lifting is a necessity for swimming fast. You can swim fast without lifting weights.
I would consider lifting a necessity... In order for me to swim fast I must keep my shoulders heathy and strong. I must do maintenance exercises that include lifting weights or some type of resistance training out of the water. My shoulders get really lax/sloppy and hurt if the muscles that support the area get weak.
If Im in pain then I don't swim fast or at all...
There was a famous psychology experiment done a number of years ago, the particulars of which are somewhat fuzzy in my mind.
But the gist of it was something like this:
The researchers provided twelve subjects with two squares. Objectively speaking, one of these was slightly but nevertheless demonstrably and provably larger than the other one. They then asked the twelve volunteers to discuss amongst themselves and vote on which one was bigger.
What one of the twelve volunteers did not know is that the other eleven were in on the scheme. They had previously been told by the researchers to maintain, calmly and rationally, that the smaller square was, in fact, larger than the big one.
When the discussion began, the "dupe" invariably thought that the others were all joking when they maintained the small square was larger than the bigger one. But over time, the dupe just as invariably came to agree with the others that they were right.
Follow-up interviews later revealed that the dupe, who had been persuaded to ignore the evidence of his or her own eyes, was not just pretending to go along with the herd to be sociable or to avoid conflict. He or she actually became convinced the small one was larger than the big one.
Group think, in other words, trumped rationality. The human tendency to fit in with our peers is so strong that it easily overwhelms our "intelligent" faculties.
I am sure most of you will have no trouble identifying this aspect of our species in a host of different realms, from religious and political nutcasedom, to the ability of aging swimmers to downplay the role of B70s in their racing performance.
As my poll figures continue to slip towards flat lining vis a vis my thoroughly rational suggestion that science has failed to validate weightlifting as a panacea for swimming performance, it occurs to me that this whole thread is nothing but one elaborate experiment!
Admit it! One of our swimming Ph.D. candidates, in search of a perfect thesis topic, has somehow managed to put the USMS membership up to this! Reveal yourself, rascal! I am now on to your fiendish tricks!
I may be the intended dupe, but I am no dupe!
And on this note, I shall continue with my own recently launched weight lifting regimen. But I have no illusions this will help my swimming, though I am cautiously optimistic it might behoove my pathetic pickle jar opening capabilities.
Sorry Jim, but I am going with Leslie on this one. I lifted last year (first time in 30 years) and got faster in all swims. And yes, I was wearing the Lazer...but my 50 fly dropped from 28.1 at Stanford FINA Worlds 2007 to 26.8 this year....that is not all suit.
Besides that, I am much handier around the house being able to open jars of pickles and lift and move furniture previously unimaginable.
What I seriously like about the type of strength training I did (very little heavy lifting) is that my core is much stronger. That means better starts, turns and getting up in the morning doesn't hurt my back so much (except for the morning after strength workout).
Here's to Leslie!
Gary Sr.
What are the chances of my posting after an Olympian and a father of one also? What I thought interesting was the pickle jar opening part. Years ago when my main sport was single tennis playing, I recall that at one time while doing weights my game improved plenty. I wish I had time to do weights and swim. What a coincidence here: Gary and I are both M.D.s, we are the same age and I have some relatives in Arizona and have spent some time there, and we both are fast, hehehe...billy fanstone
