How do you determine whether you would be better off training and racing sprints or distance events?
I'm back into competitive training this winter after ~2 decades since high school. I used to coach age group, and I've been hitting some master's practices, so I'm not without direction for what I should be doing to get back in shape. I am, however, clueless about distance swimming.
I have no exposure to distance racing or training so I am starting to read up on it (Maglischo). In high school, with the longest event being the 500 free, everyone was a "sprinter" whether they were suited to it or not.
Since I'm basically rebuilding myself from the ground up, I am wondering whether I might give distance a try? What sorts of physiology, technique or psychology lend themselves to doing distance as opposed to sprinting? Or does this not really matter for a nearly 40-year-old masters swimmer that's been out of the pool for nearly forever?
Hey Dan,
I am assuming Jeff just started back. First six months back, my 50 times dropped from really unimpressive to just unimpressive. But my endurance went from not being able to swim anything to being able to swim a 5k practice, and my repeats times dropped from 100s on 2:00 to 100s on 1:25. Those improvements made me feel great, but my 50 off the blocks time made me feel horrible. The ability to practice better let me get to a point where training for competition made sense again.
Now if Jeff knew he just wanted to swim sprints, he could probably skip straight to fast training with lots of rest, and see some impressive improvement, but since he is undetermined, I think middle distance or distance training will make him happier. Once he has an aerobic base, he can go in any direction.
I appreciate the advice. It's kind of what I expected to hear and what I pretty much plan on doing anyway -- middle distance is the logical route to take when coming back from a very long layoff.
Your description of your first six months back mirrors my first month of training. From awful to slightly less awful, but it does feel great to be able to accomplish some basic stuff, like swim a 50 fly and make 10x100@1:30, and other things I used to be able to do just goofing off.
I am starting to think about the long term plan and what sort of goals I want to set for the future. That's where the curiosity of focusing on distance comes up. Honestly, I think I'm more of a sprinter (muscular, huge kick) but I am also aware that at my age, endurance is usually easier to develop.
To ask a slightly different question, can anyone be successful at distance, provided they train for it? I know there were guys on my hs team who just looking at their strokes, you knew they were never going to be good sprinters. I always assumed (perhaps incorrectly?) that distance was for anyone who couldn't or wouldn't sprint.
Hey Dan,
I am assuming Jeff just started back. First six months back, my 50 times dropped from really unimpressive to just unimpressive. But my endurance went from not being able to swim anything to being able to swim a 5k practice, and my repeats times dropped from 100s on 2:00 to 100s on 1:25. Those improvements made me feel great, but my 50 off the blocks time made me feel horrible. The ability to practice better let me get to a point where training for competition made sense again.
Now if Jeff knew he just wanted to swim sprints, he could probably skip straight to fast training with lots of rest, and see some impressive improvement, but since he is undetermined, I think middle distance or distance training will make him happier. Once he has an aerobic base, he can go in any direction.
I appreciate the advice. It's kind of what I expected to hear and what I pretty much plan on doing anyway -- middle distance is the logical route to take when coming back from a very long layoff.
Your description of your first six months back mirrors my first month of training. From awful to slightly less awful, but it does feel great to be able to accomplish some basic stuff, like swim a 50 fly and make 10x100@1:30, and other things I used to be able to do just goofing off.
I am starting to think about the long term plan and what sort of goals I want to set for the future. That's where the curiosity of focusing on distance comes up. Honestly, I think I'm more of a sprinter (muscular, huge kick) but I am also aware that at my age, endurance is usually easier to develop.
To ask a slightly different question, can anyone be successful at distance, provided they train for it? I know there were guys on my hs team who just looking at their strokes, you knew they were never going to be good sprinters. I always assumed (perhaps incorrectly?) that distance was for anyone who couldn't or wouldn't sprint.
