Just wondering if anyone had experienced this:
Started 2nd swimming life in fall 2007 and have been hard at it since. For the first 9 or 10 months, I was just swimming long and slow until I could go no more. I began throwing in some sprint sets after a good 1600 or so for the next few months. During this period, say a year or so, I dropped 40 lbs, from 235 to 195 (I'm 6'3"). Breaking 190 was my goal, though 190 is probably where I should be.
Throughout 2009, I could no longer stand the long swims and did more and more sets, 400's, 200's, 100s & 50's between a warm-up 500 and a warm down 500. My goal is 3000 - 3200/day and try to get as close to 16k per week as I can by doing some variation of the sets above.
Over the last year of doing this, I've noticed more muscle I think, and my clothes all still fit right, but the scale is alarming me. I'm hovering around - and some weeks over - 200 again.
I think I've slipped in my eating habits (definitely did over the holidays), but I was wondering if anyone has seen this before? Are these sprints where I'm constantly trying to improve my times putting muscle on me that are causing me to fret over the weight gain? Or do I just need to stay away from the fridge? Or what?
Blue
PS> I know all the sites regarding weight loss & swimming, I just want the answers from the horses' mouths. Thanks!
Parents
Former Member
Nick,
Yes I also have read about the higher level of bf in swimmers as opposed to runners or cyclists. You bring up some interesting points. I would like to propose a few more.
First is the matter that swimmers must propel themselves through, namely water, as opposed to runners propelling themselves through air. The viscosity of water is much higher than air. Therefore swimming would naturally encourage greater muscle development than running since you are using more force. The 4-to-1 rule seems to apply. Therefore there is a great similarity in times between, say, the 400m. run and the 100m. swim.
Also since you are much lighter when in water, bw is less of a factor. I swim early in the morning, before work, with other regular swimmers. Some are very fast and efficient. None are what you would call thin and some are heavy (one of the best swimmers is, in fact,quite overweight). Almost all are well muscled (most do not lift weights and only swim). At my pool there is also a gym with many treadmills. I see the regular runners as I enter. They are all thin, some verging on anorexic. No muscular development to speak of. I realize that all this is anecdotal but I do feel that it is indicative.
Finally, the skill factor must be considered. Swimming is a very technical activity. Much more so than running. Technique is a greater factor in forward progression in swimming than in running. Therefore, the nature of swimming w/o's are different, with more time dedicated to technique. This improves swimming but does not facilitate weight loss.
So the bottom line is that if one's goal is strictly weight loss, swimming would not be the optimal method.
Joshua - some interesting observations... I think that as swimmers often our desire for low BF is often nothing to do with going quickly but eveything to do with our vanity and ego's.
In running there is most definately a benefit in having low BF but as you say some of my fastest swimming buddies are - shall we say carrying an inch or two around the middle!!
If this is the case then the question it begs - is will we be actually faster if we hold onto the spare tyre? I reckon over the last month I have lost 1-2% of BF through hard twice a day training - but I am not swimming any quicker - in fact I am probably slower!! But of course I look great in my Speedo's! :blush:
Nick,
Yes I also have read about the higher level of bf in swimmers as opposed to runners or cyclists. You bring up some interesting points. I would like to propose a few more.
First is the matter that swimmers must propel themselves through, namely water, as opposed to runners propelling themselves through air. The viscosity of water is much higher than air. Therefore swimming would naturally encourage greater muscle development than running since you are using more force. The 4-to-1 rule seems to apply. Therefore there is a great similarity in times between, say, the 400m. run and the 100m. swim.
Also since you are much lighter when in water, bw is less of a factor. I swim early in the morning, before work, with other regular swimmers. Some are very fast and efficient. None are what you would call thin and some are heavy (one of the best swimmers is, in fact,quite overweight). Almost all are well muscled (most do not lift weights and only swim). At my pool there is also a gym with many treadmills. I see the regular runners as I enter. They are all thin, some verging on anorexic. No muscular development to speak of. I realize that all this is anecdotal but I do feel that it is indicative.
Finally, the skill factor must be considered. Swimming is a very technical activity. Much more so than running. Technique is a greater factor in forward progression in swimming than in running. Therefore, the nature of swimming w/o's are different, with more time dedicated to technique. This improves swimming but does not facilitate weight loss.
So the bottom line is that if one's goal is strictly weight loss, swimming would not be the optimal method.
Joshua - some interesting observations... I think that as swimmers often our desire for low BF is often nothing to do with going quickly but eveything to do with our vanity and ego's.
In running there is most definately a benefit in having low BF but as you say some of my fastest swimming buddies are - shall we say carrying an inch or two around the middle!!
If this is the case then the question it begs - is will we be actually faster if we hold onto the spare tyre? I reckon over the last month I have lost 1-2% of BF through hard twice a day training - but I am not swimming any quicker - in fact I am probably slower!! But of course I look great in my Speedo's! :blush:
