Swim smooth has an interesting pair of videos that makes the argument that minimizing strokes per length isn't the same thing as maximizing efficiency. Janet Evans and Laure Manaudou are cited as examples of swimmers with high strokes per length and a faster turnover. Elite triathletes with shorter strokes are also cited. The idea is not to advocate everyone use a shorter stroke but just to say that if a shorter stroke works for you don't throw that away in pursuit of lower strokes per length.
I wonder if swimming with a shorter stroke and higher turnover is analogous to using a lower gear when cycling (spinning versus grinding). People generally acknowledge that the optimal gear to use will vary from individual to individual. Extrapolating from that line of reasoning, perhaps elite swimmers using longer strokes do so because they have greater strength/more power that allows them to use a longer stroke/higher gear rather than because they worked on lengthening their strokes (although the two are clearly related).
YouTube- Swim Smooth: What Is An Efficient Freestyle Stroke? Part 1
YouTube- Swim Smooth: What Is An Efficient Freestyle Stroke? Part 2
Parents
Former Member
So how does one measure efficiency? Fewest strokes, fastest time for a given distance-- like swim golf? It it 1. or 2. below?
1. If it takes me 80 seconds and 50 strokes to swim 100 yards, it is more efficient if I take 48 strokes and still maintain that 80 second pace?
2. Or is it more efficient if I take 50 strokes and improve my time to 78 seconds for 100 yards?
We're talking about whether increased SPL with all other factors equal necessarily means more efficiency. There is a possibility that few swimmers or coaches ever consider: neither #1 nor #2 which you listed is right.
In both cases, you could be getting less efficient. In an absolute sense, #2 is definitely a decrease in efficiency, since faster swimming is almost always less efficient due to drag. Especially if you get to this point by trying to stretch your stroke, or by kicking harder. Relative to speed, you might be increasing your efficiency in scenario #1 or #2, but the whole point of this thread is that SPL can increase via methods other than efficiency.
So how does one measure efficiency? Fewest strokes, fastest time for a given distance-- like swim golf? It it 1. or 2. below?
1. If it takes me 80 seconds and 50 strokes to swim 100 yards, it is more efficient if I take 48 strokes and still maintain that 80 second pace?
2. Or is it more efficient if I take 50 strokes and improve my time to 78 seconds for 100 yards?
We're talking about whether increased SPL with all other factors equal necessarily means more efficiency. There is a possibility that few swimmers or coaches ever consider: neither #1 nor #2 which you listed is right.
In both cases, you could be getting less efficient. In an absolute sense, #2 is definitely a decrease in efficiency, since faster swimming is almost always less efficient due to drag. Especially if you get to this point by trying to stretch your stroke, or by kicking harder. Relative to speed, you might be increasing your efficiency in scenario #1 or #2, but the whole point of this thread is that SPL can increase via methods other than efficiency.
