It is with some trepidation that I start this thread as I expect that many if not most Forumites will approach this issue with initial antagonism to my position in favor of butterfrog as explicated in the "both sides of the lane line" article in the current issue of SWIMMER but I ask Y'all to approach it with an open mind.(I expect antagonism as even my friends refer to my beloved and beautiful breaststroke as"evilstroke so I shudder at the initial reaction to butterfrog.)But look at the argument:George argues against it on historical and aesthetic grounds where as my argument is more practical.As to the aesthetic argument,what is uglier,both to the spectator and the participant than going vertical on butterfly.
George you are a great swimmer and an inspiration,but when is the last time you swam a 200 fly at a meet?
Speedy or not?
Some swimmers are faster with frog/whip kick in every stroke.
My backstroke is much faster with a whip kick and double arm stroke.
It all depends on the swimmer.
George Park's basic argument is that "swimming has evolved into four distinct strokes," and there is no need to accept a variation of a stroke (butterfrog). Furthermore, "why should Masters be allowed to change the rule to suit themselves?"
Speedy or not?
Some swimmers are faster with frog/whip kick in every stroke.
My backstroke is much faster with a whip kick and double arm stroke.
It all depends on the swimmer.
George Park's basic argument is that "swimming has evolved into four distinct strokes," and there is no need to accept a variation of a stroke (butterfrog). Furthermore, "why should Masters be allowed to change the rule to suit themselves?"
