This has been something I've wondered the last few years. I used to be a college swimmer, fit and trim, but the 10 years since then I've drank my fair share of beer and ate plenty of cheeseburgers. Just curious what peoples' take is on how much the extra baggage really effects swim races.
I don't really fit the swimmer mold anymore. I'm 31, 6'2", and 270lbs with a huge beer gut. I got some strange looks since the meet i was in recently was a USAS meet and I outweighed my competition by 100lbs in many cases. My first race in about 5 years i went 23.4 in the 50y free. I didn't expect to be that fast at this weight but at the same time I almost wonder if the added intertia is helping me more on the start and turns. Followed it up with a low 52 in the 100y free but I had a horrible reaction on the start and incorrect pacing. I think if i raced again today that'd be deep in the 51 range. For reference, typical non-taper times for me in college were in the low-mid 22 range at just a tick over 200lbs but I was obviously a lot stronger, younger, and doing a TON more yards at the time, that's why it makes me wonder just how much the weight is actually holding me back.
How much time do you think I stand to drop if i were 50lbs lighter? Could it be a measurable difference or something just slight? I guess I ask that to see if it'd be worth my while to drop that much weight quickly by dieting in addition to the swimming i'm doing. I don't really like dieting, and i generally eat what I want, when i want. Not gorging myself at every meal doesn't really seem to fit into my lifestyle :blush: Anyone have a similar story? "I dropped XX lbs and went XX seconds faster because of it."
Maybe it's an immeasurable, but I thought I'd ask for opinion anyway. I'm hoping it doesn't turn into a "to diet or not to diet" discussion though.
Vids of the taper swims for reference:
2010 50m - ‪swim_race1‬ - YouTube
2011 50m - ‪swim_race7‬ - YouTube (far right lane)
Just thought I'd keep the thread updated :)
Nice videos! Man, you really attacked those sprints.
Do you think the weight difference is what directly accounts for your time change, or do you think it is an indirect effect, or maybe even spurious correlation?
By this I guess I mean something along these lines:
Direct effect: weigh less, more streamlined in water, less drag = better speed.
Indirect effect: weighing less has no specific benefit for speed (less weight might be cancelled out by reduced buoyancy or a slight loss of muscle mass and power). but it IS directly correlated with being in better shape. Hence you swim faster not because you weigh less but because you are more fit (which has as a side effect reduced weight)
Spurious correlation: weighing less has nothing to do with swimming faster at all. The differences in heavier vs. lighter times are within the margin of error. Had you swum the event a handful of times in mid june last year, odds are you would have swum as fast as you did in mid june this year. Ditto for the converse. Had you swum several 50s this year, odds are you would have had at least one swim as slow as last year. Just random distribution, in other words.
I suspect you believe in option 1, and you might be right. Then again, there could be a placebo effect involved with such a belief, too. You believe slimming down will let you swim faster, and expectations nudge you towards improvement whether or not the weight has nothing to do with it.
What do you think, in your heart of hearts, is the likeliest explanation?
Vids of the taper swims for reference:
2010 50m - ‪swim_race1‬ - YouTube
2011 50m - ‪swim_race7‬ - YouTube (far right lane)
Just thought I'd keep the thread updated :)
Nice videos! Man, you really attacked those sprints.
Do you think the weight difference is what directly accounts for your time change, or do you think it is an indirect effect, or maybe even spurious correlation?
By this I guess I mean something along these lines:
Direct effect: weigh less, more streamlined in water, less drag = better speed.
Indirect effect: weighing less has no specific benefit for speed (less weight might be cancelled out by reduced buoyancy or a slight loss of muscle mass and power). but it IS directly correlated with being in better shape. Hence you swim faster not because you weigh less but because you are more fit (which has as a side effect reduced weight)
Spurious correlation: weighing less has nothing to do with swimming faster at all. The differences in heavier vs. lighter times are within the margin of error. Had you swum the event a handful of times in mid june last year, odds are you would have swum as fast as you did in mid june this year. Ditto for the converse. Had you swum several 50s this year, odds are you would have had at least one swim as slow as last year. Just random distribution, in other words.
I suspect you believe in option 1, and you might be right. Then again, there could be a placebo effect involved with such a belief, too. You believe slimming down will let you swim faster, and expectations nudge you towards improvement whether or not the weight has nothing to do with it.
What do you think, in your heart of hearts, is the likeliest explanation?
