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.
I think size and shape are worth at least 1 second in the 50 fr, you never see top sprinters with a beer belly and there's about a 1 second range of competition there.
Bottom line in my opinion is you can potentially beat your prior 21.7 in the 30-34 age group wearing a jammer with training and getting down near 200lbs. Just my opinion. But then again who knows if you can't do it at 250lbs?
I dropped 20+ lbs in January (>190 to '2") and the biggest difference I noticed was that I didn't get as hot during practice.
Yes, but you weren't overweight to begin with and fmracing is. By BMI he's 75 lbs overweight. Now we can argue about the merits of BMI, but he's already said he's fat.
Somebody once said the rule of thumb is improving 1 sec/50yds/#10 lost. Don't you wish!
Your increased cross-section/profile in the water will increase drag and slow you down -- but if you float higher it could almost net out.
I believe mass (weight) will help you travel farther ("carry well") underwater on starts. If your leg extension strength has also improved, you should also carry well underwater on turns. Heavier people need stronger legs too, just to walk around for daily activities. But with a larger midsection you probably won't be able to get as tight a tuck on flipturns, making them slower.
I hope you keep tabs on the important numbers - blood pressure, cholesterol, heart rate - not just your time for a sprint 50. You're fast, but it would be in your interests to ease off if you're risking stroke/heart attack during very intense exercise.
How fast were you and what were your proportions at your peak?
As I said above, fastest 50 was 21.7 and I was about 192lbs or so, same height. Best 100 was 47.1 in the same meet. Not sure what you mean by proportions? The frame hasn't changed much other than the midsection since those swims in the peak, just carrying around a 12-pack now and less muscle :)
fmracing, I think the difference in sprint times will be small, if any. I dropped 20+ lbs in January (>190 to '2") and the biggest difference I noticed was that I didn't get as hot during practice. Before January during a hard practice 40oz of water might not be enough. Since January, I have not finished my 40oz water bottle once.
There are a number of large fast swimmers running around. This just reinforces that skill is the number one factor in swimming fast.
Based on my personal experience, weight loss should help your training and maybe your distance events but not your sprints directly. YMMV
Somebody once said the rule of thumb is improving 1 sec/50yds/#10 lost. Don't you wish!
Your increased cross-section/profile in the water will increase drag and slow you down -- but if you float higher it could almost net out.
I believe mass (weight) will help you travel farther ("carry well") underwater on starts. If your leg extension strength has also improved, you should also carry well underwater on turns. Heavier people need stronger legs too, just to walk around for daily activities. But with a larger midsection you probably won't be able to get as tight a tuck on flipturns, making them slower.
I hope you keep tabs on the important numbers - blood pressure, cholesterol, heart rate - not just your time for a sprint 50. You're fast, but it would be in your interests to ease off if you're risking stroke/heart attack during very intense exercise.
You bet I wish that was a true formula haha.
I agree with the legs comment for sure. I've felt that my pushoffs are definately a strong point for me and especially my grab start. I typically get out to the flags on the start on 32" blocks. I've always felt that my turns in the 50 were slow for some reason but that my turns in the 100 are better than most. My turn/glide/sdk is where I tend to add distance on people rather than the swimming part. I was almost wondering if that's just the increased inertia of the weight. Will that glide ability go away without the weight there? I'm hoping not but i might not be so lucky.
I'm not worried about the latter comments. Despite my comments about overeating, I'm not a complete hazard to myself either. I never strenuously overwork myself in the pool and I know my limits. That's a major reason I'm not really considering training for the 200 free anymore. I don't think I'm ready to train at the level needed for that kind of endurance. The 50 and 100 are nice for that reason, and the 7000m per week that I'm doing is perfect for those.
I'm enjoying all the comments so far... and hoping the estimates are true for my times. :) Thanks to everyone so far for replying.
Swimming is not the optimal activity for losing weight. .
I see this comment made alot, and I've never seen it actually proven as the result of any scientific study.
The biggest factor in getting thinner is diet. This is where most of your weight loss will come from. While exercise does burn calories, it also makes you hungry. I've had non athletic friends drop dozens of pounds through nothing but proper nutrition while I swam 20k yards a week and stayed the same.
I can only relate my story, but I found success in weight loss through a low carbohydrate, high protein, moderate fat diet. Dropped 65 lbs or so over 6 months approx 6 years ago, and have managed to keep it off. My swimming performance was not optimal during the weight loss time, because as we know, you need carbs to be able to exercise, but the results on the scale kept me committed. I'm 43, 6'3", around 235 lbs (14% body fat) and eat pretty much eat what I want "within reason" on a daily basis. I also swim about 20,000 yards a week. I competed at around 200 lbs in college.
I can't say I've noticed any increase in sprint swimming performance as the result of the weight loss. My 100 back currently actually is a close to 2 seconds slower than my best as a masters, but that was swum 11 years ago and I think that is most likely the biggest factor. My 200 performance in the back and IM as well as 400 IM have improved as well as my ability to train harder (holding 2:20 for 9 x 200 scy back vs 2:40 10 years ago).
If you want to lose the weight, you need to find an eating plan the works for you. That will get you the biggest bang for the buck.
Also note, if you don't address the weight issues, you will most likely be looking at Type 2 diabetes as well as Hypertension issues by middle age. This is what finally kicked me into getting serious about the weight loss.
I see this comment made alot, and I've never seen it actually proven as the result of any scientific study.
The biggest factor in getting thinner is diet. This is where most of your weight loss will come from. While exercise does burn calories, it also makes you hungry. I've had non athletic friends drop dozens of pounds through nothing but proper nutrition while I swam 20k yards a week and stayed the same.
If you want to lose the weight, you need to find an eating plan the works for you. That will get you the biggest bang for the buck.
I am dropping weight off without diet, it's just a slow process. I've always been a believer that weight loss = calories taken in 'd consider that to see if I feel the speed increase worth not enjoying mealtimes as much as I do :blush: Like I said though, I didn't want it to turn into a total discussion on whether or not to diet. I realize benefits of dieting and also the downside to eating badly, but I'm really interested in the effects of weight on swimming. So far all the responses have been great! I kindof thought I wouldn't get much response on this topic because there's not many big swimmers out there. :)
It has been a pretty common misconception that swimming was not good for loosing weight.
I remember a lot of articles stating that swimming just, for some reason,
didn't burn the calories that running did, and that sort of thing.
A number of years ago, Masters Swimmer Phil Whitten wrote a paper
that laid all that to rest. Part of the problem was comparing folks that
were running 6-minute miles with folks that were swimming 90 second 50's !
Phil correctly pointed out that equal work burn equal calories.
Swimmers have higher bf than runners or cyclists. This is a well known fact. See here for example: www.sportsci.org/.../fat.html
The question unresolved is why this is the case.
I would like to read that paper by Whitten but cannot locate it. Do you have the link?
