SE:
OK, so I did this several ways:
100/200 back = 1.12
50/200 back = 1.10
50/100 back = 1.08
50/100 free ≈ 1.17
50/500 free ≈ 1.09
So what does this suggest to you? First thing that strikes me related to your back events, is the relatively slow times over your 50s, which suggests a lack in term of pure speed power. Previous analysis done with Allen Stark data revealed an SDI of 1.2 between his 50breast and 100 ***, which is a little more typical (normal).
Your times supplied for the free style events seem a bit inconsistent. So it's hard to issue any comment about them. It's preferable to use two data input for performances realized 1) same course type and 2) ideally, within a relatively small time frame. Allen's data was gathered over one single weekend I believe, same for the two top level breaststrokers quoted earlier in the discussion.
Let me propose a different volume model. It already exists and ready to use. It's call Skiba Swim Score. It's computed using power data. Power data can more easily be compared, or even translated into energy expenditure data. Even the good ol' trimp model does that. But it will fail in giving enough weight to short and intense segments (intervals). That is because HR (which is used as a base for calculating trimp) is too slow to respond to fast but short bouts.
As for aerobic capacity ideal sets, not sure we are talking about the same thing here. Just read page 429 of Maglischo's bible (since I know you own it). Read the guide lines in building En3 (Overload) sets.
Given my death of "pure speed power" would I get more benefit out of concentrating on building "pure speed power" or from building "speed endurance"? My current strategy is to do a mix of both in training, but sometimes I wonder if I should just concede that I will never have raw speed so I can focus more on speed endurance, which seems to be something more consistent with my physiology. Do you train alone, in a squad, or mix of both?
You are right about the free data btw, it's less reliable because it is collected over a variety of venues over a number or years. (I don't race free much.) I see.
As to the question of whether a distance swimmer should do power work,I have no real data,except that when I first started consistently doing weights the first race that I started really seeing improvement in was the 200 BR. I'll specialize in the 200bf this year (as well as the 1500 free) and trust me, I have my season ticket for once/week gym session. Vital for me I find, both for the reason you mentioned and for injury prevention.
Again, I feel very lucky because I do not know about you, but once a week for me works fine. No DOMS. 45min roughly. So not a big investment for all the good it does.
...formulas,logs;how cool is that(I am not being sarcastic,I really love this stuff.) Then here is the second part.
TU = T1 * (DU/D1) ^ SDI
Where TU is a time that is unknown for a distance (DU) you'd like to issue prediction.
As an example. You may not like this one though!!
Your time over 100 based on your 50 could be predicted as
36.48 * (50/100) ^ 1.111
1.18.8
Your time over 200 based on your 50 could be predicted as
36.48 * (50/200) ^ 1.111
2:50.2
If I was your coach, you'd probably have me on your back until you get closer to these times, as your pure speed potential seems to indicate that there's still a lot of room for improvement. I may be wrong though. Without having access to the two top swimmers' best effort over 50Breast, it's hard to tell. The balance between your 100 and 200 matches theirs, but the balance between your 50 and the two other events may indicate that you lack on both the anaerobic capacity side and the aerobic capacity side. I use the word *may*.
What Skiba says about his own model: "This calculation appears laborious at first glance, however, inexpensive software has been developed which automates the process"
This is your proposal to encourage quality work over quantity work? I don't think that can compete with the simplicity of GTD.
This is your proposal to encourage quality work over quantity work? No not at all. I'll try it first for myself before issuing any recommendation. For what it's worth, I think Skiba's comment is partly aimed at boosting his sales. Because with a simple excel spreadsheet, these complex calculations are out of the way.
I don't think that can compete with the simplicity of GTD. What is GTD?
Here is a workout Mr. Thorton mentioned last month in the "broken 200" thread. In several weeks I'm going to try it out to work on my 200 fr. But anyway, you just take your 200M fly time (3:17?) and plug in the 50 times (i.e., 51, 50, 49, 48, 47) for the even ones.
U.S. Masters Swimming Discussion Forums - View Single Post - How much time on a broken 200?
I think this is something masters suffer from noticeably. At the end of a meet, our performances start to fall of, and knowing this, we expect our best performances to be in the early to mid of our event line up and plan our events accordingly, hoping our favorite events lands early to mid meet.
If you follow the blogs of some of the more frequent competitors, there are a couple that don't suffer much of a performance drop off at the end of a meet and their training volume is usually closer to 25k than to 10k/week.
This is about mental expectancy and physical preparation. You can perform in 5+ events in a day. But if you don't expect to, if you've already got your list of excuses ready, if you don't eat and drink throughout the day to keep yourself energized, if you don't warm up or warm down properly, then of course you're going to suck. Prepare correctly and believe in yourself and you'll be amazed at what you can do.
The complete citation for the Costill study comparing training twice a day at 10,000m or more to once a day at 5,000m or less and finding no advantage is:
Costill, D.L., R. Thomas, R.A. Robergs, D.D. Pascoe, C.P. Lambert, S.I. Barr, and W.J. Fink. 1991. Adaptations to swimming training: Influence of training volume. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 23: 371-377.
It's unclear whether these volume levels have much relevance to most masters swimmers...
First, I have a bias. I am not a fan of Costill's work, so that may taint my opinion of his studies.
Lindsay, I think you are right, the volume levels in the study don't matter much to us. I think very few of us are able to get 25k in per week, and 50k is completely unrealistic.
I have only seen studies on training volume relative to single event performance. This doesn't seem to be the logical benefit of training volume. Most college swimmers are going to swim multiple events at their target meet, and certainly multiple events during in season meets. Wouldn't the increased volume prepare their body more for repeated high level performances rather than optimally for a single high level performance?
I think this is something masters suffer from noticeably. At the end of a meet, our performances start to fall of, and knowing this, we expect our best performances to be in the early to mid of our event line up and plan our events accordingly, hoping our favorite events lands early to mid meet.
If you follow the blogs of some of the more frequent competitors, there are a couple that don't suffer much of a performance drop off at the end of a meet and their training volume is usually closer to 25k than to 10k/week.
Did you notice the other comment made in the abstract, "It was also noted that both groups showed little change in swimming endurance and power after the first 8 wk of training, though their performances improved significantly after each taper period"? I don't know what the baseline was for that statement, but some masters swimmers taper multiple times per season, while others don't train seriously until 2 to 3 months out from a nationals. Maybe a 12 week training cycle is more optimal than a 24 week cycle? From a mental stand point, it should be much easier to stay focused and motivated for the shorter time period.
This is about mental expectancy and physical preparation. You can perform in 5+ events in a day. But if you don't expect to, if you've already got your list of excuses ready, if you don't eat and drink throughout the day to keep yourself energized, if you don't warm up or warm down properly, then of course you're going to suck. Prepare correctly and believe in yourself and you'll be amazed at what you can do.
I agree mental is a huge part of the game when it comes to competition and you bring up a good point that managing yourself during a meet is critical to your last events.
But does training volume play a significant roll at the end of your event list or no?
I think this is the most important statement from the original training article "Over the whole season the swimmers who made the biggest improvements were those who performed more of their training at higher paces. The volume of training had no influence on swim performance."
That statement makes a lot of sense, but what about two swimmers who train at the same intensity, but one swimmer has an extra workout a week. Will the swimmer doing the extra work perform better on his 5th event? Will he perform better on the fifth event at expense of this early events? Or is he just wasting time because that extra workout doesn't give him any advantage over his competitor?
