In threads where training philosophy comes up, discussions of TRIMPS and TSS and other training models occasionally intrude. These models are not very well known, and even more poorly understood, so probably SolarEnergy, qbrain and I are just talking to each other and killing threads in those conversations. In any case, I figured I would present a brief overview of what it is that we're talking about when this terminology starts showing up.
Best case, this will introduce these models to the subset of swimmers (or coaches) who would be interested enough to use them, but didn't previously know enough to do so.
Plus, even if you're not the type to be interested in quantifying your training, it can be useful to think about workouts in this general framework.
And, at the very least, this might serve as a place to discuss some of the details without worrying about driving those other threads too far off-topic.
Parents
Former Member
Since my 400 fly time would undoubtedly be slower than 400 back, there would be more "energy points" for the 400 back.
I recalculated the ratios using the USAS time standards, but fly is faster than back, which isn't helping your case.
Swimming efficiency is plainly not within the scope of the system; it is aimed at tracking adaptations like lactate tolerance.
Are you sure? Both increased efficiency and increased lactate tolerance will result in more points if either adaption is used to swim faster in future workouts.
-- Q-points are not all that transferable between people of differing abilities.
True.
-- Q-points are, obviously, for swimming only.
True. I wouldn't have bothered if I could strap a data acquisition computer to me like cyclists and runners can do. At that point, the data is available for better analysis. The number of times I can keep in my head during practice to later put in the computer is limited.
Personally, I get a pretty substantial taper effect when I curtail cross-training activities, particularly weights.
The biggest taper effect from weights comes from decreased tissue damage I would guess, not decreased energy usage. I do not think there is a relationship energy usage and muscle damage for weight lifting.
A given energy expenditure on the bike will not yield the same effect on swimming performance as that energy expended in the water.
I think the tissue damage from cycling is minimal and recovery is based on time to restore glycogen stores. Swimming causes minimal tissue damage, but it builds incrementally because rest is not taken. Lifting causes a lot of damage, but rest is taken. This is based on my limited experience with heavy stationary bike used at the beginning of the year. Real cyclists who have to deal with things like hills and wind might experience a much higher level of tissue damage.
My point being, I think tissue damage and recovery from that is not easily modeled and is critical to taper.
Since my 400 fly time would undoubtedly be slower than 400 back, there would be more "energy points" for the 400 back.
I recalculated the ratios using the USAS time standards, but fly is faster than back, which isn't helping your case.
Swimming efficiency is plainly not within the scope of the system; it is aimed at tracking adaptations like lactate tolerance.
Are you sure? Both increased efficiency and increased lactate tolerance will result in more points if either adaption is used to swim faster in future workouts.
-- Q-points are not all that transferable between people of differing abilities.
True.
-- Q-points are, obviously, for swimming only.
True. I wouldn't have bothered if I could strap a data acquisition computer to me like cyclists and runners can do. At that point, the data is available for better analysis. The number of times I can keep in my head during practice to later put in the computer is limited.
Personally, I get a pretty substantial taper effect when I curtail cross-training activities, particularly weights.
The biggest taper effect from weights comes from decreased tissue damage I would guess, not decreased energy usage. I do not think there is a relationship energy usage and muscle damage for weight lifting.
A given energy expenditure on the bike will not yield the same effect on swimming performance as that energy expended in the water.
I think the tissue damage from cycling is minimal and recovery is based on time to restore glycogen stores. Swimming causes minimal tissue damage, but it builds incrementally because rest is not taken. Lifting causes a lot of damage, but rest is taken. This is based on my limited experience with heavy stationary bike used at the beginning of the year. Real cyclists who have to deal with things like hills and wind might experience a much higher level of tissue damage.
My point being, I think tissue damage and recovery from that is not easily modeled and is critical to taper.
