Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

evmo — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 09:44:21 GMT

Anybody remember this great thread? I just read something that reminded me of it. A guest post on Loneswimmer.com by Chris Bryan, an internationally-elite open-water swimmer from Ireland. loneswimmer.com/.../guest-article-chris-bryan-irish-international-10k-swimmer Here's the money quote: "A higher and more relaxed stroke is essential for the open water. In the pool stroke length is of huge importance for swimming fast and count strokes per length cannot be under estimated, for open water the focus on training a higher rhythmic and comfortable stroke rate often out-weighs the need for stroke length based on the constant changing environment of open water."

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Fri, 27 May 2011 13:56:41 GMT

Coyote, this was a Big Time Post. Someone should get one of the Swim Smooth guys over here to duke it out.

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Fri, 27 May 2011 07:51:46 GMT

I have also tested Olympic water polo players who are often fairly fast swimmers with generally a high turnover and shorter strokes and who are also often coincidently excellent open water swimmers. Their ability to sight efficiently comes from their years of head-up swimming practice, their ability to hold a streamlined position in various conditions (including during sighting) and their power generation that comes from the middle third of their stroke. Based on my observations and testing, I believe the key factors in going faster in dynamic bodies of water are to focus on the middle third of the stroke whether you swim naturally at a 45 spm, 60 spm, 75 spm or 90 spm pace. I would love to do joint objective testing with the individuals on this thread and either prove my beliefs wrong or right or, most probably, somewhere in the middle. steve, have you ever tested swimmers in a wave pool? i happen to know where there is a 300' long one in hoboken, nj. it is an engineering school, so they test things like hull shape, and aqua turbine models, etc. i would love to go for a swim in there.

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Thu, 26 May 2011 13:24:16 GMT

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

srcoyote — Thu, 26 May 2011 09:22:02 GMT

I've posted examples of pool practices designed to prepare for open water races here. I did look at your pool practices, and here is my challenge which is why I started this thread in the first place: The two workouts you posted would produce very different results for me. I would find it a good workout, but not too challenging to complete the descending sets of 125's at the intervals and pace times you posted. Your last set is at about a 1:20 per 100 pace with 20 seconds rest between each 125. This I can do. But I would not be able to complete the ladder with the same pace times you posted. Swimming a 1:28 per 100 pace is sustainable for me, but I can't sustain a 1:23 pace for 1000 yards. I am looking at my stroke efficiency more closely. I mixed in some LC workouts last week. I found that my per 100 yard SC pace didn't convert as well to a 100m LC pace. I am learning I have fast powerful turns that expend a lot of energy which explains why I could swim a :50 100 in high school but never broke 5 minutes in the 500.

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

srcoyote — Thu, 26 May 2011 09:05:52 GMT

Take a look at this. It requires a careful read, but it might help. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/.../15673549 I knew I shouldn't have avoided biochemistry. I was unsure. Is my takeaway that the key is that through the establishment of motor patterns at a higher stroke rate through repition, my efficiency will follow? Or is it that I am a mutant zebrafish and my deficits cannot be traced to my biochemistry?:)

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Wed, 25 May 2011 16:35:24 GMT

What I need to do is find a way that increases velocity without substantially increasing effort. A higher SR with less force per stroke may be that solution. You could try this test to find your optimum stroke rate/stroke length: www.swimsmooth.com/ramptest.html --mjm

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Wed, 25 May 2011 05:53:13 GMT

My practices put development and imprinting of Stroke Length first, because (1) acquisition and maintenance of Stroke Length is an exacting skill I can’t agree with you more on this. (2) because swimming speed is more closely related to Length than to any other factor. I think this is where I’d need to see the data. If what you are saying that at any given level of swimming, a swimmer's speed is more closely related to Length than to any other factor, than I might be on board on that one. Again, assuming we are only talking about in a pool or calm body of water. I think both need to be developed 'organically.' What Length are YOU capable of today? How can you increase or reinforce that capacity in the next hour? And at that Length, what Rates can YOU sustain without sacrificing excess efficiency, or spending too many heartbeats. How can you increase or reinforce that capacity in the next hour? I agree The method I've developed for doing so is based on establishing Length, then practice 'trading' a bit of Length for a bit of Rate in small, measured doses. I do this in practice with two kinds of sets: 1) Rate is implicit. These are timed swims in which I count strokes. Any change in pace or time, if SPL remains constant, implies a change in rate. 2) Rate is explicit. (Time is implicit.) These are (usually) untimed swims in which I set rate with the aid of a Tempo Trainer, and count strokes. Any increase in stroke count means I've swum slower. Any savings in stroke count means I've swum faster. So naturally I strive to keep SPL as low as possible at that rate. I've posted examples of pool practices designed to prepare for open water races here. My last two practices were Implicit Rate examples. Today I did two forms of descending sets 1) On the odd rounds descend without increasing stroke count. This requires increasing Stroke Rate while keeping Stroke Length constant. In fact I don't try to increase Stroke Rate. Rather I focus on doing a variety of things that combine to propel me faster - more attention to holding the water, a bit more precision in catch, small increases in hip drive, etc. 2) On the even rounds, descend by increasing stroke count. Both exercises are useful in wiring my nervous system with skills that I believe help me swim effectively in OW races. Because there's no way of monitoring Stroke Length - and because wind and chop can make that difficult - I try to practice in ways calculated to create durable efficiency habits. But though I think such sets put more arrows in my quiver for responding to a variety of situations, my stronger motivation for these -- and all the sets I do -- is to encourage, even demand, keen focus. It's good for a 60 y.o. brain. It also creates Flow States. In the end, it's my addiction to Flow States, more than competitive urges, that keeps me coming back to the pool. I think this is an interesting and helpful discussion (although I did not examine you example pool practices)

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Wed, 25 May 2011 05:41:28 GMT

The point I was making is that a sample size of N = 10,000 is more likely to yield widely-applicable principles than a sample size of N=1. Or one of N=25-50 (the number of people in the world capable of remaining efficient in challenging conditions at SR of 80+ - and with the metabolic capacity to sustain it.) I understand what you intended now. But of course, it just establishes that if you have a validly selected random sample, where you observe objectively verifiable data, the conclusions you reach are more probably valid than a similarly selected and tested, but smaller sample. (That's assuming I remember my statistics correctly, which has a very high level of uncertainty) As for the word 'glide' - and countless other words and phrases, I've found it important to be as precise as possible when writing - as opposed to showing. When I use the term glide I mean all stroking movements cease. Usually with one arm forward and the other back. People sometimes do this in pursuit of more Stroke Length. Not a good practice -- and the reason I questioned introducing the concept of gliding. Pausing the lead hand, or being very patient about cultivating the catch, isn't gliding so long as the other hand is coming forward in recovery. I have never seen the word “glide” used as you have defined it. You might want to check on that or at least make sure you include your definition of the word in your discussions. In dozens of races I've found myself passing people who are stroking faster, when the water gets more choppy. Video example here. http://tinyurl.com/4x9aamv Yes I’ve seen this video before. Frankly I think it’s your goggles that make you faster. :-) Seriously though, my first thought when I saw that was that you had just caught and passed either a heat in front of yours, or just the nuts that went out too fast. I think what stands out the most though, is not your stroke rate so much as you excellent head position in comparison to the other swimmers around you..

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

evmo — Mon, 23 May 2011 09:51:27 GMT

This is why I believe that talking about some arbitrary ideal in SR is misguided. Simply because an elite OW swimmer has been observed to stroke at 80 to 90 strokes per minute doesn't infer anything conclusive for other swimmers who may not match an elite's skill or fitness profile. Who is talking about some "arbitrary ideal" of SR? The issue under discussion is relative stroke rates between open water and the pool. I've had the test performed on my stroke, by Steve Munatones, in March 2010. On the same day he was testing another swimmer - a Marathon Hall of Famer. ... What's noteworthy though is that the other swimmer was stroking at a much higher rate - possibly 40 to 50 percent higher - and kicking much harder. That's noteworthy, for sure - but probably not for the reason you intended.

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Mon, 23 May 2011 06:19:24 GMT

The idea to focus on is reducing drag - not gliding. I've never heard anyone make a serious suggestion that gliding is a good strategy so including it in discussion takes us off-topic. There are a number of definitions of the word glide. I was using it in the way it is commonly understood. That being: to move forward as a result of potential/stored energy, without a further application of force. The potential energy can be in the form an objects height over the ground in a gravitational field such as the earth (the plane glided to the ground) , or in the form of linear momentum as in swimming or iceskating. Anytime there is no propulsive force being applied, you are gliding. Assuming for the sake of argument that we can disregard the propulsive power of your kick (which I believe is consistent with your thoughts on this matter), then whenever a swimmer is not applying a propulsive arm force he is gliding. Merely improving your streamlining does not make you glide faster at the beginning, but it does reduce the rate of decline of your speed over time. However, it is gliding nevertheless and you will slow down. Gliding in swimming does not have to be for a long time, but there have been some in the swimming world that have advocated certain stroke mechanics which result in periods of gliding. When I read your book a couple of years ago something stood out so much that I marked it. “The whole point, in fact, is to put off pulling with the extended hand until the other one is just about to reenter the water and take its place in front of your head.” p.92 If you are not replacing the lost propulsive force with kicking while you are ‘putting off pulling with your extended hand’, then you are, by definition, gliding. That is why I included it in my analysis. But if you think it is off topic, so be it. It just seems to me that to achieve a low SPL you advocate certain stroke mechanics which result in adding glide to a swimmers stroke. And from a purely physics analysis, increases the amount of power required to be produced by the swimmer over any given distance. How does that relate to Stroke Rate and Length? If you believe there are only two ways to minimize fluctuations in speed - a higher stroke rate or a stronger kick. Actually that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is that to maintain a constant speed the swimmer must have a constant Net Propulsive Force. (Net Propulsive Force) = (Total Propulsive Force) - (Force of Drag). To reach a certain speed a swimmer must have a positive Net Propulsive Force. Once he reaches a certain speed, to maintain it he must have a Net Propulsive Force equal to zero. What is applicable to the discussion of pool vs OW is that you must maintain a Net propulsive Force equal to zero throughout your stroke cycle, and what is being suggested, is that this is easier to do with a higher stroke rate in rough water. (I refer you back to my earlier post). I was focused on keeping my bodyline long, minimizing wavemaking, using my extending arm to 'separate water molecules' and focusing far more on drag avoidance than propulsion with my kick. Which is precisely what I focus on while racing -- in a wide range of water conditions. Great! And I think the operative words here are “focusing far more on”. As an athlete with decades of experience, your body already knows how to apply force without you having to stay consciously focused on it. Your conscious efforts are focused more on reducing drag which I totally agree with. This is why I believe that talking about some arbitrary ideal in SR is misguided. I agree with you on this and with the fact that talking about an ideal SPL number is equally misguided. I do not think you advocate that, but there are others who believe that there is certain a SPL number that all swimmers should achieve. Unfortunately, my observation is that there are quite a few triathletes who take what you are teaching, misinterpret it, and conclude that pursuit of a specific SPL is the Holy Grail of swimming faster. On the other hand, what is absolutely beyond dispute is that if you take YOUR stroke and improve its streamlining qualities, you'll be able to swim the same speed with less effort -- and thus be able to maintain it longer. Absolutely. Simply, heedlessly, stroking faster is -- for the vast majority of non-elite swimmers -- virtually certain to increase drag, and therefore the energy cost of swimming a given speed. Agreed How did I learn this? Frankly, where and how you learn something is irrelevant. The thing that matters is, if it is true or not.

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Sat, 21 May 2011 16:08:45 GMT

What I need to do is find a way that increases velocity without substantially increasing effort. A higher SR with less force per stroke may be that solution. Take a look at this. It requires a careful read, but it might help. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/.../15673549

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Fri, 20 May 2011 16:58:01 GMT

"better swimmers have a smaller max/min variation in velocity than swimmers that are slower And this is the key. To measure the amount of drag on an object in a fluid over time (or distance) you can not simply take the distance and divide it by the time. That works only when there are no drag forces involved. If you divide the distance by the time you do get an average speed but that is a different thing Specifically, drag in a fluid is proportional to the square of the velocity and, more importantly, the power needed to push an object through a fluid increases as the cube of the velocity. Thus even small fluctuations in speed can significantly increase the amount of power needed to cover a specific distance. Take 2 swimmers who swim a length of the pool: one holds a constant speed, while the other speeds up and slows down. If they both reach the other end of the pool at the same time, the one with the fluctuations in speed had to generate substantially more power than the swimmer who maintained a steady speed. We all know this from our own experience. We also know that any reduction in drag forces on the body reduces the power requirements necessary to maintain a constant speed. However, an analysis of the physics involves shows that simply gliding in a non-propulsive phase of your stroke only increases the total amount of power you need to maintain an average speed. From a pure layman's point of view, it appears that to maintain a specific speed and lower your stroke rate, you must do one or both of the following. First, you must have a strong enough kick to maintain a propulsive force during your glide, sufficient to maintain a constant speed. If your glide position is more hydrodynamical efficient, then the total amount of propulsive force required may be less, but if your arms are not generating the force during the glide then the legs must. (10 X 100 yd kick on the minute anyone?) Simply gliding in a streamlined position will only increase your total power requirements over time due to the relationship of speed to power as noted above. In the alternative, you can improve your streamlining during the entire time you are swimming, but you must continue to apply a constant force. Improving streamlining during the entire stroke cycle similarly lowers the total amount of power required to maintain a constant speed. Once again, simply gliding will only hurt you. One thing that I might add, is that the analysis of a deformable body (a swimmer) in a fluid is complex, and when you ignore the physiological issues that come in play, any such analysis is an oversimplification and subject to scrutiny. So which of the 2 options (kick more while gliding or better streamlining while swimming) require less power and presumably less energy of the swimmer? This is an entirely different question that requires a further analysis of the physiology of a swimmer, which I believe is more complex than the physics involved.

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Fri, 20 May 2011 15:56:22 GMT

What I need to do is find a way that increases velocity without substantially increasing effort. If you do find it - please let us all in on the secret........or patent it, sell it and make millions:D

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Fri, 20 May 2011 13:14:32 GMT

One hypothesis (as stated by several posters) for higher SR in OW: is it more difficult to maintain a constant speed? In a forum discussion relating percision testing by a company that claims: "better swimmers have a smaller max/min variation in velocity than swimmers that are slower, and that might be obvious. However, many slower swimmers we have tested can generate similar peak velocity values, but their max/minimum velocity difference is much greater. In addition, that difference between swimmers can be very small when looking at one stroke cycle. But during a race where swimmers are using stroke rates between 50 and 60 stroke cycles per minute, that small difference becomes cumulative, and can define from a swimming perspective differences in performance." Here is the full discussion: www.usms.org/.../showthread.php

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

evmo — Fri, 20 May 2011 12:15:56 GMT

Here is Davies' stroke rate in the 1500m where I could accurately measure: 1st 50 (1.26) 95 2nd 50 (1.32) 91 550m (1.32) 91 700m (1.29) 93 800m (1.32) 91 1000m (1.24) 97 1250m (1.27) 94 (Note: I converted your stroke rate measurements into SPM format - see the bolded numbers above.) Another thing I'd point out is: For a pool swimmer (especially a male pool swimmer), these are quite high SR's for a 1500. In fact, I believe Davies is known for his high tempo. One wonders: Does this partially explain why he has been successful crossing over from the pool to OW?

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

srcoyote — Fri, 20 May 2011 09:02:02 GMT

"However, what I do know (or believe, if you prefer) that a shorter stroke (i.e. higher SR) allows me to adjust my stroke to take advantage of the conditions - or at least not be dominated by them. If I have a low SPL and low SR then as I swim in rough water the wave, or waves if the the wind and deep swells are not identical in direction and period, will interfere with the rhythm of my stroke and cause me to lose momentum. If I switch to a higher SPL and higher SR this will minimize the negative effect of the waves. This is critical because it always requires less power to achieve a certain average speed if your speed is constant, than if you are constantly speeding up and slowing down. each stroke cycle." I started this thread after attempting some research to find out why my pacing for distance swimming wasn't improving signficantly despite my training efforts over the last couple of years. I thought there might be a key in stroke rate. When I saw the video I posted at the beginning of the thread, I marvelled how someone could sustain that stroke for 10K when I can't sustain that stroke rate for 200 yards even though I can swim my stroke for 10K. I also noted the contrasting styles of the open water swimmers and the pool swimmers in the video. Admittedly, they were hand selected by the video maker to make his point, but his observations also bear out in many events that I've witnessed. I further noted that my worst performances in open water swims have come in rough conditions or against the current -- not just poor times, but poor performance relative to other swimmers who compete in many of the same races. I have come to the following conclusions: 1. My breathing needs fixed more than anything -- I have become conscious that on over half my breaths, I am taking air in little further than my mouth. Think of the first time smoker who doesn't really inhale, but just sucks smoke into his mouth. This type of very shallow breathing, I think, means I am fatiguing more quickly. I never developed good breathing patterns growing up because my successes were all at the 100 yard level. What teenager really needs to breathe on a 100? I'm using some drills Chaos shared earlier in the thread to work on my breathing using a vareity rhythms. 2. I need to reconsider my training schedule -- With work and kids, I am able to get in the water 5-6 times per week for an hour to an hour and fifteen minutes which means I'm only getting in a little over 20K yards per week. I need to mix in some longer workouts as I can. 3. I want to develop a shorter, choppier stroke as a secondary stroke to use in adverse conditions -- E=H2O makes a great point about the video demonstrating the maintenance of forward momentum being key to good performance in rough conditions. My stroke has been effective in smooth water and allows me to last longer than many people in better physical condition than I, but the glide is long enough that adverse conditions mean that every stroke is re-starting forward motion rather than maintaining it.

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

srcoyote — Fri, 20 May 2011 04:16:00 GMT

One thing that I might add, is that the analysis of a deformable body (a swimmer) in a fluid is complex, and when you ignore the physiological issues that come in play, any such analysis is an oversimplification and subject to scrutiny. So which of the 2 options (kick more while gliding or better streamlining while swimming) require less power and presumably less energy of the swimmer? This is an entirely different question that requires a further analysis of the physiology of a swimmer, which I believe is more complex than the physics involved. Here's the rub, and why I had never considered increasing stroke rate as a means of increasing my long distance pace. Both stroke cycles and kick cycles have physics associated with torque and angular forces that are not consistent with forward movement. For example, lifting my arm out of the water on recovery is a wasted movement with forces against gravity and drag. I guessed that the benefits of maintaining forward momentum against drag forces were not equal to the effects of expending more energy in moving all those moment arms in more cycles. My guess seems to be supported when I keep my SPL consistent but increase my SR. If I swim 100 yards at 15 SPL smoothly at 1:30 per 100, I can sustain this pace for several thousand meters. What fatigues first eventually is my shoulders, but not until I've swum at least 5K. Also, I find I can't swim much slower than 1:35 per 100 without my stroke disintegrating. My attempts to get faster merely had me increasing my stroke rate while holding SPL constant. So I was swimming 15 SPL at 1:25 per 100. Doing so actually increases the amount of force necessary per stroke to increase velocity (acceleration against the deceleration of drag). Unfortunately, I can only seem to sustain that pace for about 800 yards. Both my shoulders turn to rubber, and I cross into anaerobic swimming within a couple hundred yards. What it appears some swimmers are doing is sacrificing some of the force per stroke (sliding the catch a bit?) resulting in a higher SR that has an accompanying increase in SPL. We are surmising the payoff is the maintenance of forward momentum. If forward momentum is valuable in a smooth pool with primarily drag as a resistance, it is even much more valuable in open water with cross our counter forces in the forms of waves and tidal push. What I need to do is find a way that increases velocity without substantially increasing effort. A higher SR with less force per stroke may be that solution.

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Thu, 19 May 2011 13:56:26 GMT

I have analyzed an elite swimmer and clearly demonstrated that stroke rate is reduced in OW swimming, not increased. Davies was out front in all my measurements. His strategy was to leed and push the pace and he still used a slower turnover. If higher turnover is better, why didn't he use it? Great analysis, but it is based on the assumption that OW races are conducted in the near perfect conditions seen at the Olympics and doesn't address the issue I raised: "However, what I do know (or believe, if you prefer) that a shorter stroke (i.e. higher SR) allows me to adjust my stroke to take advantage of the conditions - or at least not be dominated by them. If I have a low SPL and low SR then as I swim in rough water the wave, or waves if the the wind and deep swells are not identical in direction and period, will interfere with the rhythm of my stroke and cause me to lose momentum. If I switch to a higher SPL and higher SR this will minimize the negative effect of the waves. This is critical because it always requires less power to achieve a certain average speed if your speed is constant, than if you are constantly speeding up and slowing down. each stroke cycle."

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

evmo — Thu, 19 May 2011 09:07:21 GMT

Thanks Rob, this is great data! If higher turnover is better, why didn't he use it? Probably because the 10K is a much longer race than a 1500, and he's swimming at a slower pace. When looking only a single swimmer, wouldn't you expect this? Let's step back for a moment. There are a couple different questions we're asking here, with regard to whether higher SR's are "better" in Open Water. First, are there group differences in the average tempos for elite OW swimmers vs. elite pool swimmers? In other words, are the average tempos in OW races higher than the average SRs in pool races? Second, are there individual differences between OW tempos and pool tempos? Do individuals use higher tempos in OW, compared to the pool? The data I presented earlier address the first question - group differences. And these data seem to indicate that SR's for elite OW swimmers as a group are higher than the SR's for elite pool distance swimmers (as a group). What I've been trying to understand (see the red-colored text in my post above) is: Why is that? Does open water (as a racing environment) favor those with naturally faster tempos? The data you just presented address the second question: Are individual swimmers better off using a higher tempo in OW, compared to the pool. Davies is a great example because he excels at both. And the observation that he uses a slightly lower tempo in a 10K OW vs. a pool 1500m is important information. But I'm not sure it answers the question satisfactorily, for the reason stated above -- the 10K is a much longer race. What is Davies' tempo in a 1500m OW race? Higher, lower, or the same as his pool tempo? And what happens to Davies' tempo when he encounters rough water? Or cold water? I'm not in a position to answer these questions, but Steven Munatones probably has some ideas. My bet is that Davies (and others) would use a higher tempo in a 1500m OW race than a 1500m pool race. But I'm totally willing to be wrong about that.

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

rtodd — Thu, 19 May 2011 07:55:44 GMT

OK, Let's debunk this high stroke rate mumbo jumbo for OW racing. Took out my stop watch and DVD video collection from Beijing (I recorded all the races to study). Here is Davies' stroke rate in the 1500m where I could accurately measure: 1st 50 (1.26) 2nd 50 (1.32) 550m (1.32) 700m (1.29) 800m (1.32) 1000m (1.24) 1250m (1.27) Stroke rate in the 10K 57 min (1.42) 1:05 hr (1.43) 1:14 hr (1.42) 1:25 hr (1.38) 1:36 hr (1.37) 1:45 hr (1.24) 1:46 hr (1.26) 1:47 hr (1.29) He made his move at 1:45 and managed to go under his pool tempo briefly for 200 yds or so to try and move away from the pack maybe around 500 to go. He was able to just go under his pool stroke rate for a minute or so and then slowly fell off. Even in the last 100 he was at his pool cadence of 1.29. I have analyzed an elite swimmer and clearly demonstrated that stroke rate is reduced in OW swimming, not increased. Davies was out front in all my measurements. His strategy was to leed and push the pace and he still used a slower turnover. If higher turnover is better, why didn't he use it?

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

evmo — Thu, 19 May 2011 01:08:18 GMT

I'm a professional swimming coach, and have been for almost 40 years. It seems you don't see the towering hubris in 'a guy on an internet forum' presuming to advise someone who was swimming OW races and coaching high level swimmers before your birth that his 'ideas could use some revision.' So you're saying, what exactly? That you have nothing to learn from anyone except... other swim coaches? Or perhaps only other swim coaches who have been coaching for "almost 40 years"? Really? That's what these forums are for (among other things). To test assumptions - even those held by 60-year old swim coaches. Your defensiveness speaks for itself. Much advice proffered on this thread has focused on the rates - as high as 90 strokes per minute - used by elites in open water. ... The 4:12 marathoner... can do little but shake their head in admiration for the capacity of the elite athlete. But that athlete's rate and length has little direct relevance to them. Nobody has suggested that David try to swim 90 SPM. To continue your analogy: The 4:12 marathoner would obviously be foolish to try to match the stride rate of the 2:06 marathoner. So in that sense, the elite SR isn't "relevant" data. But what if we discovered that elite cross-country runners, across all distances, run with a quicker SR and a "looser" style than track runners? And moreover, we observe this difference only at the elite level - i.e., amateurs run with similar rate/style on both smooth and uneven surfaces. Now, all of sudden, this is very relevant data. For the amateur runner, the question is not, "Should I match the stride rate of the elite runner?" The interesting question is: "Can I become a better cross-country runner by finding a slightly higher rate and looser style than what I usually practice on the track?" Overall, I think the advice you just gave to David is quite valuable. I do, however, think there's an important truth that's not quite captured by your advice: Swimming in open bodies of water is fundamentally different than swimming in a pool - for more reasons than just "conditions." Steven Munatones did a great job describing some of those variables in his recent post. The variables of Open Water, it seems, tend to favor higher stroke rates. That's why guys like Thomas Lurz routinely beat guys like Ous Mellouli in open water races - even though Mellouli is about 30 seconds faster in a 1500m pool swim.

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Munatones — Wed, 18 May 2011 10:20:52 GMT

This is a fascinating discussion that I have 3 decades of statistics and observations on this topic. My interest was first sparked by Coach Siga Rose (nee Albrecht) when she was coaching open water swimmers in the 1970s and with Penny Dean who broke the world record in the English Channel with a high stroke turnover in 1978. Simply put, there are significant dynamic forces on the human body in open bodies of water - both positive (drafting effects) and negative (cross currents and surface chop). This means that the resultant propulsion is generally less than in the pool. If we look at underwater videos of amateur and pro open water swimmers, you can see their hands beginning their pull later (deeper) in their stroke and finishing their pull earlier in their stroke. Also, look at their kick and you will see their heels come out of the water higher and more often in the open water due to the surface chop, waves and swells. And in general their torsos generate more lateral motion in the open water than in a pool. This is due to the effects of sighting, slight navigational chances throughout the race, avoidance or initiation of physical contact with other competitors, and the rise and fall of the water in rough conditions. The videos, the photos and the data are all very fascinating and enlightening to consider and analyze. However, it is most telling when an athlete significantly changes their normal spm tempo. This can happen over time with a seriously committed athlete and coach or within an actual race. While people note Maarten van der Weijden's slower spm tempo, it is telling to see Maarten make his tactical moves DURING a race. At these critical points in a race, his turnover and kick really pick up. These subtle tactical moves are rarely captured on film, but they happen all the time at amateur and professional races. At the most recent Fran Crippen SafeSwim 10K race where dozens of pro marathon swimmers competed, Andrew Gemmell, the eventual winner, essentially won the race because of one critical 20-second portion of the nearly 2-hour race. Within a 20-second span, he went from 84 spm to 96 spm and surged into the lead, catching his world-class competitors by surprise. He went from 1.5 body lengths behind the winner to a 2-body lead that he held to the finish. This happens all the time. Gerry Rodrigues of Tower 26 made these moves at the masters and amateur level. Thomas Lurz of Germany makes these moves all the time at the pro level. And, Greta Andersen, a true heroine of the 1950s and 1960s, made similar moves when she defeated the top male marathon swimmers of her eras. You can see several videos of Greta's pro swims online where she is churning over quickly and kicking hard throughout her races. As a former 100-meter sprinter, Greta proved that motivated athletes can shift from being a pool sprinter to a marathon great. Keep up the great conversation.

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

evmo — Wed, 18 May 2011 08:49:14 GMT

Terry, No offense intended. I respect - sincerely - your long history in the sport and the how your methods have brought the joy of swimming to many (I assume thousands, at this point). That said, I think your ideas about open water swimming could use some revision - including (but not limited to) the "Open Water Stroke" article. For instance, I think data from elite races are relevant information, no matter what your age, talent, or speed. You, apparently, disagree. Aside from that, I feel no overwhelming need to "debunk" TI - though some bad advice from a TI-certified coach (as described earlier)did frustrate me. What you're likely unaware of - since it occurred before you were born - is that I coached elite level swimmers in all events and distances -- including national champions in pool and open water distance swimming whose wake would have swamped you on your best day No doubt, they would have. Still, sort of overkill to say that, don't you think? You're a big company; I'm just some guy on an internet forum. Who were these "national champions in open water distance swimming" by the way? You take care now, Evan

RE: Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

Former Member — Wed, 18 May 2011 07:25:55 GMT

Interesting indeed. Here's a replay of a world class 100m race where the swimmer with the HIGHER stroke count wins: YouTube - Cesar Cielo holds off Micahel Phelps for win - from Universal Sports Cielo takes about 35 strokes on the second 50m while Phelps takes about 30. Worthy of note I think in how Phelps appears to increase his stroke rate and almost catches Cielo at the end. The distance god Ous Melluli is also in the race but not a factor as he also increases his stroke rate at the end. What does one race prove? Cielo was faster that ONE day. Was he more efficient that Phelps? I don't know. He took more strokes but swimming is not the equivalent of chopping wood. Cielo's heart rate may have been higher and if it was, what does that prove exactly? Same for lactic acid measurements, if those were taken after the race. Stroke length is a combination of many factors, some immutable, including --body features such as height, weight, shape --body ratios such as leg length vs torso length, arm wingspan vs.height, slow twitch vs. fast twitch muscle fibers, percentage of body fat vs. body muscle (i.e. buoyancy) --swimming technique--minimizing drag, maximizing effective propulsion --swimming ability --strength and power --swimming fitness --age --others I can't think of right now Just based on those first 7 factors, I would use caution before drawing universal conclusions about stroke length. What does ring true is what others in this discussion have said about developing a range of stroke rates especially in open water. --mike