Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

For somebody already below 15 SPL, there may be gains to be found on the SR side of the equation (usually, through increasing strength and fitness). The latter point is, I believe, somewhat underappreciated in some circles. I think there's definitely something in the SR only to a point theory. I count strokes a lot and can do 13 or 14 per 25 yards in warm up, but that increases to around 17 when I need to hold a decent 100 or 200 rep pace. I also noticed yesterday when I swam long course (for the first time in years) that my SR went through the roof at 44 - 46 per length. I actually thought while swimming that I'd gone into OW "panic" mode. So maybe its an instinctive thing for some, to shorten the stroke in an attempt to maintain a higher velocity. Interesting thread :)

We never use the phrase 'catch up.' In fact, we have not even used the phrase 'front quadrant' in 12 or 13 years. Any coach who suggested that to you is giving their own input, not representing anything advocated by TI. Terry, thanks for the clarifications. I'm glad to hear the catch-up stroke isn't advocated by TI. The coach does list himself as a "TI Teaching Professional," but based on your comments, I'll just chalk it up to an off-the-reservation opinion. A TI Coach who has remained current, rather than use such a vague term, would give you a series of Tempo Trainer exercises to allow you to 'organically' optimize your stroke via direct experience. That sounds like excellent advice - and indeed, I've found the Tempo Trainer to be a very useful tool. I just wish they didn't break so easily! Having more arrows in your quiver allows more adaptation to conditions. I'm also pleased to hear that "adaptation to conditions" (w/r/t stroke tempo) is part of your framework for Open Water. My impression of TI's position was based on an article you wrote in 2008, "The Open Water Stroke," in which you argue that, just as "longer, slower strokes" work better in LCM compared to SCY, that even longer, even slower strokes should work best in Open Water. Perhaps your view has evolved on this point? Or perhaps you only meant it to apply to neutral open water conditions, not rough water? In any case, it sounds like we mostly agree on this. Thanks again - I think this has been a valuable thread.

A further point I think is worth making is to view the tempos, etc. displayed by elite swimmers with a degree of perspective and a clear-eyed sense of your own goals and abilities. It's interesting info to me that 25 y.o. highly trained elite athletes swim with tempos ranging from 75 to 87 or more. It's an important point. My thought process goes something like this: If the world's best OW swimmers maintain higher stroke rates in a 10K than the best pool swimmers do in a 1500 - remarkable, given that the event is 6.7x the distance - is there a lesson for us mortals? For instance: If I'm a 65 SPM 1500 freestyler, is there value in learning to maintain 70 SPM for a 10K (with perhaps some loss in stroke length)? Perhaps it is worth exploring. My intuition about the "why" is that higher SRs are more adaptable to rough water, navigation, and other swimmers encroaching on your space. But possibly there is some other, unknown reason. Coincidentally, someone just posted a video of the 2008 Olympic 10K in a different thread. Here's some quick n' dirty stroke rate data: elapsed time swimmer stroke rate (per min) start various 110+ 2' Davies 88 32' Dyatchin 86 33' Gianniotis 100 40' Davies 94 1:28 Lurz 98 Davies 90 Dyatchin 83 1:39 Gianniotis 97 1:43 Davies 102 1:49 Davies 95 Van der Weijden 78 Lurz 102 1:51 Lurz 102 Davies 94 finish (1:52) Van der Weijden 87 Davies 95 Lurz 102 Before someone points out that the gold medalist (Maarten Van der Weijden) curiously seems to have a lower SR than his competitors, I should note that Maarten, at 6 ft 8 in, is also substantially taller than his competitors (implying a lower SR). And here's for the women's Olympic 10K: Cassie Patten (bronze) 0:20 90 1:11 87 1:38 87 Keri-Anne Payne (silver) 0:10 94 0:20 88 0:30 89 1:11 89 1:38 89 finish 99 Larisa Ilchenko (gold) 0:02 88 finish 104 ----------------- www.freshwaterswimmer.com

This explains why you finished 2 1/2 hours ahead of me. Don't forget about the power plant, Bob. Beware the power plant! :bolt:

I'm currently an 18:08 miler (unrested). In college I was about 16:30. This explains why you finished 2 1/2 hours ahead of me. The fastest I ever swam a 1500 m was 18:16 when I was 29. That was rested tapered and shaved. However, I could cover a mile in 16:30 right now if if I was walking.

Don't forget about the power plant, Bob. Beware the power plant! :bolt: :rofl::rofl::rofl: Actually, other than that 2 mile stretch I really enjoyed the swim. I never got bored. I just kept watching my older brother trying to figure out how to mix the Perpeteum and Cytomax, and toss me the 2 bottles at the end of the cord. He only hit me once!

Terry, thanks for the comments. Interesting stuff about your training methods; sounds like you make the most of your 3,000-yard workouts. That said, the aim of my recent comments on this thread has been to try to understand: Why is it that elite open water swimmers race with higher SRs than elite pool distance swimmers, despite their main event being almost 7x as long? Again, please see the videos I linked to, and the stroke rate measurements from three different elite 10Ks (including the Olympics). I think it's an interesting phenomenon. And it leads to further questions: If the elites are doing it, does it follow that there may be advantages to swimming with a (relatively) high SR in open water? If so, what are these advantages, specifically? To what extent can the rest of us (as non-elite OW swimmers) learn from this? You wrote earlier that "It's interesting info to me that 25 y.o. highly trained elite athletes swim with tempos ranging from 75 to 87 or more" - which implied that you were unaware of this phenomenon until now. You're the founder of a successful swim-teaching business and represent yourself as an expert on open water swimming. So I'm surprised you're not more interested in these questions. Don't they arouse your "passionate curiosity"? When you point out that Grant Hackett held a rate of .7 sec/stroke in setting the 1500 world record, I think you miss the point. ... Hackett broke the WR because he took 31 SPL at that rate, while others were taking 32 to 36 SPL to travel 50 meters. Swimming slower than him despite stroking at even higher rates. And when you compare Grant Hackett to other swimmers in his heat, you miss my point. I was comparing Hackett (a pool swimmer) to elite OW swimmers, and noting that his SR is substantially lower. I didn't write that your stroke should be 'even longer and even slower' in OW.... I wrote that cultivating the most leisurely stroke that works for you in any set of conditions is critical to OW success. It's true; you didn't write the exact words, "even longer and even slower" - but it was a not-unreasonable interpretation of your meaning. Here's what you wrote, specifically, in the article: "LCM swimmers had longer, slower strokes" . Then, you said: "I instantly recognized that what was true for 50-meter pools would become hugely compelling in open water." Also, I notice that the words "cultivating the most leisurely stroke that works for you in any set of conditions" do not appear anywhere in that article (or really, even the concept). You may have written more elsewhere, but the "Open Water Stroke" article is what I was reacting to. I'd also add that the Olympic 10K was held in a man-made rowing basin. The conditions were about as neutral as they get in OWS. Yet still, the top women and men were humming along in the high-80s to mid-90s -- in the middle of a 2-hour race! So, a full discussion of the "Open Water Stroke" should probably account for not only conditions, but also the effect of navigation/sighting, drafting, race tactics, other swimmers nearby, etc. Some beautiful video of Keri-Anne Payne YouTube - Keri-Anne Payne's top swimming tips. ... Keri-Anne would make a great model for anyone wanting to swim TI style Keri-Anne does have beautiful technique. She's also swimming in a pool, at 50 SPM. In the Olympic 10K, the lowest SR I observed for her was 88 SPM. Check out the video I posted and tell me if you still think her stroke is TI-style. She seems to make a lot of un-TI-like splashes with her arm recovery. (To be clear, I think her OW stroke is great. I just don't think it's a TI stroke.) I'd also point out that she was beaten in the last 100m by someone going 104 SPM. On an unrelated note, I'm not sure I understand her tip about a longer stroke in windy conditions being "aerodynamic." I swim in windy conditions all the time in Lake Michigan, and honestly my "aerodynamics" had never occurred to me as an issue. Maybe if I had sails attached to my arms? The main issue with windy conditions is chop. Cheers, Evan ---- www.freshwaterswimmer.com

Ous Mellouli made a simliar move in the 1500 at the Bejing Olympics during a commercial break where he went from a body length behind to a body length ahead. I have no idea if is stroke rate went up. Gotta love TV.

In general stroke rate and DPS is a very personal thing and there is no right or wrong. I think the most glaring example of this was with Janet Evans in the 800 and with Rebecca Adlington who took down her famous record. I think stroke rate and DPS can be accurately defined for each swimmer in the pool, but I do think you need to vary it in OW to match the conditions. I find a higher stroke rate works in rougher water (that way I can survive loosing a breath every so often when submerged), and lower stroke rate on flat water, or sometimes I can match the stroke rate to the swells and get some benefit. I have also noticed when drafting someone it is nice to match their stroke rate so as not to tangle arms. Like meshing of gear teeth. I think you need to be a bit flexible with OW stroke rate.

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