Stroke Rate & Stroke Length in OW

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

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.

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.

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?

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.

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."

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.

"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.

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?

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