coachsci.sdsu.edu/.../ultra40a.pdf
There is a method, which is referred to as the Rushall method which Michael Andrew uses.
Was wondering if you had any critique about this. If this sort of training is a good idea and what are the problems.
Would this also be good for longer events? Like the 400 IM?
Thanks!
Parents
Former Member
I could see where confusion could come in.
If for example you want to go 1:06 in the 100 free as your pace, the chart says you need to go 34.0 for a 50. That is correct, but it assumes that with a dive your first 50 is a 32.0. So this chart is really for the second 50 of a 100 ( and all the other 50's if you are going farther than 100).
Makes sense but this only makes sense for even splitters. Does Rushall urge us to split evenly? Or do we train this way and pace our own way?
I could see where confusion could come in.
If for example you want to go 1:06 in the 100 free as your pace, the chart says you need to go 34.0 for a 50. That is correct, but it assumes that with a dive your first 50 is a 32.0. So this chart is really for the second 50 of a 100 ( and all the other 50's if you are going farther than 100).
Makes sense but this only makes sense for even splitters. Does Rushall urge us to split evenly? Or do we train this way and pace our own way?
