Ultra Short Training At Race Pace

Understand that I think USRPT is intriguing and I've done similar sets in the past. But the following types of statements (from Becca Mann's blog) drive me a little crazy: I think that in both cases Rushall is trying to say that his approach is primarily data-driven rather than conjecture derived from fundamental principles. Well and good. But I hate it when people -- especially scientists -- invoke science as some all-powerful and distant thing that can't be understood, much less practiced, by mere mortals. In most cases that's just a way to stifle debate. I am a scientist, I work with scientists, and none of them talk like this. And when they report their work they do so in far more conservative fashion than this (sometimes almost comically so). Maybe sports science is different than chemistry, I dunno. While I think Rushall has some valid points,this over use of the term "science" grates on me a little.I grant that his approach is much more science based than nearly all coaches ,but frankly the swimming science literature is not robust enough to say anything definitive(at least IMHO.)I'd think of USRPT as a series of hypotheses.I intend to test some of these(sprint,100 pace and 200 pace protocols) with a sample size of one(me).

Understand that I think USRPT is intriguing and I've done similar sets in the past. But the following types of statements (from Becca Mann's blog) drive me a little crazy: I think that in both cases Rushall is trying to say that his approach is primarily data-driven rather than conjecture derived from fundamental principles. Well and good. But I hate it when people -- especially scientists -- invoke science as some all-powerful and distant thing that can't be understood, much less practiced, by mere mortals. In most cases that's just a way to stifle debate. I am a scientist, I work with scientists, and none of them talk like this. And when they report their work they do so in far more conservative fashion than this (sometimes almost comically so). Maybe sports science is different than chemistry, I dunno. While I think Rushall has some valid points,this over use of the term "science" grates on me a little.I grant that his approach is much more science based than nearly all coaches ,but frankly the swimming science literature is not robust enough to say anything definitive(at least IMHO.)I'd think of USRPT as a series of hypotheses.I intend to test some of these(sprint,100 pace and 200 pace protocols) with a sample size of one(me).