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!
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).
He is very doctrinaire -- everything is black and white with no nuance.
I agree with Glenn's comments about 20 x 50 @ 100 pace @ :20 rest being almost impossible for a masters sprinter. I would never even attempt this set.
I also think Rushall's dismissal of strength training is suspect …
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).
He is very doctrinaire -- everything is black and white with no nuance.
I agree with Glenn's comments about 20 x 50 @ 100 pace @ :20 rest being almost impossible for a masters sprinter. I would never even attempt this set.
I also think Rushall's dismissal of strength training is suspect …
