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!
I am pretty sure that if I could swim 20x50@200 pace on :20 RI, it would not be my 200 pace any more.
That's kinda the point! :agree:
I think my record is 5.
I've found (and have had confirmation from others who coach USRPT) that "back half" pace for the 200 is a more practical benchmark. And when you first start, you'll probably have to set the target time even slower while you adapt to the program.
Doesn't USRPT call for the amount of swimming at race pace to equal from 3 to 5 times the race distance? When Rushall says 3-5, he's discounting the first 4 reps as some sort of "adapting to the task" phase. So it's really 4-6, with 4 being the bare minimum to achieve the desired affect. You will typically offer 7.5 times race distance for events 400 and less.
I am pretty sure that if I could swim 20x50@200 pace on :20 RI, it would not be my 200 pace any more.
That's kinda the point! :agree:
I think my record is 5.
I've found (and have had confirmation from others who coach USRPT) that "back half" pace for the 200 is a more practical benchmark. And when you first start, you'll probably have to set the target time even slower while you adapt to the program.
Doesn't USRPT call for the amount of swimming at race pace to equal from 3 to 5 times the race distance? When Rushall says 3-5, he's discounting the first 4 reps as some sort of "adapting to the task" phase. So it's really 4-6, with 4 being the bare minimum to achieve the desired affect. You will typically offer 7.5 times race distance for events 400 and less.
