Broken swims

Sean Riley said:

Thanks for the feedback people gave me on my last query on the shave down. My next question is
about broken times. I recently did a broken 400 metre freestyle. 8 x 50 @60 seconds. I held around
the 33 mark so my adjusted 400 time would have been a 4:27.

My question is how would this equate to a straight 400 time trial.

My best 400 is a 4:59 which I did in January I have been too scared to swim a full 400 since
becuase I felt that was just a fluke and I didn't want to disappoint myself by swimming a slower
time (Strange how the mind works.)

I know the feeling. There isn't a reliable way to convert one to the other. I suggest doing the same
set once a week, but reduce the rest by 5 seconds each week - if you maintain the 33 average for the
set. Then, when you get down to the 40 interval, maybe even the 45 interval, you can be reasonably
assured that you will be way under 4:59 for a 400. If you get stuck for several weeks at the 50
interval, for example, then change to doing 4 X 100 on 1:40 and try to hold the 1:06 average.

martin

--
Martin Smith email: [email hidden] Vollsveien 9 tel. : +47 6783 1188
P.O. Box 482 mob. : +47 932 48 303 1327 Lysaker, Norway

In Sean Riley said:

Thanks for the feedback people gave me on my last query on the shave down. My next question is
about broken times. I recently did a broken 400 metre freestyle. 8 x 50 @60 seconds. I held around
the 33 mark so my adjusted 400 time would have been a 4:27.

My question is how would this equate to a straight 400 time trial.

Hard to say. 60 seconds is a pretty long interval, appropriate for 90+% effort. You couldn't hold
that speed without the rest.

Checking the results of the 2002 USMS national LCM meet, I see that the winning times for the events
progressed as

50m 25.32s 100m 54.89 200m 2:00.89 400m 4:21.13 800m 9:14.77

So the winning time for 400m was about 10.3x the time for the 50m.

If that proportion held true for you, you would expect to do the 400m in about 5:40.33. Since
your PB is slower than that, you may have been training more as a sprinter and need to do some
pace training.

Ross

In Donal Fagan said:

? He wrote, "My best 400 is a 4:59 which I did in January ..." only 9.06x his 50m repeats.

Thanks. I misread it as 5:59.

Actually, I'm having doubts about that proportion holding up anyway. 5: 40 seems awfully slow for
someone capable of doing 50m in 33 seconds. Maybe the USMS statistics are skewed because there are
so many more athletes entering the sprint events than the distance events?

Ross

Wow. Thanks for all the feedback. I will try doing the intervals with a shorter rest period and see
how i go. Thanks

Sean R "Sean Riley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Thanks for the feedback people gave me on my last query on the shave down. My next question is
about broken times. I recently did a broken 400 metre freestyle. 8 x 50 @60 seconds. I held around
the 33 mark so my adjusted 400 time would have been a 4:27.

My question is how would this equate to a straight 400 time trial.

My best 400 is a 4:59 which I did in January I have been too scared to

swim

Quoted message said:

a full 400 since becuase I felt that was just a fluke and I didn't want

to

Quoted message said:

disappoint myself by swimming a slower time (Strange how the mind works.)

Thanks in advance,

Sean R

In Jason O'Rourke said:

That's not surprising to me - there is a danger is using a multipler of winning times at each
distance. The 50m winner is the best at the sprint. But most people don't get that much speed, so
their ratio will be shorter.

Ok. Let's try those USMS statistics again, but only look at the longer events this time. This is the
2002 USMS LCM nationals, men ages 45-49, in case I didn't mention before.

Event Winning Time 200m 2:00.89 400m 4:21.13 800m 9:14.77 1500m 18:46.29

If you plot these four points, they're not quite linear. As you might expect, the times for the
longer distances are a little slower than a simple proportion would indicate. Adding the point (0,0)
to the set to make 5 points, I took the liberty of fitting the set with a quadratic instead of a
line. The fit was pretty good.

t = M0 + M1*x + M2*x^2 M0 = -3.146 <-- essentially zero, to this accuracy. M1 = 0.627 M2 = 8.401e-5

Projecting backward along the curve, a winning distance swimmer "should" be capable of doing 50m in
about 28.22 seconds. So the ratio of 400m/ 50m "should" be about 9.25 for a distance swimmer.

Now let's take that pseudo-information and apply it to the original poster. He said he could do 50m
in 33.00 seconds. If he was training as a true distance swimmer, and if the above analysis was
really significant, we'd expect him to be capable of doing 400m in 5:05. In fact, his personal best
is pretty close to that.

Given all the uncertainties, that's not bad agreement.

Ross

Ross Bogue said:

So the winning time for 400m was about 10.3x the time for the 50m.

Quoted message said:

If that proportion held true for you, you would expect to do the 400m in about 5:40.33. Since your
PB is slower than that, ...

? He wrote, "My best 400 is a 4:59 which I did in January ..." only 9.06x his 50m repeats.

Donal Fagan AIA Donal@DonalO'Fagan.com (Anglicise the name to reply by e-mail)

Donal Fagan Donal@DonalO'Fagan.com said:

Quoted message said:

So the winning time for 400m was about 10.3x the time for the 50m.

Quoted message said:

If that proportion held true for you, you would expect to do the 400m in about 5:40.33. Since your
PB is slower than that, ...

? He wrote, "My best 400 is a 4:59 which I did in January ..." only 9.06x his 50m repeats.

That's not surprising to me - there is a danger is using a multipler of winning times at each
distance. The 50m winner is the best at the sprint. But most people don't get that much speed, so
their ratio will be shorter.

Example in point - I ran longer distance in track - mostly the mile and 2. I might have been able to
do a 60sec 400, but my 100 wasn't that much faster - maybe 14. I could only move so fast, but could
do it as long as my endurance allowed. Whereas a 100m sprinter trains to go balls out at a level
where the muscles fatigue very quickly.

As for swimming, I can do a reasonably fast 100 on the few times I've checked, but my 400 speed is
pretty much the same as my 2400 speed, minus the occasional 15-30 second breaks.

--
Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

? He wrote, "My best 400 is a 4:59 which I did in January ..." only 9.06x his 50m repeats.

That's not surprising to me - there is a danger is using a multipler of winning times at each
distance. The 50m winner is the best at the sprint. But most people don't get that much speed, so
their ratio will be shorter.

mmm, though there is the International Point Chart which should provide a more accurat means by
which to compare performances in different events

GL Mike

"Sean Riley" <[email hidden]>wrote in
:"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Thanks for the feedback people gave me on my last query on the shave down. My next question is
about broken times. I recently did a broken 400 metre freestyle. 8 x 50 @60 seconds. I held around
the 33 mark so my adjusted 400 time would have been a
4:27.

My question is how would this equate to a straight 400 time trial.

My best 400 is a 4:59 which I did in January I have been too scared to swim a full 400 since
becuase I felt that was just a fluke and I didn't want to disappoint myself by swimming a slower
time (Strange how the mind works.)

Thanks in advance,

Sean R

I used to do sets similar to this leading up to major meets. Instead of doing 8x50 on a set interval
go 8x50 taking exactly 10 seconds rest inbetween each 50. At the end subtract your rest from your
total time and you should have a good idea of how you would do in a race.

--
Derek derekm at mceachernfamily dot com

Derek McEachern said:

"Sean Riley" <[email hidden]>wrote in
:"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Thanks for the feedback people gave me on my last query on the shave down. My next question is
about broken times. I recently did a broken 400 metre freestyle. 8 x 50 @60 seconds. I held
around the 33 mark so my adjusted 400 time would have been a
4:27.

My question is how would this equate to a straight 400 time trial.

My best 400 is a 4:59 which I did in January I have been too scared to swim a full 400 since
becuase I felt that was just a fluke and I didn't want to disappoint myself by swimming a slower
time (Strange how the mind works.)

Thanks in advance,

Sean R

I used to do sets similar to this leading up to major meets. Instead of doing 8x50 on a set
interval go 8x50 taking exactly 10 seconds rest inbetween each 50. At the end subtract your rest
from your total time and you should have a good idea of how you would do in a race.

That's a good set. The problem the original writer described is a
psychological one. Psychology is a big part of swimming. One's mind can become an obstacle.
Swimmer's block. Sometimes, you need to sneak up on a good time by tricking your mind into not
paying attention while you work hard. The short rest set and the technique of reducing the
interval while maintaining a fixed average time are good ways to do this.

For some individuals, it is hard not to fret about things.

martin

--
Martin Smith email: [email hidden] Vollsveien 9 tel. : +47 6783 1188
P.O. Box 482 mob. : +47 932 48 303 1327 Lysaker, Norway

<snip>

Quoted message said:

psychological one. Psychology is a big part of swimming. One's mind can become an obstacle.
Swimmer's block. Sometimes, you need to sneak up on a good time by tricking your mind into not
paying attention while you work hard. The short rest set and the technique of reducing the
interval while maintaining a fixed average time are good ways to do this.

For some individuals, it is hard not to fret about things.

martin

very good point - in fact I've known coaches that like to throw in the odd, well, odd broken swim.
Example, 100's broken as 30/30/40m or 200's broken at the 125. If you don't swim those often it's
tough to 'feel' how fast that was simply from the pace clock. You could do a little mental math, and
it should be hard to guess where a desired pace will put you but the point is that it's not
automatic like a 100 pace would be.

GL Mike