Parlysis of Analysis

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 15:08:19 -0500, rtk wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Occasionally I've tried doing the right thing and I've succeeded in
improving my time and looking much better and smoother. And getting
injured. I need to sink my hand soon, to take too many strokes, even
flail, and my shoulder will be much happier, even I don't win the Smooth
Stoke contest.

I try some of the things, when I get to the pool, that are talked about
here but then again I've always played with my strokes. I had too - in
high school I was a sprinter 6' tall and 140lbs. There simply weren't that
many guys that shape swimming fly @ > 2m/s and I certainly couldn't
compete on strength or reach with any of the guys I did race.

That being said these days I spend a lot of time coaching kids 10-12
swimming the 50 @ ~45s. How do I explain/show/elucidate/impart what I
felt? I find that much of the technical discussions here, for me at least,
revolve less around ground breaking technique and are more useful as a
groundwork for a kind of conceptual grammar for translating the
kinesthetic into the verbal. It's hard to say it if you can't think it.

--Mike

In 200 breaststroke, I dropped a good six seconds in one season by
applying the TI short axis tips. I also dropped a few seconds in the
200 free that season.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Has anyone on this user group actually "intelluctualized" themselves
into swimming faster?

[respectful snip]

Quoted message said:

Eric

i think you touch on a good point here, especially in the world that i live
in (senior age group swimming). coaches i've been around, talked with and
listened to, usually treat strokes like the text book pattern works best for
everyone. i've had coaches look at a couple of swimmers i've had and still
have and say "man, can't you fix that stroke? they'd be even faster if you
did X and Y" usually i just bite my tongue and agree (and sometimes blame it
on an obstinate kid!), but usually i've already tried correcting the fault.

the point is, and Ruth makes it well, is that after a certain amount of
instruction, there's a reason some strokes look out of whack compared to the
stock technique recommendations, and thats because a persons body usually
finds the most efficient manner in which to do something without having too
much thought put into it. when a coach does bully a swimmer into making a
change, i've often found in these situations it ends up being a change for
the worse. Bottom line for me as a coach is "if it ain't broke, and won't
lead to a broken shoulder, don't mess with it"

i've found huge advantages in getting swimmers *not* to over-think
technique, and *not* over-thinking race plans. Being able to execute without
thought is, after all, the highest level of motor learning.

i often think that some coaches (and some of the population within groups
like this) find technique something very easy to be an expert upon. all you
need is a stock comparison such as a book or some video footage and you're
set to expound their favourite topic of discussion. for many coaches, its
the one sure anchor they think they have as an area of expertise, which can
be mildly irritating sometimes. the hallmark of this group as armchair
experts is the disparity between the lack of training discussion that goes
on versus the depth of thought that goes into the technical discussions.

anyway i think i dragged this off topic.

steve

Quoted message said:

Has anyone on this user group actually "intelluctualized" themselves
into swimming faster?

In another words, with all the posts here on different ways of
swimming, from loping, to different kick patterns, to lower lumbar
arch, and all the wonderful videos now available online courtesty of
people like Donald Graft, has anyone revised their stroke

significantly

Quoted message said:

and been able to swim much faster because of it? (And by

significantly

Quoted message said:

faster I would say at least 5 seconds per hundred better, and maybe
even 10 seconds)

Back when I started participating in this group 2.5 years ago and
swimming avidly, I thought my decent engineering mind would help me
solve this problem the best way for me. And I would be able to say
something like, I don't kick much because my sprint swim to sprint

kick

Quoted message said:

ratio is greater than 1.5, but I do use a 4-beat because I have heavy
legs and I've noticed that most/all two-beat kick elites seem to be
razor thin. And I breath right instead of left because I'm right
handed, so I give body assist to the non-dominant arm with more body
roll by breathing.

I can say all that but I'm not sure I believe it. I can swim with

many

Quoted message said:

styles, but the speed doesn't seem to change much. That of course

may

Quoted message said:

be due to not sticking with one style long enough to let it fully
develop. But I also think that at the end of the day, we swim the

same

Quoted message said:

speed some irrespective of style because we're stuck with who we are.
Each one of us has a certain form-factor in the water, which yields

the

Quoted message said:

same fundamental resistance. We also have the same strength, and

limb

Quoted message said:

size, and flexibility, regardless of how we choose to swim.

So I'm little down on the intelluctualization of the whole process.
It's been a hoot reading everything here and participating. But

maybe

Quoted message said:

we're fundamentally putting the cart before the horse. By studying
swimming, we think maybe our brain can do a better job of solving how
best to move through the water rather than our bodies being the focal
point and giving feedback to our heads about what is working best.

I'll give an example as an aside. Some of my best runs were achieved
when I took off my stopwatch and didn't worry about pace. Instead,
just stay in tune with your body, it will certainly tell you when you
are at your limit for that day. It can be an exhilarating way to run
as you forget about numbers.

Sometimes I wish I could forget about loping, two beat cross-overs,

my

Quoted message said:

hand position at catch, and instead just let my body get up and down
the pool as best it can. I'm pretty convinced I wouldn't be swimming
any slower than I am now.

To phrase the problem differently - how fast would Ian Thorpe be
without his big, signature 6-beat kick. Not as quick as he is now,

but

Quoted message said:

still pretty darn fast. Also, did his coach measure his feet, have

him

Quoted message said:

point his toes, and then telling him to kick like crazy? I doubt it

-

Quoted message said:

he developed his style naturally, not by reading anything on this

user

Quoted message said:

group.

Eric

It may be almost 9am, but it's very grey outside. Everything is wet
including a large black cat that, being absolutely drenched, has just
come in and hopped right up on my lap. I had to back way off from the
computer.
I'm sure you can all quite easily visualise the above scene. I
haven't conveyed it purely through the use of grammatical terms.
Without attempting to translate the above bit by bit,nor any part, it
would be like reading something that goes something like this; noun
preposition, adjective present tense noun past participle verb....
Most of the time when I encounter what I call swim-speak (the kind of
technical terms necessary to convey technicalities of swimming), what I
experience is not unlike what most people would experience if someone
spoke to them in purely grammatical terms.
Even when I think I've understood it, I find that I mustn't have
due to how it doesn't quite fit with my form.
There are phrases the meaning of which we all understand if we've
grown up with them, but if we were to nitpick each bit of such a
phrase, it would seem to be nonsense. I think that's what you're
getting at. Is it?
However, some thinking about our swimming is quite beneficial.
Some people walk with a stoop. They find nothing wrong in their sense
of walking. They've grown into it, or an accident brought it about in
ways they've not noticed.
It feels natural to them. For them it is natural.
They might not walk a whole lot faster without the stoop and yet their
walk would be much improved, both in their appearance..
I have a feeling that's not what you were getting at, but I think
it's worth the mention.

Once an athlete reaches a level of proficiency, improvements are minor
and hardly detectable. Many newbies have reported improvements from the
advised provided in this group and have thanked us profusely for the
advise. For those who are already swimming at some proficient level, we
may notice slight improvements, either in speed, relaxation, etc.

For me, one thing is that it has made swimming a lot more fun. Swimming
laps alone can get tedious sometimes. Adding a lope, a kick where I
purposely brake the surface, a longer glide, doing the kayak vs front
quadrant,etc can make a few lengths go a lot faster.

I, for example, like to swim w/o stopping. So, I may do 5 laps loping,
five laps focusing of a long glide, five laps focusing on a deep two
beat kick, etc. So, while I may end up swimming the same 2000 to 3000
thousand yards that I used to swim in freestyle, I end up swimming them
in what feels like several different strokes. I work different muscles
and don't seem to get as tired. Because of this, it is easier for me
to swim more regularly and want to go swimming instead of thinking "oh
no, not again!" So, when larry posts 'bicep swimming instead of tricep
swimming", I am excited to go try it. I have also found that some
things don't work for me, such as the bicep swimming. On the other
hand, the propulsive kicking works for sprints and the loping works for
triathlons.

Andres

Mike Edey wrote:

SNIP

I find that much of the technical discussions here, for me at least,

Quoted message said:

revolve less around ground breaking technique and are more useful as a
groundwork for a kind of conceptual grammar for translating the
kinesthetic into the verbal. It's hard to say it if you can't think it.

--Mike

As someone who couldn't learn to swim until floating was explained to
me, I salute you. I don't think I believed in floating (perhaps due to
my drowning experience).
Madelaine

Quoted message said:

Once an athlete reaches a level of proficiency, improvements are minor
and hardly detectable. Many newbies have reported improvements from the
advised provided in this group and have thanked us profusely for the
advise. For those who are already swimming at some proficient level, we
may notice slight improvements, either in speed, relaxation, etc.

For me, one thing is that it has made swimming a lot more fun. Swimming
laps alone can get tedious sometimes. Adding a lope, a kick where I
purposely brake the surface, a longer glide, doing the kayak vs front
quadrant,etc can make a few lengths go a lot faster.

I, for example, like to swim w/o stopping. So, I may do 5 laps loping,
five laps focusing of a long glide, five laps focusing on a deep two
beat kick, etc. So, while I may end up swimming the same 2000 to 3000
thousand yards that I used to swim in freestyle, I end up swimming them
in what feels like several different strokes. I work different muscles
and don't seem to get as tired. Because of this, it is easier for me
to swim more regularly and want to go swimming instead of thinking "oh
no, not again!" So, when larry posts 'bicep swimming instead of tricep
swimming", I am excited to go try it. I have also found that some
things don't work for me, such as the bicep swimming. On the other
hand, the propulsive kicking works for sprints and the loping works for
triathlons.

Andres

I was helped by "permission to lope." I have found that most TI
technicques do not work well for my body. Biceps swimming is fine, but
I really want to work my triceps despite the fact that it is too late
for the elite swimmer triceps development. Looking better in a tank top
is a worthy goal for some of us...
Madelaine

"diablo" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

the hallmark of this group as armchair
experts is the disparity between the lack of training discussion that goes
on versus the depth of thought that goes into the technical discussions.

In my experience, variations in speed is much more training than technique
dependent, once you have achieved a good level of technical proficiency.

For example, I know that I am 7 or 8s faster per 100m if I swim 3 times a
week instead of 1 (cruising at 1:25 instead of 1:32 in a 10 x 100m set, for
example - feeling more powerfull in water, with a higher distance per
cycle).

This leads to some interesting calculation and trade off. I have time to
train only 4 times a week for triathlon (I have a life. And a wife. And
children. And a job. And rss to read...). If I swim 1 time a week, I will
lose around 1:45 on my best "possible" 1500m, but if I can bike 2 times per
week (instead of 1), I will be 5 minutes faster on a 40km ride, so I'm
better off with 1 swim, 1 run and 2 bike rides a week. If I become a better
biker, it may become advantageous to run more.

Happily enough, I sometimes get a knee (fascia lata) or achille tendinotis,
which forces me come back to my favorite sport, swimming again 3 times per
week, feeling again power in the water, and beating the pace clock.

-- Olivier

Silver0l said:

"diablo" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

the hallmark of this group as armchair
experts is the disparity between the lack of training discussion

that goes

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

on versus the depth of thought that goes into the technical

discussions.

Quoted message said:

In my experience, variations in speed is much more training than

technique

Quoted message said:

dependent, once you have achieved a good level of technical

proficiency.

I had a similar thought. It makes very little sense to talk about
technique with the level of fitness that I usually possess. And I dare
say this may also apply to most participants in this group, although I
could be wrong.

I had a six week period of training awhile back where I swam 5 days a
week, 75 minutes a workout. Freestyle Monday, Wednesday, Friday,
stroke on Tuesday, Thursday. And I'm telling you, at the end of that
period of training, swimming was a whole different ballgame. I was
strong and supple in the water in a way I had never been before,
ripping past people that used to spank me. And I could play around
with technique at will - swim a little more catch-up if I wanted,
change the kick around a bit, experiment here and then with some
different stuff, and "It was all good!" as they say. Then reality hit
of course - work, or sickness or something. And then the usual twice a
week here, once a week there, three times a week. Back to feeling like
I'm paddling a barge through the water with a popsicle stick.

So the point is thinking a great deal about what particular technique
may work best for yourself is probably not the way to go when you don't
have a lot of fitness.

Eric

If your technique is uniformly excellent, your results will only vary
with your level of fitness;

If your fitness is uniformly excellent, your results will only vary
with your level of technique.

But since both my technique and fitness could stand improvement, I find
the above situations hardly worth mentioning.

"Man o' Tea" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

If your technique is uniformly excellent, your results will only vary
with your level of fitness;

If your fitness is uniformly excellent, your results will only vary
with your level of technique.

But since both my technique and fitness could stand improvement, I find
the above situations hardly worth mentioning.

Well, I wanted to go a bit beyond our usual fitness vs. technique debate.

What I mentionned what that training not only increased my fitness level,
but also my technique. If I swim 3 times a week instead of 1, not only will
I swim much faster, but my Distance Per Cycle will largely increase, and my
feeling for water will be much better. A better condition seems to largely
increase my technique (swim efficiency), which is an advantage most people
don't expect.

So it's not a "fitness vs. technique", but "if fitness, then technique"
thing.

-- Olivier

Thanks for all of the info in this group. It is interesting and
helpful.

Sorry for addressing a somewhat-stale thread but I just got here.

Quoted message said:

Has anyone on this user group actually "intelluctualized"
themselves into swimming faster?

Yes.
However...

-You need to be strong enough in order to be able to judge whether a
new technique or tweak will be a benefit.

To get ready for competitions after a 19 yr break, I balanced between
focusing soley on physical training and adding intellectual "training".
It took me 8 months to go from failing to swim 200 yds straight to 3
USMS top 25 times in 2004 in my age group. I could not have done this
by just physical training. Current training load: 12-20k/week of
varied, focused swimming with a masters team.

-You can't think INSTEAD of train.

For me the ideal ratio, training to thinking, is 20 training hrs to 1
'intellectualizing' which doesn't include the
micro-visualization-swimming that I do while at traffic lights or at
boring meetings. If I add in the viz time, unfortuately the ratio would
change to 1:1 due to my traffic/meeting load.

The bottom line--can you overthink it? Yeah--

If you don't allow enough time for having your muscles get to a point
where you can adequately test whether new technique or tweak work for
you.

-krolek