Sports Science Topic - June 29, 2007

Use all 3 perimeters d/S, Tempo and pace in the training

50 LCM
1. Establish d/S ; example 24 cycles
2. Establish tempo ; example 1.25 use a tempo trainer
3. Establish pace ; example 33.45

These are now the markers used in practice to monitor performance. The swimmer would start the 50s on :50/1:00 and when they can no longer hold the above 3 markers they would be done with the set and number made recorded for the next time set is done. The goal would be to increase number made the next time set is done.

You can adjust cycles lower/higher and tempo lower/higher to create slight increases in CNS/Neural adjustments.

Based on what I have been reading in the Sports Science topic and in other literature, the first key to improve performance would be to work on efficiency. As one repeats the correct motion over and over and myelination is enhanced, the motion should become easier and quicker. When this is achieved, more emphasis can be placed on achieving the best rate. It doesn't make much sense to speed up inefficiency.

Not everyone has access to the kind of products that help you break down race analysis and then use that information to improve performance. Some might not have the know how to use them anyway. Some might be so limited by their training environment constraints that they feel like that they can only do certain things, and don’t have the luxury of unlimited access or time
To those I say that rate should be more important than stroke count. If fact to all I would say that rate should always have a higher priority than stroke count. However, we also know that they operate in a very symbiotic environment. Yes efficiency will have a determining effect, but when race days arrives, it’s the swimmer who can handle the neural demand of the rate who will be more successful. So to me, the bulk of the training environment should be dominated by a combination of the two, but when lacking the devices that might aid the process, I would do the bulk of the race specific work on rate versus lap after lap of awesome efficiency. There’s a need for both, but it isn’t a 50-50 split
The bottom line in all of this is the fact that the brain has to be able to handle X amount of time at X rate. So race related sets should be done at an intensity that simulates racing conditions. If I had to set up an order of priority based off what I had available to me, it would be something like this:
1. If you have no way of gauging rate or efficiency, I would make sure that you cover at least that they swim at a very high intensity that isn’t reckless arm spinning swimming, but swimming that has some level of efficiency to it.
2. My next option would be to add a certain rate to that training to ensure that you are training at the correct neural demand.
3. Lastly and by no means “leastly” (new word) the efficiency associated with that rate. So stroke count.
In cases where some programs are so encumbered by time and pool availability, you don’t have the luxury of trying to get things into an orderly or balanced fashion. So if I had 3-4 sessions a week, would I work on tech, endurance or race specific speed? I’m sure GW deals with thoughts like this all the time. Under those circumstances I would prioritize this way. Speed, tech, endurance. I’m not going to explain why, but that’s the route I would follow. If I was really cramped for time, I might even opt to do sets that focus on race intensity with no time or anything else involved… just swimming fast. I might have so many kids I couldn’t handle rates, or times etc… all I could do was watch them swim.
So it depends on who you are and what you have… If you have opportunity, use it. If you don’t , do the best you can. If I had to go back in time to my earlier days in coaching, I would have spent less time taking rates & splits, and numbers (and writing them all down… even in a driving rain storm) and spent more time just watching. I think at times you see more just watching and feeling what you see, than you do getting a bunch of numbers. So although it’s great to have both, when crimped for time, I would choose watching over the mad scramble to accumulate data. My 2 cents worth.

GW I'm shocked that you haven't noticed the camera installed at the turning end of your pool. I guess it has to be a refection of your concentration on the job at hand.