The Dichotomy in Swim Training:
"No Pain – No Gain" vs. "No Brain – No Gain"

By Peter Milliken

Editor’s Note: Pete wrote this paper for an assignment in a coaching certification class. We found his explanation of the “traditional” and “progressive” paradigms in swim coaching to be so clear that we asked permission to reprint it as an article in TOTAL SWIM.

There's an ongoing conflict concerning training methodologies of the swim coaches’ fraternity. On the one side we have the traditionalists - the advocates of the "No Pain - No Gain" philosophy. "When in doubt, get 'em to swim more yards!"

On the other side are the progressives - first advanced by Coach Bill Boomer whose focus on fluency described swimming more as a martial art than an exhausting, repetitive, tongues-hanging-out exercise. This baton has been picked up most successfully by Terry Laughlin who founded Total Immersion Swimming, and through a series of books, tapes, articles and workshops has promoted the concept that swimmers need to think of themselves as fish in the water rather than thrash about with unbalanced human motions.

Terry witnessed this dichotomy at work during a winter 2002 trip to England when he watched, and/or swam with, five different master’s teams. When he got back, he wrote about his experiences (“Energy System Training”, 2002, Terry Laughlin) in a short draft as part of a larger, unfinished work. As Terry describes it, four of the master’s groups used the traditional “struggle and survive” routines, while the fifth team, although not overtly "working on technique", was swimming more smoothly and with less effort than the others. Remarkably, many were also going “rather fast”.

Why is it, then, that most swimming coaches have stayed with the traditional “energy system training”? Clearly, their efforts have focused primarily on getting their swimmers “in shape” to survive the rigors of competitive distances. In scientific parlance, they have sought to raise the swimmers’ anaerobic threshold so that more of each swim can be done aerobically. And while they may have been successful in getting their swimmers “in shape”, they’ve done so at a huge cost – wasted motion.

So at practice, swimmers are given a set of swims, say 10 X 100 freestyle on 1:30, a quite common exercise for reasonably accomplished swimmers. The better swimmers get through this kind of set OK, while the marginal swimmers start out alright but towards the end it deteriorates into a desperate struggle to make the interval. Then the problem – the swimmers’ muscles “remember” how these swims were accomplished. And guess what? When they step on the blocks to race and the gun goes off, they swim in the same inefficient manner taking lots of short, choppy, energy-wasting strokes. What’s worse, they lose, often to swimmers in less “good shape” with no more experience, but with more efficient strokes.

So what is the alternative? “Esthetics” you say? You must be kidding! How are you ever going to get a swimmer through a 100+ yard race with ”esthetics”?

And the answer is: you’re not. But first will come the technique based practices –drill practice interspersed with “chunks” of whole-stroke that progressively make up what an actual full stroke swim will look like – and more importantly feel like – in competition. The focus is not unlike tai chi for example. Getting swimmers to stay long and balanced in the water, using fluent and coordinated movements. Here’s where the “No Brain – No Gain” cuts in. We want the swimmers to think as they perform these drills; we want them to focus on the exact motions that go into the drill; then as we get into the full stroke, we want them to take fewer but longer strokes, counting their stokes as they go along aiming for the greatest efficiency they can manage.

Then, and only then, will we move onto a set of full stroke swims. And we keep the interval generous enough so that we see fluent swims performed efficiently. We get the swimmers to pay attention to stroke counts, reporting these to us on a regular basis. When there’s a hint of struggle or stroke counts start climbing without attendant improvements in time, we stop them. Then we either adjust the task (i.e. substitute a drill) or we ask them to swim the repeat more slowly or quietly. Their time or speed are less important than their stroke count.

Now the traditionalists other arguments start to come into play: “While all of that may be fine for a group of Master’s swimmers, you’re dealing with high school kids.”

It’s at this point that you remind them that while many Master’s swimmers practice year round, the high school season is comparatively short (from 13 to 16 weeks), and that many high schoolers are working out for fewer hours per week (6 hours on average) than some Master’s swimmers.

They then scold: “But how can you be successful at the distance events given this regimen?” So you ask: “How many high school events require that you swim more than four lengths of the pool (100 yards)?” There are just three as against eight events where swimmers race for 50 or 100 yards.

“ Aha”, they continue. “Then you must be willing to sacrifice points in the longer three events.” Not at all. We train the 200 and 500 swimmers somewhat differently than we train the sprinters, BUT we never lose sight of the objective of having these swum efficiently, reminding naysayers that it’s even more important for swimmers competing at the longer distances to hold their strokes together (that is, fluency matters more) than over the shorter distances.

Finally, the traditionalists suggest that “You must be running easy workouts. How are you going to challenge a high school kid? What kind of a life-lesson is that?” To that you respond, come and see what we do then decide if it’s “easy” or not. And it’s not just their bodies that we are taxing; we’re asking them to think about what they are doing throughout the workout. And what we’re ending up with is kids swimming faster (reminding traditionalists that drag increases exponentially with speed) with equal or less effort than their counterparts in traditional programs.

Finally, let’s compare workouts:

Team “A”: “OK swimmers, warm up 1000 yards and when you’re done, let me know. Done? Good. Now, let’s get some yards in with a set of 10 X 200 free swims on 3:00. Then we’ll have time for a set of 200 IM’s before we move onto some 100’s and 50’s stroke.” And so it goes often without a mention of technique. Any “coaching” that goes on consists of urging the swimmers to “make the intervals, don’t stop, what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger!” Etc, etc.

Team “B”. “OK swimmers, let’s start out with a 200 reverse IM easy. When you get to the fly, swim it as 2 X 25 with rest. If your fly breaks down, do Body Dolphins – no ‘butterstruggle’. Now let’s move onto some freestyle drills. Remember, swim these slowly and methodically thinking about balance and fluency as you go along. During the drills the coach stops swimmers having difficulty, reinforcing the correct technique, often using “demonstrators” to show the others what words have failed to communicate. At the conclusion of the drills: “OK, now swim 4X50 free counting your strokes. Aim to have progressively one fewer stroke on each succeeding 50. Now, let’s do 4 x 50 ‘Swim Golf,” each one a little faster than the one before, counting your strokes on each one. Your golf score will be the sum of your time and the number of strokes you take. Lowest score ‘wins’.“ Then, the coach moves onto a set of 100’s, then drills for one or more of the other strokes, finishing off with turn drills and maybe some starts and finishes.

Need more be said?

Simsbury High School started a co-ed swim team in 1987, the year our family moved back to Connecticut. I joined Jim Ottman that first year as a volunteer coach, my first experience "on deck". A couple of years ago, the assistant coaching position opened up at Simsbury, and this will be my third year in that position. The team is co-ed and practices and competes in the winter season. Our competition is mostly against all boy teams in the Greater Hartford area, but there are several other co-ed teams we compete against as well. We have had (and will have this year) very large teams; we carried 50 swimmers and 6 divers last year. Our won-loss record is about 50/50 and we have placed 3rd in our league for the past couple of years. We take all our relays to "States", and we have placed several swimmers into sectional finals recently, but none has reached the state open meet for several years.

I mainly coach the kids who have never swum competitively before plus
a few who have had limited "summer" team experience. In terms of accomplishments, over half of "my" kids reach some kind of "championship" meet, whether that be our league championship or our annual "Splash" meet - a girls' only meet held during the boy's season. For the past couple of years our team has finished second (out of about 10 teams) in that meet, and "my" kids have added significantly to our point total. This past winter one swimmer from this group made the cut for States.

Peter L. Milliken

Raised in Simsbury, I received my BA in Economics from Yale and then went on to Naval OCS in Newport, RI. After commissioning, I was assigned as a line officer on a Newport based destroyer, then a year later transferred to Camp Pendleton, CA where I served for 2+ years as a Naval Gunfire Liaison Officer attached to the 11th Marines.

Upon my release from the service, I went to Columbia Business School, and after receiving my MBA in Finance, joined Connecticut Bank and Trust Company in Hartford. Served as Credit Dept. Manager, Commercial Loan Officer, and Branch Manager, then ten years later moved on to become Senior Loan Officer with BayBanks, Inc. (Boston) subsidiaries in Bristol County, MA.

In the fall of 1987, I moved back to Simsbury in line with the opening of BayBank Connecticut in Hartford, and two and a half years later left the banking business to open Fast Lane Swim Shop in Newington, retiring in 1998.

In 1987, I joined Jim Ottman (and Dick Murphy) as a volunteer, part-time coach of Simsbury High's first swim team, and two years later coached full time alongside Jim. At the end of that season, I was awarded my varsity SHS swimming letter. During the summers of 1992-5, I was the Head Coach of "Simsbury Sprinters" senior team.

After retiring, I became Assistant Coach of Westminster School from 1998-2001 and received Westminster's "Headmaster's Award" in 1999. In the fall of 2002, I joined Mark and Denise Raymond on deck as Simsbury High School's assistant coach.

Although I have not competed for several years, I have been swimming competitively since 1981 with New England Masters and more recently with Connecticut Masters Swim Teams. At the 1984 Bay State Games, I won the bronze medal in the 200 yard breaststroke and was a medallist in the 50 meter breaststroke at the 1985 Masters' Long Course National Championships.

For the past four years, I have been a volunteer tutor at SHS helping students with first year algebra. I am an avid bridge player, and compete frequently at Simsbury's Duplicate Bridge Club. My wife Birch and I have been married for 32 years; we have a daughter and son, now both married.

Reach Peter Milliken at fast-lane@att.net