I am finding the idea of comparing slowest and fastest times interesting but after reading Terry and Suzanne's posts am feeling a bit sceptical of the slow times. It is easy to determine fastest time but how do you define slowest time? If I am walking I can walk at a slow relaxing pace but I can also do a very very slow walk. I tried a slomo walk across the 5 yds of my kitchen and managed to do this in 1m15s with a continuous movement, I expect with practice I could go even slower. I decided to have a go at slow swimming in the pool today, swimming is a little different to walking in that when you walk you can determine how long your pace is, it is a bit harder to control how far you go forward when swimming.
The following was done in a 25m pool with a 5m push off.
I started with an experimental 50m of warm-up pace, this took 57s spl 21.
then 500m warm-up 10m8s spl 21.
2x 50m fast 43s spl 21/22
For the slow 50's I tried tt 1.7 this was 59s spl 15
tt 1.6 was 56s spl15/16
I then decided these were not slow enough so ditched the tt and
did slow 50's with as little pressure as I could manage in
1m15s, 1m16s and 1m21s all spl 12.
The slow ones were all done with my definition of slow swimming as at least one arm moving at all times. Not a lot of kicking though.
I think for me this disproves Suzanne's statement that lower spl requires stronger effort. It does if you want to go at higher speeds but not if you are going really slowly.
I was however surprised that I could not go any slower.