Total Immersion Forums  

Go Back   Total Immersion Forums > Freestyle
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-10-2010
suelevin suelevin is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 29
suelevin
Default Isn't Trashing A Better Calorie Burn??

Funny, but a friend of mine said many years ago that the more efficient you became swimming, the less "exercise" you get. I guess she meant that you just exert less, burn fewer calories.

Interestingly, I'm finding by incorporating TI I I feel a lot more energized after swimming and I certainly am not gaining weight. I've kept my yardage the same, just swimming it I'd say maybe about 3% slower and about 40% more efficiently.

I was interested though in what others thought about this. Does swimming smoother mean you get less of a workout??
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-10-2010
Lawrence Lawrence is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London, UK
Posts: 804
Lawrence
Default

Yes. Since increased efficiency means using less energy to get from one end of the pool to the other.

But that doesn't mean swimming poorly is better. Unless skiing poorly is better, skating poorly is better, running marathons with one hand tied behind your back is better, etc. They're all possible but where's the fun?

If burning calories is the objective, running is probably to be preferred to swimming since there's no learning involved.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-10-2010
bnichols4 bnichols4 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 16
bnichols4
Default

I'm not following what you are saying. I belive that your heart rate is what determines how hard you are actually working and how many calories you are burning. So if you are much more efficent now then your HR probably isn't as high as it was when you were struggeling to go faster. My HR goes higher quicker when I run then when I swim. I am also able to maitain a more consistent lower heart rate while swimming then running. So if I want to lose weight and burn more calories while swimming, I need to swim longer becasue my HR stays in zone 1 or 2.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-10-2010
Grant Grant is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sooke, BC. Canada
Posts: 581
Grant
Default

I think if one wants only to lose weight then running is by far the quickest. One can still control the weight by swimming even though the eficency improves by stepping the pace up a notch. When that pace becomes more efficent and is done with ease, step it up another notch and so on.
Vary the practices as Terry in his latest blog suggests. Dr Gabe Mirkin in his writtings stresses this as well. A hard workout followed by gentle ones till muscles are no longer sore, then another hard/intense practice.
There is always another level that will keeo things interesting.
__________________
May we swim with ease at the speeds we choose.
Grant
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-10-2010
suelevin suelevin is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 29
suelevin
Default Where's The Fun is right!

I just got back from a two miler and swam it with so much more ease and I'm now finally back to my old pace. Exciting. I really love swimming now. It's FUN feeling good in the water and that is SO the point!!!

I love the idea too of getting better, smoother and faster without feeling like it freaking *hurts* exertionally if you know what I mean.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-11-2010
westyswoods westyswoods is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rio, Wisconsin
Posts: 564
westyswoods
Default

Who in their right mind would want to flounder at what ever they do instead of seeking a more efficient manner. Especially under the pretense that you may have a higher caloric output by struggling. When I was still able to cycle I found it to be the most variable of all exercises, in ones ability to alter heart rate over long time frames. Just food for thought.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-11-2010
ewa.swimmer ewa.swimmer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ewa Beach or Kona Hawaii
Posts: 147
ewa.swimmer
Default short term vs. long haul

I may be able to burn more calories by thrashing around in the water but I sure wouldn't be able to do it for long. Inefficiency creates frustration, fatigue that isn't equal to the gain, and injury.
I have kept with swimming because I enjoy it.
Over the course of a workout or a season the thrasher may burn more calories swimming but they won't keep that up.
Over the course of years of swimming, I, the most efficient swimmer, win because I kept going.
The sprinter loses the long race.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-11-2010
CoachEricDeSanto CoachEricDeSanto is offline
TI Coach
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 384
CoachEricDeSanto
Default

I like to think of everything we do with efficiency as giving you a choice. If you are efficient you can choose to reduce effort and calorie burning, or you can choose to step it up. If you are not efficient, you don't have that choice. Some examples...

If you can swim with relaxed two beat kick, you can use it to save energy or turn on a driving 6 beat if you want to.

If you can hold a relaxed 12 strokes per length at 1.2 seconds/stroke, you can choose to or you can choose to drop strokes to make it a weight workout or increase tempo to push the effort and calories up.

Efficiency gives you choices.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-11-2010
CoachSuzanne CoachSuzanne is offline
Coach
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,453
CoachSuzanne
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachEricD View Post

Efficiency gives you choices.

I was just trying to convey this same thing to an athlete of mine today. She swims (without knowing it) with a nice 6 beat kick and doesn't "get" wy anyone would want to use a 2BK.

I just brushed the surface of getting her to recognize what her legs are doing, but when she learns how the 2BK feels and works, she'll be able to switch back and forth to use whichever kick she wants for the given moment...perhaps a 6BK to get in front of the pack, and then a nice 2BK to stay out there and if it's a close draft legal race, pick up the end with the 6BK to get out of the water with the first pack.
__________________
Suzanne Atkinson, MD
Level 3 USAT Coach
USA Paralympic Triathlon Coach
Coach of 5 time USA Triathlon Triathlete of the Year, Kirsten Sass
Steel City Endurance, LTD
Fresh Freestyle

Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-11-2010
CoachSuzanne CoachSuzanne is offline
Coach
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,453
CoachSuzanne
Default

efficiency only burns fewer calories of your output is the same, in otherwords, if you are swimming the same speed as your "pre-efficient" stroke.

Efficiency is a measure of how much energy input it takes to achieve a certain output. When thinking of this in cycling terms (where the range of efficiency might be 22-25%), the more efficient you are on the bike, the less energy it takes to put out the same power. So in that respect you'll burn fewer calories. However, given that original higher energy input, you'll now be able to create even more power (and go faster).

Can you imagine someone saying that Lance Armstrong burns fewer calories on the bike than the local paper delivery boy just because Lance is more efficient on the bike?
__________________
Suzanne Atkinson, MD
Level 3 USAT Coach
USA Paralympic Triathlon Coach
Coach of 5 time USA Triathlon Triathlete of the Year, Kirsten Sass
Steel City Endurance, LTD
Fresh Freestyle

Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.