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
  #21  
Old 08-30-2013
CharlesCouturier CharlesCouturier is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,244
CharlesCouturier
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danm View Post
indeed the original cooper test is based on running. However, they developed one for swimming and I linked to the swimming specific one.
All I was saying is that the test could be used as a measure of how swimming specific fitness improves.
It is after all nothing but a measure of swimming speed, but it gives a range from "very poor" to "excellent" and it is also age-group-specific. I would consider it usefull for myself if I wasnt already at the "excellent" level for my age group. The test has versions for untrained adults and for trained athletes.
Yeah that is the problem. They seem to have pulled these classifications off their hat (to be polite). They're being way too hard on 60+, certainly not enough on 30-39 category group. For example, you can't congratulate a 30yo male for holding 2min01 for 12min and expect 2min37 from a 70yo swimmer for granting the same congratulations level. That just doesn't add up. Pseudo science, at best.

Someday it may be possible to compare based on age/gender. But it is not easy to achieve. In the meantime, I believe that master swimmer level database remains a much better indicator of one's level compared to people the same age group/gender.

Quote:
Originally Posted by danm View Post
Fitness WILL improve with TI swimming, right? If that is so, why not measure by how much? The Cooper test is very well studied and it works to asses such an improvement.
The purpose of the cooper test has always been to estimate one's vo2max, not one's aerobic fitness for example.

Quote:
Originally Posted by danm View Post
Of course, things like "feels easier" "is more enlightening" are important too - I am not dismissing them at all. I am looking for bliss, like everyone here ;). But they are not measurable really.
You're totally right. What gets measured gets improved (Terry? lol).

However a 400m is a much better indicator of one's swim pace at vo2max, since it is very well studied that 12min seems forever when comes to vo2max speed. It's too long. It's no man's land.

400m = vo2max, 1500 = threshold.

SDI concept = a great way to track your fitness changes:

http://www.arhy.org/swim-predict

Maths that support this were created back in the 70s, and this too was subject to massive peer review.

Essentially, if you're a distance swimmer, you want to reach 1.06 and less of SDI. By inputting any entry point, but preferably 2 points that are further apart, it calculates your SDI and even predicts what your performances would be over 800, 1000, 1500, 1900, 3800.

In underreads compared to the CSS concept (critical swim speed), but still correlates with it somehow. Nowadays, most people use the CSS concept to assess aerobic fitness changes (good or bad). The idea is very very simple. It represents the speed that corresponds to the point above which you'd be out of breath. Just before becoming out of breath, that's CSS right there.

Last edited by CharlesCouturier : 08-31-2013 at 12:40 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-31-2013
Rincewind Rincewind is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 340
Rincewind
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danm View Post
if you're a top class marathon runner, you know very well what your fitness level is. and the original version of the cooper test is done by measuring how much one can run in 12 minutes, so no one would need to take a swimming test unless they wanted to mesure swimming specific fitness.

I didn't propose that general fitness should be improved before working on technique. What I was trying to propose was an initial range of potential improvement, for someone who has just started and wants a clear benchmark.

Fitness WILL improve with TI swimming, right? If that is so, why not measure by how much? The Cooper test is very well studied and it works to asses such an improvement. Of course, things like "feels easier" "is more enlightening" are important too - I am not dismissing them at all. I am looking for bliss, like everyone here ;). But they are not measurable really.
So whats the point? Basically the test is saying time yourself and see if you improved? Sure that works... there is hardly any science in it.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-31-2013
ananthaditya ananthaditya is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 100
ananthaditya
Default

From the information provided in the 'Definitions and Formulas' thread, I figured I convert 50-55% of wingspan to stroke.

My aerobic fitness level I can gauge realistically to be 'poor' without resorting to Cooper's test, though looking it up would confirm my poorness. Even if I tested a 'fair,' it'd just be a meh result without any kaizen at all. In fact, at any level of fitness I don't see the need for numbers to be patronized by such bromides.

What I mean is that the values should be a wider platform for wellness and improvement, and not just confirm a person's current level of fitness. If I swam 450 yards in 12 minutes and rated 'poor' on a scale up to 'excellent,' being result-driven, I'd immediately think 'swimming's not for me.' Bad attitude? Maybe.

I'd say converting wingspan to stroke is kaizen because keeping it constant across times, distances, and tempos makes even a small increment in the conversion rate sustainable by a plateau of overall wellness that is achieved by self-fulfilling practice across various focal points. It has the flexibility of being result-driven and process-driven at the same time. I'm willing to admit that it's all a question of mindset, and for some people a more straightforward 'did I make the cut or not?' mindset would work just as well, if not better.

Having said that, I did 1500m in 41 minutes yesterday, shaving off about 4 minutes through faster pushoffs and fewer intervals of slow swimming for catching my breath. It's only technique and not aerobic fitness that's brought me so far, because I can't run 2 minutes without feeling a mild burning in my core and breathing like I'm dousing a fire.

My body hasn't been fit since I was 16, and ten years on, I'm trying to pick up the pieces of overindulgence and neglect. I'm treading a careful path with numbers because I've never really been into sports, always preferring to escape into the esoteric world of philosophy and contemplation.

Somehow, TI brings contemplation to a physical activity sans any esoteric airs, which is why I'm drawn here. On an ending note, can anyone suggest DPS ranges for WCF, as already requested before in another thread? My WCF is 1.02.
__________________
योऽपामायतनं वेद आयतनवान् भवति।
yo'pām āyatanam veda āyatanavān bhavati.
'He who knows the seat of water,
Becomes established in himself.'

Ananth Aditya
Freelance writer, editor,
and aspiring novelist.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-31-2013
danm danm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 76
danm
Default

"The purpose of the cooper test has always been to estimate one's vo2max, not one's aerobic fitness for example."



@CharlesCouturier Vo2Max IS a measure of aerobic fitness.
Classifications are not pulled out of anyone's hat. Cooper institute has pretty much wrote the book on what aerobic training/fitness is. Cooper actually invented the term "aerobic". They deserve a little more credit...

@rincewind - the cooper test tells you not only that you have improved, but by how much according to your age.

TI does not make swimming totally efortless. Some people here seem to believe that with TI you can swim without ANY effort. Well, no. You can swim better at the same effort, but without those 30% of fitness, no techique will make you a better swimmer. Of course, technique practice brings fitness with it. And this test tells you how much of it. That's all I'm saying.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-31-2013
Danny Danny is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,442
Danny
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ananthaditya View Post
It's only technique and not aerobic fitness that's brought me so far, because I can't run 2 minutes without feeling a mild burning in my core and breathing like I'm dousing a fire.

My body hasn't been fit since I was 16, and ten years on, I'm trying to pick up the pieces of overindulgence and neglect. I'm treading a careful path with numbers because I've never really been into sports, always preferring to escape into the esoteric world of philosophy and contemplation.

Somehow, TI brings contemplation to a physical activity sans any esoteric airs, which is why I'm drawn here. On an ending note, can anyone suggest DPS ranges for WCF, as already requested before in another thread? My WCF is 1.02.
Ananth,

I'll bet you would be very surprised at how far you can run, especially if you bring the same focus on technique and Kaizan to running that you bring to swimming. One of the big surprises in running, for people who have never really tried it, is the fact that most of it involves pacing. So I would like to suggest an experiment, which I hope might interest you, but maybe not, and that is to set yourself a goal of running continuously for 15 minutes. When you swim 1500 m, you are paying attention to your breath, and when you start to get winded, you slow down. Use the same approach to running. If you are getting tired then you are going too fast. Also try to treat running like you treat swimming. If there is some aspect of your running that is uncomfortable, try to figure out what it is and how to correct it.

I don't know if this experiment would interest you, but, if it does, I would be very interested to hear the results!
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-31-2013
CharlesCouturier CharlesCouturier is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,244
CharlesCouturier
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danm View Post

@CharlesCouturier Vo2Max IS a measure of aerobic fitness.
Classifications are not pulled out of anyone's hat. Cooper institute has pretty much wrote the book on what aerobic training/fitness is. Cooper actually invented the term "aerobic". They deserve a little more credit...
You're mixing things up I'm afraid.

No one in the field denies the contribution of the Cooper Institute to the evolution of exercise physiology research. However 1) the cooper test wasn't even elaborate by this institute, although it was created by its founder Ken Cooper. These works translated our understanding of exercise physiology back in 1968. Few things have changed every since. Like I've mentioned to you at least 5 times now, aerobic fitness is no longer assumed to correlate with aerobic capacity (ie, vo2max), at least not as much as with Lactate Threshold.

Traces of this test being "reviewed" by science are kind or rare. Here's one. As expected, the conclusion isn't very positive.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...5#.UiHydLyiTiE

Here. Interestingly enough, this paper finds somewhat of a correlation between CSS and 12min Cooper test. This would also go inline with the SDI concept which considers the CSS pace to be sustainable for 800m (not 1500m). http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/humo...-2013-0002.xml

Here. Another one mentioning about some instability experienced with this test:
http://www.fizyoterapirehabilitasyon.../dergi/180.pdf
"We concluded that the 12-min swim test in non elite young female swimmers is not a good field test of cardiorespiratory fitness"

So in the end you may continue using it as it may fit your need quite well. After all, as long as you're booking more laps in 12min, it's reasonable to believe that you've improved. But that test is obsolete, and, has never been greatly accepted among the scientific community. It is sooooo easy to evaluate your fitness over 800m instead. You can then benchmark yourself with Master Swimmers data tables (like this one here http://mymsc.ca/EventResults.jsp) and see if this result is still "Excellent".

The 2 biggest downsides of the 12min test, is that it's harder to pace yourself. That's for one. Then it will likely end straight in a middle of a length, which makes comparisons less accurate. Anyway.

Again *that* is what I think about your *test*, not about the whole Institute! The test was designed a few years before the Institute was even founded.

Last edited by CharlesCouturier : 08-31-2013 at 02:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-31-2013
Rincewind Rincewind is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 340
Rincewind
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danm View Post
"The purpose of the cooper test has always been to estimate one's vo2max, not one's aerobic fitness for example."

@rincewind - the cooper test tells you not only that you have improved, but by how much according to your age.
Yeah, but that is such an oversimplification.

Fot athletes 5k-10k runners will probably score best on this test since it is close to the distances that they train for.

Did you know that Lance Armstrongs 1st marathon attempt was a 2:59, while his projected VO2 max time was a 2:06?

There is a lot to be said for specialization in training...
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-01-2013
The Parrot The Parrot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sherborne, Dorset, UK
Posts: 111
The Parrot
Default

'No one in the field denies the contribution of the Cooper Institute to the evolution of exercise physiology research. However 1) the cooper test wasn't even elaborate by this institute, although it was created by its founder Ken Cooper. These works translated our understanding of exercise physiology back in 1968. Few things have changed every since. Like I've mentioned to you at least 5 times now, aerobic fitness is no longer assumed to correlate with aerobic capacity (ie, vo2max), at least not as much as with Lactate Threshold.'

Absolutely, could not agree with you more, Charles. In my experience, distance running again, some of us playing at a reasonably high high level of marathon running actually didn't have a particularly outstanding VO2 max - but what we found we had was the ability to perform at a very high percentage of that VO2 max, sometimes for extended duration. I am just not convinced that Armstrong who was admittedly gifted physically (pity about the mind), could run a 2.06 marathon without some magic dust but 2.10 - 2.15 yes, perhaps.
At a very different level and only for example, I could run a 5km race within 5 beats of max heart rate, a 10km race at 10 beats off max, and marathons 15 beats off but within 5 to 10 beats of max for the last 3 miles. Ultras were a different matter and one strenuously(!) avoided getting anywhere near aerobic threshold. Others had much the same ability in this respect which convinced me the Cooper test was useless for those trying to be 'serious' athletes but better than nothing for others.
I am not good enough at swimming and its different breathing situation to know if and how this relates, if it does.

Martin T.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-01-2013
ananthaditya ananthaditya is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 100
ananthaditya
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny View Post
Ananth,

Also try to treat running like you treat swimming.
Danny,

I was just checking out Chi Running. It's definitely a similar approach to TI. But since, as Terry mentioned, aerobic fitness is more important in running while economy is in swimming (at least for non-atheletes), it's more difficult to enjoy running at this stage. But I'll definitely take your advice and try a 15 minute run, using the concepts of chi running.

I might even take what you said very literally; I'll treat air as a medium just as soothing as water, which might help me deal with a jumpy mind while running. I think this contributes a lot to my impulse of wanting to stop when my heart rate picks up. It's pretty high even while swimming (after 400m) but the water somehow takes away the 'tension' and keeps me going.

Btw, DPS ranges for WCF? Anyone?
__________________
योऽपामायतनं वेद आयतनवान् भवति।
yo'pām āyatanam veda āyatanavān bhavati.
'He who knows the seat of water,
Becomes established in himself.'

Ananth Aditya
Freelance writer, editor,
and aspiring novelist.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-01-2013
Richardsk Richardsk is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,380
Richardsk
Default

Hi ananthaditya

I'm sure I could find out if I searched assiduously, but does WCF stand for wingspan conversion factor? If so, how do you calculate it?
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 06:25 AM.


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