View Single Post
Old 06-15-2018
sclim sclim is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,499

Originally Posted by Danny View Post
Tom, I listened to Terry on this link and tried to implement it when I got back in the pool. As I said previously, my SPL had increased lately as I tried to imitate Terry's timing in his TI demo, and I couldn't understand why. By paying attention to two different things he pointed out in the above thread, I got my SPL back down again. First, start the catch by using the muscles on the top of your shoulder to raise your shoulder as the hand drops, second, to concentrate on holding the ball of water you catch as your arm moves back in the stroke. When I first started doing this, my SPL dropped, but I was surprised that it seemed to require some strength and effort. Over time, I noticed that by coordinating my recovery and rotation on the other side with the motion of the ball, the effort went down considerably. So that was just one session. My times were normal for me, but my SPL dropped by 2-3. We'll see how easy it is to hold onto and improve on this change.

I've seen this a couple of times before, and I always learn something more each time I watch it again. Terry does allude to the many moving parts -- force, speed, angle, timing, stroke rate as "trading chips" that one tries to balance in the transaction, and that does make sense in retrospect.

But if you haven't actually got it yourself, that is, exactly how with exquisite balance and timing you manage to exert minimal energy to anchor and NOT move water while you move yourself forward, and he doesn't actually tell you throughout the course of the long on-shore demonstration, because no-one can, then one is likely to think it as all BS. Until you see anyone like Terry actually do it in the water with such ease and grace, or hear a personal narrative like you just described, Danny, by using a very subtle visualization superimposed on a previously learned gross motor skill which managed to get your SPL dropped by a number of 2 or 3!!
Reply With Quote