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
  #11  
Old 04-26-2013
haschu33 haschu33 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 787
haschu33
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesCouturier View Post
I do, as I'm the one receiving the impossible missions. ...
You got to suffer if you wanna sing the blues...

Quote:
Originally Posted by haschu33 View Post
... this is fairly simple: rotation doesn't give you forward propulsion

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesCouturier View Post
...I think I've been quite consistent avoiding issuing this faulty statement.
Hmmm, I am not a native English speaker, but the English is ok, the syntax is ok, the spelling is ok, the semantics are ok, the content is ok...
What faults are you referrring to ;-)

I don't know if we can agree on anything. I am just an amateur, and as I said, I don't really mind, and I am a free man, I don't have to explain swimming, and I don't receive missions, thanks God.
So what about this, quoting our infallible doc with that brilliant nose that always makes her say the right thing at the right time (wow):
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachSuzanne View Post
......letting momentum forward bring you to the point where you can press water back (not pull). ...
So: If we want to move in a fluid like water (or like air) we need to apply a force in the opposite direction of where we want to go to. Or, on other words, we need to press water back in order to move forward.
Deal?

The rest is simple. In any stroke, in any position or stage, at any moment of any swimmer: just check what is the movement or part of the body that moves the water backwards - that is the source of propulsion, or at least contributing to it. And which movement or body part does not move water backwards? Voilą, that one does not contribute to the forward propulsion. It is as simple as that.

Why make even the few simple things in swimming complicated?


But, ...,...
Quote:
Originally Posted by haschu33 View Post
... It only works when you rotate the body but do not rotate the arm with the body ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesCouturier View Post
...
Voilą, you're getting there ;-)
Great! So we agree: it is the arm movement that creates the propulsion, not the rotation. That was easy...


But I still don't get this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesCouturier View Post
...The title of the thread mentions power, not propulsion. ...
That's why I asked what you are talking about because I don't have a clue what you mean.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-26-2013
CharlesCouturier CharlesCouturier is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,244
CharlesCouturier
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by haschu33 View Post
Hmmm, I am not a native English speaker, but the English is ok, the syntax is ok, the spelling is ok, the semantics are ok, the content is ok...
What faults are you referrring to ;-)
So simple still. And it's important, to have any relevance in this sort of discussion to be very careful with these details.

Body rotation alone can not generate propulsion, that's obvious.

It can not, not generate power though. Energy gets thrown in it, force gets generated, it can be then translated to power. That's undeniable.

Now the question being debated here is: can this power be translated into forward propulsion.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-26-2013
CharlesCouturier CharlesCouturier is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,244
CharlesCouturier
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by haschu33 View Post
Why make even the few simple things in swimming complicated?
Ahhhh gees.

Why? I'll tell you why. HVP (initials) is a 25yo guy who dreams of racing elite.

He started swimming not long ago. Still struggling holding 1:30 over 1500, but he needs 1:20 (therefore 20min flat).

Grab a challenge like that, I mean literally take a late learner, and bring him under 20min over 1500, and you'll understand why.

I'll be hosting the swim portion of our state (provincial) youth/junior elite development camp on may 11th. 75 among the best hopes will assist. They all have one dream: Going to the Olympics.

Some poeple I work with have mild hopes and goals. But in a University, you know, those kids, they want a lot.

Facts:
- If you don't use your body, you will never ever swim faster than 20min for a 1500, this is virtually impossible based on my 20+ years of experience.
- Body rotation creates a biomechanics trick, where the arm/hand is being automatically brought back simply by rotating
- The above statement explains why so many swimmers (who are fast) report feeling that they literally lock the arm in catch position, then pull with their body
- The purpose of this whole thread is to mention about this particular effect (that biomechanical effect).

"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler" (A. Einstein)

Last edited by CharlesCouturier : 04-26-2013 at 10:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-27-2013
CharlesCouturier CharlesCouturier is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,244
CharlesCouturier
Default

I realize I never actually took time to get to know you and ask about your field of expertise... I'd be interested to hear about it.

I know nothing about nothing. I need help. I'm like an an-alphabet.

So I can only talk in term of feelings, I'm sorry.

We have a driving shaft, a component in a machine that acts as a frontal axis I guess. And it's driving from side to side. The anchor points, wow there are many, not sure we should consider them right now. Let's first think of our machine without the water environment.

We have a main driving haft. Then upper body we have an axle that crosses it. That axle moves vertically as the driving shaft drives it up and down, but it (the axle) also has a front to back component a bit. If you look at the machine from the top, when you turn on the ignition, you see the driving shaft rotating, which drives up and down both sides of the axle, but also the axle moves front and back a bit.

OK. I think I'm not lost yet. A set of muscles pulls one side of the axle front whilst, and this is where it gets interesting, the other side of the axle is brought back by another set of muscles, namely the latissimus dorsi and to a lesser extent (at least hopefully), the arms adductors.

Have I mentioned the arms yet? No, purposely. No need to complexify this machine until now.

When the driving shaft drives one side of the axle down, that side is weighting something. It goes down. Do we get a lot of energy out of it? I don't think so, and I don't think you think so. So we both don't think so.

How much energy is required to take a catch? Very little. How handy... One shall not put too much effort catching. Just body weight (that side of the axle) is enough. And that, feels awesome (good feelings feel good).

By a fortunate coincidence, whilst being busy putting body weight on the downward action of the axle (which also stretches forward for better reach), the other side is moving *Up* and *Back*. BR drives the axle back, along with the hand. In fact, it drives the axle back and *UP*. How handy, since we know that the hand needs to travel back and up until it then recovers over the water.

And that, and I sincerely wish you some day discover it for yourself, otherwise I wouldn't be taking all this time, is the secret for fast swimming. Streamlining / balancing will only take you to a certain point. If you want to hold 1:10 for more than a single 100m, you have to feel this, orelse it's never going to happen.

Arms and hands are just used as paddles driven by the axle, itself driven by the driving shaft.

Mate, I may get things wrong, but I want you to correct me starting from the little story above, and not from most stuff we often read on this topic over the Internet.

As far as I'm concerned, it's recycling of energy, all that evolve around br, which transmits to axle, which transmits to paddles. I just can't see swimming the freestyle otherwise, as it would go against what I feel when I swim at the first place.

Here. It's low def, but this has to be my recorded clip at free where I demonstrate this principle the most, as I'm generating quite a lot of torque at relatively low rate, that's just a 100m done at 400m pace. One of the side effects to all this is that since the upper side back muscle pulls against the arm to hold it in place whilst body rotates, it's hard to avoid fishtailing. So at these speeds, I believe it's my worst flaw. But I'm a fly specialist, I'm doing my fair best at free.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkQY_xlFHNY

Last edited by CharlesCouturier : 04-27-2013 at 02:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-27-2013
DD_l_enclume DD_l_enclume is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 121
DD_l_enclume
Default

Charles,
I think your lawn mower video shows that as well.
Only you can tell whether the move in swimming is similar.
But if it is, then it helps understand how body rotation helps bringing *easy* power to the stroke.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-27-2013
WFEGb WFEGb is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 1,104
WFEGb
Default Off topic...

Hi Charles,

just for a smile:

Quote:
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler" (A. Einstein)
Feynman stated: Explaining Pauli's Principle is so complicated, it seems we didn't understand it well enough.

And Fermi being asked where to start: Take absolut no knowledge and infinite intelligence...

(Hope someone may find a relationship of that for swimming...)

Regards,
Werner
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-27-2013
hydrophobe hydrophobe is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 26
hydrophobe
Default

I naturally hesitate before saying this, but the flagrant misuse of scientific terms is too just painful to read.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesCouturier View Post
So simple still. And it's important, to have any relevance in this sort of discussion to be very careful with these details.
I agree, hence this reply.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesCouturier View Post
It can not, not generate power though. Energy gets thrown in it, force gets generated, it can be then translated to power. That's undeniable.
This is just plain funny :) The definitions of power, force and energy are to be found on any elementary physics website. At present, you have no clue :) 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesCouturier View Post
Now the question being debated here is: can this power be translated into forward propulsion.
You clearly don’t understand what these terms mean. The body delivers a backwards force to the water. The reaction from the water against this is the propulsive force. Why talk about energy being “thrown in” and translations of power (which, incidentally, means something completely different) at all (in this context)? This needlessly confuses you and readers and it has no rational basis.

Maybe you are thinking of efficiency? Terry talks of efficiency correctly in his MIT talk, when he says that average people are only 3% efficient in the water (ie, 3% of the energy spent, acts to move the body forward…and 9% in the case of Michael Phelps). So, the rest of us are hopefully somewhere between these values. Is this what you are trying to say?

I read your lawnmower analogy and I think that it’s good to use concepts we understand or have observed. Many thanks for taking the time to share your insight. I don’t follow it, probably because I can’t visualise the type of lawnmower you talk about. Do you know of any models or web photos that I can look at and try to follow what you mean?

Last edited by hydrophobe : 04-27-2013 at 11:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-28-2013
CharlesCouturier CharlesCouturier is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,244
CharlesCouturier
Default

Sorry, I'm a french speaking person.

Energy thrown in, defined either as I donno, vo2. How is this power, well that's at least metabolical power (note 1). That's undeniable right? Is it? Nahhh it's not.

OK, energy gets throw in. Lost? I donno... You tell me (lol). I am eager to read your thoughts on that.

Translated? Hmmm, shortly and simply explained. Translated into mechanical power obviously. Does some of the metabolical power associated with getting the body rolling translates into mechanical power recycled by the arms to create this ... how you called that? Propuslive force? Thanks for that.

But yes, that's a main field of interest for me, and I'm even about to put some money where my FRENCH mouth is.

Go easy on me mate... I try my best.

Glad you liked the lawn mower.

Again there, sorry if it's the wrong word. this here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6OaK_hKG7k

In fact, notice that the person on this clip, in spite of using a brand new and freshly oiled one, he stills pulls back with one body side. I believe he naturally does this to save some efforts. It's the natural thing to do.

Back to when I was young, they were bitches to boot up. Strap was close to the floor, extremely hard after our hard winters up north. Without body rotation, you just couldn't start ours.

Does it apply to swimming? Be very careful before answering... It is just not as simple as some may think. I've heard and read the *well swimmers aren't anchored so, etc**. That often only factors in body rotation alone. But like I'm trying to explain in this thread, there's interaction between side that moves down at the front, and side that moves back and up at the back.

If you read my original post, the very first one, you'll quickly realize that making this thread complex wasn't my primary intention. You're not the one witnessing tons of swimmer having arms that start moving backward, before the body rotation itself brings (automatically) that arm backward anyway. Read post one. If you disagree with anything, you're more than welcome.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hydrophobe View Post
and it has no rational basis.
No rational? Hmmm... Try me.

Seriously, it doesn't have much rational basis. We're swimmers first and foremost. The lawn mower stuff isn't just to sound interesting, it is actually what i feel when swimming. It's entirely up to you or anyone else to avoid getting confused by one of my primary passion. So it's true, it has no rational basis, it starts with feeling.

Note 1: http://www.triforums.vo3max.ca/viewt...p=11348#p11348

Last edited by CharlesCouturier : 04-28-2013 at 04:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-28-2013
CharlesCouturier CharlesCouturier is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,244
CharlesCouturier
Default

I answered your post above.

Now, tell me. What do you see? Forget about Terry's analysis on swim efficiency, I don't think it pertains to loping style displayed by Phelps here.

So in all honesty. What do you see? Phelps that is?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRnRLUST2z4

Don't you see that left arm attacking the water with the body rotation, so obvious that you even see his shoulder attacking the water even before the arms enters.

I'll tell you what I see. And you scientist has to put the right words on it.

I see him putting his whole left hand side body weight on catch. Huge body rotation here, energy thrown in (whether you like it or not). What's the anchor point. Look at the other arm. his right hand side body rotation his bringing the arm back vigorously, which provide rock solid anchor point for muscles that are responsible to throw the left hand side front and down. How does the left hand side body rotation translate into mechanical power (then propulsive force I guess)? Well you clearly see it. He literally locks the arm. He just drives over it with the body, almost cut it short near the end.

Front and down, back and up. So goes the body rotation.

Phelps here displays an asymmetrical stroke. It can sometimes be very efficient (mechanical power / metabolical power).

Last edited by CharlesCouturier : 04-28-2013 at 05:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-28-2013
Richardsk Richardsk is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,380
Richardsk
Default

This article seems to address some of the issues discussed here, in what seems to me to be reasonably scientific language, bearing in mind that I am not a scientist, but someone with an interest in the science of swimming:

http://www.coachesinfo.com/index.php...ice&Itemid=136
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 05:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.