elbow angle prior to catch

[andyinnorway]

Originally Posted by CharlesCouturier

Arrrgggrrrrrr..... he got me once again

" Overtaking strokes are relatively common in male distance freestylers. The inherent errors of motion and undesirable limitations of that stroking format could be argued as being the principal reason why the men's 1,500 m race has improved the least of all swimming races and strokes over the past decade (even despite the introduction of the performance-enhancing super suits). Grant Hackett's world record set in Fukuoka in 2001 was 14:34.56. In this race, Sun Yang improved that record by .42 seconds. Until overtaking and uneven stroking characteristics are removed from men's distance-freestyle, the record will remain quite stagnant. Given the usual growth characteristics/curves of world records, to which the men's 1,500 m does not comply, the record for this event would seem to be potentially the easiest to break and the amount of improvement should be very substantial."

This above, seems to completely dismiss the fact that the second position was won by someone displaying an elevated stroke rate. This also tends to forget other swimmers such as David Davies and the like, who could not beat Hackett.

Anyway.... Ahhhh scientists.....

Its funny that he dismisses the 1500m records. These guys average 58s per 100 which is a faster pace than the majority of masters and most u18's club swimmers can manage for a 100m sprint.

Actually that's an interesting question, what age do swimmers tend to get under the magic 60s mark if training regularly in a squad from an early age?

[andyinnorway]

Ok I looked up the 2011 100m freestyle results of my local UK club

Boys

8 and under - 1.45
9-10 1.33
11-12 1.22
13-14 1.07
15-16 1.03
17+ 1.06

so my guesstimate was maybe right. Sub 1 minute is elusive to many and often a college university achievement for those that do get there?

[CharlesCouturier]

Originally Posted by andyinnorway

Ok I looked up the 2011 100m freestyle results of my local UK club

Boys

8 and under - 1.45
9-10 1.33
11-12 1.22
13-14 1.07
15-16 1.03
17+ 1.06

so my guesstimate was maybe right. Sub 1 minute is elusive to many and often a college university achievement for those that do get there?

Hell no, record here in Canada over 100m free 11-12 category is 55sec I think...

I had swimmers in a bracket over that one, ie 13-15 to descend under the minute. Our fastest in the club I used to coach would do 51.6 over 100m free wearing no swim goggles SCM at age 15.

Here, to be more accurate, a quote from my blog:

" In Canada, the record for a 100m swim in 11-12 age group category is 54:12, recorded in 2011. The 200 free is done in 1:56.72 and the 1500 is booked in less than 17min. In order to aim for this sort of performances at such a young age, your typical swimmer is exposed to a lot of repetitions. In my humble opinion, that’s how they become swimmers. Repetitions, repetitions, repetitions. That is – I believe – What makes a swimmer, a swimmer!"

[CharlesCouturier]

Originally Posted by CoachSuzanne

i think he's full of it.

Wrote him an email, he answered. Debate in progress ;-)

[CoachSuzanne]

Originally Posted by CharlesCouturier

Wrote him an email, he answered. Debate in progress ;-)

Charles, I think I love you!

[CoachSuzanne]

Originally Posted by CharlesCouturier

Can someone tell me if Rushall's article is worth wasting time reading it?

This guy has shown consistent record of being wrong, or mainly wrong in most of his works on swimming.

Right now I read this "Sun Yang swam the first 1,400 meters of the race with a two-beat kick." which is dead wrong. Is the rest of the document worth reading?

Haha..yeah, I counted some 2BK, but also mostly a 4BK and once in a while there might have been 6 beats in the first 1400...there was a definite change from the final 100m, but if he categorizes the entire first 1400 kick as a 2BK then he's way overgeneralizing.


Glad to hear your take on his analysis because as I was not even finished reading through "frame 1" I was wondering if anyone else actually agrees with him? I often feel that the "experts" are just putting forth what they want to believe without basis in logic or reality.

[CharlesCouturier]

Originally Posted by CoachSuzanne

Charles, I think I love you!

Shared feeling! It's been a lot time since I felt a crush of this magnitude ;-)

[CharlesCouturier]

Originally Posted by CoachSuzanne

Haha..yeah, I counted some 2BK, but also mostly a 4BK and once in a while there might have been 6 beats in the first 1400...there was a definite change from the final 100m, but if he categorizes the entire first 1400 kick as a 2BK then he's way overgeneralizing.


Glad to hear your take on his analysis because as I was not even finished reading through "frame 1" I was wondering if anyone else actually agrees with him? I often feel that the "experts" are just putting forth what they want to believe without basis in logic or reality.

For sure, my other friends (ss) disagree. They've analyzed his stroke and established that the dead spot, if any, was not significant enough to qualify his stroke as being non productive. So.

They've concluded that the dead spot should be calculated as the time elapsed between end of stroke of one hand, vs catch of the other hand. In other words, looking at how long one glides solely by looking at how long the leading arm remains forward is seriously missing the point. A conclusion with which I (and probably everyone here) agree.

And like I said, Dr. Rushall simply overlooked the fact that the person that came second, in London, was displaying a swinger type stroke.

No matter how smart we coaches (and scientists) are, there will always be some swimmers to prove us right (we usually quote these), and others to prove us wrong (these we prefer to ignore) LOL

[CharlesCouturier]

Originally Posted by andyinnorway

Its funny that he dismisses the 1500m records. These guys average 58s per 100 which is a faster pace than the majority of masters and most u18's club swimmers can manage for a 100m sprint.

To his defense though, he's questioning the fact the WR progress faster at shorter distances compared to the 1500. And there he seriously has a point.

Now where I seriously disagree with him though, is that the benefits of techsuits were * by the number of hundreds you book right? I don't recall what the benefits of techsuits were back in 2001, but Hackett was definitely wearing one back them.

Now he has some good points, the Professor.

His complain really, is that distance swimmers can't achieve downhill swimming. Right? To a half trained high ), it's easy to spot indeed so let us allow him this position. Those sprinter can let the energy tank emptying itself over 100m, blasting quite a 6b flutter kick. As I almost died trying to explain whoever is willing to make the mental effort, the foot is not designed to push water backward in FS flutter kick. For every ounce of water you evacuate backward, you push at least 8 onces downward right? Arbritary numbers. Is it really required that science tells me exactly how much is back how much is down? Yes I would love it. But they're too busy doing our job, ie analyzing strokes. But that's another story.

A sprinter fireing a 6bk, remember that some of these guys get down very close to 60sec for 100m kick right? It brings their lower body much higher than the lower body. It's impressive on clip, you should see this live. Jawbone almost gets dislocated when you see this. It's like a jet boat sort of effect.

Now yes it's true that DS have been consistent in not being able to achieve this downhill position that sprinter can achieve. But think about it. How much pounds of force does Sun Yang exerts. Mark Tewsksberry could perform an unlimited number of pull ups (similar to chin ups, but wider grip), limited by the time, very close to distance swimming rate. Take 180 pounds divide it by 2, that's 90 pounds he can manage per arm. Bring that down to 60 pounds per stroke with Sun. That's a lot of power.

He's an FQS swimmer. He's patient right? This is what you guys learn here. So what happens is that whilst body starts rotating upward, ie the most powerful phase of the stroke, his hand is still in the front of the quadrant, he then performing the equivalent of taking an extremely solid hold on the water, and try to take his whole body weight forward over. Similar to wanting to take yourself out of a pool with just one arm, So he's going forward as a result of this, but a bit upward to. If he was indeed pulling with his arm, then yes it would be easier to avoid going upward on the water, but he performs the same sort of muscular and biomechanical gesture as if he wanted to pull his whole body (weights) outside of a pull, just by using support of one hand. Damn, that's not easy.

So I donno, not saying Brent Rushall is missing entirely the point here, as this is what he's questionning. But Hackett was doing the same thing, exact same thing. At higher rate that's all. So he had the same problem.

I donno, maybe Rushall is right after all. I was very hard on him (not here, elsewhere). Missing a 4bk for me, wow. Beginner swimmers can make the difference.

But maybe 6bk should now be the way to try to train for the 1500. But contrary to what S2BFree here might think, this again will be to elevate the lower body to create different angle, which by the same token will lower drag a bit, and possibly a bit more water will be evacuated backward in the process, but I need science to do its job correctly, ie to calculate with precision if the amount of water evacuated backward is significant enough, when compared to the tremendous power applied at the front of the vessel, to qualify a kick as being propulsive in a 1500 event. Separate the lift effect from the propulsive effect, find a way, that's your job scientists.

No paper exist on that topic, no nothing like Zero, it's about time. It's easy waking up some saturday morning thinking oh, let me download this clip using realplayer and perform an analysis and call this science.

Originally Posted by andyindorway

Actually that's an interesting question, what age do swimmers tend to get under the magic 60s mark if training regularly in a squad from an early age?

for guys, who grow up a bit slower than female, I'd say you usually see some sub60 by age 13 for those who grow up faster, and 14 for those who grow up slower. It's believed that those who grow up faster eats chicken mcnuggets at McDonalds, but science is yet to demonstrate why.

[andyinnorway]

Charles, thanks for posting everything multiple times, I always need to read these things twice to understand them, that's why I am a piano player not a professor.

Seriously with regards to times, where would the guy or girl with the 11% fastest time be in each age group, not the national record holders?

In the UK I would guess there were around 200,000 u18 swimmers doing 5 or more sessions a week but I don't think there would be more than 200 of them posting a sub 60s 100m? All these numbers totally made up but would be great to find some actual stats.