lyrrad wrote:

The only thing a band achieves is showing a swimmer how much their pull is moving their body in directions other than forward.
Apart from that it is just a gimmick to break up boredom.
As mentioned above, totally concentrating on technique will get you nowhere but it will help you later.

What needs to be done is good technique at good seed for short distances.
Some technique stuff only works at speed.
Speed highlights a lack of grip on the water or extensive draggy body positions.
Speed is essential.
But you do need to have enough technique to get you that speed and you also need the power to get you there.

So get good speed with good technique and then work on getting to go farther.

I agree with you on the band, and with the OP that drag reduction is not really fundamental, it is perhaps a by product of fundamentals. Trying to reverse engineer an exceptional swim stroke starting at drag reduction is ill advised.

Speed is indeed a potent teacher. I would take it further to assert that we need to cease drawing a categorical line between conditioning and technique.

In my opinion, many prominent coaches’ views of what constitutes "technique work" is crucially limited -- at least in terms of giving guidance to the world at large who hang on their tweets and blogs. Instead of separating "drills" from "toys", and "training" from "technique", they seem to force a choice between the two. I maintain that there is NO DIFFERENCE between proper training and technique instruction, even at the far faster than 1:30 per 100 meter level of performance. But when we start calling things "drills", some coaches get very rigid.

For myself, rather than throw out the drill, I throw out the term: I prefer to call them "activities". "Proper Training" is providing the appropriate stimulus to the body at the appropriate time. Things that can provide technical stimulus are many, and include the staples that it seems many world class coaches favor including paddles, buoys and high volume sets (5k+ yards/meters)

However, if you look past drills that are largely inappropriate such as the chicken wing, head-touch, finger-tip drag, and perhaps catch-up free (I dislike catch-up, many coaches favor it. Take your pick) -- there are many more that can enhance your abilities. To name but a few:
· Speed-play,
· Breathing pattern work,
· Kick sets,
· Complex drills that combine kicking and pulling in various combinations,
· One-arm freestyle (AKA -The one drill to control them all!)

All of these, and others, are potent and useful, and can be used to condition as well as improve technique. Heck, going a 5,000 straight swim is technique work if you use it properly (don't let yourself fall to pieces, or why not negative split it?). GOOD COACHES contrive stimulating workout activities, often without even having that as their objective. Good coaches use tools and drills like pharmaceuticals, they get the DOSE-RESPONSE relationship right.

Rejecting "technique work" as being synonymous with "do slow 25s while having your coach correct your stroke" is a limited view of training, conditioning, and skill development. It's also pretty darn low in terms of effectiveness. It absolutely, positively time that we got past having a classical, 100 meter freestyle-centric view of "proper technique". But that's not all. It's also time that we stopped looking at "conditioning" and "technique" as two separate entities. They are inextricably linked and the best among us have always acknowledged that on a sub-conscious level. Perhaps it is time that we started to acknowledge it consciously.

imswimmer328 wrote:

Why are catch up free and fingertip drag useless? My stroke is fastest when I essentially swim lazy catch up. Not trying to argue, I'm legitimately curious.

Fingertip drag attempts to establish early vertical forearm through a high elbow recovery. Not the best way to go about it, as what happens above the water doesn't have a large effect on what happens below.

Catch up is fundamentally anti kick timing, and timing is everything.

No doubt some swimmers and coaches use both of these to good effect. You mention swimming faster in a catch up style, and I certainly believe you. I interpret that as a clue to what you need to work on, not as an endorsement for catch up style. But I don't know you, and you could be a perfect facsimile of Sun Yang, so catch up my friend!

I do not teach a single, correct, style of swimming. My intention is to stimulate athletes to find their own optimal stroke technique. That's not to say there are not commonalities - techniques that optimize propulsion and minimize effort – there most certainly are, but rather than focusing on a single end-goal of precise form, I strive to develop the core competencies and develop the athletes ability to integrate multiple competencies into a stroke that works for them.

The only thing a band achieves is showing a swimmer how much their pull is moving their body in directions other than forward.

If you are an adult onset tri guy without the loose shoulders of lifetime swimmers, what you do above the water certainly does very much influence what your body does under the water. A very common sight at tri group swimming.

Yeah Dev, there's nothing wrong with doing a little catch, up recovery style, with a 2 beat kick. Certainly easier to maintain proper kick timing that way. Swimming catch up faster and with a 4 or 6 beat kick, makes proper kick timing difficult.

whoa, there, cowboy. where's an analogy that sort of fits? how about: the only thing complimenting your wife achieves is showing her that you are a considerate person. (that's a minor thing?)

i've seen here constantly over the last 15 years swimmers complaining of the exact opposite described by the OP: work on fitness and strength only to see no real swim progress. do you, or does anyone, honestly believe that the difference between a swimmer who consistently, easily clocks sub-1-minute 100s versus one who barely can go half that fast is power and fitness?

yes! that is precisely what banded swimming proves! how much you're swimming in some direction other than forward! but more precisely, what it uncovers is not that you're swimming left or right, or up or down, but that (most likely) the tortuous gyration you make when you breathe can only be counteracted by a wide splay of your legs during your kick, and banding the legs together uncovers this, and very quickly allows you to determine what to do to your stroke that keeps your banded legs from fishtailing like an eel.

faith without works is dead, brother. but you get to heaven by grace alone. neither of these truths is mooted by the other. to concentrate on one, disdaining the other, is how holy wars get started. technique without fitness is dead. but you don't get to heaven by fitness alone.

Despite your seemingly reasonable 'it's BOTH technique and fitness', the point of my thread is that at least to me, in terms of TRAINING it, it's massively power/propulsion weighted, like over 90% emphasis on power/propulsion to improve. It is NOT some midway mix of drag reduction with power - it's almost ALL power/propulsion once you're faster than a beginner swimmer.

In terms of your sub-1 minute 100 swimmer vs a 1:30-1:50 swimmer, I would say the VAST majority of the difference is power. I've made this point repeatedly in the past, but that sub-1 swimmer could literally intentionally do EVERYTHING wrong - swim head out of water tarzan style, splay their kick scissoring every stroke, and do both of those while stroking with only one arm with the other wrapped behind their back, and they would STILL beat the 1:50 swimmer who's TI-style super smooth and level in the water. It probably won't even be close, honestly - that sub-1 swimmer will slow to 1:30ish pace, and still destroy the heck out of that 1:50 'pretty' swimmer.

At the same time NOTHING that 1:40-1:50 swimmer will get them even close to 1:20 without a huge propulsion/fitness bump. No streamlining, no EVF, nothing will do it. And no, they won't even come close - they'll get like 1-2 sec/100 and that's it from drag and technique without a fitness gain.

To this day as well, I have never seen a 'powerful swimmer' with such bad technique that I felt they were a 1:20 or below capacity swimmer but dragged down to 1:40+ (or MOPish) paces. Not a single one. I have def seen plenty of MOP swimmer with ugly form limiters that did cost them 1-5sec/100, but for sure, the reason they weren't making the FOP was not their bad technique or drag as a main factor - it was their lack of power by FAR. Just look at their turnover rate as the simplest example compared to a 'fast' swimmer - it's usually nearly 1.5-2x slower, and that's not because they are choosing such a slow cadence - they just cant' turnover any faster. That's a fitness, not form issue. You don't see MOP swimmers thrashing through a 3000 yd set at powerful 100-120 strokes/minute with ugly form, ever - they'll be at 45-60, or exactly where a slower/weaker swimmer would be.

In terms of those MOPers who say they train a ton, have great fitness, but don't get any faster - I disagree with all of that. They THINK they train a ton, but in reality their volume is wayyyy lower than a competitive swimmer, AND they swim a lot less hard when it counts compared to the good ones. I seriously doubt these swimmers are stuck at 1:40/100 because of flaw errors - stick 'em with a hardcore swim-power group like Sutto, and they'll bust through their so-called training limitations. (I admittedly fall into this category, as I rarely hit 20k/wk of swimming.)