Agreed. Also, when swimming long distances, a "lap" counter is used - and a 500 yard free is 20 "laps". Otherwise it would be length counter and it's not.

---

**********************
Harry: "I expected the Rocky Mountains to be a little rockier than this."
Loyd: "I was thinking the same thing. That John Denver's full of shit, man."

Because here in America, we teach our young swimmers (at least in 100% of the year-round, summer league, and high school swimming programs in NC IME) that lap and length are equivalent. It is evidently a glaring imprecision in our language, but only so if people are aware that more than one meaning of the word "lap" can be connoted. Until I got to NC State, I probably put in (literally) millions of yards in the pool and had never heard of a "lap" being down and back.



To the people who make the argument that my definition of a "lap" changes with the length of the pool, I agree, but that is implicit, uncomplicated, and essentially irrelevant. When swimming in a 25m pool, the length of the pool is unambiguous, and therefore the issue of one lap being 25m or 25yd in a 25m pool is irrelevant. As I previously said, I define one lap to be the distance across the pool once, and this quantity is invariant (with the obvious exception of pools that have the option of moveable bulkheads). If you define a "lap" to be down in back, then you have the same issue. I'm not tying the definition of a lap to one particular pool length any more so than those of you who believe a lap is down and back are, I'm merely illustrating a point. If I were arguing your point I would make the statement that a lap was 50yd at a 25yd pool, 100m at a 50m pool, and so on and so forth. Don't get sidetracked here...

It doesn't matter that somebody has drawn lines on a track that measure out where each fraction of one circuit is. The shortest non-fractional distance offered by the track is a lap, and in the pool the shortest non-fractional distance offered is the distance between one end in the other. That is how I choose to define the lap.





To people like klehner that don't have anything to add to the discussion, please feel free to fuck off. It is obviously a contentious issue (and one worth discussing, at that), as evidenced by the fact that there are so many replies. If you don't care to join in on the conversation that's your own prerogative, but there's no need to waste space announcing your displeasure.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

I agree. You lap someone by passing them (2x pool distance).
The only time I would use the term "lap" in swimming is specifically for the above case.

<yup, i'm a swimmer>

aye!

It's not that they're confused, necessarily--the distance is unambiguous, it's just that there is an issue in translating the yardage into the actual number of laps/lengths/whatever. For example, if your coach gives you a 3000 continuous, most people would have to translate that into 120 lengths of a 25yd/m pool. Beginners just have a hard time with the math on stuff like that.

While using lap=down and back may be the "correct" connotation according to the dictionary and other sports, it is (what I consider to be) an unsatisfactorily complicated way of describing a set like this:

10 x (200 cruise, w/ the middle 50 sprint)

in translating that to "laps," it is much easier to say "3 laps easy, 2 laps fast, 3 laps easy" than it is to say "1 1/2 laps easy, 1 lap fast, 1 1/2 laps easy." People do well thinking in whole numbers.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

I grew up in the 1970's and 1980's as an age group and high school swimmer.
a "lap" always was equivalent to 1 length of the pool. Never heard it any other way.

Until I entered this Tri world, where people swear that a lap = 2 lengths, and that they've never heard it any other way.

I'm voting for 1lap = 1 length. (is this a pool poll?)

There's your problem. GO HEELS!!!!!

---

Pink? Maybe. Maybe not. You decide.

Must be a slow day around here if you're arguing about lap vs length. Just swim and don't worry about it




What about ocean swims? What's a lap? What's a length?

You never heard it because your head was underwater for millions of yards.

I define lap as there and back. Oops. Does it matter? How can one even get from point A to point B if an infinite number of events can be identified that need to happen before the arrival at B, and you cannot possible reach the beginning nor end of the last event.. therefore motion is impossible anyways and this discussion useless!

my brother's kids are starting swim team. The coach, who also taught one of them swimming lessons, told him that a lap was a length. He thought the coach misspoke until I was visiting and went to the pool with him to do a swim workout. his 7 year old was counting laps for me and when I finished spit out a number that my brother thought was wrong. I explained it was swim team speak. My brother was fine with that, except that the same coach, when teaching swimming lessons uses lap to mean down and back. My brother asked him why and the coach said it was a lot easier to get swim team parents to accept lap = length than a parent of a kid who plays soccer but needs to learn how to swim. The coach said he just doesn't have the time to argue about it at swim lessons, and he's never had to argue about it at swim team. They parents just accept it as part of swim team speak.

Yep me too...... how long the pool from one side to the other is the length. Ending up back from where you started is a lap.

I agree with this, and it highlights an inconsistency.

I liken this to what happens to regular geometry once you apply it to a non-planar cases. We're always taught that a triangle has 180 degrees, but in non-Euclidean geometry a triangle could have 270 degrees. Runners, who are used to the geometry of their particular sport feel the need to apply their language to swimming, but I have to challenge the appropriateness of this. If you come from the "triangle always has 180 degrees" background, it is foolish to reject the notion that a triangle couldn't have more than 180 degrees based simply on the idea that triangles always had 180 degrees; when there is evidence that triangles have 270 degrees.

QED swimmers are spherical and runners are flat.

This is meant to be humorous, but also to highlight the flaws in many of your arguments. Just because A implies B in one instance does not mean that the same conclusion can be drawn in another instance, particularly if substantive examples can be provided that show that the two instances are not analogous. I reject the majority of runners' arguments about track laps vs. swimming laps on this basis.

I do appreciate those of you who have made a serious attempt at arguing/settling this issue--it is a fascinating topic indeed.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

I'm with you, but read the thread and you'll understand why it's such a contentious issue.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

How about instead of stating your opinion as fact you defend it? This isn't a poll, this is a discussion.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

Adding to the confusion - a link on another ST thread points to this.

---

Proud member of FISHTWITCH: doing a bit more than fish exercise now.

I am a new swimmer (less than a year) and all my workouts have only distances listed. They don't include reference to laps/lengths. Now, some of the longer intervals (say a continuous 1500) have been listed as something like "break this down as a continuous 10x150." Since I don't have the experience keeping up with longer sets, this does help me figure it out as I do it more often.

So, if the concern is working with beginner swimmers, I think you can use distances, even if it needs to be broken up as above, and it can be easily understood. In your example, I would easily understand it if written as 10 x (75 easy, 50 fast, 75 easy). Just a small peek into the mind of a beginner swimmer.

ETA: GO HEELS!

Very funny. Although, the commercial that ran before the 2000 Olympics where a guy is depicted as swimming butterfly across the Sydney Harbor shows him counting once for each time across.


This discussion is useful to me. If you read the thread instead of flippantly replying as you did you would know that this discussion arose out of some substantial confusion at the swim practice I was running last Wednesday, and for me, this topic is intriguing enough to spend time rationally discussing. Comments such as yours contribute nothing to the conversation, and serve to illustrate only your simple-mindedness or single-mindedness.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

Haha link?

---

__________________________

I tweet!

Wow, I thought they only had this argument on BT.

Isn't it easiest of all to say 75 ez, 50 hard, 75 ez? At least it is to me...... I would get totally lost saying "laps." I never swam competitively but the one year in high school they tried to make us water polo players join the swim team, but I just always think of it in terms of distance.

All the beginners in the slow lane at my masters get this after a couple sessions.

spherical... are you calling me fat?!
As i noted in my previous post - not a runner. you will only hear the term of someone getting lapped in swimming when they're re-passed up in the pool.

This was the conclusion I settled on. The debate can rage on, and I'll decide whether or not to change my ways later on, but in the mean time I'll just be giving out all my sets as distances, and by now my athletes should understand what I want them to do when I tell them to swim a 25 or a 50 or a 75 or a 100...

It's funny how I've been coaching a summer league team with kids aged 4-18 and there was never a question (either from the kids or the parents), but college kids can't get it straight. It seems I'm part of the problem, but as I said above, I'll reserve judgement on that for later.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

Not to be mean, but the confusion arose because you used a term that you knew has different meanings to different people. If you had used lengths (which is unambiguous) or given them distance and let the people do the math themselves you could have avoided the confusion.

BTW people are going to be flippant on slowtwitch, no need to get upset about it.

To: Because here in America, we teach our young swimmers (at least in 100% of the year-round, summer league, and high school swimming programs in NC IME) that lap and length are equivalent. It is evidently a glaring imprecision in our language, but only so if people are aware that more than one meaning of the word "lap" can be connoted.
If language is used, or a definition of a word is to convey an idea........................and the imprecision is in our language is if people are aware of more than one meaning of lap................................then that is caused by swimmers, less than 5% of the population introducing that different meaning. It seems only swimmers taught in North America by other swimmers seem to go by a length = a lap. So as a swimmer in the minority you want evryone else to standardize due to the fact you swim and use it differently than everyone else. That for swimmers taught by swimmers, this is the term used,ok.......but to get pissed at the majority because the define the word by the concept that 95% + of the population uses. Well, I just don't get it. Guess I am not smart enough

Lap is down and back. You've "lapped" the pool. Length is one end to the other end.

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

i feel dumberer for having read this. Down is a length. Back is a length. Down and back is a lap. A lap can be a length of distance, but length is not the colloquially correct term for "down and back". You are teaching the kids wrong. Strong work.

oh, and Ding.