Less strokes does not equal less effort. Fewer strokes is not more efficient. Good biomechanics does not equate to slowing down your stroke.
Good technique does not always yield less strokes per length. Swimmers should care about kick. You not kicking at all in a race does not
mean it’s better. And although 21min is decent, it’s not that fantastic either.
Either you did not understand what you read, or what your coach said, or, your coach doesn’t know what he is talking about, or your book on
swimming technique is rubbish.
Anything else?
So, if good technique does not always yield less strokes per length, what does it yield? Kicking really only counts in a swimming competition. When doing a tri the kick should only be used to keep your legs afloat. When your legs drop so do the hips and now you are causing drag. Regardless of all this, the most important fact is the amount of water displaced with each stroke. The more water displaced, the more efficient the stroke. I hope we can agree on that.
So, if good technique does not always yield less strokes per length, what does it yield?
** faster velocities at the same effort level **
Regardless of all this, the most important fact is the amount of water displaced with each stroke. The more water displaced, the more efficient the stroke. I hope we can agree on that.
** no. the most important factor is the water displaced in a given time **
Agreed about the limb lengths having the largest impact…so yeah, I have no excuse for swimming slow because I have really long arms…at Muskoka in 2006, Rappstar and I stood beside each other and put our arms shoulder to shoulder (he needed to crouch over), and the arm lengths were identical. He then recommeded the same QR Superfull wetsuit that he was using…except I am like 8 inches shorter!!!
Interesting article. Too bad alot has changed in swimming technique since 1990.
Physics hasn’t changed much though. The announcement that CERN scientists may have
sent neutrinos to travel faster than the speed of light shouldn’t change the physics of swimming
in a fundamental manner.
Granted if it takes 50 gals of displaced water to do a race, then the person who displaces it the fastest wins. It does not mean they are the most efficient. The person to win the swim portion of the tri is not necessarily the person who wins the whole tri. Someone could win the swim portion and expend all their energy where a person finishing a few seconds back might only used half of that. Who is more efficient?
Less strokes equals less effort. If you’re going to cover 100m in 100 strokes vs 100m in 75 strokes in the same amount of time, then fewer strokes is more efficient. If most triathletes have poor mechanics then maybe they should work on acquiring good mechanics by slowing down their stroke and concentrating on proper technique. Good technique should result in fewer strokes per lenght. Who cares about a kick, that’s what the wetsuit is for, to keep your legs afloat. I don’t kick at all in a race. I save my legs for the bike and run. I’m 53yrs old and can swim the 1500m in under 21mins. I don’t think that’s too bad.
And I take 19-22 strokes per 25scy (and I’m 6’ tall). A smaller number of strokes for the same speed means greater effort per stroke, just as in cycling (higher cadence => lower torque for the same speed).
I’ve found one of the biggest stroke flaws among triathletes is low turnover.
In my opinion, the main thing that has changed in swimming since 1990 are the turns and the underwaters, but that’s a whole different topic.
The kick is likely what determines the stroke rate. You take a person who is used to having a 6 beat kick and they are going to have a slower stroke rate or longer stroke length than someone with a 2 beat kick. Trying to teach someone with a 2 beat kick to have a better kick or longer stroke is likely going to do nothing more than make them slower overall. Likely. It is not an absolute fact because if their stroke is total garbage and they are taking 30 strokes for 25 yards, then they can probably improve. But, I have seen some really good…as in front pack pros…who take 25 strokes per 25 when at race pace (1:12 or so for scm or 1:08 or so for scy). Should they go work on their ‘efficiency’?
So, if you take someone who naturally has a higher kick rate (4 or 6 beat) and tell them not to kick in the race, they are ‘probably’ going to go a lot slower in open water. In short, just like an athlete is likely going to develop the most natural running cadence for them, they are naturally going to have a way of swimming that works ‘best’. So, you have to tweak that for each athlete.
The biggest researcher of biomechanics in running has arguably been Dr. Peter Cavanagh, formerly of Penn State. Here is his most pivotal book on the subject: http://www.amazon.com/Biomechanics-Distance-Running-Peter-Cavanagh/dp/0873222687. It may not be as ell known as Dr. Ernie Maglischo’s Swimming Fast, Swimming Faster, and Swimming Fastest series, but definitely a great reference tool to have in any tri coach’s library.
One of the main research topics he did was taking runners and altering their stride length coupled with the cadence and comparing to speed based on PRE. They actually found that runners are at their optimum when they choose a self-selected cadence/stride length as mentioned above. If I have time, I’ll try to find it on pubmed. I might still have a paper copy of the research. I only know because I interviewed with him for grad school and wasn’t goal-oriented enough:)
Janet Evans had a pretty high stroke rate, which means her 2 beat kick was pretty frequent. Don’t under estimate how much an efficient powerful 2 beat kick will improve swim speed
Less strokes equals less effort. If you’re going to cover 100m in 100 strokes vs 100m in 75 strokes in the same amount of time, then fewer strokes is more efficient.
The fallacy in that argument is that you’re assuming it takes the same amount of effort to reach peak swim speed as it does to maintain it. Simply put, the opposite is totally true- if you’re extending the glide on the front end of your stroke with no kick, you create a huge ‘dead spot’ in the cycle where all you’re doing is decelerating and it takes a lot of effort to then stop that deceleration and maintain speed overall.
The guys with the superlow stroke rates are all uterrly awesome kickers who use their kicks to fill in that dead zone. (and remember that an excellent and highly efficient kick doesn’t always look like much, so you can’t rally judge good kick efficiency by eyeballing it.) Even the elite guys who claim they can’t kick can easily kick 1:15/100 yards.
Janet Evans had a pretty high stroke rate, which means her 2 beat kick was pretty frequent. Don’t under estimate how much an efficient powerful 2 beat kick will improve swim speed
See also Brooke Bennett and Laure Manaudou for what’s probably a better stroke model for triathlon swimming than Ian Thorpe.
Less strokes equals less effort. If you’re going to cover 100m in 100 strokes vs 100m in 75 strokes in the same amount of time, then fewer strokes is more efficient. If most triathletes have poor mechanics then maybe they should work on acquiring good mechanics by slowing down their stroke and concentrating on proper technique. Good technique should result in fewer strokes per lenght. Who cares about a kick, that’s what the wetsuit is for, to keep your legs afloat. I don’t kick at all in a race. I save my legs for the bike and run. I’m 53yrs old and can swim the 1500m in under 21mins. I don’t think that’s too bad.
And I take 19-22 strokes per 25scy (and I’m 6’ tall). A smaller number of strokes for the same speed means greater effort per stroke, just as in cycling (higher cadence => lower torque for the same speed).
I’ve found one of the biggest stroke flaws among triathletes is low turnover.
You proved my point exactly. Your swim time is very good. You must of expended way too much energy swimming as reflected in your bike and run times.
Less strokes equals less effort. If you’re going to cover 100m in 100 strokes vs 100m in 75 strokes in the same amount of time, then fewer strokes is more efficient. If most triathletes have poor mechanics then maybe they should work on acquiring good mechanics by slowing down their stroke and concentrating on proper technique. Good technique should result in fewer strokes per lenght. Who cares about a kick, that’s what the wetsuit is for, to keep your legs afloat. I don’t kick at all in a race. I save my legs for the bike and run. I’m 53yrs old and can swim the 1500m in under 21mins. I don’t think that’s too bad.
And I take 19-22 strokes per 25scy (and I’m 6’ tall). A smaller number of strokes for the same speed means greater effort per stroke, just as in cycling (higher cadence => lower torque for the same speed).
I’ve found one of the biggest stroke flaws among triathletes is low turnover.
You proved my point exactly. Your swim time is very good. You must of expended way too much energy swimming as reflected in your bike and run times.
Actually, not: the day was brutally hot and many died on the run (as did I). http://www.dqtridu.com/vce10Results.htm is the next race I did. Although they didn’t catch my swim split, trust me that I added them up and I had the fastest swim/T1, the #6 bike and the # 8 run. In fact, that was my fastest bike average time in my 25 years of triathlon.
I seem to remember some other STer saying that strokes per length one of the biggest red herrings in triathlon. I think I agree. If you are hung up on strokes per length you are hung up on the wrong thing. If you are taking a gazillion strokes per length its because you have some serious stroke flaws. Find out what those are and work on them. In my day (can’t believe I’m writing that), most world class swimmers had no idea how many strokes they took per length. They probably don’t care today either.
You proved my point exactly. Your swim time is very good. You must of expended way too much energy swimming as reflected in your bike and run times.
Wow…first of all, way to go assuming that the bike and run times are slow based on a couple of lines describing how ken swims. And second, you may want to read what -Tex and FlaJill (who both know a bit about swimming) have said…
Anyhow, looks like you want to be right, so, fine. The lower the stroke rate, the more efficient you are (at having a low stroke rate).
You must of expended way too much energy swimming as reflected in your bike and run times.
The people getting out of the very front of the race expended less energy then those swimming MOP or BOP. They happen to be better swimmers then the overwhelming majority of triathletes.
The people who are expending too much energy are those swimming middle to back of the pack. Their poor technique is robbing them of energy and costing them time.
Less strokes equals less effort. If you’re going to cover 100m in 100 strokes vs 100m in 75 strokes in the same amount of time, then fewer strokes is more efficient. If most triathletes have poor mechanics then maybe they should work on acquiring good mechanics by slowing down their stroke and concentrating on proper technique. Good technique should result in fewer strokes per lenght. Who cares about a kick, that’s what the wetsuit is for, to keep your legs afloat. I don’t kick at all in a race. I save my legs for the bike and run. I’m 53yrs old and can swim the 1500m in under 21mins. I don’t think that’s too bad.
And I take 19-22 strokes per 25scy (and I’m 6’ tall). A smaller number of strokes for the same speed means greater effort per stroke, just as in cycling (higher cadence => lower torque for the same speed).
I’ve found one of the biggest stroke flaws among triathletes is low turnover.
You proved my point exactly. Your swim time is very good. You must of expended way too much energy swimming as reflected in your bike and run times.
Actually, not: the day was brutally hot and many died on the run (as did I). http://www.dqtridu.com/vce10Results.htm is the next race I did. Although they didn’t catch my swim split, trust me that I added them up and I had the fastest swim/T1, the #6 bike and the # 8 run. In fact, that was my fastest bike average time in my 25 years of triathlon.
My bad, I was wrong. Excellent bike and run splits. It would be a pleasure and and honor to race against you at Nationals in Burlington next year. Hope you are able to attend!!!
