Reply To: Progressive Overload, Conceptual Design
I just started swimming in a 25m pool for the summer so was thinking about it. Everything is based on what anyone has available.
As for equating WT terms to swim terms, I would say TOTAL SET POWER is REPS times VELOCITY but it’s really hard to record VELOCITY while lifting without a device. POWER would be LOAD times VELOCITY. Just to be clear, LOAD=VELOCITY means the term LOAD, while lifting, refers to a similar variable, VELOCITY, in the pool. Not that they are equal in magnitude.
In either a WT or USRPT macrocycle, it seems that increasing LOAD/VELOCITY is always more strenuous than increasing REPS. This is pretty evident in WT, as you said, increasing WT REPS by 50% (from 10 to 15) before increasing the LOAD is an effective progression. Adding weight always results in a significant decrease in work, maybe because there aren’t a bunch of 1lb plates in gyms. In USRPT, increasing the reps to failure is used to adapt to the current VELOCITY. I’m looking at an additional variable, within the macrocycle concept, that can help an athlete adapt.
The hardest part about LCM is, assuming 6 meters underwater, 50 meters of LCM “swimming” distance is about 16% longer than 50 meters of SCM. And 50 meters of LCM is 31% longer than 50 yards SCY. 25 meters SCM is 13% longer than SCY (again, this is the distance stroke swimming assuming 6 meters underwater from the wall).
Anyway, just spitballing some ways to create less strenuous increments of overload. When you change variables by over 5% things can get messy.