# More Supporting Evidence

Home Forums General USRPT Topics More Supporting Evidence

Viewing 3 posts - 16 through 18 (of 18 total)
• Author
Posts
• #2051
Gary P
Participant

Gary P,
Why doesn’t your example for the 200s work for the 100?

Because the 100 pace should be just below the threshold of “fast as possible” while the 200 pace is throttled back considerably. You simply can’t go faster than your 100 pace holding anything back from your training effort. You can go faster than your training pace on the opening 50 of a 200, even at a reserved effort. That’s my limited observation and reasoned guess why the rule-of-thumb for 200’s and 100’s is different. What are seeing from your swimmers?

I have guys that go 10.23 to 10.47 and are nowhere near MA capabilities or size. So why would 10.00 be a hypothetical time for MA?

Not sure what you mean here. Are you saying you have guys that hold under 10.50 for 16 repeats on a 30×25 on a 10 second rest USPRT set? If so, what are their actual 100 race times?

As for the 10.0, it seems pretty clear that it is presented as a hypothetical. The whole example is preceded by the word “if.”

For example, if Michael Andrew swims 3-4 times the 100 m/y freestyle race-distance at 10 seconds per 25, on race day he is expected to swim 40.00 for the 100 FR but a 41.00 is acceptable to account for the added turns.

#2058
oldschoolc
Participant

I don’t care if you think “if” is hypothetical. His best time in 2013-14 was 19.76. he’d better be able to go 10.00 for 25s.

He is also not doing them with 10 seconds rest.

Oldschool

"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"

#2061
Gary P
Participant

I don’t care if you think “if” is hypothetical. His best time in 2013-14 was 19.76. he’d better be able to go 10.00 for 25s.

He is also not doing them with 10 seconds rest.

You seem to be arguing both sides of the question. If Andrew’s not doing 12-16 25s at 10.00 on 10 seconds rest, then the fact that he’s not swimming 41 in the 100 does NOT disprove the race predictive correlation of 4 X 25m training target time plus one second.

Because of the block start, going out under 10 in the front half of a 50 race is not the same as doing a it from a wall push off, and it’s not close to doing it from the wall repeatedly in a set on short rest. The elite athlete racing a short course 50 is usually .4-.5 seconds slower on the second half than the first half. Unless there was something way out of the ordinary, Andrew probably did just over a ten flat on the back half of that 19.76. Assuming you attribute that all to the structural differences in the two lengths (block start and flip turn vs. wall push off and hand touch) and not fatigue, the back half of a 50 pretty much represents the absolute fastest you can do a 25 from a wall push off with a hand touch. If he couldn’t do a ten flat on the back half of a 50 on a personal best race, I refuse to believe the hypothetical training example presented (12-16 25’s at 10-flat from a wall push off on 10 seconds rest) is supposed to be representative of his actual training regimen for the 100.

Viewing 3 posts - 16 through 18 (of 18 total)
• You must be logged in to reply to this topic.