oldschoolc
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
My question is: what is the rate of shoulder injuries per 20, 30 or whatever number of swimmers using traditional training?
Right now I have an “n” of 25 and probably a total “n” over the last 18 years of over 120+ swimming at race pace speed all practice and with no recovery days and we have had few to no major shoulder problems. (Major meaning kids missing more than 3 days of swimming).
Master swimmers come from a completely different perspective on pain/discomfort than a teenager. Master swimmers’ know pain and when things start to hurt. They STOP!
I think the majority of swimmers are afraid for whatever reason to say anything about shoulder pain or really any other problem because they know the response is “well kick this set” or “swim warm-up and we’ll see” and they just end up swimming workout.
Once they know the coach will try to diagnose the problem they will readily speak up about a problem because they know that something will be done and they know that the sooner they say something the quicker they get back to swimming fast. i.e. coach will take the time and try and see if mechanics is off, maybe even film underwater to try and figure out problem. TRUST!
It doesn’t matter whether traditional or USRPT.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Billratio,
Here is my attached training cycle for week 1 of a 4 week cycle.Pri = primary emphasis for first set or “improvement set” looking to increase numbers over last time offered.
Sec = secondary emphasis maybe be just maintenance “just make numbers from last time offered.200 = primary stroke distance
100 = secondary strokeShort = is distance of repeat, could be 25s or 50s
Long = again distance of repeat, could be 50s, 75s or we also use 100sWith regards to short – long. Usually my first two sets pertain to the primary stroke. So first set is short repeats 25s or 50s and the second set for primary would be 50s, 75s or even 100s.
A Monday would look like this:
Pri: is free, 200 distance and short repeats. So first set might be n x 50s on 1:30/2:00 or n x 25 on :30/:40 but looking for improvement in numbers over last time. My second set could be n x 100s, not really looking for an improvement in numbers but at least maintain over last time offered. Third set is secondary stroke with 100 emphasis and short, so it might be n x 25s on :40/1:00.
With limited amount of time you can drop the third set or offer a limited number of say 25s. Look at the group average made and pick a number maybe its 12 so 12 x 25 and that’s enough to make a shift.
I attached a workout with an all free emphasis that we did Monday and results.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Billratio,
Your question of “how long…” most physiologists would say “8 to 10 weeks” for aerobic capacity and that adaptation can take place to a stimulus in 8 to 10 days, so plenty of time.I’ll take a SWAG and say it’s not physical.
My question is “why did she move/come to your program?”
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Gary P.
We don”t self-time all repeats are coached timed that’s how we get to the 100th.Billratio is right about using the tempo trainer. The newer ones you can set to the exact time i.e. 25 time is 15.27, you can set it for 15.27. We’ll use them when I need to film underwater and they need to be at race pace. The set is usually 30 x 25 “beat the beep” and that will allow enough time to film two or three kids that may be having probelms and I need to take a closer look.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Correct. This all started from a couple of earlier post with coaches trying to project training pace to race performance and they were coming up with one time based off say 31.1 and the swimmers were actually holding 31.6 and now we’re nowhere close to that projected coaches time. That can cause a lot of hate, discontent and doubt in the system. So I was trying to show through our little experiment the differences between self-timed and coach timed. Not that if you do self-timing its bad. Just be aware that there may be major discrepancies in time and factor that in to performance projection.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
The kids are the ones that did that. They know that pace time comprises average plus standard deviation, so the “fudge” factor or “failure margin” (Stdev) is already in the time and so going even slower doesn’t help matters much especially if you allow say another .4 or maybe it’s .5 etc. and you could end up being a full second or more off race pace. We call that a “feel good time” because you make a lot but doesn’t really relate or correlate to race performances. But you feel good. How far off actual race times are you going to allow?
Example: 20 x 50 on :50 free SCY, average is 28.29 (using 50s 2, 3 & 4 of 200) plus Stdev of .44 (n is over 2000+ splits to determine Stdev avg.) added together swimmer would hold “no slower than” 28.73. This swimmer since September has been offered 551 x 50s on :50, made 343 (at pace) for a 62.25 make percentage.
All the things you discuss are factored in by the Stdev. It shows technical reliability in all aspects of the swim and the lower the Stdev the higher reliability to performance.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Billratio,
With regards to your “2 rounds of a 200 set” I think you are dead on! I have used 3 rounds of 12 x 50 free on :50 at 200 pace. We use the “rules of USPRT” per round so kids can be out during 1st round. But back in for the 2nd and out during the 2nd and back in for 3rd. I have the same belief the more they can do at race pace the better. We also do a mini-recovery :30 between rounds. It’s like a group “miss” If you watch respiration rates you’ll see they don’t fully recovery and they sure aren’t talking every much. I believe that it fits within the USRPT guidelines with a little bending.Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Hey!
Not sure how “scientific” we were? Two old guys with stopwatches.But it is what each one of us faces on a daily basis at practice.I agree I don’t think that the swimmers intentionally are cheating. Just that the ability to judge time can be rough for some and then each has a “fudge” factor they add in. i.e. my guys I’ve noticed will give themselves .05, and still call that a make. We time to the 100th so, 31.29 is read as 129, so if they hear 134 they consider it a make.
I also agree with asking them their time and then presenting them with what you got. If you stop and think about it that time represents a lot of information. The more consistent that time is the higher degree of better or more reliable turn speeds, underwater work and breakouts, etc. And they need to know that.
The reason I did it was coaches are trying to apply USRPT to race performance, which they should. But just be aware of the “self-timing” that is prescribed in the bulletins have some draw backs in accuracy. You think when they report makes/misses it’s from a say 31.1 and they really have been in the 31.6 range and now they just went from 2:04 to a 2:06 in the 200, might need to develop a “fudge” factor for coaches with regards to predicting race performances and USRPT sets.
We start when they drop under or roughly when feet leave the wall and have used this for over 20+ years. The kids get all over lanes that drop early. The key is being consistent.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Greg,
Couple of questions. 1. How many “n x 50s on :55” have they been offered? 2. What percent have they made? Low numbers “made” means they probably don’t have mastery yet of the 31s. The standard deviation of .94 for the 3 50s is very high (should be in the low .34s). Which says to me that something technically is up be it tempos slow (should be 1.32 to 1.25), turn speeds above 1.0 (1.0 would be great, but normally see 1.2) or speed on underwater work slows. So your question about blending “aerobic” work to me doesn’t seem to solve your problem. Executing at a slower speed does what to solve the issue?Just my thoughts
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
If you have a good to excellent grasp of the Parametric System (PS) and understand how it works and not just paying for it thru 3S then USRPT isn’t really going to be that much different nor will you see measurable differences in rates of improvement. Basically travel at race speed for each of the protocols and let them stop when they reach failure. The Parametric System does address the issue of more distance orientated swimmers with the n x 200 and n x 400 protocol sets. Which is a huge knock against USRPT that it really only address the middle and sprint distances.
I’ve spent over 17 years working with the PS and have made modifications using USRPT research such that we now go as many as 3-4 protocol sets per practice, no kicking or pulling and no recovery days just focus on swimming at race pace and technical skill. Our rates of improvement have gone up .8 to 1.2%.
Your questions:
Much like PS you might give them 8-10 days of easy swimming then start protocols/USRPT sets. That will probably depend on the length of your season.Warm-up: I give my kids 10-12 minutes to get themselves ready. Each lane has a copy of the workout so they know what’s coming BE READY!
Cool down: Some will swim easy and others will get out.
25s with 20 in three lanes: Good Luck
I’d rather continue this discussion off the forum if you are interested.
Email: recondoc@ionet.net
OldschoolC"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Coachc,
We’ve done it 5 times with that same scenario meet every 2 weeks and 3 times used the 3 day protocol 50-25-25 then meet warm-up.If it’s the same/some kids at all 3 meets what we have seen is the rate of improvement gets smaller each meet. They still go faster but be ready for smaller improvements at each meet. My thoughts on why this occurs. The first unload they have had the majority of the season to accumulate potential and then you unload and bang they swim fast. The second unload even though they came back to work they have tapped into the accumulation and not quite as much is left so rate of improvement is a little less and by the time you get to the third unloading again even though that went back to work they have pretty much spent all their “interest”
I have tried twice now a 2 day protocol with 25-25 and meet warm-up with kids that already are qualified for the season end meet on the first and second meets. Thought process there was it lets them swim fast to solid (within 2% of LTB) and still preserve a little more potential for championship meet. Rates of improvement 1.5 to 3.2% range.
Just some thoughts,
Oldschoolc
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Billratio,
You bet it’s tight with regards to technical skill and race sets. It does become easier when the kids get it! I’ve still been playing with the 4 sets per workout and using their recovery as technical skill opportunities. They do have to be quick with the transition. I’ve been staying with Monday 4, Tuesday 3 and Wednesday 4, Thursday 4 and Friday 4 with Saturday either 3 or 4 depending on needs i.e. technical or race pace work.Just thinking out loud and if you can use it fine and if not you’re not going to hurt my feelings.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
sorry about that. Trying to share data on this site is crazy with only 512k
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Billratio,
Got to thinking about number of sets within the time you have. So I tried something. We went 4 on Monday, 3 on Tuesday, 4 on Wednesday and Thursday and we’re going to repeat Wednesday’s workout today Friday. We were able to get 4 done in just 1.5 hours. (Not a lot of chit-chat but the kids actually liked the challenge).What I did was reduce the numbers offered to “one shift” or the minimum it takes for projected one adaption. I’ve attached the results from Wednesday and Thursday just to show they are very capable of handling the work. It does bring up even more questions.
Just thinking,
Oldschool"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Two works. There may be 4 or 5 other coaches that read this that have 2-3 IMers and now we have 10-12 kids with data. They just have to post it!
So a couple of SWAGs here; ba/fr probably on 1:00ish GOs? If I remember right you opened the interval for the br/flyers 25s to :40ish, so did you do your 50s br on 1:10-1:20?
25s don’t seem to correlate well with anything but fly. Every other stroke seems to be 50s. Not real sure why. Tried really tight rest intervals and long rest intervals and neither seem to work with regards to race splits.
25s fly see the same thing out in 100 fl 26.10 and 2IM 25.76 with training pace at 13.40, but if I minus the group avg for Stdev .35 puts him almost dead on. The girl was 100 fl 26.56 and 2IM 27.37 with training pace at 13.99, again minus Stdev and she’s 27.63, so it gets you close. Better to have some idea, then no idea at all
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
