oldschoolc
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Rick,
NOW we’re getting somewhere, Hot damn! It’s outstanding that you’re posting actual numbers and starting to make a correlation to training paces! Nice Job!!!!!You are dead on about “accumulation of potential”! Think about it, the better/longer you can replicate something (mastery) the easier it becomes and more reliable.
What I know from research is that it takes 10-12 weeks for the untrained regardless of skill to achieve aerobic capacity and 6-8 weeks for in-shape swimmers to achieve aerobic capacity. Makes you think why programs spend 20 weeks “getting in” shape aerobic.
Now I have a loaded question for you. Where did the first 50 of the 200 breast come from?
I’ve posted this numerous times “Let the numbers start talking to you” and that’s what’s happening.
Great job!!!!
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Greg,
Sorry for very late reply. Daughter’s getting married and busy as hell.Ok I get it now. That was a study done in 2000 at OT by Genadijus Skolovas, which did show that women distance swimmers where the only ones that benefited in performance from increase in volume. There is a way to skin that “cat” and stay within the USRPT system, kinda :). We’ve used 200s and 400s. Start with 200s and you can do this one of two ways. 1. use 500 race splits and use the last 200 split or if you want a little tougher use 100s 3 and 4 added together as “target pace” time, this is down, dirty and the quick way. 2. Test. which is 3 x 200 on short rest say less than 30 seconds, record each time, figure average and that becomes “target pace” and you do the same with 400s. Just use 1000/1650, somewhere in the middle of the race take a snapshot of a 400, it will get you close. It at least gives you race focused distance work and I can tell you now you want to hear a bunch of whinning. Trot out the first time say 4 x 200 or a 3 x 400 with 15 rest at target pace and stand-by. After I’d done this type of work with my distance kids 3 times in one week they stopped swimming distance and decided to swim 200s. Funny as heck!
The correlations are how close their training pace was to actual race splits. So, .987 to .957 is how close their pace time/target pace 100s was to actual race back 1/2 100.
Hope this helps
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Billratio,
My suggestion is “keep it all!” Especially race splits you can use them to evaluate training pace to race performance after the meet.Another one of your key indictors in the evaluation process will be percent of number made from number offered. I’ll use our “25s freestyle set” to date they have had 270 offered; swimmer A made 169 a 62.59% made, B is 116 a 42.96% made and C is 83 a 30.74% made, Which one has the better attendance? It’s B. Not that attendance is not important there are times it does state the obvious and there are times it is very misleading.
That’s why for now I say “keep it all” easier to have and not need, then need and not have.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
To all,
You have to remember that the system may not be for everyone, no system is. There are going to be kids that take to the responsibility, accept ownership and those that shrink from it. It’s going to happen and no matter how hard you try and the amount of effort you put in “you can’t save them all”. While we may see the logic and the simplicity of it, they don’t and for whatever reason won’t get it. I have kids in my program that just damn near refuse to acknowledge that how they perform in practice is what will happen in a meet (thankfully not many). No matter how many times I show them the correlations from practice times to race performance they just don’t get it.I get and understand the frustration. I’ve had kids that are Junior National qualifiers say “I can’t do these speeds” not exactly what you want to hear. But you try your best to adjust and somehow make it work and sometime you stumble on to the adjustment and other times bad things happen. But if you been diligent in your record keeping you can show why some, not all things happened the way they did.
I know this is not what you want to hear.
I could go on with this for awhile.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Rob,
Sorry for the late reply. The Parametric System was developed in the late to mid 60s by former USSR researcher S. Gordon, et al. I was very fortunate to develop a relationship with one of the students of the system in the early 80s and was privileged to gain real insight into the system. I did have to learn how to word recognize and translate Russian and Lithuanian as most of the information I received was in those languages.The best thing to try and gain more insight into the system would be to go to 3s (Super Sport Systems) or Makrotone and you can read more about it. These guys are very sharp!
I can tell you this; it is race pace before USRPT. That’s why I have a lot of data that coaches starting with USRPT what to know or have questions about. I’ve done it for 17 plus years and tracked every year. No brag, fact.
I’m not trying to be short. But this post would be 3 pages long if I went into detail of: sets, how to determine development and relationship of systems, etc.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Ottercoach,
The 3-day protocol was for all intended purposes replaced the traditional taper for us. So any meet that we would have “tapered” for we just use 3-day. For reasons I’ve stated in other post it’s just cleaner and less opportunity for error.Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Rick,
It’s been done and what I can tell you is this. People make money off it and the information it can provide and the likelihood of them sharing that data and or formulas is next to impossible. It’s called an Athlete Assessment Profile and covers/measures frustration tolerance, self control and will power of activity.I have seen the questionnaire and it is very detailed.
Good luck with this one!
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Matt,
Agree 100% with swimming 50s for the 200s stroke. We swim in 7 foot wide lanes and when going stroke RP sets the flyers will usually move in with either the backstrokers or breaststrokers, never two flyers in a lane. Yes, they sometimes will have stroke pauses and we call that an “avoidance make” out of 16 x 50 stroke RP set this may happen twice, if that, not enough to give up on swimming 50s fly.Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Matt,
If you are talking about your “calibration” cycle then that would make sense about the volume question and you would need to be concerned about making too big of an increase in work.Once you get to the actual RP sets and your using “exit conditions” (we call them “rules”) that is going to throw your volume on its head. You may offer 1st set 20 x 50 stroke at 200 pace on whatever interval you use and some make all 20 and some will make 2. 2nd set you offer 10 x 75 stroke at 200 pace and some make 4 and others come up with zero. If you look at the “workout data” sheet I posted you’ll see they are all over the place, with some just flat out having a rough day through all sets to others having a solid training day and then the very next day everything gets reversed and just wait and see your numbers at the end of the week. There are times I’m not sure I’m on foot or horseback and I’ve tracked data for over 17 years. I think you see the dilemma with trying to think in volume terms. If you figure it out let me know!
I think what may be a better approach is to look at numbers offered and numbers made and what percentage of made of the total through the cycle or season, which from your other posts you’re doing. Because you are basically starting from zero with regards to data in this type of system it does take a couple of cycles to then start the evaluation and adjustment processes. Something the good Dr. forgets to tell coaches. It’s not just read the bulletins and “plug and play”. Coaches are looking for help with real world questions and “crickets”. Sorry sore subject.
This Principle of Specificity thing is messy as hell.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Matt,
Really like the “calibration” idea! Or the “now that I have your attention” Well thought out.On the 3 day protocol it is yes, a combination of all 3. Total volume gets reduced with the 25%, the volume of the RP set is reduced with the 25% and reps are reduced. I keep all the technical and drill work the same so no reducing there. In the old days we would have called this a “drop taper” problem was it never really worked as the kids were so beat up from TT they usually swam like crap and never felt rested a great mental state to try and perform.
The best parts of the 3 day has been; they feel rested, mentally they get dialed in and maybe the best part is they don’t get that after taper “blues” After a 3 day P/F meet over the weekend we can come right back to practice and the numbers we left off with before the 3 day and they are just fine. It was worked really well if we have a January or February meet they need to swim fast at but the championship meet is not until March. You don’t spend 7-10 days coming down and then after meet 4-6 days coming back up. Just FYI, we’ll run in the 80% plus LTB and then come back in March and again post 80% plus LTB and that’s over their last meet. Over the course of the meets we’ll run in the 3-5% improvement in time event dependent.
I will say this about the 3 day. If you’re not paying attention to the numbers before then the results could be totally different and not in a good way. You seem to have a good handle on “letting the numbers” speak to you so I’d give it a try.
Yes to the third set on race focus. Because of the reduced numbers we are looking for perfect race execution which would be back to our “value system” turns speeds, underwater work and surface swimming skills.
On recording, I did the WB thing. Then the kids came up with “you already take attendance why don’t you just make columns on the data sheet and when we’re done with each set just walk down the lanes and ask how many we made it’s got to be faster than us getting in and out of the pool after each set and we’re just going into a recovery set anyway, so it’s not like we’re pressed for time” Damn if they weren’t right. Takes all of a 1-1.5 minutes and they are on to the next set. We swim outdoors year round and I think they didn’t like getting out in the winter so they came up with the idea. Smart.
Just thoughts,
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Matt & Otter,
On the team we a value system; as what do we value in race performance and what we will never give up during the race and that’s “turn speed, underwater work and surface swimming technique” and we use this value system for our for all work done between sets. We’re always trying to reinforce the value system. We may slow down. But will never give up the “system”.You’re right on this. Some are going to except responsibility example: they know that tempo on the last 12.5 is an issue so they will get a tempo trainer and plug in their number and others with the same problem don’t take advantage of this. When I was doing my student teaching I just didn’t understand why some didn’t want to learn and my supervising teacher told me “you can’t save them all” regardless of the effort you put in.
I don’t understand the “regardless of their times” if that means you have them keep going regardless of pace then you are running the risk of some very fatigued swimmers especially later in the week and the accumulation of that fatigue will cause problems later in the season with race performance. You are recording a lot of data! Just a suggestion here keeping track of number offered i.e. 20 x 50 offered, number made 12 and the percent of total offer to total made. We keep a running total and this can be easily done in EXCEL. What you want to know is; are they increasing the distance covered at race pace? Lower percentage done may be lower fitness level, higher number done higher fitness level. Plain and simple and it cuts down on a lot of data recording that while interesting is time consuming.
You have to read the numbers. If you see that they are struggling with the numbers made then you may need to slow the progression down and may need to repeat the same total the next time. i.e. 12 last time, average made was 4 and so next time you repeat 12 and see what happens. This especially is something you have to pay attention to with high school and college swimmers. Just due to the external stressor of school.
I’m guessing “exit conditions” are unloading/taper? This is much like the 2nd strategy of “distance is constant and speed is increasing” You could allow them to go even faster than goal speed if they can. I wouldn’t do this for more than a 2 week cycle as it can become very frustrating to the athlete. You have to be very careful that you aren’t increasing speed/intensity and distance at the same time this is what we call the “double whammy”. We have great success with the 3 day protocol 3 days out of meet 1st day 25% reduction in numbers 2nd day another 25% reduction which is a total of 50% and then the 3rd day meet warm-up. We’ve very well with this format.
The first set for us is always the “improvement” set we are looking for more made than the last time. So that requires that you to set up a sequence of work from short (25s) to long (50s/75s/100s) and then reverse long to short. So you have to rotate them throughout the cycle in that they have a chance at improving numbers when fresh (10 minutes to warm-up, drill and start set) our second and third and sometimes fourth are as follows 2nd set same number offered as last time. 3rd set came be anywhere from 50 to 70% reduction from last time offered. There are times we will try and “squeeze” two improvement sets out using the second set with an increase of plus 2 from last time.
I can’t stress enough that you have to read the numbers. They will talk to you!
This fourm has come a long way from it’s beginngs with coaches saying “well I think” to this is “what we’re seeing” and actually having data and sharing that helps move everyone forward.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Coacherik,
I to had read the article on concussion, inc.I know Dr Joel Stager he is the one who did the study on “Chocolate milk for recovery” ; we served on USA Swimming Sport Science Committee together back in the late 80s – early 90s. Even at that time he was a very forward-thinking research scientist and let me tell you it wasn’t pleasant to be thought of as a “science guy” ask Dave Salo. I believe he still has a club that he and some assistants started years ago that’s very closely aligned with the thought process of “quality over quantity” It may not be USRPT, but it’s definitely not “TT” I know he is on the editorial board for Journal of Swimming Science which I think is sponsored by ASCA. This could get interesting.
oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Billratio,
I’ll start with the last question first. There is truth to the “Compression Theory”. It was really hard when the suits first came out for those of us that worked on the Bill Boomer/Milt Nelms paradigm of “Posture-Line-Balance”. We’d spent all kinds of time getting kids to understand that body position and how you shaped yourself in the water played an important role in speed. Then Boom! The suit comes out and all they had to do was fork out a couple hundred bucks and didn’t have to spend any time working on or understanding “shaping” and they went fast. I could go for a very long time on this one
I’ve attached a chart that I used at a clinic in Fargo a few months back. It shows rates of improvement for just the short course seasons from 1990 to 2014. So it goes from the old “paper suit” era thru the “tech suit” era and now back to “tech suit” for women and jammers for men. It also goes from a time when I was a 9-11 workouts a week, lifting weights; core work, stretching, run 3 miles and dryland to none of that. You can see by the numbers it really had an impact on our performances not doing all that stuff. Just being a smart a@#.Recording of practice data is critical. I know that coaches have anywhere from 2 swimmers to a lane which is great to 5-6 per lane and now you are hustling. I know that Dr. Rushall says that swimmers should be accountable for their times. (You can attest to this, 33.1 and 32.7 is a big difference and has a possible huge impact on the swimmer’s performance) What if your job depended on that 500? Is Dr. Rushall going to come and speak to her parents if the wheels come off the wagon? Not a chance. It can allow you to make adjustments earlier and maybe avoid some but not all unpleasant situations. Even if you just pick a couple of swimmers to track that’s a start and then work from there.
I can’t emphasis this enough. Coaches have to keep their race splits!! and use them to compare to practice times. This may be the most important information you have. “Training must relate to performance and performance must relate to training”. I use little memo books the ones that are 3 x 5 inch and 60 sheets, (picked that one up from Bob Gillette, coach of Misty Hyman, 2000 Olympic Goal Medalist 200 fly) easy to keep in your pocket. I have 38 in a desk drawer and can go back and look at race performance over the years in a matter of minutes. No brag! Just fact :0)
I enjoy sharing what I know and I’ve posted this before that “If I don’t have data or don’t know I will say so “. Then I’ll a give you my best SWAG based on data I have. The kids love that one SWAG, “Scientific Wild A#$ Guess”, which is better than a WAG, which is a Wild A#$ Guess. They’ll ask SWAG or WAG? Always a SWAG 🙂 or I tell them I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night. If you know the commerical you get the joke.
I have a couple of coaching buddies here that give me a hard time about sharing my data. But I always figure if the Russians hadn’t shared what they knew with me then how do we progress?
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
Billratio,
Sorry for the confusion was not my intent. Ok this may get lengthy. I would replace some of what I was doing for the speed.My thinking on the 8 x 25s was that she could be speed deprived and just to allow her to get up and go fast plus if she swims the 200 she’d need the speed. The 8 x 50, those you could use as a baseline because she has done them all season and you can evaluate them against race splits and her practice performances and same with 100s.
Do you have her 100s avg for that 2 x (10×50 + 4×100 set)? Also do you have her race splits for the last two 500s she did? Just be interesting to see.
You’re trying get in 2000-3000 @ 500 pace which is the 33s pace? Problem is that’s too slow to go 5:23 she would need to be in the 32.65 range for 50s and average at least 1:05.31 for 100s. So “how do you try and get there?” If you went in Monday and had her do a set of 20-30 x 50s and told her instead of 33.1, she now has to hold 32.7, and you are going to time each one. How many do you think she’d make? My guess is it won’t be 2000 – 3000. The volume alone is not the answer especially if the speed/ pace are incorrect. If the volume is important then doing it by rounds may be a way to go e.g. 3 x 10 x 50 @ 32.7 with :30 rest between rounds. Any time there is an increase in speed/pace there will be a reduction in numbers. Especially .4 in a 50 over 30 that’s 12 seconds faster for 1500. FYI My guys go nuts when time is adjusted .2/50 and usually have a fall off in numbers done in the 30-40% range for the first couple of weeks with the adjusted time.
I thought I’d read in one of your posts that you had 2 weeks until their Championship Meet. If that’s incorrect then I apologize. If you have more than that then you are in a better situation to create adaptation (adjustment to the new speed). Yes, it is a drop but the focus would be on increasing speed.
The 3 day protocol percent improvement ranges for 200/500 free. I don’t separate out by age or gender.
The age range of the kids is 15 – 18 so it gives me a decent snap shot of how training is going.2012 – 2013 200 was 2.846 and 500 was 4.173
2013 – 2014 200 was 4.980 and 500 was 5.275Your LZR elite2 question: I had a boy at the time wearing that suit and he was nowhere near a 2.5 to 3% improvement and he swam the 50/100. He was 3rd at WUG and 12th at USOT so no sea slug. We laughed when SPEEDO made that statement. At that time with those improvements the top 10 men in the world would have swam under the WR and that didn’t happen. Sure was a great marketing angle and sold a boat load of very expensive suits.
Oldschool
"Only in America. Dream in red, white and blue"
