Triathlon · Public discussion

Swimming - let's try this clarification

Started by Topdog · · Last activity · 103 posts · 6,836 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Triathlon
Published
9 July 2003
Last activity
16 July 2003
Original author
Topdog
Posts
103
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
6,836
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 103
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I'm used to explaining things in a pool setting, where demonstration is 90% of the explanation, so
    we're having a lot of misunderstandings. However, I think I can make it more clear this way.

    Let's say that there are three elements to swimming. To some extent, these are sort of like blocks
    to a pyramid, and they build on each other. It's overly simplistic, yes, but it should be good for
    the purposes here.

    The first part is simple stroke mechanics. This would be how you move your arms, where you enter the
    water, etc. This is the foundation; everyone needs to be able to do this adequately in order to do
    anything else. To develop this, much of what you can work on are classic stroke drills, like "Tarzan
    swimming (head above water), fingertip drags, etc. Fortunately, you don't need a ton of skill here
    (I don't - I know I have several big flaws!), and it's only a small part of the whole picture. Most
    tri swimmers have this down to at least a passable level. They can use some refinement, but their
    success is not dependent on it.

    The second part is efficiency - taking fewer strokes. Holding the water. Most of you are calling
    this stroke skill, but it's really not "skill". One reason that I differentiate this from mechanics
    is that you develop this a different way. You can do fingertip drags all day long, but it's not
    really going to increase efficiency. Another big differentiation is that this ties directly into
    strength and endurance. Why do I say this? Because the fewer strokes you take, the more work you do,
    the more you increase RESISTANCE. It requires more strength per stroke, pure and simple. It requires
    muscle endurance to maintain the form. You train for efficiency differently. Stroke counting is
    vital, and a set of hand paddles are also very useful. Most of this is done as you do a "normal"
    distance workout. You need the distance to help increase the muscle strength and endurance, just
    like you do with any other leg. Most people don't realize how weak some of the swim-specific muscles
    are, and if they HAVE done workouts for them, it's for POWER - a completely different animal. Bulk
    is of little help, as you don't use them a few times in a race, but hundreds or THOUSANDS. Without
    adequate strength, we're not going to be able to hold the water very well. The stronger you are, the
    more efficient you are able to become. More importantly, the longer you will be able to MAINTAIN an
    efficient form. Many people can look good for a short distance, but as the strength fades, so does
    the form and they start slipping water. Again, this is not about power, but endurance strength. Low
    weight, high rep weight training is another useful tool. Distance swimming - which at it's simplest
    is a form of the above weight training - is critical for a leg of any reasonable distance. In my
    humble opinion, based upon my years of experience, this is the most critical area for almost
    everyone, and by far makes up the largest part of the pyramid.

    Lastly is turnover speed. This is an important element, but not one I'd emphasize much until
    efficiency improves to certain level (at which point it becomes more important). The last thing you
    want to do is have a fast turnover while slipping water! Most people will do better taking long,
    strong, SLOW strokes than fast, short ones.

    OK, is that any more clear? Efficiency really isn't skill. It's heavily dependent on strength and
    endurance - you will NOT be efficient without those - and a good part experience. You learn a lot by
    doing, what works best for your particular mechanics.

    Now, that said, once again fire away! (At least this time I think we will be at least in the same
    chapter, if not on the same page)

  2. "topdog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    endurance. Why do I say this? Because the fewer strokes you take, the more work you do, the more
    you increase RESISTANCE. It requires more strength per stroke, pure and simple. It requires muscle
    endurance to maintain the form.

    You don't take fewer strokes by stroking harder! You take fewer strokes by improving your form
    and DECREASING your resistance in the water. Improving your stroke make swimming less work, not
    more work.

    Quoted message said:

    Now, that said, once again fire away! (At least this time I think we will be at least in the same
    chapter, if not on the same page)

    Actually only one thing I want to "fire away" about.....how many new threads do you intend to start
    to discuss the same subject?

    James

  3. Quoted message said:

    You don't take fewer strokes by stroking harder! You take fewer strokes by improving your form
    and DECREASING your resistance in the water. Improving your stroke make swimming less work, not
    more work.

    You're not understanding what I'm saying. I didn't say anything about "stroking harder". You take
    fewer strokes by holding the water better. "Stroking harder" without holding the water achieves
    little positive results. All you do is spin and burn out.

    Bettering your mechanics works up to a certain extent - it depends on the swimmer and his own
    mechanics. Yes, you need a good base, but beyond a certain point, you get decreasing returns. I may
    be overestimating your base form - that I can't say without seeing you in the pool. If you feel that
    you are weak there, then by all means work away. You need this first in order to build upon it.
    However, this isn't too hard of a point to attain, and after you do, the best gains will come from
    efficiency - holding the water, taking long, strong strokes.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Now, that said, once again fire away! (At least this time I think we will be at least in the
    same chapter, if not on the same page)

    Actually only one thing I want to "fire away" about.....how many new threads do you intend to
    start to discuss the same subject?

    No more. When you get 50 posts, it's hard to "cut to the chase", and I thought this would make it
    more efficient to do so.

  4. "topdog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Actually only one thing I want to "fire away" about.....how many new


    threads

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    do you intend to start to discuss the same subject?

    No more. When you get 50 posts, it's hard to "cut to the chase", and I thought this would make it
    more efficient to do so.

    Yea, I figured as much, but 4 topics makes the clutter worse. It's not like people stop responding
    to the initial topics so the conversation becomes a little spread out and strained.

    James

  5. "James Goddard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    "topdog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Actually only one thing I want to "fire away" about.....how many new


    threads

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    do you intend to start to discuss the same subject?

    No more. When you get 50 posts, it's hard to "cut to the chase", and I thought this would make
    it more efficient to do so.

    Yea, I figured as much, but 4 topics makes the clutter worse. It's not like people stop responding
    to the initial topics so the conversation becomes a little spread out and strained.

    James

    I felt that some of the differences were more perceived than actual, and this might clear the air a
    bit. Sorry if I've perhaps mucked it up a bit.

    One more thing about your earlier reply - if you look at the good distance swimmers, they will
    almost all take an average of 12-15 strokes per 25 yds. Now, we can argue all day if this is from
    better mechanics or what, but the simple truth remains - if they cover the same distance with
    fewer strokes, then they are necessarily doing MORE work with each stroke; having MORE
    resistance, not less.

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

  6. "topdog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "James Goddard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    "topdog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    > Actually only one thing I want to "fire away" about.....how many new


    threads

    Quoted message said:

    > do you intend to start to discuss the same subject?

    No more. When you get 50 posts, it's hard to "cut to the chase", and I thought this would make
    it more efficient to do so.

    Yea, I figured as much, but 4 topics makes the clutter worse. It's not


    like

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    people stop responding to the initial topics so the conversation becomes


    a

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    little spread out and strained.

    James

    I felt that some of the differences were more perceived than actual, and this might clear the air
    a bit. Sorry if I've perhaps mucked it up a bit.

    One more thing about your earlier reply - if you look at the good distance swimmers, they will
    almost all take an average of 12-15 strokes per 25 yds. Now, we can argue all day if this is from
    better mechanics or what, but the simple truth remains - if they cover the same distance with
    fewer strokes, then they are necessarily doing MORE work with each stroke; having MORE resistance,
    not less.

    If that were true it would contradict everything we know about Physics. Wouldn't that be something!!

    Quoted message said:

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

  7. "topdog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    One more thing about your earlier reply - if you look at the good distance swimmers, they will
    almost all take an average of 12-15 strokes per 25 yds. Now, we can argue all day if this is from
    better mechanics or what, but the simple truth remains - if they cover the same distance with
    fewer strokes, then they are necessarily doing MORE work with each stroke; having MORE resistance,
    not less.

    You get less resistance by making yourself more aquadynamic (fluodynamic?, anyone?). When you make
    yourself a smaller target to the water then you can reduce your effort, cover more distance with
    fewer strokes, or do a combination of both. That is why skill is so important. You can "pull
    stronger" all day long but you are fighting a loosing battle. Water is 1000 times more dense than
    air. The ratio of increased energy to increased speed is horrible. It's like comparing the effort to
    move a pickup truck with that of a Ferrari, only multiplied dramatically.

    James

  8. Mark said:

    "topdog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "James Goddard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    "topdog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    >>Actually only one thing I want to "fire away" about.....how many new
    >
    threads

    >>do you intend to start to discuss the same subject?
    >
    >No more. When you get 50 posts, it's hard to "cut to the chase", and I thought this would make
    >it more efficient to do so.

    Yea, I figured as much, but 4 topics makes the clutter worse. It's not



    like

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    people stop responding to the initial topics so the conversation becomes



    a

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    little spread out and strained.

    James

    I felt that some of the differences were more perceived than actual, and this might clear the air
    a bit. Sorry if I've perhaps mucked it up a bit.

    One more thing about your earlier reply - if you look at the good distance swimmers, they will
    almost all take an average of 12-15 strokes per 25 yds. Now, we can argue all day if this is from
    better mechanics or what, but the simple truth remains - if they cover the same distance with
    fewer strokes, then they are necessarily doing MORE work with each stroke; having MORE resistance,
    not less.

    If that were true it would contradict everything we know about Physics. Wouldn't that be
    something!!

    Heh, I was just about to tell him the same thing. People really shouldn't throw around very specific
    terms they don't understand.

    --

    Cheers,

    Walter R. Strapps, Ph.D

    "The sheer closeness of our two countries and the intensity of our mutual interaction combined with
    the disparity between us in terms of wealth and power--all these things guarantee there will be
    problems in U.S.-Canadian relations without anybody having to do anything to deliberately worsen the
    situation."

    Robert L. Stanfield, Oct. 28, 1971

  9. "W

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    One more thing about your earlier reply - if you look at the good distance swimmers, they will
    almost all take an average of 12-15 strokes per 25 yds. Now, we can argue all day if this is
    from better mechanics or what, but the simple truth remains - if they cover the same distance
    with fewer strokes, then they are necessarily doing MORE work with each stroke; having MORE
    resistance, not less.

    If that were true it would contradict everything we know about Physics. Wouldn't that be
    something!!

    Heh, I was just about to tell him the same thing. People really shouldn't throw around very
    specific terms they don't understand.

    ??? Let's say thatI have 1000 total lbs of weights to lift today. If I do that in 10 lifts, I will
    be doing more work per lift than if I did it in 20 lifts. I face greater resistance (100lbs) in each
    of the 10 lifts than I would in 20 (50 lbs) Or, put it in terms of cycling. If I use my big
    chainring, vs the small, I will make fewer revolutions to cover the same distance, yet do more work
    per revolution.

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

  10. topdog said:

    "W

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >One more thing about your earlier reply - if you look at the good distance swimmers, they will
    >almost all take an average of 12-15 strokes per 25 yds. Now, we can argue all day if this is
    >from better mechanics or what, but the simple truth remains - if they cover the same distance
    >with fewer strokes, then they are necessarily doing MORE work with each stroke; having MORE
    >resistance, not less.

    If that were true it would contradict everything we know about Physics. Wouldn't that be
    something!!

    Heh, I was just about to tell him the same thing. People really shouldn't throw around very
    specific terms they don't understand.

    ??? Let's say thatI have 1000 total lbs of weights to lift today. If I do that in 10 lifts, I will
    be doing more work per lift than if I did it in 20 lifts. I face greater resistance (100lbs) in
    each of the 10 lifts than I would in 20 (50 lbs) Or, put it in terms of cycling. If I use my big
    chainring, vs the small, I will make fewer revolutions to cover the same distance, yet do more
    work per revolution.

    The word 'work' is a very specific word. If you want to use it in a scientific or semi-scientific
    context (as you are trying to do above), it behooves you to know what it means so that you don't use
    it incorrectly (as you have done above).

    --

    Cheers,

    Walter R. Strapps, Ph.D

    "The sheer closeness of our two countries and the intensity of our mutual interaction combined with
    the disparity between us in terms of wealth and power--all these things guarantee there will be
    problems in U.S.-Canadian relations without anybody having to do anything to deliberately worsen the
    situation."

    Robert L. Stanfield, Oct. 28, 1971

  11. Quoted message said:

    You get less resistance by making yourself more aquadynamic (fluodynamic?, anyone?). When you make
    yourself a smaller target to the water then you can reduce your effort, cover more distance with
    fewer strokes, or do a combination of both. That is why skill is so important. You can "pull
    stronger" all day long but you are fighting a loosing battle. Water is 1000 times more dense than
    air. The ratio of increased energy to increased speed is horrible. It's like comparing the effort
    to move a pickup truck with that of a Ferrari, only multiplied dramatically.

    You greatly overestimate the gains that can be made here. Ask any good swimmer, and they will tell
    you that you take fewer strokes by holding the water better. Even if you disagree with that, then
    you must see that if you are stronger, you will be able to hold the water better (and therefore take
    fewer strokes) with less effort.

    Compare it to cycling. On a normal day, by yourself, aero positioning will gain you a certain amount
    of speed. However, you still need to turn the gears. If you can turn the big ring at 90 RPM, you
    will go faster than if you're turning the little ring at 90 RPM, even with a less aero position.

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

  12. "W

    Quoted message said:

    The word 'work' is a very specific word. If you want to use it in a scientific or semi-scientific
    context (as you are trying to do above), it behooves you to know what it means so that you don't
    use it incorrectly (as you have done above).

    Hey, just because I'm from Texas doesn't mean that I don't know what work is! (You must be talking
    to my boss too much!) ;-) As I haven't had science in maybe 25 years, I won't claim to know all
    about the technical uses of the word. I wasn't trying to be tecnical. However, the point is the
    same, no matter the word you want to use.

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

  13. "topdog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Compare it to cycling. On a normal day, by yourself, aero positioning will gain you a certain
    amount of speed.

    Now you are on the right track. The more aero dynamic you are in cycling, the less wind resistance.
    The less energy you have to expend to maintain a certain speed. Just take that and apply the density
    of water to the same theory.

    James

  14. topdog said:
    Quoted message said:

    You get less resistance by making yourself more aquadynamic (fluodynamic?, anyone?). When you make
    yourself a smaller target to the water then you can reduce your effort, cover more distance with
    fewer strokes, or do a combination of both. That is why skill is so important. You can "pull
    stronger" all day long but you are fighting a loosing battle. Water is 1000 times more dense than
    air. The ratio of increased energy to increased speed is horrible. It's like comparing the effort
    to move a pickup truck with that of a Ferrari, only multiplied dramatically.

    You greatly overestimate the gains that can be made here. Ask any good swimmer, and they will tell
    you that you take fewer strokes by holding the water better.

    Ask any good swimmer, and they will tell you that you take fewer strokes by being more aquadynamic.

    Quoted message said:

    Even if you disagree with that, then you must see that if you are stronger, you will be able to
    hold the water better (and therefore take fewer strokes) with less effort.

    For people with comparable swimming skill, stroke technique or whatever you want to call it, this is
    true. If you compare a person with great technique who is weaker and one with good technique who is
    stronger, the great techniquer is going to go faster. You are greatly mis-estimating the relative
    contributions of swimming skill, stroke technique or whatever you want to call it and physical
    strength in swimming.

    Quoted message said:


    Compare it to cycling. On a normal day, by yourself, aero positioning will gain you a certain
    amount of speed. However, you still need to turn the gears. If you can turn the big ring at 90
    RPM, you will go faster than if you're turning the little ring at 90 RPM, even with a less aero
    position.

    Water, as has been pointed out to you several times, is a different substance than air and has a
    resistance to movement 3 *orders of magnitude* greater than air resistance. The relative
    contributions of aero (or aqua-) dynamics are *DIFFERENT* in *DIFFERENT* substances. You are
    comparing apples and oranges.

    --

    Cheers,

    Walter R. Strapps, Ph.D

    "The sheer closeness of our two countries and the intensity of our mutual interaction combined with
    the disparity between us in terms of wealth and power--all these things guarantee there will be
    problems in U.S.-Canadian relations without anybody having to do anything to deliberately worsen the
    situation."

    Robert L. Stanfield, Oct. 28, 1971

  15. "James Goddard" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    :"]news:[email hidden]:

    Quoted message said:

    "topdog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Compare it to cycling. On a normal day, by yourself, aero positioning will gain you a certain
    amount of speed.

    Now you are on the right track. The more aero dynamic you are in cycling, the less wind
    resistance. The less energy you have to expend to maintain a certain speed. Just take that and
    apply the density of water to the same theory.

    James

    In other words, if you swim and allow your feet to sink just a few inches lower than your head, it
    has a simliar impact on how far you can pull with each stroke as sitting up out of an aero tuck and
    opening an umbrella. Gripping the water is very important, but so is balance, body positioning,
    rolling side to side as a unit rather than just at the shoulders, etc.

    Near the beginning of yet ANOTHER thread on this topic, you mentioned that stroke mechanics was
    something you learned early on and then didn't really make much of a difference. I guarantee you
    that Ian Thorpe spends as much or more time trying to improve his stroke technique as he does
    his strength.

    SWIMMING IS A SKILL SPORT. First and foremost. Ready to take that bet?

    Tom

  16. "Walter R. Strapps" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:3F0C6FC5.5010907 @sentigen.com:

    Quoted message said:

    You are greatly mis-estimating the relative contributions of swimming skill, stroke technique or
    whatever you want to call it and physical strength in swimming.

    Exactly! There must be 10 people in my masters group who are much stronger than I am, slow and fast
    twicth muscle. Only one of them is faster than me, and that's because of his form.

  17. "James Goddard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    "topdog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Compare it to cycling. On a normal day, by yourself, aero positioning will gain you a certain
    amount of speed.

    Now you are on the right track. The more aero dynamic you are in cycling, the less wind
    resistance. The less energy you have to expend to maintain a certain speed. Just take that and
    apply the density of water to the same theory.

    James

    But James, just like in cycling, it only gets you so far. It will contribute some to your ability to
    go faster, but it's not where the big improvements are going to come. PLEASE NOTE the start of my
    first post -I stated that you have to have the basic foundation down to a passable level. If you are
    all over the place, then you need to focus on your mechanics to improve this. If rather, like most
    of us, you swim rather straight, the amount to be gained from what you suggest is not that great.
    Your efficiency will come primarily from holding the water better. Think about it - why do you use
    hand paddles in the water? It helps teach you how to - say it with me! <G> - hold the water better.
    Why do you use pull buoys? Same thing. Why will I go farther faster than you? Because I will swim
    the same distance in maybe half as many strokes. It won't be because I have a showcase stroke - my
    college coach would faint at that idea! - but because I hold the water with my stroke, allowing me
    to move foward better.

    The workout one needs to do depends on the level that he is at. If he is mechanically weak, and
    perhaps doesn't swim in a straight line, then this focusing on mechanics is what he probably needs
    to do most. If the mechanics are relatively sound, and you can swim straight and level, then you
    will likely profit most from having a more efficient, better water-holding stroke. This isn't just
    me saying this, but rather this is standard distance swimming gospel.

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

  18. topdog said:

    "James Goddard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    "topdog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    > Actually only one thing I want to "fire away" about.....how many new


    threads

    Quoted message said:

    > do you intend to start to discuss the same subject?

    No more. When you get 50 posts, it's hard to "cut to the chase", and I thought this would make
    it more efficient to do so.

    Yea, I figured as much, but 4 topics makes the clutter worse. It's not like people stop
    responding to the initial topics so the conversation becomes a little spread out and strained.

    James

    I felt that some of the differences were more perceived than actual, and this might clear the air a
    bit. Sorry if I've perhaps mucked it up a bit.

    One more thing about your earlier reply - if you look at the good distance swimmers, they will
    almost all take an average of 12-15 strokes per 25 yds. Now, we can argue all day if this is from
    better mechanics or what, but the simple truth remains - if they cover the same distance with
    fewer strokes, then they are necessarily doing MORE work with each stroke; having MORE resistance,
    not less.

    As has been pointed out several times this is not true. Even the logic is incorrect. If I
    push a 100lb block on wheels 25yds in 15 steps am I doing more work than pushing the same
    block the same distance in 25 steps without rollers? Same principle applies in the water.
    You simply can't ignore some of the factors and expect to make a valid conclusion. The
    swimmer taking less strokes per length could very well expending less energy per
    length/stroke than the slower swimmer taking more strokes simply due to friction. The more
    efficient swimmer taking less strokes has learned to "cheat" the water of some of its drag
    creating properties. Think of it as "swimming on rollers" Of course this "swimming on
    rollers" is, IMO, nearly entirely technique oriented.

    ~Matt

    Quoted message said:

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

  19. Quoted message said:

    Ask any good swimmer, and they will tell you that you take fewer strokes by being more
    aquadynamic.

    Here's an ex-collegiate swimmer that disagrees. For a passable swimmer, you might gain a stroke per
    length, but not the kind of efficiency that is needed.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Even if you disagree with that, then you must see that if you are stronger, you will be able to
    hold the water better (and therefore take fewer strokes) with less effort.

    For people with comparable swimming skill, stroke technique or whatever you want to call it, this
    is true. If you compare a person with great technique who is weaker and one with good technique
    who is stronger, the great techniquer is going to go faster. You are greatly mis-estimating the
    relative contributions of swimming skill, stroke technique or whatever you want to call it and
    physical strength in swimming.

    Quoted message said:

    Compare it to cycling. On a normal day, by yourself, aero positioning will gain you a certain
    amount of speed. However, you still need to turn the gears. If you can turn the big ring at 90
    RPM, you will go faster than if you're turning the little ring at 90 RPM, even with a less aero
    position.

    Water, as has been pointed out to you several times, is a different substance than air and has a
    resistance to movement 3 *orders of magnitude* greater than air resistance. The relative
    contributions of aero (or aqua-) dynamics are *DIFFERENT* in *DIFFERENT* substances. You are
    comparing apples and oranges.

    No, I'm not. I'm simply saying that there are similarities, not that they are exactly the same. As
    for your first point, the simple truth is that at a certain point, what you will gain from
    streamlining will decrease. If your mechanics stink, and you're all over the place in the pool, then
    you will have a good deal to gain. If rather you have adequate mechanics, and you swim relatively
    straight and level, there's much less to gain. CERTAINLY at this point you're not going to drop your
    stroke count 25% because of streamlining, since you've already made most of the gains!! It's similar
    to cycling (SIMILAR! <G>😉, if you're sitting straight upright, you're going to gain a good deal from
    better positioning. If, on the other hand, you're a reasonably competent cyclist with a decent fit,
    you're already mounted in an aero position, and while streamlining may gain you a little, your
    primary gains of speed will be from better pedaling.

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

  20. "Tom Henderson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    SWIMMING IS A SKILL SPORT. First and foremost. Ready to take that bet?

    You are preaching to the choir. (I think you meant to respond to topdog, not to me.)

    James

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.