Negative buoyancy help (Page 2)
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
2015-07-30 9:33 PM in reply to: yazmaster |
471 | Subject: RE: Negative buoyancy help Originally posted by yazmaster You might want to check out that video. In the last run, the suit the competitive swimmer is so big he can barely lower his arms, let alone do a decent pull motion, and he STILL beats the guy who swims 1:30/100m. He works pretty darn hard to do it, though!
And as an aside, in endurance sports like distance swimming, biking, and running, twig-shaped appendages are often a HELP, not a handicap. Everyone likes to point at the little girls and say "we men are so much stronger in the arms so it can't POSSIBLY be power!", but they're first of all not assuming we're testing them int the swim pull motion, in which those girls who practice their rears off pull shockingly hard, and as well, you don't need muscle bulk to go fast in endurance sports. Prime examples are the gazelle-like legs of Kenyan runners, or the svelte frames of pretty much all pro cyclists except short-track sprinters. What I'm saying is that you can't assume these strong swimmer girls have 'weak arms that produce no power' - in fact, all their fast swimming pretty much prove that they're plenty power in the swim motion, and they can pull those paddles with high turnover to prove it. It's not that they're powerful, we have skinny little 8 year olds doing 100ms in under 1.20. They have an effective technique which means they are utlilising their large lat/back muscles. A lot of swimmers don't use these muscles, so a big adult will always lose out to a small child who is using bigger muscle groups as opposed to arms and shoulders. |
|
2015-07-31 2:52 AM in reply to: zedzded |
Master 5557 , California | Subject: RE: Negative buoyancy help Originally posted by zedzded Originally posted by yazmaster It's not that they're powerful, we have skinny little 8 year olds doing 100ms in under 1.20. They have an effective technique which means they are utlilising their large lat/back muscles. A lot of swimmers don't use these muscles, so a big adult will always lose out to a small child who is using bigger muscle groups as opposed to arms and shoulders. You might want to check out that video. In the last run, the suit the competitive swimmer is so big he can barely lower his arms, let alone do a decent pull motion, and he STILL beats the guy who swims 1:30/100m. He works pretty darn hard to do it, though!
And as an aside, in endurance sports like distance swimming, biking, and running, twig-shaped appendages are often a HELP, not a handicap. Everyone likes to point at the little girls and say "we men are so much stronger in the arms so it can't POSSIBLY be power!", but they're first of all not assuming we're testing them int the swim pull motion, in which those girls who practice their rears off pull shockingly hard, and as well, you don't need muscle bulk to go fast in endurance sports. Prime examples are the gazelle-like legs of Kenyan runners, or the svelte frames of pretty much all pro cyclists except short-track sprinters. What I'm saying is that you can't assume these strong swimmer girls have 'weak arms that produce no power' - in fact, all their fast swimming pretty much prove that they're plenty power in the swim motion, and they can pull those paddles with high turnover to prove it. It's both technique and *aerobic* power-to-drag ratio. LB's example of an 11 year old girl is someone with very low drag compared to pretty much any adult. And a kid with some training and good genes can have a great aerobic engine, as LB knows firsthand. If the discussion is about 80 year olds slowing down, well... sure, they've lost a ton of aerobic top end, and most probably aren't that streamlined. Happens to all of us eventually |
2015-08-01 11:30 PM in reply to: 0 |
1660 | Subject: RE: Negative buoyancy help Originally posted by zedzded Originally posted by yazmaster It's not that they're powerful, we have skinny little 8 year olds doing 100ms in under 1.20. They have an effective technique which means they are utlilising their large lat/back muscles. A lot of swimmers don't use these muscles, so a big adult will always lose out to a small child who is using bigger muscle groups as opposed to arms and shoulders. You might want to check out that video. In the last run, the suit the competitive swimmer is so big he can barely lower his arms, let alone do a decent pull motion, and he STILL beats the guy who swims 1:30/100m. He works pretty darn hard to do it, though!
And as an aside, in endurance sports like distance swimming, biking, and running, twig-shaped appendages are often a HELP, not a handicap. Everyone likes to point at the little girls and say "we men are so much stronger in the arms so it can't POSSIBLY be power!", but they're first of all not assuming we're testing them int the swim pull motion, in which those girls who practice their rears off pull shockingly hard, and as well, you don't need muscle bulk to go fast in endurance sports. Prime examples are the gazelle-like legs of Kenyan runners, or the svelte frames of pretty much all pro cyclists except short-track sprinters. What I'm saying is that you can't assume these strong swimmer girls have 'weak arms that produce no power' - in fact, all their fast swimming pretty much prove that they're plenty power in the swim motion, and they can pull those paddles with high turnover to prove it.
How many 8 year olds do you have swimming 100m in under 1:20, and for distance? If all of your 8 year old kids can do it, and this isn't a team that preselects from the fastest kids from the region, I'm convinced! I did see that at USA Swimming, a 8-year old girl swimming a 1:20 for 100m meets the A-standard for competitive swimming. That's pretty good - for an 17 year old boy/man, you'd need a 1:01 for the 100 to make the same A standard. I'm also curious as to why if it's all smooth technique, that these kids can also power through the fly really fast - if there's a stroke that takes a ton of energy, it's the fly! If anything, that also shows they've got some serious power - you can't fake/finesse a fast fly stroke - you have to be pretty strong to pull it off, let alone do it for distance. Edited by yazmaster 2015-08-01 11:46 PM |
2015-08-02 7:41 PM in reply to: yazmaster |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Negative buoyancy help Originally posted by yazmaster Originally posted by zedzded Originally posted by yazmaster It's not that they're powerful, we have skinny little 8 year olds doing 100ms in under 1.20. They have an effective technique which means they are utlilising their large lat/back muscles. A lot of swimmers don't use these muscles, so a big adult will always lose out to a small child who is using bigger muscle groups as opposed to arms and shoulders. You might want to check out that video. In the last run, the suit the competitive swimmer is so big he can barely lower his arms, let alone do a decent pull motion, and he STILL beats the guy who swims 1:30/100m. He works pretty darn hard to do it, though!
And as an aside, in endurance sports like distance swimming, biking, and running, twig-shaped appendages are often a HELP, not a handicap. Everyone likes to point at the little girls and say "we men are so much stronger in the arms so it can't POSSIBLY be power!", but they're first of all not assuming we're testing them int the swim pull motion, in which those girls who practice their rears off pull shockingly hard, and as well, you don't need muscle bulk to go fast in endurance sports. Prime examples are the gazelle-like legs of Kenyan runners, or the svelte frames of pretty much all pro cyclists except short-track sprinters. What I'm saying is that you can't assume these strong swimmer girls have 'weak arms that produce no power' - in fact, all their fast swimming pretty much prove that they're plenty power in the swim motion, and they can pull those paddles with high turnover to prove it.
How many 8 year olds do you have swimming 100m in under 1:20, and for distance? If all of your 8 year old kids can do it, and this isn't a team that preselects from the fastest kids from the region, I'm convinced! I did see that at USA Swimming, a 8-year old girl swimming a 1:20 for 100m meets the A-standard for competitive swimming. That's pretty good - for an 17 year old boy/man, you'd need a 1:01 for the 100 to make the same A standard. I'm also curious as to why if it's all smooth technique, that these kids can also power through the fly really fast - if there's a stroke that takes a ton of energy, it's the fly! If anything, that also shows they've got some serious power - you can't fake/finesse a fast fly stroke - you have to be pretty strong to pull it off, let alone do it for distance. Yaz......honestly, you don't know anything about swimming fast. (hint: it's NOT like you see in most AG triathlons) And you REALLY don't know anything about butterfly. The butterfly swimmers would absolutely kill you with nothing more than underwater dolphin kicking in a 100 yard race - you do whatever stroke you like. I'm sorry, it's still mostly great technique and timing. |
2015-08-03 9:17 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Master 10208 Northern IL | Subject: RE: Negative buoyancy help Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by yazmaster Originally posted by zedzded Originally posted by yazmaster It's not that they're powerful, we have skinny little 8 year olds doing 100ms in under 1.20. They have an effective technique which means they are utlilising their large lat/back muscles. A lot of swimmers don't use these muscles, so a big adult will always lose out to a small child who is using bigger muscle groups as opposed to arms and shoulders. You might want to check out that video. In the last run, the suit the competitive swimmer is so big he can barely lower his arms, let alone do a decent pull motion, and he STILL beats the guy who swims 1:30/100m. He works pretty darn hard to do it, though!
And as an aside, in endurance sports like distance swimming, biking, and running, twig-shaped appendages are often a HELP, not a handicap. Everyone likes to point at the little girls and say "we men are so much stronger in the arms so it can't POSSIBLY be power!", but they're first of all not assuming we're testing them int the swim pull motion, in which those girls who practice their rears off pull shockingly hard, and as well, you don't need muscle bulk to go fast in endurance sports. Prime examples are the gazelle-like legs of Kenyan runners, or the svelte frames of pretty much all pro cyclists except short-track sprinters. What I'm saying is that you can't assume these strong swimmer girls have 'weak arms that produce no power' - in fact, all their fast swimming pretty much prove that they're plenty power in the swim motion, and they can pull those paddles with high turnover to prove it.
How many 8 year olds do you have swimming 100m in under 1:20, and for distance? If all of your 8 year old kids can do it, and this isn't a team that preselects from the fastest kids from the region, I'm convinced! I did see that at USA Swimming, a 8-year old girl swimming a 1:20 for 100m meets the A-standard for competitive swimming. That's pretty good - for an 17 year old boy/man, you'd need a 1:01 for the 100 to make the same A standard. I'm also curious as to why if it's all smooth technique, that these kids can also power through the fly really fast - if there's a stroke that takes a ton of energy, it's the fly! If anything, that also shows they've got some serious power - you can't fake/finesse a fast fly stroke - you have to be pretty strong to pull it off, let alone do it for distance. Yaz......honestly, you don't know anything about swimming fast. (hint: it's NOT like you see in most AG triathlons) And you REALLY don't know anything about butterfly. The butterfly swimmers would absolutely kill you with nothing more than underwater dolphin kicking in a 100 yard race - you do whatever stroke you like. I'm sorry, it's still mostly great technique and timing. Butterfly isn't not demanding, but the energy requirements go up incredibly fast the less one knows how to do it. Another guy at masters was a better freestyler than me and better at all forms of kicking. I was better at butterfly simply because I actually took more time to learn the stroke, while he struggled getting through 25's. At one point I thought he was jumping off the bottom in the shallow end. There is no faking the finesse part of it. |
2015-08-03 9:47 AM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Negative buoyancy help Originally posted by brigby1 Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by yazmaster Originally posted by zedzded Originally posted by yazmaster It's not that they're powerful, we have skinny little 8 year olds doing 100ms in under 1.20. They have an effective technique which means they are utlilising their large lat/back muscles. A lot of swimmers don't use these muscles, so a big adult will always lose out to a small child who is using bigger muscle groups as opposed to arms and shoulders. You might want to check out that video. In the last run, the suit the competitive swimmer is so big he can barely lower his arms, let alone do a decent pull motion, and he STILL beats the guy who swims 1:30/100m. He works pretty darn hard to do it, though!
And as an aside, in endurance sports like distance swimming, biking, and running, twig-shaped appendages are often a HELP, not a handicap. Everyone likes to point at the little girls and say "we men are so much stronger in the arms so it can't POSSIBLY be power!", but they're first of all not assuming we're testing them int the swim pull motion, in which those girls who practice their rears off pull shockingly hard, and as well, you don't need muscle bulk to go fast in endurance sports. Prime examples are the gazelle-like legs of Kenyan runners, or the svelte frames of pretty much all pro cyclists except short-track sprinters. What I'm saying is that you can't assume these strong swimmer girls have 'weak arms that produce no power' - in fact, all their fast swimming pretty much prove that they're plenty power in the swim motion, and they can pull those paddles with high turnover to prove it.
How many 8 year olds do you have swimming 100m in under 1:20, and for distance? If all of your 8 year old kids can do it, and this isn't a team that preselects from the fastest kids from the region, I'm convinced! I did see that at USA Swimming, a 8-year old girl swimming a 1:20 for 100m meets the A-standard for competitive swimming. That's pretty good - for an 17 year old boy/man, you'd need a 1:01 for the 100 to make the same A standard. I'm also curious as to why if it's all smooth technique, that these kids can also power through the fly really fast - if there's a stroke that takes a ton of energy, it's the fly! If anything, that also shows they've got some serious power - you can't fake/finesse a fast fly stroke - you have to be pretty strong to pull it off, let alone do it for distance. Yaz......honestly, you don't know anything about swimming fast. (hint: it's NOT like you see in most AG triathlons) And you REALLY don't know anything about butterfly. The butterfly swimmers would absolutely kill you with nothing more than underwater dolphin kicking in a 100 yard race - you do whatever stroke you like. I'm sorry, it's still mostly great technique and timing. Butterfly isn't not demanding, but the energy requirements go up incredibly fast the less one knows how to do it. Another guy at masters was a better freestyler than me and better at all forms of kicking. I was better at butterfly simply because I actually took more time to learn the stroke, while he struggled getting through 25's. At one point I thought he was jumping off the bottom in the shallow end. There is no faking the finesse part of it. That's right....but finesse is not power, it's technique and stroke efficiency.....the same as any other swim stroke. Edited by Left Brain 2015-08-03 9:48 AM |
|
2015-08-03 6:22 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
1660 | Subject: RE: Negative buoyancy help Ok, you guys win. I'll just expect the next no-fitness guy/gal out there to butterfly the whole Oly swim since it clearly doesn't take any energy and is all timing and finesse. And clearly you also don't need significant fitness to maintain a fast and effective stroke rate in the water since it's all technique! |
2015-08-03 7:34 PM in reply to: yazmaster |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Negative buoyancy help Originally posted by yazmaster Ok, you guys win. I'll just expect the next no-fitness guy/gal out there to butterfly the whole Oly swim since it clearly doesn't take any energy and is all timing and finesse. And clearly you also don't need significant fitness to maintain a fast and effective stroke rate in the water since it's all technique! While you're at it, have the most fit person you know go ahead and butterfly the entire Oly swim without great butterfly stroke technique and let me know how that works out for you. LOL |
2015-08-03 8:32 PM in reply to: yazmaster |
471 | Subject: RE: Negative buoyancy help Originally posted by yazmaster Ok, you guys win. I'll just expect the next no-fitness guy/gal out there to butterfly the whole Oly swim since it clearly doesn't take any energy and is all timing and finesse. And clearly you also don't need significant fitness to maintain a fast and effective stroke rate in the water since it's all technique! Obviously fitness plays a part in swimming as well as technique, but it's the latter that is much more important. Plenty of very fit athletes out there who simply struggle in the pool because of poor technique. One of the top guys from my squad when I was at school swam with me the other day, he was a national swimmer back at school and swam low 50s/100m, and he kicked my arse. He's spent the last 15 years drinking, smoking weed and has put on about 80lbs. He's done little exercise, unless you count fishing as exercise and he pulled off a 1.04/100m.. My technique is not bad, I'm fit and not carrying any extra weight, yet he smashed me.. I was pretty gobsmacked. He did look like he was about to have a heart attack though! |
|
| ||||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
|