General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Descending Swim Sets Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
2009-03-24 3:45 PM

User image

Master
1327
100010010010025
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Subject: Descending Swim Sets

I should know what this means but what are descending swim sets as defined here:

16 x 50, descend 1-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16

Thanks!!



2009-03-24 3:50 PM
in reply to: #2037551

Member
198
100252525
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets
The first four 50s are all the same speed. The next four are all at the same speed, slightly faster than the first set. The third set of 50s are all slightly faster than the second, and the fourth set of 50s are the fastest.
2009-03-24 3:52 PM
in reply to: #2037551

User image

Expert
1070
10002525
Denver Area
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets

I thought descending sets were slower and slower....ascending sets are faster and faster...

or something like that?

p.s. never should yourself, or should on anyone else for that matter 



Edited by AdaBug 2009-03-24 3:53 PM
2009-03-24 3:53 PM
in reply to: #2037551

User image

Bob
2194
2000100252525
Binghamton, NY
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets
travljini - 2009-03-24 4:45 PM

I should know what this means but what are descending swim sets as defined here:

16 x 50, descend 1-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16

Thanks!!

This means that each set of four gets gradually faster so #4, #8, #12 and #16 would be hard swims.

 Ex. :46, :44, :43, :42 ----- :45, :43, :42, :41 ----- :46, :42, :41, :40 ---- :45, :43, :41, :39

Does this help?

2009-03-24 3:53 PM
in reply to: #2037568

User image

Sneaky Slow
8694
500020001000500100252525
Herndon, VA,
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets
AdaBug - 2009-03-24 4:52 PM

I thought descending sets were slower and slower....ascending sets are faster and faster...

or something like that?

p.s. never should yourself, or should on anyone else for that matter 

No.

2009-03-24 3:55 PM
in reply to: #2037551

User image

Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets

hmmmmm, not saying I am right, but my reaction is different [eta - to the first response], I would descend 1-4, then start again descend 5-8, etc. 

So each set of four is a set of descending 50s.

And by descending, each successive 50 is faster than the previous.  (may know that part)

Interesting to see what others think [who posted while I was typing....]



Edited by ChrisM 2009-03-24 3:56 PM


2009-03-24 3:56 PM
in reply to: #2037551

User image

Extreme Veteran
478
100100100100252525
Houston, Texas
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets

In my Masters swim descending sets mean you go faster (descend in time).

For this set we would descend our time for each group of 4 sets.  Times would look like:
1 - 50 at 50 seconds
2 - 50 at 48 seconds
3 - 50 at 46 seconds
4 - 50 at 44 seconds (then repeat three more times)
5 - 50 at 50 seconds
6 - 50 at 48 seconds......

There might be different ways to do this as written but this is how I'd do it.

2009-03-24 3:59 PM
in reply to: #2037580

User image

Pro
4481
20002000100100100100252525
Reston
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets
ChrisM - 2009-03-24 4:55 PM

hmmmmm, not saying I am right, but my reaction is different [eta - to the first response], I would descend 1-4, then start again descend 5-8, etc. 

So each set of four is a set of descending 50s.

And by descending, each successive 50 is faster than the previous.  (may know that part)

Interesting to see what others think [who posted while I was typing....]


agreed.
ascending would be the opposite, where each successive 50 is slower than the previous.
2009-03-24 4:23 PM
in reply to: #2037551

User image

Sneaky Slow
8694
500020001000500100252525
Herndon, VA,
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets

Yeah, I think it means... 4 x (4 x 50 descending)

 

2009-03-24 6:19 PM
in reply to: #2037653

User image

Master
1327
100010010010025
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets

Thanks for the replies!  That refreshes my recollection, that each successive set is to be faster.

 

2009-03-24 7:51 PM
in reply to: #2037551

User image

Master
1547
100050025
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets

Think descending in time it takes to complete the rep...meaning faster as ChrisM said.

 

 



2009-03-24 8:29 PM
in reply to: #2037551

User image

Royal(PITA)
14270
50005000200020001001002525
West Chester, Ohio
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets

think sets of 4

First one easy, second a bit faster and so on...last one hard pace.  Take a rest interval then go back to the first easy one.  Repeat til complete

 

2009-03-25 6:15 AM
in reply to: #2037889

User image

Giver
18427
5000500050002000100010010010010025
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets
travljini - 2009-03-24 7:19 PM

Thanks for the replies!  That refreshes my recollection, that each successive set is to be faster.

 

Except each successive set isn't supposed to be faster. Each swim within each set is supposed to be faster. When you get to a new set, start over.

2009-03-25 3:23 PM
in reply to: #2037584

User image

Expert
1070
10002525
Denver Area
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets
tmueller - 2009-03-24 2:56 PM

In my Masters swim descending sets mean you go faster (descend in time).

For this set we would descend our time for each group of 4 sets.  Times would look like:
1 - 50 at 50 seconds
2 - 50 at 48 seconds
3 - 50 at 46 seconds
4 - 50 at 44 seconds (then repeat three more times)
5 - 50 at 50 seconds
6 - 50 at 48 seconds......

There might be different ways to do this as written but this is how I'd do it.

Ok that makes sense, descending time.

2009-07-15 2:36 PM
in reply to: #2038472

User image

Champion
11989
500050001000500100100100100252525
Philly 'burbs
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets


Reviving an old thread 'cause I have the same workout today. Seems that there is disagreement on whether each 50 within a set gets faster, and then you start over:

1@ 1:00
2@ :55
3@ :50
4@ 45

5@ 1:00
6@ :55
7@ :50
8@ 45

etc....


 Or

Each full set of four gets faster than the last full set of four:

1@ 1:00
2@ 1:00
3@ 1:00
4@ 1:00

5@ :55
6@ :55
7@ :55
8@ :55


etc....

Can we reach a consensus before I have to go to the pool after work? We have an hour and a half. Go.
2009-07-15 2:42 PM
in reply to: #2038472

User image

Champion
15211
500050005000100100
Southern Chicago Suburbs, IL
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets

run4yrlif - 2009-03-25 6:15 AM
travljini - 2009-03-24 7:19 PM

Thanks for the replies!  That refreshes my recollection, that each successive set is to be faster.

 

Except each successive set isn't supposed to be faster. Each swim within each set is supposed to be faster. When you get to a new set, start over.

Answer



2009-07-15 2:45 PM
in reply to: #2287581

User image

Champion
11989
500050001000500100100100100252525
Philly 'burbs
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets
crowny2 - 2009-07-15 3:42 PM

run4yrlif - 2009-03-25 6:15 AM
travljini - 2009-03-24 7:19 PM

Thanks for the replies!  That refreshes my recollection, that each successive set is to be faster.

 

Except each successive set isn't supposed to be faster. Each swim within each set is supposed to be faster. When you get to a new set, start over.

Answer





so this person is wrong?



cpfint - 2009-03-24 4:50 PM The first four 50s are all the same speed. The next four are all at the same speed, slightly faster than the first set. The third set of 50s are all slightly faster than the second, and the fourth set of 50s are the fastest.
2009-07-15 2:52 PM
in reply to: #2287591

User image

Champion
5117
5000100
Brandon, MS
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets

mrbbrad - 2009-07-15 2:45 PM

so this person is wrong?



The first four 50s are all the same speed. The next four are all at the same speed, slightly faster than the first set. The third set of 50s are all slightly faster than the second, and the fourth set of 50s are the fastest.

Yes. 



Edited by sesh 2009-07-15 2:55 PM
2009-07-15 4:10 PM
in reply to: #2287618

User image

Champion
15211
500050005000100100
Southern Chicago Suburbs, IL
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets

sesh - 2009-07-15 2:52 PM

mrbbrad - 2009-07-15 2:45 PM

so this person is wrong?



The first four 50s are all the same speed. The next four are all at the same speed, slightly faster than the first set. The third set of 50s are all slightly faster than the second, and the fourth set of 50s are the fastest.

Yes. 

x2

2009-07-15 4:28 PM
in reply to: #2287843

User image

Lethbridge, Alberta
Bronze member
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets
crowny2 - 2009-07-15 3:10 PM

sesh - 2009-07-15 2:52 PM

mrbbrad - 2009-07-15 2:45 PM

so this person is wrong?



The first four 50s are all the same speed. The next four are all at the same speed, slightly faster than the first set. The third set of 50s are all slightly faster than the second, and the fourth set of 50s are the fastest.

Yes. 

x2


X3

Edited by Micawber 2009-07-15 4:30 PM
2009-07-15 6:47 PM
in reply to: #2037551

User image

Champion
11989
500050001000500100100100100252525
Philly 'burbs
Subject: RE: Descending Swim Sets


New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Descending Swim Sets Rss Feed