A Fitness & exercise forum. FitnessBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » FitnessBanter.com forum » Fitness & Exercise » Swimming
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Stroke Length ... what's all the fuss?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old January 12th 04, 10:28 PM
Donal Fagan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stroke Length ... what's all the fuss?

On 12 Jan 2004 18:50:15 GMT, et
(Larry Weisenthal) wrote:

... strong kicking, in an FQS long stroke style,
maintains momentum during dead periods between arm
strokes.


You still think FQS swimming is a catchup drill.

Have you looked at Maglischo's charts? For the
two-peak style, which probably includes FQS
swimmers, there are no dead periods, there are
spikes up and down, brief instants where the
swimmer changes from insweep to upsweep or makes
the downsweep to the catch. If kicking was a
factor, it would fill in those sharp troughs.

In fact it is the one-peak charts that have
filled-in troughs, much longer slow periods, but
Maglischo notes that one-peak swimmers tend to
have "minimal kicking rhythms" and tend to be
female.

All the Counsilman/push off experiments show is
that kicking doesn't further accelerate the
swimmer above the maximal velocity achieved by
full arm stroke swimming.


Actually, Counsilman came up with about 1.5 m/s,
which is nowhere near the maximal velocity of a
good college swimmer. I'm guessing that speed has
something to do with the kicking prowess of the
swimmers he tested.

If Doc had tested Popov, the number would likely
have been around 1.67 m/s. Be interesting to know
how fast Thorpe can kick 50m.

If he had tested me, the number would have been
about 0.25 m/s ... unless I was wearing zoomers.


Donal Fagan AIA

(Anglicise the name to reply by e-mail)
  #106  
Old January 13th 04, 12:54 AM
Donal Fagan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stroke Length ... what's all the fuss?

On 13 Jan 2004 00:10:57 GMT, et
(Larry Weisenthal) wrote:

Are you going to make me drag it out of you bit by
bit by bit?


Drag what?


Donal Fagan AIA

(Anglicise the name to reply by e-mail)
  #108  
Old January 13th 04, 03:06 AM
Larry Weisenthal
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stroke Length ... what's all the fuss?

From: Donal Fagan

Have you looked at Maglischo's charts? For the

two-peak style, which probably includes FQS
swimmers, there are no dead periods, there are
spikes up and down, brief instants where the
swimmer changes from insweep to upsweep or makes
the downsweep to the catch. If kicking was a
factor, it would fill in those sharp troughs.

In fact it is the one-peak charts that have

filled-in troughs, much longer slow periods, but
Maglischo notes that one-peak swimmers tend to
have "minimal kicking rhythms" and tend to be
female.

Certainly, I've "looked at" Maglischo's charts. I just looked at them again.
They provide no information relevant to the present discussion, save for the
fact that they confirm that a very prominent degree of immediate loss of
velocity does occur during the non-arm-propulsive periods in the stroke cycle,
which supports my point of view that it is important to minimize this loss of
velocity/momentum, by kicking, by rear quadrant stroking, and/or by higher
stroke rate swimming.

These charts do not include comparisons of velocity changes in the presence and
absence of effective kicking, which is what is required to definitively address
the current controversy.

You are using "two peak" swimming as a marker for long stroke/strong kicking
and "one peak" swimming as a marker for short stroke/weak kicking. Or at least
this is the way I interpret your citation of Maglischo's data in the present
context.

But "two peak" and "one peak," per se, don't have anything to do with the
question at hand. A two peak swimmer has a prominent insweep to the center
line (generating the first velocity peak) and, following a change in direction,
associated with a fall in velocity, a prominent upsweep (generating the second
velocity peak). A one peak swimmer combines his insweep and upsweep into a
single power-generating stroke, producing only a single velocity peak. Such
swimmers don't "sweep" inward and upward, but just pull straight back,
accelerating all the way (if they are doing it properly). Maglischo states
that Biondi was a "two peak" swimmer, while Rowdy Gaines (another
stong-kicking, long stroking sprinter) was a "one peak" swimmer.

I'm pretty sure that today, pretty much everyone advocates the "one peak"
approach, and this has nothing to do with whether one is a strong or weak
kicker or long or short stroker or slow or fast stroker.

As I said, Maglischo's charts are nice in that they show the dramatic and rapid
drop in velocity occurring between applications of hand force. This shows the
great potential for performance gain by minimizing this lost in
velocity/momentum.

A long-stroking, FQSing one peak swimmer will experience a tremendous fall in
velocity between hand force applications and requires a good kick to achieve
optimum performance with this style of swimming.

- Larry
  #109  
Old January 13th 04, 04:10 AM
diablo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stroke Length ... what's all the fuss?

has it ever occured to either you, Larry, or you Donal, that you're
over-complicating the subject?

How can you begin to disagree that kicking assists propulsion, negligible or
not? Larry's example of the Sardine (even though he got it backwards) or the
Football player pushing the SUV, while wildly imaginative, could have been
boiled down to Newtonian Law. Basic physics.

Of *course* Larry's point isn't supported by Maglischo's charts, because the
the body decelerates gradually after propulsion by the upper body ends, but
is almost instantaneously reapplied before it drops to the level of that
contributed by the kick. Hopefully this will be illustrated, one way or
another when i conduct the mini-study, as the rate of retardation will
either be similar or different:

If kicking was a
factor, it would fill in those sharp troughs. (Donal)


no, if kicking was a factor, the troughs wouldn't be filled, the peaks would
be higher, and the troughs the same relative distance. just to use
arbitarary values, if the arms produce 5 and are stable, then you have a
weak kick contributing 1, and a strong kick contributing 2, whats the
difference between 6 and 1 (pull + weak kick) and 7 and 2 (pull + strong
kick)? the relative difference is 5 either way.

sure, thats a simplified way of looking at it, but the concept is the same.

To try and base an argument on points that are concrete (data from
controlled studies and observations) on one hand and wildly subjective
(Larry's elusive kicking effectiveness continuum) on the other...geez, its
no wonder this discussion is starting to hit the gutter, which is a damn
shame, because it was interesting for a while.


"Larry Weisenthal" wrote in message
...
From: Donal Fagan

Have you looked at Maglischo's charts? For the

two-peak style, which probably includes FQS
swimmers, there are no dead periods, there are
spikes up and down, brief instants where the
swimmer changes from insweep to upsweep or makes
the downsweep to the catch. If kicking was a
factor, it would fill in those sharp troughs.

In fact it is the one-peak charts that have

filled-in troughs, much longer slow periods, but
Maglischo notes that one-peak swimmers tend to
have "minimal kicking rhythms" and tend to be
female.

Certainly, I've "looked at" Maglischo's charts. I just looked at them

again.
They provide no information relevant to the present discussion, save for

the
fact that they confirm that a very prominent degree of immediate loss of
velocity does occur during the non-arm-propulsive periods in the stroke

cycle,
which supports my point of view that it is important to minimize this loss

of
velocity/momentum, by kicking, by rear quadrant stroking, and/or by higher
stroke rate swimming.

These charts do not include comparisons of velocity changes in the

presence and
absence of effective kicking, which is what is required to definitively

address
the current controversy.

You are using "two peak" swimming as a marker for long stroke/strong

kicking
and "one peak" swimming as a marker for short stroke/weak kicking. Or at

least
this is the way I interpret your citation of Maglischo's data in the

present
context.

But "two peak" and "one peak," per se, don't have anything to do with the
question at hand. A two peak swimmer has a prominent insweep to the

center
line (generating the first velocity peak) and, following a change in

direction,
associated with a fall in velocity, a prominent upsweep (generating the

second
velocity peak). A one peak swimmer combines his insweep and upsweep into

a
single power-generating stroke, producing only a single velocity peak.

Such
swimmers don't "sweep" inward and upward, but just pull straight back,
accelerating all the way (if they are doing it properly). Maglischo

states
that Biondi was a "two peak" swimmer, while Rowdy Gaines (another
stong-kicking, long stroking sprinter) was a "one peak" swimmer.

I'm pretty sure that today, pretty much everyone advocates the "one peak"
approach, and this has nothing to do with whether one is a strong or weak
kicker or long or short stroker or slow or fast stroker.

As I said, Maglischo's charts are nice in that they show the dramatic and

rapid
drop in velocity occurring between applications of hand force. This shows

the
great potential for performance gain by minimizing this lost in
velocity/momentum.

A long-stroking, FQSing one peak swimmer will experience a tremendous fall

in
velocity between hand force applications and requires a good kick to

achieve
optimum performance with this style of swimming.

- Larry



  #110  
Old January 13th 04, 08:02 AM
Larry Weisenthal
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stroke Length ... what's all the fuss?

From: "diablo"

anything

you see in the above protocol you'd like altered?

What I'd also like to see is a simple X-Y plot of stroke count per 25 (or some
other measure of stroke length) vs the kick/swim ratio. With a correlation
coefficient.

I'm totally blown away by your willingness to do all this work. You should be
motivated by the knowledge that, in the history of swimming, no one has come
close to defining the precise role of the freestyle flutter kick. Lots of
theories abound, but you are actually getting some hard data which may provide
important insights. Maybe you'll consider publishing it beyond this newsgroup.

I also think that this illustrates the incredible power of this communications
medium. Back in the pre-web days of CompuServe (circa 1993) I tried to put
together what I called the "unified forum oncology group" ("UNFOG"), which was
to be an organization of physician, patients and their families (some of whom
know more about a particular disease than many medical specialists and are
twice as smart to boot...which is one reason why I've never evaluated the
quality of an idea by the "credentials" of the person presenting the idea), and
other interested people. We didn't have the critical mass (and I didn't have
the time) to make it work, but I think that we have the rudimentary elements of
it here in swimming. You get all the credit for taking the initiative to
actually do it. Can hardly wait to see what you are able to discover.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Increasing Stride Length SwStudio Running 3 May 2nd 04 09:55 AM
Alcohol shrinks brain & no stroke benefits Sydney Weights 16 December 17th 03 05:45 AM
Data for kick only vs full stroke swim times Liz D Swimming 1 December 14th 03 11:50 PM
Stroke clinics in Mission Viejo, CA DaKitty Swimming 0 November 26th 03 02:31 AM
Just plain slow Cam Wilson Swimming 23 July 25th 03 09:59 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 FitnessBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.