Wednesday, November 28, 2007
My unqualified critique of a Terry Laughlin article at "about.com"
I saw this article a couple of weeks ago and I was apprehensive about posting it. I couldn't figure out why till tonight. In this about.com article, Terry Laughlin puts forth some interesting statistics and compelling arguments regarding Popov's power output in relation to the swimmers he competed against. Ultimately Laughlin makes a case for how important technique is over brute force. Here is a short paragraph from the article:
"... In the same vein, Rick Sharp and Jane Cappaert of the International Center for Aquatic Research have reported that of all the men's 100-meter freestylers in the 92 Olympics, the finalists averaged a power output 16% LOWER than everyone else in the field who FAILED to make finals. This is so because swimmers who maximize their stroke efficiency simply don't NEED as much power to swim fast. ..." [Link]
My problem with the article is Laughlin's stringent use of Popov's technique as an über template of perfect symmetry and grace which he seemingly suggests should be used as the de facto standard. Personally, I feel the freestyle form is fluid and evolving. I think one's gross anatomy, their flexibility, and the strength of the individual determines how they should swim. In other words you shouldn't fit the person to the stroke but rather fit the stroke to the person. To support my argument I included a video above from You Tube of Stefan Nystrand setting a world record in the 100 free SCM. Note, he swims like a submerged helicopter and he can do it faster than Popov.
In his first lap Nystrand takes 13-strokes. On laps two and three he takes 16 strokes, on his last lap I counted 19-strokes. I had to watch it twice to confirm.
UPDATE: I am submitting this video of Nystrand from the front view. Note how he looks up rather than downward. The total immersion school feels you should look more downward, Personally I have to look more downward to stay flatter in the water due to the shape of my body. Nystrand apparently does not have to.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I think you need to read more of Terry's articles. Popov is just one example he uses to support his philosophy of swimming as efficient as possible. Go to his website and you will get a better feel for what he espouses.
I did go to the site and I found Chapter 9 to the book "Triathlon Swimming made easy",and read that first. Then I read Chapter One which was philosophic in nature
All of the above were informative but geared to a newer swimmer not a masters swimmer.
I read Excerpt One to "Long Strokes in a Short Season" as well. I also looked at the FAQ and I am still seeing a Boolean logic whereas you are either swimming correctly or you are swimming incorrectly.
I think swimming is both an art and a science but more so an art since the science has to be adapted.
To reduce it to the absurd; (reductio ad absurdum), someone with cerebral palsy would have to be educated differently as to how to swim best for those particular sort of muscle deficits.
Someone like Stefan Nystrand, who has amazing power and a fast turnover has adapted his unique ability to set 2 world records using perhaps his deficits or natural enhancements to summarily kick ass.
I'm very much in Laughlin's camp on the importance of stroke technique. I also agree with anonymous that Popov is just an example of how one individual approached the solving the 'problem' of finding the maximally effective stroke (like Laughlin I've also used Popov as an example to prove my own beliefs about swimming). While a few months ago I'd have agreed with you an individual's body type and pecularities will necessarily require modifications to what constitutes the ideal stroke I'm now starting to lean the other way, thinking the best way to improve is not to adapt the stroke to the swimmer but to correct the physical flaws and deficiencies instead (i.e. improve flexibility, lose weight, better strength in areas of deficiency, and working to alter the stroke to something closer to the theoretical best). With this hypothesis I would argue that while the cost benefits of such an approach would be minimal in the sprints (though one or two tenths of a second in the fifty would be a significant race advantage) it becomes overwhelming in favor of stroke technique the longer you go out. To use your excellent example of cerebral palsy the very best thing we could do to improve his or her speed would be to cure the disease, not adapt their stroke! Consequently Stephan Nystrand can be very successful as a fifty meter specialist - I just think he could even faster with a better stroke and, for that matter, a better work ethic. Natural talent will only go so far, and for me at least, the entire point of competitive swimming is to do better.
Post a Comment