The 1650
Today's swim conditioning (the final in water for the summer session) had the 1650. I swam it in 26:46, which is on the order of my previous effort from last summer session 2. I may have miscounted by a 50 (this was in the last 150 yards, so that would push the time up to around 27:20 in that case). I get the feeling that I probably could have gone faster (most of it felt like an even split, but I think I didn't go as fast as I could at the end).
METAR KRDU 032051Z 23507KT 7SM FEW050TCU SCT095 SCT250 36/22 A2988 RMK SLP114Labels: actual swimming, swimming
posted by weather boy @ 5:52 PM
2 Comments:
Yeah its annoying when you get to the last 100~200 and sprint... only to find out that when you reach the end you still have energy to run more. Gets better with pushing it back little by little.
If the splits nearing the end half of one's race are significantly better then the first (or, there is a ton of energy left), then the runner might not be running fast enough (aka using enough energy) to begin with.
You are typically much better off spreading out the energy rather then burning_out/wasting_it in the last 15% of the race. (Pushing the last bit of the race is still good, but not when it hurts your times.) Same goes for starting too fast.
Negitive-spliting might be a way to increase performance. Reduce the overall time bit by bit, but always keep the last splits equal (or preferably) faster then the first half.
Starting out too fast isn't good, but starting 'really slow' won't help any. With negitive-spliting you just have to find the right ratio of split times (most likely the times won't be too far apart once balanced out). (That little bit of each split will add up.)
Tempo runs typically help increase speeds. You can break away from (and increase) your bodies set 'comfortable' speeds which could hold you back.
Really it ends up coming down to pacing yourself according to yourself (fartleks can also help with figuring that out), but the psychological advantage of negitive-spliting might also help when you find/feel yourself blowing past the competition at the end. How easy is it to see passing/being_passed when swimming?
I'm not sure how well general concepts translate over to swimming, but I'm curious. Does any of this make sense in the world of swimming?
---
The 100/50/25 as I first thought I understand it, sets up a bit weird when trying to negative-split overall when the distances are laddered/pyramided already.
A few noob-ish questions:
o Is a 100/50/25 back to back races each scored differently/separately?
o Or... is it just a 'normal' (mind of a runner here) 200 but times are taken at 100/50/20 and have no affect on your overall time/score?
(I'm thinking its the first.)
o Is the pool divided into 25 for the 100/50/25 or is it set at 50?
o Are splits typically taken at pool length or a smaller/larger set distance?
(There’s no way the 'lap' distances change variably (after each part. Not counting the last 25)... do they? :/ )
o If the overall time is all that matters, are you laddering/pyramiding the 200 into 100/50/25? Thus, would it be better to save a bit of energy during the 100 so that you can push the 50 and 25 (which it looks like you are doing)? Though if you are stuck at a set 50/25 time because of a limit on speed instead of energy, conserving energy doesn't help much.
Sorry about all the confusing questions. I'm trying to discus/make_sense_of it all at the same time I'm asking questions. ^_^;
You've pretty much hit on the basic strategies for swimming a 1650--negative split the race (which is very impressive when it's done correctly) or evenly split a race (the way that Janet Evans swam her long distance events [she still has the world records in the 800m and 1500m Freestyle]). The problem of course is determing whether you are actually holding a consistent split, which is more difficult at longer distances for someone who is less experienced in them than I (I never swam anything above the 500 when I was younger, but that's because the 1000yd/1650yd swims were never done when I could be at the meet, or there would be hideous time standards that I could never make to swim in those races).
An interesting sidenote is that in competitive meets, each swimmer is allowed one person to either i) count their laps for them and use a lap counter to count laps in an ascending or descending manner, or ii) have a timer call out split times to the swimmer. The choice of most swimmers is to have a lap counter count in an ascending manner. The referee also will fire a gun in most meets when the first swimmer reaches their turn before their last lap (in the Olympics and upper level events like that, they have officials who ring bells over each lane when they get to their last lap).
Starting out "real slow" is actually an interesting concept. I'll agree that in general it is a foolish concept (you won't see anyone do it that way in the Olympics). Inevitably though you will go out too fast anyway, which is problematic. When I was younger, I used to swim the 200 yard Freestyle (4 laps/8 lengths in a 25 yard length pool). At one meet, I got the "brilliant" idea to see what would happen if I tried to sprint the whole race (I think I was 13 or 14 at the time). I actually did pretty decently most of the race and led my heat, until I died with about 40 yards left. This brought me to the conclusion that I could only really sprint about 150 yards at a time in freestyle, and the question in a 200 yard freestyle (which isn't really a sprint but isn't really a paced race either) is how to do it. I considered which lap to swim slower than the other three. Obviously the last lap is out. The third lap was also out (the explanation for why it is out is a bit on the lengthy side). That leaves the first two laps. Initially I thought that the second lap would be the best one to slow down on. But then I thought about it some, and it didn't make sense that I swim one lap fast, one easy, and then two fast--it makes more sense to swim one easy and then the rest of the race fast. So the solution I came up with is to swim the first lap easier than the other three--a very counter-intuitive strategy, but getting behind in races never really fazed me because I was always behind in races!
A little nomenclature:
There are three standard "courses" for swimming pools--short course yards (SCY), short course meters (SCM), and long course meters (LCM). Short course yards is the typical competitive distance that is used in meets in the United States--it is a 25 yard distance for one length of the pool. Short course meters is used in many places in the US, and the rest of the world, and is 25 meters. Long course meters is the killer--it is a 50 meter length for the pool (which makes it harder because you have fewer pushes off the wall, which is the fastest anyone goes in a given length of swimming). The 50 meter distance is also the distance that is used at the Olympics, and probably the one you would see if you watched swimming on TV. Since I was swimming the 1650 yards distance (in meters, the event is the 1500 meter distance), I had to swim 66 lengths of the pool, or 33 laps. The 450 yards was 9 laps (18 lengths).
The 100/50/25 is actually a deceptive way to phrase the sprints we did (it was my instructor's phrasing). Actually, they were 3 seperate sprints--a 100 yard freestyle (4 lengths), a 50 yard freestyle, and a 25 yard freestyle. They were swum seperately, and I had rest in between each. The distances that are frequently swum in meets for freestyle are 50, 100, 200, 500 yards (400 meters), 1000 yards (800 meters), and 1650 yards (1500 meters).
Overall time is all that matters in swimming. Occasionally people request in meets for their leadoff splits to be taken so that can occasionally use them for qualifying standards or record-breaking (this is unusual, since the initial part of a longer distance will be slower than if the same shorter distance is done seperately). Relay leadoff splits are frequently used as well (the only part of a relay that can be used as a split, since the first swimmer must be completely motionless at the start, whereas before other legs in a relay, the swimmer can be in motion provided that some part of their body is still in contact with the starting surface until the swimmer in the water touches).
Inside of a race done at a meet, splits are taken usually once every lap. This is based on the fact that most meets are done with electronic timing systems. Splits are finish times are taken when the swimmer touches with a certain amount of force a "touchpad" that is placed on the wall (the thickness of which is not a part of the distance of the course). Since most pools only have touchpads at one end (either for cost reasons or because a second touchpad would make the course too short), splits are typically taken every lap.
For example, here are a couple of examples. The first was from the 13-14 200 yard freestyle at a meet in Greensboro in November 1998:
32 ~~~~~~~~ 14 NCAC 2:24.68
FIN 33.57 1:09.90 1:47.42 2:24.68
The time on the top line is the cumulative time (official time); the splits below it were cumulative splits. Thus I swam:
1st 100: 33.57/36.33 1:09.90
2nd 100: 37.52/37.26 1:14.78
(the "middle 100" would have been 1:13.85, which is an occasionally used racing strategy at shorter distances). At that same meet, I swam a 31.28 in the 50 yard freestyle.
Another one to look at was from a meet in Hillsborough in January 2000 (it was an interesting meet for a number of...other...reasons, and as I recall, two or three days later, we got 1-2 feet of snow on the ground):
51 ~~~~~~~~ 15 NCAC 6:18.71
PRE 29.41 1:03.80 1:39.20 2:14.73
2:50.34 3:26.07 4:01.73 4:37.79
5:12.20 6:18.71
If you break apart these splits:
1st 100: 29.41/34.39 1:03.80
2nd 100: 35.40/35.53 1:10.93
3rd 100: 35.61/35.73 1:11.34
4th 100: 35.66/36.06 1:11.72
5th 100: 34.41/1:06.51 1:40.92
Assuming that these split times were accurate, that was a decently paced race in my opinion. I am little skeptical that I died that badly on the last 50 (a 1:06.51 is quite atrocious for anyone!), so I think there may have been a problem with the timing console when the splits were being taken (in which case the official time is usually correct and the splits are usually wrong). At the same meet, I swam the 100 yard freestyle in 1:02.66 (29.96/32.70), which means that the 500 was taken out way too fast (no first 50 on a 500 should be faster than the first one of a 100 [compare the 29.41 on the 500 with the 29.96 on the 100!]). I also swam on a relay that day, swimming a 50 Free on the second leg in 28.31, but that cannot really be compared as relay starts do not have to be motionless or "set" starts.
Hopefully I haven't driven you crazy with the technical descriptions here!
METAR KRDU 090651Z 36004KT 5SM FG FEW120 SCT250 24/22 A3006 RMK SLP176
Post a Comment
<< Home