question on swimming article

peter kern

I am not really interested wheather you agree on what I wrote , at the same time, go ahead to come up with suggestions whats misisng ( at the same time the article is certainly not gonne get longer) .



Iam nore interested is it too long and when do you switch off or what to cut out.

Would appreciate serious comments. and will smile about the douche bag comments.



Triathlon swim training: worth the hours?

There's an ongoing argument in triathlon as to whether the effort it takes to swim fast or to get a non-swimming adult learner up to a respectable swim split is worth the effort. Some argue that those non-swimmers would be better off focusing more on their bike & run, rather than spending a lot of time in the pool with little return on their investment. Others argue that you are only as strong as your weakest link.

They say different folks, different strokes and there cant be a final answer, weather swimming is worth the effort in triathlon, and some would argue it also depends on your level in triathlon. In this article, I will outline the impact swimming could have on bike and run performance, an impact which is often overlooked. Furthermore, I will consider the reasons whymany people give up easily rather than persisting in trying to become better swimmers.

To be fair, being a coach that runs swim sessions and 1-2-1 training, I am a bit biased in my thinking, given that from my experience as a coach, those who give it a real try, mostly succeed, and get the return for their investment. Therefore, Ifeel that those who decide to de-prioritise their swimming, sometimes, take this decision too lightly. At the same time while this article looks a bit more into why to swim, it certainly understands the amount of time needed and that it can make sense to swim less.

There is no doubt but that learning to swim after puberty is much harder. Not only do the young learn more quickly, their joints and tendons are also more flexible. But, while there is no hope of an adult learner becoming an Olympic swimmer, it is almost never too late to learn to swim at a decent level for triathlon.


Talent is obviously an asset. There are some who will never succeed in becoming good swimmers but most people have the potential to make significant progress in swim performance. On the other hand, many people are not willing to do is to change their habit of unsuccessful swim training, be it not enough effort in training to little swimming etc etc. Or in other words if you don't like swimming, or the effort it requires, it will be difficult to improve, but do not confuse that with not being able to swim.

The fact that the importance -or not- of the swim element is continually discussed is hardly surprising given that the swim forms a small proportion of the overall race distance in half and full Ironman distance racing, relative to the bike and run.
Of course it is necessary to consider the different swim proportions pertaining to different race distances. In a non-drafting Olympic or Sprint distance race, I would argue that all disciplines have a fair balance. Using Trevor Woods as an example, when he wins a race, his win margin is often the difference between himself and the 2nd place finisher exiting the swim. There are quite a few people who, on land, are as fast as him but the swim often makes the difference and is as important as the bike and run. In half and full Ironman distances, the swim is in smaller proportion to the other disciplines, so naturally less swim training can make sense. At pro level you see that ironman athletes swim a good bit less than ITU athletes (roughly 25k vs 15k in athletes with a good swim background or 40k vs 25k for those with a swim weakness ).

There are two main reasons I would suggest why athletes should focus more on their swim. Firstly, as already mentioned, while talking about ‘talent” most people who say that they can't swim have never really tried to improve or never trained properly. Just going to the pool isn’t enough! Likewise swimming 15k per week for a month, thinking that (s)he will become a great swimmer, and then gives up after a month because (s)he sees no improvement , doesn’t count as really trying. Truth: swimming needs time and it takes years to become really good and it’s a real tough sport in training harder than cycling and running ( with fast recovery after ;-)

While I can see that triathlon becomes more and more a bucket list sport, those who are serious about it should not forget that it takes time and hard work. I always use Bella Bayliss as an example as she started to swim in her later youth. She won IM Florida in 2003 with a 1.06 swim split. By 2008, she swam 53mins in ironman races. Few would say she was a swim talent but she mastered the Ironman finally being committed.


My second point is that we all know those really great cyclists who we can hardly keep up with in training but who, on race day, are out-split every time you race in a tri.To see- the often difficult relationship of swim bike and run - an example of a client of mine who you would call a good duathlete. Before starting swim training, this athlete did a 1.17 bike split in Dublin City Triathlon (DCT) 2012. The athlete would cycle quite well in duathlons, and for instance, beat an Irish duathlon champ at the duathlon worlds in 2012 (coincidentally also a good cyclist in duathlon but not as good a cyclist in triathlon). In 2013, following 9 month of continuous swim training, the athlete cycled DCT in 1.07. I would suggest that appox. 3 minutes of that improved bike split came from increased bike training (based on comparable duathlon performances 2012-13), 2 minutes from a new bike (on the DCT course which is technical and diminishes the advantage of a tt bike overthe well fited road bike) and approx3 minutes from the athlete coming out of the water fresher. I would attribute the other 2 minutes to other factors (though not drafting). The athlete's swim time also improved by 6 minutes in DCT 2013 due to an increase in swim volume of approx. 11k per week since 2012.

Now, the logical question to ask is whether that athlete is a natural born swimmer. I'd like to say yes, but the answer is a definite no and there is still a lot of work to do.. But the athlete happens to be one of the most driven people I have worked with and made the time to swim while, very importantly, maintained a positive approach and by now loves swimming . If the average person watches 3 hours of tv a day, so the average person should have the time to swim… There are definitely time crunched people but in my view half of those people who claim not to have time just don’t really want it badly enough. Or sometimes maybe duathlon might be the better option.

A small comment on adaption to training ,by the above referenced athlete/swimmer, “Swimming was tough going as it was a whole new experience to work hard in the pool. I tired very quickly during the session and used to be pretty exhausted after the sessions but it was worth it and by February I had adjusted and was beginning to make some good progress".

Looking back on 2012-13, I would say that only 5% -10 % of Pb3 athletes did not get the deserved swim return for their time investment in the pool. Even the minority who's times did not improve (unless it was due to injury) left the water fresher for their bike leg.

In the ironman swim one aspect that’s often forgotten by the swim less cycle more advocates is nutrition and the longer you are in the water the more it impacts your nutrition plan for the race.

To conclude while this article is certainly more on why to swim, rather than not to swim, what iam really trying to get accorss here is that before making a decision about whether it’s worth the effort to focus on swimming, reflect on some of the points that have been raised in the article. What I often see is that good runner and cyclist understand that they need to work hard in their favourite sport but don’t put in the same effort into swimming when swimming training hurts more during a hard session .


Different people will come to different conclusions, and again, article isnt aimed to give a solution it is aimed to help you in your thought process, on how to approach swim training in triathlon. While I try to outline that most adults and weak swimmer can improve their swim and that overall swimming is a very important part of triathlon, I certainly agree that for the time crunched athlete and the “rock” this is not as black and white, to decide for longer distances. At the same time I want you to make sure you don’t take this decision to lightly. Finally if you get overtaken all the time after the swim, more cycling and running is needed !

SlowMe

I always like articles about swimming in triathlon because I don't think it ever gets sufficient focus.

feel free to totally disregard the my following comments because you are obviously much more experienced/competent/knowledgeable than me...

-I kinda got lost on the way to your two main points. they are in the eight paragraph and need to be up in the second/third I'd say. not sure if I would cut or reorganise to achieve that
-Your second point is a bit hard to read and isn't well described in the first sentence. your point is about exiting the swim fresh for the bike so you should say it up front
-nutrition is worth a whole third point with an example of calories burned etc rather than just the single sentence you give it
-I would make also the point that swim training for triathlon is a different beast to swim training for swimming, particularly for those whose least proficient discipline is the swim. A lot of people get swim coaching or join masters clubs and end up with training aimed at getting better 100m splits rather than getting training aimed at completing the swim leg of a triathlon efficiently and exiting strong and ready for the bike.


that's my 2 cents - I'm only commenting because you asked and I'm reasonably interested....

peter kern

thanks for the reply and I will look into your suggestions later on but they are really helpful and exactly what i was looking for

only 1 thing with swimmng for triathlon and 'just' swimming you are opening up another can of worms( somethingi would agree with to some extend ) but i think we agree we need less points than more. and this falls more on actually reflecting how to improve ones training ( if it dosnt work) at the same time for a lot of people master squads can work just as well as at least once a week a session you describe can be useful.

would you agree with that or do you think it would be worthwile to add it.
briefly

ps same with nutrition again it was only added as something to think about not to say how it is important. but you might be right maybe i will add another sentence for it

anyway comments very much appreciated !!!!

SlowMe

peter kern wrote: »

only 1 thing with swimmng for triathlon and 'just' swimming you are opening up another can of worms( somethingi would agree with to some extend ) but i think we agree we need less points than more. and this falls more on actually reflecting how to improve ones training ( if it dosnt work) at the same time for a lot of people master squads can work just as well as at least once a week a session you describe can be useful.

would you agree with that or do you think it would be worthwile to add it.
briefly

Sorry I probably didn't make my point very well. Definately masters sessions or 'just' swim training type sessions are very useful. What I am trying to say is that for athletes targeting middle and long distance events the training balance need to be carefully considered. In middle and long distance events the swim is proportionally less significant and training volumes reflect that. It is probable that weaker swimmers would benefit from training with particular technique and threshold sets that are not normally prioritised in masters sessions (e.g. masters sessions might include a lot of IM work which is interesting and adds helpful balance, is probably not 'time well spent' for your target audience).

actually now that I think about it, there are really two different cases here - one for sprint/oly training and one for middle/long distance.... maybe thats getting too involved though

peter kern wrote: »

ps same with nutrition again it was only added as something to think about not to say how it is important. but you might be right maybe i will add another sentence for it

again probably something more for middle/long distance than sprint/oly. in middle distance there should be a different nutrition plan for the athlete that exits the water in the low thirties reasonably strong than for the athlete that exits the water 45 plus having heart pounding having struggled to maintain form for the last 500m or so. I'm guessing that this is your target audience as anyone sub 30 probably has a good grasp of what they want to be doing with their swimming...

peter kern

Show me thanks again
will reply later .

gofasterdad

Thanks Peter,

I found your article quite thought provoking, especially as this season I have taken the decision to move from three swim sessions per week to two swim sessions per week on the grounds that my swim times have stayed pretty static over the last number of years so I am not seeing a huge return for my work unlike biking and running where I have seen fantastic gains from the work put in.

In any event, not to hijack your thread: your article in particular.

I wouldn't say it is too long , however it is a little rambling and could do with a bit more structure. Would you considering structuring it into four or five key arguments put forward by those who de-prioritise swimming and then offer an alternate view from the coach?


Arguments put forward by those who de-prioritise swimming
• little / no return from investment
• no natural "talent" for swimming, effectively their performance is capped at the mediocre level by a lack of "talent"
• Unless you swam competively as a junior, you will never make it as a good swimmer as an adult
• the swim leg of a triathlon is the shortest leg of a triathlon, so the volume of swim training should be the lowest of all three disciplines.


Counter Arguments
• There is a return from investment, you just have to work very very hard for it - examples provided
• don't mistake lack of talent with lack of discipline / proper coaching
• Whilst an adult learner will have a certain cap on their potential swimming ability, that cap is a lot higher than they think it is.
• The swim leg of shorter triathlons especially sprint races is close to or equal to the other disciplines.
• Becoming a better swimmer will also improve your bike & run times as you will be less tired coming out of the water.

Your point about swim training being tougher than bike / run training is interesting and perhaps warrants further discussion. Is there something inherently unpleasant about a tough swim session that just isn't present in a bike / run session of a similar intensity? Or maybe it's about lack of reward, if you push yourself hard on the bike, you get to enjoy the speed and the wind in your face and the sound of the bike on the road, pushing yourself when swimming doesn't give you the same thrill.

anyway, these are just the unqualified comments of an ordinary MOP racer but hopefully you might find something useful.

peter kern

thank you gofasterdad
comments very much appreciated !!!
especially the one about rumbleing on ;-)

the good thing is you already come up with conclusions
i dodnt really want to present conclusions i want the reader to come up with conclusions for themselves some things they might have tried some they dont.
and while there is rumbeling the 2 words i would like to hear from somebody that reads article is...
thought provoking.

I found your article quite thought provoking, especially as this season I have taken the decision to move from three swim sessions per week to two swim sessions per week on the grounds that my swim times have stayed pretty static over the last number of years so I am not seeing a huge return for my work unlike biking and running where I have seen fantastic gains from the work put in.

and i say MAYBE you need to think more how to swim train better rahter than thinking i did not make an improvement so i swim less ...
it could be am going 1 notch up for,m last years training ie from just swimming in the pool , actually having a session plan
it could be from having a session plan to go with a coach that is on deck to correct you .
it could be swimming with a group of friends to push you .
and at the end of the day it could be that your decison is right.....if you have tried everthing you could.
so thats why i dodnt really want to have a pro and con article
its not clear cut in my mind.

Diamond_25

Peter

i read the article with the same level of interest that i would read a magazine or article on a website (which is the way others will read it). On one read, what i took from the article was:

you ask the question whether it is worth training for the swim leg of a triathlon (i.e. training to improve rather than just to get through the swim)

i took from it that you are a believer in swim training and aside from faster swim times i should be better able to cycle and run post swim and age is not a barrier, i also took that if i was proficient in one sport my "hard" session in swimming should feel worse then my "hard" say bike or run session.

If i read the article again i might identify some finer points but most people will read it once. If the above are what you wanted to get across then your article works, if not then either my attention was lost or i forgot what the message was by the time i finished.

Diamond_25

forgot to say - thanks for posting the article

peter kern

show me you would not need to make change in nutrition becasue of a 45 min swim for an oly distance
of course you can almost bet on it that comming out of the water tired regardless the distance does cost time on the bike and it dosnt matter if you are a beginner cyclist or an ex pro cyclist you are going to be slower if you are tired from the swim regardles.

and again i could not say that for a swimmer doing IM sets is not good for some people that can actually be beneficial ( but you are right not for the 1,h 45 ironman swimmer that hardly stays on top of the water ( but even there back stroke can be useful.
perosnally id dodnt use much other strokes in my coaching than freestyle but i can see benefits doing back stroke and dolphin, for some swimmers.

SlowMe wrote: »

Sorry I probably didn't make my point very well. Definately masters sessions or 'just' swim training type sessions are very useful. What I am trying to say is that for athletes targeting middle and long distance events the training balance need to be carefully considered. In middle and long distance events the swim is proportionally less significant and training volumes reflect that. It is probable that weaker swimmers would benefit from training with particular technique and threshold sets that are not normally prioritised in masters sessions (e.g. masters sessions might include a lot of IM work which is interesting and adds helpful balance, is probably not 'time well spent' for your target audience).

actually now that I think about it, there are really two different cases here - one for sprint/oly training and one for middle/long distance.... maybe thats getting too involved though



again probably something more for middle/long distance than sprint/oly. in middle distance there should be a different nutrition plan for the athlete that exits the water in the low thirties reasonably strong than for the athlete that exits the water 45 plus having heart pounding having struggled to maintain form for the last 500m or so. I'm guessing that this is your target audience as anyone sub 30 probably has a good grasp of what they want to be doing with their swimming...

interested

Most comments above are already on the money

- swim is proportionally of less importance for middle and long distance events, training time should be spent wisely based on that.
- IMHO if there is 'low hanging fruit' with regard to a swimmer and their stroke then time spent (not month after month) at the start of each session with a coach (same coach) to try to alter the stroke appropriately is worthwhile .. as long as that change is utilised during the rest of the session and usual 'training'.
- copious amounts of time spent searching for the perfect stroke in the pool for triathletes is time that could be spent training in swimming or the other disciplines but time spent ensuring the stroke is more efficient (yields faster swim times with same energy used or same swim times as before with less energy used) is worthwhile but it should not take up the lions share of a training block.

Triathlon swim training is not swim training. Triathletes can definitely benefit from training with masters clubs and swim clubs because of the coaching and swimming with faster swimmers.

Coaches are challenged to coach 'groups' of swimmers of varying abilities with often different issues with their strokes.
Thats Ok, coaches should be challenged - to force them to consider how they are explaining or demonstrating something ... they should always be learning too.

One to one sessions can be beneficial but if the coach or swimmer hasnt gotten it after a couple of these then somethings up. Perhaps it would be better at that point to change focus and just buy some carbon for the bike

OuterBombie

It stuck a bell with a similar article I read a while ago:

Return on Investment Series Part2: The Swim

Agree with most in that and yours....

peter kern

thanks interested
'Triathlon swim training is not swim training'.
this is a good point and while i did not want to add it originally but I I will.

'swim is proportionally of less importance for middle and long distance events, training time should be spent wisely based on that'

with this phrase i would not agree as it oversimplyfyes something that is not so black and white . Potentially swim is a very important part even in an ironman ie for people with a weak swim , people that want to be competetive, and people that easily can make a lot of gain.
for instance I had a guy that made it from 45 min in galway 2012 to 1.05 in austria so thats roughly a 30 min improvement in the swim in one year I would say that was an low hanging fruit ,
another guy would have struggled to make the cut off in 2012 (58 min in galway i think 2012) he was 1.20 in austria so again i would think very important to focus on swim. that wasnt a low hanging fruit as one of the 3 worst swimmer i have ever seen but he made it work ( and the only fear that guy had before the race was the swim.
of course you can say for a 107 swimmer that goes sub 9 the swim is not that important at the same time if the same athelete swims 1.30 in hawaii the race is over before he goes on the bike.
so even only using 1 person in differnt circumstances the answer can be different.

so why your phrase is correct for 60% maybe even 70 % for other people its wrong to say this.

the other comments I guess are not relevant for the article that would be for how to improve swimming if somebody decided thats what they want to do.

Anyway thanks for your reply appreciated.

peter kern

I will read tonight thanks

OuterBombie wrote: »

It stuck a bell with a similar article I read a while ago:

Return on Investment Series Part2: The Swim

Agree with most in that and yours....

shotgunmcos

A Lad I went to school with did 9:30 in Kona a few weeks ago with a sub 3 run. He swam 1:20 which is about his average IM swim. What training would you prescribe him? Or is he a lost cause?

Is LCD a lost cause when it comes to swimming?

At what point do you realise a plateau and figure investing more time would be counter productive?

One point I'd make is that Adult swimmers by and large don't approach swimming properly. They approach it like the bike and run where simply more volume or sets of work will do the trick. Yes that will make inroads but swimming is disproportionately technical. Almost every session has to be approached from that perspective with the typical triathlete spending 3 hours a week in the water.

Technique sessions here and there is not enough to switch on the antennae. For a 5 hour cycle to a degree you can switch off and go into auto pilot and you will still reap benefit. Auto pilot on a standard swim set progresses nothing


So, is there a "cap" for the triathlete putting 2-3 hours or 6-8km a week into the pool?

peter kern

the only thing i would precribe is to think about their swim training
and reflect on what they are doing what works what dosnt work.

as for athe actually improving i dont like it when people say you have to do technique to become better or you have to do distance

sutton makes it work with mainly distance ( very oversimplyfyed but distance is a very important part)
smith would be much more , before your technique isnt good you dodnt swim hard and sometimes his swimmer look more like a michelin man with all the toys he puts on them.

both would be considerd pretty good coaches that imporve swimmer with copmletely different methods .

so its more a case its not that important what you do its more important that what you do , you do it well.

people would be better off to think why do those approaches work rather than saying one has to do x y and z to improve.



"At what point do you realise a plateau and figure investing more time would be counter productive? '

I think if you have been to both smith and sutton and you dodnt go anywhere its game over ;-)
Seriously I think its something you cant decide on your own you need to consult with a person your trust and a coach ( its a bit like getting a serious operation done you just dont ask 1 person)

I toally agree most people dont approach swimming right (as above explaind I dodnt agree with your conclusion you take from this)

often it dostn have to be more time it can be to invest the time better ie 1 hour just arsing around in the pool and 1 hour of foused work (technique or a good session) and yes sometimes it can be to work less hard .........


ps of course there is a cap on how far you can go with 6-8 k
talent certainly caps it
and also no world class swimmer swims 6-8k a week and make it to the olympics

shotgunmcos wrote: »

A Lad I went to school with did 9:30 in Kona a few weeks ago with a sub 3 run. He swam 1:20 which is about his average IM swim. What training would you prescribe him? Or is he a lost cause?

Is LCD a lost cause when it comes to swimming?



One point I'd make is that Adult swimmers by and large don't approach swimming properly. They approach it like the bike and run where simply more volume or sets of work will do the trick. Yes that will make inroads but swimming is disproportionately technical. Almost every session has to be approached from that perspective with the typical triathlete spending 3 hours a week in the water.

Technique sessions here and there is not enough to switch on the antennae. For a 5 hour cycle to a degree you can switch off and go into auto pilot and you will still reap benefit. Auto pilot on a standard swim set progresses nothing


So, is there a "cap" for the triathlete putting 2-3 hours or 6-8km a week into the pool?

tunney

Could have been an epic discussion thread were it not started with

I am not really interested wheather you agree on what I wrote ....