Elitetrack: Sport Training & Conditioning

kps526 - 15 August 2008 12:14 AM

(1) Relay decisions are made by capable and keen coaches. I don’t think a few minutes of extra rest is necessary for someone who is amped up to do a relay and I’m sure the coaches know if that would make a difference or not to the athlete. Phelps leading off the 4x100 was a great decision in order to put the next swimmer into open water, with no wake in front of them.

Yeah…shoulda clarified on this one that it didn’t really make sense to me and that I’m sure they had good reasons for it. I can tell you that if energy system readiness was as much of a factor in swimming as it is in track that an extra 2 minutes WOULD make a difference. You can’t overcome physiology.

(2) Ryan Lochte is arguably the best swimmer at the games other than Phelps. His ability to win gold tonight in the 200 Back and come back less than 30 minutes later to grab bronze in the 200IM is an unbelievable accomplishment. I have no qualms saying that double is easier than running the 400M and 400H back-to-back, but I don’t think you can compare swimming and track – they are two different entities. Neither Lochte nor Taylor are better than each other- swimming physically allows for the double, and running does not. However, I don’t know if anyone else could have accomplished what Lochte did. He has great talent for swimming.

I think you’re putting words in my mouth. I never said Taylor was better than Lochte. In fact, I said they were equivalent and that in track it would be impossible to pull off a double like that because 24 minutes just simply wouldn’t be enough recovery. 

(3) Taking away events, favored in “Random Observations”, is totally ridiculous to me. If you look at the men’s side, YES, Phelps is owning the gold medal stand but I assure you if he were not in the mix, there would be different athletes winning events. You see this on the women’s side of things, especially this Olympics.

This isn’t the first time this has happened in swimming…Phelps in 04, Spitz in 72, Evans in 88, Caulkins in the late 70s, Thorpe at various World Championships, etc. This doesn’t happen in other sports. On a related aside to your point that athletes couldn’t win the 50m-400m in swimming, Thorpe won the 200m, 400m, and 800m at a World Championship and only a year later won the 100m, 200m, and 400m at the commonwealth games. If that doesn’t prove redundancy I’m not sure what does.

There are and would continue to be specialty swimmers, for instance, Aaron Piersol has owned the backstrokes the last 7 years, and has won ¾ golds in the stroke the last two Olympics, but I do not believe there would be swimmers dominating across all distance and events without Phelps.

I was under the impression from my slightly-better-than-casual interest in the sport is that Phelps would be the best backstroker if he contested it more frequently or focused on it a little more. Breastroke seems to be the only true specialty stroke.

(4) The one thing swimming does need to do is to reach out to minority populations- there are demographics not represented on the national, college, and high school level that need to be. I admit that if these minorities were represented, swimming would be more competitive, but I do not think their under-representation causes swimming to be less competitive than track and field. I also believe Phelps would still look that far ahead of the competition.

I recognize that Phelps is a total genetic anomaly but there would be more of him if the talent pool were larger.

Carl Valle - 15 August 2008 12:23 AM

Swimming is a non-impact sport but remember to look at the big picture. If the fastest wins that means power is involves somewhere and that includes strength training. Weight training is now a stable in programs and that means eccentric damage.

I wasn’t discounting the training so much as I was saying that the demands of competing in the event permit sustained repeated high level efforts. The same isn’t true in track.

Hydrostatic pressure is related to depth and that doesn’t include half on top of the surface of the water. The thermal transfer allows the swimmer to work harder but not faster. Again things come down to who is the fastest.

Yeah but don’t both of the above just go in to the factors that allow swimmers to produce sustained repeated high level efforts while their track brethren cannot.

Running is part of evolution and we have most of our genes for biped gait on land. Running mechanics is about shaping an athletes natural stride by removing errors. Swimming is artificial and that is why people get faster. Experimentation or innovation swimming requires smart coaches not those infamous for falling asleep in a chair while a world record holder is made. Track is genes and swimming is more talent and coach.
Track has more of a population but those involved are not as well coached.

I totally agree and I’m glad you brought it up because as soon as I posted the blog I thought about the role of optimization of the activity and the role central pattern generators, learned activities, etc. I was kinda hoping someone would bring it up.

Different demand. The physiology is key as absolute speed is not based on fast twich!

What do you think is the reason that allows athletes to dominate over such a seemingly broad range of events that would seem to span completely different energy system demands. Is it just the role of technical development and the trickle down effect it has (i.e. if you’re supremely efficient, there’s likely not as many athletes are as efficient and this permits you to essentially have speed reserve at longer distances?).

I would have to say swimming requires more genetic benefits.  However, I believe environment plays a greater role than we are lead to believe.  We all have more genes unexpressed than we have expressed genes.  As we train harder and faster to a point those unexpressed genes now become expressed and the former expressed genes become suppressed.  I strongly believe athletic success depends a lot on what we do as children.  That doesn’t mean children should be placed into regimented systems like the former Eastern Bloc Countries and China or the monstrosity now called little league baseball and other out of control travel sports.  If your kid loves playing in the water and swimming he will likely develop expressed genes beneficial to water sports, the same as kid who plays on the playground doing everything from monkey bars to climbing the swing and jumping off of it and doing other creative playful activities will likely develop better than average strength and elastic qualities, or the kid who practices all kinds of creative shots with a basketball or attempts to throw footballs/baseballs through the smallest targets at the different distances standing or on the move. 

On this site we have discussed how those of West African descent dominate sprinting, but in the UK were there are plenty of athletes of West African descent, but the UK has as many if not more caucasian sprinters running 100m under 10.5s than the United States does but with a 1/5 the population.  It’s not a new thing in the UK to have top level caucasian sprinters either with Allan Wells (granted he didn’t run against the Americans in 1980, but he still beat some pretty good sprinters at times during his career to include Lewis, Ben Johnson, Quarrie, and even Linford Christie). 

Our genetics is what allows us to adapt and are not what limits our possibilities as species.  This is why gene doping won’t be viable as a PED, it will have to be done more often over a period of time and the training still has to be present to ensure the genes are expressed.  It’s kind of like a Sherpa from Himalayan Plateau coming to live at sea level for 12 months as their Hematocrit drops from 51-52 to 45-47 as genes and physiological mechanisms for increased natural EPO release are suppressed because the physiological stress doesn’t exist any longer to maintain a hematocrit level so high.  You won’t be able to gene dope to enhance recovery without having the training that supplements the training which doesn’t have to be done with EPO treatments.

Daley Thompson won the Dec. two years in a row and was on the the 4 x 100m….why isn’t he up there?

Chad Williams - 14 August 2008 04:10 PM

Mike Young - 14 August 2008 03:54 PM

Chad Williams - 14 August 2008 09:14 AM

The phelps-mania is a bit overwhelming, then I remind myself that swimmers get zero press coverage outside the Olympics. So let Phelps have his 1 month because it will all fade for another 4 years.

Yeah but the same could be said for every other swimmer who’s being neglected and all the other Olympic-only sports like weightlifting, gymnastics, rowing, diving, etc. I understand he’s the most decorated Olympian ever and an incredible athlete but I think the focus on Phelps is fueled by money at the cost of giving some much needed attention to the other athletes who are interesting (but not as dominant) in their own right.

I agree with everything you are saying and I know a lot of people are sick of Phelps.  I don’t think that greatness is measured in Gold Medals anyway. There are a lot of other great stories out there, but the media rides the Phelps bandwagon.

And you touched upon it but the issue here is the coverage in general. I am sure they could jam pack 4 hours of a televised broadcast with highlights from each day, regardless of whether or not they are going to get a gold medal. To me, making the Olympics and competing for the US is an accomplishment in itself and we should get a glimpse of more athletes whether it is triumph or defeat.

As someone in Canada who has watched as much Olympic coverage as possible, on CBC and very little on NBC, the perspective regarding media coverage is different but at the same time results in very similar comments.
The bulk of CBC during the first week has been split between gymnastics and swimming which is to be expected as they are “anchor” sports for television since past history indicates they are the “most watched”.  What I don’t understand is when the coverage of whatever sport/event is repeated before there has been any coverage of events/sports that are still on-going and LIVE.
Related to this but to me “worse” is when a national broadcaster (partially Canadian tax payer funded) focuses on athletes from other countries whose events are completed and that I have already seen once while ignoring live events from our own team athletes.  CBC had gymnasts WARMING UP (repeat) while the early rounds of mens’ 100m, day 1 of heptathlon, mens’ shot and mens’ hammer were all going on LIVE.
The other perspective that could possibly have more dire consequences is from swimming.  As of this moment there have been no medals for Canadians in the pool yet nearly every event has seen a new Canadian National record set.  From a funding/sponsorship view not achieving a podium finish could have financial consequences yet in reality the program is moving forward.

Speaking of the lack of talent in swimming here is what Chad Johnson had to say.

“The problem with Michael Phelps is there’s no competition where he is,” Johnson said. “Now if he came to where I’m from, which is the inner city, Liberty City [in Miami], I was the three-time Charles Hadley Pool champ. . . . I know a couple people who could beat Michael Phelps right now. Seriously, I’m telling you. And I’m one of them.”

Thats a bold comment, but still you wonder about the talent out there competing in other sports that could be successful in swimming.

getit - 16 August 2008 12:00 AM

Speaking of the lack of talent in swimming here is what Chad Johnson had to say.

“The problem with Michael Phelps is there’s no competition where he is,” Johnson said. “Now if he came to where I’m from, which is the inner city, Liberty City [in Miami], I was the three-time Charles Hadley Pool champ. . . . I know a couple people who could beat Michael Phelps right now. Seriously, I’m telling you. And I’m one of them.”

Thats a bold comment, but still you wonder about the talent out there competing in other sports that could be successful in swimming.

I would imagine a lot of volleyball players would make great swimmers and vice versa. The anthropometry needed to be successful (>6’4”, long wing span) seems to be very similar in the 2 events. I’m not so sure Chad Johnson could beat Phelps though.