PDA

View Full Version : Ultra Short Training At Race Pace



Pages : [1] 2

TooPro
July 13th, 2013, 07:07 PM
http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/ultra40a.pdf

There is a method, which is referred to as the Rushall method which Michael Andrew uses.
Was wondering if you had any critique about this. If this sort of training is a good idea and what are the problems.

Would this also be good for longer events? Like the 400 IM?

Thanks!

pwb
July 13th, 2013, 08:14 PM
http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/ultra40a.pdf

There is a method, which is referred to as the Rushall method which Michael Andrew uses.
Was wondering if you had any critique about this. If this sort of training is a good idea and what are the problems.

Would this also be good for longer events? Like the 400 IM?

Thanks!Although I think this is being primarily applied to sprints, I'd be intrigued to contemplate a season attempting to train for a 400 IM using the approach. Do you have a link to the 'short paper' from Rushall that is referenced at the end of the document you linked?

Boomerang
July 13th, 2013, 08:53 PM
I believe this is the link you're looking for: http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/ultra40b.pdf It's an interesting concept that I am now incorporating into my sprint training. The article does reference performing reps at the 100 distance for a 1500, so I'm thinking you could apply distances/intervals suitable to a 4IM...happy reading!

Boomerang
July 13th, 2013, 08:54 PM
Here's another full article: http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/energy39.pdf

TooPro
July 13th, 2013, 10:13 PM
I will probably try this for the next 2 months for 50 Free, 100 Free, 200 Free, 100 Fly, 200 IM, 400 IM, 100 Breast, 200 Breast.

Also this really baffled my mind. I mean I think he also said dryland training doesn't effect performance. That just seems weird.

fdtotten
July 13th, 2013, 10:39 PM
I recall that when Kieren Perkins was so successful swimming the 1500 in the 1990s, one of his key training sets was 20x100 meters on 2:00 at target race pace.

Glenn
July 13th, 2013, 10:47 PM
Also this really baffled my mind. I mean I think he also said dryland training doesn't effect performance. That just seems weird.

That was really for the college age and 20 somethings, not Masters. The main concept in motor learning is that transfer of training is specific. Meaning that the swim bench and ANYTHING that is not actually swimming, does not transfer to competitive swimming. (That's why I think drills are a waste of time - but that is another topic.)

However, I believe that for Masters the strength we can maintain through weight training (just look at Rich Abrahams' times) will help us. I figure that if we all lose 1% of strength a year after age 35, and I am keeping my strength through weight training, I will be ahead of my competition.

Here is another study that talks specifically about strength and Masters swimmers:

http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/training/hartley.htm

orca1946
July 14th, 2013, 12:24 AM
All but 7 of my fast twitch fibers have retired. I need an older approach to my season. Go getum you younguns !!

TooPro
July 14th, 2013, 12:49 AM
All but 7 of my fast twitch fibers have retired. I need an older approach to my season. Go getum you younguns !!
Lol!




So I'm taking it this is an awesome idea, but for those of a certain age?

Allen Stark
July 14th, 2013, 02:02 AM
I have done some of the Rushall type sets and I know the Fortress does a variation of them sometimes in her HIT workouts.The problem I have with the sets as the main type of workout is that they are better at training the CP system and the aerobic system,but not the anaerobic system.The way I read it there is very little lactic acid tolerance developed,which is really a great thing to have for the last 30M of a 100M. Also I find that I need more than 12.5 yd to get into a rhythm,even a sprint rhythm.When I am from 9 to 3 weeks out from a taper meet, I do them once a week.I am not as old as Orca,but I am 64.

sickfish
July 14th, 2013, 04:07 AM
I tried it. It's really, really hard to do it self-coached. You will definitely get better at super-short distances (25s!) But to do them on the short intervals with enough consistency for the supposed aerobic conditioning to kick in without a coach or a partner to keep you going is next to impossible. When you're pushing off for that 19th 25 on :30 and you need to blast it to keep it under :13 and you know you have to do it eleven more times after that, you'll give anything to be back doing some long, boring, non-race-specific pull set. Or, you'll find an excuse to stop and go home. At least, that's what I did. In other words, ultra-short is ultra-stressful, and definitely not a shortcut or "easy" way to improve your times. Done properly, it might work better than "traditional" training, at least for 100s. But it's too hard to do it properly solo.


For a 400IM? If you've already got a really solid 400IM, I can see the ultra-short being beneficial, in that you can hammer your desired pace into your muscle memory. But you'll still need to keep that conditioning up. If you don't have the conditioning to do it well already, don't even bother.

TooPro
July 14th, 2013, 06:24 AM
I tried it. It's really, really hard to do it self-coached. You will definitely get better at super-short distances (25s!) But to do them on the short intervals with enough consistency for the supposed aerobic conditioning to kick in without a coach or a partner to keep you going is next to impossible. When you're pushing off for that 19th 25 on :30 and you need to blast it to keep it under :13 and you know you have to do it eleven more times after that, you'll give anything to be back doing some long, boring, non-race-specific pull set. Or, you'll find an excuse to stop and go home. At least, that's what I did. In other words, ultra-short is ultra-stressful, and definitely not a shortcut or "easy" way to improve your times. Done properly, it might work better than "traditional" training, at least for 100s. But it's too hard to do it properly solo.


For a 400IM? If you've already got a really solid 400IM, I can see the ultra-short being beneficial, in that you can hammer your desired pace into your muscle memory. But you'll still need to keep that conditioning up. If you don't have the conditioning to do it well already, don't even bother.
I agree with some of this. I guess it really comes down to how much drive you have. No doubt these are painful, we did something similar in practice, and we were all toasted.

Right now I'm just looking for results. Anyway I can.

Allen Stark
July 14th, 2013, 11:55 AM
I tried it. It's really, really hard to do it self-coached. You will definitely get better at super-short distances (25s!) But to do them on the short intervals with enough consistency for the supposed aerobic conditioning to kick in without a coach or a partner to keep you going is next to impossible. When you're pushing off for that 19th 25 on :30 and you need to blast it to keep it under :13 and you know you have to do it eleven more times after that, you'll give anything to be back doing some long, boring, non-race-specific pull set. Or, you'll find an excuse to stop and go home.

I don't think that is what Rushall is talking about.That sounds more like a lactic acid tolerance set.A Rushall set could be 25s on the 30,but only the first 12.5 yds would be hard so that you are not engaging the anaerobic system,.When I am doing what I think of as a Rushall set it is 50s on the minute, sprinting the first 12.5.If I was faster/younger I think doing them on the 45 would be reasonable.As I understand it, the idea is to work on the high speed race specific stuff for only about 6-8 seconds each time so that you don't build up much lactic acid,therefore enabling you to do it over and over.It is very hard for me to keep mindful during these sets and if you don't keep mindful you are programming your muscles to swim wrong.

TooPro
July 14th, 2013, 02:16 PM
I don't think that is what Rushall is talking about.That sounds more like a lactic acid tolerance set.A Rushall set could be 25s on the 30,but only the first 12.5 yds would be hard so that you are not engaging the anaerobic system,.When I am doing what I think of as a Rushall set it is 50s on the minute, sprinting the first 12.5.If I was faster/younger I think doing them on the 45 would be reasonable.As I understand it, the idea is to work on the high speed race specific stuff for only about 6-8 seconds each time so that you don't build up much lactic acid,therefore enabling you to do it over and over.It is very hard for me to keep mindful during these sets and if you don't keep mindful you are programming your muscles to swim wrong.
I'm trying to find the best way to train this in a 25 meter pool. I don't really wanna stop in the middle D:

Allen Stark
July 14th, 2013, 02:53 PM
I'm trying to find the best way to train this in a 25 meter pool. I don't really wanna stop in the middle D:

I don't stop.I don't have a line at the 1/2 way point in my pool so I go by stroke count.For me swimming BR it is the pullout plus 4 strokes AFAP and then slow down to 200 pace, or recovery pace depending on my energy level, to finish the 50(with a turn of course as it is a 25 yd pool).

TooPro
July 14th, 2013, 03:12 PM
I don't stop.I don't have a line at the 1/2 way point in my pool so I go by stroke count.For me swimming BR it is the pullout plus 4 strokes AFAP and then slow down to 200 pace, or recovery pace depending on my energy level, to finish the 50(with a turn of course as it is a 25 yd pool).
Alright. Have you seen my big improvements?

Rich Abrahams
July 14th, 2013, 04:49 PM
I don't think that is what Rushall is talking about.That sounds more like a lactic acid tolerance set.A Rushall set could be 25s on the 30,but only the first 12.5 yds would be hard so that you are not engaging the anaerobic system,.When I am doing what I think of as a Rushall set it is 50s on the minute, sprinting the first 12.5.If I was faster/younger I think doing them on the 45 would be reasonable.As I understand it, the idea is to work on the high speed race specific stuff for only about 6-8 seconds each time so that you don't build up much lactic acid,therefore enabling you to do it over and over.It is very hard for me to keep mindful during these sets and if you don't keep mindful you are programming your muscles to swim wrong.

Allen,
Actually, 30 x 25 on :30 is a Rushall set I've done several times. You are supposed to maintain 100 race pace (for me I calculate one half of my second 50 of the race). The object is to go as many as possible at that pace. When you go one slower you sit out the next send off, then resume. At the end you total up the number of the 30 you were able to hold at pace. My best so far is 22. That is I missed four at pace and sat out four. This is a tough set and very aerobic, but you can recover from it much more quickly than a lactate set. I actually think it helps my 200 more than my 100.

The main pure speed set of his I like is 6 x 25 on :45 doling an all out 15 meters, then cruising. I do this set four times with an easy 100 between.

There is no way I can take a steady diet of this work (mostly from a psychological viewpoint) but, for me, twice a week when I'm preparing for a focus meet is about right. Again, recovery is very quick from this type of training.

Allen Stark
July 14th, 2013, 05:05 PM
Allen,
Actually, 30 x 25 on :30 is a Rushall set I've done several times. You are supposed to maintain 100 race pace (for me I calculate one half of my second 50 of the race). The object is to go as many as possible at that pace. When you go one slower you sit out the next send off, then resume. At the end you total up the number of the 30 you were able to hold at pace. My best so far is 22. That is I missed four at pace and sat out four. This is a tough set and very aerobic, but you can recover from it much more quickly than a lactate set. I actually think it helps my 200 more than my 100.

The main pure speed set of his I like is 6 x 25 on :45 doling an all out 15 meters, then cruising. I do this set four times with an easy 100 between.

There is no way I can take a steady diet of this work (mostly from a psychological viewpoint) but, for me, twice a week when I'm preparing for a focus meet is about right. Again, recovery is very quick from this type of training.
Thanks.When my shoulder is healed I'll give that a try. I do like sets with all race pace or race pace/recovery.

__steve__
July 15th, 2013, 07:57 AM
So if your L tolerence is very high, a XX x 25 on 0:30 set would qualify as UST?

Boomerang
July 15th, 2013, 10:57 AM
According to Rushall, the repeat distances would be as follows, based on goal race distance: 12.5's for goal race of 50, 25's for goal race of 100, 50's for goal race of 200, sometimes 75s for goal race of >200, 100s for goal race of 1500.

sunruh
July 15th, 2013, 12:04 PM
what do you do if you cant hit "race pace" in practice?

because i am a short wookie (ie short legs and lots of fur), i have a very hard time getting close to fast speeds in short distances.

steve

p.s.

pwb, if i ever train for the 400im (i think i need a new knee 1st) i want you to try this training method and swim beside me!

knelson
July 15th, 2013, 12:32 PM
I recall that when Kieren Perkins was so successful swimming the 1500 in the 1990s, one of his key training sets was 20x100 meters on 2:00 at target race pace.

And this would NOT qualify as UST: way too much rest. Figure Perkins was holding :58-:59 on these.


When you go one slower you sit out the next send off, then resume. At the end you total up the number of the 30 you were able to hold at pace.

This is the part I think some people forget about. The expectation isn't to be able to make all the repetitions at your goal time. If you can do that right out of the gate you need to revise your goal pace.

pwb
July 15th, 2013, 01:28 PM
And this would NOT qualify as UST: way too much rest. Figure Perkins was holding :58-:59 on these.The slightly longer Rushall article said a work:rest ratio of 1:1 or 2:1, so this would be right on the edge. I would think, though, for a 1500, you'd want to be closer to the 2:1 ratio, so the Perkins set (my interpretation) would've been 20 x 100 on 1:30. Am I reading the research correctly?

mcnair
July 15th, 2013, 04:33 PM
The slightly longer Rushall article said a work:rest ratio of 1:1 or 2:1, so this would be right on the edge. I would think, though, for a 1500, you'd want to be closer to the 2:1 ratio, so the Perkins set (my interpretation) would've been 20 x 100 on 1:30. Am I reading the research correctly?

I think the Rushall article mentioned 1:1 or even 1:2 work/rest ratios in the context of describing current practice (which would in fact be a 1:00/100 pace on a 2:00 interval), but you're right... that's not the kind of practice that he is advocating... which would be closer to 2:1 (or greater) for most sets; according to this paragraph:




Ideally, a rest period between each work period should be 20 seconds (Beidaris, Botonis,& Platanou, 2010) in any presentation of ultra-short training. At most 30 seconds mightbe tolerated (Zuniga et al., 2008) although work quality of less-than-maximal intensitymight have to be accommodated (as happens with 1,500 m swimming). Longer restperiods change the energy demands of succeeding repetitions making them unspecific forracing.



So, If you were doing 1:00/100 then your interval could be 1:30 according to him, a 2:1 work:rest ratio... and that :30 rest is at the high end of rest per rep. If your target time is 1:10 per 100 (as in the chart in his longer study) then the 1:30 interval gives you only :20 rest between 100s.

TooPro
July 15th, 2013, 08:26 PM
I think the Rushall article mentioned 1:1 or even 1:2 work/rest ratios in the context of describing current practice (which would in fact be a 1:00/100 pace on a 2:00 interval), but you're right... that's not the kind of practice that he is advocating... which would be closer to 2:1 (or greater) for most sets; according to this paragraph:



Ideally, a rest period between each work period should be 20 seconds (Beidaris, Botonis,& Platanou, 2010) in any presentation of ultra-short training. At most 30 seconds mightbe tolerated (Zuniga et al., 2008) although work quality of less-than-maximal intensitymight have to be accommodated (as happens with 1,500 m swimming). Longer restperiods change the energy demands of succeeding repetitions making them unspecific forracing.



So, If you were doing 1:00/100 then your interval could be 1:30 according to him, a 2:1 work:rest ratio... and that :30 rest is at the high end of rest per rep. If your target time is 1:10 per 100 (as in the chart in his longer study) then the 1:30 interval gives you only :20 rest between 100s.
So if I want to improve my 50s, I swim 12.5s at 50 race pace? If I want to train hundreds I do 25s at 100 meter pace? Also I make the time, to include 10 seconds of rest between each one? Sound about right?

Boomerang
July 15th, 2013, 09:12 PM
10-20 sec rest is acceptable, according to the method, so yes, I believe you stated the "training plan" correctly.

TooPro
July 15th, 2013, 11:11 PM
Hmmmm

ok as an example, I'm really interested in training my 100 Free. I swim 25s on 100 Race pace, going on 25 seconds? Is this fast? What's a good example of a workout trying to get me 100 Free under a minute?

robertsrobson
July 16th, 2013, 03:57 AM
I'm going to try this with our squad tonight, but I'm concerned about applying it directly to masters swimmers...

I wonder if we should increase the rest slightly, or break it, for example 4 sets of 8x25 with an extra rest? Or just accept that we'll all be missing the odd 25 here and there...?

Boomerang
July 16th, 2013, 11:21 AM
If you want your final race time to be around, let's say, 59 sec, then each 25 repeat within your race pace training set needs to be completed in 14.75 sec.; that's when your hand needs to hit the wall. Then you can add 10-20 sec rest after each repeat, but Rushall is a big proponent of rest not exceeding exertion. So, in your case, you'd do the 14.75 sec fast 25 and then rest at wall or float for another 10-14 sec. This would make for a slightly odd interval (leave at the 24.75, for example) for clock watching, unless you have a pretty darn precise digital clock. You may have to do them more like on the :25 - that would make it 14.75 exertion and about 10.25 sec rest. The idea would be to do as many repeats hitting the wall at 14.75 as possible before failure - knowing you WILL and SHOULD fail. This may be a little trial and error in the beginning; like trying 30 repeats on the aforementioned interval and seeing how far you can get. If you can complete all 30, then you need to speed up the exertion/repeat interval. Keep track of how you do so you can document improvements and make adjustments. Make sense?

knelson
July 16th, 2013, 11:30 AM
If you want your final race time to be around, let's say, 59 sec, then each 25 repeat within your race pace training set needs to be completed in 14.75 sec.

I think it makes more sense to use the second 50 of your goal 100 pace (as suggested by Rich Abrahams) rather than simply halving the total time. You are doing these repeats from a push, not a dive, after all. So, if your goal is a 59 second 100 you'd probably want to split it 28.5, 30.5 so personally I'd just try to hold 15 seconds on a 25 second interval. Obviously we're not talking about a huge difference, but every little counts on something like a 25.

Boomerang
July 16th, 2013, 11:32 AM
Good point!

knelson
July 16th, 2013, 11:46 AM
ok as an example, I'm really interested in training my 100 Free. I swim 25s on 100 Race pace, going on 25 seconds? Is this fast?

And to answer this, yeah, I'd say it is. If you can do--say--10 x 25 on 25 seconds and hold 15 on them I can't imagine you wouldn't be able to break a minute in a 100 yard race. In fact I think you'd destroy 1:00.

__steve__
July 16th, 2013, 02:58 PM
Or destroy a 500 for that matter

ande
July 16th, 2013, 03:38 PM
http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/ultra40a.pdf
There is a method, which is referred to as the Rushall method which Michael Andrew uses.
Was wondering if you had any critique about this. If this sort of training is a good idea and what are the problems.

Would this also be good for longer events? Like the 400 IM?
Thanks!

Over the years in certain seasons, I've trained in that way & had great results. Also Dan O Thompson who wrote the cliff notes is a friend of mine and a former world record holder in the 50 FL when he was 40 - 44 & maybe 45 - 49. I've seen him at a few meets this past year.
Ultra short might work for longer events.

Michael Andrew has had very impressive results. He's just 14 and recently went 23.47 in the 50 LCM Free which was his 1st NR in the 13/14 age group.

look up time progressions (http://www.usaswimming.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabId=1470&Alias=Rainbow&Lang=en-US)

AGE / 50 FR / 100 FR / 200 FR / 500 FR
14 / 20.62
13 / 20.87 / 46.06 / 1:44.07
12 / 21.85 / 47.95 / 1:48.51 / 4:57.04
11 / 22.93 / 50.79 / 1:56.27 / 5:21.51
10 / 24.46 / 54.10 / 2:00.63 / 5:41.66
09 / 26.11 / 57.71 / 2:05.40 / 5:52.91

LCM
Age / 50 FR / 100 FR / 200 FR / 400 FR / 1500 FR / 100 BK / 200BK / 100 BR / 200 BR / 50 FL / 100 FL / 200 IM / 400 IM
14 / 23.47 / 52.98 / 2:01.89 / 4:31.49 / xx:xx:xx / 59.88 / 2:11.84 / 1:06.13 / 2:32.49 / 25.39 / 56.36 / 2:07.85 / 4:43.12
13 / 24.09 / 54.27 / 2:05.28 / 4:28.08 / 18:08.63 / 1:00.87 / 2:17.22 / 1:07.15 / 2:36.87 / 25.50 / 56.73 / 2:17.49 / 4:58.56
12 / 25.09 / 56.06 / 2:14.18 / 5:47.36 / 20:09.63 / 1:05.57 / 2:29.53 / 1:09.95 / 2:41.82 / 26.22 / 1:03.13 / 2:18.38 /
11 / 26.77 / 1:02.79 / 2:22.92 / 5:03.09 / 21:57.00 / 1:09.15 / x:xx:xx / 1:20.67 / x:xx:xx / 29.25 / 1:17.46 / 2:25.23 /
10 / 27.76 / 1:04.17 / 2:22.92 / 5:20.84 / xx:xx:xx / 1:11.51 / x:xx:xx / 1:23.91 / x:xx:xx / 31.07 / 1:18.69 / 2:47.17 /


I'm curious to see how his progress.
He does have incredible speed. He is a huge 14 year old 6'4" / 178.
His 200's aren't as good as his 100's
His 100's aren't as good as his 50's.
He's better SCY than LCM
There's many boys equal speed in their 50's, who are much faster in their 100's & 200's. (they're older)

My concerns are:

Will he burn out from years of intense coaching by his dad?

Is he is an early bloomer?
Will his progression slow down when he stops growing?

By training Ultra Short, will he ever build the necessary base to bring home his LCM 100's & 200s?

Time will tell, Times will tell.

TooPro
July 16th, 2013, 08:50 PM
My concerns are:

Will he burn out from years of intense coaching by his dad?

Is he is an early bloomer?
Will his progression slow down when he stops growing?

By training Ultra Short, will he ever build the necessary base to bring home his LCM 100's & 200s?

Time will tell, Times will tell.
I doubt he'll burn out. From what I see he's extremely motivated, but who knows. I suppose we'll have to wait and see :P
This Rushall method still seems very little used, so there's no one we can really use as an example to show that. But I really think that the way makes logical sense. But I really still do think that dryland training/strenght training does help in the longrun.

Well, I'll be training the set @Knelson has been swimming for the next two months then.

Anyway

The problem with this sort of techinque is, from what I see Rushall is advising small 40 minute sessions. Michael Andrew said he did 3 sessions. It's easy for him to just go outside in his backyard and jump in the pool, but for me where it's a 5 minute drive, just to get out for a 40 minute session and come back twice more. Sounds difficult in itself :/

chowmi
July 17th, 2013, 11:30 AM
Help please! So in SCM, is this how I do it?

5 rounds of
6 x 25's on :30
holding 15 or under
rest 100 easy in between
fly/free/back/free/breast by round
==>this would be for my 100's of stroke & free. maybe even 50's. or rather, to appreciate the 50's more.

attempt 30 x 25's on :30
sit out if I "miss" 15 and start with the next one.
no problemo is I am doing this myself, but that would mean if you miss and your buddies don't, you are starting the next one at the opposite ends? or do you swim an easy one on the one your miss so you start together again?

If I do 12.5's, then i'd have to swim easy to finish the 25, or do them as back half 12.5's to the wall, is that correct? And attempt to accelerate or increase velocity or whatever the term is - basically, don't just get to the 12.5 and totally tighten up? And there's really no way to accurately gauge my time??

Can you also do 1/2 pool with turn as the 25? Of course, you'd need a good push off which would be hard, but then you'd have a bunch of turn work?

arthur
July 17th, 2013, 01:00 PM
Help please! So in SCM, is this how I do it?

5 rounds of
6 x 25's on :30
holding 15 or under
rest 100 easy in between
fly/free/back/free/breast by round
==>this would be for my 100's of stroke & free. maybe even 50's. or rather, to appreciate the 50's more.

attempt 30 x 25's on :30
sit out if I "miss" 15 and start with the next one.
no problemo is I am doing this myself, but that would mean if you miss and your buddies don't, you are starting the next one at the opposite ends? or do you swim an easy one on the one your miss so you start together again?

If I do 12.5's, then i'd have to swim easy to finish the 25, or do them as back half 12.5's to the wall, is that correct? And attempt to accelerate or increase velocity or whatever the term is - basically, don't just get to the 12.5 and totally tighten up? And there's really no way to accurately gauge my time??

Can you also do 1/2 pool with turn as the 25? Of course, you'd need a good push off which would be hard, but then you'd have a bunch of turn work?
The paper is kind of inconsistent in amount of rest but the 20-30 rounds are always done without splitting them up with easy swimming in between. He gives a guideline of 10 seconds rest for 25s, 20 seconds for 50s, 30 seconds for 100s. He gives a sample 2 hour workout however that doesn't seem to follow his guidelines unless intended for very young swimmers. The workout has 3 race pace sets. The 3 sets he gives are 20x50m free on 60 seconds, 30x25m fly on 45 seconds, and 30x25m back on 45 seconds. You are supposed to fail miserably at first and get better over time. He expects some people to start failing 1/4 through the set the first time they try.

If you fail and you are doing 25s or 75s you will be at the opposite end of the pool from the rest of the team after taking one round off. You don't swim that round easy. You can't really do distances that aren't pool lengths as you need to get your time each time (and he says the coach shouldn't be timing). The shorter distances I think he does doing widths of the pool. That is why some of the lengths in his examples are odd like 20m.

sickfish
July 17th, 2013, 09:48 PM
[QUOTE=arthur;289406] You are supposed to fail miserably at first and get better over time. He expects some people to start failing 1/4 through the set the first time they try.[/]

This matches my experience. It gets easier really quickly - like, every session you do better - but you hit a wall. At that point it becomes a big psychological struggle. Maybe someone with a coach or team could keep the motivation up, but I think it's too repetitive and exhausting to do it every workout solo. Twice a week is probably perfect.

robertsrobson
July 18th, 2013, 09:53 AM
I set a variation on this for our group on Tuesday evening. We did 30x25 on 40. This is slightly more rest than prescribed by the method but my thinking was that:
We have a variety of ages and fitness levels
We have people doing different strokes
We have different ability levels
We don't have a coach on the side to keep control!

Therefore, I wanted us all to go off the same interval. Personally, I set off on 18s reps (a couple of 17s) on breast, and pretty much did all 30. At one end you have to turn right round to see the clock, so I may have just done a couple of 19s but close enough. We did it so that if you missed the time you stopped and joined back in again after 50m.

It was hard but doable and I think I'd keep the rest about the same, even though we had a couple of freestylers kicking around the 14s mark. I'm one of the fitter members of the team and was just finding that I had to really focus the effort towards the end to make the time. I'd say a good half dropped. It may be that not everyone was at the right pace - some of the group don't really deal in race pace as they don't race.

I was really tired at the end - and it was definitely a different kind of tired. It was very aerobic, but also hard muscularly. It though it might end up feeling more lactic, but as the paper suggests, it didn't.

Most importantly, feedback was that people really enjoyed doing the set and it made a nice change. So, I'd definitely adding something like this to the mix.

Kevin in MD
July 18th, 2013, 05:15 PM
We don't have a coach on the side to keep control!


We did a progression of something similar to these sets last fall. We were doing it with an eye on 1650 times.

If I were to do this with an eye on 100 or 200 times, I'd do rounds of it with rest in between rounds.

For holding the times, you put your thumb right on it, that is one of the key challenges. For our swimmers it was at around 600 yards that people wanted to back off, but a little coach inspiration and a reminder of what the set was about helped people stay on task.

As for the times, it's a pretty quick matter with a spreadsheet to adjust the times and number of repeats to make sure everyone gets the proper challenge. If you look in the coaching section, I uploaded one that does those calculations for you.

I prefer to have everyone doing their proper interval and adjust so that the set time is the same for everyone than to have some folks twiddling their thumbs while others get hammered by the set construction.

wmst1
July 18th, 2013, 11:20 PM
My understanding is that Rushall doesn't like mixing strokes in the sets. Does he give a good reason why not?

robertsrobson
July 19th, 2013, 08:59 AM
We did a progression of something similar to these sets last fall. We were doing it with an eye on 1650 times.

If I were to do this with an eye on 100 or 200 times, I'd do rounds of it with rest in between rounds.

For holding the times, you put your thumb right on it, that is one of the key challenges. For our swimmers it was at around 600 yards that people wanted to back off, but a little coach inspiration and a reminder of what the set was about helped people stay on task.

As for the times, it's a pretty quick matter with a spreadsheet to adjust the times and number of repeats to make sure everyone gets the proper challenge. If you look in the coaching section, I uploaded one that does those calculations for you.

I prefer to have everyone doing their proper interval and adjust so that the set time is the same for everyone than to have some folks twiddling their thumbs while others get hammered by the set construction.

Don't people get in each other's way?

smontanaro
July 19th, 2013, 09:12 AM
Don't people get in each other's way?

Fast lanes & slow lanes, perhaps? :-)

robertsrobson
July 19th, 2013, 09:21 AM
Fast lanes & slow lanes, perhaps? :-)

Yeah, of course we do that but over 30x25 it won't take long for people to get caught. Although if they fall back into 5 second gaps when they drop out for 50m, that would help.

I'm not normally one for having too much order and structure, but in a high quality set don't really want people having to stop to let others past.

arthur
July 22nd, 2013, 12:36 PM
My understanding is that Rushall doesn't like mixing strokes in the sets. Does he give a good reason why not?I don't think he says specifically other than not to, but I think the reason is you are doing the set to train for a specific race. Your rest intervals and distance intervals are set for the event you are training for. Rushall's training is all about race specific training and mixing up the stroke in the middle of the set isn't simulating your race. You can still train for IM, but you would need to have split times from a race to determine the correct pace for each stroke.

__steve__
July 22nd, 2013, 02:52 PM
Can this method work for the 50 specialist? Other than a once or twice a week set for aerobic work, I don't see pure Ib2 fast-twitch isolation using this method, but am I mistaken?

TooPro
July 22nd, 2013, 03:53 PM
Can this method work for the 50 specialist? Other than a once or twice a week set for aerobic work, I don't see pure Ib2 fast-twitch isolation using this method, but am I mistaken?


Would you recommend this over a more traditional training method?

TooPro
July 22nd, 2013, 04:49 PM
Would you recommend this over a more traditional training method?
Also according to this dryland training will not benefit me at all?

robertsrobson
July 23rd, 2013, 06:23 AM
Would you recommend this over a more traditional training method?

Yes, there was a variation for 50 pace. I think it was 4 sets of 6x12.5, without rereading the paper...

wmst1
July 23rd, 2013, 08:09 PM
I don't think he says specifically other than not to, but I think the reason is you are doing the set to train for a specific race. Your rest intervals and distance intervals are set for the event you are training for. Rushall's training is all about race specific training and mixing up the stroke in the middle of the set isn't simulating your race. You can still train for IM, but you would need to have split times from a race to determine the correct pace for each stroke.

I hear what you are saying but I am trying to focus on what I thought his 2 basic principles were:
1. Race pace good
2. Lactate bad
Switching strokes seems to help with principle number two.

TooPro
July 23rd, 2013, 11:58 PM
Yes, there was a variation for 50 pace. I think it was 4 sets of 6x12.5, without rereading the paper...
Sorry I have to quotes things to respond on my iPad so I randomly quoted that.




My question is Rushall's training method be superior to traditional training methods?
Also Dryland training has no benefit on performance according to this?

knelson
July 24th, 2013, 12:37 AM
My question is Rushall's training method be superior to traditional training methods?
Also Dryland training has no benefit on performance according to this?

This is Rushall's theory. I would say it has not been proven. Take it with a serious grain of salt.

arthur
July 24th, 2013, 10:38 AM
This is Rushall's theory. I would say it has not been proven. Take it with a serious grain of salt.
For an age group swimmer training every day using this training method Rushall might be right, but for a masters swimmer, especially if they train 3 or 4 times a week they should notice a big improvement from lifting weights, or at least I have. There are also studies showing weightlifting or higher resistance swim training make swimmers faster so I think Rushall is wrong on this one.

ande
July 24th, 2013, 12:16 PM
I know short fast training works because I've done it, and when I did it, I swam well.
My training probably wasn't exactly how Rushall recommends.

The years I did it were:

Nov 1990 - July 1992
1990 50 FR 21.0, 100 FR 46.0
1991 SCY 50 FR 20.52*, 100 FR 46.40 LCM 50 FR 23.65*, 50 FL 25.74 (*done in USS meets)
1992 LCM 50 FL 25.68

1996 & 1996
1995 SCY 50 FR 21.06, 100 FR 46.40, 50 FL 23.22, 50 BK 24.49
1996 SCY 50 FR 21.46, 100 FR 46.79, 50 BK 24.61


2008
2008 SCY 50 FR 21.43, 50 FL 23.20, 50 BK 24.41
(for comparison my 2007 times were)
2007 SCY 50 FR 22.30, 50 FL 23.93, 50 BK 25.75

from Top 10 (http://www.usms.org/comp/tt/toptenind.php?SwimmerID=02P06)


(Rushall says:) "dryland training will not benefit me at all"
I disagree with "dryland training will not benefit me at all."
Where did Rushall write that?
What was his exact phrasing?

For me, strength training is critical to swimming fast.
The years I swam my fastest, were the ones when I did short fast training in the pool and got stronger from weights. I was stronger during those years than I was in the years before or after.

Strength is a critical component for speed.

There is a point of diminishing returns where swimmers might be too big, too strong, and/or too muscular.
Which is why body builders and power lifters tend to not be fast swimmers. But most swimmers are no where near the point of being too muscular, too big or too strong.

Josh Schneider (http://www.google.com/search?q=josh+schneider+swimming&biw=1680&bih=850&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=0wDwUbmwE9ix4APhrIAY&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQsAQ#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=A9roMuo_vj--6M%3A%3BBWlami_8vU7MQM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Flondon-olympics-accommodation.morganritchie.co.uk%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2012%252F06%252FJoosh-316x310.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Flondon-olympics-accommodation.morganritchie.co.uk%252Fgeneral-news%252Fjosh-schneider%2525E2%252580%252599s-dreams-extend-past-olympics-london2012%252F%3B316%3B310) might be close, he has a great 50 free but doesn't hold up as well in his LCM 100 FR.

2012 USA OLYMPIC TRIALS (http://www.usaswimming.org/_Rainbow/Documents/06c76f21-4af4-47f1-b6d6-62150dbf4340/complete%20meet%20results%20-%20olympic%20trials.pdf)

Men 50 LC Meter Freestyle Finals
1 Jones, Cullen 28 MAC-NC 21.59 908
2 Ervin, Anthony 31 CAL-PC/Undercurr 21.60 907
3 Adrian, Nathan 23 CAL-PC/Tacoma 21.68 897
4 Schneider, Josh 24 MAC-NC 21.78 884
5 Feigen, Jimmy 22 TXLA-ST/Univ. of 21.93 866
6 Grevers, Matt 27 FORD-AZ 22.09 848
7 Small, Adam 22 ZONA-AZ 22.38 815
8 Schnur, Jason 21 OSU-OH 22.53 799


Men 100 LC Meter Freestyle Preliminaries
1 Robison, Scot 23 NSS-NC/UVA 49.08 q873
23.56 25.52
2 Adrian, Nathan 23 CAL-PC/Tacoma 49.17 q868
23.32 25.85
3 Grevers, Matt 27 FORD-AZ 49.24 q864
23.65 25.59
4 Feigen, Jimmy 22 TXLA-ST/Univ. of 49.29 q862
23.33 25.96
5 Lochte, Ryan 27 DBS-FL/Florida 49.33 q859
23.99 25.34
6 Weber-Gale, Garrett 26 TXLA-ST 49.34 q859
23.77 25.57
7 Berens, Ricky 24 TROJ-CA 49.35 q858
24.21 25.14
8 Schneider, Josh 24 MAC-NC 49.37 q857 22.99 26.38

Semi-Finals
1 Adrian, Nathan 23 CAL-PC/Tacoma 48.33 q914
22.64 25.69
2 Feigen, Jimmy 22 TXLA-ST/Univ. of 48.48 q905
22.98 25.50
3 Grevers, Matt 27 FORD-AZ 48.71 q893
22.94 25.77
4 Berens, Ricky 24 TROJ-CA 48.85 q885
23.85 25.00
*5 Robison, Scot 23 NSS-NC/UVA 48.91 q882
23.38 25.53
*5 Lochte, Ryan 27 DBS-FL/Florida 48.91 q882
23.61 25.30
7 Weber-Gale, Garrett 26 TXLA-ST 48.98 q878
23.45 25.53
8 Jones, Cullen 28 MAC-NC 49.03 q875
23.63 25.40
9 Lezak, Jason 36 ROSE-CA 49.05 874
23.55 25.50
10 Walters, David 24 TROJ-CA 49.34 859
23.72 25.62
11 Coville, Alex 23 STAN-PC 49.39 856
23.59 25.80
12 Ellis, Matt 18 NTRO-ST 49.44 854
24.03 25.41
13 Ervin, Anthony 31 CAL-PC/Undercurr 49.46 853
23.14 26.32
14 Savulich, Bobby 24 CW-MI 49.47 852
23.63 25.84
15 Schneider, Josh 24 MAC-NC 49.77 837
23.35 26.42
16 Brunelli, Nick 30 MAC-NC 49.85 833
23.60 26.25

Glenn
July 24th, 2013, 01:01 PM
Rushall does not specifically say that weight training or dryland is useless for Masters swimmers. In fact here is a link to a study he uses to say that we DO need strength training.http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/training/hartley.htm

Now, here is a study by Zamparo that says the decline in speed as we age is due to other factors http://www.swimmingscience.net/2013/07/brief-swimming-review-volume-1-edition-7.html

TooPro
July 24th, 2013, 02:42 PM
For an age group swimmer training every day using this training method Rushall might be right, but for a masters swimmer, especially if they train 3 or 4 times a week they should notice a big improvement from lifting weights, or at least I have. There are also studies showing weightlifting or higher resistance swim training make swimmers faster so I think Rushall is wrong on this one.
I honestly couldn't agree more. More strength = More you can catch in water = More efficient = Get tired less
It's pretty obvious logic. I suppose I might have mis read though. He did use a quote which said that Dryland training is not related to performance in competition.

One of my major concerns is how do you do this for a lot of events? Like I'll be training 8-9 events, ( just a made up example)
50 Free
100 Free
200 Free
400 Free
200 IM
400 IM
100 Breast
100 Fly
100 Backstroke

Now with a large amount of events like that I don't see how you could use this sort of training.
Note: I can probably get to the pool everyday for 2-3 hours. Would you just do about 40 minutes of a hard main set training the 50 free for maybe 40 minutes? Then you take a tiny break and resume and start to work on another event? Like the 100 Free?

If you're training 8 events:
You'd be able to work on 2 events a day if you dedicate 2 hours everyday and up to 14 events a week
but the problem is that you'd go days without swimming a certain event? Well I guess the insane amount of repetitions makes up for that.

Also:
Say you're wanting to improve your 100 Free time, and currently it's like a 1:05, would you do 25's on 26.5 seconds holding 16.5 seconds? Or would you get your ideal times and then then divide those by 4 and do 25's on that time?

Allen Stark
July 25th, 2013, 07:51 PM
I have now done sets of 50s at 200 pace with 20 sec rest,sets of 25s at 100 pace with 10 sec rest and sets of 25s with 12.5 at sprint and 12.5 at recovery speed swum continuously.All of these were done kicking only as I am rehabbing my shoulder which undoubtedly has some effect on the results.I found the sets to be very mentally taxing.Each swim required focus and I felt I had to psyche myself up at every rest.I couldn't do more than 12X25 without my mind saying"enough is enough".I found that if I did sets of 8 with a cool down between each I could do many of these.The rapid clearance of lactate is readily noticed.I got tired,but not in the same way.It was strange that the sets seemed more mentally than physically exhausting.Maybe that was a function of novelty and with more experience I can do them easier.

TooPro
July 26th, 2013, 01:12 AM
I have now done sets of 50s at 200 pace with 20 sec rest,sets of 25s at 100 pace with 10 sec rest and sets of 25s with 12.5 at sprint and 12.5 at recovery speed swum continuously.All of these were done kicking only as I am rehabbing my shoulder which undoubtedly has some effect on the results.I found the sets to be very mentally taxing.Each swim required focus and I felt I had to psyche myself up at every rest.I couldn't do more than 12X25 without my mind saying"enough is enough".I found that if I did sets of 8 with a cool down between each I could do many of these.The rapid clearance of lactate is readily noticed.I got tired,but not in the same way.It was strange that the sets seemed more mentally than physically exhausting.Maybe that was a function of novelty and with more experience I can do them easier.
Brent Rushall has always stressed psychological training for athletes maybe this has that as an added benefit? V

One of the major things I'm in love with is that you don't need to taper because the way of training in it self does not cause your body to fatigue for too long. So instead of spending 2 weeks in taper where you feel like you're blowing it, you cn continue to practice.

__steve__
July 26th, 2013, 08:27 AM
I've realized one of the sets I do qualifies for UST: 20 x block starts on 0:40

wmst1
July 26th, 2013, 08:41 AM
Rushall does not specifically say that weight training or dryland is useless for Masters swimmers. In fact here is a link to a study he uses to say that we DO need strength training.http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/training/hartley.htm

Now, here is a study by Zamparo that says the decline in speed as we age is due to other factors http://www.swimmingscience.net/2013/07/brief-swimming-review-volume-1-edition-7.html


I sometimes feel that USRP is like dryland. It makes one stronger and more muscular.

knelson
July 26th, 2013, 11:39 AM
What was the deal with this thread being locked yesterday?

__steve__
July 26th, 2013, 02:05 PM
Maybe one of the links was unsafe

knelson
July 26th, 2013, 04:40 PM
Maybe one of the links was unsafe

Don't see how locking the thread would do anything about that. The thread was still accessible, you just couldn't post anything new to it.

TooPro
July 26th, 2013, 06:14 PM
Don't see how locking the thread would do anything about that. The thread was still accessible, you just couldn't post anything new to it.
Yeah, I was curious as well, I was about to contact a moderator.

TooPro
July 26th, 2013, 06:15 PM
Say you're wanting to improve your 100 Free time, and currently it's like a 1:05, would you do 25's on 26.5 seconds holding 16.5 seconds? Or would you get your ideal times and then then divide those by 4 and do 25's on that time?

could someone answer this as well?

matysekj
July 26th, 2013, 06:31 PM
Yeah, I was curious as well, I was about to contact a moderator.

We don't know either. Someone wrote us asking about it and we saw that the thread was closed, but none of us did it (intentionally at least) and there is no record in the logs of anyone closing it. I thought that maybe you closed it as the thread starter (you can do that), but I'm relatively certain that even if that happens, it goes into the logs. So it is unknown and I don't particularly care right now. If there is a rash of such unexplained closings, we'll look into it further, but for now it isn't worth the time. We just re-opened it after it was reported.

Allen Stark
July 26th, 2013, 06:37 PM
Say you're wanting to improve your 100 Free time, and currently it's like a 1:05, would you do 25's on 26.5 seconds holding 16.5 seconds? Or would you get your ideal times and then then divide those by 4 and do 25's on that time?

could someone answer this as well?
Based on my reading of the article,you would want to devide your ideal time by 4.If you aim for your current time,then you are just training to go that time,instead of improving.

TooPro
July 26th, 2013, 06:42 PM
We don't know either. Someone wrote us asking about it and we saw that the thread was closed, but none of us did it (intentionally at least) and there is no record in the logs of anyone closing it. I thought that maybe you closed it as the thread starter (you can do that), but I'm relatively certain that even if that happens, it goes into the logs. So it is unknown and I don't particularly care right now. If there is a rash of such unexplained closings, we'll look into it further, but for now it isn't worth the time. We just re-opened it after it was reported.
It's no problem, I was just curious!

TooPro
July 26th, 2013, 06:42 PM
Based on my reading of the article,you would want to devide your ideal time by 4.If you aim for your current time,then you are just training to go that time,instead of improving.
So like a really reasonable time not large jumps?

knelson
July 27th, 2013, 01:31 AM
We don't know either.

Must be the USMS Forums poltergeist!

__steve__
July 27th, 2013, 07:55 AM
Man, you're scaring me now.

TooPro
July 27th, 2013, 07:17 PM
I'm guessing you don't attribute pacing into this training? Like what about people who don't even split? Do we just do this training with the ideal times divided by 4 and that'll build the base and we just execute pacing in the actual race?

One giant gain from this type of training: The feeling of being prepared. You know rxactly what time you're capable of doing, it feels like you truly have complete control over your times.

Chris Stevenson
July 27th, 2013, 08:52 PM
Based on my reading of the article,you would want to devide your ideal time by 4.


I'm guessing you don't attribute pacing into this training? Like what about people who don't even split? Do we just do this training with the ideal times divided by 4 and that'll build the base and we just execute pacing in the actual race?

If you like you can get more nuanced than just dividing your ideal time by 4. The coaches here came up with a race pace chart:

http://forums.usms.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=6233&d=1230916140

Paces are only for 50s and 100s, but just divide the goal 50 pace by 2 to get the 25 pace. Free & back are different than fly & brst because they are foot touches for the first splits.

Keep in mind though that if you want to REALLY be going at true race pace then you need to factor in the time for a turn. For free and back, add about 0.5 sec to get those feet around; for fly & brst, add about a second for the time between the hand touch and the push off (really it is about 0.7-0.8 if you have good turns).

Why Not
July 28th, 2013, 03:33 AM
I started september 2012 a thread about same topic which was discussed quite well then.

http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?21414-Ultra-Short-Training-Rushall&highlight=

TooPro
July 28th, 2013, 03:23 PM
If you like you can get more nuanced than just dividing your ideal time by 4. The coaches here came up with a race pace chart:

http://forums.usms.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=6233&d=1230916140

Paces are only for 50s and 100s, but just divide the goal 50 pace by 2 to get the 25 pace. Free & back are different than fly & brst because they are foot touches for the first splits.

Keep in mind though that if you want to REALLY be going at true race pace then you need to factor in the time for a turn. For free and back, add about 0.5 sec to get those feet around; for fly & brst, add about a second for the time between the hand touch and the push off (really it is about 0.7-0.8 if you have good turns).
Charts kinda confusing o_O

Glenn
July 28th, 2013, 03:38 PM
Charts kinda confusing o_O

I could see where confusion could come in.

If for example you want to go 1:06 in the 100 free as your pace, the chart says you need to go 34.0 for a 50. That is correct, but it assumes that with a dive your first 50 is a 32.0. So this chart is really for the second 50 of a 100 ( and all the other 50's if you are going farther than 100).

wmst1
July 28th, 2013, 05:05 PM
I could see where confusion could come in.

If for example you want to go 1:06 in the 100 free as your pace, the chart says you need to go 34.0 for a 50. That is correct, but it assumes that with a dive your first 50 is a 32.0. So this chart is really for the second 50 of a 100 ( and all the other 50's if you are going farther than 100).
USRP is also about doing 25s and not 50s. The 50s only apply to the 400s and maybe, sometimes , the 200.

TooPro
July 28th, 2013, 05:44 PM
I could see where confusion could come in.

If for example you want to go 1:06 in the 100 free as your pace, the chart says you need to go 34.0 for a 50. That is correct, but it assumes that with a dive your first 50 is a 32.0. So this chart is really for the second 50 of a 100 ( and all the other 50's if you are going farther than 100).
Makes sense but this only makes sense for even splitters. Does Rushall urge us to split evenly? Or do we train this way and pace our own way?

Glenn
July 28th, 2013, 08:35 PM
USRP is also about doing 25s and not 50s. The 50s only apply to the 400s and maybe, sometimes , the 200.

Well, yes it's about 25's and also 12.5's and burst and cruise's. I was responding to the pace chart which showed the pace for 100's and 200's.

Glenn
July 28th, 2013, 08:40 PM
Makes sense but this only makes sense for even splitters. Does Rushall urge us to split evenly? Or do we train this way and pace our own way?

Yes, he would suggest that you even split. Most people, and I have done it myself, go out too fast and pay the price at the end. My third all time Masters best 100 free was split 27.12 and 27.19. With the dive that is actually a negative split.

TooPro
July 28th, 2013, 09:20 PM
Yes, he would suggest that you even split. Most people, and I have done it myself, go out too fast and pay the price at the end. My third all time Masters best 100 free was split 27.12 and 27.19. With the dive that is actually a negative split.
I negative split hard. I always find negative splitting the best pacing option. Sort of like James Magnusson he'll be 7th off the wall and on the way back he'll destroy his opposition. So I can do this training and still negative split?

__steve__
July 29th, 2013, 07:26 AM
Stefen Nystrand 2007 100 SCM free

(21.85) 46.48
(22.09) 45.83

His PB was 46.48 then three days later he takes the first 25 out less than before (less as in 2.4 tenths) but has more afterburner for the remaining 75 home for a world record, and first sub 46 swim ever.

Chris Stevenson
July 29th, 2013, 11:39 AM
Makes sense but this only makes sense for even splitters. Does Rushall urge us to split evenly? Or do we train this way and pace our own way?

It makes sense for people who want to pace their races properly. It is better to even split or negative split your races (accounting for the effects of starts & turns, which the table does).

The main danger in even/negative splitting is that you get stuck in a "rut" and don't really put forth a complete effort (ie, after the race you still have energy to burn). That's why it is important to work on proper pacing and race-pace training so you can recognize the warning signs if you are taking it out too hard.

Don't make the mistake of thinking Rushall or any other race-pace approach is just about physiological conditioning; you also need to develop a good sense of pacing. I believe one advantage of Rushall's UST approach (and I should mention that I'm not a fan of UST) is that you don't really break down in training, so you don't need to "re-train" your sense of pace during taper.

knelson
July 29th, 2013, 11:55 AM
The main danger in even/negative splitting is that you get stuck in a "rut" and don't really put forth a complete effort (ie, after the race you still have energy to burn).

I agree. You shouldn't be thinking before a race "I'm going to hold back on the first half." If you feel like you are pushing the first half and still are able to even split that's great, but otherwise you're probably leaving something on the table. And I know this from plenty of experience. I'm notorious for being close to dead last at the halfway point.

TooPro
July 29th, 2013, 01:18 PM
I agree. You shouldn't be thinking before a race "I'm going to hold back on the first half." If you feel like you are pushing the first half and still are able to even split that's great, but otherwise you're probably leaving something on the table. And I know this from plenty of experience. I'm notorious for being close to dead last at the halfway point.
My back end speed is always awesome, I always get pretty good split, but I suppose I don't put enough into the front end. I suppose you're right that the first half is important as well. This is a major lesson I've learned in the past few meets >_>

knelson
July 29th, 2013, 04:16 PM
I would contend that in a 100 the bare minimum your 50 splits should be apart is one second and your first 50 split should be within a second of your fastest 50 time. If you can do this then you will be an outstanding 100 swimmer. If taking it out that fast means your second 50 suffers (let's say more than a three second drop-off) then you might consider backing off a tad on the first 50. I think very few people have the conditioning to pull off an ideal 100--especially long course.

TooPro
July 29th, 2013, 07:17 PM
I would contend that in a 100 the bare minimum your 50 splits should be apart is one second and your first 50 split should be within a second of your fastest 50 time. If you can do this then you will be an outstanding 100 swimmer. If taking it out that fast means your second 50 suffers (let's say more than a three second drop-off) then you might consider backing off a tad on the first 50. I think very few people have the conditioning to pull off an ideal 100--especially long course.
I think with this kind of training what you're describing can be done. I realized that a bit too late. For some reason starting this year I've really been slowing own my first 50 and swimming last 50 like a normal 50 free race.

TooPro
August 3rd, 2013, 09:31 PM
Someone should make a race pace chart for all the other events as well! That chart seems so helpful. My first major experience with this type of training coming up this week.

Also how do I tell weather or not I should move on to a faster pace? I heard Michael Andrew's dad say you should o it once you can complete the race 2 and a half times.

swimBRCT
August 7th, 2013, 04:22 PM
Ladies and Gentlemen,

It's great to see a renewed interest in the USRPT (Ultra-Short Training at Race Pace) model amongst masters' swimmers.

I'd like to take a moment to let you guys know that there's a USRPT Training Discussion Panel (http://usrpt.ucoz.com/) that was just launched very recently, in collaboration with SwimmingScience.net and Dr. Rushall himself. Here is the link if anybody is interested. Send a note to "cam@swimmingscience.net" if you'd be interested in taking part, with a brief description of who you are and why you'd be interested in discussing and learning about this form of training.

It would be wonderful to have the perspective of masters swimmers testing this form of training, whether you're doing it solo (very much possible) or you're lucky enough to have a coach that tries new things!

USRPT has been very slow to gain traction on a team basis at the competitive level at essentially every level of the sport in the US, but it's growing particularly amongst teams overseas (Australia, India, Netherlands, Spain).

On the topic of splitting: Rushall derives his recommendations from a combination of basic principles of physics and and biology, as well as observations of patterns amongst elite swimmers. If something happens in the performance of many many elites, across multiple age groups and across both genders, most likely it is a behavior worth emulating. In the case of recommending "even splitting", that recommendation is substantiated on both fronts. (That said, it is observed that for various psychological reasons there is a consistent pattern of a "speedy finishing burst" in the last 25 of races across events from the 100 to the 1500.)

swimBRCT
August 9th, 2013, 01:04 PM
Someone should make a race pace chart for all the other events as well! That chart seems so helpful. My first major experience with this type of training coming up this week.

Also how do I tell weather or not I should move on to a faster pace? I heard Michael Andrew's dad say you should o it once you can complete the race 2 and a half times.

The guideline from Dr. Rushall is when you can complete ~75% of the target reps (say, 15 out of 20 25s without a failed rep) as specified in the chart on page 6 of Bulletin 40B, you should adjust the difficulty of the set.

This can involve reducing the rest period, or increasing the goal pace.

Which other events do you need charts for?

THOMMED
August 12th, 2013, 09:24 AM
Dr. R. has made a number of tweaks since his big paper came out, often in response to feedback from the teams and solo swimmers who were brazen enough to put his methods to the test. Ande, Rich, Allen, and everyone else out there who harbors an honest interest, think about joining the panel mentioned in the above post. After all, USRPT is nothing if not about efficiency. And who should be more concerned with that than those of us who are now stingily having to parcel out our aging energy reserves? This is cutting edge stuff, based in science and especially attractive to persons with an open, scientific bent of mind, who look to science cut through the tangles of pseudo-scientific superstition. The only legitimate way to rebut USRPT is to rebut the science behind it, and no one that I can find has been able to do that—unless you seriously think that studies on lab rats and untrained volunteers can apply to trained athletes. What we see instead is evasion. Somewhat in frustration, after striking out with entreaties to ASCA, Swimming Science Journal, and a well known swimming scientist, I wrote the following letter to John Leonard (which I suspect will put the nix on further speaking invitations):

Dear John, Can there be a better means of fortifying one’s own coaching ideology than of laboring to understand the thinking of a worthy opponent? Ignoring an adversary, however, as though he doesn’t exist or is too outlandish to be taken seriously, is the laziest form of intellectual evasion. It’s a dodge that’s irresistible, itseems, when the opponent puts his ideas in a daunting, 55 page treatise that even Dr. Maglischo calls “imposing.” I refer of course to Dr. Rushall’s “Swimming Energy Training in the 21st Century, the Justification for Radical Changes,” Swimming ScienceBulletin, 39.
Rushall—no shrinking violet he—makes the case for straight sets of short, race-pace repeats on short rest-intervals. He calls this format “ultra-short training at race pace,” and it is highly counterintuitive. Try to imagine how 30 x 25 meters at 100 meter race pace, on a rest interval of 20 seconds, can avoid lactacid fatigue and glycogen depletion while optimally training race-specific technique and race-specific aerobic and anaerobic endurance!
Sidestepping Rushall is now even less defensible. He has written an abridged version of the energy paper, using language merciful to coaches, and I have written an introductory synopsis. These can be found at http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/ultra40a.pdf (http://forums.usms.org/coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/ultra40b.pdf) and http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/ultra40b.pdf (http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/ultra40a.pdf).
Rushall is anyone’s tough read. But a determined effort to grasp his science and his concepts, even if one is already invested against them, will help to buttress one’s own standards—and to preserve one’s integrity as a thinking person. Best wishes always, Dan

ande
September 9th, 2013, 10:46 AM
just a few MIchael Andrew updates from this summer

LCM Age 14
50 FR 23.38 (13- 14 NR)
100 FR 52.00
100 BK 58.18
200 BK 2:07.56
100 BR 1:05.59
100 FL 54.98
200 IM 2:05.13 (13-14 NR )

He turns 15 in April 2014, so he has plenty of time to grow, train, improve & break more NRs

Several NR's has a shot at are:

100 FR 51.59 vs his 52.00
100 BK 57.39 vs his 58.18
100 BR 1:04.74 vs his 1:05.59
100 FL 54.80 vs his 54.98

LCM NRs (http://www.usaswimming.org/_Rainbow/Documents/e8f10a43-499e-4c61-a6e3-3d6abe76f29d/USA%20SWIMMING%20NATIONAL%20A%20G%20%20RECORDS%20L %20C.pdf)

Times will Tell.

ande
September 9th, 2013, 10:55 AM
Hey Dan, nice to see you here, hope to see you more. Are you now in Keller?

I would love to see more simple english versions of Rushall's points along with more sample workouts and or season plans.

Also somewhere I heard Rushall said or wrote that strength training for swimmers was unnecessary?
Is that true?
Has he changed his position on this?
Curious on your thoughts about this.

Ande


Dr. R. has made a number of tweaks since his big paper came out, often in response to feedback from the teams and solo swimmers who were brazen enough to put his methods to the test. Ande, Rich, Allen, and everyone else out there who harbors an honest interest, think about joining the panel mentioned in the above post. After all, USRPT is nothing if not about efficiency. And who should be more concerned with that than those of us who are now stingily having to parcel out our aging energy reserves? This is cutting edge stuff, based in science and especially attractive to persons with an open, scientific bent of mind, who look to science cut through the tangles of pseudo-scientific superstition. The only legitimate way to rebut USRPT is to rebut the science behind it, and no one that I can find has been able to do that—unless you seriously think that studies on lab rats and untrained volunteers can apply to trained athletes. What we see instead is evasion. Somewhat in frustration, after striking out with entreaties to ASCA, Swimming Science Journal, and a well known swimming scientist, I wrote the following letter to John Leonard (which I suspect will put the nix on further speaking invitations):

Dear John, Can there be a better means of fortifying one’s own coaching ideology than of laboring to understand the thinking of a worthy opponent? Ignoring an adversary, however, as though he doesn’t exist or is too outlandish to be taken seriously, is the laziest form of intellectual evasion. It’s a dodge that’s irresistible, itseems, when the opponent puts his ideas in a daunting, 55 page treatise that even Dr. Maglischo calls “imposing.” I refer of course to Dr. Rushall’s “Swimming Energy Training in the 21st Century, the Justification for Radical Changes,” Swimming ScienceBulletin, 39.
Rushall—no shrinking violet he—makes the case for straight sets of short, race-pace repeats on short rest-intervals. He calls this format “ultra-short training at race pace,” and it is highly counterintuitive. Try to imagine how 30 x 25 meters at 100 meter race pace, on a rest interval of 20 seconds, can avoid lactacid fatigue and glycogen depletion while optimally training race-specific technique and race-specific aerobic and anaerobic endurance!
Sidestepping Rushall is now even less defensible. He has written an abridged version of the energy paper, using language merciful to coaches, and I have written an introductory synopsis. These can be found at http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/ultra40a.pdf (http://forums.usms.org/coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/ultra40b.pdf) and http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/ultra40b.pdf (http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/ultra40a.pdf).
Rushall is anyone’s tough read. But a determined effort to grasp his science and his concepts, even if one is already invested against them, will help to buttress one’s own standards—and to preserve one’s integrity as a thinking person. Best wishes always, Dan

Glenn
September 9th, 2013, 11:28 AM
Ande,

You are correct that Rushall says that strength training is unnecessary, however, he sites the following study that says it is OK for Masters swimmers.

http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/training/hartley.htm

Given what I have read on Sarcopenia, it seems to me it is essential.

http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/sarcopenia.html

guppy
September 11th, 2013, 09:05 AM
"Also this really baffled my mind. I mean I think he also said dryland training doesn't effect performance. That just seems weird."

Looking at some of the sources it seems like this conclusion is most applicable to sprinters; and one of the premises for some of these studies is that dryland exercises do not mimic swimming movements, though it seems that some such exercises are supposed to do this.

THOMMED
September 20th, 2013, 05:44 PM
Hello, Ande. Glad you saw my post. Just go to Rushall's site (Swimming Science Journal). It's all there, along with the science that supports it. Ever since my daughter switched over to middle-distance track (6th at age-group nationals), where there is no penalty for being of average height, I have not been as current on USRPT in swimming, though I have had fun adaptiing it to running. Cameron was handling the day-to-day at the USRPT Panel, but he may now be tied up a bit with his studies at Yale (hard science major). However, I just discovered that Dr. R. has recently written several articles of topical interest in Swimming Science Bulletin (in the SSJ), including Adapting to the USRPT Format and Understanding a USRPT Set, and has made an effort to simplify his language for us laymen. Yes, still in Keller. --Dan

THOMMED
November 24th, 2013, 04:45 PM
Sound familiar?

You’re feeling some swagger these days. Putting in the big yardage. Topping it off with high intensity too. And looking to put an edge on that blade. So you dial up one of those ultra-short sets. You know, the 30 x 25 at 100 race pace on 20 seconds rest. And … HOLY MOLY! ... it eats your backside for lunch! Spits you out too.

This cannot be right, you say. I’m a stud. It has to be the set. Yea, it’s a bad set. Simply bathes you in lactic acid. Strictly for masochists. Forget it. I am too old for a beat down like that.

First thing:

No one‒I mean no one‒jumping into the teeth of an ultra-short set comes away without a seriously masticated ego. Why? Because nothing‒I mean nothing‒can duplicate the demands of ultra short. Except ultra short itself. That’s how specific it is. Or how un-specific everything else is. Real life cases of this, and the science too, are cited in Rushall B. S. (2013). Hypotheses about the specificity of physical conditioning in swimming: it is a lot more specific than commonly believed. Swimming Science Journal – Swimming Science Bulletin 42.

So, what to do?

Ø You’re not too old. Scratch that.

Ø You’ve got to ease into it, with longer rests and slower paces at first. This is laid out by Dr. Rushall in Adapting to the USRPT format. Swimming Science Bulletin 45b and in Step by step USRPT planning and decision-making processes. Swimming Science Bulletin 47.

Ø You’ve got to recite, over and over, again and again, “ultra-short rests are not too short … ultra-short rests are not too short …” Common sense says otherwise, I know. But the science says that resting too little or too long is what swamps the muscles in lactic acid. Between the too-little and the too-long is the ultra short sweet spot where speed-endurance evolves—where anaerobic, acid-making muscle becomes oxygen-loving muscle. This is explained nicely in Aerobic Training is not Enough. Swimming Science Bulletin 42c.

Second thing:

In sport, it’s recovery time—the time needed to bounce back from the last workout—that takes the biggest hit from aging. Ultra short can help to counter this unhappy process. The sets are a bear, sure, but they are self-limiting. You get to bail out whenever you can’t keep the pace. No survival swimming here. You get plenty tired, but you never get wasted by acid build up or wacked out by depleted energy stores. Recovery time is quicker, thus preserving—as aging takes its toll—the ability to chalk up an ample load of quality workouts.

Then there’s the problem of shrinking reserves of time and energy. Married, kids, real job? You know what I mean. Ultra short can help there too—by excluding everything, like weight lifting, that is extraneous to the direct pursuit of fast racing. This is explained fully in Fatigue in swimming: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Swimming Science Bulletin 46a. And, despite all the interest in the training format, the heart and soul of ultra short is the perfection of stroke technique. Every rest interval is devoted to focused attention on skill. Ultra short is nothing if not efficient.

What about recovery within a set? Mightn’t the march of time have an effect on that too? Ultra-short rest intervals, derived from studies on college kids, are 15 seconds for sets of 12.5s or 25s and 20 seconds for sets of 50s, 75s, or 100s. See The mechanisms of ultra-short training: the translation of Christensen’s thinking into swimming terms and its place in training programs. Swimming Science Bulletin 45. Masters swimmers can individualize these rests so that their repeats begin at the same state of recovery as younger swimmers. Here’s how. The science says that breathing, not pulse rate, is the best measure of recovery—and Dr. Rushall says that each repeat should begin before the breathing rate slows by more than 5%. This means that the sensation of breathlessness can be used as a send off signal. You push off, not when you’ve caught your breath, but at the very first easing of air hunger. When I—a 67 year-old, drop-dead sprinter—do this on a fly set of 12.5s at 50 race pace, the rest intervals begin at 8 seconds and level off at 18 seconds before neural fatigue shuts down the set.

A word about 50s though. Ultra short chiefly trains the type of endurance that is fueled by inhaled oxygen. Now, at the elite level, 50s are no-breathers—and ultra short has to be modified for these hypoxic dashes (see Swimming Science Bulletin 47). But at the masters level, your race times inevitably slow, and breath holding ceases to be an option. Your 50s become more aerobic, such that fewer changes are required in the ultra-short format. (At age 44, I could no-breathe a 50 fly in 23 seconds. Now, at 27 seconds, the need for air is overwhelming.)

ande
November 26th, 2013, 11:07 AM
FYI Ultra-Short Race-Pace Training Two-Day Seminars For Coaches, Swimmers and Swim Parents (http://swimswam.com/ultra-short-race-pace-training-two-day-seminar-coaches-swimmers-swim-parents/)

WHERE & WHEN

DENTON, TEXAS
•December 14th & 15th, 2013 (Saturday & Sunday), at the
University of North Texas, Denton, Texas Hosted by UNT Women’s Swimming and Diving Program
•To Register – Go to:
http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/index.htm.

LAWRENCE, KANSAS
•January 7th & 8th, 2014 (Tuesday & Wednesday) at the University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS hosted by Indie Swimming and KU Women’s Swimming and Diving Program.
•To Register – Go to: http://www.indieswimming.com/Home.jsp?team=cmisk
Sponsored by: UNT & KU Women’s Swimming and Diving programs & Indie Swimming

THOMMED
November 27th, 2013, 08:31 AM
P.S. You can find the articles mentioned above by going to the Swimming Science Journal at http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/index.htm. Click on Swimming Science Bulletin in the Quick Links box and then scroll down. In the past, Dr. Rushall charged a fee for access to the Journal, but he has now opened it to everyone.

The Fortress
November 27th, 2013, 09:58 AM
When I—a 67 year-old, drop-dead sprinter—do this on a fly set of 12.5s at 50 race pace, the rest intervals begin at 8 seconds and level off at 18 seconds before neural fatigue shuts down the set.

Ultra short is intriguing to me. However, personally, I don't see what it has to do with drop dead sprinting. 50s are about 5% aerobic so why would you train with a method dedicated to aerobic fitness? I think you're better off doing max rest sets and race simulation for drop dead sprints.

One other thing that puzzles me about Rushall -- how does he account for the SDK? I can't train for 50 fly or 50 back using only 12.5 AFAP sprints because I'm UW for 15 meters in my races. If I used his method for 50s (which I wouldn't), I'd never do any full stroke swimming. Also, the breath deprivation from streamline dolphin kicking or not breathing much during a 25y 100 pace sprint makes his proposed intervals impossible for me. I guess you could use the sensation of breathlessness test you mention, but my rest interval would be nowhere near his proposed 1:1 rest.

geochuck
November 27th, 2013, 10:27 AM
Late getting into this one. When I used to train for the marathon races I would do 100 x 100s with a minute rest and as the race season got closer rest was cut down to 30 seconds.

Glenn
November 27th, 2013, 06:10 PM
Late getting into this one. When I used to train for the marathon races I would do 100 x 100s with a minute rest and as the race season got closer rest was cut down to 30 seconds.

That is certainly a lot of yardage!!! USRPT is not about yardage. It is about race pace. Rest is only either 15 seconds for 25's or 20 seconds for 50's, 75's and 100's.

Also, if the set is 30 x 50's it is skip if missed - meaning that if you miss your target time, you sit out the next one. If you miss two in a row including the rest time, the set is done. You are not expected to make all 30. If you do, the set is too easy. If it is too easy, you need to make your target time faster.

You do not break the 30 x 50's down into 3 sets of 10. There is no Masters minute. Currently with my target time of :31 I can complete 23 with #'s 22 and 23 failures. My previous target time of :32 I was able to get 25 out of 30 but did not have two failures in a row. As a result I moved the target time down to :31. I am training for the 400 free.

Chris Stevenson
November 27th, 2013, 07:35 PM
nothing‒I mean nothing‒can duplicate the demands of ultra short. Except ultra short itself. That’s how specific it is. Or how un-specific everything else is.
....
Between the too-little and the too-long is the ultra short sweet spot where speed-endurance evolves
...
In sport, it’s recovery time—the time needed to bounce back from the last workout—that takes the biggest hit from aging. Ultra short can help to counter this unhappy process.
...
Then there’s the problem of shrinking reserves of time and energy. Married, kids, real job? You know what I mean. Ultra short can help there too

I've heard that UST also puts hair on your chest, cures cancer, and makes a mean pot roast.

StewartACarroll
November 27th, 2013, 09:56 PM
I've heard that UST also puts hair on your chest, cures cancer, and makes a mean pot roast.

Thats hilarious. I love it!

THOMMED
November 28th, 2013, 01:28 PM
In answer to The Fortress

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

> USRPT does have to be modified for hypoxic 50s, as I mentioned. But when you eventually have to start breathing, as mother nature will force you to do (in long course initially), these short sprints become progressively more oxidative—fueled by oxygen. This involves more than just the recruitment of additional slow twitch, Type I muscle fibers. Drop-dead, fast-twitch fibers also pitch in. These are the Type IIb fibers. The ability to recruit both Type I and Type IIb fibers is what Dr. Rushall calls “oxidative capacity,” as opposed to simple aerobic capacity, as measured by VO2max. What USRPT does so well is to convert many Type II fibers into Type IIb fibers, enhancing the oxidative contribution to the race (beyond the 5% you mention) and lessening the predominance of the anaerobic system. This means less acidification of the blood and less tying up on the charge to the finish. My point for masters swimmers was only that modifications in USRPT become less necessary as the years pass by.

> I have the same problem, though I can’t quite submarine out to 15 meters anymore. Just slice up the race into its segments and use an USRPT set for each segment: 1) dive to 15M; 2) 15M to wall; 3) wall to 15M; and 4) 15M to finish. On 1 and 3 you can ease in to the opposite wall for the next repeat. For 1, if there is no starting platform on that side, you have to go from the deck. Not perfect but workable. On 2 and 4, you have to ease back out to the 15M mark. (It is tempting to do these segments in sequence, as a broken 50, but this would breach USRPT protocol, which calls for repetition to failure of each skill.) If you want more free swimming, as you might for long-course, you can begin the repeats over a lane mark, and starting with one or two submarine kicks and your break-out stroke, you can sprint across the next four to five marks. Since for 50s you go as fast as possible (AFAP) as far as possible (AFAP), you don’t have to keep an eye on the clock. Just stop when your stroke has lost its pop. All of us drop dead types can pinpoint that. On the hypoxic segments, 1 and 3, you may need more recovery time than the official 15 seconds. Let breathlessness be your guide.

By the way, I think your HIT program is super. It reminds me of the one I came up with at Longhorn, which was inspired by Dave Salo, back when he was considered a rogue coach. I suspect we share the same disdain for the glorified lap swimming that burns out so many promising kids, especially sprinters. To me USRPT is a refinement of Salo. But what you are doing is probably a lot more fun. Inserting some USRPT might even add to that.

__steve__
November 28th, 2013, 03:04 PM
Would 9 second 50 pace efforts on 0:30 qualify as UST? Though the work to rest is more like 1:3, the aerobic system starts to kick in when done hypoxically.

THOMMED
November 28th, 2013, 03:29 PM
That's repeat 12.5s at 50 race pace on a 30 second rest interval? No, not USRPT---unless you are new to it and using the long rest interval as a means of adapting, with the aim of working down to 15 seconds; or unless you are old enough that you actually need that much rest to attain the proper state of recovery. Otherwise, the rest interval is too long, allowing too much recovery of the oxidative system. The goal of USRPT, as far as conditioning goes, is to maintain maximal pressure on the oxygen-using muscle fibers, the slow twitch Type I fibers and the fast twitch Type IIb fibers. That's why you are not allowed to catch your breath. You have to go again while you are still hungering for air. This can be unpleasant, but you get to stop when you can't make the nine seconds anymore.

__steve__
November 28th, 2013, 03:47 PM
Thanks.
That is what I've been doing to practice turns. At a 7.8m width portion of the pool I just push off, take a 3/4 stroke cycle of free, turn, and DK UW back to wall. I have tried it on 0:15 which would likely be true UST, but I die after 1 minutes from lack of air and form disintegration. But yes, like thatit hurts exceptionally well.

THOMMED
November 28th, 2013, 03:57 PM
Half of each repeat is hypoxic, so you may need a longer rest interval to repay the oxygen debt. Try the breathlessness approach as described above, realizing that an adaption period of several weeks may be needed before you can begin knocking off a fair number of repeats. Best of luck!

geochuck
November 29th, 2013, 07:33 AM
During my 35 years of racing I had done everything and tried every thing. I even used Man Tan to fake that I was I shape.

Average John Smith
November 29th, 2013, 10:32 AM
Good grief........ in Masters..... it's not how fast your go..... it's how good you look behind the blocks.

THOMMED
December 16th, 2013, 09:31 AM
Follow-up:

1) Ultra short race-pace training (USRPT) exerts nonstop, maximal stress on every oxygen-using source of energy. A major effect, ultimately, is to compel lactate-producing Type IIa fast-twitch muscle fibers to undergo maximal conversion to oxygen-fueled Type IIb fast-twitch fibers. This serves to expand overall oxidative capacity, boosting performance in every pool event requiring repeated breathing.

2) Another major training effect, especially relevant for hypoxic 50s, is to compel hemoglobin and myoglobin (hemoglobin’s counterpart in the muscles) to undergo maximal increases not only in quantity but also in their ability to bind oxygen. This “stored oxygen” is plentiful in diving mammals such as seals. In sprint swimmers going full bore in a 50, it recharges the ATP-CP energy system, enabling ATP-CP to operate longer, before it must yield to the lactacid system. Because ATP-CP is the predominant energy source in trained sprint swimmers, the result is greater speed endurance—the ability to bring home a 50 before the build-up of blood acid takes its toll. See Rushall B. S. (2013). Swimming energy training in the 21st century: the justification for radical changes (Second Edition) pp. 12–23. Swimming Science Journal – Swimming Science Bulletin 39.

(Back when I could be somewhat serious about swimming, in the days before USRPT, I had no trouble bringing home a short-course 50. But long-course was another story. No matter whose program I followed, from Shubert-style over-distance to Salo-style high intensity, I always struggled to maintain pace toward the finish. How I wish I could turn back the clock, using USRPT to bring that final 15 meters up to par.)

3) It bears repeating that, despite its unique training protocol, the heart and soul of USRPT is stroke technique—toward the ultimate goal of enhanced propelling efficiency.

ande
December 17th, 2013, 12:13 PM
Michael Andrew, 14 swam some amazing times at JRs, breaking several NRs and continually improving. He doesn't turn 15 till around April 2014 so he's likely to break more.

50 FR 20.40
100 FR 44.85 very close the rec is 44.81.
100 BK 48.68 NR
100 BR 55.43 NR
100 FL 47.47 NR
200 BR 2:04.97
200 IM 1:49.67

USA Swimming SCY Age Group Recs (http://www.usaswimming.org/_Rainbow/Documents/00fd82a3-cd1f-4c96-8735-52cecdd59b30/USA%20SWIMMING%20NATIONAL%20A%20G%20%20RECORDS%20S %20C.pdf)

I'm also curious to see how he countinues to improve as he matures and if his Ultra Short Training At Race Pace will hold up and enable him to become a world class swimmer and a serious contender at 2016 trials.

Glenn
December 17th, 2013, 12:55 PM
I'm also curious to see how he countinues to improve as he matures and if his Ultra Short Training At Race Pace will hold up and enable him to become a world class swimmer and a serious contender at 2016 trials.

This may not prove anything, but I started USRPT in September training for the 400 free SCM. I don't do any garbage yardage. No kicking, no pulling, no toys. Only a warm up and one or two USRPT sets a day.

I just swam my fastest 400 free time in three years in our SCM championship meet, and was 7 seconds faster than last year. I'm 64.

sunruh
December 17th, 2013, 01:05 PM
would love to see your splits glenn
and congrats on the good swim!

Glenn
December 17th, 2013, 01:29 PM
would love to see your splits

USMS Meet Results Database Splits (http://www.usms.org/comp/meets/swim.php?s=2278088)

I age up to 65 in January so my time of 4:56.25 is .7 off the 65-69 record of 4:55.56.

sunruh
December 17th, 2013, 02:02 PM
very nice last 100!

so how many yards/meters is your typical warmup and single main set of ustarp?

Glenn
December 17th, 2013, 02:29 PM
I do a 400 warm-up.

I don't really count yardage, it's not important.

My Monday and Friday workout is 2 x (30 x 50) on :50 holding :32 skip if missed (SCY). My Tuesday and Thursday workout is 40 x 25 on :30 holding :15. Wednesday is not a true USRPT workout where I do 15 x 100 on 1:30 holding 1:10 or better.

Remember however, that the sets of 30 x 50 is not supposed to be completed. If you can do 30 the set is too easy. Yesterday I did 26 and had 4 failures during the set. I stop the set when I reach either 4 failures total or 2 failures in a row. What I am trying to do is to push back the first failure further and further. So for example, my first failure yesterday was at # 14 which is good for me. Then I try to do at least 4 more before the next failure.

I am gradually increasing my USRPT sets. I hope to get to 2 x (40 x 25) on Tu/Th in the next few weeks.

sunruh
December 17th, 2013, 02:45 PM
WOW!!!
thats darn impressive

how many times do you chum the gutter?

Chris Stevenson
December 17th, 2013, 02:54 PM
1) Ultra short race-pace training (USRPT) exerts nonstop, maximal stress on every oxygen-using source of energy. A major effect, ultimately, is to compel lactate-producing Type IIa fast-twitch muscle fibers to undergo maximal conversion to oxygen-fueled Type IIb fast-twitch fibers.

2) Another major training effect, especially relevant for hypoxic 50s, is to compel hemoglobin and myoglobin (hemoglobin’s counterpart in the muscles) to undergo maximal increases not only in quantity but also in their ability to bind oxygen.


Citations of controlled studies, please. There are plenty of unsupported assertions in swimming as it is.

Glenn
December 17th, 2013, 03:47 PM
how many times do you chum the gutter?

I consider that TMI...

knelson
December 17th, 2013, 06:27 PM
very nice last 100!

I agree. Very nice swim, Glenn.

Glenn
December 17th, 2013, 07:06 PM
Does anyone know of an age group coach in California (if possible) who actually coaches using USRPT?

ddskier63
December 17th, 2013, 10:20 PM
I do a 400 warm-up.

I don't really count yardage, it's not important.

My Monday and Friday workout is 2 x (30 x 50) on :50 holding :32 skip if missed (SCY). My Tuesday and Thursday workout is 40 x 25 on :30 holding :15. Wednesday is not a true USRPT workout where I do 15 x 100 on 1:30 holding 1:10 or better.

Remember however, that the sets of 30 x 50 is not supposed to be completed. If you can do 30 the set is too easy. Yesterday I did 26 and had 4 failures during the set. I stop the set when I reach either 4 failures total or 2 failures in a row. What I am trying to do is to push back the first failure further and further. So for example, my first failure yesterday was at # 14 which is good for me. Then I try to do at least 4 more before the next failure.

I am gradually increasing my USRPT sets. I hope to get to 2 x (40 x 25) on Tu/Th in the next few weeks.

Glenn,
Do you warm-up, swim 2 x (30 x 50) on the :50 until failure, warm down then dry off and call it good? Do you follow up your USRPT set with a drill or kick set? I'm looking to adopt this training method 2x/week with a 3-4x/week practice schedule. The remaining workouts consisting of HIT workouts? Does this training strategy make sense for a drop-dead sprinter with delusions of becoming a respectable 200 free/200 breaststroker? Your thoughts?

Glenn
December 17th, 2013, 10:59 PM
Do you warm-up, swim 2 x (30 x 50) on the :50 until failure, warm down then dry off and call it good? Do you follow up your USRPT set with a drill or kick set? I'm looking to adopt this training method 2x/week with a 3-4x/week practice schedule. The remaining workouts consisting of HIT workouts? Does this training strategy make sense for a drop-dead sprinter with delusions of becoming a respectable 200 free/200 breaststroker? Your thoughts?


Warm up takes about 6 - 8 minutes. Each set of 30 x 50 takes around 23 or so minutes. I do a 400 warm down between sets plus another 5 - 7 minutes of resting on the side. Then the second set of 30 x 50, followed by a 400 warm down. So it takes me a total of about 1 hour 15 or 20 minutes.

I don't do any kick sets or drills. Why, because I have never done kicking only in a race nor have I done a zipper drill or catch up drill in a race.

I think you could do this for the 200, yes. I know for me, I would have to hold 29's to a hand touch for it to be race pace 200. That would be very difficult. Of course you don't start at 29.

My race pace goal for the 400 was/is 32 to a hand touch, which is 33 to a foot touch or 1:06 per 100. I started USRPT by using 35 as my race pace. That was easy so I moved it down to 34, that was easy too. By the third week I was at 33 and it was a challenge. After two weeks I could do 33 with maybe one failure. I have been at 32 for 6 weeks now and my progress at this point is to push the first failure further and further down the line and to try and get at least 4 50s in before another failure.

I am now working on picking up the pace at the flags, hitting the turn hard and coming off the turn with 2-3 fast strokes.

If you do these sets you will have to do them on your own. For some that is too difficult. For me it is always me against the clock.

Give it a try. What is the worst that could happen?

sunruh
December 18th, 2013, 09:59 AM
glenn,
when you dont make 1 at your target pace, what do you do?
rest for the 50sec intervaul or how long?
do you rest more if you fail 2 in a row?
what about 3 in a row?
your total (if all completed and i realize its not supposed to be) is 3400+ thats a lot for some people. and with 3000 of that sprinting that is darn tough.

knelson
December 18th, 2013, 10:22 AM
and with 3000 of that sprinting that is darn tough.

It's not sprinting, though. It's 400 pace. Not to say that's easy, but it's not all out, either.

THOMMED
December 18th, 2013, 10:36 AM
http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/index.htm

Glenn
December 18th, 2013, 12:30 PM
glenn,
when you dont make 1 at your target pace, what do you do?
rest for the 50sec intervaul or how long?
do you rest more if you fail 2 in a row?
what about 3 in a row?
your total (if all completed and i realize its not supposed to be) is 3400+ thats a lot for some people. and with 3000 of that sprinting that is darn tough.

When you miss your target pace ( :32 for me), you rest for one cycle, i.e. for one repeat. Then you pick up again on the next repeat. So if I start on the top (:00) and I go a :33, instead of leaving on the :50, I rest and leave on the next interval which would be :40.

If you miss two in a row, that means that you missed one, rested, then missed one again. If that happens, your set is done, you are finished. That's why Dr. Rushall calls these sets self-limiting. When you can't make the interval you're done. It's not how many you do, it's the quality. Too many swimmers are concerned with YARDAGE. It's not about yardage, it's about quality and race pace. Your body needs to know what race pace feels like. The nice thing about this training is that when I get up behind the blocks, I tell myself "Just do what you do everyday in practice".

The optimim rest for the sets of 50s, 75s or 100s is :20. Not :25, not :30, not :45 seconds. For the set of 40 x 25s the rest is :15. You don't break up the set into three sets of ten with extra rest. No Masters minute. You go, you push and make as many as you can.

Your last sentence mentions total yardage. Forget about total yardage. Total yardage does not make you a fast swimmer. Quality swims at race pace make you a faster swimmer.

Glenn
December 18th, 2013, 12:35 PM
It's not sprinting, though. It's 400 pace. Not to say that's easy, but it's not all out, either.

Knelson is right. These are not AFAP swims. I am training for the 400, not the 50 or 100. Although my 50 time in the meet was my fastest since the rubber suit era ended.

Yes, a set of 30 x 50 on the :50 holding :32 is tough. It is supposed to be. If you were training for the 100 you would be doing sets of 20 x 50, also not very easy.

Glenn
December 18th, 2013, 12:57 PM
Sunruh,

I have never calculated my yardage before but to give you a perspective, here it is for Monday:

Warm up - 400

28 x 50 - 1400

EZ swim - 400

16 x 50 - 800

warm down - 400

The total yardage is 3400 of which 2200 is at race pace. I am pretty sure you won't get that much race pace training in any other Masters workout.

Let me break down the 28 x 50. My first failure was at #14 (:34), my second failure was at #19 (:33), my third failure was at #24 (:35) and my fourth failure was at #28 (:37). After the fourth failure I stopped the set.

I did an easy 400 swim and rested at the wall for about 5 minutes after the first set.

The second USRPT set was 16 x 50 and went like this: First failure was at #6 (:33), second failure at #9 (:33), third failure at # 12 (:33) and fourth failure at #16 (:35).

Then I swam a 400 warm down.

knelson
December 18th, 2013, 01:14 PM
The nice thing about this training is that when I get up behind the blocks, I tell myself "Just do what you do everyday in practice".

I agree. You're training your body to be able to hold your goal pace and you're also convincing your brain you can hold that pace.

sunruh
December 18th, 2013, 02:37 PM
Sunruh,
The total yardage is 3400 of which 2200 is at race pace. I am pretty sure you won't get that much race pace training in any other Masters workout.


oh i agree!
but also understand that 3400 is still a good distance as well.

while this may work for up to 500yds for masters.

i dont see how this works for elite nor any distance over 500 even for masters.
i could be quite wrong but i just dont think anyone is willing to try it for a season to "test it"

aztimm
December 18th, 2013, 03:08 PM
nor any distance over 500 even for masters.
i could be quite wrong but i just dont think anyone is willing to try it for a season to "test it"

I don't see why a swimmer couldn't do a set of say 16 to 20 x 100's with 20 sec rest, holding a mile pace?

A couple weeks ago, as part of my team workouts, we did just that. Paul assigned each of us goal times, then the interval was that + 20 (we rounded up to the nearest 5/10 for simplicity). My interval was 1:35, with a goal of under 1:15 on each.

Actually, Paul gives us even shorter sets, like 50s @ 50, for me holding :35 or better. He adjusts both the interval and goal time, mostly based on lane (who is in the lane on that day).

So yes some teams actually do train like this. And to think he usually passes this off as a distance set ;)

sunruh
December 18th, 2013, 03:12 PM
aztimm,
but did you stop if you didnt go under 1:15?
or just continue on with less rest?
big difference there

Glenn
December 18th, 2013, 04:29 PM
i dont see how this works for elite nor any distance over 500 even for masters.
i could be quite wrong but i just dont think anyone is willing to try it for a season to "test it"


I think it works better for 500 and over! If you are swimming a set of 500s you could do 2 x (24 x 75s). If you are doing 800 you can do 2 x (36 x 50) or 2 x (30 x 75). If you are doing 1500 you can do 2 x (25 - 30 x 100).

My time in the 800 at the SCM meet was also my fastest in 4 years and the water was way too warm!

Just because no one is doing it doesn't mean it doesn't work. Even the "elite" swimmers are not doing the mega yards they did in the 70's and 80's. It is no longer in vogue to do 20K a day.

knelson
December 18th, 2013, 05:53 PM
I don't see why a swimmer couldn't do a set of say 16 to 20 x 100's with 20 sec rest, holding a mile pace?

A couple weeks ago, as part of my team workouts, we did just that. Paul assigned each of us goal times, then the interval was that + 20 (we rounded up to the nearest 5/10 for simplicity). My interval was 1:35, with a goal of under 1:15 on each.

Yes, but can you imagine doing this same set every day? That's the part I can't wrap my head around. It seems like it would be very boring to do the same sets day in and day out.

Glenn
December 18th, 2013, 07:51 PM
Yes, but can you imagine doing this same set every day? That's the part I can't wrap my head around. It seems like it would be very boring to do the same sets day in and day out.

I do the 30 x 50 sets on Monday and Friday and the 2 x (40 x25) sets on Tue/Th. Wednesday I do 75's or 100s. The reason it is not boring is that I am always trying to get fewer failures and to push the first failure later and later. That is the challenge every single day. I also work on speeding up at the flags sometimes or counting strokes or hitting the turn faster. I never find it boring.

I also have a measure from day to day and week to week as to my progress. I also throw in a time trial evry week or two. Sometimes at the end of the sets and sometimes at the beginning. Then I can compare my times against a rested time trial or a fatigued time trial.

thewookiee
December 18th, 2013, 08:01 PM
I do the 30 x 50 sets on Monday and Friday and the 2 x (40 x25) sets on Tue/Th. Wednesday I do 75's or 100s. The reason it is not boring is that I am always trying to get fewer failures and to push the first failure later and later. That is the challenge every single day. I also work on speeding up at the flags sometimes or counting strokes or hitting the turn faster. I never find it boring.

I also have a measure from day to day and week to week as to my progress. I also throw in a time trial evry week or two. Sometimes at the end of the sets and sometimes at the beginning. Then I can compare my times against a rested time trial or a fatigued time trial.

Glenn,

You are doing the sets on :50 for freestyle. If someone was going to this set backstroke or fly, what interval would you recommend?

Glenn
December 18th, 2013, 08:23 PM
You are doing the sets on :50 for freestyle. If someone was going to this set backstroke or fly, what interval would you recommend?


The rest is always the same for 50s and above, i.e.20 seconds. If you are doing 25s the rest is :15.

Just figure out what your race pace time is and add the 20 seconds to get your interval. Say you want to go a 1:10 100 fly. Each 50 would be :34 to a hand touch - (your feet should hit at :35 as they would on a touch pad). So in this case your interval would be :54 - but I would round up to :55 to make it easier to see on the clock.

knelson
December 18th, 2013, 09:14 PM
Say you want to go a 1:10 100 fly. Each 50 would be :34 to a hand touch - (your feet should hit at :35 as they would on a touch pad). So in this case your interval would be :54 - but I would round up to :55 to make it easier to see on the clock.

For fly and breast your touch is always to the hand so you shouldn't need to add a second.

Glenn
December 18th, 2013, 10:46 PM
For fly and breast your touch is always to the hand so you shouldn't need to add a second.


Yes, you are correct. I am a freestyler, can't you tell?

ourswimmer
December 19th, 2013, 01:05 AM
I don't see why a swimmer couldn't do a set of say 16 to 20 x 100's with 20 sec rest, holding a mile pace?

1. At true mile race pace for a typical middle-aged swimmer, that would be a tough set.
2. To scale up from Glenn's example, one would make the set even tougher by doing it twice, each set with 20-25 rather than 15-20 reps.
3. Lots of masters teams do sets like that occasionally. Very few masters swimmers and probably no teams do all of their training that way.

sunruh
December 19th, 2013, 08:23 AM
Just because no one is doing it doesn't mean it doesn't work. Even the "elite" swimmers are not doing the mega yards they did in the 70's and 80's. It is no longer in vogue to do 20K a day.

oh how i wish some of those days had ONLY been 20k.
and not 21 or 22+

you cant get to 120,000lcm in 11 workouts without breaking a few eggs

i'll bet Sun Yang does quite a few meters. as did Grant Hacket.

all i know is that swimmers train way more than any other sport for the little amount of time spent in the actual competition.

Allen Stark
December 19th, 2013, 06:18 PM
I had been doing the sprint version of this as 25s:sprint the first 12.5,coast 12.5,repeat.I now wonder if that is too much rest as the coast segment takes longer than the sprint.Also,how do you set goal times for 12.5s?

THOMMED
December 19th, 2013, 07:18 PM
12.5s are usually done at 50 race pace, meaning pedal to the metal, as 4 x (6 x 12.5), so there is no need to time them. Stop when your your stroke loses its snap. If you want the 12.5s to be stroke only, start in the water instead of off the wall.

Had an e-mail conversation with Dr. Rushall recently, and he is allowing longer rest intervals---but only for older masters drop-dead sprinters who have tried for months but cannot generate adequate race-pace yardage using 15 and 20 seconds. That is, not enough yardage to improve technique.

Regarding the issue of boredom, remember that every rest interval involves two big things: energy recovery (stored oxygen and ATP-CP) AND mental focus on improving stroke technique. It's hard to get bored when you are always thinking ahead, always striving for better mechanics on the upcoming interval, always trying to hang on to the fragile improvements you have already made.

The Fortress
December 20th, 2013, 02:56 PM
Had an e-mail conversation with Dr. Rushall recently, and he is allowing longer rest intervals---but only for older masters drop-dead sprinters who have tried for months but cannot generate adequate race-pace yardage using 15 and 20 seconds. That is, not enough yardage to improve technique.



I don't think USD is for drop dead sprinters. As one, there is absolutely no way I can maintain race pace on the specified 1:1 rest ratio. And I can't imagine training 12.5s from mid-pool all the time. 50s are about starts, turns, SDKs and platinum speed. You can only work on platinum speed with max rest sets. Plus, I think there's some value in doing AFAP 15s and 25s that are above 50 pace. And I think toys can be helpful for sprinters. Just MHO.

Now, 100s may be a different matter. But I can't do the Rushall sets on a 1:1 ratio either.

sunruh
December 21st, 2013, 09:30 AM
I do a 400 warm-up.

My Monday and Friday workout is 2 x (30 x 50) on :50 holding :32 skip if missed (SCY).

i did this workout today.

4th failure on the 1st round was at 17.
at 13 on the 2nd round.

NOT EASY AT ALL!!!

the 400 warmup didnt seem enough for me.
i bounced back after the rest from the failure pretty good, but then fell off quickly again.

mentally its a total mess up
never went into a set before knowing i would fail before the end.

steve

THOMMED
December 21st, 2013, 09:45 AM
“No one‒I mean no one‒jumping into the teeth of an ultra-short set comes away without a seriously masticated ego. Why? Because nothing‒I mean nothing‒can duplicate the demands of ultra short. Except ultra short itself. That’s how specific it is. Or how un-specific everything else is. Real life cases of this, and the science too, are cited in Rushall B. S. (2013). Hypotheses about the specificity of physical conditioning in swimming: it is a lot more specific than commonly believed. Swimming Science Journal – Swimming Science Bulletin 42.”

“You’ve got to ease into it, with longer rests and slower paces at first. This is laid out by Dr. Rushall in Adapting to the USRPT format. Swimming Science Bulletin 45b and in Step by step USRPT planning and decision-making processes. Swimming Science Bulletin 47.”

Glenn
December 21st, 2013, 10:29 AM
mentally its a total mess up
never went into a set before knowing i would fail before the end.




Wow, you are brave to start with that workout!

When I started this in September, I did one set and it was 20 x 50 holding :35. I knew my race pace goal was :32 but also knew I wouldn't be there the first day.

Don't worry about the failure part. The motivator for me each day is to do the set better. I use one of those little scuba divers white boards - about the size of a half sheet of paper - and I write each split down each time and circle the failures. With my goal at :32 when all my failures are only at :33, that is a victory! When my first failure is one later than the last time, that is a victory! When I can string together 5 succcessful 50s, that is a victory! When I can push my self to get 4 in a row before the last failure in the set, that is a victory!

Don't dwell on the failures. Rejoice in the victory!

Now, go back and do the set as 20 x 50 and make the goal time easier. Just get used to doing this kind of set. You will find all kinds of ways to see successes.

__steve__
December 21st, 2013, 11:56 AM
Not for cats?

Rich Abrahams
December 21st, 2013, 12:56 PM
Glenn, first of all, congratulations on your outstanding performances last weekend. How exciting to be so close to Tom’s record in the 400 when you age up in a few days. (need to find a SCM meet soon!). Your other swims were great as well.

I’ve been toying around with Ultra Short for about 18 months, but doing nothing consistent. The two workouts I do with some regularity are the 4 sets of breakouts on the :45 and the 30 X 25 on the :30 (the first for 50 race pace and the second for
100's). Yesterday I tried the 30 X 50 on :50 but, as per my wont, I morphed it for 200 race pace. In a 20 meter pool I did 30 X 40 on 1:00 (the little extra rest for age and altitude). I now know why I’ll never be a long distance swimmer. Although I’m quite used to intense lactate pain, I was totally daunted by that dull ache in the pit of your belly associated with maintaining a relatively hard effort for an extended period. My goal was to keep my efforts under 27.5 which translates to about a 2:18 200 meters. A buddy on deck was timing with a stop watch. I was able to keep all but two between 26.0 and 27.3. My two failures – at 16 and 24 - were in the high 27’s. Man, that was tough! Needless to say, I didn’t attempt the second set.

Looking at your weekly training, I think I’m most impressed with your mental toughness in, although it may be more viewing it from my perspective of wimpyness.

A few questions: Do you have a specific goal meet in mind or do you intend to train like this indefinitely? Do you do any of the burst 12.5’s to work on pure speed? Do you use a digital or analog clock in workout? If you see a 32 on the clock when you come in, does that count as a 32 even if the clock changes to 33 a tenth later? Do you ever train with a partner or in a team setting?

Rich,

p.s. regards to Sharon

Glenn
December 21st, 2013, 01:39 PM
Hi Rich,

Nice to hear from you! As you would understand, I was very pleased with my performances at the SCM meet. The 400 is really the only race I am training for so swimming the time I did was very enjoyable. It was nice that one of the Rose Bowl swimmers, Drew Skelly was next to me. He is 47 and we talked before the race and his goal was the same as mine, we both wanted to go under 5:00. I always try to swim my own race, but both Drew and I could trust each other and we knew we could work off of each other to both our advantage.

I think the USRP training is ideal for 400 and above. I honestly don't know how you (generic you) could use actual race pace to train for the 100. Maybe I would have to work into it, but it is hard for me to envision going 27s per 50 for a set of 20 x 50.

To answer your specific questions:

I have from January 1 to December 31 to break the record. However I have targeted several meets that are SCM around the country and in Canada that I will attend. The first one is the Olympic Club 1500 SCM meet on January 24 in the Bay area. I plan to swim the 1500 as a 400 split to see if I can get the record then. If I do, great, if not there is an SCM meet I think in Oregon in Feb etc. In any event I plan to continue the USRPT training indefinitely.

I am not doing any 12.5 bursts, so am not working on pure speed. Again, my only focus is the 400 free. It is actually kind of liberating to not worry about the 50, 100, 200 and 800! However, I must add that my time in the 50 at the SCM meet was my fastest since the rubber suits.

I use a digital clock. Thank goodness.

When I come in and lift my head to the clock I must see 32. Sometimes it changes right away, sometimes it is a solid 32 - heck, sometimes I see a 31, but not very often. That also means that sometimes I see a 33.1 and that is a failure.

I do not train with a partner or with the team anymore. Like you, I do not find it difficult to train on my own. I know many people feel that they cannot train alone, but it has never been a concern of mine. If I were in Denver however, I would love to train with you.

So far I have to say that this training is working for me and I enjoy it. I remember you telling me sometime ago that you would occasionally workout with a team and you could never understand them doing mindless sets of 100s on the 1:30 or whatever. I totally agree with that! Your focus and training for years has been race pace and it certainly has worked very very well for you!!!

Give my best to Peri.

Glenn

THOMMED
December 21st, 2013, 01:43 PM
Leslie, you may be right. Different strokes for different folks. A good area for future research.

[To clarify, the rest intervals are not derived from ratios. They’re 15 and 20 seconds only. If you cannot maintain race pace, it probably means that the work interval is too long, or the period of adaptation has been too short, or that you qualify as an older drop-dead sprinter (it happens). The 12.5s are not generally done from mid pool. I only mentioned that for folks who want more stroke work, as in preparing for long course. By definition 50 race pace should already be as fast as you can go.]

But I will mention one further thing. USRPT is based in science, and the science says that pace and mechanics are inextricable. Change the pace, and the mechanics change, whether you are aware of it or not. You cannot train at one pace and expect optimal mechanics at another pace. 100 meter and 50 meter mechanics, for example, are not interchangeable. The science also says that the more yardage you train at a specific pace, the more perfect your mechanics will become at that pace. Swimming requires sophisticated technique, unlike distance running, so the question becomes, how do you maximize yardage at a specific race pace? Dr. Rushall created USRPT to answer that very question. The conventional method involves long repeats, often half the event distance, and long rest intervals, which create the kind of fatigue that requires at least two days recovery (longer as you get older). This limits the weekly yardage that can be accomplished at race pace, which limits improvement in propelling efficiency. The science also says that there is a point of diminishing returns as to how much improvement can be obtained by way of conditioning alone, that after a point further speed can only come by way of sharpened skill.

The Fortress
December 23rd, 2013, 10:31 AM
Leslie, you may be right. Different strokes for different folks. A good area for future research.

[To clarify, the rest intervals are not derived from ratios. They’re 15 and 20 seconds only. If you cannot maintain race pace, it probably means that the work interval is too long, or the period of adaptation has been too short, or that you qualify as an older drop-dead sprinter (it happens). The 12.5s are not generally done from mid pool. I only mentioned that for folks who want more stroke work, as in preparing for long course. By definition 50 race pace should already be as fast as you can go.]

But I will mention one further thing. USRPT is based in science, and the science says that pace and mechanics are inextricable. Change the pace, and the mechanics change, whether you are aware of it or not. You cannot train at one pace and expect optimal mechanics at another pace. 100 meter and 50 meter mechanics, for example, are not interchangeable. The science also says that the more yardage you train at a specific pace, the more perfect your mechanics will become at that pace. Swimming requires sophisticated technique, unlike distance running, so the question becomes, how do you maximize yardage at a specific race pace? Dr. Rushall created USRPT to answer that very question. The conventional method involves long repeats, often half the event distance, and long rest intervals, which create the kind of fatigue that requires at least two days recovery (longer as you get older). This limits the weekly yardage that can be accomplished at race pace, which limits improvement in propelling efficiency. The science also says that there is a point of diminishing returns as to how much improvement can be obtained by way of conditioning alone, that after a point further speed can only come by way of sharpened skill.



USRPT is "based in science," but "future research" is needed wrt drop dead sprinting. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of USRPT. I just don't think it works that well for 50s.

1. The start and turn are half the race. 50s are not just about stroke mechanics. USRPT neglects this reality.
2. Mid-pool sprints don't replicate race conditions or stroke mechanics initially, and are more of a strength training exercise.
3. If you don't do mid-pool sprints and are doing bursts from the wall, you could be only SDK-ing and not doing any swimming. If you don't SDK, you are, again, not mimicking race conditions.
4. If SDK is a key part of the start and turn in drop dead sprints, then it seems to me that doing kick only 12.5s should count as USRPT even though Rushall disdains kicking.
5. Most sprinters should be able to do back to back speed workouts. If they can't, they'll have some trouble at multi-day meets.
6. I thought Rushall believed that you should be above race pace on the start of virtually any race bc you carry easy speed off the blocks and can maintain speed more easily.

Another question for Glenn -- did you taper at all for your meet? I would think masters might need to taper despite Rushall saying you don't.

Glenn
December 23rd, 2013, 10:47 AM
Another question for Glenn -- did you taper at all for your meet? I would think masters might need to taper despite Rushall saying you don't.


Yes, but I wouldn't call it anything like a traditional taper. I did my normal workout up until the Monday of the week of the meet. The meet started on Friday and I did half the normal workout on Monday and Tuesday, took Wednesday off and did a meet warm-up on Thursday.

I go by your words of wisdom Leslie, "rest is your friend"!!!

THOMMED
December 23rd, 2013, 12:16 PM
See Rushall B. S. (2013). USRPT and the non-taper. Swimming Science Journal – Swimming Science Bulletin 45d.

Glenn
December 23rd, 2013, 12:35 PM
See Rushall B. S. (2013). USRPT and the non-taper. Swimming Science Journal – Swimming Science Bulletin 45d.



As you have probably figured out by now, I am a big believer in USRPT. It is based on science and I believe that is one of the keys to it's appeal, certainly to me.

How much of that science is based upon studies that included or were exclusively with Masters swimmers? There is not much research done on or with Masters swimmers. So if you take the USRPT concepts a step further especially when you consider specificity, I am not sure that all of the concepts apply as well as they might apply to age groupers.

I work very hard in the pool. My body needs rest. Today was a perfect example. I got to #15 in my set of 30 x 50 and already had three failures... I went into the jacuzzi for 10 minutes, took a shower, and went home.

Actually since Rushall says that USRPT is self-limiting, it was self-limiting today.

THOMMED
December 23rd, 2013, 01:06 PM
I loved being a rogue, Salo-style coach and competitor. My Longhorn swimmers loved it too, with top-notch results. My masters team was Texas SprinterBeast. You would have had a hard time talking me out of it. But Michael Andrew does not seem to be hurting in his 50s.

Start and turn may be half of your race but not for most of us. And then there is long course.

Mechanics are not limited to stroking. Every segment of the race, has it own mechanics. Start, submarine, pull-out for breaststroke, break-out, etc. USRPT recommends subjecting each segment to its own set in order to perfect the mechanics of each.

Rushall does not disdain kicking that is specific to racing.

If speed workouts, using non ultra-short intervals, are of sufficient yardage to improve mechanics, rather than just to maintain them, then blood lactate rises to a level that requires at least 48 hours recovery (in young people).

I’m pretty sure he advocates even pacing.

I really have no interest in being Dr. Rushall’s mouthpiece. He speaks very well for himself. Just go to the site and read his stuff. Even if you disagree with the science, you can’t help learning a lot.

wmst1
December 23rd, 2013, 11:50 PM
Leslie, you may be right. Different strokes for different folks. A good area for future research.

[To clarify, the rest intervals are not derived from ratios. They’re 15 and 20 seconds only. If you cannot maintain race pace, it probably means that the work interval is too long, or the period of adaptation has been too short, or that you qualify as an older drop-dead sprinter (it happens). The 12.5s are not generally done from mid pool. I only mentioned that for folks who want more stroke work, as in preparing for long course. By definition 50 race pace should already be as fast as you can go.]

But I will mention one further thing. USRPT is based in science, and the science says that pace and mechanics are inextricable. Change the pace, and the mechanics change, whether you are aware of it or not. You cannot train at one pace and expect optimal mechanics at another pace. 100 meter and 50 meter mechanics, for example, are not interchangeable. The science also says that the more yardage you train at a specific pace, the more perfect your mechanics will become at that pace. Swimming requires sophisticated technique, unlike distance running, so the question becomes, how do you maximize yardage at a specific race pace? Dr. Rushall created USRPT to answer that very question. The conventional method involves long repeats, often half the event distance, and long rest intervals, which create the kind of fatigue that requires at least two days recovery (longer as you get older). This limits the weekly yardage that can be accomplished at race pace, which limits improvement in propelling efficiency. The science also says that there is a point of diminishing returns as to how much improvement can be obtained by way of conditioning alone, that after a point further speed can only come by way of sharpened skill.



You say USRPT is based on science. There is no doubt that the science behind USRPT for 100s and 200s is very compelling. It is also very clear that the science behind USRPT is not as compelling for 50s training. Dr. Rushall has stated multiple times that 50s are a different animal compared to longer races - from the physiology to the technique. He does not have the lactate graphs to back up his training methods for 50s as the are not as relevant. I think Dr. Rushall is in the process of building out exactly what he believes about 50s as he barely addressed them his first few bulletins. I look forward to the day that his thoughts on 50s are as well developed as his thoughts on 100s and 200s.

__steve__
December 24th, 2013, 02:58 PM
Dr. Rushall has stated multiple times that 50s are a different animal compared to longer races - from the physiology to the technique.


. But Michael Andrew does not seem to be hurting in his 50s.

He could probably bang an impressive 50 after 6 months of no training at all.

ddskier63
December 24th, 2013, 03:22 PM
I ask this of Glenn, Leslie, Rich Abrahams, and THOMMED: As a drop-dead sprinter, and the occasional 200 free/200 breast swimmer, how should my weekly swim workouts look? Need I incorporate HIT and USRPT? Throw in a few broken 200s here and there? I'm swimming only 50s and 100s at Nats but I still relish the thought of developing into a decent 200 free/breaststroker. Any suggestions?:bow:

THOMMED
December 24th, 2013, 05:28 PM
True enough. It’s evolving for 50s. That’s part of the fun. But there is some relevant science (see SSJ):

♦ Pace and mechanics are inseparable.
♦ Mechanics improve only by way of serial repetition.

So, how can you get enough repetition into your training week, at race pace, without wearing yourself out? You can’t even do race pace if you're tired. USRPT would seem to be an answer.

Dr. Rushall wrote me that at his recent clinic he met a top masters swimmer, a drop-dead sprinter, who was having trouble with the sets. Seems he couldn’t do enough yardage, using the prescribed 15 and 20 second rest intervals, to work on his stroke mechanics. Rushall told him that since 50s are largely hypoxic that he should err on the side of race-pace yardage rather than oxidative conditioning. That he should increase the rest intervals in his sets, progressively, until the yardage came, even if he had to go up from 20 to 30 seconds.

If I were able to get serious again, I think I would start the season with strict USRPT, as a way of solidifying my stroke and of laying down an “oxidative base.” We sprinters are mainly fast-twitch, and I can’t help thinking that it would be of benefit, especially in long course, to force some of that muscle to use oxygen (II to IIb conversion), as well as to enhance the capacity to store oxygen. Then at some point I would begin adding long-rest sets, like the ones Leslie advises, to work on power. That would be a kind of periodizing, which Dr. Rushall doesn’t like, but until we get the full science we are surely entitled to experiment.

Merry Christmas!

__steve__
December 24th, 2013, 07:52 PM
Merry Christmas!

THOMMED
December 25th, 2013, 11:47 AM
There he is, Usain Bolt, snug in his bed, while visions of decent half miles dance in his head. Can you possibly picture that? So what is it with swimming, anyhow, that makes us drop deaders pine for events that God designed us not to do? I’ve been there, and I think it’s the need for some sort of legitimacy. Or maybe we feel that we just don’t suffer enough. Bringing home a 200 will sure take care of that.

OK. Here’s how you do it, strictly from the USRPT point of view. First, realize that your muscle is 90% fast twitch. It is not aerobic. It derives energy from the ATP-CP and lactacid systems. Which means that you are going to pump out gallons of lactic acid in the agonizing final meters of a 200, especially long course. That is, unless you use USRPT, which will at least reduce the acid output to quarts. It does this by forcing some fast-twitch muscle to switch over to using inhaled oxygen. That will get at least a few of the acid monkeys off your back. Plus which, it will train your 100. The 50, at least short-course, is not entirely decided, but I would wait to see what USRPT does for it before loading up with other kinds of sets.

Allen Stark
December 25th, 2013, 03:24 PM
There he is, Usain Bolt, snug in his bed, while visions of decent half miles dance in his head. Can you possibly picture that? So what is it with swimming, anyhow, that makes us drop deaders pine for events that God designed us not to do? I’ve been there, and I think it’s the need for some sort of legitimacy. Or maybe we feel that we just don’t suffer enough. Bringing home a 200 will sure take care of that.

OK. Here’s how you do it, strictly from the USRPT point of view. First, realize that your muscle is 90% fast twitch. It is not aerobic. It derives energy from the ATP-CP and lactacid systems. Which means that you are going to pump out gallons of lactic acid in the agonizing final meters of a 200, especially long course. That is, unless you use USRPT, which will at least reduce the acid output to quarts. It does this by forcing some fast-twitch muscle to switch over to using inhaled oxygen. That will get at least a few of acid monkeys off your back. Plus which, it will train your 100. The 50, at least short-course, is not entirely decided, but I would wait to see what USRPT does for it before loading up with other kinds of sets.
It would seem to me, that if you want to focus on 50s and 100s, you are better off converting the transitional fibers to fast twitch mode to maximize power.Am I missing something?

wmst1
December 25th, 2013, 04:08 PM
Dr Rushall's view about maximizing repetitions at race pace seems very sound. The problem is that he thinks race pace repetitions can be maximized for 50s by doing, among other things, 4x6x12.5m. I do not think this set can be accomplished at race pace by anybody on the planet. It is like asking for a square-shaped circle. Many seem to advocate the "platinum" 25m or 20m. You can only manage a few of these per day - not sure how many but far less than 24 (4x6). I think I am becoming a believer in a few "platinum" 25s almost every day as the best way to implement Rushall's principles.

I would love to know how Manadou and others do their 50 training. I do know he used a 20 minute sprint practice every Friday, but that is about all I know.

THOMMED
December 25th, 2013, 08:12 PM
It would seem to me, that if you want to focus on 50s and 100s, you are better off converting the transitional fibers to fast twitch mode to maximize power.Am I missing something?

I don't recall Rushall discussing transitional fibers, do you? Presumably they are an intermediate kind of fiber that converts to fast twitch in response to training. If so, is there any reason to think that race-pace training, which is hard, fast, and tough, would not do the trick?

THOMMED
December 25th, 2013, 08:24 PM
The problem is that he thinks race pace repetitions can be maximized for 50s by doing, among other things, 4x6x12.5m. I do not think this set can be accomplished at race pace by anybody on the planet.

I believe you are mistaken. But why waste your time on me? Take it up with Dr. Rushall. He does not suffer fools, but I have always known him to be willing to listen to reasonable arguments. Dogmatic, anecdotal assertions, however, unsupported by evidence, will not get you very far.

wmst1
December 25th, 2013, 08:51 PM
I believe you are mistaken. But why waste your time on me? Take it up with Dr. Rushall. He does not suffer fools, but I have always known him to be willing to listen to reasonable arguments. Dogmatic, anecdotal assertions, however, unsupported by evidence, will not get you very far.



True. But it only takes one example to prove me wrong. He has presented the set to do well over a year ago. If the set was doable at race pace by a fast sprinter then surely one would be around to say "I did it" or "I know someone who did it". You are right that I was being a bit hyperbolic when I said not doable by anyone on the planet. Really what I am saying is that a fast sprinter would have massive fatigue well before completion - I assume it would be central nervous system fatigue but that is just speculation on my part.

By the way - I have tried the set and I have seen others try it too. My guess is that race pace may be achieved for a 1/3 of them but that you are operating slightly slower than race pace for about 2/3 of them. Also I am not saying it is a bad set. I like the set and I think it helps with 50s and 100s and underwaters and sprinting speed. My point is that the set might be good - but not for the reason that it maximizes race pace yardage.

Glenn
December 25th, 2013, 11:29 PM
Really what I am saying is that a fast sprinter would have massive fatigue well before completion



The whole idea with USRPT is that you are not supposed to complete the entire set. It is self limiting. Three total failures or two failures in a row with the skip if missed and you are done. You never get to massive fatigue. If you can complete the set, it is too easy.

With traditional sets you are supposed to complete the entire set, but not with USRPT. We are so used to completing a traditional set, it is hard for some people to get used to USRPT sets and the concept of failure.

If you are failing every other one, as I was at one point, you are not doing the set. You need to change the target time.

wmst1
December 26th, 2013, 01:55 AM
Glenn:
There are really two discussions here:
1. Does USRPT, as laid out by Rushall, work for 100s and 200s with its self-limiting short distance repeats? I say yes and I am not discussing that right now.
2. Does USRPT, as laid out by Rushall, work for 50s with its NON self-limiting short distance repeats? I say maybe not as well as it could. There are no failure criteria laid out for 4x6x12.5 or 10-15 all out turns or any other aspect of 50 training laid out by Rushall. This leads to non-race pace training.

I think you are confusing the two types of USRPT.

knelson
December 26th, 2013, 02:17 AM
It seems to me that someone who focuses on 50s really needs to practice lots of starts and lots of turns (assuming you are swimming short course). Any USRPT (or any training regime, for that matter) aimed at 50s that does not include these two elements is inherently flawed.

The Fortress
December 26th, 2013, 03:14 PM
There he is, Usain Bolt, snug in his bed, while visions of decent half miles dance in his head. Can you possibly picture that? So what is it with swimming, anyhow, that makes us drop deaders pine for events that God designed us not to do? I’ve been there, and I think it’s the need for some sort of legitimacy. Or maybe we feel that we just don’t suffer enough. Bringing home a 200 will sure take care of that.

???

I admire my distance brethren, but I do not pine for anything over a 100. I don't care for "suffering" and it seems Rushall doesn't either. And sprints are "legitimate." There is no room for error and sprint practices are demanding both mentally and physically.

Kirk really just made my point. Rushall seems entirely focused on actual swimming. But 50s are about starts and turns and SDKs. (Recently read that even in long course, starts are 26% of a race.) Does Rushall now endorse kick only sets? I certainly spend plenty of time doing AFAP 15s dolphin kick … But having had success with my method of training for 50s, I'm not going to "wait to see what USRPT does before loading up with other kinds of sets." Just saying. I will try doing some 25s @ 100 pace, but I think I will be in the category of needing more rest than 15-20 seconds.

__steve__
December 26th, 2013, 03:50 PM
I use fins to make the pace with 15-20sr and keep the mechanics:D

wmst1
December 26th, 2013, 05:34 PM
???
Does Rushall now endorse kick only sets?

He has emphasized the importance of SDK sets from very early on in his USRPT writings.

In his last bulletin (47 I think), he did include a kick set in a sample practice near the end of the document (not SDK, with snorkel). The non-SDK set is new to his writings and I still don't know what to make of it.

THOMMED
December 26th, 2013, 06:48 PM
Truth be told, Dr. Rushall has not shown overwhelming interest in the short sprints, despite Michael Andrew’s success. Rather, he wants to show that swimming can prosper without the chronic exhaustion that comes of miles of wall tag and sadistic sets of lactate tolerance.

But aren’t we just begging the question here? What is race pace anyway when you are training to go faster than your fastest? Is it date pace, which is achievable. Or is it goal pace, which may never be achievable in the absence of meet-day excitement?

As I recall, Rushall wanted the 4 x (6 x 12.5) done full-bore, with maximum effort toward peak velocity. He did not mention failure, likely because the swimmers he had in mind would not fail (what is a 12.5, anyway, for a top sprinter, five strokes?). For us mortals, I’m sure he would advise sitting one out when we've lost our punch (which drop-dead sprinters can pinpoint in a heartbeat).

He said more recently that a 50 should be viewed as a series of skill segments, each of which must be done perfectly. He advised USRPT sets for each segment—not all on the same day, of course. (He dislikes broken 50s because they do not provide serial repetition of each segment).

If I were coaching 50s again, I would begin with stroke-only sets. That seems fundamental. Then, when the sprint stroke solidified, I would add the “skill” segments, one at a time, to include the start, streamline, submarine, pull out, break out, etc.

Glenn
December 26th, 2013, 07:06 PM
I ask this of Glenn, Leslie, Rich Abrahams, and THOMMED: As a drop-dead sprinter, and the occasional 200 free/200 breast swimmer, how should my weekly swim workouts look? Need I incorporate HIT and USRPT? Throw in a few broken 200s here and there? I'm swimming only 50s and 100s at Nats but I still relish the thought of developing into a decent 200 free/breaststroker. Any suggestions?:bow:

For what it's worth from me, the 50 and the 200 are very different races that require different training. You need to choose what you are going for. But I think you have already done that - you are training for the 50 and 100! If you train HIT or USRPT for those races you will do well. And, you should be able to do a "decent" 200 as well (you need to define decent for yourself).

The 200 is about proper energy usage. The 50 is about a great start, break out, breath control, turn over, streamline, turn and finish (and probably a few other things that I don't do).

If you train exclusively either HIT or USRPT for 50 & 100, your 200 will benefit as well

ande
January 3rd, 2014, 12:59 PM
It would be very helpful to see sample workouts. Please post a few.
I'd also like to see how workouts change over the course of a season. Especially going into taper, preparation for peak meets.

I've done speed training at various times in my life and always had good results.

It pretty much boils down to my first tip in Swim Faster Faster (http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?4229-Ande-s-Swimming-Tips-Swimming-Faster-Faster).

Swim FAST in PRACTICE.

shortly after that I added
Kick Fast in PRACTICE. (especially SDK) (Fast Swimmers tend to be fast kickers)

I'd also throw in,
Rest enough before you swim fast, so you can swim really fast.

Train to race. Training needs to prepare you to perform your best events.
(at a meet: we warm up, rest 20, 30, 40 or 60 min, RACE, then warm down)
If you train fast with rest then you're getting your body to adapt to the stress of swimming fast and you're honing your skills for excellent execution at race pace.

Anything you do and measure, improves. So time and track your fast efforts.

Perfect your technique.

What else?

one of my favorite sayings is from Rich Abrahams.
"Most swimmers swim
too fast when they need to be going slow and
too slow when they need to be going fast."

Glenn
January 3rd, 2014, 11:07 PM
Workouts don't change much during the season except to lower your target time. There is NO taper. You are always ready to race because the workouts are self - limiting, i.e. because you stop a set after 4 failures or two failures in a row, you don't over train.

Here's what I am doing now each week:

Monday - warm-up, 30 x 50 on :50 holding :32 (400 race pace for me) skip if missed, 200 - 300 EZ + 5 minutes, 30 x 50 on :50 holding :32 skip if missed, warm down

Tuesday - warm-up, 40 x 25 on :30 holding :15, 200 - 300 EZ + 5 minutes, 40 x 25 on :30 holding :15, warm down

Wednesday - warm-up, 3 x 50 holding :32, 1 x 400 time trial, 300 EZ + 5 minutes, 30 x 50 on :50 holding :32 skip if missed, warm down

Thursday - same as Tuesday

Friday - Same as Monday

NOTES: First, I am training only for the 400 SCM. I am working into this schedule, i.e., I am doing Monday and Friday as written Tuesday and Thursday I am doing the 40 x 25 and a 20 x 25. Several weeks ago I tried to go this entire schedule all at once and was unable to do so. As a result I am easing into it week by week.

I also do weights 2 days a week, Tuesday and Friday.

Some people find this boring. I love it. I always have a way to measure my progress against what I did last week or last month.

I have been battling an infection for the last week or so and my doctor put me on anti-biotics. In Mondays session I never hit my target time of :32. I was going :34s and :36s. What I did was adjust my target time to :34 and esentially did the same number of repeats I usually do in the first round, about 24. I also only did one round. Today I was able to do 22 of the 30 x 50 but was able to hit my target time of :32 on 18 of them. I also only did one round but did a second round of 20 x 25. I don't know if Rushall would approve, but my body approved! I'll go back to the regular schedule next week.

And YES, your first tip is right on! It's really very simple, it's all about race pace.

lynnmorrison
January 6th, 2014, 07:22 PM
Hmmmm

ok as an example, I'm really interested in training my 100 Free. I swim 25s on 100 Race pace, going on 25 seconds? Is this fast? What's a good example of a workout trying to get me 100 Free under a minute?

I went to a two day workshop last month with Dr. Rushall which was very interesting. A couple of things he addressed were to do your sprint work at the BEGINING of the work out and these do NOT have to be on a race pace interval because when we swim 50's it should be an all out swim from the start - there is NO "pacing" involved. So after a short warm up of 400-500 you can do a assortment of "all-out" swims, such as 25's with a start (and he says to always do a turn) then geting out and walking slowly back to the block, or 50's on the 1:30 working only FAST into and out of the wall or a set of 12.5 sprints. After your sprint work, do another 300-400 easy swim, then start your race pace set.

At the end of the first days session we had a pool and could practice a USRP set. I used to break 1:00 for my 100 free but the last two years it has been a :00, so my set was 25's on the :35, holding :15. He is big on :20 rest, but for the sets of 25's would go with :15-:20 rest interval IF your target time is :56 or under, or :14 per 25, which would mean 25's on the :30. You swim the set until you have two consecutive "fails". I did 12, and then hit :16 on my 13th swim, so rested that next :35 interval, then I did 3 more at :15, but :16 on the next, so sat out again. My next one after my rest as a :16, so that was two fails in a row and I stopped the set and warmed down with a 300. I did this set again last week and still had my first "fail" at 13, BUT, swam more after my first rest and after my second rest, so ended up with more TOTAL swims of :15

thewookiee
January 7th, 2014, 08:10 AM
From SwimSwam.

http://swimswam.com/becca-mann-blogs-usrpt-day-1/

thewookiee
January 7th, 2014, 08:13 AM
Glenn,

If you are training for the scm 400 free, why would you do 30x50's? If you are racing 8x50's, wouldn't make more sense to do 10x50 at goal pace on :50, do a recover swim, repeat the 50's, etc?

What is the reasoning for doing nearly 4 times the amount needed for the 400?

Glenn
January 7th, 2014, 12:37 PM
Glenn,

If you are training for the scm 400 free, why would you do 30x50's? If you are racing 8x50's, wouldn't make more sense to do 10x50 at goal pace on :50, do a recover swim, repeat the 50's, etc?

What is the reasoning for doing nearly 4 times the amount needed for the 400?

I guess the best reason for the set of 30 x 50 is that is what Rushall suggests.

Beyond that, remember, even though the set is 30 x 50, You should not be able to do all 30 at race pace - and I can't. My best is 26 and that is with 4 failures. Meaning that I have done 22 x 50 at actual race pace. If I get to the point that I can do all 30 or even do 27 or 28 at race pace, I will move the interval doen to 31.

And no, doing 10 x 50 at goal pace then recover is not how USRPT is done. Rushall says that the first 5 of the set is essentially getting your body ready and adjusted to the interval, if you only do 10 x 50 and recover, you are starting the set all over again each time.

I was talking to an Olympian that works out at Rose Bowl where I swim and he was asking about USRPT. He told me that Ous Mellouilli (sp) who trains for the 1500 does not do any repeats over 100m. That is consistent with what Rushall suggests.

__steve__
January 7th, 2014, 01:40 PM
these do NOT have to be on a race pace interval because when we swim 50's it should be an all out swim from the start - there is NO "pacing" involved. there is pacing in a 50. I Definitely pace 50 LC, and also hold back for 50 yards. At an all out pace I will slow down about 90% of peak speed by 20 the second mark. This is not factoring the peak from the block as my 2nd 25 in a 50 is almost 2 seconds slower than what I can accomplish a 25 from a push. I literally drop dead before the end of a 50

lynnmorrison
January 7th, 2014, 02:44 PM
The handout he gave us at the seminar is too large to attach - but I will be happy to email it if you like. He addresses the training of the 50 sprint, relating not to "pacing" but to the other, what he considers more important components. Plus much more additional very insightful information.

The Fortress
January 7th, 2014, 04:08 PM
Glenn,

If you are training for the scm 400 free, why would you do 30x50's? If you are racing 8x50's, wouldn't make more sense to do 10x50 at goal pace on :50, do a recover swim, repeat the 50's, etc?

What is the reasoning for doing nearly 4 times the amount needed for the 400?

Rushall give 2 reasons: (1) repetition to build stroke mechanics and get your body conditioned to X race pace, (2) to build an oxidative base, i.e., convert fibers to those using oxygen for energy.

Well, according to the workshop even Rushall agrees that 15-20 seconds rest for AFAP is ludicrous!

I agree with Steve about LCM 50 pacing. I take almost the same number of strokes in a 50 LCM as I do in a 100 SCY. And I always crash and burn the last 10 meters if I start AFAP. But then I am really not a long course swimmer.

Glenn
January 7th, 2014, 04:47 PM
Well, according to the workshop even Rushall agrees that 15-20 seconds rest for AFAP is ludicrous!



I am going fast and hard on my USRPT repeats, but not AFAP. That is why I believe, for me, in training for the 400, this is ideal and so far it works. I have said from the beginning that I don't know if I could do this training if I was training for the 100 or maybe even the 200.

jim thornton
January 7th, 2014, 06:02 PM
I am going fast and hard on my USRPT repeats, but not AFAP. That is why I believe, for me, in training for the 400, this is ideal and so far it works. I have said from the beginning that I don't know if I could do this training if I was training for the 100 or maybe even the 200.

For what it's worth, Glenn, Rushall told me that the difference between 100 percent effort and 95 percent effort is close to negligible because of the fact that resistance increases exponentially with speed. Personally, I have long marvelled at how much easier the first 50 in a 100 feels than an all out 50, even though the times (when you adjust for touching the wall with your feet in the first case, and your hand in the second case) is not terribly significant.

Glenn
January 7th, 2014, 06:14 PM
For what it's worth, Glenn, Rushall told me that the difference between 100 percent effort and 95 percent effort is close to negligible because of the fact that resistance increases exponentially with speed. Personally, I have long marvelled at how much easier the first 50 in a 100 feels than an all out 50, even though the times (when you adjust for touching the wall with your feet in the first case, and your hand in the second case) is not terribly significant.

Point taken. But I just don't see how I could do his workouts if I was training for the 100. That would mean 50s going 26 to a hand touch. And that would probably be 20 x 50 where I should be expected to do 12 - 14 including 4 failures. Not only could I not do those on a :20 rest, but I couldn't do them on a :30 rest and maybe not even 1:30.

mcnair
January 7th, 2014, 08:53 PM
Point taken. But I just don't see how I could do his workouts if I was training for the 100. That would mean 50s going 26 to a hand touch. And that would probably be 20 x 50 where I should be expected to do 12 - 14 including 4 failures. Not only could I not do those on a :20 rest, but I couldn't do them on a :30 rest and maybe not even 1:30.

Right; but if you're training for a 100 instead of a 200, 400, or longer, you would probably want to do interval 25s instead of 50s... that's the ultra-"short" concept. I do interval 100s now to train for 1500, 50s to train for 200-400, and 25s for the 100s.

Glenn
January 7th, 2014, 09:11 PM
Right; but if you're training for a 100 instead of a 200, 400, or longer, you would probably want to do interval 25s instead of 50s... that's the ultra-"short" concept. I do interval 100s now to train for 1500, 50s to train for 200-400, and 25s for the 100s.


I'm going by table 2 (page 12) of Rushall's bulletin #47 http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/47GUIDE.pdf In it he suggests 30 x 25 and 20 x 50 at race pace for training for the 100. Training for the 200 he suggests 40 x 25, 30 x 50 and 20 x 75. For the 400 he suggests the same as the 200 except 24 x 75. The 800 is 50 x 25, 36 x 50 and 30 x 75. Only in the 1500 does he go above 75 e.g., he suggests 40 x 50, 30 - 35 x 75 and 25 - 30 x 100.

wmst1
January 8th, 2014, 01:13 AM
You are right the table says that 50yd repeats are OK for training for the 100. This is unfortunate and I hope he changes the table. Nobody does 50s for 100 training with USRPT.

ekw
January 8th, 2014, 09:22 AM
Day two of Becca Mann's blogging of USRPT training (day one posted above by Wookiee)
http://swimswam.com/becca-mann-blogs-usrpt-day-2/

Chris Stevenson
January 8th, 2014, 10:11 AM
Understand that I think USRPT is intriguing and I've done similar sets in the past. But the following types of statements (from Becca Mann's blog) drive me a little crazy:


- Dr. Rushall said in his seminar was that USRPT is, “not theories, but deductions made from scientific work.”
- You must accept that science is right and opinions are mostly wrong.


I think that in both cases Rushall is trying to say that his approach is primarily data-driven rather than conjecture derived from fundamental principles. Well and good. But I hate it when people -- especially scientists -- invoke science as some all-powerful and distant thing that can't be understood, much less practiced, by mere mortals. In most cases that's just a way to stifle debate.

I am a scientist, I work with scientists, and none of them talk like this. And when they report their work they do so in far more conservative fashion than this (sometimes almost comically so). Maybe sports science is different than chemistry, I dunno.

sunruh
January 8th, 2014, 11:58 AM
Maybe sports science is different than chemistry, I dunno.

pay no attention to the man behind the curtain chris. :D

Allen Stark
January 8th, 2014, 02:56 PM
Understand that I think USRPT is intriguing and I've done similar sets in the past. But the following types of statements (from Becca Mann's blog) drive me a little crazy:



I think that in both cases Rushall is trying to say that his approach is primarily data-driven rather than conjecture derived from fundamental principles. Well and good. But I hate it when people -- especially scientists -- invoke science as some all-powerful and distant thing that can't be understood, much less practiced, by mere mortals. In most cases that's just a way to stifle debate.

I am a scientist, I work with scientists, and none of them talk like this. And when they report their work they do so in far more conservative fashion than this (sometimes almost comically so). Maybe sports science is different than chemistry, I dunno.
While I think Rushall has some valid points,this over use of the term "science" grates on me a little.I grant that his approach is much more science based than nearly all coaches ,but frankly the swimming science literature is not robust enough to say anything definitive(at least IMHO.)I'd think of USRPT as a series of hypotheses.I intend to test some of these(sprint,100 pace and 200 pace protocols) with a sample size of one(me).

The Fortress
January 8th, 2014, 03:39 PM
While I think Rushall has some valid points,this over use of the term "science" grates on me a little.I grant that his approach is much more science based than nearly all coaches ,but frankly the swimming science literature is not robust enough to say anything definitive(at least IMHO.)I'd think of USRPT as a series of hypotheses.I intend to test some of these(sprint,100 pace and 200 pace protocols) with a sample size of one(me).

He is very doctrinaire -- everything is black and white with no nuance.

I agree with Glenn's comments about 20 x 50 @ 100 pace @ :20 rest being almost impossible for a masters sprinter. I would never even attempt this set.

I also think Rushall's dismissal of strength training is suspect …

sunruh
January 8th, 2014, 03:48 PM
I agree with Glenn's comments about 20 x 50 @ 100 pace @ :20 rest being almost impossible for a masters sprinter. I would never even attempt this set.


depends on if we are talking the 1st 50 of a 100 or 2nd 50 of a 100. would make a huge difference.

i think i could make 2 of the 1st 50...with 10 MINUTES rest or 3 of the 2nd 50 with the same 10 MINUTES rest.
20? forget 20. i'd be laughing at thinking of even 6.

Glenn
January 8th, 2014, 04:03 PM
While I think Rushall has some valid points,this over use of the term "science" grates on me a little.I grant that his approach is much more science based than nearly all coaches ,but frankly the swimming science literature is not robust enough to say anything definitive(at least IMHO.)I'd think of USRPT as a series of hypotheses.I intend to test some of these(sprint,100 pace and 200 pace protocols) with a sample size of one(me).


I agree with you Allen to a large degree. There are a few problems with research in swimming i.e. the sample sizes are sometimes too small or the wrong age ( can you extrapolate results from age groupers to 60 year old Masters swimmers) and there are so many variables that it is very difficult to isolate what it is you are testing for. That said, there are a few concepts in motor learning, such as the idea that transfer of training is specific (hence the idea that drills are useless), that have been proven over and over again in many different sports and motor activities.

Also, I beleive I am correct when I say that Rushall is not doing any of this research, he is looking at what all is out there and interpreting it for the swimming community. Remember when we all believed that the "S" pattern in the freestyle pull was the way to go or that a good start from the blocks was the one where you slapped the top of the water with your body?

I think if you believe something will work, it will. I also believe that each swimmer brings a different mind set, a different body and different natural advantages and disadvantages to the pool. Remember when they said Mark Spitz could hyper extend his knees which gave him a better whip in the dolphin kick? You can't coach for that. As a result, different training protocols are going to be effective for different people. Everyone is always looking for that magic training that will make them a champion. But there is no one way to train in our sport that will be effective for everyone. You have to find what works for you and the way you do that is to give it enough time and committment to see if it actually works.

End of lecture...

Glenn
January 8th, 2014, 04:09 PM
I also think Rushall's dismissal of strength training is suspect …


Training for Swimming (http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/training/hartley.htm) Here is a piece of work that Rushall includes in his abstracts. I believe that for Masters he may say that weight training has some benefit.

rockky
January 8th, 2014, 05:27 PM
I coached swimming for 35yrs....and about 10yrs in after conversatin' with Dave Salo, and reading stuff by Brent, Bob Steele, and getting corroboration from about every page of every exercise physiology book that looked at volume vs intensity parameters, made a big shift to high intensity training, drastically reduced volumes (under 30,000/wk) with the centerpiece of the program being 'Goal Sets'...defined by best or goal times. Relative recovery days (2 a week, focused on other components of the sport).
The results were immediately dramatic. Initial mindblowers for me, were mid-season lifetime bests....opposing rivals always said we rested for them! Did a lot of Rushall alactic style training, but also lactic tolerance sparingly: 100's on 3min@200mtr pace. 50's@100mtr pace, even
250's on 8@500pace.
I can vouch for High intensity in general for sure....and'l say continual volume overload ala much of the swimming world (back then) didn't do any swimmers justice. The genetically gifted rise above it, but lose out on even faster performances cause of being hampered by the unnecessary volume. ... If your training for a 4min event, cranking 6000-9000yd workouts is a crock.

Allen Stark
January 8th, 2014, 08:30 PM
I coached swimming for 35yrs....and about 10yrs in after conversatin' with Dave Salo, and reading stuff by Brent, Bob Steele, and getting corroboration from about every page of every exercise physiology book that looked at volume vs intensity parameters, made a big shift to high intensity training, drastically reduced volumes (under 30,000/wk) with the centerpiece of the program being 'Goal Sets'...defined by best or goal times. Relative recovery days (2 a week, focused on other components of the sport).
The results were immediately dramatic. Initial mindblowers for me, were mid-season lifetime bests....opposing rivals always said we rested for them! Did a lot of Rushall alactic style training, but also lactic tolerance sparingly: 100's on 3min@200mtr pace. 50's@100mtr pace, even
250's on 8@500pace.
I can vouch for High intensity in general for sure....and'l say continual volume overload ala much of the swimming world (back then) didn't do any swimmers justice. The genetically gifted rise above it, but lose out on even faster performances cause of being hampered by the unnecessary volume. ... If your training for a 4min event, cranking 6000-9000yd workouts is a crock.
Amen.I don't think there is much doubt from any of the forward thinkers is swimming that race pace is the way to go. Rushall has a plan that may maximize race pace.That makes sense.Workouts like Leslie's HIT are a different way to do race pace.Both are very specific to race conditions in some ways.I am going to give Rushalls workouts a try and see if they work for me,but I reserve the right to go more in the HIT direction at any time(I'm a Masters swimmers so I reserve the right to do whatever seems right for me on any given day.)

SwimKat
January 8th, 2014, 09:15 PM
Hey Glenn - Kathleen here, from swim camp. Nice to hear you are swimming so fast! Your workouts sound intense! Congrats on your hard work and results. I am trying to get back in shape after having a baby. Its slow going, but Im inspired and will try some very modified versions for the shorter distances that I am inclined to race. (:

Glenn
January 8th, 2014, 09:21 PM
Hey Glenn - Kathleen here, from swim camp. Nice to hear you are swimming so fast! Your workouts sound intense! Congrats on your hard work and results. I am trying to get back in shape after having a baby. Its slow going, but Im inspired and will try some very modified versions for the shorter distances that I am inclined to race. (:


Kathleen, nice to hear from you! Glad you are getting back in the swim. Go easy and enjoy, that's the best part of Masters swimming - I get to enjoy it everyday. I can't wait to get up in the morning and get to the pool!

Chris Stevenson
January 10th, 2014, 10:37 AM
There are a few problems with research in swimming i.e. the sample sizes are sometimes too small or the wrong age ( can you extrapolate results from age groupers to 60 year old Masters swimmers) and there are so many variables that it is very difficult to isolate what it is you are testing for.

Absolutely it is a hard thing to do; to your list I would add that there is a big problem with scale. For example, many studies I see about the benefits (or lack thereof) of weight training will do testing on a scale of weeks, maybe even 6-8 weeks. But many coaches think about much longer time scales: often season-long but sometimes (at least for elites) even longer than that. More than that, sometimes benefits of a particular activity such as cross-training or heavier training loads, might have a significant lag effect (i.e. appearing some time after the activity ceases).

Moreover, elite swimmers are sometimes understandably unwilling to serve as guinea pigs for season-long experiments. Then there is the problem of applying lessons learned for high-level swimmers to those of lesser ability or training level.

Somewhat ironically, masters swimmers are often great for this sort of work: hopefully we have lots of seasons "to burn" and (comparatively speaking) there is little at stake so people are more willing to devote a season or two to a different type of training.


I can vouch for High intensity in general for sure....and'l say continual volume overload ala much of the swimming world (back then) didn't do any swimmers justice. The genetically gifted rise above it, but lose out on even faster performances cause of being hampered by the unnecessary volume. ... If your training for a 4min event, cranking 6000-9000yd workouts is a crock.

Totally agree that race-pace/high-intensity training is the way to go, and day after day of long aerobic work is not a good way for most swimmers to train. One of the big problems with swimming at the age group level is that often everyone gets lumped together: sprinters with distance types, IM'ers with freestylers, etc. Sometimes this is simply an issue of logistics of course.

But it is something of a leap to go from saying "race-pace training is great" (for which I think there is substantial evidence) to saying "USRPT is the best way to do race-pace training for everyone." Not to mention other assertions made as part of the USRPT package (about tapering, lactate tolerance, cross-training, drills, etc) that I am skeptical about.

And while I think day after day after day of mind-numbing aerobic training isn't suitable for most swimmers, that doesn't mean I think it should NEVER be done. That's a bit of a leap too, though I admit that I don't really see much value for drop-dead sprinters (except maybe general health/fitness?).

Finally: ANY type of exercise/training is better than none. Masters athletes need to choose a form of training that they can do over the long haul, one that they enjoy and maintain and that doesn't cause injuries. For people who get jazzed about USRPT or any other "system" of training, the mere fact that they are enthusiastic about it (and thus more likely to follow it rigorously) is a powerful argument in its favor. It is sort of like the arguments over which diet is best.

rtodd
January 11th, 2014, 02:45 PM
What age groups are we talking about? A lot of the high intensity stuff is great for masters and college sprinters, but does not translate to age group learning to swim. For that, I like high volume aerobic training up to senior level.good for developing aerobic capacity. It rewards technique development, which is crucial for developing swimmers. A lot of this is true for new swimmers regardless do their biological age. If the training age is young, masters included, I would emphasize a lot of below threshold training. If you already have a stroke, go for the sprint based workouts. That's the way to drop time!

wmst1
January 11th, 2014, 09:47 PM
rtodd:
Dr. Rushall agrees with you when it comes to swimmers still learning the fundamentals - drills, aerobic swimming, fins, bouys, etc are all OK. But these days there are many 10 and unders who already have the fundamentals. There are 10 and unders going under 1 min. for 100 scy free. Drills and toys and garbage yardage would only hurt these top-notch young age groupers.

Syd
January 12th, 2014, 01:31 AM
A question for Glenn and the others who are doing USRPT. If you are failing to reach your target times, do you:

a) reduce the number of repeats (for example, settle for 10 and call it a day)?
or
b) lower your time so that you can do more repeats?

The first option seems to go against the whole idea USRPT which I interpret as conditioning your body to get used to racing by doing large numbers of repeats at race pace.

However if I choose the second option, am I not conditioning my body to get used to a pace which maybe a second or two slower than actually want to race? Surely that is not conditioning my body for success?

And another related question? What if my stroke is starting to fall apart early on in the set? Do I call it a day even if I am still making the target time or do I stop for fear of reinforcing bad habits?

I tried a set of 30x50 on Thursday. I took my best 200 time, divided it by 4 and set that as my target time. By the time I got to the tenth repeat I had failed three times and was breathing so hard it was scary. The whole task seemed insurmountable. And that would only train me to equal my best recent time. I wasn't even accounting for the hand touch, either. Ideally, I should have made that time another half second to a full second faster to allow for the flip turn.

What are your thoughts?

wmst1
January 12th, 2014, 08:02 AM
Go to plan C - switch to race pace 25s when the 50s fail. Peter Andrew advocates for this.

Glenn
January 12th, 2014, 10:27 AM
I tried a set of 30x50 on Thursday. I took my best 200 time, divided it by 4 and set that as my target time. By the time I got to the tenth repeat I had failed three times and was breathing so hard it was scary. The whole task seemed insurmountable. And that would only train me to equal my best recent time. I wasn't even accounting for the hand touch, either. Ideally, I should have made that time another half second to a full second faster to allow for the flip turn.



Is the 30 x 50 the first time you have tried USRPT set? If so, you may want to start with 20 or even 10 to get the idea. When I started this in September, my target time was 32. But I did not start doing the sets at 32. I started at 35. That was too easy so I went to 34 which was also too easy. I spent 2 or 3 weeks at 33 then finally to 32.

The fact that you failed three by the time you got to the tenth repeat tells me your target time is too fast. You want to be able to get in at least 10 before your first failure. That is always my goal.

Take me through the set you did. What was the interval and what were your times on each 50 including the ones after a rest.

The Fortress
January 12th, 2014, 10:55 AM
Drills and toys and garbage yardage would only hurt these top-notch young age groupers.

It's these kind of blanket unsupported statements that make Rushall seem rather cult-like ...

aztimm
January 12th, 2014, 01:34 PM
Ideally, I should have made that time another half second to a full second faster to allow for the flip turn.


When we do broken swims, we'll do the broken bits ending with a flip to make it more life-like. So if we do a 200 broken at each 50 for 15, 3 will end with a foot touch (for free or back), then the last touch will be a normal hand touch.
Have you tried this?


It's these kind of blanket unsupported statements that make Rushall seem rather cult-like ...

I agree, I stumble into this thread about every week, and noticed a blogger doing training like this. It definitely seems cult-like.

Personally, my body couldn't handle more than 1 or 2 days/week of training like this. When our coach gives one of these sets, he tries to explain a little about it. But at a typical masters practice, you have some swimmers who have never swum in a meet, so they need to estimate what a race-pace is. Even those of us who have done meets may not have done every distance, especially if we're doing LCM one day.

wmst1
January 12th, 2014, 05:36 PM
Fortress:
I have read so much of his stuff that maybe sometimes I speak like him, with his occasionally abrasive tone toward everything that he doesn't explicitly endorse. As a result, I want to change "would" to "might" in my statement.

The Fortress
January 12th, 2014, 07:21 PM
Fortress:
I have read so much of his stuff that maybe sometimes I speak like him, with his occasionally abrasive tone toward everything that he doesn't explicitly endorse. As a result, I want to change "would" to "might" in my statement.

His last bulletin had the words "impostors" and "ignorance" in just the first paragraph. He went on to claim that literally anything other than USRPT training is "irrelevant" and that high intensity training "must" be practiced only within the USRPT format. Sounds like Scientology, not science to me.

I've been doing my own "research" along the way. And, at this juncture without actual science, I'm not convinced, though I am a race pace training advocate. So your use of "might" is appreciated.

Is it possible to dabble in USRPT or do some sets regularly and get a training effect?

wmst1
January 12th, 2014, 07:35 PM
I believe he says that some type of deconditioning occurs after 2-3 days so he advocates each set be done several times per week. I have never had time to do that many but I have seen gains with fewer than what he recommends. I think he would say doing each set 3 times per week is optimal. Any more than that is counterproductive and any less is beneficial, but sub optimal.

With respect to your comments about doing things within the USRPT format, I think he is much more rigid about doing the sets themselves HIS way. He definitely does not like swimming slower than race pace and he does not like excessive rest.

rtodd
January 12th, 2014, 07:56 PM
Read the article and a few comments. It implies if this training is done correctly, it can be done more frequently than every 48 hrs. I question this as the central nervous system can be overtaxed. I don't think you can train like this day after day. Where does that leave us? What do we do all the other days? Training at or below threshold. Where does this fit into a progression? A 45-60 second effort is 40% aerobic. You need this training as we'll.
http://http://www.swiss-hurdling.ch/upload/dokumente/c_hart.pdf (http://www.swiss-hurdling.ch/upload/documents/c_hart.pdf)

wmst1
January 12th, 2014, 11:02 PM
Read the article and a few comments. It implies if this training is done correctly, it can be done more frequently than every 48 hrs. I question this as the central nervous system can be overtaxed. I don't think you can train like this day after day. Where does that leave us? What do we do all the other days? Training at or below threshold. Where does this fit into a progression? A 45-60 second effort is 40% aerobic. You need this training as we'll.
http://http://www.swiss-hurdling.ch/upload/dokumente/c_hart.pdf (http://www.swiss-hurdling.ch/upload/documents/c_hart.pdf)

Your link doesn't work.

Rushall's bulletin 45a recommends 3-4 times per week for each event. I said 3 so I wasn't too far off. You may be right about the CNS getting overtaxed. I have heard of coaches who do the training described in 45a and they say that sometimes it is a disaster for the remainder of the week after having a good workout on Monday. Peter Andrew seems to prefer 2 sets per workout as opposed to the 4 described in bulletin 45a. Maybe Peter Andrew knows best.

rtodd
January 12th, 2014, 11:14 PM
None of the links seem to work. Try searching for it........Clyde Hart "train slower to race faster"

wmst1
January 12th, 2014, 11:43 PM
rtodd:
Fascinating article. I know nothing about track training but I am curious about parallels between success in other sports and USRPT. At first impression your article seems to completely refute USRPT. I did find one parallel though - 8x200 (the set they like)=1600m. 1600m is 4 times as long as a 400m. Dr. Rushall says that training sets should optimally be about 3-5 times the distance of the race based on some study that was done. It almost sounds like other track teams aren't getting the required yardage in their sets, compared to Baylor's track team.

sunruh
January 13th, 2014, 09:23 AM
so he advocates each set be done several times per week.

I think he would say doing each set 3 times per week is optimal.

does anybody else read this and go.....BORING....omg BORING!!!!!

the same workout several times in the same week, week after week after week. ug, stick a fork in my eye that is so boring. i'd retire again by the 3rd week that sounds so boring.

do you have to eat the same breakfast, lunch and dinner too? everyday to go along with this completely bored to tears workout.

steve - i'm just not drinking the koolaid

Syd
January 13th, 2014, 10:25 AM
[QUOTE=Glenn;293778]Is the 30 x 50 the first time you have tried USRPT set? If so, you may want to start with 20 or even 10 to get the idea. When I started this in September, my target time was 32. But I did not start doing the sets at 32. I started at 35. That was too easy so I went to 34 which was also too easy. I spent 2 or 3 weeks at 33 then finally to 32.

The fact that you failed three by the time you got to the tenth repeat tells me your target time is too fast. You want to be able to get in at least 10 before your first failure. That is always my goal.

Take me through the set you did. What was the interval and what were your times on each 50 including the ones after a rest.[/QUOTEM

Yes, this was the first time I did an USRPT set. I train SCM and I set a target time of 32 seconds for each repeat based on my 200 LCM time of 2:08. It went like this: 32, 32, 32, 33, 33, 32,, 32, 32, 33, 33. So that was four failures instead of three as I initially stated. I use a poolmate swim watch to time myself and it doesn't record tenths of a second. It rounds up or down to the nearest whole number (I presume) so a 32 could be anywhere from a 31:50 to a 32:49. Similarly a 32:50 would be recorded as a 33. I used my tempo trainer set on the second function to beep every 50 seconds for my interval time. I didn't rest on any of them. To be honest, my eyesight is not great at all and the poolmate only gives you four seconds to read the lap time before it goes into pause mode. With only four seconds, my bad eyesight and all that heavy breathing I wasn't really sure what time I was doing so I decided not to rest and instead to carry on until I felt I could do no more. I was pretty sure that I saw 32's on the first two but after that it was anybody's guess. I only knew what times I did when I stopped and reviewed my log. The tempo trainer works very well for the interval times but I need to find a more visible way of recording my repeat times (that or get goggles with a prescription).

I did another set yesterday but this time shifted my target time to 34. I set the tempo trainer to beep every seventeen seconds. I still recorded my times on my watch but the tempo trainer gave me a reliable way on knowing whether I was hitting my target time or not. All I had to do was to get in before the second beep and I knew I was under 34. On the third beep I pushed off for my next repeat. That meant I was doing repeats on 51 seconds with roughly 17 or 18 seconds of rest. This set went as follows: 34, 34, 33, 34, 34, 33, 34, 33, 34, 32, 34, 33, 33, 34, 34, 32, 32, 32, 34 and then I stopped because I had to leave early. So that was nineteen repeats without any failures but it wasn't nearly as challenging as the target of 32.

I am always interested in new ways of training and recently I have got stuck in a bit of a plateau with my 200 training. I am also intrigued by the results you and others have gotten using this method and would like to give it a try and see if it can get me to the next level.

ekw
January 13th, 2014, 11:25 AM
does anybody else read this and go.....BORING....omg BORING!!!!!

Yup! I would have a really hard time motivating myself to get to the pool for this - I have enough trouble with anything that repeats more than ten times. At this point in my life I swim to enjoy it and while I would like to go faster (who wouldn't?), dropping out with this method certainly wouldn't accomplish either. Different strokes for different folks!

wmst1
January 13th, 2014, 11:28 AM
Syd:
A lot of people complain that the 50 sets for 200m are too hard. Becca Mann was doing USRPT with the Andrews last week (swim swam has the articles) and they switched to the 25 set for 200s after about 10 repeats of 50s. I think they failed several times early on. Dr Rushall hasn't written about this but it seems like a really good idea.

Glenn
January 13th, 2014, 12:45 PM
[/QUOTEM

get goggles with a prescription).

I did another set yesterday but this time shifted my target time to 34. I set the tempo trainer to beep every seventeen seconds. I still recorded my times on my watch but the tempo trainer gave me a reliable way on knowing whether I was hitting my target time or not. All I had to do was to get in before the second beep and I knew I was under 34. On the third beep I pushed off for my next repeat. That meant I was doing repeats on 51 seconds with roughly 17 or 18 seconds of rest. This set went as follows: 34, 34, 33, 34, 34, 33, 34, 33, 34, 32, 34, 33, 33, 34, 34, 32, 32, 32, 34 and then I stopped because I had to leave early. So that was nineteen repeats without any failures but it wasn't nearly as challenging as the target of 32.

[/QUOTE]


The goggles with a perscription are WONDERFUL! I couldn't do this without them.

OK, that second time you did it with a target time of 34 was good. Rushall says don't count a faillure in the first 5 repeats. Your body is adjusting to the target time on the first five. I sometimes go all 32s in the first five but also go 33s and 32s more often. Of course if your target is 34 and you are going 37 in the first five that's no good.

Discounting any failures in the first five of the original set (when your target was 32) means your first failure was at #9! That is good. What you then want to do is push that first failure to #10 then to #11 etc. But even before you do that, I would use 33 as your target time and try it.

THOMMED
January 13th, 2014, 03:25 PM
It's these kind of blanket unsupported statements that make Rushall seem rather cult-like ...

"There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain
its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things, because the
innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and
lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new." ―Machiavelli

The Fortress
January 13th, 2014, 03:43 PM
"There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain
its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things, because the
innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and
lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new." ―Machiavelli


Ha! I think Rushall's promotion of his "new order" is great in that (1) he's stirring up a lot of animated/analytical conversations, and (2) he has people thinking more about race pace training instead of garbage yards. But not every "new order" is valid and he lacks some of the actual science that he claims to have at this juncture.

I hardly think I qualify as someone who has "done well under the old conditions." My training is very different than most masters, and I embraced a race pace philosophy early on.

I do think it's troublesome that the 50 sets for 100s and 200s seem virtually impossible to most (even Andrews and Mann). Rushall needs to address this ...

sunruh
January 13th, 2014, 04:02 PM
I do think it's troublesome that the 50 sets for 100s and 200s seem virtually impossible to most (even Andrews and Mann). Rushall needs to address this ...

it's not a problem at all...here have some more koolaide! :D

Glenn
January 13th, 2014, 04:35 PM
does anybody else read this and go.....BORING....omg BORING!!!!!

the same workout several times in the same week, week after week after week. ug, stick a fork in my eye that is so boring. i'd retire again by the 3rd week that sounds so boring.

do you have to eat the same breakfast, lunch and dinner too? everyday to go along with this completely bored to tears workout.

steve - i'm just not drinking the koolaid

I guess boring is relative. I figure in over 30 years of masters swimming I have done 6,000 + workouts. I can't think of one that I would have called boring. Some were better than others for a variety of reasons, but never ever boring!

No matter if you are doing USRPT, HIT or tons of yardage workouts, to me it has always been about the clock, and that challenge can never, to me, be a bore.

Chris Stevenson
January 13th, 2014, 06:43 PM
"There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain
its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things, because the
innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and
lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new." ―Machiavelli


Oh, please. Race pace training has been around for a long time, this is just another version of it. Evolutionary perhaps, but not some radical paradigm shift.

Does anyone truly think that Rushall is acting as an impartial scientist at this point? He has invested far too much of himself in "selling" this system to be objective about it IMO. It happens.

In an ideal world it wouldn't matter, USRPT would be evaluated on its own merits and those of the studies supporting and refuting it. In the real world as its #1 promoter I would like to see Rushall act a little more balanced and nuanced in his pronouncements. Most people don't have the time to investigate all these things fully and form an objective opinion (and many of the studies are available to most people only as abstracts) that's why we depend on experts.

The irony is that Rushall appears to be acting in a manner -- overgeneralizing, overinterpreting -- that he derides in others. At least that's the way it seems to me.

But it's all good. I stand by my assertion that in most cases the best system for masters swimmers (both for athletic performance and general health) is usually the one that you can follow enthusiastically. If that's USRPT then go for it.

Jazz Hands
January 13th, 2014, 10:34 PM
"There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain
its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things, because the
innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and
lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new." ―Machiavelli


"I hate people who are not serious about meals. It is so shallow of them." - Algernon, The Importance of Being Earnest

That Guy
January 13th, 2014, 10:48 PM
"I hate people who are not serious about meals. It is so shallow of them." - Algernon, The Importance of Being Earnest
For a while I thought, "I wonder what will happen when Jazzy gets in on this thread?"

I'm not going to lie to you, this isn't how I imagined it going down. 3.5 Unpredictability Points awarded to Mr. Hands.

mmlr38
January 15th, 2014, 11:44 AM
Since coming across this thread a few weeks ago, I've been wanting to try a UST@RP workout for a while now. It was delayed by an illness at the start of the year and then resting to do the one-hour postal, which I did on Sunday. After recovering the last couple of days from the postal, I finally got to do an UST@RP set today! I attempted it, at least.

I'd love some feedback from Glenn (or anyone else who does this type of training), to let me know what I need to adjust.

My training goal: hold 1:08s in the 1650 (my personal best is averaging just over 1:09s)
The set I chose to start with: 2 x (16 x 100) on 1:30 trying to hold 1:07s
The results:
=========================================
300 warmup


16 x 100 @ 1:30
1 = 1:06
2 = 1:06
3 = 1:06
4 = 1:06
5 = 1:06
6 = 1:05
7 = 1:06
8 = 1:06
9 = 1:06
10 = 1:06
11 = 1:06
12 = 1:05
13 = 1:05
14 = 1:05
15 = 1:05
16 = 1:05


300 swim and rest for a couple of minutes

Since I easily made all of the first 16 on 1:30, I adjusted the interval to 1:25


16 x 100 @ 1:25
1 = 1:06
2 = 1:06
3 = 1:05
4 = 1:05
5 = 1:06
6 = 1:06
7 = 1:06
8 = 1:06
9 = 1:06
10 = 1:06
11 = 1:07
12 = 1:06
13 = 1:07
14 = 1:07
15 = 1:07
16 = 1:06


400 cool down
=========================================

As I understand UST@RP, the ideal amount of rest for this type of set is around 20 seconds, so I figured that trying to hold 1:07s, starting with 1:30 (or 23 seconds rest) would be OK. I guess I was wrong because I easily made all of the first 16. I adjusted the sendoff for the second 16 to 1:25. This was a bit more challenging, especially near the end of the set, but I still made them all.

I guess I either need to drop my target interval to 1:06 or 1:05 or change the sendoff to 1:25 or both.

What would be your advice?

Glenn
January 15th, 2014, 08:21 PM
As I understand UST@RP, the ideal amount of rest for this type of set is around 20 seconds, so I figured that trying to hold 1:07s, starting with 1:30 (or 23 seconds rest) would be OK. I guess I was wrong because I easily made all of the first 16. I adjusted the sendoff for the second 16 to 1:25. This was a bit more challenging, especially near the end of the set, but I still made them all.

I guess I either need to drop my target interval to 1:06 or 1:05 or change the sendoff to 1:25 or both.

What would be your advice?


I would say both. You might try 1:05 on the 1:25. Remember that Rushall suggests the following sets for the 1650:

40 x 50

30 - 35 x 75

25 - 30 x 100

Eventually you should get to 2 days per week of 2 x (40 x 50) skip if missed on a rest interval of :20, plus 2 days per week of 2 x (35 x 75) skip if missed on a rest interval of :20 and 2 days per week of 2 x (30 x 100) skip if missed on a rest interval of :20.

There is no rest after 16, no EZ 300 and couple of minutes rest. You do 30 x 100 and the only time you rest is if you miss one (except for the first 5). And if you miss two in a row with the rest OR miss four total, you stop the set. If you are not having failures the set is too easy. You are supposed to have failures.

As per above, you should never get to being able to do 2 entire sets of 30 x 100. Again, if you are able to do 60 x 100 at the target time, the set is not challenging enough.

My 2 big sets are 2 x (30 x 50) which means a total of 60 x 50. The most I have ever done is 26 in the first set and 16 in the second set for a total of 42 and of those 42 only a total of 34 have been at the target time. The other 8 have been failures i.e. 4 failures in each set.

Hope this helps.

SwimKat
January 15th, 2014, 09:29 PM
the only time you rest is if you miss one (except for the first 5) [/QUOTE]

Hey Glenn,

So for the first 5, even if you miss your goal time you keep going? Or you skip and rest but dont count it towards your 4 total failures?

Ive tried twice now to do a set of 30 x 25s free and both times Ive missed an early one but then do better for the rest of the set. But I have been skipping when I miss, which kinda helps me "reset" and do better from there. Is that wrong? Am I supposed to just keep going until I miss one after rep 5?

Also after the free, Ive been doing a mini set of 25s fly but using short fins. Its the only way for me to keep my stroke together and maintain race pace. My thought is maybe after a month or so I can try taking them off.

Lastly I am only planning to do this once a week. Does that defeat the purpose, or will there still be a benefit? I assume there will be some benefit because I did significantly better this week than last week.

Glenn
January 15th, 2014, 10:50 PM
[/QUOTE]



So for the first 5, even if you miss your goal time you keep going? Or you skip and rest but dont count it towards your 4 total failures?

[/QUOTE]


According to Rushall the first 5 your body is adjusting to the interval and even if you miss, you don't rest (you don't really need to that early) and you don't count it toward your 4 failures.

When I miss during the first 5 it is usually a 33 rather than a 32 and I just turn it up a little on the next one. I made this same mistake when I first started until I asked Rushall about it.

If this was Rushall answering he would say do not use fins or any other device... ever. Actually he says you can use toys during the rest time between sets if you wish. He suggests taking an EZ swim and some wall rest time of as much as you need between USRPT sets. Me answering, I'd say it is up to you.

USRPT is about race pace. If you want to swim fast in a race you have to swim fast in practice. Other than a recovery day which I believe in but don't know where Rushall stands, I believe the only way to swim fast is to swim fast. So, if you swim fast once a week that will probably help. If you swim fast twice a week that will help more. If you swim fast three times a week...you get the idea.

Good luck!

mmlr38
January 16th, 2014, 12:27 PM
Thanks so much for the response, Glenn! Next time I do the 100s set, I'll do 2 x (30 x 100) on 1:05 skip if missed on a rest interval of :20. That sounds very intimidating to me right now, but hopefully I can get at least part way through the first set before reaching failure.

I would say both. You might try 1:05 on the 1:25. Remember that Rushall suggests the following sets for the 1650:

40 x 50

30 - 35 x 75

25 - 30 x 100

Eventually you should get to 2 days per week of 2 x (40 x 50) skip if missed on a rest interval of :20, plus 2 days per week of 2 x (35 x 75) skip if missed on a rest interval of :20 and 2 days per week of 2 x (30 x 100) skip if missed on a rest interval of :20.
Yikes! That seems like a lot of yardage, but I guess with all of the failures, it won't work out to be too much; perhaps 4000 to 5000 per set, on the longer end, which is reasonable. Though it does seem that with that much swimming, I'd need more than one day off per week in order to recover.

Just to clarify, when doing the 2 x ( XXXXX ), I can take time between the first and second major sets, right?

Something else I've been wondering: I have several goal times in the different distance freestyle events. In the 1000, I'd like to go a 11:10 (holding 1:07s). In the 500, I'd like to go a 5:15 (holding 1:03s). Is it possible with UST@RP to train for different events with each workout? I know you're focused (exclusively?) on the 400 SCM. But say I want to focus on the 1650 race pace two days a week, the 1000 pace 2 days a week and the 500 pace the other two days. Is that something that's possible with UST@RP?

sunruh
January 16th, 2014, 12:39 PM
Is it possible with UST@RP to train for different events with each workout?

that's were i think it really fails.

as an example how would Michael Phelps train for the 400im, 200im, 200fly, 100fly, 200free and 100free using this method?

if you are trying to condition your muscles for 400im race pace, you wont be ready for the 200im. same on the others.

it would be even worse if you want to swim the 1500 and 400m.

training for the 100s and a single 50 (say like the kid michael andrews does) isnt very broad. except the strokes are also totally different.

again, may work for a few, may not. if it does for you great!
but 1 size does not fit all

That Guy
January 16th, 2014, 12:59 PM
that's were i think it really fails.

as an example how would Michael Phelps train for the 400im, 200im, 200fly, 100fly, 200free and 100free using this method?

if you are trying to condition your muscles for 400im race pace, you wont be ready for the 200im. same on the others.

it would be even worse if you want to swim the 1500 and 400m.

training for the 100s and a single 50 (say like the kid michael andrews does) isnt very broad. except the strokes are also totally different.

again, may work for a few, may not. if it does for you great!
but 1 size does not fit all Is there any one method that trains a swimmer for all those different events? I've been dabbling with USRPT, and I race pretty much every event, so I've been varying what I do each day. One day might be 50's at 500 free pace, the next day 50's at 200 back pace, etc.

sunruh
January 16th, 2014, 01:29 PM
well you certainly have different workouts.

but considering that above it was said you need days off to recover....meaning you can only train 3 events a week.

i dont think you will see a multi-event elite doing that.

SwimKat
January 16th, 2014, 01:49 PM
So for the first 5, even if you miss your goal time you keep going? Or you skip and rest but dont count it towards your 4 total failures?

[/QUOTE]



USRPT is about race pace. If you want to swim fast in a race you have to swim fast in practice. Other than a recovery day which I believe in but don't know where Rushall stands, I believe the only way to swim fast is to swim fast. So, if you swim fast once a week that will probably help. If you swim fast twice a week that will help more. If you swim fast three times a week...you get the idea.

Good luck![/QUOTE]

Thanks for the info and clarifications!

I am also trying to do a pure speed workout one day a week and a lactate workout one day a week. So trying to do all fast swimming, just not all USRPT. I like the USRPT for speed endurance for 100s, but at the moment, I don't have enough speed to start with so I need to focus on that for 50s. I suppose I should substitute the lactate with another USRPT, but I don't have the mental fortitude to do it more than once a week - I would get bored and unmotivated. l also like doing 50s/75s/100s lactate because it really builds my confidence that I can keep moving through the burn in those last yards.

Good luck breaking the 400 record!! Though it doesn't sound like you need any luck at all. (:

wmst1
January 16th, 2014, 03:48 PM
Dr. Rushall is opposed to doing IM sets. So, other than turn work, he rejects the idea of doing IM sets if you are an IMer. By the way, Michael Andrew's only 13-14 LC NAG in a 100 or 200 happens to be the 200IM.

Glenn
January 16th, 2014, 06:16 PM
Thanks so much for the response, Glenn! Next time I do the 100s set, I'll do 2 x (30 x 100) on 1:05 skip if missed on a rest interval of :20. That sounds very intimidating to me right now, but hopefully I can get at least part way through the first set before reaching failure.

Yikes! That seems like a lot of yardage, but I guess with all of the failures, it won't work out to be too much; perhaps 4000 to 5000 per set, on the longer end, which is reasonable. Though it does seem that with that much swimming, I'd need more than one day off per week in order to recover.

Just to clarify, when doing the 2 x ( XXXXX ), I can take time between the first and second major sets, right?

Something else I've been wondering: I have several goal times in the different distance freestyle events. In the 1000, I'd like to go a 11:10 (holding 1:07s). In the 500, I'd like to go a 5:15 (holding 1:03s). Is it possible with UST@RP to train for different events with each workout? I know you're focused (exclusively?) on the 400 SCM. But say I want to focus on the 1650 race pace two days a week, the 1000 pace 2 days a week and the 500 pace the other two days. Is that something that's possible with UST@RP?

Yes, that is a lot of yardage. But I think it is OK to modify the number of sets you do. Rushall had suggested that I do 2 x (30 x 50) three times a week plus two days of 2 x (40 x 25) two times a week plus another workout on Saturday. This 65 year old body needs rest so I don't do Saturday's anymore. And as yet I have been able to do 2 days of 2 x (30 x 50), 1 day of 40 x 25 plus 20 x 25 and one other day of 40 x 25 , my fifth day has been time trials and a partial set of USRPT. He suggested to work up to a full schedule. I may not ever get there. It kind of depends on if the current training gets me to my goal time.

As far as time between sets is concerned, Rushall told me to take as much time as I needed. So I usually swim an EZ 300 or so and then rest on the wall for another 5 minutes.

In terms of other freestyle events, yes you can train for other events by just adjusting your target time for the set.

Glenn
January 16th, 2014, 06:18 PM
Dr. Rushall is opposed to doing IM sets. So, other than turn work, he rejects the idea of doing IM sets if you are an IMer. By the way, Michael Andrew's only 13-14 LC NAG in a 100 or 200 happens to be the 200IM.

He doesn't want you to do different strokes within a set i.e. swimming IM, but he suggests doing backstroke or fly or breast sets.

Glenn
January 16th, 2014, 06:29 PM
that's were i think it really fails.

as an example how would Michael Phelps train for the 400im, 200im, 200fly, 100fly, 200free and 100free using this method?

if you are trying to condition your muscles for 400im race pace, you wont be ready for the 200im. same on the others.

it would be even worse if you want to swim the 1500 and 400m.

training for the 100s and a single 50 (say like the kid michael andrews does) isnt very broad. except the strokes are also totally different.

again, may work for a few, may not. if it does for you great!
but 1 size does not fit all

http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/swim/bullets/47GUIDE.pdf


If you look at this latest bulletin, specifically page 2.2 (Training Sessions), 2.3 (One Day's Training Using USRPT), 2.4 (Sample Training Session), 2.5 (Microcycles - 1 week), and 2.6 (Michael Andrew's workouts), I think it shows that you actually can train for a variety of strokes and distances using USRPT. Now I'm certainly not going to do two-a-days, but it looks like he has most of it covered.

Chris Stevenson
January 16th, 2014, 06:34 PM
Something else I've been wondering: I have several goal times in the different distance freestyle events. In the 1000, I'd like to go a 11:10 (holding 1:07s). In the 500, I'd like to go a 5:15 (holding 1:03s). Is it possible with UST@RP to train for different events with each workout? I know you're focused (exclusively?) on the 400 SCM. But say I want to focus on the 1650 race pace two days a week, the 1000 pace 2 days a week and the 500 pace the other two days. Is that something that's possible with UST@RP?


that's were i think it really fails.


This is really only a problem if you believe (as I definitely do not) that training at race pace for event X has little or no benefit for event Y. I think the overlap is considerable, especially if you are talking about things like the 500/1000.

mmlr38
January 16th, 2014, 09:14 PM
Thank you very much for the feedback Glenn. I'm not sure my body would be able to hold up with 6 days of very hard training like this, but I'm going to try to work it in at least 4 days a week, probably 5, and see what kind of results I get. I think I'm going to do 50s two days a week with a target time for my desired 500 race pace, 75s one day a week with a target time for my desired 1000 race pace and then 100s one day a week with a target time for my desired 1650 race pace. Not sure if this is something Rushall would suggest, but I think it's worth a try for me.

This is really only a problem if you believe (as I definitely do not) that training at race pace for event X has little or no benefit for event Y. I think the overlap is considerable, especially if you are talking about things like the 500/1000.
Yes, that certainly makes sense Chris. I also want to swim the 200 fly and 400 IM at future meets, which I just did for the first time recently and had a blast! So I'll have to figure out when to work training in for those events.

Allen Stark
January 26th, 2014, 03:44 PM
I have been "kinda,sorta"trying these sets(kinda, sorta because I got ill and missed 10 days and so started easing back slower than I wished.)What I notice is missing is the burn from lactic acid build up I get from my usual HIT sets.I know Rushall thinks that is a good thing,but I have read several articles about the body's adaptation to lactic acid by improving buffering enzyme production etc. that would seem very useful for the 50-100 swimmer.Also the skill of holding ones stroke together when having muscle lactic acidosis("the burn") also seems to be useful.I know "train like you swim or you'll swim like you train"is important and that the Rushall method gives lots of race pace,but I am not sure how well it mimics the feeling of a race.This is really more of a question than a complaint,so what say Yáll?

Chris Stevenson
January 26th, 2014, 07:03 PM
I have been "kinda,sorta"trying these sets(kinda, sorta because I got ill and missed 10 days and so started easing back slower than I wished.)What I notice is missing is the burn from lactic acid build up I get from my usual HIT sets.I know Rushall thinks that is a good thing,but I have read several articles about the body's adaptation to lactic acid by improving buffering enzyme production etc. that would seem very useful for the 50-100 swimmer.Also the skill of holding ones stroke together when having muscle lactic acidosis("the burn") also seems to be useful.I know "train like you swim or you'll swim like you train"is important and that the Rushall method gives lots of race pace,but I am not sure how well it mimics the feeling of a race.This is really more of a question than a complaint,so what say Yáll?

Seems to me that possibly there are several related adaptations, two of which Allen mentions:

1. Improving ability to buffer lactic acid, helping to avoid or lessen the magnitude of acidosis

2. Improving ability to "hold one's stroke together" when experiencing acidosis

3. Improving ability to recover from acidosis (e.g. between races)

Rushall avoids lactic acid buildup like the plague but very possibly that doesn't mean that one doesn't get the first adaptation. One could argue that what Rushall is doing by maximizing the amount of race pace training is increasing the overall amount of LA production, which could even be the best way to achieve adaptation #1 even though blood LA levels are kept low, b/c production is still high.

I don't know how much #2 is a physiological adaptation vs a psychological/learned one. Which doesn't mean it isn't important...!

Adaptation #3 seems pretty important to me, at least for some people, and seems lacking in USRPT.

All of this is well outside my area of expertise, other than as a lifelong competitive swimmer, so I'd welcome correction from those of you better versed in exercise physiology and the like. Based on my experiences in training I tend to agree with Allen that it is important to learn to deal with acidosis in and after a race and that USRPT (by itself, with nothing else added) doesn't IMO promise to be the best way to do that. At least for 100s and 200s, and maybe longer events too; I never experience significant acidosis in 50s.

mmlr38
January 26th, 2014, 08:14 PM
What I notice is missing is the burn from lactic acid build up I get from my usual HIT sets.
How does one "measure" lactic acid build up? I too have been doing these sets for the past week or so now. I think my body is responding well to the workouts. I love the warm, tired feeling after completing the sets, especially the 2 x 25 100s at race pace, but I don't feel overworked. I've been an endurance athlete my entire life (running until my knee stopped working a couple of years ago and switching to swimming then), and I guess I don't know what lactic acid build up might feel like. While doing these sets, I do get the extreme burning that results from doing high intensity training. Is that the burn? But perhaps at a lower level than you're talking about?