PDA

View Full Version : Hypoxic Advice/Workouts--Not Your opinion of Hypox Efficacy



SwimStud
January 15th, 2008, 10:06 AM
Discusing Hypoxic sets with a freind, can anyone suggest a good hypoxic set for me.

I'm doing 3500-4000 3x a week and a short sprint workout on the weekend. I will not likely add another day to my schedule.

What's a good starting workout, and also where in my workout should I do this? Do you mix it up e.g. hard interval set then a hypox or hypox and then a pace set.

I am guessing mixing is a good thing but what's a good start point for a set and intervals for this? BR and FR being my stronger strokes.

ALM
January 15th, 2008, 10:47 AM
My coach gives us lots of hypoxic sets. One of the more unusual was a warm-up set a few weeks ago. It was a "prime number" set (he loves making us solve math problems while we swim, too).

The set was 22, 50-yard swims. On the prime-numbered 50s, the first one was 8 breaths per length. The second one was 7 breaths per length, and so on. The non-prime-numbered 50s were choice, I believe. So it looked something like this:

1) 50 free, 8 breaths/length
2) 50 choice
3) 50 Free, 7 breaths/length
4) 50 choice
5) 50 free, 6 breaths/length
6) 50 choice
7) 50 free, 5 breaths/length
8) 50 choice
9) 50 choice
10) 50 choice
11) 50 free, 4 breaths/length
12) 50 choice
13) 50 free, 3 breaths/length
14) 50 choice
15) 50 choice
16) 50 choice
17) 50 free, 2 breaths/length
18) 50 choice
19) 50 free, 1 breath/length
20) 50 choice
21) 50 choice
22) 50 choice


We've also done things like this:

1) Underwater dolphin kick, N x 25 (where N is an algebraic variable). The first 25 is 6 underwater dolphin kicks, then swim easy the rest of the 25. The next 25 is 7 underwater dolphin kicks, then swim easy the rest of the way. Continue to add one dolphin kick per length until you either can't go any farther or you get to the wall.


2) Underwater breaststroke pullouts, N x 25. Similar to above. The first 25, do one underwater breaststroke pullout, then swim the rest of the length (the swim can be freestyle). The next 25, do 2 underwater breaststroke pullouts, then swim the rest of the length. Continue by adding one breaststroke pullout each time, until you either can't do any more or you hit the wall.

We swim long course every Saturday. I think the last time we did the above set, it was 50s instead of 25s.


3) Swim a series of 200s as follows:
1st 50 - breathe every 3 strokes
2nd 50 - breathe every 5 strokes
3rd 50 - breathe every 7 strokes
4th 50 - breathe every 9 strokes

SwimStud
January 15th, 2008, 11:00 AM
Are there intervals on this or just straight through? I honestly don't know, but since it's breathtraining I assume no rest?
Also I guess wwim speed is less important than sticking to the plan...within reason?

ALM
January 15th, 2008, 11:21 AM
We do everything on intervals, but I don't remember what they were. For the warmup set you don't want to make them too tight (it is a warmup, after all). You could probably get away with less rest on the 200s, because even though you're dying at the end from breathing every 9, you get to go back to breathing every 3 on your next swim.

Also, especially on the sets where you're doing the underwater stuff, make sure you let someone (teammate or guard) know what you're doing so they can keep an eye on you. Just in case...

Anna Lea

Rob Copeland
January 15th, 2008, 11:38 AM
Annually we do the 12 50’s of Christmas; however it can be done any time.
Set an interval that gives you about 15 seconds rest at 85% effort (e.g. on 50 sec. if you hold 35’s)
1) 50 free, 12 breaths total
2) 50 free, 10 breaths total
3) 50 free, 9 breaths total

11) 50 free, 2 breaths total
12) 50 free, 1 breaths total

After #6 we add 5 seconds to the interval.

For the real macho types, we take an extra minute then throw in one more no breather 50.:weightlifter:

aquageek
January 15th, 2008, 11:43 AM
Here's a toughie we did recently. 5 X 200 @ a faster interval (whatever is faster for you, maybe your normal int - 10 secs), breath every 3,5,3,7 by 50. That's a gasser.

The Fortress
January 15th, 2008, 11:47 AM
9 x 75s free or back (5, 7, 9 dolphin kicks off each wall, repeat 3 times)

four point underwater shooters (more fun with monofin, decrease the interval)

I like Rob's set.

smontanaro
January 15th, 2008, 12:12 PM
By comparison with everybody else, our hypoxic sets seem mundane, typically one or more 300s breathing every 3/5/7 by 100. This is generally the last thing we do before warm-down, so we're often fairly gassed at that point already (at least I am).

Skip Montanaro

shark
January 15th, 2008, 12:30 PM
5 x 100 (1-2-2-1) @ 2:00 Breathing 1 time 1st 25, 2 times 2nd 25, 2 times 3rd 25, 1 time 4th 25.

Guttbuster 200's - 4 x 200 @ 4:00 odd 25's underwater

Gallaghers ~15 yards, (across the diving well), x 40 @ :20, no breath

Underwater IM's, 5 x 100IM, fly and breast underwater @ 2:00

We had the following one in college, if anyone tries it, watch out for The Beast.
666 - 6 x 100 @ 1:20 100's to be done sub :60, @ :60 inhale for 6 seconds, @ 1:06 hold breath for 6 seconds, @ 1:12 exhale for 6 seconds, repeat at 1:20. Oh, what fun we had...

Breathing is overrated!

SwimStud
January 15th, 2008, 01:08 PM
We had the following one in college, if anyone tries it, watch out for The Beast.
666 - 6 x 100 @ 1:20 100's to be done sub :60, @ :60 inhale for 6 seconds, @ 1:06 hold breath for 6 seconds, @ 1:12 exhale for 6 seconds, repeat at 1:20. Oh, what fun we had...

Breathing is overrated!

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, NO!

Holy Crabcakes!
LOL Did you miss the part where I said "Starting Point?" :) That would be the "Ending Point" for me I think! hehehe

aztimm
January 15th, 2008, 03:02 PM
At least once a week (I think on Thursdays) we seem to do some type of hypoxic stuff....a few examples:

5x200, breathing every 3, 5, 7, 9 by 50 (on about 3:00), some people will wear paddles
5x50, starting at 5 breaths per 50, down to 1 breath (or less), twice through (on about a minute)
6x25 underwater swimming, however you can get to the other side underwater (on about 45 sec)

You can vary the intervals...I think you're about the same speed so see if these work for you.

Jazz Hands
January 15th, 2008, 03:11 PM
I really don't get the point of holding your breath for long sets. That's a completely useless skill for racing.

A while ago I decided that I always wanted to swim the 50 free without breathing. All I had to do was swim a 50 without breathing every once in a while and I had the skill down. No need to do any long hypoxic sets.

Chris Stevenson
January 15th, 2008, 03:15 PM
Using the FINIS snorkel can definitely can be similar to a hypoxic set...especially if you "forget" yourself and go a little too hard.

Some of the local USS and college coaches use those constrictor thingies (cardio caps?) that are supposed to simulate altitude training (sounds a little dubious to me). That's a bit much for me.

aquageek
January 15th, 2008, 03:18 PM
I really don't get the point of holding your breath for long sets. That's a completely useless skill for racing.

A while ago I decided that I always wanted to swim the 50 free without breathing. All I had to do was swim a 50 without breathing every once in a while and I had the skill down. No need to do any long hypoxic sets.

What, other than your own personal observations and feelings, do you have to support this statement? Which of your coaches has told you this?

Chris Stevenson
January 15th, 2008, 03:25 PM
I really don't get the point of holding your breath for long sets. That's a completely useless skill for racing.

A pretty strong statement, though I know many who agree with you. I disagree, though:

-- I like hypoxic sets for conditioning and to train for SDKs at the end of a race, especially a 200.

-- I also like doing them during taper because they raise the heart-rate but do not really stress the muscles too much (ie, recovery is quick) -- that allows me to get my endorphin fix without ruining my taper. (I always get itchy for more exercise during taper time.)

-- Finally, a good hypoxic set encourages efficient swimming: you try to swim as fast as you can with the least effort (or you can't make the set!).

Hypoxic training does not have to be "breathe every 7 for the whole swim." It could be something like "take no fewer than 7 SDKs off every turn."

This is all just my opinion, of course; don't do hypoxic training if you don't like it.

Jazz Hands
January 15th, 2008, 03:26 PM
What, other than your own personal observations and feelings, do you have to support this statement?

I don't think anyone has identified a unique physiological response in the lungs or the muscles to hypoxic training. A quick search on Google Scholar found me an article titled Intermittent Hypoxic Training: Fact and Fancy, (http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/15270290260131911?journalCode=ham) which has this to say:



... rather than intensifying the training stimulus, training at altitude or under hypoxia leads to the opposite effect - reduced speeds, reduced power output, reduced oxygen flux - and therefore is not likely to provide any advantage for a well-trained athlete.


So really the only thing you would need hypoxic training for is to learn a specific breath-holding skill, which is to say that you want to create a nervous system adaptation rather than a lung/muscle adaptation. I can think of two important breath-holding skills for swimming: the 50 freestyle and underwater dolphin kicking. Neither one of these are very similar to the kinds of sets people usually do for their hypoxic training.

aquageek
January 15th, 2008, 03:40 PM
Sorry, amigo, a "quick Google search" following your post isn't gonna cut it. I don't believe you have the coaching or training background to make such assertions. If others on the forum with experience feel the way you do, then I will give it more credibility.

Further you quoted only part of the article and the whole article is available for a fee. Did you pay the fee and read the whole thing or just pick and choose from the excerpt what you wanted?

scyfreestyler
January 15th, 2008, 03:44 PM
This might be of value... http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/94/2/733 ...but I have not had the time to read through it.

irishpolarbear
January 15th, 2008, 03:47 PM
I really don't get the point of holding your breath for long sets.Which part don’t you get? Long sets or breath holding or both.



“I don't think anyone has identified a unique physiological response in the lungs or the muscles to hypoxic training.”
And if you would do a little more googling you will find quite a few articles providing specific benefit in the lungs or the muscles to hypoxic training. But obviously you are entitles to yor opinion on this subject so keep doing what works for you.

SwimStud
January 15th, 2008, 03:47 PM
I really don't get the point of holding your breath for long sets. That's a completely useless skill for racing.

A while ago I decided that I always wanted to swim the 50 free without breathing. All I had to do was swim a 50 without breathing every once in a while and I had the skill down. No need to do any long hypoxic sets.

Let's forget the science of it all.

...It's the 150 mark of a 200 BR and you're hitting the turns, your mind and body are telling you to surface ASAP. Doing so cuts your pullout short.

I want to do this to at least train myself to mentally handle it...please don't blanket it as being a useless skill for racing.

Jazz Hands
January 15th, 2008, 03:54 PM
Sorry, amigo, a "quick Google search" following your post isn't gonna cut it. I don't believe you have the coaching or training background to make such assertions. If others on the forum with experience feel the way you do, then I will give it more credibility.

Further you quoted only part of the article and the whole article is available for a fee. Did you pay the fee and read the whole thing or just pick and choose from the excerpt what you wanted?

You can read the abstract yourself. I might be able to get the full artcle with my school login, but the abstract is clear enough about the conclusions. There are quite a few other articles on this subject if you want to read them yourself. They appear to agree with the conclusion that hypoxic training either has no additional training effect, or a negative effect. If you could find me some article that supports hypoxic training, I'd like to see that.

I originally got my skepticism on hypoxic training from Maglischo's "Swimming Even Faster." This is what he writes:



Hypoxic training refers to swimming a repeat distance with a restricted breathing pattern. Swimmers may breathe only once every second, third or fourth stroke cycle. The original purpose of this method of training was to simulate swimming at high altitude. Proponents thought that reducing the breathing rate would also curtail the oxygen supply and create the same kind of hypoxia that takes place at high altitudes.

We know now that this assumption was incorrect.


He goes on to cite several studies which support the idea that hypoxic training does not provide unique benefits.

And I see that now, after having gotten a good scientific look at why long hypoxic sets are useless, you are asking about my experience. I told you, I don't breathe in the 50. I used to do it a lot, back in the day when I had expert coaches who told me to do thousands of yards holding my breath. All that ever got me was a headache. Now that I train myself, I specifically practice the skill of not breathing on a 50 free. Amazingly, I no longer struggle to hold my breath in that race.

The Fortress
January 15th, 2008, 03:54 PM
Unless I'm not remembering correctly (and this could be), I think Terry Laughlin disputed the efficacy of hypoxic training many months ago.

With respect to freestyle sets where you breathe every 3-5-7 or some other restrictive breathing pattern, I have no idea. I don't do them.

However, I think shooters and dolphin kicking sets are invaluable for streamlining and SDKs. The more I'm underwater, the easier it is to stay underwater. When I back off the SDKs, I'm not as effective. I cut back on them during my last taper. That was a big mistake. I feel like I have to re-train myself. I'm trying Chris' taper trick next time.

I have no "evidence" to support this view. It just works for me in my personal experience. And these limited type of hypoxic sets have been assigned by coaches.

scyfreestyler
January 15th, 2008, 03:57 PM
From the above article..

The present study showed that high-intensity flume training significantly improved swimming performance in a pool over both 100 and 400 m. However, this improvement was not enhanced by performing such training under hypoxic conditions. This conclusion is strengthened by the carefully matched groups containing well-trained swimmers and by the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled nature of the intervention. Therefore, our hypothesis that intermittent hypoxic training improves swimming performance more than training under normoxic conditions was rejected.

I'll let the scientists on here discredit the methods and the results of the study. Perhaps some of our members here actually took part in this study.

aquageek
January 15th, 2008, 04:07 PM
JH - the way to state what you feel, given your lack of research, experience and knowledge on the subject should have been as follows:

There are studies and coaches that don't support hypoxic training, along with studies and coaches that do support it. I have chosen to side with the ones that don't support it and it seems to work that way for me.

Given, by your own numerous previous admissions, that you are entirely self taught and coached presently, making a statement that it is a useless skill for racing is way too strong and not adequately supported.

Jazz Hands
January 15th, 2008, 04:10 PM
JH - the way to state what you feel, given your lack of research, experience and knowledge on the subject should have been as follows:

There are studies and coaches that don't support hypoxic training, along with studies and coaches that do support it. I have chosen to side with the ones that don't support it and it seems to work that way for me.

I've actually done quite a bit of reading previously on this subject, and I've had many years of traditional hypoxic training. I don't know what else would qualify someone to say something about hypoxic training. What I do know is that I've never seen a study supporting added effects from hypoxic training. Can you find any?

aquageek
January 15th, 2008, 04:30 PM
I'm not buying it. Only when pressed on your statement did you provide an excerpt from a "quick google search." And, you have admitted you didn't read the whole article. Now you are claiming you have done quite a bit of reading previously on the subject.

And, you have admitted to having many years of hypoxic training from coaches but have chosen, once again, to go it alone and use a partial abstract from a google article as your basis for your swimming. I think it's fine that you are doing this but please don't hold yourself out as some sort of learned research expert on the topic.

Jazz Hands
January 15th, 2008, 04:35 PM
It's not a "google article." I don't think you get the difference between Google and Google Scholar. Google Scholar is a search engine for scholarly articles. It works really well for finding the most relevant articles on a given subject, and I like to use it for writing research papers. It's not a general internet search engine like Google.

I did a quick Google Scholar search because I knew that I had previously read multiple studies on hypoxic training, and Maglischo's book. I don't just memorize the URLs of abstracts that support all of the scientific theories I know about. That wouldn't make very much sense, would it? I have to search for them to find them. Another example of this would be Theory of Mind in young children, something I'm learning about in one of my classes right now. I know that ToM develops in several stages usually around the ages of 3-5. To give you any kind of research to support this notion, however, I would have to do a quick search on Google Scholar.

aquageek
January 15th, 2008, 04:39 PM
I'm in the I/T field and fully understand Google. I understand it well enough to know it isn't the be all and end all of research that apparently you believe it to be.

God help us all if the basis of scholarly research in the US these days is based on google searches solely.

Jazz Hands
January 15th, 2008, 04:40 PM
I'm in the I/T field and fully understand Google. I understand it well enough to know it isn't the be all and end all of research that apparently you believe it to be.

God help us all if the basis of scholarly research in the US these days is based on google searches solely.

Wow, you are really not reading what I'm saying. Google Scholar is not Google.

The Fortress
January 15th, 2008, 04:41 PM
Let's forget the science of it all.


Noooo. It'd be nice to know if it has a scientific basis!

Here's a prior thread. There are some others too.

http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?t=7487&highlight=hypoxic+training&page=2

It didn't seem to me like JH was holding himself out as a "learned" expert with his initial post. Seemed like an opinion.

SwimStud
January 15th, 2008, 04:48 PM
Noooo. It'd be nice to know if it has a scientific basis!

Here's a prior thread. There are some others too.

http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?t=7487&highlight=hypoxic+training&page=2

It didn't seem to me like JH was holding himself out as a "learned" expert with his initial post. Seemed like an opinion.

I'm just saying forget the science of it...even if it's mental preparedness it's a factor in racing... .

blainesapprentice
January 15th, 2008, 04:51 PM
Well this article pretty strongly tells me theres something to gain out of hypoxic training. http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/94/2/733#T2

Plus, I completely agree with Swim Stud, if your swimming longer events the more lung capacity you have to mentally and physically stay under longer off your walls in the 200 of any stroke the faster your going to be.

And in a discussion with my pulmonary doctor and his team just recently, we were talking about the benefits of having better breath control in the pool--because I have had chronic lung problems and often breathe every 2-4strokes. It has shown that someone with better breathe control and breathing patterns in swimming tend to have a lower heart rate. The lower the heart rate the more apt one's body is for exercising/swimming at high intensities over longer periods of time. For example, Lance Armstrong has a resting heart rate of around 45...same as most elite marathon runners, and while its both a cause and effect of being in the shape they are in, on many levels their physiological make-up or altered makeup through proper training, that allows their heart rate to be so low, allows them to be such high caliber distance athletes.

JH: you train low yardage anyways, so of course you wouldn't see the point in someone doing a hypoxic set thats longer than your entire workout, but criticizing someones training method seems to be quite hypocritical of you, since you found it so distasteful when others were criticizing your workout log. You clearly already have good breath control :applaud: and hats off to you--because I know I couldn't do a 50 no breath, probably ever, but certainly not as fast or comparably as fast as you can, but keep in mind that a lot of people here are asking questions and seeking advice because they know their own weaknesses and are seeking advice on how to better themselves as swimmers...

Some people need hypoxic workouts, because they know they breathe way to much in ALL of their events (thats me.) others might not need that kinda workouts built into their training because they already are happy with how they are able to perform (breath control wise) in race scenarios. But until I am able to swim a full 50 freestyle in no breath whether that be in practice or a meet, I think I should probably keep doing these longer hypoxic sets and using the snorkel to build up some lung strength.

Jazz Hands
January 15th, 2008, 04:52 PM
Morgan, I think you are misreading that article. Here's a key quote:



The present study showed that high-intensity flume training significantly improved swimming performance in a pool over both 100 and 400 m. However, this improvement was not enhanced by performing such training under hypoxic conditions. This conclusion is strengthened by the carefully matched groups containing well-trained swimmers and by the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled nature of the intervention. Therefore, our hypothesis that intermittent hypoxic training improves swimming performance more than training under normoxic conditions was rejected.

Both groups improved equally. The hypoxic training didn't help.

Rob Copeland
January 15th, 2008, 04:52 PM
Google Scholar is Google, or more accurately a subset of Google. If you want an independent research search engine Id recommend Scopus.

But we have seemed to drift far a field of the threads request for advice on hypoxic sets. How about returning this hijacked thread. And if you must continue, start another thread.

Jazz Hands
January 15th, 2008, 04:55 PM
Google Scholar is Google, or more accurately a subset of Google. If you want an independent research search engine I’d recommend Scopus.

There are a lot of ways to search for research, and Google Scholar isn't the only one I use. It's just my favorite for a quick subject search. The important point, however, is that the results from a Google Scholar search will be articles from peer reviewed journals, and not just a collection of whatever anyone chooses to put on the web.

scyfreestyler
January 15th, 2008, 04:55 PM
Well this article pretty strongly tells me theres something to gain out of hypoxic training. http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/94/2/733#T2




Did you read the article you linked to? :dunno:

This is what I found under their discussion...

The present study showed that high-intensity flume training significantly improved swimming performance in a pool over both 100 and 400 m. However, this improvement was not enhanced by performing such training under hypoxic conditions. This conclusion is strengthened by the carefully matched groups containing well-trained swimmers and by the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled nature of the intervention. Therefore, our hypothesis that intermittent hypoxic training improves swimming performance more than training under normoxic conditions was rejected.

And this in the abstract...

We conclude that 5 wk of high-intensity training in a flume improves sea-level swimming performances and O2 max in well-trained swimmers, with no additive effect of hypoxic training.

aquageek
January 15th, 2008, 05:01 PM
I disagree this is any sort of hijacking, that's incorrect. First, JH stated his opinion (agree with Fort), and one that contradicts what most of us have been coached our whole lives, like it or hate it. When pressed on this, he quotes a partial article he got from a Google Scholar search (a service of google, owned by google). Then, he states he's done quite a bit of reading on the subject. To top it off he is now quoting other poster's quotes as his ammo.

Where's the beef?

I do not believe it is hijacking to press a person on such assertions, especially when that person consistently holds himself out as some sort of swimming maverick with a power lifting plan to improve your swimming. Therefore, if someone asks for hypoxic sets and JH says they are pointless, there is no hijacking to challenge that assertion in order to return the thread to its intended purpose.

scyfreestyler
January 15th, 2008, 05:04 PM
Swimming maverick..I love it! Good stuff.

Anyhow, I am still waiting for somebody to discredit the study that Morgan and I have posted (each hoping to prove something different with the same article it seems).

blainesapprentice
January 15th, 2008, 05:07 PM
Did you read the article you linked to? :dunno:

This is what I found under their discussion...

The present study showed that high-intensity flume training significantly improved swimming performance in a pool over both 100 and 400 m. However, this improvement was not enhanced by performing such training under hypoxic conditions. This conclusion is strengthened by the carefully matched groups containing well-trained swimmers and by the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled nature of the intervention. Therefore, our hypothesis that intermittent hypoxic training improves swimming performance more than training under normoxic conditions was rejected.

And this in the abstract...

We conclude that 5 wk of high-intensity training in a flume improves sea-level swimming performances and O2 max in well-trained swimmers, with no additive effect of hypoxic training.

well i forgot to attach the second article was the problem--but that was that intermittent hypoxic training does not improve swimming. I had another article that used more swimmers and a longer test period, that showed that the prolongation of hypoxic training does reap benefits. I have to go look it up again. I found it using my colleges online journal source, ill look for it later after practice. sorry about that.

Jazz Hands
January 15th, 2008, 05:14 PM
Geek, we've seen two articles in this thread supporting the point of view that hypoxic training doesn't cause additional adaptations. Here's a couple more.

Effects of Hypoxic Interval Training on Cycling Performance (http://www.acsm-msse.org/pt/re/msse/abstract.00005768-200501000-00022.htm;jsessionid=HNtfvTcpQ5HpHyGTQt18Kf1KG1G16 FRDz1lNcJS5L7kxv0vtH9zn!-1036421505!181195629!8091!-1)

The effects of intermittent hypoxic training on aerobic and anaerobic performance (http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/tandf/terg/2005/00000048/F0040011/art00017)

If you really want to debate me on this, I would suggest you find some opposing literature. I'm not saying it's not out there, it could be. But the evidence we have here seems to agree with me. The swimming-specific study is especially good evidence for our purposes.

I think it's weird that you are so obsessed with my use of Google Scholar (owned by Google!). An academic research article is an academic research article, regardless of how you find it.

aquageek
January 15th, 2008, 05:20 PM
Ah yes, weird. Weird like "that's weird he makes assertions and then tries to find proof afterwards by posting partial articles" or weird like "I'm right, most coaches are wrong, including most legendary coaches out there" or weird like "wow, someone is really stepping up and calling me out?"

Lots of holes in your articles, most notably they refer to a short term study of bicyclists. Use your googling powers and show some swimming studies.

Lots of weirdness out there, I agree totally, Capt. Google.

Jazz Hands
January 15th, 2008, 05:27 PM
Ah yes, weird. Weird like "that's weird he makes assertions and then tries to find proof afterwards by posting partial articles" or weird like "I'm right, most coaches are wrong, including most legendary coaches out there" or weird like "wow, someone is really stepping up and calling me out?"

Lots of weirdness out there, I agree totally, Capt. Google.

Now you are just being ridiculous. I already explained why it was necessary to search for articles to back up something that I remember reading about previously. As far as I can tell, you either didn't read that post or you completely ignored it. Neither one of those options would surprise me at this point. I don't even know where to begin with this "Captain Google" crap. I'm presenting scholarly research articles. Why in the name of L. Ron Hubbard would it matter in the slightest how I found them? You need to either start making sense or stop posting.

aquageek
January 15th, 2008, 05:40 PM
I'm presenting scholarly research articles.

On biking, for 4 -7 weeks.

ourswimmer
January 15th, 2008, 05:44 PM
Geek, we've seen two articles in this thread supporting the point of view that hypoxic training doesn't cause additional adaptations.

What I see here are articles (apparently) supporting the hypothesis that hypoxic training doesn't add anything to the oxygen-utilization capacity that swimmers are already training with other exercises.

What I don't see here is any discussion of how hypoxic training as described early in the thread can, or cannot, serve the other purposes people have identified: (1) reinforcing breath control skills (which are oh-so-important in the last few turns of a 200 when your brain is screaming at you to surface before the flags and breathe already); (2) getting the heart rate up without taxing the muscles, as one might want to do during a taper; (3) focusing on stroke efficiency and highlighting the effects of inefficiency.

I would tend to agree that any breath-control sets I do aren't contributing much or anything to my aerobic fitness, but they definitely help with my ability to stay underwater off turns. And although I work on that skill somewhat with every turn and even more in speed-focused sets, the occasional breath-control set helps me achieve that desperate sense of needing to breathe, and train myself to ignore it just a bit, without the muscular fatigue that speedwork or racing causes. So I don't think those sets are useless, even though they don't very much resemble what I do in a race, because they isolate a component of racing and work on that one component intensively. And seeing as how such sets do encourage stroke efficiency, I don't think that they reinforce bad habits either.

SwimStud
January 15th, 2008, 06:38 PM
yes, I just wanted a starting point so I could work on going longer without breathing...

Jazz Hands
January 15th, 2008, 07:46 PM
What I see here are articles (apparently) supporting the hypothesis that hypoxic training doesn't add anything to the oxygen-utilization capacity that swimmers are already training with other exercises.

What I don't see here is any discussion of how hypoxic training as described early in the thread can, or cannot, serve the other purposes people have identified: (1) reinforcing breath control skills (which are oh-so-important in the last few turns of a 200 when your brain is screaming at you to surface before the flags and breathe already); (2) getting the heart rate up without taxing the muscles, as one might want to do during a taper; (3) focusing on stroke efficiency and highlighting the effects of inefficiency.

I would tend to agree that any breath-control sets I do aren't contributing much or anything to my aerobic fitness, but they definitely help with my ability to stay underwater off turns. And although I work on that skill somewhat with every turn and even more in speed-focused sets, the occasional breath-control set helps me achieve that desperate sense of needing to breathe, and train myself to ignore it just a bit, without the muscular fatigue that speedwork or racing causes. So I don't think those sets are useless, even though they don't very much resemble what I do in a race, because they isolate a component of racing and work on that one component intensively. And seeing as how such sets do encourage stroke efficiency, I don't think that they reinforce bad habits either.

Good post. I would rather focus on this aspect of hypoxic training. I don't think that the need for breath control in races matches up very well with the old "breathe every 3-5-7-9" sets. Basically, you don't ever swim like that in a race. That's why I think it's a waste of time to practice it.

SwimStud mentioned the need to stay under on the last turn of a 200 breast. As a non-breaststroker, I had completely forgotten about that. If I were a breaststroker, I would work on this aspect of my race by simulating it closely in practice. One thing that comes to mind is double or triple pullout breaststroke. We used to do that on my club team sometimes.

Chris Stevenson
January 15th, 2008, 08:49 PM
Perhaps it is my academic background, but there comes a time when one must realize that PhD = Piled Higher and Deeper and just go with one's own experience.

Studies of the type described are all well and good but they are rarely conclusive. I think there is MUCH more quesswork in training than is typically acknowledged, though it is on far more solid scientific background than in the dark ages. It is nice to quote Maglischo but I also know of many very well respected college coaches who think there is benefit to hypoxic training. (And, no, hypoxic training does not have to be "3-5-7-9 breathing," something I rarely do becuase I find it somewhat boring.)

Naturally I find it somewhat ironic that JH started this discussion, since it seems to me that the ability to control one's breathing is easily as relevant a skill to swimming as the ability to hoist very heavy weights, but what do I know?:weightlifter: (And, JH, before you object, I do lift weights too...just having some fun...)

Chris

shark
January 16th, 2008, 08:24 AM
I want to do this to at least train myself to mentally handle it....

The mental part is the biggest part of hypoxic training. IMO. The mind is a powerful thing. Especially in swimming. Who was it that said, "Swimming is 90% mental and 10% physical."
"Try Not, Do, or Do Not. There is no try in hypoxic swimming." - Yoda

No, really, he actually said that.

cantwait4bike
January 16th, 2008, 12:57 PM
Jazz Hands............your wasting your time on this thread. Let the believers in Hypox training continue the worthless practice.

SwimStud
January 16th, 2008, 01:08 PM
Jazz Hands............your wasting your time on this thread. Let the believers in Hypox training continue the worthless practice.

Believing or not and your opinion was not what this thread was intended for. Read the first few posts.
I asked for some guidance on hypox sets so I don't over do it on my first try. Will it add speed to my 50FR? I don't know. Will it help me at least mentally control my urge to surface and breathe too early on an underwater pull-out probably.

Either way, JH started the hi-jack by spouting off when a new thread was more apt...nobody asked "Hypoxic Sets: Do they work?" Please do not add fuel to the fire and distract the thread further.

Rob Copeland
January 16th, 2008, 01:16 PM
Interspersed with other stuff were some good suggestions. I think (personal opinion) the suggestions to not breath in and out of turns and to work the breakout, either dolphin or flutter, are excellent. I plan on incorporating these into my training.

Thanks!

aquageek
January 16th, 2008, 01:24 PM
We often do "no breathe flags in/flags out" which I guess is hypoxic in some regards and would seem a valuable training tool for longer distances. It also couples as a way to improve turns and even work on SDKs as you make serious effort to get to the flags on each turn so you can breathe.

cowsvils
January 16th, 2008, 04:04 PM
Your goal seems to not so much be able to hold your breath for an extended period of time (i.e not breathing for a fifty) but more to be able to mange your breath more on walls. Try working 200s double pullouts with quick turns, this will give you a good simulation of 200s in your race it will allow you to work on your pullouts as well. Take enough time to recover in between each, and work with whatever feels good. We usually end up doing 400-800 yards of these in some combination of 50s,100s and 200s.

Paul Smith
January 16th, 2008, 05:02 PM
Perhaps it is my academic background, but there comes a time when one must realize that PhD = Piled Higher and Deeper and just go with one's own experience.

Studies of the type described are all well and good but they are rarely conclusive. I think there is MUCH more quesswork in training than is typically acknowledged, though it is on far more solid scientific background than in the dark ages. It is nice to quote Maglischo but I also know of many very well respected college coaches who think there is benefit to hypoxic training. (And, no, hypoxic training does not have to be "3-5-7-9 breathing," something I rarely do becuase I find it somewhat boring.)

Naturally I find it somewhat ironic that JH started this discussion, since it seems to me that the ability to control one's breathing is easily as relevant a skill to swimming as the ability to hoist very heavy weights, but what do I know?:weightlifter: (And, JH, before you object, I do lift weights too...just having some fun...)

Chris

Great post Chris.

I've always been a big supporter of hypoxic work and use it now mostly on longer recovery sets especially during tapers.

Traditonal hypoxic training seems to have been replaced by many coaches/swimmers with snorkel training....something I added in a few years back and now use on about 25% of my sets.

I added the restrictor valve recently just to inflict even more punishment on my lungs...my favorite kick sets are now down with no board, a snorkel and 6 x 6 flutter. I do power work like this as well as long (up to 400's) swims...

KaizenSwimmer
January 16th, 2008, 05:30 PM
Good post. I would rather focus on this aspect of hypoxic training. I don't think that the need for breath control in races matches up very well with the old "breathe every 3-5-7-9" sets. Basically, you don't ever swim like that in a race. That's why I think it's a waste of time to practice it.

SwimStud mentioned the need to stay under on the last turn of a 200 breast. As a non-breaststroker, I had completely forgotten about that. If I were a breaststroker, I would work on this aspect of my race by simulating it closely in practice. One thing that comes to mind is double or triple pullout breaststroke. We used to do that on my club team sometimes.

As Leslie noted, I've previously expressed my skepticism of the value of hypoxic training. I first heard about it at my first coaching clinic in Dec 72 and used it for nearly 20 years thereafter, in my own training and with the athletes I coached. I never really questioned its value until I read some research which said that breath-holding does not produce any desirable physiological adaptation. All it does is result in an increase of CO2 -- which simply makes you want to breathe more.

That doesn't mean there may not be some kinds of training in which breath control is useful. And I think that's the point JH is making here. Indeed, as he notes, most people apply "hypoxic training" with sets like the 3-5-7-9 breathing. And I'm in complete agreement with him that such a set doesn't prepare you for the kind of breath control that could benefit you in a race - a no-breath or 1-breath 50, or holding your SDK, or how you may feel on the breast pullout in the final 50 of a 200. The best way to train yourself to do those things is with closely matched activities.

I spoke with Peter Daland shortly after Joe Bottom became the first swimmer to break 20 seconds in a 50. He related that a key part of their training was to prepare Joe to swim the complete 50 without a breath. Breathing 3-5-7-9 had nothing to do with it. Instead, from early in the season, he would have Joe do a dive-start 50 without a breath, at the end of practice. Initially he had to do it at moderate speed. He gradually built up to doing it at full speed. With a bit of imagination you could come up with a training exercise to improve your capacity for breath control for any of the other instances where it can come in handy.

smontanaro
January 16th, 2008, 07:36 PM
Traditonal hypoxic training seems to have been replaced by many coaches/swimmers with snorkel training....something I added in a few years back and now use on about 25% of my sets.

I apologize in advance for my thick skull, but it's not obvious to me (who's never used a snorkel except when, well, snorkeling) how training with a snorkel would be in any way equivalent to hypoxic work (breathing less frequently, more SDKs off the wall, etc). I've always thought of a snorkel as a stroke training device. You don't need to breath side-to-side, so you can work on a nice symmetrical stroke.

Thx,

Skip Montanaro

smontanaro
January 16th, 2008, 07:43 PM
I never really questioned its value until I read some research which said that breath-holding does not produce any desirable physiological adaptation. All it does is result in an increase of CO2 -- which simply makes you want to breathe more.

Isn't that precisely the sort of thing it's supposed to help with? Several people here have posted the problem of holding your streamline on the last pull-out on a 200. One of our coaches a couple years ago said it was really helpful on the last BR pullout of a 400IM. Our current coach stresses it for that reason as well. There's really plenty of oxygen there for your muscles, but you have to train yourself to resist/fight the urge to breathe that the CO2 buildup gives you. The "piano on your back" I think others have called it. How are you going to do that in a race if you never practice it during practice?

Skip Montanaro

That Guy
January 16th, 2008, 11:59 PM
The "piano on your back" I think others have called it. How are you going to do that in a race if you never practice it during practice?

You do not want the piano. The piano is bad. Do not practice swimming with a piano. Do not race with a piano. Then you will beat people who swim with pianos.

geochuck
January 17th, 2008, 01:11 AM
Much easier to go to the Hypoxic Chamber http://www.go2altitude.com/

SwimStud
January 17th, 2008, 08:11 AM
Maybe I should rename the thread "Hypoxic Sets to help learn control of one's diaphragm? No not the contraceptive type...

I enjoyed the posts: scientific, old wive's tales, conjecture; pro and anti.
I agree practicing 200's is a good way to practice that last 2 or 3 turns and the feeling.

I also beleive that trainin win hypox sets will help the body adapt...even if purely on psycho' and perhaps muscular control levels.

I can't say whetehr I will get faster because of it but I think it will help my times.

Why do athletes train at altitude for sports events in places like Mexico city if it doesn't at least prepare them for a change?

Maybe it's all placebo but like anything else on this forum whther it's TI, Kick Sets, Drag Suits, Nose Clips, Snorkels, Visualisation or Mantras if you do not believe it will work or help then it probably won't. As you won't apply yourself to training efficiently and then the results will reiforce your belief that a certain technique is bunk. 90% mental right?

scyfreestyler
January 17th, 2008, 12:56 PM
I am starting to think that the best way to swim faster races in meets is to swim fast races in practice. Less 10 x 100 on whatever and more full effort swims with more rest in between. This will get you both anaerobic training as well as some aerobic training. It will also give you the sensation of swimming at speed, turning at speed, streamlining, etc.. What better way to train your body and mind for a race than to race.

SwimStud
January 17th, 2008, 12:58 PM
I am starting to think that the best way to swim faster races in meets is to swim fast races in practice. Less 10 x 100 on whatever and more full effort swims with more rest in between. This will get you both anaerobic training as well as some aerobic training. It will also give you the sensation of swimming at speed, turning at speed, streamlining, etc.. What better way to train your body and mind for a race than to race.
Oh give it a rest already...lol

ALM
January 17th, 2008, 04:36 PM
I want to do this to at least train myself to mentally handle it...

Stud,

You and I are different from most of the posters here because we did not grow up competing in swimming. Shoot, I didn't learn know how to swim "proper" freestyle until I was 26 years old. And there are those who would say that even today I don't swim "proper" freestyle. :lmao:

So a lot of things that are "old hat" for many of the forumites are new to you and me.

Doing the breathing every 5, 7, 9 strokes helped my confidence a lot. It taught me, for example, that I can wait a couple of extra strokes to take a breath when going into a turn. (I don't have very good lung capacity and I still have a hard time forcing myself to consistently do flip turns. I tend to wimp out and take that big breath on an open turn.)

The veteran swimmers have been doing it for so long that it all just comes naturally to them. They've forgotten what it was like when they were learning.

When I was first trying to learn flip turns, I asked the best swimmer on our Masters team (a guy who had swum in the '84 Olympic Trials) if he would watch me and give me some pointers. I then asked him a question that began, "When you were learning how to do flip turns..." Dave very politely answered, "I don't remember. I've been doing flip turns since I was four."

So, do some hypoxic breathing sets. It's not going to hurt you (we hope). :drown:

Anna Lea

geochuck
January 17th, 2008, 05:08 PM
Jayhawk

You are right lots of the swimmers have gone thru all kinds of steps to get where they are today.

I know that I have tried just about everthing that was new. I even did duck squat walks around the pool before I swam now that was an idiotic exercise. We all followed the directions of coaches of all types. I even listened to Howard Firby and followed his directions for about 10 minutes, until I told him no.

Steve Ruiter
January 17th, 2008, 08:01 PM
I have the very best hypoxic set of ALL TIME. Really. I dare you to improve it. Its art.

I do this hypoxic set when I want to do 600 more yards, but don't want to work hard, but I want to work smart. Its exceptionally elegant, if I may say so. The clock counts your repeats and tells you how many breaths to take.

12 x 50 on :50

1: leave on the :10 and take 1 breath for the 50
2: leave on the :60 and take 6 breaths
3: :50, 5 breaths
4: :40, 4 breaths
5: :30, 3 breaths
6: :20, 2 breaths
7: :10, 1 breath
8-12: complete the pattern

The first one is done rested, so it shows you its possible to make a one breath 50. Then it gets progressively harder, some recovery, then harder again.

My objective with this set has very little to do with oxygen, but the restriction forces you to swim efficiently, and NOT breathe out of the turns. Its just another "drill" to add to your collection.

As for my opinion, I think hypoxic sets should NEVER be assigned based on strokes per breath, but ALWAYS on breaths per length. If you are told to breathe every 5 strokes, I take 12 strokes on a length and you take 22, why should you get more air? It makes no sense.

KaizenSwimmer
January 17th, 2008, 09:50 PM
Beat people who swim with pianos.

Smartest words I've read on this Forum in a long time. So much written here about learning to swim with pain. And so little on learning to feel good while swimming fast.

Paul Smith
January 18th, 2008, 10:18 AM
I apologize in advance for my thick skull, but it's not obvious to me (who's never used a snorkel except when, well, snorkeling) how training with a snorkel would be in any way equivalent to hypoxic work (breathing less frequently, more SDKs off the wall, etc). I've always thought of a snorkel as a stroke training device. You don't need to breath side-to-side, so you can work on a nice symmetrical stroke.

Thx,

Skip Montanaro

Yes it does help in balancing out your stroke...but if you don't beleive that restricting your air intake (even more by the addtional valve you can use) during extremally hard workouts is hypoxic I can't help you. In my opinion it has far more relevance than swimming a "breathe every 3, 5, 7, 9" set which to me is absolutley worthless.

smontanaro
January 18th, 2008, 10:48 AM
Yes it does help in balancing out your stroke...but if you don't beleive that restricting your air intake (even more by the addtional valve you can use) during extremally hard workouts is hypoxic I can't help you. In my opinion it has far more relevance than swimming a "breathe every 3, 5, 7, 9" set which to me is absolutley worthless.

Like I said, I've never used a snorkel except when snorkeling (or scuba diving). I've never even examined the Finis type snorkel. I wasn't aware that they provided any restriction at all. I was just asking.

Skip

Paul Smith
January 18th, 2008, 11:02 AM
Like I said, I've never used a snorkel except when snorkeling (or scuba diving). I've never even examined the Finis type snorkel. I wasn't aware that they provided any restriction at all. I was just asking.

Skip

Sorry....didn't mean to sound "snappy"....ask away!

Like I said, although its primary function is served for technique and drill work-check this out:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3871/is_200107/ai_n8973274

However I also have seen (and done) hard/sprint/kick training done with a snorkel and the addtional effort needed to pull in air is incredible....