Did Ian Thorpe Overglide?

[Don Wright]

[AM EDITING THIS POST A DAY AFTER INITIAL POSTING - HAVE FOUND THE ANSWERS TO MY QUERIES FROM MAGLISCHO'S "SWIMMING FASTEST" - MY EDITS ARE IN RED AND QUOTATIONS IN BLUE!]

Worried about this over-gliding business! A long time ago, I downloaded the SS guide to help eradicate this very common fault - but one glance at the contents "switched me off", since at the time I was unable to swim for more than a 25m length without having a "pit-stop" for breathing and allow my heart rate to settle down to an acceptable level before continuing. Can't say that I've really overcome that "pit-stop need", to my own satisfaction, although I can currently manage a few laps without a rest when swimming FC. So there's still a lot of correction to be done! Think it's a problem am going to have to live with - possibly due to age (78), lung function impairment, fitness (fit to drop!) etc,. I seem to have acquired a really bad habit of pausing that lead arm for too long. "Solar..." has tried to help me (old "non-perpetual" swimming thread) and some progress was made. Last year before moving elsewhere, to a location where there is only a 20m pool nearby, I was thrilled to be able to slowly swim just 100m of FC continuously. But now in the smaller pool at 5 lengths to the 100m, I've definitely got lazier and frequently ease off for a rest. A problem compounded by the fact that at the pool entry end, 1/3 is taken up by fancy widening steps going down into the water - so if the pool is busy, might not have an end wall to turn against at the pool entry end. There is a single roped-off lane which I sometimes share with others - but it's not a real "swimmers pool", just a leisure one!

This thread has spurred me to examine more closely where am going wrong - so please forgive me for "going off-piste"(another of my common failings!), away from chatting about Thorpe's style!

In one of Paul's old blogs he advocated turning the head away from the just entered arm in preparation for an inhalation an instant later. Also keeping that lead arm extended for support during inhalation so as to avoid the lead arm collapsing while taking a breath, with associated faults. Have always understood that inhalation could start as the stroking arm pointed to the bottom (coinciding with body roll away from the stroking arm. so as to clear the hip, and facilitate inhalation) for the start of the stroking arm's upsweep to the surface. Also, that inhalation should finish as the hand of the recovering arm comes up level with the head. At which time, the lead arm should be on it's way down to the catch (or possibly into the start of the pull phase). Have always kept in mind an FQS arm arrangement, in which as the recovered arm enters, or is spearing into the water, there is an approx angle of 90 degrees between the arms at that instant.

So by swimming like that, the lead arm is outstretched for an awful long time! OG-ing? [MOST DEFINITELY YES! - MAGLISCHO WRITES "...the arm in front should not begin sweeping down until the other arm has completed it's upsweep. [ AND NO LONGER THAN THAT! - WAS STILL KEEPING THE LEAD ARM OUTSTRETCHED TILL INHALATION FINISHED! ] This allows swimmers to keep the entering arm streamlined in front while the other arm is applying propulsive force. The entering arm thus creates less form and pushing drag than would be the case if it were pressing down below the vertical confines of the body. Consequently it will interfere less with the propulsive efforts of the stroking arm. When swimmers sprint, they go against what I have just recommended. They overlap the downsweep of the front arm with the upsweep of the rear arm so that they can begin applying propulsive force with the arm in front almost immediately as the other arm releases pressure on the water in back. This method probably reduces the average velocity per stroke cycle, distance per stroke, while increasing the energy cost. Nevertheless, the increase in turnover rate may result in faster times over a short distance."

I can understand that ideally, as the rear arm finishes useful work, the lead arm should be ready to start useful work - so there is no gap in propulsive effort. [THIS IS NOT THE "IDEAL" BECAUSE THERE WILL BE CONFLICT - INCREASED DRAG DUE TO HAVING 2 ARMS IN THE WATER AT THE SAME TIME AS "M" NOTED IN THE ABOVE QUOTE (HAVE UNDERLINED THE RELEVANT SENTENCE)!]. I think Adam's side-views of Phelps arm action show his rear arm about to recover, while the lead arm is well down on its way to the catch - blow my concepts to bits![NOT AT ALL - AGAIN SEE "M"'S QUOTE ABOVE] In fact seeing that, prompts me to temporarily shelve FQS, and have a go at trying to get the arm action more in line with the [SUPPOSED!] ideal.

[I tried an overlapping arm action today, and although it seemed faster, I can understand what "M" was getting at, by my underline of the sentence in the above quote. There did seem to be some "conflict", when both arms were in the water together - one pulling and the other pushing. For my experiments, I did in fact swop my usual EVF catch for an SS style one, after "Making a Deeper Entry" with the lead arm, because that was quicker than "drifting" the lead arm outside the shoulder/hip line before dropping just the forearm/hand! It felt strange for a while to be turning the arms over a lot faster than my usual efforts. Also - according to typical OG characteristics - I tried to plan where my arms should be at various stages - but the plans were quickly discarded , and I just tried to get both arms acting in the water simultaneously as often as possible, bar for arm recovery. For a bit of fun, will add a few lengths of this action to my usual routine.]

[Don Wright]

Just been looking very closely at what Mr Smooth does with his lead arm as the rear arm finishes the upsweep - a very slight beginning to the drop of the lead arm down to the catch. In accordance with Maglischo's "...the arm in front should not begin sweeping down until the other arm has completed it's upsweep." - the movement is not as pronounced as in Adam's sideways shot of Phelps, about to start his rear arm recovery. I had hitherto, wrongly thought that one shouldn't start to drop the lead arm until the hand of the recovering arm came level with the head. That lead arm drop beginning as soon as the upsweep finishes, brings the arm action closer to the supposed "ideal", of one arm about to start useful work as the rear arm finishes it's useful work. Something else to "engrave on my heart" - learning never ends!

No wonder I've been so slow - the combination of keeping the lead arm outstretched until my inhalation had finished (as hand of recovering arm came level with head), i.e. "OG-ing" like crazy - and delaying the dropping of the lead arm down to the catch at that same arm position (hand of recovering arm level with head) - has been a real "killer" to decent forward motion. Too much like arm "catch-up" drill (I remember when first writing about that drill, that I found it a bit "addictive" - evidently and unthinkingly, I just carried on with only a slight mod when supposedly swimming a proper stroke!)

[minkza]

Very interesting thanks for sharing.

ร่วมเล่นสนุกๆไปกับพวกเรา ได้ที่นี่ คาสิโนออนไลน์

[Swimcoach]

WOW What a great depth on knowledge. This is such a great topic and one in which i will be reading more about.
Thanks guys

[Don Wright]

After a long time thinking about the "conflict" that arises if both arms are propelling UW at the same time - lead arm pulling, rear arm pushing - I think we need to consider what happens to the water flow under the body, as momentum pushes it forwards. Even if the hands of the lead and rear arms are acting close to the body's centre line for most of the stroke path - there is still the torque being produced by the forearms and upper arms, acting for a short while on different sides of the body away from it's centre line. So we can imagine that the under-body water flow is deflected slightly one way by the lead arm, and then deflected slightly the other way by the rear arm before that flow is affected by the action of the legs/feet kicking up/down further down the body. These deflections of the flow each way are, I reckon, the reason why "conflict" is experienced by those of us who try this business of having 2 arms acting UW at the same time! It is not so apparent if the lead arm is just starting it's pull as the rear arm has almost finished it's push - or has actually finished and released pressure on the water prior to arm exit and start of it's recovery. So that could be a good reason to try the business of "dropping" the lead arm down to the catch and starting the pull, very close to the time of the rear arm's exit for recovery!

IMO making the "drop" of the lead arm down to the catch slightly slower than the pull/push phases has the advantage of facilitating a bit of lead arm rest (arm turn-over is quicker than in normal stroking - so rest has to be grabbed where possible), no "push down" of the lead arm upsetting balance, and gets the arms at the right position relative to each other for the propulsive phases. Any "almost wind-milling" of the arms is only apparent for a brief moment as the lead arm "drops" to the catch while the rear arm is finishing its push (arms less than 180 degrees apart UW). A moment later the lead arm is into its pull while the rear arm is starting it's recovery. Needless to say, there is no gliding whatsoever with this arm action, since the arms are continually on the move! Think the key to getting started with this arm action is to think about "dropping" the lead arm down to the catch, very close to the time of rear arm water exit. Well it's not FQS swimming, but the increased momentum forwards from the faster arm-turnover, helps preserve body balance at what could be "tricky" stages - but at least it gets away from the "almost catch-up" arm action, with the lead arm dwelling too long out front!

[nightcrawler]

According to swim smooth there is a term called overgliding. But until watching the ss masterclass catch dvd, I have never heard about this term in my 33+ years background neither from my trainers nor any swimmers, can swim types be a big marketing fake?

Ian Thorpe is surely kicking strong and gliding, his stroke is not choppy or punchy. Also he has thumb first hand entry which is not good for swim smooth(but i have also swum with thumb fist entry more than 25 years).
https://youtu.be/HLNqkFj81Kg

"In all affairs it’s a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted." Bertrand Russel

May be there shouldnt be a term overgliding, should be thought again.

[Paul Newsome]

Two words nightcrawler: COGNITIVE DISSONANCE

And then this from the horses mouth:

[nightcrawler]

Thanks for the explanation Paul.
Cheers,

[Paul Newsome]

I have to say nightcrawler I increasingly lose the will to offer my free help and advice on these forums when people like yourself feel like they have some right to claim things like "Swim Types is a big marketing bullshit fake" (I note you've since edited that after letting it reside for several days*). That shows total lack of respect for what we do here at Swim Smooth and it's one of the primary reasons why we are looking at the possibility of closing the forum down.

I get badgered daily with emails saying that I should contribute more to the forum, that I'm neglecting you guys and all despite all the masses of high quality free material we put out on all our various media channels. It's crazy. Very unfair IMHO. And when I get language and abuse like that which you wrote above, it just confirms my feeling of "why bother".

And then you have the audacity to email me directly asking me to spend my quality time assessing your videos and helping you to improve your swimming. Are you serious?!

You know what, I felt so strongly about what you said that I happened to recount this to my 7yo son in the car today. In his pure innocence he simply responded "maybe you should help him Dad, maybe that's his way of saying sorry". I couldn't believe the insight that came from his mouth. He'll make an excellent swim coach (or diplomat!) one day if that's what he chooses to do, ignorant to the internet heroes like yourself who feel you have the right to totally disrespect everything we have tried valiantly to do for the world of swimming.

So no, we won't be rethinking the term "over-glider", sorry. Even the great Ian Thorpe who knows nothing about these semantic debates about technique recognises that there's a point where he's simply gliding RATHER than swimming efficiently, vis-a-vis he's "over-gliding".

Swim Types is NOT a marketing bullshit ploy and I resent you for saying as such. It's a system which is helping many thousands of swim coaches in 119 countries around the world improve the way they work with and help their swimmers improve. Ironically enough I hear that you had pipe-dreams of becoming as Swim Smooth coach yourself? I'm sorry mate, that ain't gonna happen.

Swimmers, we provide this forum to help you discuss various aspects of swimming technique. We offer this freely. We do not edit for content. We do not delete posts such as that which cause personal offence above to us as an association. We do not even restrict your discussions of rival companies and their methodologies despite those same companies editing any mention of our name anywhere on their forums. To speak about Swim Smooth on their sites is taboo - we even get called "the site that shall not be named". We do not do this here, we are an open community, but neither do I feel particularly inspired to assist you with your queries if / when you call us "a big fake and full of bullshit."

I find your quote from Betrand Russell highly ironic nightcrawler about hanging a question on something you have long taken for granted. In your own words, and in 33yrs of swimming, you've never even heard the term "over-gliding" (I personally termed that in 2008) and yet I bet your last dollar that you've heard, and likely adhered to, the world view that a swimmer taking fewer strokes and gliding more is more efficient than someone with a shorter stroke and higher turn-over irrespective of their height and wingspan. Sad really, all you need do is to have watched Gregorio Pallitrineiri win the Olympic Gold in the men's 1500 in Rio to realise that he did that with the shortest stroke and the highest stroke rate in the ENTIRE field - some 12 strokes per length MORE than Mack Horton in 5th place. Luckily Gregorios coach doesn't take things for granted, hey?

So yes nightcrawler consider yourself "served". Consider that I will not tollerate disrespectful postings by yourself using swear words to somehow make you feel like the bigger man or the oracle on swimming. You're not. Consider me a grumpy git who is tiring of internet heroes like yourself thinking they rule the roost and yet do absolutely sweet F.A themselves to contribute towards the world of swimming and betterment of others.

Thanks for your time and attention. I'm off now to go and do something truly productive for the world of swimming - our next project. I suggest you do something productive yourself.

*here's the original post for historical referencing:

Screen Shot 2016-11-30 at 6.12.10 pm.png (118.23 KiB) Viewed 4907 times

[nightcrawler]

Hey Paul,

What is happening, are you serious? You cant attack like that without knowing one's intention. I have never accused you/yourself personally! On the other hand, you have known that English is not my mother tongue. You could have considered it as a "shoutbox item", why havent you, how can you be so poor?

If you have a thesis then should learn to deal with the ideas not with the poeple. The subject matter is the following, not me as Emrah:
Are swim types the absolute truth??? Of course not they are SS's fictive (marketing) idea, not even a theory. If Swim Smooth claims something, then should be ready/open for criticism. If it was the absolute truth, then why noone didnt know about swim types since swim smooth etablished? One step further, has it been approved by any swimming authority(association), not of course! Actually, havent been seen such a thing in my 33+ years of swimming, has anyone before SS? no, never! Cant someone believe something without questioning???

If you had taken a look at my posts in the forum, I have never provoked anyone in this forum, instead I met here with lovely people such as cottmiler, solarenergy, smootharnie, sciame, advido, etc... got on well with everyone, never argued, had very nice friendships here. On the other hand, I have been already praising your useful stuff wherever I go and to whom I met also to my masters squad also share your stuff on my site by proudly showing you as a reference!!! You could better took a look at my posts in which I was commending you as "Paul" youself.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5117&p=29507&hilit=serkan#p29507

Our words turn to our behaviours. Aren't you behaving in the manner of "COGNITIVE DISSONANCE" that you wrote Paul? Hoisted with your own petard. You are obviously performing an action that is contradictory to SS's ideas, or values by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs,ideas.

A coach(IMO you as a leader) should better explain the pros and cons of something instead of umbraging. Until now I had never considered/and expected that you would have such a super big ego and primitive behaviour.

Finally you wrote:
"I'm off now to go and do something truly productive for the world of swimming - our next project. I suggest you do something productive yourself."
First you should have paid attention on your followers's posts and contributions, but you didnt, guess why? Your big ego is the only thing that you are feeding. I have been spending 3 hours on your swimsmoothforum.com site for knowledge sharing and interaction, you could have checked it and written something useful and be productive. Even olympic champions have modesty, they are in peace with themselves, first go and have it, do something healthy for yourself and for your followers, ok? because you harm them as you have wanted to destruct the forum.

You were an idol in my eyes, Paul and SS was everywhere in my swimming life... Now you have fallen from grace with me! I also know it wont be important for you, as you wrote "it will never be", obviously seeing that nothing has never been important than your ego.

From now on you "as Paul Newsome" are in my black book.

Good luck,
Emrah

[Paul Newsome]

Hey Paul,

What is happening, are you serious? You cant attack like that without knowing one's intention. I have never accused you/yourself personally!

I believe your intentions were quite clear nightcrawler. Swim Types is my baby, so yes in fact you did offend me.

Firstly, our very first post in May 2009 on this very forum:

Screen Shot 2016-11-30 at 7.48.58 pm.png (94.65 KiB) Viewed 4854 times

"Be Nice to Each Other" - you have not been nice.

On the other hand, you have known that English is not my mother tongue. You could have considered it as a "shoutbox item", why havent you, how can you be so poor?

We do not tolerate swearing on this forum nightcrawler, in any language. People on other forums have been banned for less. You must have a) realised that what you had wrote was offensive / improper and b) that it was totally inappropriate in this context. Why? Because you edited it yourself.

I can see that you're getting angrier and angrier nightcrawler, and I'm sorry about that, every time I look up you've re-edited this post. I don't really know if what I'm responding to is your latest edit or not? Perhaps this will continue all evening?

If you have a thesis then should learn to deal with the ideas not with the poeple. The subject matter is the following, not me as Emrah:
Are swim types the absolute truth??? Of course not they are SS's fictive (marketing) idea, not even a theory. If Swim Smooth claims something, then should be ready/open for criticism.

I see you like to throw the use of the word "ego" upon me? Upon count of your first response I believe you used the word 8 times. In this edit we're down to 3. I'm not sure if we're going up or down from here, but I'll settle on three in this quotation.

So, do I have a big ego? Perhaps. It takes a special kind of ego Emrah to a) recognise trends in the way people swim, b) connect this with what they need to then do to improve rather than the "one size fits all" approach that pervaded until Swim Types was released in 2010, c) develop and refine this theory over thousands and thousands of consultations with real swimmers (see https://vimeo.com/106812865), d) propose it as a foundational system for our entire program to our coaches, stakeholders and over 120,000 followers worldwide via http://www.feelforthewater.com and then most difficult of all e) subject it to peer review, criticism and feedback from the national and international governing bodies for whom we've re-written their entire swim coaching curriculum, now going out in 119 countries worldwide. Do they see it as "fictive" or "marketing bullshit", I don't know, all I do know is that it's helping in this context:

Quote.jpg (149.6 KiB) Viewed 4854 times

...and that is what good coaching is all about - generating ideas for experimentation. Thousands of swimmer and coaches worldwide are becoming better swimmers and coaches because of this proposition. My ego is healthy in that knowledge that I have helped in this way.

Am I open to your criticism nightcrawler? Is that what you want to know? I would have happily expanded on these ideas and methodologies given an appropriate line of questioning. Yours was not. Sorry.

The simple fact remains that we have dedicated our entire coaching lives to producing the plethora of free content that resides on http://www.swimsmooth.com the actual http://www.swimtypes.com website and of course 408 posts on our blog http://www.feelforthewater.com which expands on all of our concepts and ideas to help illustrate our meanings and purpose.

If it was the absolute truth, then why noone didnt know about swim types since swim smooth etablished? One step further, has it been approved by any swimming authority(association), not of course! Actually, havent been seen such a thing in my 33+ years of swimming, has anyone before SS? no, never!

...there is no absolute truth Emrah, only suggestion, ready for experimentation and the generation of ideas. Our cohort of clientele far exceeds ANY scientific experimentation along these lines. Can we ever prove it? Do we NEED to prove it? You seem to think so, I know not.

Why did no one know about the iPad before Apple and Steve Jobs created it? Who knew we would grow to need it so much? And the iPod - wow, a thousand songs in your pocket and all that. Why did Einstein's theory of relativity not exist before he suggested it (actually it did, he simply built upon theoretical results and empirical work by Albert A. Michelson, Hendrik Lorentz, Henri Poincaré and others), why did no one invent the cyclonic vacuum cleaner before Dyson (in fact they did, he was just the first to patent it and pragmatically develop the framework and infrastructure to develop and release it)? Just because something has not always existed does it mean that it never will? Hardly.

For the sake of being perceived as stoking my "ego" as you would believe, let's consider this:

OPINIONS1.jpg (65.63 KiB) Viewed 4854 times

Had I sat on my backside, twiddled my thumbs and spent 3 hours on internet forums a day (actually I did and then some in the early days) and then worried about what you might have thought and said, none of what you see before you, what you are writing upon now, what has helped to form and shape your ideas and understanding would have ever existed...

...and then "that" old chestnut:

jobs.jpg (149.76 KiB) Viewed 4854 times

...you see Emrah, you can pass off Swim Types or whatever else you like as clever marketing ploy, but the reality is that it HAS been approved by both the British and the International Triathlon Union as their modus operandi by nature of the fact that every coach that goes through their system learns the system and begins to understand how to better improve their own coaching. Does discussion and debate take place? Absolutely, but that's respectful discussion and yours I'm afraid is not.

So just because you might have been living your own life of cognitive dissonance for the past 33 years, does not suggest that something cannot come along to change that status quo and get quality coaches talking about how better to improve their coaching.

I have never provoked anyone in this forum, instead I met here with lovely people such as cottmiler, solarenergy, smootharnie, sciame, advido, etc... had very nice friendship here. On the other hand, I have been already praising your useful stuff wherever I go and to whom I met also to my masters squad. You could better took a look at my posts in which I was commending you as "Paul" youself.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5117&p=29507&hilit=serkan#p29507

...well I'm sorry Emrah but you've provoked the beast itself, me, and entirely inappropriately too.

Our words turn to our behaviours. Aren't you behaving in the manner of "COGNITIVE DISSONANCE" that you wrote Paul? Hoisted with your own petard. You are obviously performing an action that is contradictory to SS's ideas, or values by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs,ideas.

Good work! You've got me on this one, except for the fact that you're wrong on this specific point. The world view on freestyle swimming has ALWAYS been that we should all reach towards this idea of the same "perfect" stroke. Just last week we wrote this http://www.feelforthewater.com/2016/11/what-does-swim-smooth-stroke-look-like.html indicating that no such thing exists. Swim Types is our answer to individualising the sport of swimming based on someone's background, gender, height, build, previous swimming experience. My actions are not contradictory to SS's ideas and values as these are the ideas and values that I've personally cultivated over the years. Is that cognitive dissonance in action? Perhaps, but then we're going to be chasing our tails on this one for a while I'm afraid!

A coach(IMO you as a leader) should better explain the pros and cons of something instead of umbraging.

408 posts over 7 years on one of the world's most prominent coaching blogs would suggest that we do indeed explain the pros and cons of everything that we preach and / or has been taken as gospel over the years. Still not enough explanation for you? Well I guess then you would have had to have sit through the critique and peer review in our coaching courses around the world over the last 12 years.

Until now I had never considered/and expected that you would have such a super big ego and primitive behaviour.

Yeah well, sorry to disappoint there. Ironically my grandmother (god rest her soul) always used to tell me that people would resort to primitive use of swear words when they had nothing better to say. Seems she was right for your original posting.

Finally you wrote:
"I'm off now to go and do something truly productive for the world of swimming - our next project. I suggest you do something productive yourself."
First you should have paid attention on your followers's posts and contributions, but you didnt, guess why? Your big ego is the only thing that you are feeding. I have been spending 3 hours on your swimsmoothforum.com site for knowledge sharing and interaction, you could have checked it and written something useful and be productive.

You know what, ironically enough I did, and my first response was "has this guy's account been hacked over night as this really seems like a hardcore troll we're dealing with?" I set my IT team onto the task of checking that and it returned a negative. So yes, I did my research but sadly I was massively disappointed in what that returned.

You had always been an idol in my eyes, were everywhere in my swimming life... Now you have fallen from grace with me! I also know it wont be important for you, as you wrote "it will never be", obviously seeing that nothing has never been important than your ego. Even olympic champions have modesty, in peace with themselves, first go and have it, will be useful for your health.

From now on you "as Paul Newsome" are in my black book.

Good luck,
Emrah

I'm sorry I wasn't for you.