Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimming XI

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Effect of Start Time Feedback on Swimming Start Performance. de la Fuente, B. 1 and Arellano, r. 2 1Sierra Nevada High Performance Altitude Training Centre, Monachil, Spain. 2University of Granada, Granada, Spain. The start is a significant component in competitive swimming performance, particularly in the short events. This relevance is confirmed when the differences in the start times are greater than the differences in the event’s final times. The purpose of this study was to determine how start time feedback during training would improve a swimmer’s start performance. A group (n=42) of regional swimmers and P. E. Students (former competitive swimmers), participated in the study. The main group was equally divided related to 15m performance and gender into experimental and control groups. After ten sessions of specific start training, both groups improved their starting times (average improvements: EG: 0.30 s vs CG 0.11 s). However, greater improvements were produced within the experimental group (15m: p
BiomechanicsandmedicineinswimmingXi Figure 1. Specifically designed structure to support the electronic ALGE touchpad (TPI), to be placed at any distance from the wall on either side of the 25 m or 50 m pool. results The change in start times did not display significant differences between groups. However, data showed that both groups reduced their starting times, even the group that did not receive feedback after the effort (Average improvements: EG: 0.30 s vs CG 0.11 s). The fact that the CG group improved due to practice without feedback may explain the lack of significant differences between the improvements in the EG and CG. However, the improvements were greater within the EG (5.2%) than control (2.2%), where the swimmers received TKR after the practice. In order to check the significance of the improvement within each group, a related samples t-Test was performed. Results showed significant differences in both groups, with a greater significance level in the EG, at the four distances analyzed (Table 2). At the previous video recording, most swimmers emerged to the surface before 10 m. For that reason, the decision was made to focus the training on 10 m rather than 15m, in order to avoid an erroneous start measurement related to the swim phase after surfacing. Taking into account the total number of repetitions, the performance improvement was greater at the more practiced distances (start followed by freestyle swimming up to 10m and start followed by underwater dolphin kicking up to 10m) (Table 2). Table 2. Differences between pre-test and post-test in both groups (Experimental – EG and control group CG). Results from related samples t-Test. Pre-test Post-Test Mean (s) SD Mean (s) SD t-test 15 m free EG 1 8.02 0.78 7.87 0.79 ** 10 m DK2 10 m free 5.68 4.84 0.75 0.53 5.38 4.58 0.73 0.49 *** *** 10 m glide 3 7.18 1.11 7.04 1.09 ** 15 m free 8.17 0.81 8.07 0.81 * CG 10 m DK1 10 m free 5.84 4.95 0.81 0.57 5.73 4.84 0.81 0.58 ** ** 10 m glide 7.41 1.11 7.31 1.10 * 1. Free. Start followed by freestyle swim until 15m 2. DK: Underwater dolphin kicking. 3. Start + Gliding until hands contact (TPI) at 10m. To represent the effectiveness of the experimental training, the start improvement as a percentage between the times achieved before and after the training sessions was calculated. As a result, the improvement percentage was 3% greater in the experimental group, with greater differences on the more practiced distances (Figure 2). This seems to indicate 250 that giving accurate feedback related to the start duration produces more significant effects than just systematic repetition. Figure 2. Percentage improvement in start times before and after training in the experimental and control groups. As a consequence of the statistical results, the data for individual swimmers were analysed. The starting times as a function of the number of training sessions for two subjects; the one with greatest improvement and the one with the least improvement for both groups were examined (Figure 3). Comparing times, (Figure 4) it was seen that performance tended to be more consistent within the EG (lower differences between the best time and the average time among the sessions). Similar times Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimming XI / Chapter 4 Training Page 25 seem to indicate a more constant and uniform performance at the end of the training period. 10m Free Swim (s) 5,2 5 4,8 4,6 4,4 4,2 6,8 6,6 6,4 6,2 6 Experimental Group (Subject 39) Best Average 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 S E S S I ON S Control Group (Subject 21) Best Avera 5 8 Figure 3. Individual performance evolution (10m Free) along the sessions. Dif. Before Dif. After Figure 0,4 3. Individual performance evolution (10m Free) along the sessions. Dif. between Best & Average (s) 0,35 0,3 0,25 0,2 0,15 0,1 0,05 0 S21 S16 S09 S73 S39 S15 S75 S25 Control Group Experimental Group
Page 1 and 2:
Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimmi
Page 3 and 4:
Bibliographic information: Biomecha
Page 5 and 6:
Biomechanicsandmedicinein
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Figure 1. General biomechanical par
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200: Biomechanicsandmedicinein
Page 217 and 218: average VO2 measured during resting
Page 221 and 222: Fourteen highly trained male swimme
Page 249: Biomechanicsandmedicinein
Page 267 and 268: Figure 2. Repeatability of the LTin
Page 299 and 300: -ARM * 5 Biomechanicsandmedic
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
• Without restriction; • Blinde
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
etween experimental groups and cont
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Page 379 and 380:
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391:
Pahlen Norge AS Pahlen Norge AS Cha
show all

Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimming XI

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?