Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimming XI

More documents

Recommendations

Info

and backstroke events, and one swimmer in butterfly. All swimmers had followed regular training and competitive participation during the previous four to six years. The swimmers’ training was recorded daily and the training load was calculated multiplying the 10-point rating of the perceived exertion scale (RPE) score with the training duration in minutes (Wallace et al., 2009). The training duration in minutes was recorded by the experimenters and the RPE scale was shown to each swimmer 30 minutes after the end of each training session. This time was selected to ensure the report of a global RPE for each session as has been suggested by Wallace et al., (2009). The daily load was summarized to a weekly training load. The weekly session-RPE load was calculated the four weeks before the NC (week 1: the last before NC). All swimmers were familiarised with the use of the RPE scale fifteen days before the examination period. Thirty-four days (TEST 1), twenty days (TEST 2) and six days (TEST 3) before the NC each swimmer’s tethered swimming force during a 15 s maximum effort test, the hand-grip strength (HG) and the percentage of body fat (BF) were evaluated. Hand-Grip strength was selected because it has been shown to correlate with performance in young swimmers (Geladas et al., 2005), while BF may show body composition changes that have been reported during the taper period (Mujika et al., 2004). Tethered swimming force was measured using a piezoelectric force transducer interfaced to an analog to digital converter (Muscle- Lab, Ergotest). Swimmers were familiarized with the procedure a week before the first test and followed the same warm-up before each test. The procedure had previously been tested for its reliability (ICC=0.985, p
BiomechanicsandmedicineinswimmingXi scale, swimmers expressed the general feeling of fatigue after training. It has been shown that significant improvement of psychometric parameters during a taper may be related to performance of swimmers (Hooper et al., 1999). It seems that calculation of training load with this method takes into account the “global” feeling of fatigue of the swimmers. It has been shown that training load should be reduced more than 50% (Mujika and Padilla, 2003) and training distance by 41 to 60% for an effective taper (Bosquet et al., 2007). In the present study the taper planned by the coaches failed to meet these criteria since training load and distance were decreased only by 30% and 35% respectively from week 4 to the last week of taper. It should be noted that five of the six swimmers who improved their performance showed the greatest difference in training load between week 4 and week 1 (Figure 2). Although not significant, this 1.3% improvement in performance of six swimmers may be important for improving the placing in a race. It is likely that the swimmers were not overloaded enough the weeks preceding the taper (weeks 3 and 4). In fact, the calculated training load was somewhat reduced during week 3 before a local competition. This occurred because the coaches decided to reduce the training distance of week 3 aiming to increase the number of individual qualifying events for the NC. Whatever the case, it has been reported that performance may improve more after taper with prior increased training overloading, than without prior overloading (Thomas et al., 2008). A likely less than necessary overload before the taper or the small percentage decrease of training load and distance from week 4 to week 1 before the NC may partly explain the failure to improve performance in this group of swimmers. It is also likely that given the absence of overload training before the taper, a shorter than fifteen days taper duration may be required for an effective performance outcome in this group of young swimmers. The performance of NC was compared to the best performance of the year in the present study. Previous studies compared performance changes after a taper with performance after an intensified training period and this may have caused a greater reported percent improvement (Hooper et al., 1998; Papoti et al., 2007; Trinity et al., 2008). Furthermore, the swimmers participated in a local competition at the start of the taper after a reduction of training distance and load (Figure 1) and some of them achieved personal best performance time during this competition (after week 3). This may have decreased the chance for a further improvement of performance, since it was possibly difficult to achieve a better performance in the NC after the two weeks of tapering. Although the training distance and load reduction during week 3 was not characterised as a tapering, it cannot be overlooked that it may have had an impact on the following taper and subsequent NC performance. It has been shown that after reduction of training load for a conferance competition, the performance achieved in a following taper is reduced (Trinity et al., 2008). Force (N) 256 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 TEST 1 TEST 2 TEST 3 * * * * * 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Time (s) Figure 1. Changes of tethered force during the 15 s tests performed thirty-four (TEST 1), twenty (TEST 2) and six days (TEST 3) before the National competition. * p
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:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206: Biomechanicsandmedicinein
Page 217 and 218: average VO2 measured during resting
Page 221 and 222: Fourteen highly trained male swimme
Page 255: Biomechanicsandmedicinein
Page 267 and 268: Figure 2. Repeatability of the LTin
Page 299 and 300: -ARM * 5 Biomechanicsandmedic
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?