Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimming XI

(test 2), however, all BACs are integrated in clusters, the distances are
smaller and the nodes are in regularity. After the twelve weeks training
period (test 3) the structure is quite stabilized, some distances are once
again reduced (p. E. 9 and 10, 5 and 6) but also some (p. e. 3 and 4, 7 and
8) increased.
The following schedule shows a way to transfer the structure of the dendrograms
above into a schedule to compare it directly. Each dendrogram
Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimming XI / Chapter 4 Training Page 111
shows 2 main groups, but only test (2) and (3) shows 3 and 4 clusters.
At test (2) there are 6 nodes (2 clusters) in the main group 1, at test (3)
7 nodes (3 clusters). According to main group 1 are in main group 2 at
test The following (2) 4 nodes schedule (1 cluster) shows a way and to at transfer test the (3) structure 3 nodes of (1 the cluster). dendrograms The above real
into Biomechanics a schedule and to compare Medicine it in directly. Swimming Each XI dendrogram / Chapter shows 4 Training 2 main groups, Page but only 111
distances test (2) and between (3) shows 3 the and single 4 clusters. nodes At test cannot (2) there be are shown 6 nodes in (2 the clusters) schedule, in the
these main group details 1, at are test only (3) 7 visible nodes (3 directly clusters). in According the dendrograms. to main group 1 are in main
group 2 at test (2) 4 nodes (1 cluster) and at test (3) 3 nodes (1 cluster). The real
distances between the single nodes cannot be shown in the schedule, these details are
Tab. The following 1 Schedule schedule of representational shows a way to transfer
only visible directly in the dendrograms. structure the structure for one of the swimmer dendrograms at above
Biomechanics three
into a schedule and to Medicine compare in it directly. Swimming Each XI dendrogram / Chapter 4 Training shows 2 main groups, Page but 111 only
tests test (2) and (3) shows 3 and 4 clusters. At test (2) there are 6 nodes (2 clusters) in the
Tab. 1 Schedule of representational structure for one swimmer at three tests
main group 1, at test (3) 7 nodes (3 clusters). According to main group 1 are in main
Number of Number of
group Test 2 at test (2) 4 nodes (1 cluster) BAC and main at test group (3) 1 3 nodes BAC (1 main cluster). group The 2 real
main groups Cluster
The distances
Test following between
1 2 schedule the shows single
0 a nodes way to cannot
1,2,4 transfer be the shown structure in the of schedule,
5,8,9,10,7,3 the dendrograms these details above are
into only
Test a schedule visible directly
2 2 to compare in the
3 it dendrograms. directly. Each {9,10} dendrogram {1,2,3,4} shows {5,6,7,8} 2 main groups, but only
test Test (2) 3 and 2 (3) shows 3 and 4 4 clusters. {8,9,10}{1,2}{3,4} At test (2) there are 6 nodes {5,6,7} (2 clusters) in the
main Tab. group 1 Schedule 1, at test of representational (3) 7 nodes (3 structure clusters). for According one swimmer to main at three group tests 1 are in main
group
The Test improvement 2 at Number test (2) of
in 4 mental nodes Number (1 representation cluster) of
improvement in mental representation BAC and shown main at test group as (3) example 3
shown 1 nodes BAC for (1
as one example main cluster). swimmer group The
for 2 above real
one
distances also led between main groups
to improvements the single Cluster
in nodes the swimming cannot be parameters shown in the (also schedule, shown for these one details swimmer are
only swimmer Test
below). visible 1 2
According directly above in also to the REISCHLE dendrograms. led 0 to improvements 1,2,4
(1988) and Arellano in the et swimming 5,8,9,10,7,3
al. (1991) the parameters following
Test 2 2 3 {9,10} {1,2,3,4} {5,6,7,8}
(also parameters shown were for selected one swimmer to demonstrate below). technical According progress: to REISCHLE first, stroke length (1988) and
Tab. Test
second, 1 Schedule 3 2
stroke index of representational 4
which combines structure {8,9,10}{1,2}{3,4}
stroke for length one swimmer and swimming at {5,6,7} three speed. tests
and Arellano
The following Number schedule of et al. Number (1991)
lists the of the following parameters were selected to
Test
time (10 metres) (t), speed (v), stroke rate (sr), length
demonstrate The improvement
(d) and the stroke technical in mental
index (si) of progress: representation BAC main
the example first, shown group
swimmer. stroke as example 1 BAC
length for main
and one second, swimmer group 2
main groups Cluster
stroke above
Test also 1 led 2 to improvements 0 in the swimming 1,2,4 parameters (also 5,8,9,10,7,3 shown for one swimmer
Test index below). which combines stroke length and swimming speed.
Tab. 2 Biomechanical 2 According to REISCHLE
data 3 (1988)
of one swimmer {9,10} at {1,2,3,4} and Arellano et
test (1), (2) and {5,6,7,8} al. (1991) the following
(3)
Test The parameters 3 following 2 were
Test 1 schedule selected 4 to lists demonstrate the {8,9,10}{1,2}{3,4} Test time technical
2 (10 metres) progress: {5,6,7} (t), first, speed stroke
Test 3 (v), length stroke and
second, stroke index which combines stroke length and swimming speed.
rate t (sr), v length sr d (d) and si the t stroke v sr index d (si) si of the t example v sr swimmer. d si
The The
6.52 improvement following schedule
1.53 53 in 1.76 mental lists
4.08 representation the time (10
6.64 1.51 47 shown metres)
1.92 as (t), example speed (v),
4.36 6.66for stroke
1.50 one swimmer rate (sr),
48 1.88 above length
4.23
also (d)
6.64 led and
1.49 to the improvements stroke index (si)
50 1.81 4.10 in of the the
6.22 swimming example swimmer.
1.57 46 parameters 2.04 5.02 (also 6.64 shown 1.51 for 48 one 1.88 swimmer 4.27
below). Tab. 2 According Biomechanical to REISCHLE data of (1988) one swimmer and Arellano at test et al. (1), (1991) (2) and the following (3)
parameters Tab. 2 Biomechanical
From test 1 were to test selected data
2 (training to of demonstrate one swimmer at test (1), (2) and (3)
period) the technical average progress: speed increased first, stroke a little, length the stroke and
second, Test 1 Test 2 Test 3
length clearly, stroke index while which the stroke combines rate decreased. stroke length Thus, and the swimming stroke-index speed. also increased. At
The t v sr d si t v sr d si t v sr d si
test following 3 the average schedule speed lists decreased the time a bit. (10 The metres) stroke (t), rate, speed the (v), stroke stroke length rate and (sr), the length stroke
(d) 6.52 1.53 53 1.76 4.08 6.64 1.51 47 1.92 4.36 6.66 1.50 48 1.88 4.23
index and were the stroke stabilized index on (si) a level of the between example test swimmer. (1) and test (2).
6.64 1.49 50 1.81 4.10 6.22 1.57 46 2.04 5.02 6.64 1.51 48 1.88 4.27
The following table shows the mean data of relevant parameters (test 1, 2 and 3) of the
Tab. test 2 group. Biomechanical data of one swimmer at test (1), (2) and (3)
From test Test 1 to 1 1 to test test 2 (training 2 (training period) Test the period) 2 average the speed average increased speed Test a little, 3 increased the stroke a
little, length clearly, while the stroke rate decreased. Thus, the stroke-index also increased. At
Tab. t 3 v the Statistical stroke sr data d length for si test clearly, group t v while sr the d stroke si rate t decreased. v sr d Thus, si the
6.52 test 3 the average speed decreased a bit. The stroke rate, the stroke length and the stroke
Parameter 1.53 53 1.76 4.08 Test 6.64 1 (mean, 1.51std) 47
stroke-index Test 1.922 4.36 (mean, 6.66 std) 1.50 Test 48 3 (mean, 1.88 4.23 std)
index were stabilized also increased. on a level between At test test 3 (1) the and average test (2). speed decreased a bit.
6.64 Speed 1.49 50 1.81 4.10 1.53 6.22 ± 0.09 1.57 m/s 46 1.52 2.04 ± 5.02 0.11 6.64 m/s 1.51 1.49 48 ± 1.88 0.09 m/s 4.27
The following table shows the mean data of relevant parameters (test 1, 2 and 3) of the
Stroke stroke rate rate, the 49.61 stroke ± length 4.2 /min and 47.81 the stroke ± 3.26 index /min were 46.70 stabilized ± 4.18 /min on
From test group.
a Stroke level test length between 1 to test 2 test (training 1.85 (1) and ± period) 0.16 test m the (2). average 1.92 speed ± 0.19 increased m 1.93 a little, ± 0.20 the stroke m
length Stroke clearly, index while the stroke 4.36 ± rate 0.72 decreased. 4.50 Thus, ± the 1.01 stroke-index 4.34 also ± increased. 0.80 At
test The Tab. 3 the following 3 Statistical average speed data table for decreased shows test group the a bit. mean The stroke data rate, of relevant the stroke length parameters and the (test stroke 1,
index Parameter Test 1 (mean, std) Test 2 (mean, std) Test 3 (mean, std)
2 The and speed were 3) stabilized of remained the test on nearly a group. level the between same over test (1) the and 3 tests. test (2). Comparing the stroke length,
The Speed 1.53 ± 0.09 m/s 1.52 ± 0.11 m/s 1.49 ± 0.09 m/s
however, following an increase table shows of approx. the mean 0.07 data m (60 of strokes relevant = parameters 4.20 m) and (test again 1, 2 1 and cm to 3) test of the (3).
test Stroke rate 49.61 ± 4.2 /min 47.81 ± 3.26 /min 46.70 ± 4.18 /min
The group. stroke rate decreased by approx. 2 and 1 strokes per minute. The stroke index
Tab. Stroke length 1.85 ± 0.16 m 1.92 ± 0.19 m 1.93 ± 0.20 m
increased 3 Statistical from test data 1 to test for 2 test and group decreased to test 3. Although there are small
Tab. Stroke 3 Statistical index data for 4.36 test group ± 0.72 4.50 ± 1.01 4.34 ± 0.80
Parameter Test 1 (mean, std) Test 2 (mean, std) Test 3 (mean, std)
Speed The speed remained nearly 1.53 ± 0.09 the same m/s over 1.52 the 3 ± tests. 0.11 m/s Comparing 1.49 the ± stroke 0.09 m/s length,
Stroke however, rate an increase of 49.61 approx. ± 4.2 0.07 /min m (60 strokes 47.81 = ± 4.20 3.26 m) /min and again 46.70 1 ± cm 4.18 to test /min (3).
Stroke The stroke length rate decreased 1.85 ± by 0.16 approx. m 2 and 1.92 1 strokes ± 0.19 per m minute. 1.93 The ± 0.20 stroke m index
Stroke increased index from test 1 4.36 to ± test 0.72 2 and decreased 4.50 ± to 1.01 test 3. Although 4.34 ± there 0.80 are small
The speed remained nearly the same over the 3 tests. Comparing the
stroke length, however, an increase of approx. 0.07 m (60 strokes = 4.20
m) and again 1 cm to test (3). The stroke rate decreased by approx. 2 and
1 strokes per minute. The stroke index increased from test 1 to test 2 and
decreased Biomechanics to and test Medicine 3. Although in Swimming there XI are / Chapter small 4 increases, Training only the Page stroke 112
rate changed significantly (shown by the Wilcoxon signed-rank test).
The speed remained nearly the same over the 3 tests. Comparing the stroke length,
however, an increase of approx. 0.07 m (60 strokes = 4.20 m) and again 1 cm to test (3).
The stroke rate decreased by approx. 2 and 1 strokes per minute. The stroke index
increased from test 1 to test 2 and decreased to test 3. Although there are small
increases, only the stroke rate changed significantly (shown by the Wilcoxon signed-
The rank test). following table shows the mean data of relevant parameters (test 1,
2 and 3) of the control group.
The following table shows the mean data of relevant parameters (test 1, 2 and 3) of the
control group.
Tab. 4 Statistical data for control group
Tab. 4 Statistical data for control group
Parameter Test 1 (mean, std) Test 2 (mean, std) Test 3 (mean, std)
Speed 1.38 ± 0.10 m/s 1.30 ± 0.11 m/s 1.28 ± 0.08 m/s
Stroke rate 49.63 ± 3.62 /min 48.65 ± 3.87 /min 48.80 ± 4.62 /min
Stroke length 1.68 ± 0.15 m 1.62 ± 0.16 m 1.57 ± 0.18 m
Stroke index 3.23 ± 0.66 2.81 ± 0.70 2.60 ± 0.56
In contrast with the test group, the control group does not show any increases. Rather
the speed and the stroke distance decreased, while the stroke rate nearly remained at the
same level.
DISCUSSION
Comparing the test-group-results of the three tests after six weeks training including a
SDA-M based intervention the increase of stroke length at a similar speed is obvious.
This can also be shown for the stroke index (test 1 to 2, which is based on speed and the
stroke length. Longer stroke length is an indicator of an increased effect of the stroking
action. In combination with lower stroke rate a total increase of efficiency is obvious.
chaPter4.trainingandPerformance
In contrast with the test group, the control group does not show any
increases. Rather the speed and the stroke distance decreased, while the
stroke rate nearly remained at the same level.
dIscussIon
Comparing the test-group-results of the three tests after six weeks
training including a SDA-M based intervention the increase of stroke
length at a similar speed is obvious. This can also be shown for the stroke
index (test 1 to 2, which is based on speed and the stroke length. Longer
stroke length is an indicator of an increased effect of the stroking action.
In combination with lower stroke rate a total increase of efficiency is obvious.
However, without the specific workouts the test group also could
not stabilize the high level reached at test 2. The chosen parameters also
decreased a bit, but reached at test 3 a level between test 1 and test 2.
In contrast of the test group, the control group remained on the level
of test 1 or the results decreased. Without using Split or doing the specific
technique training, they did not show the same changes as the test
group.
Even though the changes were mostly not statistically significant,
the intervention made an impact: the participating swimmers increased
their cognitive ability and thus enhanced their own power to optimize
their aquatic space activities. But this seems to be a first, small step –
without the specific training the changes could not be stabilized at the
high level of test 2. Either the intervention-time was too short or it
might be important to repeat the specific workouts for better stabilization.
Presumably, if the SDA-M based stroking instructions causes
large-sale changes, the concerned swimmers were not able to automate
the new motion sequence in the short time of the intervention. Especially
when they try to swim at maximal speed, they did not manage
to continuously produce the motion sequence at an optimized level or
they did not reach maximal speed, they swam more slowly than on the
pre-test.
conclusIon
The elected method stands the test, although it will be important in the
future to study again this type of training in the domain of motor control
and motor learning, for example during a longer intervention. In the
future, technique training offers great potential for more effective training
of age-group swimmers. In long term performance planning, more
time should therefore be spent on the education of motor competence
starting early in the swimmer’s education. With advanced swimmers the
cognition based technique training can be used to work systematically
on the cognitive representation of the motion in theory and practice.
However, this requires better education of the swimmers in the theoretical
background of the different strokes.
reFerences
Arellano, R & Pardollp, S. (1991). An evaluation of changes in the
crawl-stroke techniques during training periods in a swimming season.
In D. Mac Laren, T. Reilly, A. Lees (eds.), Swimming Science VI
(S. 143-149). London.
Bläsing, B., Tenenbaum, G. & Schack, T. (2009). The cognitive structure
of movements in classical dance. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10,
350-360.
Engel, F. & Schack, T. (2001), Das Coachingkonzept ProMent in der
Praxis.
Reischle, k., 1988: Biomechanik des Schwimmens. Bockenem.
Schack, T. (2002). Kognitive Architektur von Bewegungshandlungen. Unveröffentlichte
Habil. Köln.
Schmidt, A. C. (2009). Kognitionsbasiertes Bewegungstraining und Talentförderung.
Eine Interventionsstudie zur Kraularmbewegung. Göttingen.
285