scholarly journals Mechanical power, thrust power and propelling efficiency: relationships with elite sprint swimming performance

2017 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 506-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giorgio Gatta ◽  
Matteo Cortesi ◽  
Ian Swaine ◽  
Paola Zamparo
Keyword(s):  
Swimming Performance ◽  
Mechanical Power ◽  
Propelling Efficiency ◽  
Sprint Swimming

Mechanical and propelling efficiency in swimming derived from exercise using a laboratory-based whole-body swimming ergometer

2012 ◽  
Vol 113 (4) ◽  
pp. 584-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paola Zamparo ◽  
Ian L. Swaine
Keyword(s):  
Power Output ◽  
Power Input ◽  
Mechanical Power ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Metabolic Power ◽  
Exact Simulation ◽  
Mechanical Power Output ◽  
Propelling Efficiency ◽  
Overall Efficiency ◽  
Active Drag

Determining the efficiency of a swimming stroke is difficult because different “efficiencies” can be computed based on the partitioning of mechanical power output (Ẇ) into its useful and nonuseful components, as well as because of the difficulties in measuring the forces that a swimmer can exert in water. In this paper, overall efficiency (ηO = ẆTOT/Ė, where ẆTOT is total mechanical power output, and Ė is overall metabolic power input) was calculated in 10 swimmers by means of a laboratory-based whole-body swimming ergometer, whereas propelling efficiency (ηP = ẆD/ẆTOT, where ẆD is the power to overcome drag) was estimated based on these values and on values of drag efficiency (ηD = ẆD/Ė): ηP = ηD/ηO. The values of ηD reported in the literature range from 0.03 to 0.09 (based on data for passive and active drag, respectively). ηO was 0.28 ± 0.01, and ηP was estimated to range from ∼0.10 (ηD = 0.03) to 0.35 (ηD = 0.09). Even if there are obvious limitations to exact simulation of the whole swimming stroke within the laboratory, these calculations suggest that the data reported in the literature for ηO are probably underestimated, because not all components of ẆTOT can be measured accurately in this environment. Similarly, our estimations of ηP suggest that the data reported in the literature are probably overestimated.

scholarly journals Specific and Holistic Predictors of Sprint Front Crawl Swimming Performance

2021 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 197-207
Author(s):  
Marek Strzała ◽  
Arkadiusz Stanula ◽  
Piotr Krężałek ◽  
Wojciech Rejdych ◽  
Jakub Karpiński ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Swimming Performance ◽  
Strongly Correlated ◽  
Arm Cranking ◽  
Front Crawl ◽  
Dry Land ◽  
Fitness Assessment ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Sprint Swimming

Abstract The aim of the study was to examine the impact of selected water- and dry-land predictors of 50-m front crawl performance among 27 male swimmers aged 19.3 ± 2.67 years. The following water tests were performed: front crawl tethered arm stroking in a water flume (flow velocity: 0.9 m·s–1) and leg tethered flutter kicking in a swimming pool. Anaerobic tests on dry land included arm cranking and a set of 10 countermovement jumps. The maximal and average forces generated by legs in tethered swimming (Fl max and Fl ave) turned out to be the strongest predictors of sprint swimming aptitude. These values were strongly correlated with total speed (Vtotal50) (r = 0.49, p < 0.05 and r = 0.54, p < 0.01, respectively), start, turn, and finishing speed (VSTF) (r = 0.60, p < 0.01 and r = 0.67, p < 0.01, respectively). The relationship of Fl max and Fl ave with surface speed (Vsurface) was moderate (r = 0.33, non-significant and r = 0.41, p < 0.05, respectively). The maximal force generated by arms (Fa max) during flume tethered swimming significantly influenced Vsurface and Vtotal50 (0.51, p < 0.01 and 0.47, p < 0.05, respectively). Its relationship with VSTF was close to significant (0.36, p = 0.07). Upper and lower limb dry-land tests showed lower and more holistic relationships with the 50-m front crawl race, however, being a good complement to overall fitness assessment. Specific in-water evaluation, especially the newly prepared flutter kicking test, as well as dry-land tests, can be applied to regularly monitor progress in swimming training, and to identify talented swimmers.

scholarly journals Proposal of a Conditioning Activity Model on Sprint Swimming Performance

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tarine Botta de Arruda ◽  
Ricardo Augusto Barbieri ◽  
Vitor Luiz de Andrade ◽  
Jônatas Augusto Cursiol ◽  
Carlos Augusto Kalva-Filho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Swimming Performance ◽  
Activity Model ◽  
Sprint Swimming

scholarly journals Corrigendum: Proposal of a Conditioning Activity Model on Sprint Swimming Performance

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tarine Botta de Arruda ◽  
Ricardo Augusto Barbieri ◽  
Vitor Luiz de Andrade ◽  
Jônatas Augusto Cursiol ◽  
Carlos Augusto Kalva-Filho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Swimming Performance ◽  
Activity Model ◽  
Sprint Swimming

scholarly journals The Effect of Concurrent Resistance Training on Upper Body Strength, Sprint Swimming Performance and Kinematics in Competitive Adolescent Swimmers. A Randomized Controlled Trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (19) ◽  
pp. 10261
Author(s):  
Sofiene Amara ◽  
Tiago M. Barbosa ◽  
Yassine Negra ◽  
Raouf Hammami ◽  
Riadh Khalifa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Resistance Training ◽  
Muscle Strength ◽  
Bench Press ◽  
Swimming Performance ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Upper Body ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Swimming Velocity ◽  
Stroke Rate ◽  
Sprint Swimming

This study aimed to examine the effect of 9 weeks of concurrent resistance training (CRT) between resistance on dry land (bench press (BP) and medicine ball throw) and resistance in water (water parachute and hand paddles) on muscle strength, sprint swimming performance and kinematic variables compared by the usual training (standard in-water training). Twenty-two male competitive swimmers participated in this study and were randomly allocated to two groups. The CRT group (CRTG, age = 16.5 ± 0.30 years) performed a CRT program, and the control group (CG, age = 16.1 ± 0.32 years) completed their usual training. The independent variables were measured pre- and post-intervention. The findings showed that the one-repetition maximum bench press (1RM BP) was improved only after a CRT program (d = 2.18; +12.11 ± 1.79%). Moreover, all sprint swimming performances were optimized in the CRT group (d = 1.3 to 2.61; −4.22 ± 0.18% to −7.13 ± 0.23%). In addition, the findings revealed an increase in velocity and stroke rate (d = 1.67, d = 2.24; 9.36 ± 2.55%, 13.51 ± 4.22%, respectively) after the CRT program. The CRT program improved the muscle strength, which, in turn, improved the stroke rate, with no change in the stroke length. Then, the improved stroke rate increased the swimming velocity. Ultimately, a faster velocity leads to better swim performances.

Buoyancy, Gender, and Swimming Performance

2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 248-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott P. McLean ◽  
Richard N. Hinrichs
Keyword(s):  
Body Fat ◽  
Swimming Performance ◽  
Body Position ◽  
Center Of Mass ◽  
Upper Body ◽  
Percent Body Fat ◽  
Buoyant Force ◽  
Body Strength ◽  
Upper Body Strength ◽  
Sprint Swimming

This study investigated the relationship of gender and buoyancy to sprint swimming performance. The center of buoyancy (CB) and center of mass (CM) were measured using reaction board principles. Performance was evaluated as the time needed to complete the middle 13.7 m of a 22.9-m sprint for kicking and swimming trials. Nineteen female swimmers (mean ±SD, 21.9 ± 3.2 years) had significantly more body fat (24.1 ± 4.5%) than 13 male swimmers (21.7 ± 4.2 years, 14.8 ± 5.0%). Males swam and kicked significantly faster (p< .01) than females. Percent body fat, upper body strength, the distance between the CB and CM (d), and the buoyant force measured in 3 body positions all met the criteria for entrance into a regression equation. When gender was not controlled in the analysis, these variables accounted for 70% of the variance in swim time (p< .008). When gender was controlled in the analysis, these variables accounted for 45% of the variance in swim time (p= .06). Percent body fat accounted for the largest amount variance in both regression analyses (39%,p< .001; 18%,p= 0.02, respectively). Upper body strength accounted for 14% of the variance in swim time (p= .006) when gender was not controlled but only 4% when gender was controlled (p= .27). The distancedas measured in a body position with both arms raised above the head was the buoyancy factor that accounted for the greatest amount of variance in swim time (6% when gender was not controlled,p= .06, 10%; when gender was controlled,p= .07). Percent body fat,d, and the buoyant force accounted for no significant amount of variance in kick time. These data suggested that a swimmer’s buoyancy characteristics did have a small but important influence on sprint swimming performance.

scholarly journals Energetic and Biomechanical Contributions for Longitudinal Performance in Master Swimmers

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
Daniel A. Marinho ◽  
Maria I. Ferreira ◽  
Tiago M. Barbosa ◽  
José Vilaça-Alves ◽  
Mário J. Costa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Lactate ◽  
Swimming Performance ◽  
Lactate Concentration ◽  
Blood Lactate Concentration ◽  
Stroke Index ◽  
Front Crawl ◽  
Stroke Length ◽  
Propelling Efficiency ◽  
Peak Blood ◽  
Peak Blood Lactate

Background: The current study aimed to verify the changes in performance, physiological and biomechanical variables throughout a season in master swimmers. Methods: Twenty-three master swimmers (34.9 ± 7.4 years) were assessed three times during a season (December: M1, March: M2, June: M3), in indoor 25 m swimming pools. An incremental 5 × 200 m test was used to evaluate the speed at 4 mmol·L−1 of blood lactate concentration (sLT), maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), peak blood lactate ([La-]peak) after the test, stroke frequency (SF), stroke length (SL), stroke index (SI) and propelling efficiency (ηp). The performance was assessed in the 200 m front crawl during competition. Results: Swimming performance improved between M1, M2 (2%, p = 0.03), and M3 (4%, p < 0.001). Both sLT and VO2max increased throughout the season (4% and 18%, p < 0.001, respectively) but not [La-]peak. While SF decreased 5%, SL, SI and ηp increased 5%, 7%, and 6% (p < 0.001) from M1 to M3. Conclusions: Master swimmers improved significantly in their 200 m front crawl performance over a season, with decreased SF, and increased SL, ηp and SI. Despite the improvement in energetic variables, the change in performance seemed to be more dependent on technical than energetic factors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document