scholarly journals Front Crawl Is More Efficient and Has Smaller Active Drag Than Backstroke Swimming: Kinematic and Kinetic Comparison Between the Two Techniques at the Same Swimming Speeds

Author(s):  
Tomohiro Gonjo ◽  
Kenzo Narita ◽  
Carla McCabe ◽  
Ricardo J. Fernandes ◽  
João Paulo Vilas-Boas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Henrique P. Neiva ◽  
Ricardo J. Fernandes ◽  
Ricardo Cardoso ◽  
Daniel A. Marinho ◽  
J. Arturo Abraldes

This study aimed to analyze the effects of a swimming training mesocycle in master swimmers’ performance and active drag. Twenty-two 39.87 ± 6.10 year-old master swimmers performed a 25 m front crawl at maximal intensity before and after a typical four-week training mesocycle. Maximum, mean and minimum speeds, speed decrease and hip horizontal intra-cyclic velocity variation were assessed using an electromechanical speedometer, and the active drag and power to overcome drag were determined using the measuring active drag system. Maximum, mean and minimum front crawl speeds improved from pre- to post-training (mean ± 95% CI: 3.1 ± 2.8%, p = 0.04; 2.9 ± 1.6%, p = 0.01; and 4.6 ± 3.1%, p = 0.01; respectively) and the speed decrease along the 25 m test lowered after the training period (82.5 ± 76.3%, p = 0.01). The training mesocycle caused a reduction in the active drag at speeds corresponding to 70% (5.0 ± 3.9%), 80% (5.6 ± 4.0%), and 90% (5.9 ± 4.0%), but not at 100% (5.9 ± 6.7%), of the swimmers’ maximal exertions in the 25 m test. These results showed that four weeks of predominantly aerobic training could improve master swimmers’ performance and reduce their hydrodynamic drag while swimming mainly at submaximal speeds.


2012 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 746-750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle P. Formosa ◽  
Huub M. Toussaint ◽  
Bruce R. Mason ◽  
Brendan Burkett

The measurement of active drag in swimming is a biomechanical challenge. This research compared two systems: (i) measuring active drag (MAD) and (ii) assisted towing method (ATM). Nine intermediate-level swimmers (19.7 ± 4.4 years) completed front crawl trials with both systems during one session. The mean (95% confidence interval) active drag for the two systems, at the same maximum speed of 1.68 m/s (1.40–1.87 m/s), was significantly different (p= .002) with a 55% variation in magnitude. The mean active drag was 82.3 N (74.0–90.6 N) for the MAD system and 148.3 N (127.5–169.1 N) for the ATM system. These differences were attributed to variations in swimming style within each measurement system. The inability to measure the early catch phase and kick, along with the fixed length and depth hand place requirement within the MAD system generated a different swimming technique, when compared with the more natural free swimming ATM protocol. A benefit of the MAD system was the measurement of active drag at various speeds. Conversely, the fixed towing speed of the ATM system allowed a natural self-selected arm stroke (plus kick) and the generation of an instantaneous force-time profile.


2020 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge E. Morais ◽  
Ross H. Sanders ◽  
Christopher Papic ◽  
Tiago M. Barbosa ◽  
Daniel A. Marinho

Proceedings ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenzo Narita ◽  
Futoshi Ogita ◽  
Motomu Nakashima ◽  
Hideki Takagi
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Kenzo Narita ◽  
Motomu Nakashima ◽  
Yasuo Sengoku ◽  
Miwako Homma ◽  
Shozo Tsubakimoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
The Body ◽  

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 310-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiago M. Barbosa ◽  
Jorge E. Morais ◽  
Mário J. Costa ◽  
José Goncalves ◽  
Daniel A. Marinho ◽  
...  

The aim of this article has been to classify swimmers based on kinematics, hydrodynamics, and anthropometrics. Sixty-seven young swimmers made a maximal 25 m front-crawl to measure with a speedometer the swimming velocity (v), speed-fluctuation (dv) anddvnormalized tov(dv/v). Another two 25 m bouts with and without carrying a perturbation device were made to estimate active drag coefficient (CDa). Trunk transverse surface area (S) was measured with photogrammetric technique on land and in the hydrodynamic position. Cluster 1 was related to swimmers with a high speed fluctuation (ie,dvanddv/v), cluster 2 with anthropometrics (ie,S) and cluster 3 with a high hydrodynamic profile (ie,CDa). The variable that seems to discriminate better the clusters was thedv/v(F= 53.680;P< .001), followed by thedv(F= 28.506;P< .001),CDa(F= 21.025;P< .001),S(F= 6.297;P< .01) andv(F= 5.375;P= .01). Stepwise discriminant analysis extracted 2 functions: Function 1 was mainly defined bydv/vandS(74.3% of variance), whereas function 2 was mainly defined byCDa(25.7% of variance). It can be concluded that kinematics, hydrodynamics and anthropometrics are determinant domains in which to classify and characterize young swimmers’ profiles.


2017 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-13
Author(s):  
Pendar Hazrati ◽  
Peter James Sinclair ◽  
Wayne Spratford ◽  
René Edouard Ferdinands ◽  
Bruce Robert Mason
Keyword(s):  

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rozaimi Ghazali ◽  
◽  
Asiah Mohd Pilus ◽  
Wan Mohd Bukhari Wan Daud ◽  
Mohd Juzaila Abd Latif ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Figueiredo ◽  
Joao Paulo Vilas-Boas ◽  
Ludovic Seifert ◽  
Didier Chollet ◽  
Ricardo J. Fernandes

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document