Why is Active Streamlining overlooked?
by Terry Laughlin
Brian Vande Krol, TI Coach in Denver, sent me this email query today, which raises perhaps the most provocative question in all of swimming:
>>From time to time, I’ve heard you mention a study about olympic swimmers and power output. Can you elaborate on it for me? >>
Here are the details of the study Brian refers to:
In 1992, Rick Sharp and Jane Cappaert, "performance science" specialists for USA Swimming, conducted tests of stroking power on swimmers at the Barcelona Olympics. They found that the also-rans — those who failed to advance out of prelims – generated as much stroking power as the eventual medalists.
Even more striking, when they analyzed data on swimmers who competed in the Mens 100M Free — usually considered the "ultimate power event" — they found that non-finalists averaged 16 percent more power than finalists!
Their conclusion? That "active streamlining" was far more critical than propulsive power to speed.
Here’s more: In 2005 when Defense Dept engineers and physicists studied human and fish swimming while designing a swim foil for the Navy Seals, they found that average (i.e. recreational) human swimmers converted only 3% of their power expenditures into forward motion, while dolphins convert 80%. They further found that dolphins have only 1/8 of the "horsepower" their calculations predicted it should take to move their mass at the peak velocities they achieve while swimming.
Their conclusion? Dolphins are brilliant — and humans hopeless — at "active streamlining." Which raises two questions:
Why does traditional swimming instruction focus almost exclusively on teaching the pull and kick, and virtually ignore teaching of "slippery or fishlike" body positions – i.e. active streamlining?
Why does competitive swim training focus so heavily on power development (kicking and pulling sets, , big paddles, swimming with drag devices, weight training sessions, etc.) and virtually ignore active streamlining?
Comments?