Pull Buoy question-use for working free style
KOS
I was swimmning with a pull buoy to work on arm placement etc.. w/
free style.. I was using a larger size buoy- swim was great. The
following day, worked with a smaller size buoy and found the swim
akward, could swimming with a smaller buoy negatively impact a swim?
I found it easier to swim with the larger buoy this was the kind that
are one piece..
Steve Freides
You're trying to get to a place where you can concentrate on your arms -
just use whichever kind you like best and that's all there is to it.
-S-
MW Smith
If the smaller one was awkward because it didn't hold your legs up,
then use the bigger one. The purpose of the buoy is to keep your legs
on the surface, so if it doesn't do that, it isn't useful. If it was
awkward because it was hard to grip between your legs, again, use the
bigger one. You hold it all the way at the top of your legs, not
further down.
Another technique, not for the faint-hearted, is to use a rubber band
cut from an automobile inner tube. You twist it and put one loop over
each foot. Then you try to swim dragging your legs with no flotation
at all. Hard work. I hated it, but I have to admit it did force me to
find ways to make my pull more efficient.
Duncan Heenan
news:4d818412-3207-4f05...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
I know this will sound like heresy, as coaches all seem to like anything
that involves equipment, but I'd question the value of pull buoys at all.
They don't increase drag in water much, so there's little if any strength
training gain, and if you are using them for 'arm placement', surely you are
developing an arm placement which will not apply when you start using your
legs. I don't see the point of training for something you are not going to
do (you don't race or even leisure swim with a pull buoy do you?) The only
value I see in a pull buoy is to keep your legs afloat of you have an injury
down there, so you can keep the rest of you training until your legal are
ready to use again.
I know this is an unorthodox thing to say, but so was 'The Emperor has no
clothes on!', then everyobody realised he didn't.
--
Duncan Heenan
MW Smith
wrote:
> "KOS" <computerstu...@excite.com> wrote in message
> The only
> value I see in a pull buoy is to keep your legs afloat of you have an injury
> down there, so you can keep the rest of you training until your legal are
> ready to use again.
> I know this is an unorthodox thing to say, but so was 'The Emperor has no
> clothes on!', then everyobody realised he didn't.
That IS the purpose of the pull buoy, to keep the legs in the proper
position when you aren't using them. But this isn't just for the
injured. It also helps people whose legs are too deep because their
form is bad. It can be very revealing to feel what it is like for your
legs to be in the correct position, when you have been swimming for a
time in the wrong position.
>They don't increase drag in water much,
Yes, but if you have a good kick, then swimming with a pull buoy
subtractsthe thrust of your kick and increases the load on your upper
body, which is the purpose for people with good kicks. On the other
hand, I was always able to swim faster with a pull buoy than without,
because my kick provides balance but no thrust at all.
Duncan Heenan
"MW Smith" <clippe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:994202b1-500a-46e0...@k4g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>snip<
Yes, but if you have a good kick, then swimming with a pull buoy
subtractsthe thrust of your kick and increases the load on your upper
body, which is the purpose for people with good kicks. On the other
hand, I was always able to swim faster with a pull buoy than without,
because my kick provides balance but no thrust at all.
--------------------
Same here.
--
Duncan Heenan
_
> Yes, but if you have a good kick, then swimming with a pull buoy
> subtractsthe thrust of your kick and increases the load on your upper
> body
No.
Hollander et al showed that the force produced when swimming with a pull
bouy averaged 12% less than with full stroke swimming.
MW Smith
wrote:
The force of what? Your remark is ambiguous.
MW Smith
I think I see what you mean, but the lower force would be due to lower
speed. So my point still stands. The load on your upper body is
increased because of the dead weight of the legs. When the legs are no
longer providing thrust, the upper body works harder to do the same
amount of work. Otherwise, elite swimmers with good kicks would be
breaking world records while using a pull buoy during training, which
they aren't doing, as far as I know.
Steve Freides
I started off that way - my front crawl kick gave me no forward movement
by itself whatsoever, just churned up the water.
I think, in most things, it is beneficial to be able to isolate and work
on some part of the whole - not that this is necessary or desirable for
everyone, but I found it very educational, a kind of poor man's swimming
teacher. I would use buoys along with paddles and work on a slow,
powerful stroke and a good glide - this helped me get hands and arms
into the best position, again it taught me many things I wouldn't have
figured out otherwise. I also used to do kick-only laps to work on
that, and it was really rude at first, and only somewhat less rude years
later, but it was good for me.
In other words, buoys are a tool and, like any tool, they can used well
or poorly, and not needed in some situations. There is no simple answer
to be had here, IMHO, as just they're "good" or "not good."
-S-
Ghost Rider
My 12 yr old son's coach has him pulling with a kick board held between
his thighs with the long direction vertical as he swims. You want the
majority of the board underwater like a sail boat keel. This has helped
his axial rotation of his hips and shoulders. His 'catch' of the water
after hand entry has improved dramatically and so have his times.
The pull buoys tend to make some swimmers flat in the water probably due
to the lack of hip action when there isn't a flutter kick going.
_
> On Dec 20, 2:20�pm, _ <jtayNOSPAM...@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com>
> wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 03:37:36 -0800 (PST), MW Smith wrote:
>>> Yes, but if you have a good kick, then swimming with a pull buoy
>>> subtractsthe thrust of your kick and increases the load on your upper
>>> body
>>
>> No.
>>
>> Hollander et al showed that the force produced when swimming with a pull
>> bouy averaged 12% less than with full stroke swimming.
>
> I think I see what you mean, but the lower force would be due to lower
> speed.
No.
a) it is not what *I* mean, it is what the facts mean; and
b) lower speed results from the lower force exerted - you confuse cause and
effect.
> So my point still stands. The load on your upper body is
> increased because of the dead weight of the legs.
No.
A pull bouy floats; the legs are supported.
Steve Freides
This is all semantics and nothing more. All other things being equal,
if one's kick provides forward propulsion, not using it will mean, yes,
less force is being produced because, duh, you're not kicking. If you
attempt to maintain the same speed then, yes, the load on your upper
body will be increased. This is all way obvious sort of stuff, MW was
right, and you disagreeing with him serves no one.
I killfiled you once before - time to do that again, I see. <sigh>
-S-
_
>>>> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 03:37:36 -0800 (PST), MW Smith wrote:
>>>>> Yes, but if you have a good kick, then swimming with a pull buoy
>>>>> subtractsthe thrust of your kick and increases the load on your
>>>>> upper body
>>>>
>>>> No.
>>>>
>>>> Hollander et al showed that the force produced when swimming with a
>>>> pull bouy averaged 12% less than with full stroke swimming.
>>>
>>> I think I see what you mean, but the lower force would be due to
>>> lower speed.
>>
>> No.
>>
>> a) it is not what *I* mean, it is what the facts mean; and
>>
>> b) lower speed results from the lower force exerted - you confuse
>> cause and effect.
> This is all semantics and nothing more. All other things being equal,
> if one's kick provides forward propulsion, not using it will mean, yes,
> less force is being produced because, duh, you're not kicking. If you
> attempt to maintain the same speed then, yes, the load on your upper
> body will be increased. This is all way obvious sort of stuff,
Such is too simple a view of swimming. The kick and pull are not
independant actions, and the inter-relationship between them not only
varies with speed but with the individual.
Did you even read the study? If not, you should have; there is an
inportant and relevant point there that you seem to have missed.
MW Smith
wrote:
> a) it is not what *I* mean, it is what the facts mean; and
>
> b) lower speed results from the lower force exerted - you confuse cause and
> effect.
Which lower force? Why not just answer the question?
Answer: Because you know that if you answer the question you will be
seen to be off point.
> A pull bouy floats; the legs are supported.
What you are saying is the kick provides no thrust for a swimmer with
a good kick. You are also saying that an elite swimmer can swim faster
with a pull buoy than he can without one. I've never seen an elite
swimmer whose personal bests were swum with a pull buoy. Have you?
_
> On Dec 22, 7:46�pm, _ <jtayNOSPAM...@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com>
> wrote:
>
>> a) it is not what *I* mean, it is what the facts mean; and
>>
>> b) lower speed results from the lower force exerted - you confuse cause and
>> effect.
>
> What you are saying is the kick provides no thrust for a swimmer with
> a good kick.
No.
I am reporting study results that show that the force is lower, not higher,
when a pull-bouy is used. You claim the opposite:
"...swimming with a pull buoy subtracts the thrust of your kick and
increases the load on your upper body..."
> You are also saying that an elite swimmer can swim faster
> with a pull buoy than he can without one.
No.
I have made no such claim.
MW Smith
wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 01:03:51 -0800 (PST), MW Smith wrote:
> > On Dec 22, 7:46 pm, _ <jtayNOSPAM...@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >> a) it is not what *I* mean, it is what the facts mean; and
>
> >> b) lower speed results from the lower force exerted - you confuse cause and
> >> effect.
>
> > What you are saying is the kick provides no thrust for a swimmer with
> > a good kick.
>
> No.
>
> I am reporting study results that show that the force is lower, not higher,
> when a pull-bouy is used. You claim the opposite:
WHAT FORCE? Until you specify what force you are talking about, I
can't respond. So my point stands.
_
Force exerted by the arms.
MW Smith
That means two things:
1. Even in elite swimmers, the kick provides no thrust;
2. Elite swimmers can swim faster with a pull buoy than with their
kick.
I don't believe either of those, so I'm guessing you interpreted the
study wrong.
_
> On Dec 23, 7:56�pm, _ <jtayNOSPAM...@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 10:25:26 -0800 (PST), MW Smith wrote:
>>> On Dec 23, 1:53 pm, _ <jtayNOSPAM...@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 01:03:51 -0800 (PST), MW Smith wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 22, 7:46 pm, _ <jtayNOSPAM...@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> a) it is not what *I* mean, it is what the facts mean; and
>>
>>>>>> b) lower speed results from the lower force exerted - you confuse cause and
>>>>>> effect.
>>
>>>>> What you are saying is the kick provides no thrust for a swimmer with
>>>>> a good kick.
>>
>>>> No.
>>
>>>> I am reporting study results that show that the force is lower, not higher,
>>>> when a pull-bouy is used. You claim the opposite:
>>
>>> WHAT FORCE? Until you specify what force you are talking about, I
>>> can't respond. So my point stands.
>>
>> Force exerted by the arms.
>
> That means two things:
>
> 1. Even in elite swimmers, the kick provides no thrust;
>
No.
> 2. Elite swimmers can swim faster with a pull buoy than with their
> kick.
>
No.
> I don't believe either of those, so I'm guessing you interpreted the
> study wrong.
No.
"The mean force produced during full stroke swimming was, on average,
approximately 12 percent greater."
MW Smith
wrote:
> "The mean force produced during full stroke swimming was, on average,
> approximately 12 percent greater."
I understand. I think you misinterpreted the results of the study,
because what you just said doesn't contradict my point.
_
Your point was:
"...swimming with a pull buoy subtracts the thrust of your kick and
increases the load on your upper body..."
wich is directly contradicted by the results of the study, which showed
that the force exerted by the arms was LESS, not MORE, when pulling.
MW Smith
wrote:
Your statement of what the study showed is at best incomplete. I'll
stick with my claim that you are misrepresenting the results of the
study. In the first place, you are the one who is fond of saying "It's
not that simple," but here you are reducing the results for ALL
swimmers to a single number. For ALL swimmers, no matter what their
size, shape, efficiency of kick, weight, (it just doesn't matter),
their arms work 12% less when they have a pull buoy than without one.
It beggars belief. You don't even say what the fixed point is. Is the
fixed point time a swimmers personal best for a particular distance?
Let's use that. You are saying that ths study shows that Michael
Phelps can pull 1:51.51 for the 200 fly.
I don't believe that. I believe that when a swimmer with an efficient
kick pulls the best time he can swim, his arms have to work harder to
generate that same speed.
"the force exerted by the arms was LESS, not MORE, when pulling."
Force exerted for what? You still refuse to specify what you mean.
What is the comparison and why won't you say what it is? Can Michael
Phelps pull 1:51.51 for 200 fly or 1:42.96 for 200 free? I say he
can't, so the study could not have made such comparisons. If Michael
Phelps can pull those world record times, then ok, but I assume he
can't. If he can't pull that fast, what is being compared?
_
> On Dec 24, 6:31�pm, _ <jtayNOSPAM...@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:52:42 -0800 (PST), MW Smith wrote:
>>> On Dec 23, 8:47�pm, _ <jtayNOSPAM...@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com>
>>> wrote:
>>
>>>> "The mean force produced during full stroke swimming was, on average,
>>>> approximately 12 percent greater."
>>
>>> I understand. I think you misinterpreted the results of the study,
>>> because what you just said doesn't contradict my point.
>>
>> Your point was:
>>
>> "...swimming with a pull buoy subtracts the thrust of your kick and
>> increases the load on your upper body..."
>>
>> wich is directly contradicted by the results of the study, which showed
>> that the force exerted by the arms was LESS, not MORE, when pulling.
>
> Your statement of what the study showed is at best incomplete. I'll
> stick with my claim that you are misrepresenting the results of the
> study.
You'll have to do more than "I say so".
Reading the research might be a good thing to do first.
> In the first place, you are the one who is fond of saying "It's
> not that simple," but here you are reducing the results for ALL
> swimmers to a single number.
No.
You did this simplification by asserting that "...swimming with a pull buoy
subtracts the thrust of your kick and increases the load on your upper
body..."
Yes, 12% is a single number, but you apparently missed the word "mean" in
the quote above. The full treatment of the data shows that that is a good
summary.
> For ALL swimmers, no matter what their
> size, shape, efficiency of kick, weight, (it just doesn't matter),
> their arms work 12% less when they have a pull buoy than without one.
No.
That is the "mean"
> It beggars belief.
No.
It requires that you understand simple statistical terms.
Steve Freides
He trolls you successfully - I'd just give up.
-S-
MW Smith
wrote:
> It requires that you understand simple statistical terms.
I do and you still aren't answering the question.
>You'll have to do more than "I say so".
I did. I used Michael Phelps's world records as examples. Your 12%
less force number means that IF Michael Phelps could pull 1:51.51 for
200 fly, his arms would be exerting 12% less force than when he swims
1:51.51 for 200 fly.
Do we agree that he can't pull that time for a 200 fly?
If we agree, why can't he? It should be easier, because the study you
read indicates that subtracting the thrust of his kick means he can
pull 200 fly in the same time by exerting 12% less force using only
his arms.
Since he can't do that, you have misinterpreted the result.
MW Smith
> He trolls you successfully - I'd just give up.
It's entertainment. Nothing else happening.
Steve Freides
Merry Christmas.
-S-
andre...@aol.com
I'd argue that a swimmer with a poor body posture whose legs tend to
sink will swim easier with a pool buoy. I remember when my legs sank
I'd swim easy with a buoy forever. Took off the pool buoy and I'd get
tire in a second. I have an efficient stroke now and can swim high in
the water w/o a buoy. When I put the buoy on, I can immediately feel
it on my triceps. I can tell that my arms are working harder.
When I was a weak swimmer I preferred the buoy. Now I'd rather swim w/
o it. To me the buoy is great for isolating arms and work on the pull.
Buoy and paddles feels like lifting weights.
Andres
MW Smith
I agree.
Steve Freides
and had previously stated exactly that in an earlier message in this
thread.
I agree, too.
-S-
andre...@aol.com
Now, all we have to do is hold hands and profess our love for each
other.
Steve Freides
Neither of you are my type. :)
NB: Some swimmers have knee problems and, if they're only in it for
general fitness, can swim many, most, or even all of their laps with a
buoy. My father, who swam a lot when younger, became a regular lap
swimmer again at around age 50, but started having knee problems and
spent the last decade or so of his lap swimming (he stopped at around
age 80) swimming only with a buoy - worked well for him, let him keep
swimming.
-S-
MW Smith
My kick is so useless (resulting in my legs being too low) that I
always swim now with a pull buoy or training fins. Straight swimming
is simply not a useful exercise for me. It is just too unproductive.
It's a psychological thing. I feel the need for speed. Yes, "-"
pulling is easier for me than swimming, when pulling and swimming the
same time for the same distance. But I work harder when I pull (or
swim with fins), because I feel more productive.
Certainly, if you are a young person training to be an elite swimmer,
use the pull buoy and fins as your coach directs. But if you're a
masters swimmer swimming for fitness, use the equipment that helps you
improve your fitness and enjoy the work. You have to make your own
decision. If you are using equipment as a crutch, think it out again.
But if your equipment helps you work harder and enjoy it more, enjoy.
Steve Freides
-snip-
>> NB: Some swimmers have knee problems and, if they're only in it for
>> general fitness, can swim many, most, or even all of their laps with
>> a buoy. My father, who swam a lot when younger, became a regular lap
>> swimmer again at around age 50, but started having knee problems and
>> spent the last decade or so of his lap swimming (he stopped at around
>> age 80) swimming only with a buoy - worked well for him, let him keep
>> swimming.
>>
>> -S-
>
> My kick is so useless (resulting in my legs being too low) that I
> always swim now with a pull buoy or training fins. Straight swimming
> is simply not a useful exercise for me. It is just too unproductive.
> It's a psychological thing. I feel the need for speed. Yes, "-"
> pulling is easier for me than swimming, when pulling and swimming the
> same time for the same distance. But I work harder when I pull (or
Just curious - are you a triathlete or a runner? The worst kicks I come
across in the pool are from runners, and the second worst are cyclists.
I ran for many years, and it took me a _long_ time to work out my kick
in the pool. I got it to the point where I am faster with it than
without it, but I'm sure most of the time it's just doing balance work
and not really adding much to my forward movement. When I'm sprinting,
OTOH, I do know that my kick helps and not hinders. All just my own
data point of one - I spent a long time working on ankle flexibility.
-S-
MW Smith
> Just curious - are you a triathlete or a runner? The worst kicks I come
> across in the pool are from runners, and the second worst are cyclists.
> I ran for many years, and it took me a _long_ time to work out my kick
> in the pool. I got it to the point where I am faster with it than
> without it, but I'm sure most of the time it's just doing balance work
> and not really adding much to my forward movement. When I'm sprinting,
> OTOH, I do know that my kick helps and not hinders. All just my own
> data point of one - I spent a long time working on ankle flexibility.
>
> -S-
I'm neither a triathlete nor a runner. I was a swimmer who should have
been a baseball player. I didn't get good baseball coaching when I was
a boy, but I did get some of the best swimming coaching (from Dick
Hannula http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Hannula), so I stuck with
swimming. We won the Washington State swimming title at Wilson High
School, where he also coached (not mentioned in the article) every
year. I think we won it the 10th year in a row, while I was there, and
the school kept winning it for about 25 years.
I was never a good racing swimmer. I didn't even like racing. It made
me too nervous. I liked the training. Much later, as a masters
swimmer, I came to enjoy open water racing, because it is a zen
meditation for me. I don't attribute my not becoming a better racer to
my kick. I mainly competed in the 1500, where a good kick was not so
important (my kicked worked well for balance), and in breaststroke,
where my kick was actually pretty good. I think it was just genetics
that held me back. I look like a first baseman, which was my position.
I don't look like a swimmer.
Steve Freides
Very good. One of the things I notice teaching kids to swim is that
some are good at all strokes, often they are either good at breaststroke
kick _or_ they're good at front crawl but lousy at breaststroke. There
aren't many who really have a good feeling for both. Those who have a
good breaststroke kick are relatively few and far between. I can't tell
if it's how we teach them, since they're supposed to learn that stroke
before they get to me, but I do spend quite a bit of time fixing
breaststroke kicks. Something to do with hip flexibility - that's my
guess. My mobility was never naturally good but I worked hard at it -
can do splits now, actually - and I have a passable, although not great,
breaststroke kick if I really put my mind to it, but it still doesn't
come at all naturally to me.
Now I'm thinking of various Yankee first basemen - not sure there is a
look to player of that position or most positions in baseball. I'm
thinking of Jason Giambi and Mark Texiera (sp? on both) - the former
rather stocky, the latter a bit lankier.
I look like Bruce Lee, just not as strong, not as thin (although close),
a bit taller, and not Oriental. Other than that, .... :)
-S-
_
> Those who have a
> good breaststroke kick are relatively few and far between. I can't tell
> if it's how we teach them, since they're supposed to learn that stroke
> before they get to me, but I do spend quite a bit of time fixing
> breaststroke kicks. Something to do with hip flexibility - that's my
> guess.
No.
Hip flexibility is rarely, if ever, a significant factor in breaststroke
kick.
Flexibility in the knee, and to a lesser extent ankle, is.