This morning Ewa Swimmer posted the following on “Tempo Trainer and an Open Water Race.”

What really struck me in the above post was that 1.0 tempo felt “leisurely”. To me that meant I needed to experience much faster tempos so that 1.0 would feel slow. <snip>
I don’t know if it’s possible to get that wonderful relaxed flowing feeling at higher tempos. It can be addictive I think, like chocolate.

My Reply:

The first time I used the Tempo Trainer in practice, I had two reactions:
1) Wow, my nervous system is really adaptable — and I can actually feel adaptation the moment it occurs; and
2) The combination of enhanced (from the beep) and the thrill of feeling adaptation occur (in 40 years of swimming I’d never experienced adaptation except over months) had distinct potential to become addictive.

The adaptation of which I speak was of experiencing a particular tempo – 1.20 sec/stroke – as “I feel like I’m just spinning my arms” when I swam my first 50m with TT. Then, about 20 min later – after the set described below – experiencing 1.20 as “I’ve got all the time in the world.”

Here’s an excerpt from p. 68 of the Outside the Box ebook describing that moment:
>>I first used the TT in a 50-meter pool in the summer of 2006. Its first invaluable service was to alert me to how slow my tempo had become. I’d spent more than a decade focused single-mindedly on increasing Stroke Length. As I related earlier, that required tradeoffs–primarily giving up some SR. After so many years of trading SR for SL, I had a more efficient stroke but had imprinted a habit of stroking rather slowly. I did my first lap with the TT at a relatively unhurried 1.20 sec/stroke but felt like I was spinning my wheels trying to keep up.

So I reset the TT to 1.30. That felt more manageable, similar to 2nd or 3rd gear. I then swam 10 x 50, advancing beep frequency by .01 between 50s. (I.e., 1.29, 1.28 . . . 1.21, 1.20). That 500 meter set, which took only about 10 minutes, was as eye-opening as any set I’d swum in 40 years. Here are six reasons why:

1) At 1.30, I took 34 strokes to swim 50 meters. As I increased frequency, I discovered I could hold my SL surprisingly consistent. Through constant focus on Patient Catch, by the end I’d added only one stroke. Though there was no pace clock, I mentally calculated that 35 strokes @ 1.2 was faster than 34 strokes @ 1.3. (Later, using a calculator, I found it was exactly 2.5 seconds faster. Allowing 3 beeps for pushoff, 37 beeps x 1.3 = 48.1 seconds; 38 beeps x 1.2 = 45.6 seconds.) Analyzing this set was the first time I fully appreciated the math of speed and realized that the combination of stroke count and beep frequency (SR) made the pace clock almost irrelevant. If I could keep SPL fairly constant while speeding up the beeps, I had to go faster.

2) I was surprised at how quickly my nervous system adapted to an audible stimulus. A change in SR of .1 second may seem trivial, but it can add significant speed at a sufficiently high Stroke Length. Swimming 2.5 seconds faster over 50-meters converts to 75 seconds faster for 1500-meter pace and 3:10 faster for a 2.4-mile Ironman swim. Even without considering how much it improved my 50-meter pace, I was struck by how a 1.20 tempo that felt rushed only 10 minutes earlier, had quickly become comfortable. I realized the secret was adjusting by hundredth-of-a-second increments.

3) I was particularly excited that I had simply gone faster just by keeping up with the beep as it went faster. (Caution: If my SPL had increased by three, I’d have swum slower at the higher tempo.) I’m always excited when I discover a new way to cultivate Voodoo Speed that just happens rather than by trying to go faster.

4) I realized the true cost of inefficiency. Few swimmers count strokes consistently enough to know when they’ve added one. Having counted for years, I was always alert to lost efficiency. This was the first time I grasped that every additional stroke represented lost time since, at a beep frequency of 1.2 seconds, every additional stroke adds that much to my time.

5) Conscious that every added stroke increased my final time, I became even more focused on each stroke. In particular, I became aware of how even a single stroke that felt slightly rushed would add strokes-–and seconds.

6) Though I’d practiced Mindful Swimming for years, this set exposed me to a deeper level of focus. By synchronizing hand-hits to the beep stimulus, I was focused purely on what matters-–how SL and SR combine-–and the sensations that tell me I’m keeping my strokes efficient as SR increases.>>

Chapters 11 and 12 of OTB describe the systematic approach I developed for “marrying” Stroke Length and Stroke Rate to improve pace while controlling effort. That helped me “turn back the clock” on my distance swimming times by about 12 years in 2006. My times, at 55, were faster than any I’d done since age 43.

• Distance of repeats and/or the set;
• Strokes Per Length [SPL];
• Time for the repeats; and/or
• Stroke Tempo (in strokes per second) from the Tempo Trainer.

In addition to the objective numbers above, I also include a subjective rating, for effort level or “mojo.” I’ll describe how I use subjective ratings in another post. Here I’ll focus on how and why I use hard data.

Last week I traveled to Pittsburgh Thurs thru Sat to conduct a clinic for the Allegheny Mountain LMSC. While traveling I try to swim as regularly as possible though sometimes I can only squeeze in 30 minutes or less, as was true two of the three days I’ll recount here. As you’ll see, even 20 minutes can constitute a great practice when you aim for measurable improvement.

Thursday May 6 1000 yards at Bucknell University

While driving from New Paltz to State College PA, I stopped in Lewisburg for a swim and lunch with Jeannie Zappe a newly certified TI Coach. We had only 20 minutes to swim. I suggested 20 x 50 on a minute, trying to gradually increase pace, while maintaining a constant SPL.
On the first 50, swimming with consummate ease, I took 25 strokes (12 down, 13 back) and 46 seconds. My goal would be to continue taking 25 strokes per 50 for as long as possible while gradually swimming faster. This is a common set for me; I always try to let the seconds “melt away” (swim faster without trying) initially. When I succeed, it’s because my nervous system gets progressively more “tuned” to the task.
Over the first 10 x 50, I improved gradually from :46 to :42 with no perceptible increase in effort.  My primary focus was to feel a longer, more slippery bodyline. (Lesson 3 of Easy Freestyle). When the effortless improvements no longer came, I increased effort in highly specific ways:

• More sense of hold with my hand and forearm.
• More snap in my 2BK “toe flick” – yet keeping it streamlined within the “shadow” of my upper legs.

Over 6 x 50, I improved to 39 seconds. During my final 4 x 50 I allowed myself 1 more stroke on each length for 27 total and improved to 38 seconds, trying to feel a bit more ease at that higher count and faster speed. I felt great at the end.

What happened? To maintain the same SPL for an extended series of repeats, I have to travel a constant distance on each stroke. To improve pace, I have to propel myself over that distance faster. That means the frequency of my strokes also increases – though I never consciously tried to stroke faster. So Stroke Length was constant. Stroke Rate increased . . . because Velocity increased. This is different – and easier – than trying to stroke faster . . . which is the most common way to try to swim faster.

Friday May 7 4200 yards at JCC in Pittsburgh

TI Coach Suzanne Atkinson brought me to the JCC where she’s a member. We swam for about 90 minutes. For warmup, I swam 400 easy, alternating 25s of FR, BK and BR. I held 13 SPL for FR, 16 for BK and 8 for BR. I can take fewer strokes on back and breast if I focus in an exacting way, but preferred to stay relaxed.

Main Set: 6 rounds of 4 x 50 + 2 x 100 + 1 x 200 with Tempo Trainer. Increase tempo by .02 sec on each round, progressing from 1.10 sec/stroke on 1^st round to 1.00 sec/stroke on 6^th round. I rested 10 beeps between 50s, 15 beeps between 100s, 20 beeps before the 200 and gave myself a minute between rounds to reset the TT.

My SPL on the 4 x 50 @ 1.10 was 14+15. My goal was to progress through all distances and rounds to the final 200 @ 1.00 with as little change in SPL as I could manage. I was able to keep my SPL at 16 or lower for Rounds 1 through 4. In round 5 (1.02 sec/stroke) I had perhaps 3 lengths (of 24 total) at 17 SPL. In round 6 (1.00 sec/stroke) I took 17 SPL on about 6 lengths.

Suzanne and I finished with 12 (for me, 16 for her) 25s of Butterfly. I’ll describe this set in a separate post.

What happened? The goal of this set is to swim constant pace within each round — as repeat distance goes from 50 to 200 – and to improve pace with each successive round. If Tempo and SPL stay constant, so must pace. If Tempo increases and SPL stays the same (or increases very modestly) then pace improves. If SPL increases too much as Tempo increases, then pace will stay the same, or possibly even get slower.

I only checked the pace clock after the 200s. My 200 time improved an average of 2 seconds in each round. That means a tempo increase of .02 sec for one stroke created an improvement of 2 seconds (100 times as much) for 200 yards. This is a decent “trade” of tempo for speed so I ingrained good efficiency habits during this set.

Saturday May 8 2200 yards at Duquesne University

Duquesne Coach Dave Sheets opened the pool so Suzanne and I could swim prior to our clinic. He also joined us for the swim (and was impressively fast; in fact his backstroke repeats were as fast as or faster than my crawl.)

We had only 30 minutes so I planned a set similar to Friday’s, but with a varying pace  emphasis with each round, in place of Saturday’s constant pace emphasis.

Main Set: (1 x 200 + 8 x 25) – (1 x 200 + 4 x 50) – (1 x 200 + 2 x 100) – (1 x 200 + 4 x 50) – (1 x 200 + 8 x 25) The 200s were to be swum at “Cruise” pace and the 25s, 50s and 100s at “Brisk” pace. I aimed to hold ALL repeats @ 14 SPL.

I didn’t time the 200s, focusing instead on a Stroke Thought of Superslow Recovery without sacrificing balance or stability. I swam the 25s in an average of 17 sec, the 50s in 37 sec and the 100s in 1:14-1:15.

What happened? SPL remained constant, but – as on Thursday’s 50-yd repeats – pace varied. I swam significantly faster on the 25s, 50s and 100s, than on the 200s. In this case, I did put a good deal more effort into them. But SAME SPL combined with FASTER Pace also means higher Stroke Rate. This time I accomplished faster pace by shortening repeat distance and adding a bit of effort.

Summary: In all 3 practices I created nervous system adaptation by varying the task, while keeping at least one variable constant.

• On Thurs, repeat distance and SPL stayed constant, SR (and consequently pace) increased.
• On Fri, I tried to keep SPL constant, and succeeded in minimizing change as repeat distance and tempo increased.
• On Sat, I kept SPL constant while repeat distance varied. Pace and SR changed as repeat distance got shorter.

When I describe my practices, I’m often asked how I can remember so many details to record them in my log later. Part of the reason is years of “data collection and recording” have trained my brain for this kind of memory capacity (which is highly specialized; outside the pool I’m know for being absent-minded and forgetful). But recall is also made easier by the fact that I have a context or framework for the numbers I track. I use my first repeat or two to set a baseline or benchmark then decide, based on experience, what sort of improvement goal I’ll pursue. Since thousands of hours of practice have improved my ability to execute what I intend, I usually need only to take note of where I’ve diverged from the plan.

I did the set with them and never added a stroke. Indeed I subtracted one. After 21 x 50, and an increase of two-tenths of a second in stroke tempo, I counted myself sufficiently pleased with my improvement to call it a day.

I took 29 strokes on the first 50, 14SPL going and 15SPL returning, and maintained 29 strokes for the next 3 x 50. On the fifth 50, I reduced my count to 28 (13+15). I then held that count for the next 16 x 50, to a tempo of 1.0 sec/stroke. I had never before held the same stroke count over such a large range of tempos, so this was my best Tempo Trainer set ever. In terms of time, adding the 3 beeps I allow on each pushoff to the number of strokes I took, I swam the first 50 (36 beeps x 1.2 sec/beep) in 43.2 sec. I swam the final 50 (35 beeps x 1.0 sec/beep) in 35 seconds, meaning I went over 8 seconds faster yet took one less stroke.

This took keen concentration (I do sets like this just as much to hone my concentration as my stroke) and reflects hundreds of hours of Tempo Trainer experience over the last 5 years. Try a similar set and compare how your own stroke efficiency is effected. If the range of 1.0 to 1.20 is a bit too brisk for you, start at 1.30 or above. Reset the Tempo Trainer after each 50 by depressing the left button once. Happy Laps.

Wed Feb 10 0800 AM at Coronado Pool        3500 LCM

Set #1 7 x 400 on 7:30 – “Tempo Pyramid”

Time, Tempo and Total Strokes

Notes: This was another example of what is becoming a favorite set – a “Tempo Pyramid” in which I (i) start with a faster tempo; (ii) slow tempo gradually, seeking to reduce SPL; then (iii) speed tempo again, intent upon minimizing SPL increase. As the chart shows, I took off 28 strokes, from #1 to #4 as tempo slowed. From #4 to #7, as tempo increased again, I added back only 9.

I calculated stroke count for each 400 by dividing time by tempo then subtracting 24 (I allow 3 beeps on the initial pushoff and all turns.)  My last 400 was 21 seconds faster than the first – though both were at the same tempo — because I took 19 fewer 1.1-second strokes.  (This improvement – multiplied by the approx 95 x 400 in an English Channel swim – converts into reaching France 32 minutes faster, in about 1800 fewer strokes.)

Most people know only one way to swim faster – stroke faster and work harder. By using the Tempo Trainer (combined with hundreds of hours of technique practice) I’ve learned to swim faster by traveling farther. The Tempo Pyramid has proven to be one of the most reliable ways to imprint that on my brain.

Experience has shown me that slowing my tempo (by precise amounts as the TT allows) dependably leads to a longer stroke. Not by accident but because I use the extra time to improve my streamline and stroke. A good outcome is when I stroke slower and swim the same time. A better outcome is when I stroke slower and swim faster, as I did here.

When I begin increasing tempo again, on the 2^nd half of the set, I concentrate on making it feel slow. Indeed the last 400 felt more leisurely than the first. I felt as if I had more time between beeps to extend my bodyline, trap water behind my hand, etc. Taking 19 fewer strokes shows that perception indeed had become reality.

This is also an illustration of how rapidly the brain and nervous system adapt when you give them the right kind of stimulus. Adaptation here was stimulated by (i) the intense focus I gave to each stroke; and (ii) the auditory stimulus from the Tempo Trainer beep. The nervous system adapts far faster than the aerobic system – and when it does adapt you sense it immediately. That’s motivating.

Set #2 8 x 50 @ 1.10 and 36 SPL, resting 10 beeps (11 sec.) at each wall.

Notes: I finished practice with a brisk set of 50s. I do these in hopes of improving Set #1 when I repeat it in the future. Finishing 50m in 36 SPL at a tempo of 1.1 (allowing 3 beeps for pushoff) gives a time of 42.9 sec, or a pace of 5:43 for 400. This set starts developing a neural program for traveling farther and faster in 1.1 sec than I did on the 400 (39 strokes per 50 and a pace of about 47 sec.). The more 50 repeats I swim with fewer strokes and seconds, the more robust that brain circuit becomes. Eventually, I hope, it will be strong enough to sustain that pace for a nonstop 400, during a set such as today’s.

Endnote: A comment described me as having a preference for scientific training. It’s more accurate to say I prefer empirical training. I train in ways that provide measurable feedback that allows me to link efforts to outcomes. I.E. That a particular combination of SPL and tempo allows me to hold a stronger pace at a more sustainable effort level. That tells me where to focus my training efforts. At age 59, training for 3 marathons, I don’t want to waste energy and time on ineffective – or unexamined – training.

Evening Swim – 2 Miles in the 57F Pacific along Coronado’s Silver Strand. I swam right along the breaker line for a bit more fun and challenge.

Tuesday Feb 9 at Coronado Municipal Pool

Set #1 50+100+150+200+250 FR. EZ 50 BK between FR repeats

Notes: I held 36-37 SPL on FR repeats and 38-39 on BK lengths.  My goals on this set were to (1) begin practice by deepening my neural program for a long, relaxed stroke and (2) to test whether I was equally efficient on both breathing sides. I breathed right on one length and left the next. I was pleased that SPL was same on both.

Set #2 Swim  12 X 150 FR with Tempo Trainer, striving for best combination of SPL and Stroke Rate (or tempo).

1-4 @ 1.10-1.12-1.14-1.16

5-8 @ 1.16-1.14-1.12-1.10

9-12 @ 1.08-1.0-1.04-1.02

Notes: On the 1^st 150, with my Tempo Trainer set at 1.10 sec/stroke, I averaged 40SPL (38+41+41). My plan on #’s 1-4 was to slow tempo on each and try to subtract as many strokes as possible as tempo slowed. My plan on #’s 5-8 was to reverse tempo back to my starting point – while trying to avoid adding strokes.

On # 4 I averaged 38 SPL – or 6 fewer total strokes for 150. How does that convert into pace? I allow 3 beeps on each pushoff so my pace/50 on #1 was 43 x 1.10 or 47.3 sec. My pace on #4 was 41 x 1.16 or 47.5 sec.  My pace was .2 sec/50 slower BUT I felt materially more relaxed, meaning that pace would likely be sustainable for a longer distance.

The real benefit came when I begin increasing tempo again, (and seeking to avoid adding strokes.) When I got back to 1.10 on #8 my average SPL was 39, one stroke lower than when I started the set. This converted into a pace of 46.2 sec – which, though faster, actually felt a bit easier than #1 had.

I’d originally planned to swim only 8 x 150, but decided spontaneously to keep swimming 150s – and increasing tempo – until my stroke count reached the same level where I’d started – 40 SPL. That didn’t happen until I reached 1.02 sec/stroke on #12, At 1.02, 40 SPL converts to a pace of 43.8 sec. And how does this difference in pace convert over the estimated 38,000 meters (760 x 50m) of an English Channel crossing? 760 x 3.5 sec = 44 minutes saved.

As I’ve noted, every set I do in the pool has one of two objects: (1) to develop brain circuits that get me across the Channel more easily or (2) to develop circuits that get me across faster.

I don’t do any sets for conditioning purposes (Conditioning “happens.”) I don’t do any to get the yards in; over the next six months, there will be sufficient yards.

Set #1 was for the former. Set #2 was for the latter. But here’s the key takeaway from this set. While I swam much faster on #12, and worked harder, my brain wasn’t thinking “Work harder.”  It wasn’t even thinking “Swim faster.”  My focus was entirely on the difficult task of keeping my stroke long, effective — and feeling relaxed and leisurely — while the beep on my Tempo Trainer got faster.

An intention of “going harder” isn’t a realistic option in swimming the English Channel. That’s why my intention, my focus, is always on building or maintaining efficiency in training, — and will be the same while swimming alongside Lance Oram’s boat.

Mon Feb 8 3100 LCM at Coronado Municipal Pool plus 2+ miles at LaJolla Cove

Warmup Swim: 200 Free at 34-35 SPL

Set #1 3 rounds of [4 x 100 Free] on 1:55 interval – 100 EZ Back-Breast between rounds.

SPL: 34+35 (69 total strokes)

Times: 1:46-1:43

Notes: This was an economy-oriented set-intending to use as few strokes and as little energy as possible. I was pleased by the improvement over similar sets last week. I took 5 fewer strokes per 100 and my interval was 5 seconds faster than any set of 100s last week. I achieved the efficiency by focusing on making my recovery in each stroke as relaxed and unhurried as possible. My times improved in the 2^nd round, over the 1^st, and improved again on the 3^rd round, with constant SPL, demonstrating that your swimming can improve when more repetition helps your nervous system  learn to perform a task more efficiently.

Set #2 3 rounds of [4 x 100 Free] on 2:00 interval  100 EZ Back-Breast between rounds. 1^st round @ 1.13 sec/stroke; 2^nd round @ 1.14 sec/stroke; 3^rd round @ 1.15 sec/stroke

SPL: 36+38 (74 total strokes) on rounds 1 and 2; 73 and 72 strokes on 3^rd round.

Times: 1:33 on Rounds 1&2;  1:32-1:30 on Round 3.

Notes: I repeated Set #1, but this time with a Stroke Rate set by a Tempo Trainer. I set the TT at 1.13 sec/stroke on the 1^st round. My strokes/100 increased by 5, but my times improved by over 10 seconds from Set #1. On the 2^nd round I slowed tempo by .01 sec to 1.14 sec/stroke. I took the same number of strokes and kept my times the same. This raises the question: If my total strokes were the same but my tempo was .01 slower, how did I keep my times the same? I should have swum nearly a second slower (74 strokes x .01 sec = .74 sec).

Though the change in tempo was slight I used the extra  in each stroke to improve my hold on the water slightly and thus travel slightly farther on each stroke. In Round 1, I had to stretch and glide a bit to reach the wall after 74 strokes.  At a tempo of 1.14, my 74^th stroke took me strongly to the wall, saving enough time to offset the .7 sec that slower tempo should have added.

On the 3^rd round, I slowed tempo again to 1.15. Again, taking 70+ strokes at a slower tempo should have slowed my times. Instead, I used the extra time to improve  my grip again and reduced my SPL on the first 50 to 35, saving 1.15 seconds on that lap. This improved my times to 1:32 – and 1:31 when my I was able to finish stroke, rather than glide on my 73^rd stroke. On the last 100, I cut a stroke from the 2^nd 50, resulting in improving in time again (since cutting a stroke also saved 1.15 sec) for a time of 1:30. In this case, slower strokes yielded faster times – because my efficiency improved more than my stroke slowed – a great outcome for long-distance endurance.

Swimdown 100 Easy Long-Axis Combo

Open Water I finished this practice at 6:10 am, climbed out and drove directly to LaJolla Cove to swim 2+ miles in 57F water, taking just over an hour to complete the swim. Last week I also swam twice a day with an afternoon open water swim usually following my morning swim by about 8 hours.  This week I’ll begin doing some of these “daily doubles” back to back to see how I tolerate them. This morning my energy was a bit low toward the end of my Cove swim.

A potential benefit of a continuous 30-minute swim could be to test the durability of your muscle memory and focus.  For an exercise in Mindful Swimming, you could cycle through three “stroke thoughts” for 30 minutes of uninterrupted swimming E.G. Marionette Arm Recovery for 50 yards and Mail Slot Entry for 50 yards and Patient Catch for 50 yards, continuing that way for 30 minutes. Learn more about these “stroke thoughts by downloading a free “Easy Freestyle”  e-book.

Or in an exercise that will increase your ability to calibrate and adjust your Stroke Length,  alternate two or three strokes counts. E.G. Swim at 15 SPL (Strokes Per Length) for odd 25s and 16 SPL on the even 25s. When you add 1 SPL, you should notice an increase in speed.

Alternatively, you could work on consistent pacing by swimming with a goal of maintaining a consistent SPL with a particular Tempo Trainer setting. E.G. Set TT at 1.30 sec/stroke and maintain 15 SPL. Continue swimming so long as you keep completing laps at 15 SPL. If your count goes above 15, give yourself one more length to try to bring it back down. (Remember, adding a stroke at a 1.30 tempo means your pace on that length was 1.3 seconds slower. If you keep swimming with the higher SPL, you’re not improving aerobic fitness — you’re training yourself to lose pace.) If you can’t return to 15 SPL, take a break, say 5 to 10 beeps. Then resume swimming. Keep track of the number of times you need to rest in 30 minutes. If it was 10 times, your goal for your next continuous 30-minute swim could be to maintain a 15 SPL – 1.30 SR with nine or fewer breaks.

Most swimmers will benefit more from a series of shorter swims. At times, having only 30 minutes to swim, I’ve done 30-minutes of 25-yard and/or 50-yard repeats because I gave myself a task so exacting that I couldn’t complete it successfully if I swam farther. E.G. I can maintain 12 SPL at a tempo faster than 1.20 sec per stroke only for 25 yards. If I attempt a 50, it’s almost inevitable that I’ll take 13 SPL on the second lap. If I decide to swim 50s, then I’ll set the bar for the task at not exceeding 25 total strokes at a tempo of 1.20. Or I could allow a faster tempo and find the lowest number of strokes I can hit for 50 yards with unblinking focus.

The main takeaway here is that you should evaluate the benefit of any practice – even those that are quite brief – on the mental and neuromuscular adaptation they produce, not just the metabolic. In fact the argument for emphasizing mental and motor training over conditioning in a short practice is far stronger since it’s nearly impossible to get a metabolic effect in a time period that short, while your nervous system can make considerable adaptation.

Understand that I’m not arguing against doing a continuous 30-minute swim. I’ve made that choice at times. But I made sure the content of my 30-minute swim – e.g. to maintain a challenging combination of SPL and TT setting – would result in strengthening my neuromuscular “efficiency imprint” and require complete attention for every stroke I took (probably around 1500 in 30 minutes) during that swim. Fifteen-hundred beneficial imprints is definitely a positive return on a 30-minute practice.

Yesterday i swam like this: 1500 meters very easy and efficient, concentrating on what you said Terry, a short glide each time your hand points forward and concentrating on the forward move. It was quite amazing how easy and relaxed I felt.

I forgot my sports watch so I have no time on the total distance, but checked a couple of100s. I was swimming each 100 meter at about 1:47 . Not fast, but my SPL remained constant at 33-34, which is 2 to 3 strokes lower than my usual.

After this 1500 I was so relaxed I could have swum with that speed indefinitely. I followed that with 3×300, broken as 50+100+150. I set my Tempo Trainer at 1.28 sec/stroke for #1, 1.24 for #2 and 1.20 for #3. Next I swam 3×100 with TT at 1.10 and SPL at 37. My pace on these was 1.30.

I ended with another fantastic and relaxing 800 meters. Gorgeous training session!

Today, just to see if I could get that feeling back, I swam a straight 5000m  in the pool, with TT at 1.32 and holding 34-35 SPL. I didn’t take any water during the swim so I was thirsty afterwards, but apart from that I felt like I could have continued that way for another 5 K.

That post prompted Vol to ask: Congratulations! Was that a 50m pool? How can you swim “straight 5 K in the pool” (not river/lake/ocean) without being bored? It means 100 laps in a 50m pool.

I replied: It’s true that many people would find it boring to “follow the black line” for a straight 5K. The key to avoiding boredom — and to swimming your best — is to be mindful.

Set a goal for the swim. Not a time goal, but a measure of both consistent execution and consistent engagement. Make it your primary goal to stay in the moment for every one of what could be – in a 50m pool – 4000 or more strokes. In other words. 4000 opportunities to improve your stroke and make efficiency more permanent. If you succeed, the 5K will seem timeless and, indeed, when it ends you may even be sorry it’s time to stop.

The challenge of being mindful in a pool is fundamentally no different than in open water, where potential boredom is thought to be far less of an issue. Pool swimming requires you to reset your focus and intention after every turn. As you approach the wall, execute the turn, then push off and break out, you’ll replace your “stroke thought” with “turn thoughts.” Every time for 99 turns. That makes 99 opportunities to improve your turn.

Add it all up and a 5k in the pool represents 4099, or more, opportunities to improve your capacity (neural circuits) for attentive repetition.

I swim for exercise and weight control (and a few other reasons) but I’m wondering if my heart rate is where it should be. I did a vigorous swim the other day and could only get to 108. On the elliptical trainer, I can get over 130 with effort. According to one online heart rate calculator, I should be between 115 and 149. I want to keep swimming but I also want the benefits of exercise.

Your “aquatic heart rate” will be 13% (or 15 to 17 beats) lower than your land HR at a similar level of exercise intensity — mainly because swimming’s horizontal position, and the reduced effect of gravity, makes it easier for blood to circulate out to the working muscles and return to the heart. Thus an aquatic HR of 108 would equate to a land HR of 123 to 125, which is both health-enhancing and sustainable.
Your max and working HR can also be influenced by age, though the “220-minus-age” equation traditionally used to estimate a person’s maximum heart rate is no longer considered accurate.

The larger question is to be clear on your swimming goals. In TI, the first goal is always to improve your swimming. Healthfulness is a beneficial byproduct of spending three or more hours each week practicing for improvement. If you think of HR as a key factor in the fitness side of your training, then you might be curious to learn how various kinds of training affect  it.
Speaking personally, I haven’t checked my HR during a swim practice in nearly two decades – yet still get high marks on my regular physicals, and my resting HR (which I check – along with blood pressure — upon rising every couple of days) is an admirable 42. When you adopt as your goal to improve your swimming, then you’ll practice guided by two key principles. I’ll also explain how to get information about your HR in this kind of practice.

Principle #1 Reduce Energy Waste to swim better.
The traditional approach is to swim better by pushing yourself harder. This creates a priority of raising HR to maximal levels during certain sets. Indeed, the core purpose of such sets is a higher HR. The set is considered a success if HR approaches its predicted maximum. How efficiently you swim is often besides the point. In fact churning heedlessly and inefficiently could be considered beneficial, since it’s more likely to increase HR.

Improvement-minded swimmers have the opposite objective. We understand that human swimmers waste energy massively and therefore focus intently on saving energy. This translates into mindfully seeking the easiest way to complete any task — whether swimming a well-paced and relaxed mile or a fast 200m. Thus we focus on minimizing HR while training. As I noted above, I haven’t checked my HR in years. Instead I use a well-honed “perception of effort” to gauge it.

Principle #2 Improve by Building Neural Circuits (not the Aerobic System)
Improvement comes from energy savings, which come from efficiency. This gives TI swimmers two clear priorities for their training: (1) Strengthen your focus; and (2) Build “neural circuits” for effective movement. In that approach, aerobic system training becomes something that happens while you train your neuromuscular system.

With these priorities, a logical way to get information about HR response while swimming would be to check HR while using a Tempo Trainer. E.G. On a series of 200s, start with a slower tempo and progress in steps to a fairly brisk tempo. Check your HR prior to beginning the set, and recheck it immediately after completing your fastest-tempo swim. That would give you the most useful and functional info – i.e. your HR relative to speed and tempo.

If I were to do this set I’d be most interested in correlating time to tempo. It’s possible I might also be curious – purely for informational purposes – how HR correlates to time and tempo. But in keeping with my first training principle of saving energy, I’d consider the set a success if I maximized improvement in time, relative to tempo, while minimizing increase in HR relative to time and tempo.

Note: While I don’t base any of my training on HR,  if you do plan to include HR level among your exercise goals, consider having your personal MaxHR calculated by an exercise physiologist or sports doctor with a stress test and ask how the results should be adjusted for swimming.