Freestyle Technique

This is lifted from an article found at USASwimming.org for later editing. Pertinent parts have been saved while others have been cut. It is information gathering for use in a technique posting not related to the primary subject and discussion found in Jonty Skinner's article. http://www.usaswimming.org/USASWeb/ViewMiscArticle.aspx?TabId=59&Alias=Rainbow&Lang=en&mid=437&ItemId=1690

Has short course yards affected freestyle technique?
By Jonty Skinner

If you polled 10 coaches in a room and asked them to describe the underwater phase of the freestyle stroke, they would more than likely all describe the stroke with these main emphasis points.
The hand would enter and extend along the body line
The body/hips would be rotated during the hand entry extension
The hand would either pitch down to initiate the catch or pitch slightly outward initiating the beginning of an “S” pattern pull
The elbow would be positioned above the hand forearm in a “high elbow position” as the swimmer created the anchor/catch point
The body would begin rotating to the opposite side as pressure was applied to the anchor position and the opposite arm exited and was moved forward (recovered)
The anchor position would sweep in slightly towards the centerline of the body as the recovering hand passed the shoulder line
The hips would be into the exit rotation phase as the elbow led the arm out of the water while the opposite arm was being extended into the catch position.

Granted there might be a number of different ways to describe this process, but without a doubt the majority of coaches in world would agree on one fact. That the anchor or catch mechanics should involve an elbow position that is higher than the wrist/hand position. Looking at figure 1, coaches might argue as to the specific angles of the joints, but I believe all might agree that the upper and lower arm components would be on distinctly different planes. However, after reviewing underwater footage of hundreds of swimmers, I find that the majority don’t employ this kind of technique at all. After continuing to ask coaches to describe their opinion of the catch or anchor position I continued to find a huge discrepancy between what coaches were describing, and what was actually occurring in the water. Looking at figure 2 you will notice that the upper and lower arms are almost in the same plane, and the picture resembles the technique employed by the large majority of athletes that I have reviewed underwater.

The impact of the straighter arm under water stroke
Although I cannot find a logical sequence that shows the potential evolution from a high elbow to a straight arm freestyle, in many ways the evolution to the straight arm stroke makes sense. The advantages are:
It has a greater power (force application) potential over short distances
It can generate much faster velocities over short distances
The shorter more compact stroke handles higher tempos very easily
It has the potential to take a more direct path to the catch lever/anchor position

However, the minuses of this kind of stroke as they translate to LCM swimming are:
Excessive muscle fiber/motor unit recruitment patterns
Limited or no use of angular momentum and hip rotation as a source of power
A propensity to swim with a technique where the catch position isn’t anchored through the body (Use a 2nd class lever)
The majority of the muscle load is placed on the muscles located in the arms & shoulders
Faster depletion of energy sources (glycogen)(opinion with no proof)
High levels of lactate accumulation resulting in the early onset of muscle fatigue (based on anecdotal observation)
Limited ability to sustain power for long periods
A propensity to “drop” the elbow and lose the leverage position when weak or fatigued

The questions surrounding this dilemma that beg to be answered are:
Were there always a high number of straight arm swimmers? (The lack of under water footage to this point would support that)
Has there been a distinct path of evolution from the high elbow stroke to the straight arm stroke as athletes adapted to differing training and performance demands.
Did the volume based training environment in the 70’s force the athlete’s into a stroke that helped them manage the training environment. (High elbow)
And conversely did the lower volume period in the 80’s & 90’s allow the straight arm version to flourish and take hold
Has the increased level of attention to dry land strength programs resulted in a greater ability to maximize the benefits of the straight arm stroke in the Short pool.

I was taught to use a high elbow catch position. Like many of today’s coaches I took what I was taught as a swimmer, read from books and learned from other coaches and applied that same approach with my swimmers. Pick up most swim instruction books and you’ll find them describing the same approach.

Needless to say, I’m writing this article because I have an opinion, and it would be best to remind the reader that the opinion expressed in this article is the opinion of the author and not that of USA Swimming.

If I was going to choose the major influence that has allowed this straight arm hybrid to flourish, I would put a large part of the onus on our almost dependence on the seemingly easy gratification associated with short course yard racing. Although SCY swimming has walked in step with the evolution of the sport, it wasn’t until the 1980’s and early 90’s that it began to etch its place within the swimming performance landscape. The choice of extremely hard work to get a foot in the door gave way to less work, focus on short course competition and get more bang for the buck a lot quicker. I have written extensively on the way our SCY record progressions have changed through the decades, and have covered in detail how SCY racing is for the most part a different sport that LCM racing. (See Long Course versus Short Course and a Statistical look……future).

Although I have no evidence to prove this point, it is my opinion that as we became more attuned to the needs and training environments that promoted short course swimming (lower volume training in the 80’s),a natural evolution or conversion in technique occurred. It made sense (under the training conditions) for an athlete focused on SCY performance to adopt or gravitate to a freestyle option that was more suited to the SCY racing environment. Considering the “serial” nature of SCY swimming, the change in freestyle mechanics was an almost perfect fit.

This is a term/concept (serial) that I stole from Bill Boomer, so like all Boomerisms it needs explaining. Swimming can be either “cyclical” (something that turns over the same way many times in succession with little or no break) or “serial” (something that is a recycling phase amongst the many parts of a single event). Put into context, SCY races are a series of events joined together to form a single race. A swimming phase followed by a turning phase followed by an underwater kicking phase. Although the same can be said for LCM swimming, the duration of the swimming phases in SCY swimming are very different and although 3+ seconds isn’t a huge break between swimming portions, the combination of the break from swimming and the short swimming duration, make it much easier to sustain a high tempo, using a high force based stroke.

Image #’s 3 & 4 will look at the “high elbow” (HE) version of freestyle.
Looking at Image #3 (HE) you will notice that the hips are fully rotated in preparation to use the hips as a source of rotational power.
As we progress to the middle of the catch (lever)/anchor position, In Image #4 (HE) we see that there is a distinct difference between the plane of the upper & lower arms, and that the wrist is flexed slightly off the plane of the lower arm as the swimmer locks in the anchor position. The hips have begun to swivel/rotate back towards the left side using the rotational torque as a source of power.

In my opinion there are many reasons why the “high elbow” stroke is very attractive, and when combined with the rotational force of the torso, produces an extremely efficient way to propel the body through the water. The main reasons are:
Efficient recruitment of muscle fiber/motor units.
Less reliance on dry land strength.
The use of the swinging/recovery action of the opposite arm (angular momentum) connected through the shoulders harnesses a naturally occurring source of energy (force) that can be applied to the anchor position with a limited impact on energy reserves.
The anchor position is connected through the core of the body, and the rotational force of the hips can be used to supply all the energy needed to propel the body forward past the anchor position.
Systematic use of greater muscle groups to facilitate the process
Efficient distribution of the muscle load across a broad range of groups to lessen the fatigue effect of any one group
Lower levels of lactate accumulation. (Anecdotal observation)
Delayed muscle fatigue

In closing, I’d like to point out that there is a place for almost everything in this world. Although it’s my opinion that coaches should consider a return to a high elbow, connected, angular momentum based freestyle, my voice is but one amongst many. Since there is still much to learn about biomechanics any observations are worth putting forward since ultimately it will be the coaches that have the best opportunity to gauge the value of any point of view. By bringing these thoughts to the attention of others, I hope to stimulate some debate regarding the subject and hopefully in the long run, we’ll all be better off for it.

Note
In the majority of my articles I have solicited the opinion of others as I weave the fabric of the story. I would be remiss to not express my thanks for these thoughts and opinions. In this case I wish to thank those already mentioned in the article, and the members of the Technical Support Department staff.