Current warm-up practices and the contemporary issues faced by elite swimming coaches

From dry-land to the water: training and testing practices of strength and conditioning coaches in high level French sprint swimmers

Introduction

The aim of this study was to explore training and testing practices from Strength & Conditioning (S&C) coaches who manage groups of high-level French swimmers in elite training centers. The transfer of abilities from dry-land to in situ condition was also investigated.

Methods

24 French S&C coaches completed a survey via an online platform. Frequency analyses were made for quantitative and qualitative responses, the level of significance set for this study was p ≤ 0.05.

Results

Core stability, Strength & Power were the three most targeted qualities. Core strengthening in all its forms, Bench Press & Squat were the three most prescribed exercises. 79% of S&C coaches adapted exercises according to different parameters. Most of the coaches indicated that dry-land S&C sessions were preferentially placed before in-water sessions. Very varied exercises were used in-water to make the transfer from dry-land more effective. 87% of participants monitored the training load and 38% assessed the force and velocity parameters for some S&C exercises.

Discussion

Dry-land training practices of S&C coaches were mostly in line with scientific recommendations. In the light of results of the questionnaire, it would appear that testing procedures might be a key issue for transferring qualities from dry-land to in situ.

Warm-up for Sprint Swimming: Race-Pace or Aerobic Stimulation? A Randomized Study

Neiva, HP, Marques, MC, Barbosa, TM, Izquierdo, M, Viana, JL, Teixeira, AM, and Marinho, DA. Warm-up for sprint swimming: race-pace or aerobic stimulation? A randomized study. J Strength Cond Res 31(9): 2423-2431, 2017-The aim of this study was to compare the effects of 2 different warm-up intensities on 100-m swimming performance in a randomized controlled trial. Thirteen competitive swimmers performed two 100-m freestyle time-trials on separate days after either control or experimental warm-up in a randomized design. The control warm-up included a typical race-pace set (4 × 25 m), whereas the experimental warm-up included an aerobic set (8 × 50 m at 98-102% of critical velocity). Cortisol, testosterone, blood lactate ([La]), oxygen uptake (V[Combining Dot Above]O2), heart rate, core (Tcore and Tcorenet) and tympanic temperatures, and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were monitored. Stroke length (SL), stroke frequency (SF), stroke index (SI), and propelling efficiency (ηp) were assessed for each 50-m lap. We found that V[Combining Dot Above]O2, heart rate, and Tcorenet were higher after experimental warm-up (d > 0.73), but only the positive effect for Tcorenet was maintained until the trial. Performance was not different between conditions (d = 0.07). Experimental warm-up was found to slow SF (mean change ±90% CL = 2.06 ± 1.48%) and increase SL (1.65 ± 1.40%) and ηp (1.87 ± 1.33%) in the first lap. After the time-trials, this warm-up had a positive effect on Tcorenet (d = 0.69) and a negative effect on [La] (d = 0.56). Although the warm-ups had similar outcomes in the 100-m freestyle, performance was achieved through different biomechanical strategies. Stroke length and efficiency were higher in the first lap after the experimental warm-up, whereas SF was higher after control warm-up. Physiological adaptations were observed mainly through an increased Tcore after experimental warm-up. In this condition, the lower [La] after the trial suggests lower dependency on anaerobic metabolism.

The Effects of Different Warm-up Volumes on the 100-m Swimming Performance: A Randomized Crossover Study

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of 3 different warm-up (WU) volumes on 100-m swimming performance. Eleven male swimmers at the national level completed 3 time trials of 100-m freestyle on separate days and after a standard WU, a short WU (SWU), or a long WU (LWU) in a randomized sequence. All of them replicated some usual sets and drills, and the WU totaled 1,200 m, the SWU totaled 600 m, and the LWU totaled 1,800 m. The swimmers were faster after the WU (59.29 seconds; confidence interval [CI] 95%, 57.98-60.61) and after the SWU (59.38 seconds; CI 95%, 57.92-60.84) compared with the LWU (60.18 seconds; CI 95%, 58.53-61.83). The second 50-m lap after the WU was performed with a higher stroke length (effect size [ES] = 0.77), stroke index (ES = 1.26), and propelling efficiency (ES = 0.78) than that after the SWU. Both WU and SWU resulted in higher pretrial values of blood lactate concentrations [La] compared with LWU (ES = 1.58 and 0.74, respectively), and the testosterone:cortisol levels were increased in WU compared with LWU (ES = 0.86). In addition, the trial after WU caused higher [La] (ES ≥ 0.68) and testosterone:cortisol values compared with the LWU (ES = 0.93). These results suggest that an LWU could impair 100-m freestyle performance. The swimmers showed higher efficiency during the race after a 1200-m WU, suggesting a favorable situation. It highlighted the importance of the [La] and hormonal responses to each particular WU, possibly influencing performance and biomechanical responses during a 100-m race.