Abstract
The purposes of this study were to establish test-retest reliability of calculating load-velocity profiles in front crawl swimming using five and three different external loads, and if outcome results were comparable between calculation methods for monitoring performance over time. Fifteen swimmers at either national or international competition level (seven females and eight males) participated in this study. The subjects performed 25 m of semi-tethered swimming with maximal effort with five progressive loads (females 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 kg and males 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 kg) as well as 50 m maximal front crawl on 2 different days. The mean velocity during three stroke cycles in mid-pool was calculated and plotted as a function of the external load. Relationship between the load and velocity was expressed by a linear regression line and established for each swimmer. The intercepts between the axes of the plot and the established regression line were defined as theoretical maximum velocity (V0) and load (L0). In addition, L0 was also expressed as a percentage of body mass (rL0). The coefficient of determination (R2) and the slope (Slv) of the linear load-velocity relationship were calculated. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) showed excellent agreement (ICC ≥0.902) for all variables. The coefficient of variation was ≤3.14% and typical error was rated as “good” in all variables. A difference was found between day 1 and 2 in V0 for three- and five-load calculations and for 50 m front crawl time (p < 0.05). No difference was found between the load-velocity profile outcomes variables compared between the three- and five-trial protocols on neither day 1 nor 2. The Bland-Altman plots showed a small bias across all resistance conditions for five loads, L0: 0.04 kg, rL0: 0.13%, V0: −0.03 m/s, and Slv: 0.003 −m/s/kg and for three loads, L0: −0.24 kg, rL0: −0.27%, V0: −0.04 m/s, Slv: 0.002 −m/s/kg. In conclusion, the load-velocity profile for front crawl swimming can be calculated with high reliability from both five and three external loads and comparable results in outcome variables were established. These methods can be used to monitor performance parameters over time, and to investigate and compare swimmers’ velocity and strength capabilities to allow for individualized training prescription to improve performance.
Highlights
Force-velocity profiles of locomotive patterns, such as sprint running, have been used to understand how these two performance indicators interact (Cross et al, 2018a; JiménezReyes et al, 2019, 2020)
Test-retest reliability for load-velocity profiling parameters from five and three different load conditions are displayed in Tables 1, 2, respectively
standard error of measurement (SEM) was rated as “good” in all variables when compared to MDC
Summary
Force-velocity profiles of locomotive patterns, such as sprint running, have been used to understand how these two performance indicators interact (Cross et al, 2018a; JiménezReyes et al, 2019, 2020). One way of overcoming the complexity is to apply a fully tethered swimming approach, in which a swimmer is attached to an inelastic cord - the other end of which is attached to a fixed force transducer (Amaro et al, 2014, 2017). With this method, a tested swimmer does not move forward; thereby, the measured force can be interpreted as the force the swimmer produced for a propulsive purpose. Since the swimmer do not produce any forward velocity, fully tethered swimming is not applicable for establishing the force-velocity profile
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.