If a taper for track works from CNS rebounding and a reduction of work…can swimming benefit from a reduction of volume, increase on intensification, and a cns rebound Charlie?

I know I’m not charlie but I’m going to just throw in my two cents to help out my freind clemson :smiley: . I personally believe that swimming work is not as an intense as track work so I don’t believe that a rebound from a reduction of work and intensification would be as great as it would be in track. Mabye the swimmer could benefit from a reduction in volume and intensification but since the nature of swim work is less intense the reduction in volume and increases in intensification would be more subtle.

ahhhhhhhhhh no.

hey I’m just throwing some ideas around. Do you think swimming fast is more intense then running fast?

I’ll throw my hat into the ring and ask why wouldn’t it work?

Isn’t a taper effectly doing that.

Even though the shortest sprint in swimming is the 50m Free, which takes around 20secs. (rough guide) couldn’t equate the work of that event to 200m on the track. I would of thought it use the same energy systems and structure.

I basically have no idea about swimming

I have basically have no idea about swimming too but I would think that swimming is less intense then track. In swimming you don’t have to deal with the ground or use as much elastic energy. I would think since swimming is less intense, more volume could be done in the pool and that the effect from a taper wouldn’t be as great because the intensity isn’t as high. That’s why I think you would taper less and (becuase of the nature of the sport) intensify less becuase there is less of a rebound in swimming from cutting the volume of the pool work and intensifying.

T2 I think I understand where you are coming from. Swimming perhaps doesn’t have the forces put on the body as does track sprinting. But from an intensity point of view it would still be high and hence a CNS effect.

Perhaps there high and low days or should say the difference between these days are less.

As they have less forces on there body they may do more volume

A reduction in volume and an increase in intensity increases the stress on the CNS and lowers the possibility of performances. The taper consists of a slight reduction of intensity on the speed work and a reduced speed vol by session and by week. The slower work has no real cost to the CNS and needn’t be reduced much, if at all.

100% to 95% Sprinting in the pool does tax heavily the CNS,though probably not as much as on the track-of which I have limited experience.

Recovery times needed to replicate/rebound from a 100%->95% workload,and volume actually possible at those intensities (actually not that dissimilar ,in terms of reps number and overall volumes,from figures indicated both in CFTS and around this Forum) would in my experience be an indication of such a nature of the sport.
Also interaction with gym work allows me to draw similar conclusions,as if Swim sessions in the pool were that “low CNS impact” they would not heavily influence work with weights afterwards,if not from a pure Energy Systems / mechanical available energy standpoint.

95% to 90% “Sprint” Swimming seems to create much less impact and cns demand, probably allowing - along with lower overall mechanical stress - considerably different training volumes than on the track.

I would agree with DMA,and actually wouldn’t see the reasons for such an approach to tapering as far as CNS is concerned.


I am seeing this approach with American Sprinters (pool) now as a way to get the general taper (reduction in volume) and a CNS taper (load 8-10 days out to rebound).

It looks good to me…

Let me give my personal observations. As a swimmer (sprinter) I have personally known, and benefited from, a substantial CNS rebound during a taper. I taper a minimum of 7 days for a normal meet, a maximum of 14 for a championship meet. (Though I am wondering if that is too long.)

Sprint swimming is very draining of the CNS. In fact I am constantly outstripping my CNS abilities to recover. I have ot be very careful in my own training.

Clemson, what are the American Sprinters doing exactly in the pool?
Would You share any example?

Under this light it sounds interesting…

Also would You agree with my considerations above? Or has practical work in the pool lead You to much different conclusions?

I am convinced this is a most open topic,and well worth debating.

That is true - the 50 free is the same energy system as the 200 meters, requiring very similar demands in speed endurance and power.