13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Understanding the Role of Propulsion in the Prediction of Front-Crawl Swimming Velocity and in the Relationship Between Stroke Frequency and Stroke Length

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction: This study aimed to: 1) determine swimming velocity based on a set of anthropometric, kinematic, and kinetic variables, and; 2) understand the stroke frequency (SF)–stroke length (SL) combinations associated with swimming velocity and propulsion in young sprint swimmers.

          Methods: 38 swimmers (22 males: 15.92 ± 0.75 years; 16 females: 14.99 ± 1.06 years) participated and underwent anthropometric, kinematic, and kinetic variables assessment. Exploratory associations between SL and SF on swimming velocity were explored using two two-way ANOVA (independent for males and females). Swimming velocity was determined using multilevel modeling.

          Results: The prediction of swimming velocity revealed a significant sex effect. Height, underwater stroke time, and mean propulsion of the dominant limb were predictors of swimming velocity. For both sexes, swimming velocity suggested that SL presented a significant variation (males: F = 8.20, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.40; females: F = 18.23, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.39), as well as SF (males: F = 38.20, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.47; females: F = 83.04, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.51). The interaction between SL and SF was significant for females (F = 8.00, p = 0.001, η 2 = 0.05), but not for males (F = 1.60, p = 0.172, η 2 = 0.04). The optimal SF–SL combination suggested a SF of 0.80 Hz and a SL of 2.20 m (swimming velocity: 1.75 m s −1), and a SF of 0.80 Hz and a SL of 1.90 m (swimming velocity: 1.56 m s −1) for males and females, respectively. The propulsion in both sexes showed the same trend in SL, but not in SF (i.e., non-significant variation). Also, a non-significant interaction between SL and SF was observed (males: F = 0.77, p = 0.601, η 2 = 0.05; females: F = 1.48, p = 0.242, η 2 = 0.05).

          Conclusion: Swimming velocity was predicted by an interaction of anthropometrics, kinematics, and kinetics. Faster velocities in young sprinters of both sexes were achieved by an optimal combination of SF–SL. The same trend was shown by the propulsion data. The highest propulsion was not necessarily associated with higher velocity achievement.

          Related collections

          Most cited references59

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          An effect size primer: A guide for clinicians and researchers.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Defining Training and Performance Caliber: A Participant Classification Framework

            Throughout the sport-science and sports-medicine literature, the term “elite” subjects might be one of the most overused and ill-defined terms. Currently, there is no common perspective or terminology to characterize the caliber and training status of an individual or cohort. This paper presents a 6-tiered Participant Classification Framework whereby all individuals across a spectrum of exercise backgrounds and athletic abilities can be classified. The Participant Classification Framework uses training volume and performance metrics to classify a participant to one of the following: Tier 0: Sedentary; Tier 1: Recreationally Active; Tier 2: Trained/Developmental; Tier 3: Highly Trained/National Level; Tier 4: Elite/International Level; or Tier 5: World Class. We suggest the Participant Classification Framework can be used to classify participants both prospectively (as part of study participant recruitment) and retrospectively (during systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses). Discussion around how the Participant Classification Framework can be tailored toward different sports, athletes, and/or events has occurred, and sport-specific examples provided. Additional nuances such as depth of sport participation, nationality differences, and gender parity within a sport are all discussed. Finally, chronological age with reference to the junior and masters athlete, as well as the Paralympic athlete, and their inclusion within the Participant Classification Framework has also been considered. It is our intention that this framework be widely implemented to systematically classify participants in research featuring exercise, sport, performance, health, and/or fitness outcomes going forward, providing the much-needed uniformity to classification practices.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Biomechanics of competitive front crawl swimming.

              Essential performance-determining factors in front crawl swimming can be analysed within a biomechanical framework, in reference to the physiological basis of performance. These factors include: active drag forces, effective propulsive forces, propelling efficiency and power output. The success of a swimmer is determined by the ability to generate propulsive force, while reducing the resistance to forward motion. Although for a given competitive stroke a range of optimal stroking styles may be expected across a sample of swimmers, a common element of technique related to a high performance level is the use of complex sculling motions of the hands to generate especially lift forces. By changing the orientation of the hand the propulsive force acting on the hand is aimed successfully in the direction of motion. Furthermore, the swimming velocity (v) is related to drag (A), power input (Pi, the rate of energy liberation via the aerobic/anaerobic metabolism), the gross efficiency (eg), propelling efficiency (ep), and power output (Po) according to: [formula; see text] Based on the research available at present it is concluded that: (a) drag in groups of elite swimmers homogeneous with respect to swimming technique is determined by anthropometric dimensions; (b) total mechanical power output (Po) is important since improvement in performance is related to increased Po. Furthermore, it shows dramatic changes with training and possibly reflects the size of the 'swimming engine'; (c) propelling efficiency seems to be important since it is much higher in elite swimmers (61%) than in triathletes (44%); and (d) distance per stroke gives a fairly good indication of propelling efficiency and may be used to evaluate individual progress in technical ability.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Physiol
                Front Physiol
                Front. Physiol.
                Frontiers in Physiology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-042X
                27 April 2022
                2022
                : 13
                : 876838
                Affiliations
                [1] 1 Department of Sport Sciences , Instituto Politécnico de Bragança , Bragança, Portugal
                [2] 2 Research Center in Sports Health and Human Development (CIDESD) , University of Beira Interior , Covilhã, Portugal
                [3] 3 Faculty of Education , Health, and Wellbeing , University of Wolverhampton , Wolverhampton, United Kingdom
                [4] 4 Discipline of Exercise and Sport Science , Faculty of Health Sciences , The University of Sydney , Sydney, NSW, Australia
                [5] 5 Department of Sport Sciences , University of Beira Interior , Covilhã, Portugal
                Author notes

                Edited by: Beat Knechtle, University of Zurich, Switzerland

                Reviewed by: Mário C. Marques, University of Beira Interior, Portugal

                Petros G Botonis, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece

                Santiago Veiga, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain

                Marek Rejman, Marek Rejman, Poland

                Brice Guignard, Université de Rouen, France

                *Correspondence: Jorge E. Morais, morais.jorgestrela@ 123456gmail.com

                This article was submitted to Exercise Physiology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Physiology

                Article
                876838
                10.3389/fphys.2022.876838
                9094697
                35574451
                df7a3738-410a-4126-aecd-75f33213f1ac
                Copyright © 2022 Morais, Barbosa, Nevill, Cobley and Marinho.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 15 February 2022
                : 12 April 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia , doi 10.13039/501100001871;
                Award ID: UIBD/DTP/04045/2020
                Categories
                Physiology
                Original Research

                Anatomy & Physiology
                youth,swimming,technique,performance,stroke parameters
                Anatomy & Physiology
                youth, swimming, technique, performance, stroke parameters

                Comments

                Comment on this article