Running vs. Swimming

[Channing]

Which is better for you? I have seen some sources say running, and some say swimming.

My measurement would be time based (i.e. 40 minutes of swimming (a little more than 1 mile) vs. 40 minutes of running (about 5 miles)) rather than distance based (i.e. 3 miles of running vs. 3 miles of swimming) because I run a lot faster than I swim.

[pfrduke]

Which is better for you? I have seen some sources say running, and some say swimming.

My measurement would be time based (i.e. 40 minutes of swimming (a little more than 1 mile) vs. 40 minutes of running (about 5 miles)) rather than distance based (i.e. 3 miles of running vs. 3 miles of swimming) because I run a lot faster than I swim.

Well, swimming is better in the sense that you're less likely to develop any kind of lower body injury (or any injury at all, really). It's also better in the sense that it's a full body workout, rather than just legs/cardio. As for burning calories, couldn't say.

That being said, I do both, and find swimming to be almost mind-numbingly boring. I can last 30 minutes, tops, without starting to go crazy. I find running to be a much more pleasurable activity.

[Bostondevil]

Define better, injuries are less likely with swimming but swimming in cool water encourages the body to store fat as insulation so it's not always the best exercise if slimming down is the primary goal.

The best total body exercise I know is yoga. If you do it properly, you're not likely to injure yourself and you can hit every muscle. Yoga has a drawback though, it's not an aerobic activity. It will make you stronger, more flexible, and relieve stress but I think you should add some aerobic activity into your routine for overall fitness. (Power yoga is an oxymoron. I would argue that power yoga completely misses the point.) Walking is aerobic, so, find a yoga class within walking (or running) distance and you should be all set. Teachers are important, shop around until you find one with a style that suits your approach. For me, I prefer encouragement without pushing and as little of the new agey stuff as possible just teach me how to properly enter and exit the poses but I don't need to ring any chimes.

[TNTDevil]

Define better, injuries are less likely with swimming but swimming in cool water encourages the body to store fat as insulation so it's not always the best exercise if slimming down is the primary goal.
I'll not debate the benefits of yoga vs. swimming. However, you don't build up and store fat unless the swimming your doing is limited to barely keeping your head above water.

If you are swimming for time and distance there is no way you're gonna' store fat.

[EarlJam]

Scientifically, I don't know which is better, but I do know this: They are two totally different animals.

In 1998 I got married. We honeymooned in Negril, Jamaica. I worked hard that year to get into shape and was playing a lot of hoops, hitting weights, running, etc. I was a lean, mean, athletic machine and could run for miles or play full-court hoops for hours without getting too whipped. I was a bad arse.

Or so I thought.

I thought taking scuba diving lessons would be cool. To do that, I had to pass a swimming test. A simple swimming test. Swim, oh, I dunno, 50 yards or so just off the shore? The instructor said that if any feet hit the bottom you were automatically disqualified, out, see ya!

Hey, I'm EarlJam! This will be a cinch. Look at these poor older people next to me. I hope they can keep up. I'll try not to show them up to badly.

Must have been about 20 yards out when utter hopelessness set in. Old people were flying by me. No one was behind me. Down go the legs. Down, down, down, sand, whistle, and the arm of the instructer pointing to me as he exclaimed, "You! You're out!"

Adding a box of salt to the wound was my wife, who was standing on the shore, watching me fail miserably. It was a great lesson in humility and I gained a bunch of respect for swimmers.

I was definitely born a land animal. Anyway, wanted to share.

-EarlJam

[merry]

Which is better for you? I have seen some sources say running, and some say swimming.


The one that's best for you is the one you will do. I've always been advised that swimming is better for you over all in most cases (unless you have an injured rotator cuff like I do right now) but it requires access to a pool and IMO the whole process takes more time. Running you can do pretty much any where any time if you have the shoes.

[dukie8]

Which is better for you? I have seen some sources say running, and some say swimming.

My measurement would be time based (i.e. 40 minutes of swimming (a little more than 1 mile) vs. 40 minutes of running (about 5 miles)) rather than distance based (i.e. 3 miles of running vs. 3 miles of swimming) because I run a lot faster than I swim.

what do you mean by "better?" i do a fair amount of both (and biking). running requires more energy than swimming and therefore burns a lot more calories. however, running involves a lot of high impact and therefore causes many injuries (i have suffered too many of them). swimming has no impact and works your entire body (the upper body workout in running is minimal). because swimming has no impact, you generally can do it longer than running. collegiate swimmers will swim upwards of 20,000 yards a day, which takes many hours to accomplish. nobody, except wackos, runs 4 or 5 hours a day. swimming also is much more a pain to do because you need access to a pool (which often is expensive and usually with restrictive hours) and the chlorine kills your skin and hair.

biking kind of is inbetween the 2 -- it has minimal impact, so less injuries and you can do it longer, and only works the lower body. it also is much more dangerous than the other 2 and i know numerous people who have suffered horrific crashes. it does cost much more than running and swimming -- particularly if you get caught up in all the bling bling of biking. i will note that i have been injuried from all 3...

if you only have 40 minutes, you probably want to run because by the time you get to the pool, change, swim, change again and then get home, you probably only will be swimming 10 or 15 minutes.

[captmojo]

Buy yourself an elliptical machine.

Best of both worlds. No impact.

[tecumseh]

I have a fair amount of experience here, I have run many 10Ks and several marathons, I am a masters swimmer who won his age group in the Alcatraz swim this year and am an MD who reads a lot of exercise articles. Some observations in no particular order.

1) The best exercise is the one you do. For some people the camaraderie of the gym or bike club is important, for some on tight schedules an elipitical machine in the basement is the way to go.

2) These exercises are not exclusive and in fact are complimentary, no reason you can't run, swim AND do yoga.

3) There is experience and technique that comes into play, I grew up a competitive swimmer so I can get a better cardiovascular workout swimming than anything else but for other people this might not be so.

4) Most people work out too wimpy, you really should push yourself and rather than feel good after a workout you should feel a little sick sometimes. Disclaimer this is not medical advice and please don't sue me when you drop over dead from a heart attack. Your body really has a different physiologic response to high intensity workouts (interval training) than to low intensity ones. Not to say a little LSD ..long slow distance is not good now and the it is just I see people jogging, riding bikes or swimming laps and that is ALL they do, slow and steady. So for you people out there who do exercise regularly like most I would say a great new years resolution is get out of the slow and steady rut

5) More specifically most of your training should be done at 70% of your maximum heart rate but you should do some interval training or work some hills such that you are at 90plus % of your maximum heart rate. You really do not need a heart rate monitor to do this kind of training.

[Jim3k]

I have a fair amount of experience here, I have run many 10Ks and several marathons, I am a masters swimmer who won his age group in the Alcatraz swim this year and am an MD who reads a lot of exercise articles. Some observations in no particular order.

1) The best exercise is the one you do. For some people the camaraderie of the gym or bike club is important, for some on tight schedules an elipitical machine in the basement is the way to go.

2) These exercises are not exclusive and in fact are complimentary, no reason you can't run, swim AND do yoga.

3) There is experience and technique that comes into play, I grew up a competitive swimmer so I can get a better cardiovascular workout swimming than anything else but for other people this might not be so.

4) Most people work out too wimpy, you really should push yourself and rather than feel good after a workout you should feel a little sick sometimes. Disclaimer this is not medical advice and please don't sue me when you drop over dead from a heart attack. Your body really has a different physiologic response to high intensity workouts (interval training) than to low intensity ones. Not to say a little LSD ..long slow distance is not good now and the it is just I see people jogging, riding bikes or swimming laps and that is ALL they do, slow and steady. So for you people out there who do exercise regularly like most I would say a great new years resolution is get out of the slow and steady rut

5) More specifically most of your training should be done at 70% of your maximum heart rate but you should do some interval training or work some hills such that you are at 90plus % of your maximum heart rate. You really do not need a heart rate monitor to do this kind of training.

I'm in full agreement with this, but with a caveat: act your age!

I'm 66 and swim a mile three times a week in an outdoor public pool which is heated at 80 degrees. I've been doing that now for about 10 years. Prior to that I was a jogger but quit because of heel and other impact problems.

Because I was a high school and college (freshman only) swimmer (I even coached age group swimming for a couple of years), I know about heavy workouts. I no longer do them because I'm not trying to get better. I'm only trying to get some decent cardiovascular, maintain weight and burn some glucose. I still complete the mile in about 40-45 minutes and may push the last 100. But I don't want to get that heart attack, so I don't kill myself. A strong steady pace does it.

If you've never swum competitively (and therefore do not have an efficient stroke), I don't recommend it. You'll just tire yourself without getting the benefit of a 30-40 minute workout. Hanging on the wall breathless is not going to accomplish much.

For people over 50, who don't golf, I recommend swimming if you know how.

(BTW, Tecumseh, you must be in my neighborhood if you do the Alcatraz thing. I've never had any interest, due to the temperature, but I'd enjoy talking to you about it. Do you do AAAC as well? PM me if you want.)

[hughgs]

If you've never swum competitively (and therefore do not have an efficient stroke), I don't recommend it. You'll just tire yourself without getting the benefit of a 30-40 minute workout. Hanging on the wall breathless is not going to accomplish much.

I'm a little confused by this statement. Are you saying that one shouldn't swim unless they've done so competitively? Or, are you referring to trying to swim a mile in less than an hour? You created a new paragraph so it's unclear what you're referring to.

[Channing]

If you've never swum competitively (and therefore do not have an efficient stroke), I don't recommend it. You'll just tire yourself without getting the benefit of a 30-40 minute workout. Hanging on the wall breathless is not going to accomplish much.

Thanks for the input - but I must also disagree with this statement. I have never swum competitively in my life - but I wanted to pick up swimming to give the pounding on my joints from running a break here and there. I certainly dont have an efficient stroke, and when I started there was a lot of hanging on the wall breathless, but just like running the more you do it and build up stamina the better you get. I can now swim my mile in slightly less than 30 minutes with no wall hanging (although I do need to use the wall to turn around - havent mastered the flip turn yet).

[Jim3k]

I'm a little confused by this statement. Are you saying that one shouldn't swim unless they've done so competitively? Or, are you referring to trying to swim a mile in less than an hour? You created a new paragraph so it's unclear what you're referring to.



Thanks for the input - but I must also disagree with this statement. I have never swum competitively in my life - but I wanted to pick up swimming to give the pounding on my joints from running a break here and there. I certainly dont have an efficient stroke, and when I started there was a lot of hanging on the wall breathless, but just like running the more you do it and build up stamina the better you get. I can now swim my mile in slightly less than 30 minutes with no wall hanging (although I do need to use the wall to turn around - havent mastered the flip turn yet).

Sorry for the lack of clarity. It's my experience (coaching, water safety instructor, etc.) that most people who have not swum competitively are simply inefficient swimmers. They also don't adjust well to the rhythmic breathing required. That doesn't rule out that someone without that experience can't learn to swim or breathe efficiently. If you can, fine, but you're a member of the minority. My point was that you need an efficient stroke to maintain a proper pace for the 45 minutes or so needed. Without it, you won't succeed. I see it all the time at the pool where I work out.

[Channing]

Sorry for the lack of clarity. It's my experience (coaching, water safety instructor, etc.) that most people who have not swum competitively are simply inefficient swimmers. They also don't adjust well to the rhythmic breathing required. That doesn't rule out that someone without that experience can't learn to swim or breathe efficiently. If you can, fine, but you're a member of the minority. My point was that you need an efficient stroke to maintain a proper pace for the 45 minutes or so needed. Without it, you won't succeed. I see it all the time at the pool where I work out.

fair enough - i see it also in the pool. Folks who are in the pool and hanging out on the edges - the functional equivalent of going to the gym, getting a smoothie and looking at the equipment.

[greybeard]

Fear, boredom, and the difference between efforting and force, in swimming and Yoga. Or, shall we say, the Yoga of swimming.

Some might say that it is not how well your body approximates the outward form of a posture that is important to get the full effects of Yoga, but rather how you be in the posture on the inside. Learn to listen to the chatter of the mind, and do not own it--"Oh, this hurts too much;" "oh, this is going to hurt too much in the next moment;" "oh, this is boring;" "oh, I am not doing this correctly, look how perfect X looks compared to me;" "oh, I when will the instructor stay the holding is over;" etc. If you can listen from the perspective, "thank you for sharing," and focus on what you are feeling (physically and emotionally) and thinking while in the posture, you are moving in a helpful direction, Yoga becomes more possible.

If you enter the posture with an intent to "power", "force" your way through it, you might be stretching and might build muscle, but you will not be doing Yoga.

What does it mean to effort without force? To invite physical sensation to intensify by choice without gritting your teeth and clenching muscles unnecessary for maintaining the posture, to be willing to see what intention without force can accomplish, without judgment about whether your shape is out of whack or you might not hold the posture as long as the instructor might ask, Yoga becomes more possible.

Swimming, in my experience, is similar to holding a Yoga posture. There is the fear of sinking for those of us who are neophites. Fear constricts the rib cage, causes the lower abdominum to constrict, the biceps to constrict, the hamstrings. Swimming in that POSTURE is not going to be fun. Gasping at the end of each lap is predictable. Personally, I have always had difficulty with this. My solution, which has its costs, is a pull booey--styrophom thingie you put between your lower thighs. Keeps your lower body up in the water, allows the fear to evaporate, the breathe to be easy, and the stroke and rotation of the torso to be fluid. You can even kick in abbreviated fashion when you get comfortable. Downside, the aerobic aspects suffer.

Then, even with the pull booey, there is the concern about the pain, and, of course the boredom. I like to focus on the breathe, try to increase the number of strokes between breathing in and modulate the underwater exhale to last until the next breathe. I also look for different ways to use my core muscles, to put more kick into my swimming, using again different muscles. To be all the while in the experince of swimming, what it actually feels like in my body to be moving in the water. To come closer to Yoga.

As for running, you need special shoes, it hurts like crazy, feet, ankles, knees, chest, etc, or is gonna hurt in the next moment, you never know when you are going to get mugged, you can quit at anytime without having invested nothing up front, and that, my friends, definitely ain't Yoga.

[tecumseh]

I would agree with Jim3K about stroke and efficiency. But I think the key is to realize that swimming is not like say cycling. One can decide to get into shape by cycling and ride and become a decent cyclist. The swimming stroke is much more difficult and most people do A LOT of things wrong when they swim. So if you want to use swimming as an exercise sign up for lessons, you can usually get private lessons fairly cheaply...often even free from bored lifeguards or other people. It really is not something you can teach yourself as an adult very well.

A somewhat humorous aside from this is when you go to open water races I find it impossible to predict who is fast and who is slow out of the water. At running races and bicycle events you can kind of tell. But in swimming that buff young triathlete may get smoked by middle aged overweight former competitive swimmer. This is because technique is so important in swimming and so hard to learn on your own. Actually most triatheletes are wising up and many take private swim lessons at least to get started.

[hughgs]

Sorry for the lack of clarity. It's my experience (coaching, water safety instructor, etc.) that most people who have not swum competitively are simply inefficient swimmers. They also don't adjust well to the rhythmic breathing required. That doesn't rule out that someone without that experience can't learn to swim or breathe efficiently. If you can, fine, but you're a member of the minority. My point was that you need an efficient stroke to maintain a proper pace for the 45 minutes or so needed. Without it, you won't succeed. I see it all the time at the pool where I work out.

So, are you saying that the only way to see exercise gains in the pool is to be able to swim for 45 minutes? If so, then how is that any different than someone taking up running and only being able to run for 10 minutes at a time?

It seems that you have some sort of time/distance metric that swimmers are required to meet or they can't consider swimming to be a good exercise. I would submit that setting such a lower limit for exercising would preclude a lot of people from starting to exercise and implies a bit of elitism in one's sport.

I spent a good portion of my volleyball days snubbing my nose at some of the players I would see on the beach. Took me a while to appreciate the way they played the game.

[Jim3k]

So, are you saying that the only way to see exercise gains in the pool is to be able to swim for 45 minutes? If so, then how is that any different than someone taking up running and only being able to run for 10 minutes at a time?

It seems that you have some sort of time/distance metric that swimmers are required to meet or they can't consider swimming to be a good exercise. I would submit that setting such a lower limit for exercising would preclude a lot of people from starting to exercise and implies a bit of elitism in one's sport.

I spent a good portion of my volleyball days snubbing my nose at some of the players I would see on the beach. Took me a while to appreciate the way they played the game.


Sorry for not responding before; I've been working and this fell down a couple of pages, so I missed it.

First, let me say that there are two ways to accomplish your goals by swimming, and some of it depends on the goal. Due to my age I am not trying to get better. I just want to maintain a decent weight, give my heart some decent exercise and maintain decent muscle tone. I'm not trying to beat anyone, and believe me, there are many who can trounce me. The time distance metric I describe is for myself since it works for me. There's no one pushing but me.

But, if you're younger and want to really push, the second choice is to join a masters program. There are plenty of master's coaches who will put you into exhausting workouts. But be prepared to nap afterwards rather than going to work. Those often involve sprints -- 50s and 100s and repeats, intertwined with pushed more lengthy stuff, quarters and halves. By the time you're done, you might be at thee miles or so. I don't enjoy that any more. Most masters are trying to improve their times. I don't care about that

From my point of view, a 50-year old man shouldn't be even considering a 100 or 200 fly workout (but one of the masters coaches here is in such good shape he did 50 fly 100s to celebrate his 50th birthday. He told me he wasn't going to try that again. Still...

So I think the metric is something each person needs to find for himself. I mean being lazy doesn't accomplish much. But a mile swim is still a mile swim from a physics point of view. So work is being accomplished. Once I start, I don't stop unless my goggles fill up or something. I'll probably start with three breaths for the first 50 yards and then every other stroke for a while, often 20 lengths. And, I'll probably push at the end into the 70s. I don't do flip turns much anymore because I've hurt my shoulders. Yet by the time I'm done at 40 minutes, I've burned a lot of calories and given myself a strong workout.

Your program might be much different. Suppose you prefer a different stroke or like to change strokes. More muscle choices. (Though I'm an old backstroker, I don't like it much any more because breathing's too easy, the flip turns hurt, our lanes aren't under any guides and I still hit the lane lines. So I stick with free where I can see where I'm going.

I think the elitism comment is silly. Old vets in any sport handle it easily. Muscle memory and all that. But it ain't elitism. It's only self-grunting, since I'm not doing it for anybody but me. There isn't any audience to play to nor an opponent to beat. (I have had people come to me and compliment me on my stroke, but I know better. Still, as an old bird, the compliments are secretly welcomed.) Elitism is off the table; muscle aches and pains are always present. And now that the cold weather has come, it's only the serious ones who continue to show up. (Outdoors, in the 30's or 40's, though pool temp is 80.) Elitism isn't anywhere to be seen when I get out and quiver my way to the shower.

[tecumseh]

For fitness swimmers here is something Santa might bring you.
Highly recommended
http://www.waterproofmusic.com/swimp3.html

[cspan37421]

swimming is better because I prefer it.

Just kidding. It's a variant of the quote "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- George Bernard Shaw

I do prefer swimming because I wrecked my knees in high school trying to be a cross country runner. I probably wasn't dealt a great hand, knee-wise, but I am confident I made things much, much worse by the pounding they took. Ever since then, I can only run a mile before getting excruciating pain.

I didn't get into swimming until my late 30s but I have found it slightly addictive. I really like the completeness of the workout and the fact that, if the water is cool enough, you don't get all sweaty. Since I lack swimming endurance, I change strokes each lap so I don't get so tired out that I have to stop. I do a freestyle/crawl, then breast stroke, then backstroke, then elementary backstroke. The last one is practically a resting stroke but the pace is not that much off the others.

But as others say, the best exercise is the one you do. Swimming is generally a hassle - you have to travel to/from your pool, change, etc. We have an elliptical machine at home, and it is excellent for the legs, without hurting joints. That and some free weights and you can get in decent shape.

[hughgs]

Sorry for not responding before; I've been working and this fell down a couple of pages, so I missed it.

First, let me say that there are two ways to accomplish your goals by swimming, and some of it depends on the goal. Due to my age I am not trying to get better. I just want to maintain a decent weight, give my heart some decent exercise and maintain decent muscle tone. I'm not trying to beat anyone, and believe me, there are many who can trounce me. The time distance metric I describe is for myself since it works for me. There's no one pushing but me.

But, if you're younger and want to really push, the second choice is to join a masters program. There are plenty of master's coaches who will put you into exhausting workouts. But be prepared to nap afterwards rather than going to work. Those often involve sprints -- 50s and 100s and repeats, intertwined with pushed more lengthy stuff, quarters and halves. By the time you're done, you might be at thee miles or so. I don't enjoy that any more. Most masters are trying to improve their times. I don't care about that

From my point of view, a 50-year old man shouldn't be even considering a 100 or 200 fly workout (but one of the masters coaches here is in such good shape he did 50 fly 100s to celebrate his 50th birthday. He told me he wasn't going to try that again. Still...

So I think the metric is something each person needs to find for himself. I mean being lazy doesn't accomplish much. But a mile swim is still a mile swim from a physics point of view. So work is being accomplished. Once I start, I don't stop unless my goggles fill up or something. I'll probably start with three breaths for the first 50 yards and then every other stroke for a while, often 20 lengths. And, I'll probably push at the end into the 70s. I don't do flip turns much anymore because I've hurt my shoulders. Yet by the time I'm done at 40 minutes, I've burned a lot of calories and given myself a strong workout.

Your program might be much different. Suppose you prefer a different stroke or like to change strokes. More muscle choices. (Though I'm an old backstroker, I don't like it much any more because breathing's too easy, the flip turns hurt, our lanes aren't under any guides and I still hit the lane lines. So I stick with free where I can see where I'm going.

I think the elitism comment is silly. Old vets in any sport handle it easily. Muscle memory and all that. But it ain't elitism. It's only self-grunting, since I'm not doing it for anybody but me. There isn't any audience to play to nor an opponent to beat. (I have had people come to me and compliment me on my stroke, but I know better. Still, as an old bird, the compliments are secretly welcomed.) Elitism is off the table; muscle aches and pains are always present. And now that the cold weather has come, it's only the serious ones who continue to show up. (Outdoors, in the 30's or 40's, though pool temp is 80.) Elitism isn't anywhere to be seen when I get out and quiver my way to the shower.

My elitism comment referred to the fact that you previously suggested that if you couldn't swim for 45 minutes then you shouldn't be swimming. It had nothing to do with whether anyone thought you looked good swimming.

I agree that everyone needs to decide for themselves what they want out of swimming. I'm just having a hard time reconciling that view with your statement that you shouldn't really be swimming unless you can swim 45 minutes at a time. That statement precludes almost everyone from even starting to swim as exercise unless they did so before. And that seems elitist to me.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

If you can run, you'll be recruited to play football at Duke. If you can only swim, you won't.

[Jim3k]

My elitism comment referred to the fact that you previously suggested that if you couldn't swim for 45 minutes then you shouldn't be swimming. It had nothing to do with whether anyone thought you looked good swimming.

I agree that everyone needs to decide for themselves what they want out of swimming. I'm just having a hard time reconciling that view with your statement that you shouldn't really be swimming unless you can swim 45 minutes at a time. That statement precludes almost everyone from even starting to swim as exercise unless they did so before. And that seems elitist to me.

OK. Now that I understand you better, my answer remains the same.

And it's not elitism. How could it be? I'm not excluding anyone because they are inferior. And nothing says you can't get some help with your stroke to make it work.

It's simply a matter of being able to get a decent workout. If you stop and rest after every lap or so, probably because you are catching your breath, you will exhaust yourself without really putting long term pressure on your heart, which is the whole idea. You also might make it race too much, too fast and endanger yourself. I think the this Wiki article on aerobic exercise (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerobic_exercise)explains it better than I can. The times the article uses adds up to the 40-45 minutes I'm speaking about.

Hey, you're a better bicyclist than I am, and I don't think you're being elite if you say you are more efficient. ;)

[MChambers]

but I have bad knees, so running isn't an option. As far as boredom goes, my wife got me a Finis mp3 player, so I can listen to music while I swim.

http://www.finisinc.com/products-swimp3v2.shtml

[hughgs]

OK. Now that I understand you better, my answer remains the same.

And it's not elitism. How could it be? I'm not excluding anyone because they are inferior. And nothing says you can't get some help with your stroke to make it work.

It's simply a matter of being able to get a decent workout. If you stop and rest after every lap or so, probably because you are catching your breath, you will exhaust yourself without really putting long term pressure on your heart, which is the whole idea. You also might make it race too much, too fast and endanger yourself. I think the this Wiki article on aerobic exercise (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerobic_exercise)explains it better than I can. The times the article uses adds up to the 40-45 minutes I'm speaking about.

Hey, you're a better bicyclist than I am, and I don't think you're being elite if you say you are more efficient. ;)

Hey, stop using my exercise against me!

While I agree with your ideas of heart rate, etc. the requirements you lay down would seem to exclude people from starting a lot of exercise programs. To say you shouldn't start swimming until you can swim for 45 minutes (with some portion devoted to aerobics) precludes almost everyone from even starting to swim.

Efficiency has absolutely nothing do to with aerobic exercise, it's all about heart rate. If I decided to swim and was only able to swim 1/4 mile but was still able to achieve 20 minutes of aerobic activity then by all accounts that's a good workout.

It's the same thing in any sport. 20 minutes of aerobic exercise is the goal and something that one should strive to achieve. You seem to be arguing that if you can't achieve that goal in swimming then you shouldn't start at all. And that argument could be easily extended to all sports and makes it sound like beginners are not welcome in a sport.

From a cycling standpoint I love helping beginners start off. Stay with a fast group for as long as you can and increase your time until you comfortably ride with them. As they ride longer then you can work on their efficiency. I had to do the same thing at the beginning of the year on the bike. I was able to stay with my normal group for about 4 miles and that was their warm-up! But as I kept at it I was able to stay with them. And I think the same idea holds for all exercising.

[tecumseh]

Hey, stop using my exercise against me!

Efficiency has absolutely nothing do to with aerobic exercise, it's all about heart rate. If I decided to swim and was only able to swim 1/4 mile but was still able to achieve 20 minutes of aerobic activity then by all accounts that's a good workout.

.

In theory I would agree with you but the reality is different. Let me explain, in order to get a certain type of workout lets say you want to be in a zone of 70 to 75% or max heart rate. Now say you are tooling along on a flat road on your bike and notice you are going 65 to 70% HR, well you just shift to higher gear and keep up the rpms and there you are. Now if you are an inefficient swimmer you have nowhere near this level of control. Your rate yos yos around and your breathing is all wrong and yes you can get a workout of sorts it just is poorly controlled. You have to be a pretty darn good swimmer to be able to switch it up just one gear on ten speed hub.

[hughgs]

In theory I would agree with you but the reality is different. Let me explain, in order to get a certain type of workout lets say you want to be in a zone of 70 to 75% or max heart rate. Now say you are tooling along on a flat road on your bike and notice you are going 65 to 70% HR, well you just shift to higher gear and keep up the rpms and there you are. Now if you are an inefficient swimmer you have nowhere near this level of control. Your rate yos yos around and your breathing is all wrong and yes you can get a workout of sorts it just is poorly controlled. You have to be a pretty darn good swimmer to be able to switch it up just one gear on ten speed hub.

How many beginner exercisers have a heart rate monitor? While I agree with assessment, your version of reality doesn't really apply to someone just starting out in either sport.

And if your going on perceived heart rate then I would submit that it's just as hard to figure out how to control your exertion level in either sport. In cycling you can shift your gear but in swimming can't you just go a little slower or faster?

Either way the notion that you have to be a good swimmer to begin to use swimming as an exercise seems elitist to me.

[Jim3k]

OK, this is what I said that seems to have set you off: You somehow concluded that I was being elitist.




If you've never swum competitively (and therefore do not have an efficient stroke), I don't recommend it. You'll just tire yourself without getting the benefit of a 30-40 minute workout. Hanging on the wall breathless is not going to accomplish much.



In retrospect perhaps I could have said it better, but whatever improvements I make, I would not be correcting elitism. Maybe correcting an overstatement.

And, in part, this is what you are saying now:





Efficiency has absolutely nothing do to with aerobic exercise, it's all about heart rate. If I decided to swim and was only able to swim 1/4 mile but was still able to achieve 20 minutes of aerobic activity then by all accounts that's a good workout. It's the same thing in any sport. 20 minutes of aerobic exercise is the goal and something that one should strive to achieve. You seem to be arguing that if you can't achieve that goal in swimming then you shouldn't start at all. And that argument could be easily extended to all sports and makes it sound like beginners are not welcome in a sport.

A couple of things. Both Tecumseh, who does open water swimming (and is a doc) and I both swim long(er) distances. To do that you have to be very comfortable in the water and have to understand (mostly by habit) that your breathing must be regular and the pace must be relatively controlled for that distance. For a slower swimmer, those things are essential to understanding the buoyancy of one's body and trusting it. Pace and breath regulation are two constants if you don't want to tire too quickly.

The part of your quote I have bolded really doesn't deal with what I, and probably Tecumseh, are saying. If you were to try do what you describe there, you would be considered lifeguard bait. You might have your 20 minutes of exercise (not really enough) but anyone taking that amount of time to swim that distance because they aren't efficient means that they will have been flailing somehow and not breathing properly. That's not swimming; that's struggling and that's why such a person would attract the lifeguard's attention. Floundering like that is conclusive evidence that s/he is someone who is terribly uncomfortable in the water. In fact, that performance would be seen as evidence of panic, probably from a type of claustrophobia -- which, btw, is what happens to people who don't like to put their face in the water -- often older beginners. That person is not going to be a better swimmer without help -- because they are a risk to themselves. That's why they would be better off doing something else.

It is imperative, for life saving reasons, to be comfortable when swimming. Comfort is only achieved through combining an efficient stroke with regular breathing. For the time period we are describing, whatever the pace, that swimmer must be comfortable.

This is where I probably overstated in my original comment. I said you needed competitive experience -- you don't, but it helps, because you have already come to understand what's required. Most people who have learned to swim for safety reasons or just to relax in a pool have never swum head down for the period of time the workout takes. They haven't learned to regulate their breathing. They haven't learned the technique. I agree it can be learned. But if you're 50 and haven't done it before, it's not like riding that bike. There is no coasting; your face is in the water except for a very few seconds. If you change the rhythm, you'll either breathe water and choke or break your stroke -- becoming inefficient and impacting your buoyancy.

So I'll modify my beginning remark to say "If you do not have an efficient stroke, I don't recommend it."

But believe me, elitism was not in the equation. Life saving was.

Finally, it has been my experience that older people who have not swum workouts before, and who forgo being taught, usually swim some form of backstroke. I don't denigrate that because if that's what they can do, then at least they're doing it. It's usually very awkward and there is little rhythm to it. It probably does satisfy the aerobic requirements, given their effort. At least they've become comfortable in the water even if they are not efficient. Again, in my experience, I'm only aware of one person like that in my lifetime (he's been doing it for 10 years now, in his mid-70's). To me that shows how hard it is to do what you are suggesting can be done. The odds are against it.

So take some lessons and learn to swim comfortably, crawl or breaststroke before you jump in the pool with the idea that you are going to swim for 40 minutes straight. Most other strokes that a learning swimmer might be able to use, such as elementary backstroke or sidestroke, have a lifesaving purpose. They are designed to keep your head out of the water. They would not be a choice for a workout.

And no, I'm not joining you for your next mountain climb :D

[hughgs]

OK, this is what I said that seems to have set you off: You somehow concluded that I was being elitist.



In retrospect perhaps I could have said it better, but whatever improvements I make, I would not be correcting elitism. Maybe correcting an overstatement.

And, in part, this is what you are saying now:




A couple of things. Both Tecumseh, who does open water swimming (and is a doc) and I both swim long(er) distances. To do that you have to be very comfortable in the water and have to understand (mostly by habit) that your breathing must be regular and the pace must be relatively controlled for that distance. For a slower swimmer, those things are essential to understanding the buoyancy of one's body and trusting it. Pace and breath regulation are two constants if you don't want to tire too quickly.

The part of your quote I have bolded really doesn't deal with what I, and probably Tecumseh, are saying. If you were to try do what you describe there, you would be considered lifeguard bait. You might have your 20 minutes of exercise (not really enough) but anyone taking that amount of time to swim that distance because they aren't efficient means that they will have been flailing somehow and not breathing properly. That's not swimming; that's struggling and that's why such a person would attract the lifeguard's attention. Floundering like that is conclusive evidence that s/he is someone who is terribly uncomfortable in the water. In fact, that performance would be seen as evidence of panic, probably from a type of claustrophobia -- which, btw, is what happens to people who don't like to put their face in the water -- often older beginners. That person is not going to be a better swimmer without help -- because they are a risk to themselves. That's why they would be better off doing something else.

It is imperative, for life saving reasons, to be comfortable when swimming. Comfort is only achieved through combining an efficient stroke with regular breathing. For the time period we are describing, whatever the pace, that swimmer must be comfortable.

This is where I probably overstated in my original comment. I said you needed competitive experience -- you don't, but it helps, because you have already come to understand what's required. Most people who have learned to swim for safety reasons or just to relax in a pool have never swum head down for the period of time the workout takes. They haven't learned to regulate their breathing. They haven't learned the technique. I agree it can be learned. But if you're 50 and haven't done it before, it's not like riding that bike. There is no coasting; your face is in the water except for a very few seconds. If you change the rhythm, you'll either breathe water and choke or break your stroke -- becoming inefficient and impacting your buoyancy.

So I'll modify my beginning remark to say "If you do not have an efficient stroke, I don't recommend it."

But believe me, elitism was not in the equation. Life saving was.

Finally, it has been my experience that older people who have not swum workouts before, and who forgo being taught, usually swim some form of backstroke. I don't denigrate that because if that's what they can do, then at least they're doing it. It's usually very awkward and there is little rhythm to it. It probably does satisfy the aerobic requirements, given their effort. At least they've become comfortable in the water even if they are not efficient. Again, in my experience, I'm only aware of one person like that in my lifetime (he's been doing it for 10 years now, in his mid-70's). To me that shows how hard it is to do what you are suggesting can be done. The odds are against it.

So take some lessons and learn to swim comfortably, crawl or breaststroke before you jump in the pool with the idea that you are going to swim for 40 minutes straight. Most other strokes that a learning swimmer might be able to use, such as elementary backstroke or sidestroke, have a lifesaving purpose. They are designed to keep your head out of the water. They would not be a choice for a workout.

And no, I'm not joining you for your next mountain climb :D

OK, I see were you're coming from. You seem to be saying that efficient swimming is defined by the ability to perform a basic swimming stroke, i.e. not struggling. I'm assuming some level of stroke competence, i.e. the exerciser has swum before and knows how to perform a basic swimming stroke. If that is how you're defining "efficient" then I would agree with that sentiment. But, that seems like a crazy definition of efficient. If I take that definition into the cycling world then it would be like me saying that your not an efficient bike rider if you can't ride straight. While it may be true that you're not efficient, I would go further and say you haven't actually learned to ride a bike yet and should therefore reconsider cycling as an exercise until you learn to ride in a straight line. Same thing with swimming or any other exercise. If you're struggling to perform a basic swimming stroke then you're not going to be able to use swimming as an exercise. But I would stop very short of saying that learning to not struggle the same thing as having an efficient stroke. Efficiency to me implies fine-tuning one's stroke and you seem to be talking about basic swimming.

So, I would amend your statement to read that you shouldn't begin using swimming as an exercise until you can perform a basic swimming stroke. If you call a basic swimming stroke an efficient swimming stroke then that's fine, but it does come across as being elitist since I think most people don't equate efficiency in any endeavor with being able to perform the basics. I think people would equate efficiency as something for advanced participants hence equating efficiency to a basic swimming stroke implies that only advanced swimmers should use swimming as an exercise and beginners should stay out of the pool.

As for the 20 minutes of exercise, I think I described it as 20 minutes of aerobic exercise, per your link.