News

  • Questions on a swim workout, preparing to kick butt

     

    Q: Hi Gale, I recently bought your book “Swim Workouts for Triathletes.”  I’m afraid as someone without a swimming background I am stuck on the first drill terminology: in the 30-minute #1 workout (beginner) it reads halfway through the workout:

    4 X 50 2-2-2   :10 RI. (For the advanced it has 6 X 50 2-2-2.)

    The part I don’t get is the “2-2-2.” I have scoured the book and can’t find an explanation. Why are there three “2”s for four intervals?? What does it mean? Please help.

    I am an age grouper who recently did the Malibu Olympic distance triathlon after a layoff from triathlon. My goal was to finish standing up, and I did. Next year’s goal is to kick some of my old colleague’s butts!

    Thanks, R. L.

    A: Hi R.L., First, congrats on coming back to triathlon! I suspect with some patience and dedication, your goal of kicking butt is well within reach.

    The explanation for "2-2-2" is at the bottom of page 27, a bit tucked away. It is within the descending definition. And due to your note, I've found a couple of typos. Thank you!

    Descending (DESC) With each swim interval, your time will incrementally decrease. For example:

               8 x 100 DESC: Each 100-m interval swim is faster than the previous one. When the code reads DESC 2-2-2-2 you will swim every two sets at a descending speed.

    I can see the 30-minute #1 workout is missing DESC before the 2-2-2. No wonder it was confusing.

    Best wishes preparing for next season. Keep me posted on how it goes.

    Gale

  • ← Next Post Previous Post →
  • Comments on this post (2 comments)

    • James Chung says...

      @Milt Allen
      Yes, I think you’re right. It should read DESC 2-2 since it is a 4 × 50.

      If it was 6 × 50, then the DESC 2-2-2 makes sense. But then again, I’m a newbie so…

      On June 18, 2015

    • Milt Allen says...

      Great book! Thanks! In addition to the above comments, it should read simply “2-2” as well, rather than “2-2-2”, right? (4 × 50 . . . )

      Thanks, Gale!

      On December 08, 2014

  • Leave a comment