See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/286738567

Training load and performance in swimming

Article · January 2011

CITATIONS READS

16 24,701

2 authors, including:

Jean-Claude Chatard
Université Jean Monnet
116 PUBLICATIONS   7,019 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Swimming strategy in oLympic games View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jean-Claude Chatard on 19 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

In: World Book of Swimming: From Science to Performance ISBN: 978-1-61668-202-6
Editors: L. Seifert, D. Chollet and I.Mujika ©2011 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 18

TRAINING LOAD AND PERFORMANCE IN SWIMMING

Jean-Claude Chatard1 and Andrew M Stewart2

1
Laboratoire de Physiologie Clinique et de l’Exercice,
Faculté de Médecine de Saint-Etienne, France,
2
Department of Osteopathy, Faculty of Social and Health Sciences Unitec New Zealand

ABSTRACT
More than three quarters of all competitive swimming events are completed in less
than two and a half minutes by athletes of at least national class. To prepare for these
events, coaches manipulate training load (usually described as a combination of volume,
intensity, frequency, and dry-land training) at various times of the season in an attempt to
prepare their swimmers to peak just at the right time. Leading into competition, there is
usually a phase of high load training followed by some kind of tapering (reduced load)
program. Scientific data support bigger performance gains through a program based on
high intensity and low volume prior to a high-load phase and taper phase leading into
competition. Individual athletes will respond differently to such fluctuations in training
load and will depend on parameters such as training status at the time and performance
level. Individual responses can be monitored using simple observational or monitoring
techniques, regression analysis, or with the help of a systems model. These analytical
processes may be useful tools to establish individualized training programs.

Key words: fatigue, fitness, taper, super compensation, mathematical model

1. INTRODUCTION
Most competitive swimming events are completed in a relatively short period of time
(less than two and a half minutes by athletes of national standard or better). Preparation for
competing in these events usually involves varying the training load at various times during
the season to have the swimmer peak at the desired moment. This training load is usually
described as a combination of volume swum, intensity of effort, frequency of workout, and
dry-land training (30). The premise of most traditional coaching programmes has been to lay
360 Jean-Claude Chatard and Andrew M Stewart

down an initial base of fitness at the start of the season, then to gradually increase the training
load to accelerate fitness gains and stress the athlete to a point close to breakdown, then to
back off the training load through a tapering phase that allows recovery in time for optimum
performance at the chosen competition. The aim of this chapter is twofold: First, to discuss
the most effective combination of each of the factors contributing to training load during
various phases of the season that may lead to an optimum enhancement in performance.
Second, to indicate that training load and performance data can be useful tools for estimating
the individual adaptation profiles either by means of simple observations, statistical analyses,
or a systems model.

2. MEASUREMENT OF TRAINING LOAD

Training load is ultimately the combination of volume swum, intensity of effort,
frequency of workout, and dry-land training. The volume of training undertaken by elite
swimmers ranges usually from around 10-12 km.d-1 during light-load periods up to 15-20
km.d-1 during high-load phases over either two or three sessions per day (11, 25, and 48).

80

I Speed < B.L.A.T.

70
II Speed = B.L.A.T.
% of total swimming distance

III Speed > B.L.A.T.

15
IV Lactic swimming
V Sprint swimming
10

0
I II III IV V
Training Intensity

Figure 1. Mean ± SD percentage of total swimming distance covered at each intensity level (30).

For example, it has been reported that the Sydney and Athens 1500 m Olympic
Champion, Grant Hackett, swam between 2400 km and 2800 km per year from 1995 to 2004.
Training intensity has been measured in several ways; including heart rate, oxygen uptake,
swim pace, percent effort, and blood lactate concentration. The most valid and reliable of
these measures appears to be swimming pace as most physiologically-based measures are too
slow to react to non steady-state conditions. One exception appears to be the use of blood
 Training Load and Performance in Swimming 361

lactate concentration, even though its response time to changing intensity is somewhat slow
(minutes). Several authors have used such a measure to beneficial effect during progressive
incremental step tests (16, 30, and 35). In particular, Mujika et al. (30) have defined five
ranges of blood lactate concentration: intensity I is swimming speed close to 2 mM; intensity
II is speed close to 4 mM; intensity III speed close to 6 mM; intensity IV highly lactic
swimming (10 mM); and intensity V maximal intensity sprint swimming. Training frequency
can be quantified either by the number of training sessions or the number of half days of rest.
One hour dry-land training has been empirically considered equivalent to 1 km swum at
intensity I, 0.5 km at intensity IV, and 0.5 km at intensity V using a stress index scale of
training load and blood lactate concentration over different training sets (30).
Using the above training load factors, Mujika et al. (30) measured a mean (± SD) training
volume of 1126 ± 222 km, a training frequency of 316 ± 44 half days of rest (range from 264
to 370), and 1108 ± 828 min (range from 0 to 2415) of dry-land training in a group of 18
international French swimmers for a complete season of training. The percentages of the total
distance covered over the season at each intensity are presented in Figure 1.

3. VOLUME OF TRAINING AND PERFORMANCE

In competitive swimming, it is generally assumed, though unsubstantiated, that improve-
ments in strength and endurance are proportional to the volume of work performed during
training (14). It is the general belief (particularly among coaches) that increased volume
produces an adaptive response that directly leads to an improvement in performance. This
belief is indoctrinated in most swim coaches to the extent that a progressive increase in
training volumes over years is the norm. For example, from 1968 to 1980, a regular increase
in training volume from around 1,300-1,700 km per year to around 1,900-3,500 km was
observed for elite swimmers (33). In contrast to this approach, the French Swimming
Academy recommends an increase in volume only as the swimmer matures, but beyond such
an age there is a ‘ceiling effect’ when other factors (primarily intensity) become more the
focus to provide the training stimulus (Table 1).

Table 1. Recommended daily and weekly training volume for age groups swimmers

10 years 11-12 years 13-14 years 15-16 years > 17 years

daily 3.5 - 4 km 4 - 4.5 km 4.5 - 5.5 km 5.5 - 10 km 6 - 10 km
weekly 20 km 25 km 30 km 35-40 km 45 - 60 km

Rigorous scientific investigation over the last 20 years or so, has questioned this volume-
based philosophy. In 1995, Mujika et al. (30) found that training volume, ranging from 749
km to 1475 km for a season did not significantly correlate with performance in 18
international sprint swimmers. Stewart and Hopkins (42) followed the training practices of 24
highly-qualified coaches and 185 of their national age-group swimmers over two consecutive
seasons. This study concluded that periodization of training and differences in training
between sprint and middle-distance events were broadly in accord with principles of
specificity, but that strong effects of specificity of training on performance were not apparent.
Stewart and Hopkins (42) also noted that the majority of training for most of the season was
362 Jean-Claude Chatard and Andrew M Stewart

freestyle-based (on average from 46% to 62%), which is counterintuitive to stroke or distance
speciality (43). This result highlights the practice of ‘filler mileage’ within training
prescription (additional slow to moderate pace swimming to make up the target volume for
the session). Costill et al. (14) investigated the effects of doubling training volume for a group
of swimmers from 5 km.d-1 to 9.4 km.d-1 for six weeks, while another group continued to
train normally. The results showed that the larger training volumes neither increased aerobic
or anaerobic capacities, while maximal sprinting velocity and performance were decreased.
Moreover, a 50% reduction in training volume (4.5 km.d-1 vs 8.7 km.d-1) over two
competitive seasons resulted in improved swimming power and performance, with no
changes in V O2max or blood lactate concentration after a standardized swim (11). In a more
recent study (15), Faude et al. implemented a randomized cross-over trial of 10 weeks.
During this time national-level age-group swimmers performed a four-week period consisting
of either high-volume or high-intensity workouts. The intervention period was then followed
by an identical taper in each group. Results clearly showed no advantageous effect of
additional volume on performance in 100m or 400m swims and similar performance gains
were noted for both groups three months post-study. Taken together, these results agree with
previously reported data concerning the influence of training volume on the adaptation to
training in competitive swimmers (11, 12, 13, and 24). In all these studies, the authors suggest
that in highly trained swimmers, increased volume ultimately loses its capacity to stimulate
adaptation beyond some critical training threshold, while training intensity becomes the key
parameter to produce a further positive response.
It might be concluded from previous observations that low intensity training is not useful
for short distance swimmers. It may be possible that a high volume of low intensity training
could improve the recovery process and thus make high intensity training easier to tolerate
(39), however, such a possibility has yet to be rigorously studied. Gliding ability in the water
could also be developed with increased low intensity training, with a consequent reduction in
the energy cost of swimming (9, 39).
After several weeks or months of high volume training, a short period of gradually
reduced training load of around two to four weeks (taper) results in vastly improved
performances (11, 22, 25, and 28). Mujika, et al. (30) found that the reduction in training
volume during the taper was related to performance improvements (Figure 2A). Studies by
Stewart et al. (41) and Stewart and Hopkins (42) found similar results. The key question here
relates to what aspect(s) of overall training load should be reduced. Banister and Calvert (5)
indicated that training impulse engenders fitness states, but also fatigue that limits the
performance. As fatigue has a shorter time constant than fitness, reducing the quantity of
training over the tapering period improves the performance as the body learns to
“supercompensate” in a classical biological adaptive response. It is suggested that the key
element of training load that has to be retained is that of intensity to maintain fitness levels.
The overall load could still be reduced by a combination of less frequency and lower
volumes. The ‘art’ of coaching is to manipulate this load to suit the individual needs of the
swimmer and in time for peak performance to occur at the desired moment at the end of the
taper (45).
 Training Load and Performance in Swimming 363
% Improvement in Performance
6 11

% C hange in Performance
A B
r = 0.69
4 9 P < 0.01
N = 18

7
2 r = 0.61
P < 0.01
n = 17 5
0
5 15 25 35 45 1.42 1.47 1.52 1.57 1.62
% reduction in training volume during taper MITS (arbitrary units)

Figure 2. A - Relationship between the improvement in performance and the percentage reduction in
training volume (mean pre-taper weekly volume vs. mean weekly volume during the taper) during a 3-
week taper. B - Relationship between the improvement in performance throughout the follow-up
training season and the mean intensity of training, MITS (30).

FS=12
Volume
Performance (% pace)
FS=25 (Arbitrary unit)
105 30
FS=30

101 25

20
97 Overreaching
Overtraining
15
93
10
89 5

85 0

1 7 13 19 25 31 37 43 49 55 61

2002 Weeks 2003

Figure 3. Simple recording of the performances and volumes of training, measured during normal
training sessions and averaged per week (10). FS = Fatigue Score. When over 20 points, it indicates a
state of fatigue. These measurements allowed to distinguish a 3-wk overreaching period (weeks 19-21)
and an 11-wk overtraining period (weeks 35-45).

Tapering periods from four to 28 days may be linear or by steps (22, 28). A 14-day taper
consisting of a progressive reduction in swimming training volume from about 9 km.day-1 to
about 3 km.day-1 resulted in increased power on both a biokinetic swim bench (17.7%) and a
power swim apparatus (24.6%). The taper had no influence on acid-base balance after a
standardized 183-m swim and competition performance times improved by an average of
3.1% (9). Improvements in muscular power (≈ 5%) and performance (≈ 3%) after two to four
364 Jean-Claude Chatard and Andrew M Stewart

weeks of reduced volume taper have also been reported in other studies concerning
competitive swimmers (8, 14, and 22).
A number of different methods have been utilized to monitor individual responses to
training loads. These methods have included various enzyme markers, monitoring immune
status, endocrine assays, and heart rate variability (18, 36, and 34). None of these markers
though seem to temporally track training status and performance as accurately as the
swimmers’ psychological response. As a consequence, regular and brief questionnaires of
fatigue and mood states may help to quantify the tolerance of swimmers to training (Table 2).
Such questionnaires have been demonstrated to relate to variations of training and
performance (10, 18, and 19) and are considered better markers than physiological assays. An
example of the use of such monitoring can be found in Figure 3.

Table 2. Description of the eight items of the questionnaire of fatigue in English, Arabic,
and French. A total score over 20 points indicates a state of fatigue (10).
Answer the 8 questions: The previous week….. ....‫ ﺍﻷﺳﺒﻮﻉ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺿﻲ‬:‫ﺃﺟﺐ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻷﺳﺌﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬
Repondre aux 8 questions: Cette semaine …

Rating Scale
No. Questions ____________________________________
‫ﺍﻷﺳﺌﻠﺔ‬ No Average Yes
I found training more difficult than usual
1. ‫ﺃﺟﺪ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺪﺭﻳﺐ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺻﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﺎﺩ‬ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
J’ai trouvé l’entraînement plus difficile
I slept more ‫ﺃﻧﺎﻡ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ‬
2. J’ai plus dormi 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
My legs felt heavy ‫ﺷﻌﺮﺕ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺃﺭﺟﻠﻲ ﺛﻘﻴﻠﺔ‬
3. Mes jambes étaient plus lourdes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
I caught cold/infection/flue ‫ ﺍﻟﺰﻛﺎﻡ‬/‫ﺃﺻﺒﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﺒﺮﺩ‬
4. J’ai attrapé froid ou eu une infection 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
My concentration was poorer than usual
5. ‫ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﻛﻴﺰ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺃﻗﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﺎﺩ‬ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Ma concentration était plus difficile
I worked less efficiently than usual
6. ‫ﻋﻤﻠﻲ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺃﻗﻞ ﻛﻔﺎءﻩ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﺎﺩ‬ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
J’ai travaillé moins efficacement
I felt more anxious or irritable than usual
7. ‫ﺷﻌﺮﺕ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻠﻖ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻮﺗﺮ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﺎﺩ‬ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Je me suis senti plus anxieux et irritable
I had more stress at home, school, training
8. ‫ ﺃﺛﻨﺎء ﺍﻟﺘﺪﺭﻳﺐ‬،‫ ﺍﻟﻤﺪﺭﺳﺔ‬،‫ﺷﻌﺮﺕ ﺑﺎﻹﺟﻬﺎﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺖ‬ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
J’ai été plus stressé à la maison ou à l’école

4. INTENSITY OF TRAINING AND PERFORMANCE

Mujika et al. (30) found that mean intensity of the training season was the major
parameter influencing the improvement in performance throughout the season (Figure. 2B), in
international sprint swimmers. This relationship is in accordance with previous reports
 Training Load and Performance in Swimming 365

indicating that the intensity of training is the key factor in producing a training effect in well-
trained athletes (1, 27, 32, and 38). Different experimental results suggest that specific high
intensity anaerobic training could be included in the training programs for short distance
swimmers; especially early to mid-season in preparation for the high-load phase prior to the
taper. When an exercise lasts from around one to two minutes (most 100m and 200m
swimming events), the relative part of anaerobic energy release varies approximately between
35% and 60% (26). It is questionable, however, whether this possibility could be extended to
apply to swimmers of longer distances (e.g. 400m, 800m, and 1500m), since training volume
could be much more important for those swimmers than for the short distance swimmers.
During the taper, maintenance of training intensity appears to be necessary to avoid
detraining, provided that reductions in other training characteristics allow sufficient recovery
to optimize performance (28). However, the taper should not be considered the time to
increase the total sprinting distance. As other components of training load (i.e. frequency and
volume) are reduced, the absolute amount of sprinting must be reduced during the taper in
order to allow time for recovery (25). The subtlety in the art of effective tapering is that the
percent of total training volume prescribed as high-intensity training may actually increase up
to (but not beyond) some critical threshold for the individual swimmer (41, 45).
Van Handel and co-workers (48) studied a group of elite swimmers during 60 days of
long-course training and 20 days of taper. Training volume dropped from 11 km.day-1 to 2.5
km.day-1 during the taper, while training intensity was held constant or increased. They
observed an absolute increase in V O2max and a shift to the right of the blood lactate versus
swimming velocity curve during training, with no further significant changes during the taper,
but a non significant curve shift back to the left. Based on their own data and previously
reported results (mainly those of Costill’s group), these authors suggested that the absolute
volume of high-intensity training may also be reduced to further optimize the effects of taper
by allowing adequate rest and recovery. Unfortunately, data on swimming performance
during the different phases of training were not reported in the study.

5. TRAINING PRESCRIPTION AND COMPLIANCE

There are a variety of means to prescribe and monitor training load. Volume swum,
number of repetitions, rest intervals, and frequency of training are straightforward (Figure 4),
but the intensity of training is somewhat problematic. Most physiological measures take
several minutes to attain steady state, whereas most swim training is conducted using repeat
short bouts (interval training) so the interval is usually completed before physiology has
accurately ‘tracked’ the intensity. Incremental blood lactate step tests have been used (2, 3,
and 30) that work well, but the exact mechanism of how such a measure tracks non-steady
state intensity is little understood. Indeed, in the studies by Anderson et al. (2, 3) and Pyne et
al. (35), it was reported that while physiological monitoring was shown to be a useful means
to track performance during test sets, there was little relationship between the use of such
blood lactate testing and competition performance. Furthermore, it appears that only large
changes in competition performance are able to be predicted through the use of physiologic
monitoring and/or training prescription (2, 3, 30, and 42).
366 Jean-Claude Chatard and Andrew M Stewart

© 2001 A M Stewart & W G Hopkins training for… type

1 = sprint 1 = 501 = even pace
Recording Form for a Set of Swimming Reps 2 = m.d. 2 = 2 = alt
100
3 = desc
3 = both 3 = 200
4 = 4 = asc
400
1 = free 5 = bro
Place: ______________________ Coach: ______________________ 5 = 800
2 = fly 6 = pickup
6 = 1500
3 = back 7 = paddles
4 = breast 8 = fins
Swimmer: ______________________ Date: _________________
5 = IM 9 = pads+fins
97 = kick (no fins)
98 = kick (fins)
training for… prescription 99 = other
coach swimmer 1,2,3 free fly back breast IM no. of reps distance type

A X
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

rep no. stroke distance interval split rest split rest Px min:sec or ON min:sec intensity (%) or R,H,M,E PB for distance (or 400m)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Figure 4. Part of a data coding sheet to quantify training (40).

From a practical point of view, training pace is a good (arguably the most valid) marker
of training intensity (47). In such a case, the best method for quantifying training is direct
observation of swimmers (40). An example of how to use training pace can be seen in Figure
5. Even though there exists a substantial body of knowledge relating to popular training
prescription and substantial evidence calling for greater application of the principles of
specificity in training, there is little mention in the literature of the compliance of swimmers
and coaches to such training practices and scientific intervention. One such study of
compliance (40) found that swimmers adhere closely to all aspects of training load, except
intensity. Considering that this aspect of training is arguably the most crucial, such a result is
somewhat of a concern. Similarly, coaches do not appear to comply strongly with scientific
intervention (41). Until coaches comply with the application of scientific interventions and
swimmers comply with training prescription, the effects of studies investigating the impact of
specificity on swim performance will remain somewhat unclear.

6. INDIVIDUAL RESPONSE TO TRAINING

The individual response to training depends, to a great extent, on the level of fitness and
practice of the subjects. Mujika et al. (30) found a highly significant correlation between the
initial level of performance and the improvement in performance during the season (Figure
6A). Furthermore, the percentage loss in performance between the end of the previous season
and the beginning of the new season was significantly different for the swimmers that
improved their personal best times (fast) than for the others (slow, Figure 6B). No significant
differences existed in training volume, intensity, frequency or dry-land training between
groups. From these results, it could be suggested that in spite of good adaptation to training,
 Training Load and Performance in Swimming 367

the best performance achieved depended less on the effects of training than on the influence
of previous detraining. However, the reason why some swimmers were more detrained than
others was not explored.

CURRENT VERY HARD HARD MODERATE

PB 99% 98% 97% 96% 94% 92% 90% 88% 86% 84%
20 20.2 20.6 20.6 20.8 21.2 21.6 22.0 22.4 22.8 23.2
22 22.2 22.4 22.7 22.9 23.3 23.8 24.2 24.6 25.1 25.5
24 24.2 24.5 24.7 25.0 25.4 25.9 26.4 26.9 27.4 27.8
26 26.3 26.5 26.8 27.0 27.6 28.1 28.6 29.1 29.6 30.2
28 28.3 28.6 28.8 29.1 29.7 30.2 30.8 31.4 31.9 32.5
30 30.3 30.6 30.9 31.2 31.8 32.4 33.0 33.6 34.2 34.8
32 32.3 32.6 33.0 33.3 33.9 34.6 35.2 35.8 36.5 37.1
34 34.3 34.7 35.0 35.4 36.0 36.7 37.4 38.1 38.8 39.4
36 36.4 36.7 37.1 37.4 38.2 38.9 39.6 40.3 41.0 41.8
38 38.4 38.8 39.1 39.5 40.3 41.0 41.8 42.6 43.3 44.1
40 40.4 40.8 41.2 41.6 42.4 43.2 44.0 44.8 45.6 46.4
42 42.4 42.8 43.3 43.7 44.5 45.4 46.2 47.0 47.9 48.7
44 44.4 44.9 45.3 45.8 46.6 47.5 48.4 49.3 50.2 51.0
46 46.5 46.9 47.4 47.8 48.8 49.7 50.6 51.5 52.4 53.4
48 48.5 49.0 49.4 49.9 50.9 51.8 52.8 53.8 54.7 55.7
50 50.5 51.0 51.5 52.0 53.0 54.0 55.0 56.0 57.0 58.0
52 52.5 53.0 53.6 54.1 55.1 56.2 57.2 58.2 59.3 1.00
54 54.5 55.1 55.6 56.2 57.2 58.3 59.4 1.00 1.02 1.03
56 56.6 57.1 57.7 58.2 59.4 1.00 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05
58 58.6 59.2 1.00 1.00 1.01 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07

Figure 5. Part of a pace chart used for prescribing and monitoring intensity (40).
% of Best Performance 91

11 105
r = 0.90
Performance 92

***
9 P < 0.001
% Change in

100
N = 18 **
7 95

5 A fast
90 B
slow
86 90 94 98 85
Initial performance 92 Best 91 Initial 92 Best 92
(% of best 91)

Figure 6. Relationship between the improvement in performance throughout a follow-up training

season, the initial performance (A) and the best of the previous season (B) (30).
368 Jean-Claude Chatard and Andrew M Stewart

Individual adaptation profiles can be estimated from swimming training and performance
data either by means of simple and stepwise regression analysis or with the help of a systems
model. Mujika et al. (29) used regression analysis to indicate that for some swimmers, several
training variables were correlated with a decline in swimming performance, while for other
swimmers these relationships were very scant. This observation could indicate that the former
swimmers had a higher sensitivity to the training stimulus than the latter. The analysis of the
relationships between the training variables and the variations in performance for each
swimmer could thus be a helpful tool for coaches and swimmers in order to establish
individualized training programs based on individual adaptation profiles, especially during
periods of taper. Avalos et al. (4) and Hellard et al. (17) used mixed linear modelling instead
of the accepted Bannister (6) model to account for the residual effects of different training
loads at various times of the season. From these models, the authors concluded that the
training of individuals and groups of swimmers (by stroke and/or by distance) closely tracked
changes in performance over several seasons. In a practical sense, Stewart et al. (45) followed
the performances of 25 age-group swimmers (ranging from 14 to 17 yrs and seasonal best
performances of ≈ 80% world-record pace) over several seasons and monitored their
compliance to the training prescription. From this approach, it would appear that there may be
an additional positive effect (≈ 1 to 1.5%) of tapering for swimmers who comply strongly to
the training prescription throughout the season as opposed to those who comply moderately
or poorly. These results have yet to be rigorously verified.
Systems models assume that performance can be estimated from the difference between a
positive gain ascribed to the adaptation to exercise and a negative gain as a result of the
negative effects of the training load (5, 7, 29, and 31). Negative and positive influences may
represent respectively fatigue and fitness accumulated in response to training. The main
advantage of the mathematical models from a practical point of view is that they allow an
evaluation of the individual’s adaptation processes. For example, the time required following
a training stimulus for the effect of fatigue to dissipate may be calculated and the optimum
duration of the taper for each subject estimated. In this respect, values ranging from 12 to 32
days were reported (28). An individual example of data analyzed by means of a systems
model is given in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Comparison between the real and modelled performances (A). Positive and negative influence
calculated by the systems model from the training load and the performance variations (B) (29).
 Training Load and Performance in Swimming 369

7. PERFORMANCE PROGRESSION AND VARIABILITY

International competitive swimming has become essentially a year-round competitive
sport. Indeed, there is really little (if any) off-season as competitions (either short course or
long course) have sprung up around the world. In addition, the current format of heats, semi-
finals, and finals is relatively recent. It was not that long ago when the top eight swimmers
progressed direct from heat swims to a final, with those ranked 9 through 16 from the heats
entering the ‘B’ final. These relatively recent changes within the sport have placed a
considerably different requirement on swimmers’ preparation to such an extent that
progression through the various qualifying swims within a competition and consistency of
performance between competitions has now become the subject of research focus.
Pyne et al. (37), Stewart and Hopkins (43), and Trewin et al. (46) have conducted studies
that investigated the relationships between performance and rankings within and between
competitions for swimmers ranging in ability from junior age-group through to Olympic-level
athletes. These studies have stemmed from work by Hopkins (20) and Hopkins et al. (21) in
which it was found that the smallest worthwhile enhancement in performance that would
affect an athlete’s chance of winning a medal was approximately 0.5 of the within-athlete
coefficient of variation (CV), the percent random variation in performance. It is not surprising
to note that the more experienced international swimmers are more consistent in their
performances (37, 46) than their junior national-level counterparts (43), but within a major
competition such as an Olympic final there appears to be negligible difference in consistency
between swimmers. Another interesting finding is that consistency of performance between
events within the same competition is greater for the more-experienced swimmer. The authors
of these studies (37, 43, and 46) conclude that while junior national-level swimmers appear to
cope better with the physiological challenge of a different distance (for a given stroke) rather
than the technical challenge of a different stroke (for a given distance), top international
swimmers (such as Olympians) are equally adept at alternating between events differing in
distance and stroke. Such a reality then presents a different challenge to the swimmer and
coach in terms of deciding which events to enter in any given competition and therefore how
to base their preparation in the season(s) leading into that particular ‘swim meet’. The
phenomenal achievement of Michael Phelps at the 2008 Olympic Games is testimony to such
practice.

8. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
This chapter has discussed in depth many factors relating to training load and
performance in swimmers. From all the issues presented, there is overwhelming evidence to
indicate that workouts need to be structured in such a way as to train only the power systems
or skills required for a swimmer’s specialty event(s) throughout the season. In light of this
evidence, several authors have suggested alternate and more-specific periodized training
regimes than have previously been utilized (23, 44). In the model proposed by Issurin et al.
(23), block periodization is suggested whereby specialized meso-cycles are designed in
sequence during which training is highly-concentrated and athletes focus on only a few
technical skills in any given cycle. The key difference from the block approach is that
370 Jean-Claude Chatard and Andrew M Stewart

physical attributes required for competition are developed sequentially as opposed to

simultaneously, which leads to superimposed training effects focussing on a singular
competition at the end of a given cycle rather than over a competition period. Stewart et al.
(44) have suggested that swimmers should be prepared close to the point of over-reaching
during a build-up phase. The training load during this phase should be such that swimmers
recover on a day-to-basis and there would be small gains in performance (which could be
measured in regular training sets) from week to week. Following this initial phase there
should be a short phase (one to two weeks) to overload the swimmers. During this phase there
would likely be a brief improvement in performance in the first few days, but the continuation
of such training over another week or two would eventually lead to a downturn in
performance (as measured by decrements in training set times and a change in mood states of
swimmers). During this overload phase, the focus is improving the relative fitness of the
swimmers, but such improvements are masked by the fatigue effects of the additional training
load. When such detrimental effects appear, swimmers should start tapering, through a
reduction in overall training load. Such a reduction should focus on a reduction in training
volume, not so much a reduction in intensity of workouts. To accommodate the practicalities
of such a shift in training philosophy, it is suggested that coaches look for areas in their
prescription where ‘filler mileage’ could be reduced and focus more on the specific event
(stroke and distance) for which the swimmer is aiming to peak.

CONCLUSION
In swimming, scientific data indicate that in highly trained swimmers training intensity
becomes the key parameter to optimize performance rather than training volume. However,
the individual response to training depends, to a great extent, on the level of fitness and
practice of the individuals. This response can be calculated with the help of simple
observation, regression analysis, or a systems model, as a useful tool to establish
individualized training programs.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Authors wish to thank the swimming coaches Lucien Lacoste, Frédéric Barale,
Jacqueline Legrand, and Michel Paulin for their co-operation and for making valuable
suggestions.

REFERENCES
[1] Acevedo, E. O. & Goldfarb, A. H. (1989). Increased training intensity effects on plasma
lactate, ventilatory threshold, and endurance. Medicine and Science in Sports and
Exercise, 21: 563-568.
[2] Anderson, M. E., Hopkins, W. G., Roberts, A. D., & Pyne, D. B (2006). Monitoring
seasonal and long-term changes in test performance in elite swimmers. European
Journal of Sport Science, 6: 145-154.
 Training Load and Performance in Swimming 371

[3] Anderson, M. E., Hopkins, W. G., Roberts, A. D., & Pyne, D. B (2008). Ability of test
measures to predict competitive performance in elite swimmers. Journal of Sport
Sciences, 26: 123-130.
[4] Avalos, M., Hellard, P., & Chatard, J. C. (2003). Modeling the training-performance
relationship using a mixed model in elite swimmers. Medicine and Science in Sports
and Exercise, 35: 838-846.
[5] Banister, E. W. & Calvert, T. W. (1980). Planning for future performance: implications
for long term training. Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 5: 170-6.
[6] Banister, E. W., Calvert, T. W., & Savage, M. V. (1975). A systems model of training
for athletic performance. Canadian Journal of Sports Medicine, 7: 57-61.
[7] Busso, T., Denis, C., Bonnefoy, R., Geyssant, A. & Lacour, J. R. (1997). Modelling of
adaptations to physical training by using recursive least squares algorithm. Journal of
Applied Physiology, 82: 1685-1693.
[8] Cavanaugh, D. J. & Musch, K. I. (1989). Arm and leg power of elite swimmers increase
after taper as measured by biokinetic variable resistance machines. Journal of
Swimming Research, 5: 7-10.
[9] Chatard, J. C., Lavoie, & J. M. Lacour, J. R. (1990). Analysis of determinants of
swimming economy in front crawl. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 61: 88-
92.
[10] Chatard, J. C., Atlaoui D., Pichot, V., Gourne, C., Duclos, M., & Guezennec Y-C.
(2003). Training follow up by questionnaire fatigue, hormones and heart rate variability
measurements. Science et Sports, 18: 302-304.
[11] Costill, D. L. (1985). Practical problems in exercise physiology research. Research
Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 56: 378-384.
[12] Costill, D. L., Fink, W. J., Hargreaves, M., King, D. S., Thomas, & R. Fielding, R.
(1985). Metabolic characteristics of skeletal muscle during detraining from competitive
swimming. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 17: 339-343.
[13] Costill, D. L., Flynn, M. G., Kirwan, J. P., Houmard, J. A., Mitchell, J. B., Thomas, &
R. Park, S. H. (1988). Effects of repeated days of intensified training on muscle
glycogen and swimming performance. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise,
20: 249-54.
[14] Costill, D. L., Thomas, R., Robergs, R. A., Pascoe, D., Lambert, C., Barr, S. & Fink, W.
J. (1991). Adaptations to swimming training: influence of training volume. Medicine
and Science in Sports and Exercise, 23: 371-7.
[15] Faude, O., Meyer, T., Scharhag, J., Weins, F., Urhausen, A., & Kindermann, W. (2008).
Volume vs intensity in the training of competitive swimmers. International Journal of
Sports Medicine, 29: 906-912.
[16] Hein, M. S., Kelly, J. M., & Zeballos, R. J. (1989). A fixed velocity swimming protocol
for determination of individual anaerobic threshold. Journal of Swimming Research, 31:
578-582.
[17] Hellard, P., Avalos, M., Millet, G., Lacoste, L., Barale, F., & Chatard, J. C. (2005).
Modeling the residual effects and threshold saturation of training: A case study of
Olympic swimmers. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 19: 67-75.
[18] Hooper, S. L. & Traeger-MacKinnon, L. (1995). Monitoring overtraining in athletes:
recommendations. Sports Medicine, 20: 321-327.
372 Jean-Claude Chatard and Andrew M Stewart

[19] Hooper, S. L., Traeger-MacKinnon, L., & Hanrahan, S. (1997). Mood states as an
indication of staleneness. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 28: 1-12.
[20] Hopkins, W. G. (2000). Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports
Medicine, 30: 1-15.
[21] Hopkins, W. G., Hawley, J. A., & Burke, L. M. (1999). Design and analysis of research
on sport performance enhancement. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 31:
472-485.
[22] Houmard, J. A. & Johns, R. A. (1994). Effects of taper on swim performance. Practical
implications. Sports Medicine, 17: 224-32.
[23] Issurin, V. (2008). Block periodization versus traditional training theory: a review.
Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 48: 65-75.
[24] Kirwan, J. P., Costill, D. L., Flynn, M. G., Mitchell, J. B., Fink, W. J., Neufer, P. D. &
Houmard, J. A. (1988). Physiological responses to successive days of intense training in
competitive swimmers. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 20: 255-9.
[25] Maglischo, E. (1982). Swimming faster. Mayfield Publishing Company, Palo Alto,
California, 1-472
[26] Medbø, J. I. & Tabata, I. (1989). Relative importance of aerobic and anaerobic energy
release during short-lasting exhausting bicycle exercise. Journal of Applied Physiology,
67: 1881-1886.
[27] Mikesell, K. A. & Dudley, G. A. (1984). Influence of intense endurance training on
aerobic power of competitive distance runners. Medicine and Science in Sports and
Exercise, 16: 371-375.
[28] Mujika, I. (1998). The influence of training characteristics and tapering on the
adaptation in highly trained individuals: a review. International Journal of Sports
Medicine, 19: 1-8.
[29] Mujika, I., Busso, T., Lacoste, L., Barale, F., Geyssant, A. & Chatard, J. C. (1996).
Modelled responses to training and taper in competitive swimmers. Medicine and
Science in Sports and Exercise, 28: 251-258.
[30] Mujika, I., Chatard, J. C., Busso, T., Geyssant, A., Barale, F. & Lacoste, L. (1995).
Effects of training on performance in competitive swimming. Canadian Journal of
Applied Sport Sciences, 20: 395-406.
[31] Mujika, I., Chatard, J. C., Busso, T., Geyssant, A., Lacoste, & L. Barale, F. (1996). Use
of swim-training profiles and performance data to enhance training effectiveness.
Journal of Swimming Research, 11: 23-29.
[32] Neary, J. P., Martin, T. P., Reid, D. C., Burnham, R. & Quinney, H. A. (1992). The
effects of a reduced exercise duration taper programme on performance and muscle
enzymes of endurance cyclists. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 65: 30-36.
[33] Platonov, V. N. (1988). L'entraînement sportif: théorie et méthodologie. Revue EPS,
Paris, 1-289.
[34] Pyne, D. B. (2003). Immunity, illness and competition performance in elite swimmers.
In Chatard, J-C (Ed), Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimming IX. Proceedings of the
IXth World Symposium on Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimming (pp. 27-31).
University of Saint-Etienne, France.
[35] Pyne, D. B., Lee, H., & Swanwick, K. M. (2001). Monitoring the lactate threshold in
world-ranked swimmers. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 33 : 291-297.
 Training Load and Performance in Swimming 373

[36] Pyne, D. B., McDonald, W. A., Gleeson, M., Flanagan, A., Clancy, R. L., & Fricker, P.
A. (2000). Mucosal immunity, respiratory illness, and competitive performance in elite
swimmers. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 33: 348-353.
[37] Pyne, D. B., Trewin, C. B., & Hopkins, W. G. (2004). Progression and variability of
competitive performance of Olympic swimmers. Journal of Sports Sciences, 22: 613-
620.
[38] Rusko, H. (1987). The effect of training on aerobic power characteristics of young
cross-country skiers. Journal of Sports Sciences, 5: 273-286.
[39] Sharp, R. L. (1993). Prescribing and evaluating interval training sets in swimming: a
proposed model. Journal of Swimming Research, 9: 36-40.
[40] Stewart, A. M., & Hopkins, W. G. (1997). Swimmer’s compliance with training
prescription. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 29, 1389-1392.
[41] Stewart, A. M., Hopkins, W. G., & Sanders, R. H. (1997).Enhancement of seasonal
training of competitive swimmers. In B. O. Eriksson, & L. Gullstrand (Eds.),
Proceedings of the XII FINA World Sports Medicine Congress, (pp. 269-290).
Goteborg: Chalmers Reproservice.
[42] Stewart, A. M. & Hopkins, W. G. (2000). Seasonal training and performance of
competitive swimmers. Journal of Sports Sciences, 18, 873-884.
[43] Stewart, A. M., & Hopkins, W. G. (2000). Consistency of swimming performance
within and between competitions. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 32,
997-1001.
[44] Stewart, A. M., Shearman, J. P., & Hopkins, W. G. (2000). A rational approach to
periodization of swim training. Swimming Times, 77(1), 23-26.
[45] Stewart, A. M., McGowan, D., & Park, J. (2002). Seasonal manipulation of swim-
training loads (intensity & volume) as constraints on competitive performance. Paper
presented at the 12th International Commonwealth Sport Conference, Manchester,
England, (July 19-23).
[46] Trewin, C. B., Hopkins, W. G., & Pyne, D. B. (2004). Relationship between world-
ranking and Olympic performance of swimmers. Journal of Sports Sciences, 22: 339-
345.
[47] Wakayoshi, K., Yoshida, T., & Udo, M. (1992). A simple method for determining
critical speed as swimming fatigue threshold in competitive swimming. International
Journal of Sports Medicine, 13: 367-371.
[48] Van Handel, P. J., Katz, A., Troup, J. P., Daniels, J. T. & Bradley, P. W. (1988).
Oxygen consumption and blood lactic acid response to training and taper. Human
Kinetics Book, Champain, IL, 269-275.

View publication stats