competitive swimmers as freedivers

[esom]

Hopefully one day they will add freediver to their list.

I´m so glad i don´t have to hope that they won´t. Simply because on such a list can not be written the names of free divers.
freediving is freediving isn´t it?

... woudn´t it be cool to speak for example of "distance diving"* and let freediving become what it is?

*as written: just an example

 

[Mullins]

Diver87 - it's pretty clear that genetics is severely limiting for some and enabling for others. Some people could train hard for a decade and never reach 200m; others achieve it within months. Of course the level will continue to rise, but there will always be a big gap between those who are predisposed and those who aren't.

I don't think that psychology has a great deal to do with it. Most people can motivate themselves to push to their limits in freediving.

 

[ReefTroll]

And as far as compariosns saying that years ago divers blacked out at 80m's etc, and today they do 200's really doesn't take away the genetic debate. This has changed with knowledge of training and techniques. And I agree with Dave, every sport has a genetic advantage. The TDF riders are all born with a huge advantage, and THEN they train that body to get there.

 

[esom]

I read the question in the starting post again and recognised that i don´t understand what is meant.

I was wondering if having a competitive swimming background helped in transition to freediving and if there were any benefits with having that background.

competitive swimming either creates transition (because it is something where you come from), or helps transition coming from another backround-which we somehow alsways do, so there is not really something to not understand .

anyway i feel beside akwaman´s post there have been only answers to the second question (is there any benefit in having that backround).

my version of the first question, as indicated in my first post would be:
in which way should "swimming" be separated*, so that the transition which is needed to freediving due to this separation can be done in a good way?

or another version- which do you like better?- :

"is learning to swim competitivly a learning of how to learn freediving? "
...
"how can learning competitive swimming become a learning about learning freediving?" is maybe a little more realistic, as in learning there is no "is", is it?



*this separation is not genetically determined

 

[Haydn]

Whats the point of being genetically advantaged to freedive? Particularly if your chosen activity is flower arranging? The question could be valuable in a generation or two time, when maybe we can be tested to see if we are advantaged or not. But would that make you give up the sport if you lack the gene?

The answerable question relating to competitive swimmeing is the vital point. Remember, most competitive swimmers start swimming from infant age and training from around 5 years old. Thats the advantage that Goran suggests. They easily switch to freediving and take up the new skills speedily.

Are the great freedivers also great swimmers? Or competitively trained? I bet they are. Although the majority of freedivers can swim, they have not trained throughout their lives. They lack the sport specific advantages that so natuarally switch from swimming to freediving. Yet they still perform to a certain standard, whilst the swimmers take the lead.

As for Daves suggestion that 200m freedivers do have a genetic advantage. I am not sure. Certainly if a genetic advantage means a better lung capacity, then that may help a swimmer get a 200m dynamic, but its not why they get that far. The reason only a few can do 200m today cannot be attributed to gentic advantrage, but can be attributed to sport specific training, especially for those who have trained all their lives.

Most freedivers dont know the meaning of training. They know a bit about doing the odd static table, and recreational freediving holiday or course and an hour a week at the local pool. They started this regime a few years ago and can now do 100m dynamic and 50m constant and hold their breaths for (using the genetic advantage bit) maybe 5 minutes. But that does not compare to a freediver who trains. The training freediver is the one thats get 200m, not the one with the genes.

I can only balance this with my (non genetic) performance of rubbish static 4:15 but in my 3rd max effort in dynamic did 156m in 2002. Despite a heart problem that became apparent in that period (probably why my static was poor, but I was also born 10 weeks premature and my lungs were always rubbish). You could say then, I was not the perfect freediver due to my genetics. And those who know me, will remember an overweight and over aged blubberbelly getting within a few kicks of a world record. The clue is the tatty and worn out monofin.

So what did I bring to the table? How could I possibly have had the cheek to think I could match up to sleek, youthful and experieced likes of Herbert Nitch & Pierre Frolla and all.

All I had was the ability to swim. Thats the foundation that gave me a competitive advantage.

The 200m mark is only a number that will easily be broken once freediving gets thousands of participants and a few hundred training athletes. ie those who train seriously as athletes do, every day.

Its about training not genetics.

Why cant Dave be a great power lifter? Only because he didnt start lifting weights and live his life doing the weight lifting thing.

 

[mermaidgirl]

I started competing in swimming at age 7 and was the record holder in the butterfly during my career. I also did the IM, so I had to breastroke. I think it is almost impossible to learn to dolphin kick fluidly as an adult. Learning as a child, one develops a flexibility in the lower back and ankles that is not attainable after we mature. I know the kick is much easier for me than most and I did not have to learn to monofin- it was natural. I also think swimmer sprinters have an advantage as they don't breathe much and developed good breath hold. "No-breathers" are a regular exercise during swim workouts.
Having said that.; the mental transition is difficult. Swimming is not about relaxation. I am still not good at it and I am yet to freefall. I swim all the way down on a 50m cnf dive, much to the chagrin of my mentor, William Trubridge.
I assisted William last year trying to teach an Olympic gold medalist breastroker to do cnf. You may have seen the tv show about on NBC sports. It was a lot harder than he had anticipated, Just because you can breastroke does not mean you can dive.

 

[Mullins]

Its about training not genetics.

Why cant Dave be a great power lifter? Only because he didnt start lifting weights and live his life doing the weight lifting thing.

rofl

Err, no. I could have trained from birth and still never been competitive at the top level. Or national level. Or probaby even local club level. I have totally the wrong body shape for it. This "you can be anything you want" stuff is pure romanticism. Of course you get better with training and most could probably achieve 200m. But people's performance ceilings differ greatly and some could never do it, even with perfect technique.

 

[watts]

Should we all be scanned at an early age for our preferred sports/endeavors so we don,t get disappointed.

 

[Mullins]

Whats the point of being genetically advantaged to freedive? Particularly if your chosen activity is flower arranging? The question could be valuable in a generation or two time, when maybe we can be tested to see if we are advantaged or not. But would that make you give up the sport if you lack the gene?

This is so daft that I probably shouldn't be responding, but here goes....

I'm not sure how flower arranging comes into it, but the "point" of being genetically advantaged to freedive is that you can freedive better than somebody who is less advantaged, for the same amount of training.

Nobody is talking about eugenics here. I'm not suggesting people run off and get "tested" to find out if they're a talented freediver or not. What I am saying is that freediving performance depends heavily on physiological factors that won't be obvious from one's experience in other sports.

If somebody is a swimmer looking to start freediving, they should be aware that the technique and strength they carry over, while no doubt useful, is no guarantee of success. Nor is training. They just have to suck it and see.

 

[Mullins]

Should we all be scanned at an early age for our preferred sports/endeavors so we don,t get disappointed.

Should we pretend everybody has identical potential in every sport?

 

[esom]

Should we all be scanned at an early age for our preferred sports/endeavors so we don,t get disappointed.

is this a question, a statement or just an ironc comment? i really don´t know

anyway
being disappointed by being measured and based on this considered better (i´d better say faster, deeper, longer, shorter...) is not geneticaly determined.

 

[ReefTroll]

The idea we can all work hard at something and achieve top levels PURELY based upon work alone is wonderful. Sadly though, yes, genetics play a huge part, and it's not a negative aspect of the world, it's true. And does it stop you trying to become the best? Hell no. Imagine if NOBODY who was gnetically gifted to freedive ever took the sport up? It's a lottery, but that's life, and we can't all be good at everything. If this was the case everybody would follow the top competitors training regime and records would be broken simultaneously by 3,500 people. And we'd be bored S***less.

 

[Simos]

Of course genetics play a very important part as well as training - you need both. This is true of all sports if you want to compete at the highest level.

The key is the word 'competitive' (which interestingly appears in the title of the thread too). If we can detach the pleasure we get from freediving and other sports from the comparison of our results to other people's results then everyone can truly enjoy any sport regardless of their genetic predisposition - and eventually with dedication, love and practice it's amazing what people that don't have the natural ability can achieve.

I know I sound a bit like Confucius today but I find it interesting to note what makes people love a sport or give it up and it's largely the comparison to others. This is 'built' into most sports so hard to get away from it eg the 'criteria' for ** in freediving tell you what you SHOULD be able to achieve after your course (16m CWT etc) and in climbing the difficulty levels of the set routes on a wall will make you very quickly aware of how your performance fairs against others'.

Of course, this is true of life in general (eg you compete with others for a job etc) but for something like sports and hobbies I think there could be a big less 'comparison' and more 'enjoyment' at times.

Confucius has spoken lol

 

[esom]

Should we pretend everybody has identical potential in every sport?

i think we are free on answering this and produce reality out of this freedom* (as we do it everyday anyway)

what i mean: even if someone is not a hardliner on this genetics thing, saying "training is such a big factor" or something like this, saying "i (or you) can do anything you want to learn" makes a difference to the first statement in the true sense of the word (make). And vice versa


*the idea that there is a right and wrong answer on the question is pure romanticsim (i don´t like this romantiscism - i have my own though)

 

[esom]

And does it stop you trying to become the best?

Hell Yes! , sometimes - see my last post

edit: i don´t say you are wrong, how could i

 

[Erki]

Knowledge how genes correlates with sport performances is still in infancy but there are several cleary estabished relationships. Even first commertial tests are available.
For example:
Athletic performance test of strength, speed and endurance | Asper Biotech

 

[esom]

Knowledge how genes correlates with sport performances is still in infancy but there are several cleary estabished relationships. Even first commertial tests are available.
For example:
Athletic performance test of strength, speed and endurance | Asper Biotech

and even better this "clearity" can now start to produce clearity.

and consistently: the more you pay the clearer the clearness your bought clearity is producing.


thanks for the phrase "in infancy", to me it indicates thats something is fading away someday, as it is "in infancy" now.
-

weren´t we talking about transition and gained* ability?



*what else, we are human

 

[Haydn]

Mermaid has it right. What is trained for as a child develops the body. Butterfly is the perfect example. It is this training that enables the swimmer to be better than the non swimmer as they commence freediving (especially monofin dynamics) in later years.

The principle being the swimmer has trained to be better than the non swimmer, and its the training that counts in their performance. Their body will also have developed the traits that Dave suggests is down to genetics. They will have developed the other specialities of breath control, lung capacity, training disciplines that any other newbie freediver will lack. They may well have one or two tricks to learn (I too always swam down the line and rarely managed to glide).

Now, if the swimmer also happens to have good genetics (maybe 6 foot 6 inches tall), so much the better. If 7 foot tall, better still if they prefer high jump. If smaller, well, they probably wont be Olympic medalists. Because genetics will come into play then. But as a child, nobody can forsee the final body shape.

Dave cant be an olympic weight lifter, because he turned out to be the wrong shape in adulthood. But had he trained to become one, from childhood, he would (regardless of genetics) been a great weight lifter today.

The original question could be asked again . eg Is there a sport that would offer the best foundation to athletes if they come into freediving at around age 25?

So, lets say a swimmer, a rower, a boxer, a dart player, an archer or a person who has never done a sport, a chess player, a flower arranger, a doctor, a scientist, a school teacher, an office worker?

Now, genetics will give a freediving advantage or not randomly to all of the above. But do you think a perfectly genetically endowed flower arranger or chess player will have an advantage over the genetically average but trained swimmer, as they become interested in taking up freediving?

I think training is key. Romanticism (another word for it could be attitude) is key. Belief, enthusiasm, vitality, integrity, passion, endeavour, commitment etc etc , are key. Genetics? Yes, stick that word in the list somewhere too. Where would you stick it? For me, not too near the top of the list.

Freediving for me is like a teenage love, enjoyed for a season, but sadly now just a passing fancy that I would love to revisit. Being genetically poor has never spoiled the enjoyment and rewards that freediving offered me. I brought to the table, what I brought to the table.

I have seen lovely things, and felt closer to things that mattered. I have enjoyed experiences that enriched my life. I have competed with myself and my friends. I have gazed down a line disapearing into the blue and felt to go deeper. I have spoken with my soul.

What could good genetics have given me that I have not already received? A gold medal I suppose.

 

[Chrillepille]

I have to concur with Dave. Where freediving is today, people with very unswimmerlike monofin technique, such as Guy Brew and Herbert Nitch, win medals at the worlds and sets world records.

Would them be better off with a swimmerlike monofin technique? The answer is pure speculation.

There are also other sports that will give you benefits when starting to freedive e.g. sports where you have to commit to try something you have never tried before and you have to be mentally focused and not tense and nervous about the outcome (going for your first backflip or ski jumping the 90meter hill for the first time).

Cheers!

 

[Simos]

I have to concur with Dave. Where freediving is today, people with very unswimmerlike monofin technique, such as Guy Brew and Herbert Nitch, win medals at the worlds and sets world records.

Would them be better off with a swimmerlike monofin technique? The answer is pure speculation.

There are also other sports that will give you benefits when starting to freedive e.g. sports where you have to commit to try something you have never tried before and you have to be mentally focused and not tense and nervous about the outcome (going for your first backflip or ski jumping the 90meter hill for the first time).

Cheers!

Out of curiosity, why can't we confidently say that anyone (incl. Herbert etc) would do better with more efficient monofin technique? Seems to me like a given.

A question I guess is whether 'proper' dolphin kick technique is the most efficient in all situations (as freediving is not a race). I'd guess the answer is mostly yes...