Subject: RE: Why the swim is important.... but not really,,,,,,,,, Interesting analysis, but does heart rate during the swim really have anything to do with run performance? Or, alternatively, is muscular fatigue more important? Swimming and running mainly rely on different muscle groups. If muscular fatigue limits performance, then you should push yourself hard during the swim (as long as you don't rely too much on your kick ), because your arms won't really be needed later in the race. So the issue is whether your cardiovascular system or your muscles give out first.
Here's an example to consider:
When I bike, my heart rate tops out at 60% of my max and is just slightly higher than what's required to walk up some stairs. Despite this very low heart rate, running right after the bike is relatively difficult (even without a swim ). It seems like according to Gordo's argument, running should be very easy, because the bike ride was essentially a warmup as far as my cardiovascular system could tell. Even if there is a swim before the bike, the bike would represent a long period of active recovery. Gordo's argument seems to assume that there is a limited number of heartbeats we have during a race, and I'm not sure that's supported by any evidence. It makes much more sense, especially since we can feel it, that muscular fatigue mostly from the bike is what hurts run performance.
Now, if you kick a lot in the swim, maybe a case can be made for easing off the swim. |