Sprint swimming-FiS22

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 10

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

published: 01 March 2022


doi: 10.3389/fspor.2022.758095

Sprint Performance in Arms-Only


Front Crawl Swimming Is
Strongly Associated With the
Power-To-Drag Ratio
Sander Schreven 1,2*, Jeroen B. J. Smeets 1† and Peter J. Beek 1,2†
1
Department of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam,
Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2 InnoSportLab De Tongelreep, Eindhoven, Netherlands

To date, optimal propulsion in swimming has been studied predominantly using physical
or computational models of the arm and seldom during real-life swimming. In the present
study we examined the contributions of selected power, technique and anthropometric
Edited by: measures on sprint performance during arms-only front crawl swimming. To this end,
Tiago M. Barbosa,
Polytechnic Institute of Bragança
25 male adult competitive swimmers, equipped with markers on their arms and hands,
(IPB), Portugal performed four 25-m sprint trials, which were recorded on video. For the fastest trial
Reviewed by: of each swimmer, we determined the average swim speed as well as two technique
Raul Arellano,
variables: the average stroke width and average horizontal acceleration. Each participant
University of Granada, Spain
Argyris G. Toubekis, also swam 10–12 trials over a custom-made system for measuring active drag, the
National and Kapodistrian University MAD system. Since the propelling efficiency is 100% while swimming over the MAD
of Athens, Greece
system, the power output of the swimmer is fully used to overcome the drag acting
*Correspondence:
Sander Schreven
on the body. The resulting speed thus represents the ratio between power output and
s.schreven@fieldlabswimming.com drag. We included this power-to-drag ratio, the power output and the drag coefficient
† ORCID:
of the fastest trial on the MAD system in the analysis. Finally, the body height and hand
Jeroen B. J. Smeets
surface area of each swimmer were determined as anthropometric variables. A model
orcid.org/0000-0002-3794-0579
Peter J. Beek selection procedure was conducted to predict the swim speed from the two technique
orcid.org/0000-0002-0917-8548 variables, three power variables and the two anthropometric variables. The ratio between
power output and the drag was the only significant predictor of the maximal swimming
Specialty section:
This article was submitted to speed (v = 0.86·power/drag). The variations in this ratio explained 65% of the variance
Elite Sports and Performance in swimming performance. This indicates that sprint performance in arms-only front
Enhancement,
a section of the journal
crawl swimming is strongly associated with the power-to-drag ratio and not with the
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living isolated power variables and the anthropometric and technique variables selected in the
Received: 13 August 2021 present study.
Accepted: 27 January 2022
Published: 01 March 2022 Keywords: 3d hand kinematics, swimming technique, power, anthropometrics, front crawl, MAD system

Citation:
Schreven S, Smeets JBJ and Beek PJ
(2022) Sprint Performance in
INTRODUCTION
Arms-Only Front Crawl Swimming Is
Strongly Associated With the The overarching aim of competitive swimming is to transverse a given race distance as fast as
Power-To-Drag Ratio. possible. Swim coaches are therefore constantly looking for ways to improve the swim speed and
Front. Sports Act. Living 4:758095. thus the race performance of their swimmers, as indeed the swimmers do themselves. Two main
doi: 10.3389/fspor.2022.758095 domains that coaches work on with their swimmers are the mechanical power that can be delivered

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living | www.frontiersin.org 1 March 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 758095
Schreven et al. Sprint Performance in Swimming

by the swimmer and the swimming technique employed to literature is that the power output of the swimmer in relation to
convert that power into speed. It is generally understood and drag is an important determinant of swimming performance.
experienced that both domains can be altered by training. A third In the technique domain, the trajectory, orientation, speed
domain that is important for swimming performance concerns and acceleration of the hand are aspects of the swimming
the swimmer’s anthropometric properties. After maturation technique that have been studied extensively, particularly in
the swimmer’s anthropometrics are fixed and cannot (or only front crawl swimming, while other aspects such as leg, trunk
marginally) be adjusted by training. These three domains have and head movements have received considerably less attention.
all received attention in studies aimed at identifying relevant In an encompassing literature review, van Houwelingen et al.
performance related variables in speed swimming. In the (2017) summarized the current state of knowledge regarding
following sections important findings within each domain are the hydrodynamic aspects of hand and arm movements in
highlighted. An a priori selection of potentially relevant variables front crawl swimming. Since the influential work of Counsilman
from each domain was made based on those findings. (1971), there has been considerable debate in the literature
The power balance is a commonly used approach to gain whether or not the hand trajectory in the front crawl stroke
insight into how power, drag and swimming technique affect should contain lateral (sculling) movements. van Houwelingen
swimming speed. It posits that the total mechanical power et al. (2017) concluded from the literature that excessive sculling
produced by the swimmer (Po ) is equal to the power to overcome movements generally lead to lower propulsive forces than a
drag (Pd ) and the power expended in pushing away masses of (roughly) straight underwater stroke and should therefore be
water (Pk ). Unlike the ground surface in running, water is a avoided. With respect to optimal hand orientation no firm
non-stationary medium that is brought into motion during the conclusions could be drawn, since the results reported on this
push-off (van Ingen Schenau and Cavanagh, 1990; Rodríguez variable were too inconsistent. van Houwelingen et al. (2017)
and Mader, 2011). The theoretical relationship between swim further concluded that accelerating the hand leads to a higher
speed (v), power output (Po ), propelling efficiency (ep ) and drag propulsive force compared to a stroke performed at constant
(represented by the drag coefficient K) shows how power output speed, implying that a high acceleration would be desirable for
and propelling efficiency both contribute to swimming speed effective propulsion.
(Toussaint and Truijens, 2006; Rodríguez and Mader, 2011): In the anthropometric domain, body height, hand surface area
and arm span have been associated with swimming performance.
r In several studies (Klentrou and Montpetit, 1991; Geladas
3 Po · ep
v= (1) et al., 2005; Lätt et al., 2010) a significant correlation between
K body height and swimming performance was found in young
swimmers. Moura et al. (2014) found that body height was
The power balance for swimming illustrates that swimmers a significant predictor of the propulsive arm force in young
have two main options to swim faster, namely to increase their swimmers, even after having controlled for maturation stage.
overall power and to decrease the power losses associated with Two potential mechanisms are described in the literature through
overcoming drag and bringing water into motion. The first which body height could be positively related to swimming speed.
option may be realized through strength training, which makes First, it has been suggested that an increased body height could
swimmers stronger and capable of generating greater power, reduce the wave drag acting on the body (Toussaint et al., 1990,
while the second option may be realized by optimizing swimming 2000; Toussaint and Beek, 1992). Second, taller swimmers were
technique, resulting in a higher propelling efficiency. found to have larger arm spans, which in turn were found
In the power domain, numerous studies have determined to be associated with increased stroke length and swimming
power output on land and some in water. Several studies reported performance (Grimston and Hay, 1986; Mazzilli, 2019).
a significant relationship between swimming performance and The beneficial effect of a large hand surface area on swimming
dry land power tests in which power output was determined performance can be understood best from the equations that
with an upper-body ergometer (e.g., Hawley and Williams, 1991; describe the forces acting on the hand and arm during the stroke.
Hawley et al., 1992; Zamparo et al., 2014), swim bench (arms These forces are typically described in a component parallel to the
only: e.g., Sharp et al., 1982, whole-body: e.g., Gatta et al., line of hand motion, the so-called drag forces, and a component
2017) or during strength exercises (e.g., Pérez-Olea et al., 2018), perpendicular to the line of hand motion, the so-called lift forces.
although some of these studies also included variables and/or The drag and lift forces acting on the hand can be derived from
considerations related to the technique and anthropometric the following equation:
domain. Significant correlations were also found between power
tests in the pool and swimming performance. In the water, power 1 2
FD,L = ρAvhand CD,L (2)
was determined with semi-tethered (e.g., Costill et al., 1983; 2
Dominguez-Castells et al., 2013) swimming tests and by using the
MAD system (Toussaint and Vervoorn, 1990). However, the high where ρ is the water density, A is the hand surface as projected
correlation coefficients found in some of these studies should be on a plane perpendicular to the mean flow (for the drag force),
regarded with caution since the participants in these studies were vhand is the hand speed, and CD,L is the drag/lift coefficient
heterogeneous in terms of age and gender (Morouço et al., 2012). (Toussaint and Beek, 1992; van Houwelingen et al., 2017). Since
Nevertheless, the general conclusion that can be drawn from the the projected hand surface area A is directly related to the

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living | www.frontiersin.org 2 March 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 758095
Schreven et al. Sprint Performance in Swimming

forces acting on the hand, a large hand surface area seems The participants volunteered to partake in the study following
an important anthropometric asset for competitive swimmers an informal recruitment procedure via their swimming club
besides body height. or coach, and provided informed consent prior to the start
The cited findings in the three domains suggest that factors of the study. Only male swimmers, 18 years or older, with a
related to power, propulsion technique and anthropometrics all personal best below 60 s on the 100 m freestyle (long course) were
contribute to swimming performance. One point of concern included in the study. The protocol for the study was approved
is that for the most part, the conclusions drawn by van by the local ethics committee of the Faculty of Behavioural
Houwelingen et al. (2017) about optimal swimming technique and Movement Sciences of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
are either based on studies in which physical arm models were (VCWE, VCWE-2018-054). The protocol consisted of three
equipped with actuators and/or sensors or studies in which a parts: (1) anthropometric measurement, (2) measurement of
computational fluid dynamics model was simulated, while only hand kinematics during arms-only front crawl swimming, and
few studies investigated optimal swimming technique during (3) measurements of power output and drag.
actual swimming. Another point of concern is that most studies
only looked at the effect of one of the domains of swimming Anthropometric Measurements
performance distinguished here, instead of adopting an integral Upon arrival at the InnoSportLab De Tongelreep at Eindhoven,
approach covering variables from all three domains. In one of the where the study was conducted, participants were informed
few studies that looked at more than one domain, Klentrou and about the general aim and the experimental procedures of the
Montpetit (1991) found that height, arm span, maximal stroke study. Subsequently, a series of anthropometric measures were
rate and power, measured using a tethered swim, were predictors taken, including body height and hand surface area. The hand
of 100 m performance in 25 male age-group swimmers. The surface was measured using the available equipment in the
model containing height and arm span explained 56% of the testing environment. This was done as follows. First, one of the
variance. After adding the measured power to the model, the experimenters marked the location of the ulnar and radial styloid
explained variance increased by 10% to a total of 66%. The on the skin of the right arm with a pencil. Next, the participant
maximal stroke rate added another 5% of the explained variance. placed his right hand flat on a vertical surface with fingers spread.
Whereas the participants in the study of Klentrou and Montpetit Perpendicular to the surface, a camera (Sony NEX-VG20E) was
(1991) were age-group swimmers, Lätt et al. (2010) concluded positioned to take a picture of the hand. A sheet of A4 paper was
that technique factors (stroke rate and stroke index) explained placed on the same surface close to the participant’s hand. The
90.3% of the variance in 100 m sprint performance in adolescent resulting image was postprocessed in ImageJ and rescaled using
male swimmers. Anthropometric factors explained 45.8% of the the known distance of the long side of the A4 paper. Finally, the
variance. The participants in the studies of both Klentrou and hand surface area was determined by tracing the hand until the
Montpetit (1991) and Lätt et al. (2010) were youth swimmers. skin marks of the ulnar and radial styloid.
For adult swimmers the contribution of each domain might be
different. Moreover, in none of the studies in question factors Measurement of Hand Kinematics During
from all three domains—i.e., power generation, propulsion Arms-Only Front Crawl Swimming
technique and anthropometrics—were included and compared. After the participants had been prepared for measurement, they
In the present study we adopted an integral approach swam for 15 min to warm up and familiarize themselves with
aimed at determining and comparing the contributions of swimming with clusters of LED markers attached to the ventral
selected power, technique and anthropometric measures on and dorsal side of both forearms and markers placed on the
sprint performance during arms-only front crawl swimming in tip of the middle fingers. Immediately thereafter they performed
adult, male competitive swimmers. Based on the literature, we four trials in front crawl starting from the middle of the 50-m
expected that variables from each of the three domains would long pool (i.e., at 25 meters) toward the wall. The swimming
contribute to swimming performance. movements were recorded within a calibrated volume of 2 × 1 ×
1 m (i.e., 2 m long in the swimming direction). The participants
were instructed to swim as fast as possible in each trial. Their
MATERIALS AND METHODS legs were supported by a pull-buoy and they were instructed not
to use the leg kick. Since breathing has an effect on the stroke
Twenty-five healthy, male adult competitive swimmers [age: 22 ± kinematics, they were also instructed not to breathe around the
5 years, body weight: 77.6 ± 9.2 kg, body height: 184.8 ± 6.4 cm; calibrated volume.
all measures mean ± standard deviation (SD)] participated in the In the pool, cameras (scA1400-30gc, Basler AG, Ahrensburg,
study. For each participant, the highest FINA score (based on the Germany, 50 fps) in the sidewall of the pool positioned at,
FINA 2018 points table; Kaufmann, 2018) during competition respectively, 15 and 5 m from the start edge of the pool were used
within the period between 90 days before and 90 days after the to determine the average swimming speed (vtrial ) in this segment,
measurement day was obtained from www.swimrankings.net. while six cameras (avA1900-50gc, Basler AG, Ahrensburg,
The participants scored 593 ± 108 FINA points within this Germany, 50 fps) in underwater housings placed at the bottom
period. Their average personal best time (also obtained from of the pool were used to capture the movement of the right arm.
swimrankings.net) on the 50 meter and 100 meter freestyle The intrinsic parameters of the cameras at the bottom of the pool
(long course) were, respectively, 25.8 ± 1.5 s and 56.1 ± 2.5 s. were determined with the Camera Calibration Toolbox in Matlab

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living | www.frontiersin.org 3 March 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 758095
Schreven et al. Sprint Performance in Swimming

(Bouguet, 2008) using a checkerboard, while the Direct Linear and no power is lost by pushing away masses of water. The
Transformation (DLT) parameters were calculated based on a 2 speed reached by the participant is therefore determined by the
× 1 × 1 m calibration frame containing 60 control points. These power-to-drag ratio and thus represents a direct measure for
parameters were combined with the tracked marker positions to this ratio.
reconstruct the real-world coordinates in 3D. The position of the Each participant swam five trials of 23 m on the MAD system
marker on the middle finger was tracked frame-by-frame by the to become familiar with swimming over the system. Next, the
experimenter using custom-made software. If the experimenter participant swam 10–12 trials over the system during which
could not judge the position of a marker, the missing data were data were recorded, starting at a speed around 1.2 m/s and
filled by linear interpolation. These raw data were filtered using incrementally increasing the speed each trial by ∼0.1 m/s until
a second order low-pass Butterworth filter. A cut-off frequency the maximal speed of the participant in question was reached.
of 10 Hz was used to filter the coordinates of the marker on Next, one extra attempt was made at maximal intensity. The
the tip of the middle finger. This cut-off frequency was chosen breaks between adjacent trials lasted ∼3 min. During all trials,
based on the results of a previous study showing that the optimal participants swam over the system with a pull buoy between their
dynamic precision of a marker cluster modeled on the forearm thighs to provide support to the body without kicking their legs.
was smallest with a cut-off frequency of 10 Hz (Schreven et al., They were also instructed not to breathe while swimming over
2015). The tracking procedure was only conducted on one stroke the system. Using a custom made Matlab script, the force data
of the right arm in the fastest trial of each swimmer, resulting in were filtered using a 2nd order low-pass Butterworth filter with
25 observations. Since the aim of the present study was to predict a cut-off frequency of 10 Hz. The average swim speed in each
maximal swim speed from power, technique and anthropometric trial on the MAD system was determined by manually selecting
variables, only the fastest trial of each swimmer was included in the time interval between the onset of the push-off against the
the analysis. second push-off pad and the onset of the push-off against the
Based on the processed real-world coordinates, two technique last (17th) push-off pad. During the same interval the average
variables were calculated: the stroke width (standard deviation of push-off force was determined. For each participant the maximal
the lateral position of the tip of the middle finger) and ahand,hor power-to-drag ratio (as determined by the maximal average speed
(mean absolute horizontal acceleration of the tip of the middle achieved on the MAD system) was used in the statistical analysis.
finger). Ideally, the technique variables would be calculated over We will refer to this as “power/drag”. Furthermore, the power
the full backward part of the stroke from the moment that the tip output and drag coefficient were determined for the trial in which
of the middle finger starts moving backwards (t 0 , t = 0%) until the maximal average speed was achieved. The power output
the last frame in which the tip of the middle finger was visible in was calculated by multiplying the average push-off force by the
the underwater recordings (t 100 , t = 100%). However, since the average speed. The drag coefficient was determined by dividing
markers were not visible in each trial from t 0 to t 100 the part of the average push-off force by the average speed squared. Since
the stroke in which data was available for all participants had to be we obtained three power variables (power/drag, power output,
determined. The marker at the tip of the middle finger was visible and drag coefficient) from two measurements (average speed and
for all participants from t = 0 to t = 90% (t 90 ) and therefore average force in the fastest trial on the MAD system), we expected
the technique variables stroke width and ahand,hor were calculated redundancy between those variables. Therefore, we checked in
between t 0 and t 90 . the statistical analysis for collinearity between these (and all
other) independent variables to reduce the redundancy between
Measurement of Power Output and Drag the power variables.
To obtain variables describing drag and power output, a system
dedicated to this purpose was used, the so-called measuring
active drag or MAD system (Hollander et al., 1986). The MAD Statistical Analysis
system is one of the established methods to measure active drag The statistical analysis was performed in R (R Core Team,
(for an overview of all established methods for this purpose 2020) using RStudio 1.3.1056 (RStudio, Boston, Massachusetts,
see Toussaint et al., 2000; Wilson and Thorp, 2003). The MAD USA). The following R packages were used: nlme (Pinheiro
system consists of a 23-meter long rod with 17 push-off pads et al., 2020), readxl (Wickham and Bryan, 2019) and regclass
attached to it. The rod is positioned 0.8 meters below the water (Petrie, 2020). The aim of the analysis was to determine the
surface. The distance between the pads is 1.35 m and the top optimal model to predict vtrial (dependent variable) from the
edge of the push-off pads is positioned 0.56 m below the water following seven independent variables: body height, hand surface
surface. The dimensions of each push-off pad are 25.5 × 16.5 cm. area, power/drag, power output, drag coefficient, stroke width
The rod is attached to a waterproof force transducer (BSP-603, and ahand,hor . The technique variables and swim speed from
Vishay Precision Group, Malvern, Pennsylvania, USA) connected the fastest trial out of the four trials were included in the
to the wall. The force signal is digitized with an A/D converter dataset, resulting in a total of 25 observations. First, boxplots
(NI 9237 and cDAQ-9171, National Instruments, Austin, Texas, and histograms were made for all independent variables to
USA) at a sampling rate of 100 Hz. The participant swims over detect outliers. Collinearity was assessed by calculating Pearson’s
the system by pushing off against the fixed push-off pads. The correlation coefficient between all independent variables. In case
propelling efficiency is 100% while swimming over the MAD two variables had a Pearson’s correlation coefficient above 0.7,
system, because the swimmer pushes off against a fixed surface one independent variable was selected.

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living | www.frontiersin.org 4 March 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 758095
Schreven et al. Sprint Performance in Swimming

In line with the procedure described by Zuur et al. (2009), TABLE 1 | Overview of the values of the dependent and independent variables.
the following three steps were taken to construct the optimal
Variable Mean ± SD 95%
model taking into account both fixed effects and the residual Confidence
variance structure using the generalized least squares technique. interval
First, the optimal residual variance structure was determined. All
independent variables were entered as fixed terms in the model. vtrial (m/s) 1.57 ± 0.08 (1.54, 1.60)
Models with different residual variance structures were compared body height (cm) 184.8 ± 6.4 (182.1, 187.4)
using the Akaike information criterion (AIC). A total of 14 hand surface area (cm2 ) 175.5 ± 12.9 (170.2, 180.8)
residual variance structures were compared: seven models with a power/drag (m/s) 1.84 ± 0.09 (1.80, 1.88)
fixed variance with each of the independent variables as variance power output (W) 181 ± 40 (165, 198)
covariate and seven models with a “power of the covariate” drag coefficient (kg/m) 28.7 ± 3.7 (27.2, 30.3)
variance structure with each of the independent variables as ahand,hor (m/s2 ) 23.1 ± 4.7 (21.2, 25.1)
variance covariate; the residual variance structure that resulted stroke width (m) 0.076 ± 0.030 (0.063, 0.088)
in the smallest AIC was selected as the optimal residual variance
Values are given over the 25 observations.
structure. The various residual variance structures were also
compared to a standard linear model. In this first step the
model parameters were estimated using the Restricted Maximum
Likelihood approach (REML). Second, using the optimal residual acceleration (bottom panel) are shown for one of the swimmers
variance structure selected in the previous step, a step down in Figure 2.
procedure was followed to find the optimal fixed structure In search for the optimal residual variance structure, the
starting by entering all independent variables as fixed terms in model with a fixed variance structure with stroke width as the
the model. In each round of the parameter removal procedure all variance covariate had the lowest AIC value (AIC = −20.7)
fixed terms were dropped one by one and using the likelihood and was therefore preferred over the standard linear model
ratio test each of the models in which one of the fixed terms (AIC = −17.8), the model with a power to the covariate
was dropped was compared to the full model from the start of structure with stroke width as variance covariate (AIC = −20.2)
the elimination round. In case any of the fixed terms was not and the models in which the other independent variables
significant (p > 0.05), the parameter with the highest p-value were used as variance covariates (AIC > −18.3). In search
in the likelihood ratio test was removed from the model and a for the optimal fixed effects, the non-significant independent
new round of the elimination process was started. This process variables were eliminated in the following order: intercept
was repeated until all fixed terms in the model were significant. (L = 0.03, p = 0.86), hand surface area (L = 0.29, p =
In this second step the model parameters were estimated using 0.59), drag coefficient (L < 0.80, p = 0.37), body height
Maximum Likelihood estimation. Third, the results of the model (L = 1.44, p = 0.23), ahand,hor (L = 1.18, p = 0.28) and
selected in the second step were presented using the values stroke width (L = 0.38, p = 0.54). Only power/drag was
obtained by REML estimation. a significant predictor of the maximal sprint speed [mean:
0.856, 95% confidence interval (0.847, 0.865)] resulting in the
following model:
RESULTS
vtrial = 0.856 · power/drag (3)
Table 1 shows an overview of the results for the dependent and
independent variables. The swimmers could indeed swim fast The scatter plot of power/drag vs. vtrial in Figure 3 shows the
(1.57 ± 0.08 m/s). As expected, they swam even faster on the strong relationship between both variables. A strong positive
MAD system (1.84 ± 0.09 m/s) because in this environment no correlation (R2 = 0.65) between both variables indicated that the
power is lost by bringing water into motion. The variation in the variations in the maximal power-to-drag ratio explained 65% of
anthropometric variables was smaller (coefficient of variation < the variance in swimming performance.
0.1) than in the technique variables. As can be seen in Figure 1,
which shows the scatter plots of the maximal swim speed as DISCUSSION
a function of all independent variables, there were no outliers
for any of the variables. A high correlation coefficient (r > The aim of the present study was to determine which
0.70) was found between power/drag and power output (r = variables from the power, technique, and anthropometric domain
0.83) and between power output and the drag coefficient (r = contribute significantly to the prediction of maximal sprint
0.80), indicating collinearity between the variables in question. speed during arms-only front crawl swimming. We expected
Power output was therefore excluded as independent variable, variables from all three domains to be significant predictors.
because the correlation coefficient with vtrial was higher for However, the results showed that the maximal power-to-
power/drag (r = 0.81) than for power output (r = 0.66). To drag ratio, determined by the maximal speed swum on the
indicate how a hand trajectory leads to values for the two MAD system, was the only significant predictor in the model.
technique variables, the hand trajectory in side-view (top, left Unexpectedly, given previous findings reported in the literature,
panel) and top-view (top, right panel) and the horizontal hand the technique and anthropometric variables selected in this

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living | www.frontiersin.org 5 March 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 758095
Schreven et al. Sprint Performance in Swimming

FIGURE 1 | Scatter plots of the maximal swim speed (vtrial ) as a function of the 7 independent variables: hand surface (A), body height (B), stroke width (C), the mean
horizontal hand acceleration (ahand,hor , D), power-to-drag ratio (obtained from the speed of the fastest trial on the MAD system, power/drag, E), power output (F), and
drag coefficient (G).

study were excluded from the final model. The resulting model this method proved unreliable, as orientations obtained from
parameter indicates that a 1 m/s higher maximal power-to- a marker cluster placed on the dorsal side of the forearm
drag ratio was related to a 0.86 m/s higher maximal sprint deviated substantially from the orientation obtained from a
speed during the swimming trials. The variations in the maximal cluster placed on the ventral side. This could have been caused
power-to-drag ratio explained 65% of the variance in the by skin movement artifacts but this is uncertain; more research
swimming performance. is needed to resolve this issue and to determine where these
The present study has several limitations that need to be (rigid) marker clusters should be placed on the swimmer’s body.
discussed. The technique variables were obtained from only Since we were unable to determine hand orientation reliably, we
one stroke of the right arm, while competitive swimmers make could not test whether it accounted for some of the variance in
many more strokes per lap. It may be questioned whether the swim speed. Furthermore, the experimental task was restricted
technique variables obtained during that single stroke provide to arms-only front crawl swimming: the legs were not used
a valid representation of the technique of the swimmer in for propulsion and supported by a pull buoy in all sprints,
question as there will be a degree of variability in the arm which affects the swimmer’s body position in the water and
movements and more technique variables might contribute to leads to slower sprint speeds. Despite these restrictions, vtrial was
swimming performance than considered in the present study. significantly correlated with the personal best times on the 50
For example, we intended to include hand orientation to the meter freestyle (r = −0.69, p < 0.01) and 100 meter freestyle (r
technique variables because it follows from Equation (2) that = −0.52, p < 0.01).
the hand area projected on the plane of the flow is important Not only did we exclude the contribution of the legs,
for the propulsion generated by the arm. Several studies (e.g., we also ignored the inter-arm coordination (which can be
Berger et al., 1995; Bixler and Riewald, 2002; Sato and Hino, quantified with the index of coordination; Chollet et al.,
2003) on numerical and physical arm models found that the 2000), and the coordination between the arms and legs. The
drag and lift coefficients determined in a steady state flow varied variables selected in this study represent a subset of all possible
with the angle of attack, although the results reported on this variables that could be included from the three domains of
variable were too inconsistent to draw firm conclusions (van interest. Patently, the hydrodynamics during actual swimming
Houwelingen et al., 2017). We tried to determine this variable is much more complex than is covered by our current
by means of marker clusters attached to the forearm. However, quantification of technique in terms of mean stroke width and

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living | www.frontiersin.org 6 March 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 758095
Schreven et al. Sprint Performance in Swimming

FIGURE 2 | Example of hand trajectory. The side view (A), top view (B), and of one of the swimmers is presented together with the horizontal hand acceleration (C).
The stroke width was 0.045 m and the mean horizontal hand acceleration was 22.0 m/s2 in this trial. The red crosses in (A,B) indicate the limits of the part of the
stroke that was analyzed (see Methods section).

mean horizontal hand acceleration. It is very likely that an


interaction occurs between hand path, speed, acceleration, and
orientation, which might be oversimplified with the selected
technique variables.
Another limitation was the relatively small number of
participants in this study. Larger sample sizes would lead to
more robust results and allow independent variables with small
contributions to be included in the model. Furthermore, with
a larger number of observations more variables from each
domain could be included. The a priori selection of variables
would then likely include more variables that predict swimming
speed. The digitization process to obtain the technique variables
remains very time-consuming and precludes the inclusion
of many participants in studies involving a detailed analysis
of the hand kinematics during actual swimming. Although
the participants in the present study were all competitive FIGURE 3 | Scatter plot of the maximal swim speed (vtrial ) as a function of the
swimmers, the average personal best times and FINA scores power-to-drag ratio (obtained from the speed of the fastest trial on the MAD
as reported in the Methods section indicate that the majority system, power/drag). The red line indicates the regression line based on the
optimal model (vtrial = 0.856 · power/drag).
of the participants were no elite swimmers. The results
might well be different for a sample consisting solely of
elite swimmers.
A crucial limitation is that to date no gold standard exists
to determine power output and drag in swimming. All of 2004; Formosa et al., 2012; Mason et al., 2013). In the present
the established methods have their limitations and underlying study, the MAD system was used to determine power output
assumptions and cross-validations between various pairs of and drag. One of the limitations of the MAD system is
these methods have shown limited agreement (Toussaint et al., that the push-off pads on the MAD system were placed at

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living | www.frontiersin.org 7 March 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 758095
Schreven et al. Sprint Performance in Swimming

a fixed inter-pad distance of 1.35 m. Although it was found power-to-drag ratio in a time effective manner. The participants
that different inter-pad distances did not affect the measured did not have prior experience with the MAD system and were
drag (Schreven et al., 2013), it has not been studied to date able to complete the protocol for the power measurements within
whether the maximal speed achieved on the MAD system 30 min. This system can therefore be used to evaluate changes in
varies with inter-pad distance. Therefore, it cannot be excluded the maximal power-to-drag ratio due to training and might be
that by using a different inter-pad distance, the correlation an expedient way to identify talented swimmers, irrespective of
with swimming speed would have been different. Given this their technique, although it remains to be established whether the
discussion on the validity of the various methods to measure maximal power-to-drag ratio determined at a young age predicts
power and drag, it is an important open question to what swim performance at a later, more senior age.
extent the association between power-to-drag ratio and sprint Future research should aim for a better understanding of the
performance depends on the method used to determine power role of power, technique and anthropometrics, as well as the
output and drag. underlying mechanisms. Furthermore, the relative contribution
In contrast to the many studies that reported important of each of these domains on swim performance should be
contributions of the technique and anthropometric domains studied for swimmers of different age, sex and swim level
to swim speed, the variables from these domains did not add as the (relative) contribution might be different in other
significantly to the prediction of sprint speed in our study. populations. Also, since the maximal power-to-drag ratio was
One possible explanation for this lack of effect might be that found to be an important predictor of swim speed, it would
we only selected a limited set of variables from the technique be interesting to investigate whether a causal relationship exists
and anthropometric domain, as discussed above. However, as between both variables and if so, which strength training
we chose the variables that, based on the literature, were most interventions lead to the largest improvement of this ratio and
likely associated with swimming performance, we deem this what would be the optimal muscle architecture to maximize
explanation less likely. An alternative explanation might be that this ratio.
these variables did not contribute significantly to the variation
in sprint speed between participants in the current group, as DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
the group consisted of well-trained competitive swimmers that
have passed various selection stages. Indeed, the participants The raw data supporting the conclusions of this
in the studies that reported a significant correlation between article will be made available by the authors, without
body height and swim performance were all youth swimmers undue reservation.
(Klentrou and Montpetit, 1991; Geladas et al., 2005; Lätt et al.,
2010). ETHICS STATEMENT
This leaves us with the general conclusion that a substantial
portion (i.e., 65%) of the variance in maximal swim speed is The studies involving human participants were reviewed
explained by the maximal speed on the MAD system. Although and approved by the Local Ethics Committee of the
we introduced the maximum speed on the MAD system as Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences of the Vrije
a power related variable, it represents in fact the power-to- Universiteit Amsterdam (VCWE, VCWE-2018-054). The
drag ratio, as explained in the Methods section. As the drag patients/participants provided their written informed consent to
is determined by anthropometric factors, this variable also participate in this study.
reflects some anthropometric characteristics of the participant.
Moreover, the MAD system forces the participant to use a certain AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
stroke length, which might differ from the participant’s preferred
stroke length. The maximum speed on the MAD system might SS conducted the experiment and collected the data. SS and JS
therefore also reflect an aspect of the technique domain. performed the statistical analysis. SS and PB wrote the first draft
The strong relationship between the maximal power-to- of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the conception and
drag ratio and the maximal swim speed indicates that the experimental and statistical design of the study and contributed
maximal power-to-drag ratio is strongly associated with sprint to subsequent versions of the manuscript, read, and approved the
performance. It remains to be explored whether a cause-and- final version.
effect relationship exists between both variables. The maximal
power-to-drag ratio could be the swimming equivalent of ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
power-to-bodyweight ratio that is considered a key performance
indicator in for example cycling (Faria et al., 2005), especially The authors would like to thank Roald van der Vliet, Hans
when cycling uphill (Antón et al., 2007). The correlation suggests de Koning, Bert Coolen, Peter Verdijk, Brenda Merks, Kim
that increasing the power output by strength training might be Rooijmans, and Hilde van der Aa for their technical support
beneficial for swimming performance, provided that the positive and help in organizing the measurements. We also would like to
effect of the increase in power output outweighs the potentially thank Carlo van der Heijden, Sjoerd Vennema and the team of
negative effect of an increase in frontal area due to muscle InnoSportLab De Tongelreep for their assistance in the analysis
hypertrophy. The MAD system allows determining the maximal of the data.

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living | www.frontiersin.org 8 March 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 758095
Schreven et al. Sprint Performance in Swimming

REFERENCES on swimming performance: a brief review. J. Hum. Sport Exerc. 7, 553–559.


doi: 10.4100/jhse.2012.72.18
Antón, M., Izquierdo, M., Ibáñez, J., Asiain, X., Mendiguchía, J., and Gorostiaga, E. Moura, T., Costa, M., Oliveira, S., Júnior, M. B., Ritti-Dias, R., and Santos, M.
(2007). Flat and uphill climb time trial performance prediction in elite amateur (2014). Height and body composition determine arm propulsive force in youth
cyclists. Int. J. Sports Med. 28, 306–313. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-924356 swimmers independent of a maturation stage. J. Hum. Kinet. 42, 277–284.
Berger, M. A. M., de Groot, G., and Hollander, A. P. (1995). Hydrodynamic doi: 10.2478/hukin-2014-0081
drag and lift forces on human hand/arm models. J. Biomech. 28, 125–133. Pérez-Olea, J. I., Valenzuela, P. L., Aponte, C., and Izquierdo, M. (2018).
doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(94)00053-7 Relationship between dryland strength and swimming performance: pull-
Bixler, B., and Riewald, S. (2002). Analysis of a swimmer’s hand and arm in steady up mechanics as a predictor of swimming speed. J. Strength Cond. Res. 32,
flow conditions using computational fluid dynamics. J. Biomech. 35, 713–717. 1637–1642. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002037
doi: 10.1016/S0021-9290(01)00246-9 Petrie, A. (2020). regclass: Tools for an Introductory Class in Regression and
Bouguet, J. Y. (2008). Camera Calibration Toolbox for Matlab. Available online Modeling. R Package Version 1.6. Available online at: https://cran.r-project.org/
at: http://www.vision.caltech.edu/bouguetj/calib_doc/index.html (Accessed package=regclass (Accessed July 5, 2021).
March 29, 2018). Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D., and R Core Team (2020). nlme:
Chollet, D., Chalies, S., and Chatard, J. C. (2000). A new index of coordination Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. R Package Version 3.1-148.
for the crawl: description and usefulness. Int. J. Sports Med. 21, 54–59. Available online at: https://cran.r-project.org/package=nlme (Accessed July 5,
doi: 10.1055/s-2000-8855 2021).
Costill, D., King, D., Holdren, A., and Hargreaves, M. (1983). Sprint speed vs. R Core Team (2020). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.
swimming power. Swim. Tech. 20, 20–22. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available online at: https://www.r-
Counsilman, J. E. (1971). “The application of Bernoulli’s principle to human project.org/ (Accessed July 5, 2021).
propulsion in water,” in Proceedings: First International Symposium on Rodríguez, F. A., and Mader, A. (2011). “Energy systems in swimming,” in World
Biomechanics in Swimming, Waterpolo and diving, eds. L. Lewillie, and J. P. Book of Swimming: From Science to Performance, eds. L. Seifert, D. Chollet, and
Clarys (Brussels: Universite libre de Bruxelles, Laboratoire de l’effort), 59–71. I. Mujika (Hauppage, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.), 225–240.
Dominguez-Castells, R., Izquierdo, M., and Arellano, R. (2013). An updated Sato, Y., and Hino, T. (2003). “Estimation of thrust of swimmer’s hand using CFD,”
protocol to assess arm swimming power in front crawl. Int. J. Sports Med. 34, in Proc. Second Int. Symp. Aqua Bio-Mechanisms (Hawaii), 81–86.
324–329. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1323721 Schreven, S., Beek, P. J., and Smeets, J. B. J. (2015). Optimising filtering parameters
Faria, E. W., Parker, D. L., and Faria, I. E. (2005). The science of cycling. Sport. for a 3D motion analysis system. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 25, 808–814.
Med. 35, 313–337. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200535040-00003 doi: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2015.06.004
Formosa, D. P., Toussaint, H. M., Mason, B. R., and Burkett, B. (2012). Schreven, S., Toussaint, H. M., Smeets, J. B. J., and Beek, P. J. (2013).
Comparative analysis of active drag using the MAD system and an assisted The effect of different inter-pad distances on the determination of active
towing method in front crawl swimming. J. Appl. Biomech. 28, 746–750. drag using the measuring active drag system. J. Biomech. 46, 1933–1937.
doi: 10.1123/jab.28.6.746 doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.05.020
Gatta, G., Cortesi, M., Swaine, I., and Zamparo, P. (2017). Mechanical power, Sharp, R. L., Troup, J. P., and Costill, D. L. (1982). Relationship between
thrust power and propelling efficiency: relationships with elite sprint swimming power and sprint freestyle swimming. Med. Sci. Sport. Exerc. 14, 53–56.
performance. J. Sports Sci. 36, 506–512. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2017.1322214 doi: 10.1249/00005768-198201000-00010
Geladas, N. D., Nassis, G. P., and Pavlicevic, S. (2005). Somatic and physical traits Toussaint, H., and Vervoorn, K. (1990). Effects of specific high resistance training
affecting sprint swimming performance in young swimmers. Int. J. Sports Med. in the water on competitive swimmers. Int. J. Sports Med. 11, 228–233.
26, 139–144. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-817862 doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1024797
Grimston, S. K., and Hay, J. G. (1986). Relationships among anthropometric and Toussaint, H. M., and Beek, P. J. (1992). Biomechanics of competitive front crawl
stroking characteristics of college swimmers. Med. Sci. Sport. Exerc. 18, 60–68. swimming. Sport. Med. 13, 8–24. doi: 10.2165/00007256-199213010-00002
doi: 10.1249/00005768-198602000-00011 Toussaint, H. M., de Looze, M., Van Rossem, B., Leijdekkers, M., and Dignum, H.
Hawley, J., and Williams, M. (1991). Relationship between upper body anaerobic (1990). The effect of growth on drag in young swimmers. Int. J. Sport Biomech.
power and freestyle swimming performance. Int. J. Sports Med. 12, 1–5. 6, 18–28. doi: 10.1123/ijsb.6.1.18
doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1024645 Toussaint, H. M., Hollander, A. P., van den Berg, C., and Vorontsov, A. R.
Hawley, J. A., Williams, M. M., Vickovic, M. M., and Handcock, P. J. (1992). Muscle (2000). “Biomechanics of swimming,” in Exercise and Sport Science, eds. W.
power predicts freestyle swimming performance. Br. J. Sports Med. 26, 151–155. E. Garrett and D. T. Kirkendall (Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams &
doi: 10.1136/bjsm.26.3.151 Wilkins), 639–660.
Hollander, A. P., de Groot, G., van Ingen Schenau, G. J., Toussaint, H. M., Toussaint, H. M., Roos, P. E., and Kolmogorov, S. (2004). The determination
de Best, H., Peeters, W., et al. (1986). Measurement of active drag during of drag in front crawl swimming. J. Biomech. 37, 1655–1663.
crawl arm stroke swimming. J. Sports Sci. 4, 21–30. doi: 10.1080/026404186087 doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.02.020
32094 Toussaint, H. M., and Truijens, M. (2006). Power requirements for swimming
Kaufmann, C. (2018). FINA Points. Available online at: https://wiki.swimrankings. a world-record 50-m front crawl. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 1, 61–64.
net/index.php/swimrankings:FINA_Points (accessed December 21, 2021). doi: 10.1123/ijspp.1.1.61
Klentrou, P. P., and Montpetit, R. R. (1991). Physiologic and physical correlates of van Houwelingen, J., Schreven, S., Smeets, J. B. J., Clercx, H. J. H., and Beek, P. J.
swimming performance. J. Swim. Res. 7, 13–18. (2017). Effective propulsion in swimming: grasping the hydrodynamics of hand
Lätt, E., Jürimäe, J., Mäestu, J., Purge, P., Rämson, R., Haljaste, K., et al. and arm movements. J. Appl. Biomech. 33, 87–100. doi: 10.1123/jab.2016-0064
(2010). Physiological, biomechanical and anthropometrical predictors of sprint van Ingen Schenau, G. J., and Cavanagh, P. R. (1990). Power equations in
swimming performance in adolescent swimmers. J. Sports Sci. Med. 9, 398–404. endurance sports. J. Biomech. 23, 865–881. doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(90)90352-4
Mason, B. R., Kolmogorov, S., Wilson, B. D., Toussaint, H. M., Sinclair, P. J., Wickham, H., and Bryan, J. (2019). readxl: Read Excel Files. R Package Version
Schreven, S., et al. (2013). “Comparison between active drag values estimated 1.3.1. Available online at: https://cran.r-project.org/package=readxl (Accessed
using both the velocity perturbation method and the A.I.S. assisted towing July 5, 2021).
method,” in Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Biomechanics Wilson, B. D., and Thorp, R. (2003). “Active drag in swimming,” in Biomechanics
in Sports, eds. T.-Y. Shiang, W.-H. Ho, P. C. Huang, and C.-L. Tsai (Taipei). and Medicine in Swimming, IX Edn, ed J. C. Chatard (Saint Etienne:
Mazzilli, F. (2019). Body height and swimming performance in 50 and 100 m Publications de l’Universite de Saint Etienne), 15–20.
freestyle Olympic and World Championship swimming events: 1908 - 2016. Zamparo, P., Turri, E., Peterson Silveira, R., and Poli, A. (2014). The
J. Hum. Kinet. 66, 205–213. doi: 10.2478/hukin-2018-0068 interplay between arms-only propelling efficiency, power output and
Morouço, P. G., Marinho, D. A., Amaro, N. M., Peréz-Turpin, J. A., Marques, speed in master swimmers. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 114, 1259–1268.
M. C., Pérez-Turpin, J. A., et al. (2012). Effects of dry-land strength training doi: 10.1007/s00421-014-2860-7

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living | www.frontiersin.org 9 March 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 758095
Schreven et al. Sprint Performance in Swimming

Zuur, A. F., Ieno, E. N., Walker, N. J., Saveliev, A. A., and Smith, G. M. (2009). the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in
Mixed Effects Models and Extensions in Ecology With R. Statistics for Biology this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or
and Health (New York, NY: Springer). endorsed by the publisher.

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the Copyright © 2022 Schreven, Smeets and Beek. This is an open-access article
absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
potential conflict of interest. The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the
original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original
publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.
Publisher’s Note: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these
and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of terms.

Frontiers in Sports and Active Living | www.frontiersin.org 10 March 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 758095

You might also like