No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
What makes a successful relay start in swimming?
Sports Biomechanics
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
The present study investigated swimmers’ performances on the starting and turning segments between individual and relay races. A total number of 72 race performances of the same swimmers in both relay 4 × 100 m finals (freestyle, medley, and mixed freestyle) and individual 100 m finals or semi-finals (butterfly, breaststroke, and freestyle) from the LEN European Swimming Championships were compared with repeated measures MANOVA. Swimmers performed 5–7% faster starts in the relay than in the corresponding individual events, despite no differences in the flight phase and a lower performance (shorter distances and slower velocities) on the underwater start section. The 15 m turn times were slower in the butterfly relay races although no specific differences in the underwater parameters were observed. These results suggest that specific training of the starting and turning segments should be performed under relay conditions to optimise pacing and performance in the underwater sections.
The primary goal of the present research was to determine the order of swimmers on a mixed relay team that would ensure the best performance in the Fédération Internationale de Natation (FINA) World Championships held in Kazan (Russia, 2015), Budapest (Hungary, 2017), and Gwangju (South Korea, 2019). The data were obtained from database websites for the 4 × 100 m freestyle and 4 × 100 m medley official results,¹ including 660 records from 188 entries of finals and 472 preliminary events. The results showed that the fastest swimmers (according to their best season times) were located primarily in the first or second positions of the freestyle relay. The most successful gender strategy for the 4 × 100 m freestyle (57 out of 82 observations) and for the 4 × 100 m medley (29 out of 83) relays was the order male-male-female-female, although no statistical differences were found (p = 0.79) for the medley relays. In the 4 × 100 m freestyle, the second (p = 0.002; β = 1.62) and third (p =0.003; β = 1.41) relay legs had a statistical effect on the total relay time, whereas in the 4 × 100 m medley, all four relay legs had a statistical effect (p < 0.001) on the final performance, the weight of the four strokes being different in heats with respect to the final round. Also, a later position of the first female swimmer or the consecutive position of two female swimmers in the team order significantly affected the relay performance in specific events. Mixed relay events appeared to present specific strategies in comparison to traditional male- or female-only relay lineups.
The aim of the study was to (1) assess the test–retest reliability of a novel performance analysis system for swimming (KiSwim) including an instrumented starting block and optical motion capture system, (2) identify key performance indicators (KPI) for the kick-start, (3) determine the most beneficial position of the strong leg and (4) investigate the effect of acute reversal of leg positioning. During three sessions, kick-starts of 15 competitive swimmers were investigated. Eighteen kinematic and kinetic parameters showed high reliability (ICC>0.75) from which principal component analysis identified seven KPI (i.e., time to 15 m, time on-block, depth at 7.5 m, horizontal take-off velocity, horizontal impulse back plate, horizontal peak force back plate and vertical peak force front plate). For the preferred start position, the back plate showed a higher horizontal peak force (0.71 vs. 0.96 x body mass; p < 0.001) and impulse (0.191 vs. 0.28Ns/BW; p < 0.001) compared to front plate. Acute reversal of the leg position reduced performance (i.e., increased time to 15 m and reduced horizontal take-off velocity). However, plate-specific kinetic analysis revealed a larger horizontal peak force (p < 0.001) and impulse (p < 0.001) for the back compared to the front plate in any start position investigated. Therefore, swimmers are encouraged to position the strong leg in the back.
The aim of this study was to determine how elite volleyball players employed the arm swing (AS) to enhance their jump performance. The study assessed how the AS influenced the duration and magnitude of the vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) during the main phases (preparatory, braking and accelerating) of the countermovement vertical jump (CMVJ), the starting position of the body at the beginning of the accelerating phase and the moment when the AS began contributing to increasing the jump height. Eighteen elite volleyball players performed three CMVJs with and without an AS. Kinetics and kinematics data were collected using two Kistler force plates and the C-motion system. The time and force variables were evaluated based on the VGRF, and the position of the body and the trajectory of the arm movement were determined using kinematic analysis. The AS improved the CMVJ by increasing the jump height by 38% relative to jumping without an AS. The AS significantly shortened the braking phase and prolonged the accelerating phase, however, it did not influence the preparatory phase or the overall jump duration. The AS also significantly increased the average force during the accelerating phase as well as the accelerating impulse. The AS upward began at 76% into the overall jump duration. The AS did not influence the body position at the beginning of the accelerating phase. These findings can be used to improve performance of the CMVJ with the AS and in teaching beginning volleyball players proper jumping technique.
Ten male collegiate swimmers (age = 20.2 ± 1.4 years, height = 184.6 ± 5.8 cm, mass = 82.9 ± 9.3 kg) performed 3 swimming relay step starts, which incorporated a one or two-step approach, and a no-step relay start. Time to 10 m was not significantly shorter between step and no-step starts. A double-step start increased horizontal takeoff velocity by 0.2 m/s. A single-step together start decreased vertical takeoff velocity by 0.2 m/s but increased takeoff height by 0.16 m. Subjects were more upright at takeoff by 4°, 2°, and 5° in the double-step, single-step apart, and single-step together starts respectively, than in the no-step start. Entry angle was steeper by 2°, entry orientation was steeper by 3°, and entry vertical velocity was faster by 0.3 m/s in the single-step together start. Restricting step length by 50% had little effect on step starts with the exceptions that horizontal velocity was significantly reduced by 0.1 m/s in the double-step start and vertical takeoff velocity was increased by 0.2 m/s in the single-step together start. These data suggested that step starts offered some performance improvements over the no-step start, but these improvements were not widespread and, in the case of the double-step start, were dependent on the ability to take longer steps.
This review updates the swim-start state of the art from a biomechanical standpoint. We review the contribution of the swim-start to overall swimming performance, the effects of various swim-start strategies, and skill effects across the range of swim-start strategies identified in the literature. The main objective is to determine the techniques to focus on in swimming training in the contemporary context of the sport. The phases leading to key temporal events of the swim-start, like water entry, require adaptations to the swimmer's chosen technique over the course of a performance; we thus define the swim-start as the moment when preparation for take-off begins to the moment when the swimming pattern begins. A secondary objective is to determine the role of adaptive variability as it emerges during the swim-start. Variability is contextualized as having a functional role and operating across multiple levels of analysis: inter-subject (expert versus non-expert), inter-trial or intra-subject (through repetitions of the same movement), and inter-preference (preferred versus non-preferred technique). Regarding skill effects, we assume that swim-start expertise is distinct from swim stroke expertise. Highly skilled swim-starts are distinguished in terms of several factors: reaction time from the start signal to the impulse on the block, including the control and regulation of foot force and foot orientation during take-off; appropriate amount of glide time before leg kicking commences; effective transition from leg kicking to break-out of full swimming with arm stroking; overall maximal leg and arm propulsion and minimal water resistance; and minimized energy expenditure through streamlined body position. Swimmers who are less expert at the swim-start spend more time in this phase and would benefit from training designed to reduce: (i) the time between reaction to the start signal and impulse on the block, and (ii) the time in transition (i.e., between gliding and leg kicking, and between leg-kicking and full swimming). Key pointsSWIMMERS MEET TWO MAIN CONSTRAINTS DURING THE START MOVEMENT: travelling more distance in the air (to get less resistance) and rotate to enter properly in the water.Swim start is a sum of compromises in all parts of it, and swim-start expertise is distinct from swim stroke expertise corresponding to best ways to manage these compromises.Variability found is contextualized as having a functional role and operating across multiple levels of analysis.
Vertical jumping performance is dependent on muscle strength and motor skill. An understanding of motor skill strategies and their influence on jumping mechanics provides insight into how to improve performance. This study aimed to determine whether kinematic sequencing strategy influenced jump height, the effect of sequencing on jumping mechanics and if arm swing influences sequencing strategy. Women volleyball players (n=16) performed vertical jumps with and without arm swing on force platforms while recorded with a six-camera motion capture system. Sequencing strategy was determined as the relative time delay between pelvis and knee extension. A long time delay indicated a proximal-to-distal strategy while no time delay represented a simultaneous strategy. Longer relative time delay was correlated with higher jump height in jumps with (r = 0.82, P < 0.001) and without arm swing (r = 0.58, P = 0.02). Longer relative time delay and higher jump height were associated with greater hip extensor and ankle plantar flexor net joint moments; and greater ratio of concentric to eccentric knee extensor net joint moment (P < 0.05). Longer relative time delay and higher jump height were correlated with greater thigh and leg angular accelerations (P < 0.05). These kinetic and kinematic variables, along with relative time delay and jump height were greater in jumps with arm swing than without (P < 0.05); indicating arm swing promotes use of a proximal-to-distal strategy. Use of a proximal-to-distal strategy is associated with greater net joint moments and segment accelerations which may contribute to better vertical jump performance.
Abstract Work presented in this paper provides a methodology for categorising swimming start performance based on peak force production on the main block and footrest components of the Omega OSB11 starting block. A total of 46 elite British swimmers were tested, producing over 1000 start trials. Overwater cameras were synchronised to a specifically designed start block that allowed the measurement of force production via two sets of four, tri-axis, force transducers; one set in the main block and one in the footrest. Data were then analysed, segregating trials for gender. Each start was categorised, with respect to the peak force production in horizontal and vertical components, into one of nine categories. Three performance indicators, i.e. block time, take-off velocity and distance of entry, were used to assess whether differences in performance could be correlated with these categories. Results from these data suggest that swimmers generating higher than average peak forces were more likely to produce a better overall start performance than those who produced forces lower than the average, for this population of athletes.
Members of sports teams often differ in their individual performance capabilities. While numerous laboratory studies have shown that especially less capable members exhibit larger effort gains in teams as compared to their individual performance, related findings in relay swimming remained ambiguous. Thus, this research aims to clarify whether relative strength among the team members represents an independent source of effort gains in swimming relays (i.e., faster swim times in the relay as compared to the individual race). Statistical analyses of relay swimming performances in elite-class (Study 1) and U.S. college (Study 2) competitions were conducted with a total N = 1,488 cases including 1,020 swimmers. We tested the hypothesis that weaker swimmers show larger effort gains in relays than stronger swimmers. The results of both studies correspond and confirm this hypothesis: Weaker relay members exhibit significantly larger effort gains than stronger swimmers. Thus, this study provides evidence for the relative strength hypothesis under real-world conditions. Based on our findings, and contrary to the prevailing preference of swimming coaches, we recommend that the strongest swimmers should not be positioned first in the serial order of the relay team.
The level of expertise must be defined for the sample studied when reporting research in sport. Concretely in swimming, apart from the participants’ background, the competitive status is based on the level that swimmers participate. Thus, the International Swimming Federation (FINA) points are added to improve the sample level characterization. The aim of this study was two-fold: (1) to assess whether national and regional swimmers from different countries differ in their performance level (based on FINA points), and (2) to propose a model that allows standardizing the research results in swimming. The FINA points of 5876 participants (males = 2962 and females = 2914) in 100 m butterfly, backstroke, breaststroke and freestyle were retrieved from nationals (n = 21) and regionals (n = 44) swimming competitions. One-way analysis of variance was conducted to test the difference in FINA points between swimmers of different countries. Significant disparities (100–350 FINA points; p < 0.001) were observed in national and regional competitions for male and female swimmers among the different countries analyzed. This could lead to misleading conclusions when comparing studies with national or regional swimmers from different countries. In this regard, a new model of performance classification based on national and regional worldwide competition is proposed. This might be used to standardized the swimming research results.
•
Highlights
• - The current classification of swimmers’ status could lead to misleading conclusion when comparing studies from different countries using national or regional swimmers.
• - The proposed model will allow to better standardize the research results in swimming, aiding to draw more accurate conclusion when comparing results from different studies.
The main aims of the present research were 1) to characterise the inter-subject and intra-subject timing of the preparatory movements of competitive swimmers during relay starts and 2) to relate the preparatory movements with the relay start outcome. Nine international youth swimmers performed 10 relay freestyle starts (one-step technique) filmed at 120 Hz from a lateral viewpoint. Results obtained (0.14 ± 0.10 s changeover time, 0.31 ± 0.07 s entry time, 2.59 ± 0.09 m entry distance and 0.96 ± 0.06 s time to 5 m) indicated that the longer the preparation time (from the initial position to the swimmer’s take-off), the better the changeover time, entry distance, and 5 m time. Specifically, a mixed linear model identified preparation time (p < 0.001, F (1,80.01) = 56.36), and entry distance (p = 0.008, F (1,80.01) = 7.36) as predicting variables for 5 m time. Also, faster swimmers on times to 5 m were found to be more consistent – lower levels of intra-subject variability – in 5 m (r = 0.76, p = 0.018) and changeover (r = 0.72, p = 0.029) times. In summary, the timing of the preparatory movements seems to be a key aspect to optimise relay start performances.
Elite swimmers are individual athletes competing mostly on their own. However, when competing in a relay team, they are exposed to social influences possibly leading to effort gains compared to their individual performance. This study investigated effort gains in relay team members during 4 x 100 m freestyle races of Olympic Games and World Championships across the past 20 years. We assumed increasing effort gains in swimmers competing on later serial positions within their relay team since weaknesses in their performances can increasingly less be compensated by their teammates (social indispensability). Furthermore, we assumed a stronger gain in female athletes since females have been shown to be more affected by social indispensability then males. Using linear mixed modelling analyses, we additionally examined the moderating impact of the relay team outcome (i.e. medal-winning chance) on effort gains and indispensability effects while accounting for current team rankings at change-over. Except for the first swimmer, overall effort gains in relay performances were found as compared to performances in individual races during the same championship. Furthermore, these gains were close to equally distributed among both laps of the 100 m distance. However, even though effort gains are tending to be most pronounced for the last relay team swimmer we failed to detect any significant indispensability effect in our data set. Noteworthy, female swimmers showed larger effort gains when winning a medal (based on the current team rankings) was likely. In contrast, males showed effort gains irrespective of the serial order within the relay team and medal chance. Consequently, tentative recommendations are derived on how to line up a relay team.
The purpose of the present study was twofold: (i) to compare the kinematic characteristics of individual and relay swimming starts; and (ii) to relate the kinematic variables to 5 m performance for both starts. Twelve elite-level swimmers performed 2 × 25 m at maximal effort (one with an individual and one with a relay start randomly). Two-dimensional direct linear transformation algorithms were used to calculate swimmers’ centre of mass (CM) kinematics during each subphase. The results indicated moderate to much faster 5 m, 10 m 15 and 15 m times (29.4, 10.7 and 6.5%) for relay than individual starts as well as the differences at specific parameters, but no differences in take-off horizontal velocity between start techniques. Large correlations to performance times were found in block time, horizontal take-off velocity, take-off velocity and entry angle (r = 0.77 to 0.83) 20 for individual start, but in changeover time, take-off height and entry distance (r = 0.69 to 0.90) for relay start. Differences on swim start regulations between individual and relay events were in line with different key parameters related to start performances in each event. This should be considered by swimmers and coaches when addressing the starting improvement.
In swimming relay races, various start techniques are performed by swimmers, but it remains unclear which technique leads to a better start performance. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to compare the kinematic characteristics of different relay start techniques with the new starting block Omega OSB11. Eleven international youth swimmers were filmed during 1) no step with parallel feet, 2) no step with separated feet and 3) one-step starts and their centre of mass kinematics calculated with 2D- DLT algorithms. Results indicate that differences between techniques were detected in the spatiotem-poral parameters of the block and aerial start phases (e.g., initial and take-off positions, entry height, preparation and changeover times) and in selected parameters of the underwater phase (e.g., emersion time and distance, underwater time and distance). However, no statistical effects were found in 5 m, 10 m and 15 m start times, nor in horizontal take-off velocity, despite an observed trend for the one-step start to be superior to the non-step techniques. These results suggest that differences between relay techni-ques could rely more on the swimmer’s body posture (angular kinematics) on the block, flight and underwater phases than on the centre of mass linear kinematics.
Purpose:
Although pacing is considered crucial for success in individual swimming events, there is a lack of research examining pacing in relays. The authors investigated the impact of start lap and pacing strategy on swimming performance and whether these strategies differ between relays and the corresponding individual event.
Methods:
Race data for 716 relay (4 × 200-m freestyle) finals from 14 international competitions between 2010 and 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. Each swimmer's individual 200-m freestyle season's best time for the same year was used for comparison. Races were classified as a fast, average, or slow start lap strategy (lap 1) and as an even, negative, or positive pacing strategy (laps 2-4) to give an overall race strategy, for example, average start lap even pacing.
Results:
A fast start lap strategy was associated with slower 200-m times (range 0.5-0.9 s, P ≤ .04) irrespective of gender, and positive pacing led to slower 200-m (0.4-0.5 s, P ≤ .03) times in females. A fast start lap strategy led to positive pacing in 71% of swimmers. Half of the swimmers changed pacing strategy, with 13% and 7% more female and male swimmers, respectively, displaying positive pacing in relays compared with individual events. In relays, a fast start lap and positive pacing was utilized more frequently by swimmers positioned on second to fourth relay legs (+13%) compared with lead-off leg swimmers (+3%).
Conclusion:
To maximize performance, swimmers should be more conservative in the first lap and avoid unnecessary alterations in race strategy in relay events.
The aim of this study was to examine the importance of the change-over time in swimming relay races. Top-class international 4 x 100 m freestyle races were analysed across a 10-year period including three Olympic Games and five European and World Championships. A total of 220 swimmers (116 female, 104 male) were included in this study with an average participation of 1.7 ± 1.2 races. To consider such repeated measurements and other factors (e.g., ranking in the relay race, position in the relay team) linear mixed models for longitudinal data were used for the statistical evaluation. Our results showed significantly longer change-over times for male medallists (0.23 ± 0.08 s) than non-medallists (0.20 ± 0.09 s) which reflects a very likely effect (94.2%). Furthermore, there were significant differences in change-over times between female and male swimmers depending on the current race positions. In total, the influence of change-over time on the final performance in 4 x 100-m freestyle relay appears to be overrated in previous studies.
In the past, studies and book recommendations on relay starts in swimming have been predominantly focused on the change-over time (COT) as a performance criterion. Aside from the circular backswing start with parallel foot placement, few studies have analysed differences in the take-off movement including step approaches as well. Although trends could be identified, the results remained still somewhat inconclusive. In contrast, no study has examined as has examined whether a reduction of COT in between wall contact of the income swimmer and the take-off of the outgoing swimmer is an optimal relay start strategy, as advocated by various swimming experts. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare two different relay start strategies: offensive strategy minimizing COT and conservative strategy to maximize horizontal peak force (HPF). In this regard, a learning intervention with 24 elite-level swimmers (12 females, 12 male) was conducted to compare both strategies regarding relay start time, HPF and COT. Subjects were randomly assigned to two feedback groups: COT versus HPF at take-off. The results of this study showed a clear advantage for HPF feedback for relay start performance measured by wall contact of the incoming swimmer and head passage at 7.5 m of the outgoing swimmer. In addition, similar reductions in COTs were found in both training groups. In conclusion, swimmers should focus on force production rather than minimizing COT. For the latter, deteriorating consequences for force production must be considered.
The aim of this study was to analyse the significance of various biomechanical parameters in swim start performance for the grab and track start techniques. To do so, structural equation models were analysed, incorporating measurements for the take-off phase, flight phase and entry phase. Forty-six elite German swimmers (18 female and 28 male; age: 20.1 ± 4.2 yrs; PB (100 m Freestyle): 53.6 ± 2.9 s) participated in the study. Their swim start performance was examined within a 25-m sprint test. Structural equation modelling was conducted in separate models for the block time, flight time and water time and in a combined model for swim start time. Our main finding was that swim start time is predominantly related to water time and determined to a lesser extent by block time and flight time. We conclude that more emphasis should be given to the water immersion behaviour and the gliding phase when analysing swim start performance. Furthermore, significant differences were found between the grab start and track techniques as regards the biomechanical parameters representing the take-off phase and water phase.
This study examines the hand and foot reaction force recorded independently while performing the kick-start technique. Eleven male competitive swimmers performed three trials for the kick-start with maximum effort. Three force platforms (main block, backplate and handgrip) were used to measure reaction forces during starting motion. Force impulses from the hands, front foot and rearfoot were calculated via time integration. During the kick-start, the vertical impulse from the front foot was significantly higher than that from the rearfoot and the horizontal impulse from the rearfoot was significantly higher than that from the front foot. The force impulse from the front foot was dominant for generating vertical take-off velocity and the force impulse from the rearfoot was dominant for horizontal take-off velocity. The kick-start’s shorter block time in comparison to prior measurements of the grab start was explained by the development of horizontal reaction force from the hands and the rearfoot at the beginning of the starting motion.
This paperback edition is a reprint of the 2000 edition.
This book provides a comprehensive treatment of linear mixed models for continuous longitudinal data. Next to model formulation, this edition puts major emphasis on exploratory data analysis for all aspects of the model, such as the marginal model, subject-specific profiles, and residual covariance structure. Further, model diagnostics and missing data receive extensive treatment. Sensitivity analysis for incomplete data is given a prominent place. Several variations to the conventional linear mixed model are discussed (a heterogeity model, conditional linear mixed models). This book will be of interest to applied statisticians and biomedical researchers in industry, public health organizations, contract research organizations, and academia. The book is explanatory rather than mathematically rigorous. Most analyses were done with the MIXED procedure of the SAS software package, and many of its features are clearly elucidated. However, some other commercially available packages are discussed as well. Great care has been taken in presenting the data analyses in a software-independent fashion.
Geert Verbeke is Professor in Biostatistics at the Biostatistical Centre of the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium. He is Past President of the Belgian Region of the International Biometric Society, a Board Member of the American Statistical Association, and past Joint Editor of the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A (2005--2008). He is the director of the Leuven Center for Biostatistics and statistical Bioinformatics (L-BioStat), and vice-director of the Interuniversity Institute for Biostatistics and statistical Bioinformatics (I-BioStat), a joint initiative of the Hasselt and Leuven universities in Belgium.
Geert Molenberghs is Professor of Biostatistics at Universiteit Hasselt and Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium. He was Joint Editor of Applied Statistics (2001-2004) and Co-Editor of Biometrics (2007-2009). He was President of the International Biometric Society (2004-2005), and has received the Guy Medal in Bronze from the Royal Statistical Society and the Myrto Lefkopoulou award from the Harvard School of Public Health. He is founding director of the Center for Statistics and also the director of the Interuniversity Institute for Biostatistics and statistical Bioinformatics.
Both authors have received the American Statistical Association's Excellence in Continuing Education Award in 2002, 2004, 2005, and 2008. Both are elected Fellows of the American Statistical Association and elected members of the International Statistical Institute.
Many published papers include large numbers of significance tests. These may be difficult to interpret because if we go on testing long enough we will inevitably find something which is “significant.” We must beware of attaching too much importance to a lone significant result among a mass of non-significant ones. It may be the one in 20 which we expect by chance alone.
Lee et al simulated a clinical trial of the treatment of coronary artery disease by allocating 1073 patient records from past cases into two “treatment” groups at random.1 They then analysed the outcome as if it were a genuine trial of two treatments. The analysis was quite detailed and thorough. As we would expect, it failed to show any significant difference in survival between those patients allocated to the two treatments. Patients were then subdivided by two variables which affect prognosis, the number of diseased coronary vessels and whether the left ventricular contraction pattern was normal or abnormal. A significant difference in survival between the two “treatment” groups was found in those patients with three diseased vessels (the maximum) and abnormal ventricular contraction. As this would be the subset of patients with the worst prognosis, the finding would be easy to account for by saying that the superior “treatment” …
This investigation was conducted to examine the various theories that have been proposed to explain the enhancement of jumping performance when using an arm swing compared to when no arm swing is used. Twenty adult males were asked to perform a series of maximal vertical jumps while using an arm swing and again while holding their arms by their sides. Force, motion and electromyographical data were recorded during each performance. Participants jumped higher (0.086 m) in the arm swing compared to the no-arm swing condition and was due to increased height (28%) and velocity (72%) of the center of mass at take-off. The increased height at take-off was due to the elevation of the arm segments. The increased velocity of take-off stemmed from a complex series of events which allowed the arms to build up energy early in the jump and transfer it to the rest of the body during the later stages of the jump. This energy came from the shoulder and elbow joints as well as from extra work done at the hip. This energy was used to (i) increase the kinetic and potential energy of the arms at take-off, (ii) store and release energy from the muscles and tendons around the ankle, knee and hip joint, and (iii) 'pull' on the body through an upward force acting on the trunk at the shoulder. It was concluded that none of the prevailing theories exclusively explains the enhanced performance in the arm swing jump, but rather the enhanced performance is based on several mechanisms operating together.
Comparison among three types of relay starts in competitive swimming
- T Takeda
- H Takagi
- S Tsubakimoto
- Takeda T.
Takeda, T., Takagi, H., & Tsubakimoto, S. (2010). Comparison among three types of relay starts in
competitive swimming. In P.-L. Kjendlie, R. Stallman, & J. Cabri (Eds.), XIth international
symposium for biomechanics & medicine in swimming (pp. 170-172). Norwegian School of Sport
Science. http://proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=s3h&AN=82876648&site=ehost-live
What are the differences between grab and track start
- T Takeda
- T Nomura
- Takeda T.
Takeda, T., & Nomura, T. (2006). What are the differences between grab and track start. In
A. Marques, F. Alves, & J. Vilas-Boas (Eds.), X international symposium on biomechanics and
medicine in swimming (pp. 102-105). Faculty of Sport, University of Porto.
Effects of handle and block configuration on swim start performance
- P Vint
- S Mclean
- R Hinrichs
- S Riewald
- R Mason
- Vint P.
Vint, P., Mclean, S., Hinrichs, R., Riewald, S., & Mason, R. (2009). Effects of handle and block
configuration on swim start performance. In A. Harrison, R. Anderson, & I. Kenny (Eds.),
XXVII International Conference on Biomechanics in Sports, Limerick, Ireland.
World Aquatics. (2022, October 5). Fina swimming rules 2023-2025. Retrieved 2023 5 October,
from https://www.fina.org/swimming/rules