When I think about my own experiences with triathlon swimming, I’m generally focused on two things. This includes a) not getting kicked in the face, and b) not starting out too fast because I don’t want to get out of breath mid-swim and start floundering around. Looks like I may need to re-evaluate my second approach if I want to improve my overall short distance tri times though.
Well, not the getting out of breath and floundering around part. I still want to avoid that.
I’m talking about re-evaluating my “not starting out too fast” approach. A recent study examined three different swim pace strategies on sprint distance triathlon times. These are the three types of swim pace you might encounter in triathlon swimming:
- Positive swim pacing = speed starts faster and gradually gets slower
- Even swim pacing = same speed throughout
- Negative swim pacing = speed starts slower and gradually gets faster
The study, published in 2016, included nine competitive male triathletes. The researchers had the athletes complete three different sprint distance triathlons. Each time, the athlete used one of the three swim pace strategies mentioned above.
Turns out the positive pacing strategy – starting faster in the swim and then fading to a slower crawl towards the finish of that leg – led to faster cycling and overall triathlon times compared to the even or negative pacing strategies. This approach also resulted in lower perceived exertion. This could be due to the end of the swim feeling easier compared to the negative or even approach, since the pace at the end of those would be faster comparatively at that point in time.
This was the first study that actually randomized athletes to these different triathlon swim approaches, so even though the study group was very small – I find the research really interesting. Other research on Olympic distance triathletes have found some observational results that appear to support this. For example, 2009 study looked at elite male and female triathletes in a World Cup Olympic distance competition. Both genders were found to use similar a similar positive swim pace strategy in the swim leg. And in another study looking at Olympic distance racers, position in the first 200 m of the swim was correlated with swim outcome and proximity to the leader. These had some correlations to overall performance as well.
This goes against some of the traditional wisdom that you don’t want to start too hard and run out of gas too early. But with the excitement of the race start, you may be fine to start hard with some of that extra adrenaline and then settle down into a more comfortable pace mid-way through. If this approach worked the way it did in the study above, you might feel more energized as you cross the swim finish and venture into the rest of the sprint distance triathlon ready to push yourself.
Of course, a few small studies don’t give definitive results. This certainly isn’t the be all and end all of triathlon swimming strategy advice. However, it’s something you can test out and consider if it would work for you.
Share with me: How do you approach triathlon swimming? Do you have a swim pace strategy? Or do you just get out there and do what feels right?
Chrissy Carroll
Latest posts by Chrissy Carroll (see all)
- 10 Insanely Good Holiday Peanut Butter Treats - December 9, 2019
- Free Goal Setting Worksheets (Perfect for New Year’s Resolutions) - December 7, 2019
- Armored Fitness XPO Trainer 2 Review + Four Sled Workouts! - December 3, 2019
I usually swim at a pace, that feels best for me! Sometimes I start fast, and gradually slow down, and do intervals. It depends what me energy levels are. This is awesome to learn about though, thank you for sharing!
Sure thing Abbey! I don’t personally pay too much attention to my pace, but found this research really interesting to possibly try to implement in my training / my athletes’ training.
I don’t know much about swimming, but I always like to “negative split” when it comes to running! I always feel better finishing on a high note!
Yes, I know most people love negative splits in running! I think possibly the difference with tri here is that you still need to conserve the energy for the bike & run portions, so if you can possibly end on a lower RPE on the swim by using positive pacing – you may feel better for the rest of the event. Speculation of course given it’s only a little research, but still interesting!
As a non-triathlete, I didn’t know there were so many approaches to swim training!
Even as a triathlete, I’m always surprised at all the different approaches to all three disciplines.
Interesting that positive pacing gave better results. In running, I try to negative split – I like to know I can go faster later in the race.
that’s interesting! I’m more of a slow start then strong finish!
I’ve never done a triathlon, in fact I can barely swim to save my life. But, based on my other forms of training I’d say for me starting out fast and ending slow would probably work best for me…. sadly I may never know for sure!
I’ve never heard of positive pacing before, but I guess it makes sense since its pretty much the opposite of negative splits in running. Now that I know there’s a name for it, I had a positive split on my run yesterday!
I found your post very interesting! I’ve always heard people say that starting too hard will lose your energy soon at the end. I think your idea makes a sense. Thanks a lot for sharing!
That’s what a lot of us traditionally think, so I found this research really interesting!
It’s so difficult to correct … your arms are still in front of you when you crossover in swimming. The crossover effect is that you direct your energy diagonally instead of the direction you really want to go! But somehow I still stuck with this.
I prefer slow start and hard finish. I try to control my energy at the beginning. I used to spend most of energy at the start. I found it is not healthy and enjoyable at all.
That’s how I’ve traditionally swam, but I’m going to try the positive pacing approach instead given this research to see if it makes a difference for me.