More on CSS

Today I tested my CSS again.  It's been about five weeks since my last (first also) test, which resulted in me having a CSS pace of 1:29. To get that result, I swam the 400 in 5:49 and the 200 in 2:50. That pace (1:29) was hard to hit, especially in my 200 set of the 1000-800-600-400-200 series.  

So today I reswam it. With faster times. My 400 was in 5:48 and my 200 in 2:42. I assumed this meant my CSS pace would speed up, but after punching my times into the calculator, I got a CSS pace of 1:33. Uh, what?

I wrote to the folks at Swim Smooth, and the head coach Paul Newsome himself wrote me back! The math involved in figuring out CSS is 400-200 / T400-T200, where the 400 and 200 swims are in seconds. Sure enough, when I do the math, my time got slower. The point is, by swimming with your CSS, your 400 should improve faster than your sprint speed. My sprint speed increased more than my distance speed, thus the calculator gave me a slower CSS to work with for the next 6 weeks, in hopes that my 400 time would improve more than my sprint speed.

At least, that's how I understood Paul's email. And I think he is right. All these weeks I've been doing this set, I've never made the 200 on time:

1000 at 16:30

800 at 12:54

600 at 9:30

400 at 6:12

200 at 3:02

So now, with a new CSS, this set will look like this:

1000 at 17:10

800 at 13:28

600 at 9:54

400 at 6:28

200 at 3:10

So, that is what I'll swim on Wednesday. 

Comments

[Katie]

Interesting. The other way he mentions for coming up with your CSS pace is to to use a 1500m race pace. Do you have a recent 1500m time? If so, how does it compare to your CSS pace(s)?

[IronMike]

I don't have a recent 1500 time, but I did an 1800 yesterday in 28:54. What does he say about the 1500 with respect to CSS?