Effect of an 8-week technical tethered swimming program on front crawl kinematics in adolescent swimmers

Effect of an 8-week technical tethered swimming program on front crawl kinematics in adolescent swimmers | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Effect of an 8-week technical tethered swimming program on front crawl kinematics in adolescent swimmers Maciej Skorulski, Szymon Kuliś, Jan Gajewski This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7079764/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 07 Nov, 2025 Read the published version in Scientific Reports → Version 1 posted 10 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The aim of this study was to assess the effect of long-term use of technical tethered swimming on kinematics of crawl swimming, and sport performance. The experiment was attended by 19 girls (age 13.18 ± 0.66 years; body height 163.6 ± 5.2 cm; body weight 50.8 ± 4.42 kg; body fat 20.5% ± 2.0%) and 20 boys (age 13.33 ± 0.60 years; body height 167.8 ± 8.76 cm; body weight 52.46 ± 8.8 kg; body fat 14.1% ± 2.3%). The participants were randomly assigned to two groups. The experimental group received additional technical tethered swimming protocol. At this time, the control group performed standard technical training in free swimming. The study included an 8-week training cycle. Changes in swimming technique were assessed using a device equipped with a triaxial gyroscope and a triaxial accelerometer, with a particular focus on body roll and yaw movements of the athletes. Significant changes were observed in the variables describing yaw, and body roll movements. The study showed that a training protocol involving technical tethered swimming can positively affect front crawl kinematics in adolescent athletes when applied over the long term. Health sciences/Health care Biological sciences/Physiology Swimming Humans Biomechanical Phenomena Physical Exertion Figures Figure 1 Introduction The concept of tethered swimming (TS) was pioneered by Magel ( 1970 ). Tethered swimming has been recognized as one of the most specific methods for simulating ergometer swimming (Filho & Denadai, 2008 ), due to the similarity of movement in interaction with the environment (Crowley et al., 2017 ), cycle mechanics (Sokołowski et al., 2022 ) and physiological aspects (Psycharakis et al., 2024 ). In addition, it is a method commonly used to measure thrust (Bujak et al., 2025 ; Stachowicz & Milde, 2023a ), and as a training tool to help develop physical abilities such as strength and power (Gonjo et al., 2020 ). Although it is often emphasized in the scientific literature that the technique of tethered swimming is significantly different from that of free swimming, few comparative studies on the subject have been conducted to date (Franken et al., 2024 ). These differences particularly relate to the mechanics of movement and the drag forces generated (Amaro et al., 2017 ). Tethered swimming was introduced not only as a measurement method but also as a swimming training method (Stachowicz & Milde, 2023b ). There are two main methods used in competitive swimming training using tethered swimming. The first is tethered swimming, which limits progressive movement and allows for almost static power training. The second method involves tethered swimming with inertial loading, which allows the athlete to move in a controlled manner, enabling a more dynamic replication of free swimming conditions (semi-tethered swimming) (Cortesi et al., 2024 ). These take the form of resistance training, understood as that type of exercise that requires an impact against an opposing force usually generated by some type of training device. Such training aims to increase strength, power (Fleck & Kraemer, 2014). Maglischo and Maglischo ( 1984 ) in their comparative study analysed the effects of tethered swimming and free swimming. The study included an analysis of swimmers performing a series of sprints with additional resistance to assess the effects of this method on the strength and performance parameters of swimmers. The researchers suggested that the technical changes observed during high-intensity tethered swimming may negatively affect technique. In another study, semi-tethered swimming was performed using a specially adapted Smith machine. This method is mainly used to perform high intensity tests or to assess swimmers' skills (Cuenca Fernández et al., 2020 ). Olbrecht ( 2015 ) described two types of technical training: type I – training aimed at improving or teaching a new movement pattern; and type II – described as training swim drills aimed at automating the correct movement cycle at starting speed. Type I technical training should be planned at the beginning of the training session (after the warm-up), there should be a long break between exercises for a full rest, the working time should be short and the intensity low. Type II exercises, on the other hand, aim to ‘automate the movement’. The volume and distance of the repetitions should be progressively longer, the rests shorter and the intensity higher, and the exercise itself should reflect racing conditions as much as possible. The tethered training methods described in the literature do not fall under technical training, as they are not performed at low intensity, do not aim to improve or teach an appropriate movement pattern (type I) and do not reflect racing conditions (type II). They do, however, fall within resistance training and are described as such in the literature (Muniz-Pardos et al., 2019 ). Practices based on exercises use the part method of teaching movement. They are used by coaches in various sports. They help correct technique and learn new skills. Still, there are doubts about whether the skills learned in such exercises effectively replicate key information and movement requirements in the target environment (Barris et al., 2013 ; Pinder et al., 2011 ; Seifert et al., 2013 ). An example of this would be single-arm crawl swimming, with the resting arm held close to the body. The purpose of this exercise is to allow athletes to focus on coordinating their breathing and improving their body position (Arellano et al., 2010 ; Lucero, 2015 ). However, there is no empirical evidence to demonstrate that these exercises affect the improvement of body alignment, breathing coordination or athletic performance. Instead, it is argued that the whole method may better facilitate learning for the repetitive and continuous movements that occur in swimming (Fontana et al., 2009 ). There seems to be a belief among coaches that tethered swimming has a positive effect on swimming technique. Compared to the other described uses of TS, the exercises performed for this purpose are characterized by low intensity and focus on stability of the arm and trunk during the active phase of the arms. For the purposes of this study, this type of use of tethering has been termed technical tethered swimming (TTS). The observations of Maglischo and Maglischo ( 1984 ) were used as theoretical confirmation of the assumptions. It was observed that athletes tended to move their arms in a smaller arc during tethered swimming and took longer to perform the arm movement. Samson et al. ( 2019 ) observed less medial-lateral arm movement during tethered swimming compared to free swimming. This raises the question of whether technical tethered swimming has real benefits as a training tool using a holistic method of teaching movement. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of long-term use of technical tethered swimming on kinematics of crawl swimming, and sport performance. Material and methods Participants Nineteen girls (age 13.18 ± 0.66 years; body height 163.6 ± 5.2 cm; body weight 50.8 ± 4.42 kg; body fat 20.5% ± 2.0%) and 20 boys (age 13.33 ± 0.60 years; body height 167.8 ± 8.76 cm; body weight 52.46 ± 8.8 kg; body fat 14.1% ± 2.3%) participated in the study. All subjects were athletes of a local sports club. Inclusion conditions were a calendar age of 12–13 years and at least two years of training experience. Athletes with injuries were excluded from the study. The study was approved by the Senate Committee on Research Ethics of the Józef Piłsudski Academy of Physical Education in Warsaw (SKE 01–31/2023). All procedures involving human participants were performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations, and in adherence to the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from all participants and, due to the age of the subjects, from their parents or legal guardians. Participants and their legal guardians were fully informed about the nature, purpose, and course of the study, including any potential risks or benefits associated with participation. Procedure The study participants were randomly divided into two groups, in each maintaining gender parity. Randomization was performed using an Excel function. In the experimental group (EG), additional tethered technical training was introduced. At this time, the control group (CG) performed standard technical training in free swimming. The study included an 8-week training cycle. Additional technical tether swimming was performed once a week and lasted 45 min. It included the following training procedure: 6x 10 tethered swimming crawl cycles with 10ʹʹ rest, 1x 150 crawl snorkel crawl swimming. The athletes performed technical training in a tether with a snorkel to facilitate breathing. Free swimming was also performed with a snorkel to standardize training methods. The main objectives of performing this task were: 1. Focusing on the length of the stroke. 2. Slow execution of movements. 3. Stabilizing the trunk by reducing lateral arm movement. 4. Comfortable work (intensity below aerobic threshold). At the same time, the control group (CG) performed technical training for crawl, following an identical schedule and technical guidelines as the experimental group (EG), and it concluded with a trending procedure: 45 min (x50 rest 10ʹʹ-20ʹʹ) 1. One-arm crawl 2. Catch-up stroke drill 3. One-arm alternate catch-up 4. Crawl Both workouts were instructed and coordinated by two experienced swimming coaches (level I – certified by Polish National Swimming Association). Before and after the split, the whole group performed the same swimming training together. The split was only introduced during the 45 min of training described above. Pre-test and post-test included: 1. Measurement of height and weight. 2. Measurement of the time taken to swim a distance of 50 m in crawl at maximum speed while measuring acceleration using an accelerometer placed on the back of the pelvic girdle. A number of variables were measured in 3 major body movements: - Translational motion – represented by averaged acceleration along the vertical axis. - Body roll (rotational movements around the vertical axis of the body) – recorded by velocities around the vertical axis. - Yaw rotation (rotational movements around the sagittal axis) recorded by angular velocities around the sagittal axis and accelerations along the transverse axis. The analysis presents the most relevant variables, whose values are averaged. The most relevant variables were selected for analysis, and the values presented were averaged. From the recorded data, average numerical values of the swimming cycle were calculated, including arithmetic means and standard deviations for relative time (relative to cycle duration), all measured from the beginning of the cycle. These calculations were performed using STA1v0 software (Zbigniew Staniak, Institute of Sport – National Research Institute, Poland). The following components were measured and analysed: av max – vertical acceleration during propulsion, ω max R – angular velocity around the vertical axis in rolling movements, ω max Y – angular velocity around the sagittal axis in yaw movements, and A max R – maximum angle of pelvic tilt around the vertical axis during rotational movements. The data were analysed separately for movements involving the left upper limb (Left) and right upper limb (Right), as well as for the first lap (I25) and the second lap (II25). The measurements took place in a 25 m pool. The athletes started from the water (without a starting dive). They swam the 25 m crawl, did the standard freestyle turnaround and swam the second lap of the 50 m distance. The subjects were asked to complete the task in the shortest possible time. Before starting the swim, they performed a start warm-up consisting of a 1200 m swim as detailed by Skorulski et al. (Skorulski et al., 2025). Research instruments For each swimmer, the individual characteristics of the kinematics of average hip movement during the first and second halves of the pool were determined. A recorder (REJ62g by JD Jarosław Doliński, Poland) was used to track changes in speed and acceleration. The device contained a triaxial gyroscope and triaxial accelerometer (65x50x30 mm, 95 g). It was placed in a foam cover to minimise hydrodynamic drag and provide stability in the swimmer's lower back, near the pelvic girdle. The centre of the recorder was aligned at the base of the sacrum. A special two-part belt was used to secure it: a non-elastic rope attached the recorder, while an elastic band was placed on the swimmer's lower abdomen (Fig. 1). Measurements were taken at a sampling frequency of 200 Hz, with acceleration measured within a range of ± 2 g. The signal underwent analogue low-pass filtering at a cutoff frequency of 93 Hz. To measure angular velocity during rotation, a range of ± 500 deg·s − 1 was used. The accuracy of acceleration measurements was verified statically against ground acceleration, with an absolute error of ± 0.2 m·s − 2 . The precision of angular velocity readings was checked indirectly by measuring and calculating the recorder’s rotation angle within a 90-degree range around each axis. The absolute error for angle calculation was ± 1 degree, and for angular velocity, it was ± 0.6 deg·s − 1 . The recorded waveforms were smoothed using a four-pole low-pass Butterworth filter with a cutoff frequency of 20 Hz. This frequency was selected to ensure that the calculated amplitude of motion speed would not decrease by more than 0.5% as a result of filtering, while keeping important acceleration waveform points for movement analysis clearly visible. Body weight and composition were measured using a Tanita BC-545N scale (Tanita Corporation, Tokyo, Japan). A tether with a force meter (ZPS5-BTU1kN, Staniak, Poland) recorded the pulling force at 100 Hz and sent the data to a computer program for further analysis (MAX6v0M software, Poland). During training, the test subjects were monitored using Polar Verity sense sensors, which allow real-time measurement of heart rate using Polar Team software. After a task, each athlete was asked to rate the task using the Children's OMNI Scale of Perceived Exertion (OMNI) (Robertson et al., 2000). Heart rate and fatigue levels were monitored by experienced swim coaches using the PolarTeam app and Variety Sense sensors. The aim of the training was to keep the heart rate below 150 HR (bpm). The athletes had already been introduced to the OMNI scale and to working with heart rate sensors. Test subjects performing tethered technical swimming were subjected to pulling force measurements during technical work to determine the maximum force with which they performed the technical task. A tether with a force meter (ZPS5-BTU1kN, Staniak, Poland) recorded the pulling force at 100 Hz and sent the data to a computer program for further analysis (MAX6v0M software, Poland). Test subjects performing technical tethered swimming were subjected to a thrust measurement during technical work to determine the maximum force with which they performed the technical task. Training volume and intensity The training was designed and performed by the trainers in charge of the study training group. The structure of the training used is shown in Table 1. ****INSERT TABLE 1. Statistical analysis Statistical analyses were carried out using STATISTICA software, version 13.1 (TIBCO Software Inc., 2017). The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to verify the normality of data distribution, with a p-value greater than 0.20 indicating a normal distribution. All examined variables met the assumption of normality. To assess differences in means, a repeated measures ANOVA (general linear model) was used. The analysis included three within-subject factors: MEASUREMENT (pretest, posttest), LAP (first, second), and SIDE (left, right), while GROUP (experimental, control) was treated as a between-subject factor. Post-hoc analyses were conducted using Fisher’s least significant difference (LSD) test. Statistical significance was set at the level of α = 0.05. Data were reported as means ± standard deviations and accompanied by 95% confidence intervals. Effect sizes were estimated using partial eta squared. Results Of all the measured speed and acceleration variables, those that showed the most significant differences or interactions were selected and are described in the following section. Detailed changes in velocity and acceleration are given in Table 2. ***** INSERT TABLE 2. Yaw rotation Significant changes were observed in the variables describing yaw movements (yaw). Maximum acceleration in the direction of the transverse axis (ab max ) decreased in the experimental group while an increase in this variable was observed in the control group (interaction GROUP x MEASUREMENT: F 1,37 = 7.89, p = 0.008, η² = 0.18). At the same time, there were no significant differences between the groups in the time needed to achieve the abmax (Time_ab max ). The post-hoc test (GROUP × MEASUREMENT) for the ab max variable showed a significant difference (p = 0.035) in the experimental group between measurements before and after the application of technical tethered swimming. In addition, post-hoc analysis for the MEASUREMENT × GROUP × SIDE interaction for the variable ω max Y showed a significant difference (p = 0.024) in the experimental group after the application of tethered technical swimming during the active phase of the left arm. A significant difference (p = 0.024) was also observed between the experimental and control groups after the training intervention, in the value of ω max Y during the active phase of the left arm. The study showed an interaction (GROUP × MEASUREMENT × SIDE: F1,37 = 4.15, p = 0.048, η² = 0.10) in maximum angular velocity around the vertical axis (ω max Y). Post-hoc analysis for the MEASUREMENT × GROUP × SIDE interaction showed a significant difference (p = 0.024) in the value of ω max Y during the active phase of the left arm in the experimental group after the application of tethered technical swimming. For the same interaction, a significant difference (p = 0.024) was observed between the experimental group and the control group after the training intervention, in the value of ω max Y during the active phase of the left arm. No significant differences were observed between the CG and EG in ω max Y during the active phase of the right arm and in the time required to reach ω max Y (Time_ω max Y). Body roll In the study, a significant MEASUREMENT × GROUP interaction (F 1,37 = 5.48, p = 0.025, η² = 0.13) indicated that the groups reacted differently to the intervention in the maximum pelvic angle about the vertical axis (A max R). The study showed a significant interaction (MEASUREMENT × GROUP x SIDE: F 1,37 = 5.57, p = 0.024, η² = 0.13) in the maximum angular velocity around the vertical axis (ω max R). The post-hoc test (MEASUREMENT × GROUP × SIDE) showed a difference (p = 0.008) in ω max R during the active phase of the left arm in the experimental group after the application of technical tethered swimming. Training control During the technical tethered swimming (TTS) series, the subjects in the experimental group achieved an average of 48.8 ± 12.45 N, scoring 1.5 ± 0.51 on the OMNI scale, while the control group scored technical training in free swimming at 1.36 ± 0.49 on the same scale. The Mann-Whitney U test showed no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.49). Discussion The results of the study showed no significant differences in the time for swimming 50 meters crawl after an 8-week training cycle in either the experimental group (EG) or the control group (CG). The lack of change in time results suggests that the time achieved over this distance alone is not directly dependent on the training used. Although technique-related parameters changed, they did not translate into a change in athletic performance. The lack of time results may be due to the complexity of the training process. The periodization of the training was not intended as a pretest and posttest. The timing of the training intervention was selected to allow for an uninterrupted 8-week training cycle. Breaks in training were determined by the school calendar. As a result, participants were not at optimal readiness for competition. Yaw rotation The use of accelerometers placed on the athletes' backs provides a modern tool to accurately analyse yaw movements (Staniak et al., 2018 ). The basis for the analysis of these movements is the angular velocity about the sagittal axis. An auxiliary variable in the description of yaw movements is the acceleration about the transverse axis, which describes the dynamic changes in the transverse movement of the body. Bächlin & Tröster ( 2012 ) stated that acceleration is only one element that influences yaw analysis. They also demonstrated that elite swimmers had more controlled and less variable yaw movements than less experienced swimmers, and that high yaw stability helped to maintain a faster swimming pace with fewer arm cycles. To describe the dynamics of yaw movements in detail, two additional variables were used: the time needed to reach maximum angular velocity, and the time needed to reach maximum acceleration in the transverse axis direction. In the study, significant changes in variables describing yaw movements were observed. Acceleration in the transverse axis direction (ab max ) decreased in the EG after technical tethered swimming by 4% in the first length during the active phase of the left arm (I25Left) and 10% during the active phase of the right arm (I25Right), and decreased by 7% in the second length during the active phase of the left arm (II25Left) and 6% during the active phase of the right arm (II25Right). A decrease of this value indicates improved trunk stabilization. Athletes swam more economically, by lowering the force needed to overcome water resistance in lateral movements. At the same time, the study showed significant differences between the groups in the maximum angular velocity around the sagittal axis (ω max Y) during the active phase of the left arm. In the EG, a decrease of 5.7% was observed in I25Left and II25Left. In contrast, an increase of 7.8% in I25Left and 6.0% in II25Left was observed in the CG. These changes indicate that technical tethered swimming (TTS) may have helped participants to improve control of body rotation, but the lack of significant difference in the active phase of the right arm suggests that these changes are asymmetrical and mainly involve movements during the active phase of the left arm, which may be related to the respiratory phase. As we know from research, athletes prefer a unilateral breathing phase, especially during maximal efforts (87% of those surveyed were right-handed) (Barden & Barber, 2022 ; Seifert et al., 2005 ). A decrease in ab max with a simultaneous decrease in ωmaxY may be indicative of a more stable body position in the water, which reduces energy loss due to excessive lateral movements, after application of TTS. Body roll Based on the findings of a computer simulation study, the authors suggested that body rotation about the vertical axis can have a significant effect on hand trajectory, promote the development of propulsive forces and therefore improve swimming performance (Psycharakis & Sanders, 2010 ). In the literature, angular velocity and maximum pelvic angle around the vertical axis are used to describe body roll (He & Cheng, 2022 ; Lee et al., 2008 ). The description was extended with variables describing the time required to reach the maximum angular velocity around the vertical axis. This variable enriches the analysis with the dynamics of the swimmer's movement. The study revealed a significant difference between groups in the maximum angle of pelvic roll relative to the vertical axis (A max R). A max R in the EG decreased by 5.9% in I25Left, 3.4% in I25Right, 3.7% in II25Left and 2.2% in II25Right, while increasing by 4.0% in I23Left, 5.9% in I25Right, 3.8% in II25Left and 4.8% in II25Right in CG. A reduction in this value may indicate better stabilization, reduced water resistance and increased efficiency. We know from research that hip rotation is inversely correlated with swimming speed (Andersen et al., 2020 ), which has a positive effect on improving sports performance. There was a significant increase in the value of ω max R in the CG of 4.29% in I25Left and 1.24% in II25Left, and a decrease in the value of this variable in the EG of 6.0% in I25Left and II25Left. The significant differences observed between the groups in movements during active left arm work suggest better trunk stabilization. The less effective stabilization is probably caused by the unilateral breathing phase in the athletes. Conclusion As we know from research (Skorulski et al., 2025 ), during long maximal efforts, numerous adverse changes in swimming technique occur in adolescent athletes. Based on the literature (He & Cheng, 2022 ; Lee et al., 2008 ; Psycharakis & Sanders, 2010 ), it can be concluded that the changes observed after the application of the training protocol with technical tethered swimming (TTS) are positive. Nevertheless, they did not significantly improve the sports result in relation to the group performing technical training in free swimming. However, this may be related to the training loads applied before the end of the experiment according to the training periodization (Table 1). The changes observed during the active phase of the left arm are likely to be the result of a correction in the technical errors acquired during the earlier training process that occur under the influence of non-unilateral breathing in athletes. It is probable that after using technical tethered swimming (TTS), the athletes made better use of the arm pull during the breathing phase by making smaller yaw movements. The changes observed during tethered technical training can improve swimming performance and reduce hydrodynamic drag (He & Cheng, 2022 ), even if they are not immediately apparent in improved athletic performance. This suggests that TTS can be a valuable part of a training programme. The method helps permanently correct technical errors and improves swimming mechanics. It bases exercises on a whole-movement teaching practice. Training based on whole movement teaching practice tends to promote greater improvements in executive functions. This may result from the need for integrated planning and precise temporal coordination required to perform entire motor sequences, which are less emphasized in part-based practice (Richter et al., 2024 ). The performance of TTS exercises is characterized by low intensity, comparable to the intensity performed during technical exercises in free swimming. It is worth considering in the future whether extending the time of such training in the training microcycle can significantly improve athletic performance. It is also important to study how TTS affects swimming technique in the short term, for example when used as part of a swimming warm-up. In addition, the impact of this method on kinematics and athletic performance in other swimming styles would need to be assessed. Understanding these relationships can help to better match training methods to individual players' needs and maximize their potential. Declarations Funding This research was funded by the Polish Ministry of Education and Science in the years 2023–2024 under the University Research Project no. 3 at Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw, Poland: “Postural assessment and accelerometric characterisation of movement technique in selected sports disciplines.” References Amaro, N. M., Morouço, P. G., Marques, M. C., Fernandes, R. J., & Marinho, D. A. (2017). Biomechanical and bioenergetical evaluation of swimmers using fully-tethered swimming: A qualitative review . https://rua.ua.es/dspace/handle/10045/71966 Andersen, J. T., Sinclair, P. J., McCabe, C. B., & Sanders, R. H. (2020). Kinematic Differences in Shoulder Roll and Hip Roll at Different Front Crawl Speeds in National Level Swimmers. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research , 34 (1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000003281 Arellano, R., Domínguez-Castells, R., Perez-Infantes, E., & Sánchez, E. (2010). Effect of stroke drills on intra-cycle hip velocity in front crawl. Proceedings of the Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimming XI , 45–47. Bächlin, M., & Tröster, G. (2012). Swimming performance and technique evaluation with wearable acceleration sensors. Pervasive and Mobile Computing , 8 (1), 68–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmcj.2011.05.003 Barden, J. M., & Barber, M. V. (2022). The Effect of Breathing Laterality on Hip Roll Kinematics in Submaximal Front Crawl Swimming. Sensors , 22 (6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22062324 Barris, S., Farrow, D., & Davids, K. (2013). Do the kinematics of a baulked take-off in springboard diving differ from those of a completed dive. Journal of Sports Sciences , 31 (3), 305–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2012.733018 Bujak, P., Rogowska, P., & Zarzeczny, R. (2025). Correlations between peripubertal male swimmers’ results of short-distance swimming tests and land-based sprint and endurance tests. Biomedical Human Kinetics , 17 (1), 68–77. https://doi.org/10.2478/bhk-2025-0007 Cortesi, M., Gatta, G., Carmigniani, R., & Zamparo, P. (2024). Estimating active drag based on full and semi-tethered swimming tests. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine , 23 (1), 17. Crowley, E., Harrison, A. J., & Lyons, M. (2017). The Impact of Resistance Training on Swimming Performance: A Systematic Review. Sports Medicine , 47 (11), 2285–2307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0730-2 Cuenca Fernández, F., Gay Párraga, A., Ruiz Navarro, J. J., & Arellano Colomina, R. (2020). The effect of different loads on semi-tethered swimming and its relationship with dry-land performance variables . https://digibug.ugr.es/handle/10481/62642 DM Filho, P., & Denadai, B. S. (2008). Mathematical basis for modeling swimmer power output in the front crawl tethered swimming: An application to aerobic evaluation . https://benthamopen.com/ABSTRACT/TOSSJ-1-31 Fleck, S. J., & Kraemer, W. (2014). Designing resistance training programs, 4E . Human Kinetics. https://books.google.com/books?hl=pl&lr=&id=CczZAgAAQBA J&oi=fnd&pg=PR1&dq= Designing+Resistance+Training+Programs,+fleck+ 2016&ots=kA1yavecdV&sig=XZHxgEM1X_fRTs8aG1ZXc-D-cAE Fontana, F. E., FurtadoJr., O., Mazzardo, O., & Gallagher, J. D. (2009). Whole and Part Practice: A Meta-Analysis. Perceptual and Motor Skills , 109 (2), 517–530. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.109.2.517-530 Franken, M., De Jesus, K., De Jesus, K., & De Souza Castro, F. A. (2024). Variables and protocols of the tethered swimming method: A systematic review. Sport Sciences for Health , 20 (2), 535–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11332-023-01140-1 Gonjo, T., Narita, K., McCabe, C., Fernandes, R. J., Vilas-Boas, J. P., Takagi, H., & Sanders, R. (2020). Front Crawl Is More Efficient and Has Smaller Active Drag Than Backstroke Swimming: Kinematic and Kinetic Comparison Between the Two Techniques at the Same Swimming Speeds. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology , 8 , 570657. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.570657 He, Q., & Cheng, Y. (2022). Research Progress on the Characteristics of Body Roll in Swimming. HBDSS 2022; 2nd International Conference on Health Big Data and Smart Sports , 1–5. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/10104254 Kimura, T., Ohba, M., & Shionoya, A. (2013). Construction of a multiple-regression model for estimating the force in tethered swimming, and power in semi-tethered swimming for males. Procedia Engineering , 60 , 275–280. Lee, J., Mellifont, R., Winstanley, J., & Burkett, B. (2008). Body Roll in Simulated Freestyle Swimming. International Journal of Sports Medicine , 29 (7), 569–573. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-989285 Loturco, I., Barbosa, A., Nocentini, R., Pereira, L., Kobal, R., Kitamura, K., Abad, C., Figueiredo, P., & Nakamura, F. (2015). A Correlational Analysis of Tethered Swimming, Swim Sprint Performance and Dry-land Power Assessments. International Journal of Sports Medicine , 37 (03), 211–218. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1559694 Lucero, B. (2015). The 100 Best Swimming Drills . Meyer & Meyer Verlag. Magel, J. R. (1970). Propelling Force Measured during Tethered Swimming in the Four Competitive Swimming Styles. Research Quarterly. American Association for Health, Physical Education and Recreation , 41 (1), 68–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/10671188.1970.10614948 Maglischo, C. W., & Maglischo, E. W. (1984). Tethered and nontethered crawl swimming. ISBS-Conference Proceedings Archive . https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/1416 Muniz-Pardos, B., Gomez-Bruton, A., Matute-Llorente, A., Gonzalez-Aguero, A., Gomez-Cabello, A., Gonzalo-Skok, O., Casajus, J. A., & Vicente-Rodriguez, G. (2019). Swim-Specific Resistance Training: A Systematic Review. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research , 33 (10), 2875. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000003256 Olbrecht, J. (2015). The science of winning: Planning, periodizing and optimizing swim training . F&G Partners. Pinder, R. A., Davids, K., Renshaw, I., & Araújo, D. (2011). Representative learning design and functionality of research and practice in sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 33 (1), 146–155. Psycharakis, S. G., & Sanders, R. H. (2010). Body roll in swimming: A review. Journal of Sports Sciences , 28 (3), 229–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410903508847 Psycharakis, S. G., Soultanakis, H., González Ravé, J. M., & Paradisis, G. P. (2024). Force production during maximal front crawl tethered swimming: Exploring bilateral asymmetries and differences between breathing and non-breathing conditions. Sports Biomechanics , 23 (6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2021.1891277 Richter, M. J., Ali, H., & Immink, M. A. (2024). Enhancing Executive Function in Children and Adolescents Through Motor Learning: A Systematic Review. Journal of Motor Learning and Development , 13 (1), 59–108. https://doi.org/10.1123/jmld.2024-0038 ROBERTSON, R. J., GOSS, F. L., BOER, N. F., PEOPLES, J. A., FOREMAN, A. J., DABAYEBEH, I. M., MILLICH, N. B., Balasekaran, G., RIECHMAN, S. E., & GALLAGHER, J. D. (2000). Children’s OMNI scale of perceived exertion: Mixed gender and race validation. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise , 32 (2), 452. Samson, M., Monnet, T., Bernard, A., Lacouture, P., & David, L. (2019). Comparative study between fully tethered and free swimming at different paces of swimming in front crawl. Sports Biomechanics , 18 (6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2018.1443492 Seifert, L., Button, C., & Davids, K. (2013). Key Properties of Expert Movement Systems in Sport: An Ecological Dynamics Perspective. Sports Medicine , 43 (3), 167–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-012-0011-z Seifert, L., Chollet, D., & Allard, P. (2005). Arm coordination symmetry and breathing effect in front crawl. Human Movement Science , 24 (2), 234–256. Skorulski, M., Stachowicz, M., Kuliś, S., & Gajewski, J. (2025). Accelerometric assessment of fatigue-induced changes in swimming technique in high performance adolescent athletes. Scientific Reports , 15 (1), 2409. Sokołowski, K., Bartolomeu, R. F., Barbosa, T. M., & Strzała, M. (2022). V˙ O 2 kinetics and tethered strength influence the 200-m front crawl stroke kinematics and speed in young male swimmers. Frontiers in Physiology , 13 , 1045178. Stachowicz, M., & Milde, K. (2023a). Changes in thrust force in swimmers in the annual training cycle. Biomedical Human Kinetics , 15 (1), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.2478/bhk-2023-0019 Stachowicz, M., & Milde, K. (2023b). Changes in thrust force in swimmers in the annual training cycle. Biomedical Human Kinetics , 15 (1), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.2478/bhk-2023-0019 Staniak, Z., Buśko, K., Górski, M., & Pastuszak, A. (2018). Accelerometer profile of motion of the pelvic girdle in butterfly swimming. Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics , 20 (1), 159–167. Tables Table 1. Training volume completed by the control group, expressed as swimming distance (m), in the successive weeks of the experiment by designated training task Week Total[m] REC[m] AEC1[m] AEC2[m] AEP[m] ANP[m] ANC[m] SP[m] 1 22170 6950 13600 0 0 0 600 1020 2 33070 19920 12850 0 0 0 300 0 3 29950 17500 11950 0 0 0 500 0 4 27450 11100 11600 3000 0 300 600 850 5 22850 13150 6500 0 2600 0 600 0 6 32300 12050 17400 2000 0 0 0 850 7 21050 18500 2000 0 0 550 0 0 8 29280 13610 11400 2000 0 500 720 1050 Table 1. REC – swim sets included warm up, cool down, kicking, pulling, and drill sets; AEC1 (aerobic capacity type 1) – swim set included swimming up to 30 min in one style, high volume, low intensity, and short rest. AEC2 (aerobic capacity type 2) – combination of short, intensive repetitions with AEC1; AEP (aerobic power) – included swimming sets with high intensity work, short rest, competitions of 200 m and more; ANP (anaerobic power) – swimming sets included extremely hard efforts with short rest, competitions up to 100 m. ANC (anaerobic capacity) – included short interval (25-50 m), long rest, very high to maximal intensity; SP (sprint sets) – very short sets ( <10 s) with maximal velocity, and very long rest. Table 2. Mean ± standard deviation (SD) of the analyzed acceleration components during the first and second lengths of the pool, measured before and after the 8-week training cycle in the experimental group (technical tethered swimming) and the control group. Variables Side Control group Experimental group I25 II25 I25 II25 PreTest PostTest PreTest PostTest PreTest PostTest PreTest PostTest ω max R Left 217.0 ± 40.3 226.7 ± 47.8 233.6 ± 49.3 236.51 ± 43.2 241.6 ± 45.4 228.0 ± 49.0 253.3 ± 45.2 240.0 ± 46.6 Right 237.6 ± 51.1 229.1 ± 47.8 241.9 ± 43.6 230.7 ± 43.0 244.8 ± 54.6 233.0 ± 56.5 246.9 ± 50.1 244.6 ± 44.4 Time_ω max R Left 0.27 ± 0.11 0.31 ± 0.12 0.29 ± 0.11 0.31 ± 0.14 0.24 ±0.11 0.24 ± 0.12 0.27 ± 0.12 0.28 ± 0.13 Right 0.23 ± 0.09 0.25 ± 0.11 0.24 ± 0.08 0.27 ± 0.11 0.26 ± 0.12 0.23 ± 0.11 0.27 ± 0.13 0.27 ± 0.12 ω max Y Left 108.2 ± 18.8 117.3 ± 22.6 112.9 ± 21.5 120.2 ± 21.1 106.9 ± 25.5 101.1 ± 25.0 110.9 ± 27.0 104.9 ± 24.2 Right 109.6 ± 21.8 108.8 ± 18.7 111.3 ± 19.7 114.9 ± 16.1 111.8 ± 24.3 106.9 ± 21.5 112.7 ± 22.7 112.9 ± 20.9 Time_ω max Y Left 0.28 ± 0.09 0.29 ± 0.12 0.33 ± 0.11 0.32 ± 0.12 0.30 ± 0.09 0.28 ± 0.08 0.32 ± 0.10 0.31 ± 0.09 Right 0.27 ± 0.09 0.29 ± 0.09 0.30 ± 0.08 0.31 ± 0.10 0.31 ± 0.10 0.29 ± 0.10 0.31 ± 0.12 0.32 ± 0.11 ab max Left 12.14 ± 3.44 12.38 ± 4.06 12.20 ± 3.14 12.91 ± 3.84 13.20 ± 2.83 12.67 ± 2.79 12.87 ± 3.1 12.03 ± 2.93 Right 11.01 ± 1.63 11.67 ± 1.75 11.43 ± 2.00 12.51 ± 2.02 12.23 ± 2.66 11.11 ± 2.11 12.11 ± 2.22 11.43 ± 2.09 A max R Left 28.62 ± 4.92 29.81 ± 4.77 33.10 ± 4.89 34.42 ± 4.23 28.83 ± 4.22 27.23 ± 5.57 32.91 ± 5.24 31.84 ± 4.68 Right 27.61 ± 4.58 29.34 ± 4.00 32.30 ± 4.39 33.92 3.81 27.94 ± 4.20 27.02 ± 5.28 31.94 ± 5.40 31.26 ± 4.62 Time_A max R Left 0.55 ± 0.11 0.55 ± 0.14 0.61 ± 0.08 0.62 ± 0.12 0.53 ± 0.04 0.53 ± 0.06 0.60 ± 0.05 0.59 ± 0.08 Right 0.50 ± 0.10 0.53 ± 0.11 0.56 ± 0.11 0.59 ± 0.11 0.53 ± 0.05 0.52 ± 0.06 0.58 ± 0.07 0.58 ± 0.07 Left – motion during active left upper limb, Right – motion during active right upper limb, I25 – the first part (25 m) of the analyzed effort, II25 – the second part (25 m) of the analyzed effort, ω max R – maximum angular velocity around the long axis in rotation movements, t_ω max R – time needed to achieve maximum angular velocity around the long axis (roll), ω max Y – maximum angular velocity around the sagittal axis of the athletes in yaw movements (yaw rotation), t_ω max Y – time needed to achieve maximum angular velocity around the sagittal axis of the athletes in yaw movements (yaw rotation), ab max – acceleration along the transverse axis in yaw movments, A max R – maximum angle around the long axis in rotation movements, t_A max R – time needed to achieve maximum angle around the long axis in rotation movements. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 07 Nov, 2025 Read the published version in Scientific Reports → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 18 Sep, 2025 Reviews received at journal 17 Sep, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 09 Sep, 2025 Reviews received at journal 06 Sep, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 06 Sep, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 04 Sep, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 04 Sep, 2025 Editor invited by journal 03 Sep, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 02 Sep, 2025 First submitted to journal 02 Sep, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7079764","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":512317977,"identity":"de49520b-53b1-4c26-9583-b0032b38ce6f","order_by":0,"name":"Maciej Skorulski","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Maciej","middleName":"","lastName":"Skorulski","suffix":""},{"id":512317978,"identity":"86034322-0843-4853-9175-c1911b2cbb45","order_by":1,"name":"Szymon Kuliś","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Szymon","middleName":"","lastName":"Kuliś","suffix":""},{"id":512317979,"identity":"91460ceb-483b-41c5-b49b-4db2b25b1086","order_by":2,"name":"Jan Gajewski","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jan","middleName":"","lastName":"Gajewski","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-07-09 04:53:10","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7079764/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7079764/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-24816-9","type":"published","date":"2025-11-07T15:56:58+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":91076641,"identity":"7849d327-2cba-4114-95e7-13f57eefd560","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-11 11:11:43","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":911374,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7079764/v1/054a41f28f14a8a53b4cd9fa.png"},{"id":95563987,"identity":"55511934-5c71-4ef1-bc12-653cc8dde78d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-10 16:06:08","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1904631,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7079764/v1/465820b2-f2c9-4e27-89df-01b22eceaba7.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Effect of an 8-week technical tethered swimming program on front crawl kinematics in adolescent swimmers","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe concept of tethered swimming (TS) was pioneered by Magel (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1970\u003c/span\u003e). Tethered swimming has been recognized as one of the most specific methods for simulating ergometer swimming (Filho \u0026amp; Denadai, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e), due to the similarity of movement in interaction with the environment (Crowley et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), cycle mechanics (Sokołowski et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) and physiological aspects (Psycharakis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). In addition, it is a method commonly used to measure thrust (Bujak et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Stachowicz \u0026amp; Milde, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023a\u003c/span\u003e), and as a training tool to help develop physical abilities such as strength and power (Gonjo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Although it is often emphasized in the scientific literature that the technique of tethered swimming is significantly different from that of free swimming, few comparative studies on the subject have been conducted to date (Franken et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). These differences particularly relate to the mechanics of movement and the drag forces generated (Amaro et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTethered swimming was introduced not only as a measurement method but also as a swimming training method (Stachowicz \u0026amp; Milde, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023b\u003c/span\u003e). There are two main methods used in competitive swimming training using tethered swimming. The first is tethered swimming, which limits progressive movement and allows for almost static power training. The second method involves tethered swimming with inertial loading, which allows the athlete to move in a controlled manner, enabling a more dynamic replication of free swimming conditions (semi-tethered swimming) (Cortesi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). These take the form of resistance training, understood as that type of exercise that requires an impact against an opposing force usually generated by some type of training device. Such training aims to increase strength, power (Fleck \u0026amp; Kraemer, 2014).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMaglischo and Maglischo (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1984\u003c/span\u003e) in their comparative study analysed the effects of tethered swimming and free swimming. The study included an analysis of swimmers performing a series of sprints with additional resistance to assess the effects of this method on the strength and performance parameters of swimmers. The researchers suggested that the technical changes observed during high-intensity tethered swimming may negatively affect technique. In another study, semi-tethered swimming was performed using a specially adapted Smith machine. This method is mainly used to perform high intensity tests or to assess swimmers' skills (Cuenca Fern\u0026aacute;ndez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOlbrecht (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) described two types of technical training: type I \u0026ndash; training aimed at improving or teaching a new movement pattern; and type II \u0026ndash; described as training swim drills aimed at automating the correct movement cycle at starting speed. Type I technical training should be planned at the beginning of the training session (after the warm-up), there should be a long break between exercises for a full rest, the working time should be short and the intensity low. Type II exercises, on the other hand, aim to \u0026lsquo;automate the movement\u0026rsquo;. The volume and distance of the repetitions should be progressively longer, the rests shorter and the intensity higher, and the exercise itself should reflect racing conditions as much as possible. The tethered training methods described in the literature do not fall under technical training, as they are not performed at low intensity, do not aim to improve or teach an appropriate movement pattern (type I) and do not reflect racing conditions (type II). They do, however, fall within resistance training and are described as such in the literature (Muniz-Pardos et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePractices based on exercises use the part method of teaching movement. They are used by coaches in various sports. They help correct technique and learn new skills. Still, there are doubts about whether the skills learned in such exercises effectively replicate key information and movement requirements in the target environment (Barris et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Pinder et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Seifert et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). An example of this would be single-arm crawl swimming, with the resting arm held close to the body. The purpose of this exercise is to allow athletes to focus on coordinating their breathing and improving their body position (Arellano et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Lucero, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). However, there is no empirical evidence to demonstrate that these exercises affect the improvement of body alignment, breathing coordination or athletic performance. Instead, it is argued that the whole method may better facilitate learning for the repetitive and continuous movements that occur in swimming (Fontana et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThere seems to be a belief among coaches that tethered swimming has a positive effect on swimming technique. Compared to the other described uses of TS, the exercises performed for this purpose are characterized by low intensity and focus on stability of the arm and trunk during the active phase of the arms. For the purposes of this study, this type of use of tethering has been termed technical tethered swimming (TTS).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe observations of Maglischo and Maglischo (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1984\u003c/span\u003e) were used as theoretical confirmation of the assumptions. It was observed that athletes tended to move their arms in a smaller arc during tethered swimming and took longer to perform the arm movement. Samson et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) observed less medial-lateral arm movement during tethered swimming compared to free swimming.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis raises the question of whether technical tethered swimming has real benefits as a training tool using a holistic method of teaching movement.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe aim of this study was to assess the effect of long-term use of technical tethered swimming on kinematics of crawl swimming, and sport performance.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Material and methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eParticipants\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNineteen girls (age 13.18 ± 0.66 years; body height 163.6 ± 5.2 cm; body weight 50.8 ± 4.42 kg; body fat 20.5% ± 2.0%) and 20 boys (age 13.33 ± 0.60 years; body height 167.8 ± 8.76 cm; body weight 52.46 ± 8.8 kg; body fat 14.1% ± 2.3%) participated in the study. All subjects were athletes of a local sports club. Inclusion conditions were a calendar age of 12–13 years and at least two years of training experience. Athletes with injuries were excluded from the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study was approved by the Senate Committee on Research Ethics of the Józef Piłsudski Academy of Physical Education in Warsaw (SKE 01–31/2023). All procedures involving human participants were performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations, and in adherence to the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from all participants and, due to the age of the subjects, from their parents or legal guardians. Participants and their legal guardians were fully informed about the nature, purpose, and course of the study, including any potential risks or benefits associated with participation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eProcedure\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study participants were randomly divided into two groups, in each maintaining gender parity. Randomization was performed using an Excel function. In the experimental group (EG), additional tethered technical training was introduced. At this time, the control group (CG) performed standard technical training in free swimming. The study included an 8-week training cycle.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdditional technical tether swimming was performed once a week and lasted 45 min. It included the following training procedure:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6x 10 tethered swimming crawl cycles with 10ʹʹ rest,\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1x 150 crawl snorkel crawl swimming.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe athletes performed technical training in a tether with a snorkel to facilitate breathing. Free swimming was also performed with a snorkel to standardize training methods. The main objectives of performing this task were:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1. Focusing on the length of the stroke.\u003cbr\u003e2. Slow execution of movements.\u003cbr\u003e3. Stabilizing the trunk by reducing lateral arm movement.\u003cbr\u003e4. Comfortable work (intensity below aerobic threshold).\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAt the same time, the control group (CG) performed technical training for crawl, following an identical schedule and technical guidelines as the experimental group (EG), and it concluded with a trending procedure:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e45 min (x50 rest 10ʹʹ-20ʹʹ)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1. One-arm crawl\u003cbr\u003e2. Catch-up stroke drill\u003cbr\u003e3. One-arm alternate catch-up\u003cbr\u003e4. Crawl\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBoth workouts were instructed and coordinated by two experienced swimming coaches (level I – certified by Polish National Swimming Association).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore and after the split, the whole group performed the same swimming training together. The split was only introduced during the 45 min of training described above.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePre-test and post-test included:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1. Measurement of height and weight.\u003cbr\u003e2. Measurement of the time taken to swim a distance of 50 m in crawl at maximum speed while measuring acceleration using an accelerometer placed on the back of the pelvic girdle. A number of variables were measured in 3 major body movements:\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e- Translational motion – represented by averaged acceleration along the vertical axis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e- Body roll (rotational movements around the vertical axis of the body) – recorded by velocities around the vertical axis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e- Yaw rotation (rotational movements around the sagittal axis) recorded by angular velocities around the sagittal axis and accelerations along the transverse axis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe analysis presents the most relevant variables, whose values are averaged.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe most relevant variables were selected for analysis, and the values presented were averaged.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom the recorded data, average numerical values of the swimming cycle were calculated, including arithmetic means and standard deviations for relative time (relative to cycle duration), all measured from the beginning of the cycle. These calculations were performed using STA1v0 software (Zbigniew Staniak, Institute of Sport – National Research Institute, Poland).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe following components were measured and analysed: av\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003e – vertical acceleration during propulsion, ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR – angular velocity around the vertical axis in rolling movements, ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY – angular velocity around the sagittal axis in yaw movements, and A\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR – maximum angle of pelvic tilt around the vertical axis during rotational movements. The data were analysed separately for movements involving the left upper limb (Left) and right upper limb (Right), as well as for the first lap (I25) and the second lap (II25).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe measurements took place in a 25 m pool. The athletes started from the water (without a starting dive). They swam the 25 m crawl, did the standard freestyle turnaround and swam the second lap of the 50 m distance. The subjects were asked to complete the task in the shortest possible time. Before starting the swim, they performed a start warm-up consisting of a 1200 m swim as detailed by Skorulski et al. (Skorulski et al., 2025).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResearch instruments\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor each swimmer, the individual characteristics of the kinematics of average hip movement during the first and second halves of the pool were determined. A recorder (REJ62g by JD Jarosław Doliński, Poland) was used to track changes in speed and acceleration. The device contained a triaxial gyroscope and triaxial accelerometer (65x50x30 mm, 95 g). It was placed in a foam cover to minimise hydrodynamic drag and provide stability in the swimmer's lower back, near the pelvic girdle. The centre of the recorder was aligned at the base of the sacrum. A special two-part belt was used to secure it: a non-elastic rope attached the recorder, while an elastic band was placed on the swimmer's lower abdomen (Fig.\u0026nbsp;1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMeasurements were taken at a sampling frequency of 200 Hz, with acceleration measured within a range of ± 2 g. The signal underwent analogue low-pass filtering at a cutoff frequency of 93 Hz. To measure angular velocity during rotation, a range of ± 500 deg·s\u003csup\u003e− 1\u003c/sup\u003e was used.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe accuracy of acceleration measurements was verified statically against ground acceleration, with an absolute error of ± 0.2 m·s\u003csup\u003e− 2\u003c/sup\u003e. The precision of angular velocity readings was checked indirectly by measuring and calculating the recorder’s rotation angle within a 90-degree range around each axis. The absolute error for angle calculation was ± 1 degree, and for angular velocity, it was ± 0.6 deg·s\u003csup\u003e− 1\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe recorded waveforms were smoothed using a four-pole low-pass Butterworth filter with a cutoff frequency of 20 Hz. This frequency was selected to ensure that the calculated amplitude of motion speed would not decrease by more than 0.5% as a result of filtering, while keeping important acceleration waveform points for movement analysis clearly visible.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBody weight and composition were measured using a Tanita BC-545N scale (Tanita Corporation, Tokyo, Japan).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA tether with a force meter (ZPS5-BTU1kN, Staniak, Poland) recorded the pulling force at 100 Hz and sent the data to a computer program for further analysis (MAX6v0M software, Poland).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuring training, the test subjects were monitored using Polar Verity sense sensors, which allow real-time measurement of heart rate using Polar Team software. After a task, each athlete was asked to rate the task using the Children's OMNI Scale of Perceived Exertion (OMNI) (Robertson et al., 2000).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHeart rate and fatigue levels were monitored by experienced swim coaches using the PolarTeam app and Variety Sense sensors. The aim of the training was to keep the heart rate below 150 HR (bpm). The athletes had already been introduced to the OMNI scale and to working with heart rate sensors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTest subjects performing tethered technical swimming were subjected to pulling force measurements during technical work to determine the maximum force with which they performed the technical task. A tether with a force meter (ZPS5-BTU1kN, Staniak, Poland) recorded the pulling force at 100 Hz and sent the data to a computer program for further analysis (MAX6v0M software, Poland).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTest subjects performing technical tethered swimming were subjected to a thrust measurement during technical work to determine the maximum force with which they performed the technical task.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eTraining volume and intensity\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe training was designed and performed by the trainers in charge of the study training group. The structure of the training used is shown in Table\u0026nbsp;1.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e****INSERT TABLE 1.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eStatistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStatistical analyses were carried out using STATISTICA software, version 13.1 (TIBCO Software Inc., 2017). The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to verify the normality of data distribution, with a p-value greater than 0.20 indicating a normal distribution. All examined variables met the assumption of normality.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTo assess differences in means, a repeated measures ANOVA (general linear model) was used. The analysis included three within-subject factors: MEASUREMENT (pretest, posttest), LAP (first, second), and SIDE (left, right), while GROUP (experimental, control) was treated as a between-subject factor. Post-hoc analyses were conducted using Fisher’s least significant difference (LSD) test. Statistical significance was set at the level of α = 0.05. Data were reported as means ± standard deviations and accompanied by 95% confidence intervals. Effect sizes were estimated using partial eta squared.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eOf all the measured speed and acceleration variables, those that showed the most significant differences or interactions were selected and are described in the following section. Detailed changes in velocity and acceleration are given in Table\u0026nbsp;2.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e***** INSERT TABLE 2.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eYaw rotation\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSignificant changes were observed in the variables describing yaw movements (yaw). Maximum acceleration in the direction of the transverse axis (ab\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003e) decreased in the experimental group while an increase in this variable was observed in the control group (interaction GROUP x MEASUREMENT: F\u003csub\u003e1,37\u003c/sub\u003e = 7.89, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.008, η\u0026sup2; = 0.18). At the same time, there were no significant differences between the groups in the time needed to achieve the abmax (Time_ab\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003e). The post-hoc test (GROUP \u0026times; MEASUREMENT) for the ab\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003e variable showed a significant difference (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.035) in the experimental group between measurements before and after the application of technical tethered swimming.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn addition, post-hoc analysis for the MEASUREMENT \u0026times; GROUP \u0026times; SIDE interaction for the variable ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY showed a significant difference (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.024) in the experimental group after the application of tethered technical swimming during the active phase of the left arm.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA significant difference (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.024) was also observed between the experimental and control groups after the training intervention, in the value of ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY during the active phase of the left arm.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study showed an interaction (GROUP \u0026times; MEASUREMENT \u0026times; SIDE: F1,37\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.15, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.048, η\u0026sup2; = 0.10) in maximum angular velocity around the vertical axis (ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY). Post-hoc analysis for the MEASUREMENT \u0026times; GROUP \u0026times; SIDE interaction showed a significant difference (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.024) in the value of ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY during the active phase of the left arm in the experimental group after the application of tethered technical swimming. For the same interaction, a significant difference (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.024) was observed between the experimental group and the control group after the training intervention, in the value of ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY during the active phase of the left arm. No significant differences were observed between the CG and EG in ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY during the active phase of the right arm and in the time required to reach ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY (Time_ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eBody roll\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the study, a significant MEASUREMENT \u0026times; GROUP interaction (F\u003csub\u003e1,37\u003c/sub\u003e = 5.48, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.025, η\u0026sup2; = 0.13) indicated that the groups reacted differently to the intervention in the maximum pelvic angle about the vertical axis (A\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study showed a significant interaction (MEASUREMENT \u0026times; GROUP x SIDE: F\u003csub\u003e1,37\u003c/sub\u003e = 5.57, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.024, η\u0026sup2; = 0.13) in the maximum angular velocity around the vertical axis (ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe post-hoc test (MEASUREMENT \u0026times; GROUP \u0026times; SIDE) showed a difference (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.008) in ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR during the active phase of the left arm in the experimental group after the application of technical tethered swimming.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTraining control\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDuring the technical tethered swimming (TTS) series, the subjects in the experimental group achieved an average of 48.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;12.45 N, scoring 1.5\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.51 on the OMNI scale, while the control group scored technical training in free swimming at 1.36\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.49 on the same scale. The Mann-Whitney U test showed no significant difference between the groups (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.49).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe results of the study showed no significant differences in the time for swimming 50 meters crawl after an 8-week training cycle in either the experimental group (EG) or the control group (CG). The lack of change in time results suggests that the time achieved over this distance alone is not directly dependent on the training used. Although technique-related parameters changed, they did not translate into a change in athletic performance. The lack of time results may be due to the complexity of the training process. The periodization of the training was not intended as a pretest and posttest. The timing of the training intervention was selected to allow for an uninterrupted 8-week training cycle. Breaks in training were determined by the school calendar. As a result, participants were not at optimal readiness for competition.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eYaw rotation\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe use of accelerometers placed on the athletes' backs provides a modern tool to accurately analyse yaw movements (Staniak et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The basis for the analysis of these movements is the angular velocity about the sagittal axis. An auxiliary variable in the description of yaw movements is the acceleration about the transverse axis, which describes the dynamic changes in the transverse movement of the body. B\u0026auml;chlin \u0026amp; Tr\u0026ouml;ster (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) stated that acceleration is only one element that influences yaw analysis. They also demonstrated that elite swimmers had more controlled and less variable yaw movements than less experienced swimmers, and that high yaw stability helped to maintain a faster swimming pace with fewer arm cycles.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo describe the dynamics of yaw movements in detail, two additional variables were used: the time needed to reach maximum angular velocity, and the time needed to reach maximum acceleration in the transverse axis direction.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the study, significant changes in variables describing yaw movements were observed. Acceleration in the transverse axis direction (ab\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003e) decreased in the EG after technical tethered swimming by 4% in the first length during the active phase of the left arm (I25Left) and 10% during the active phase of the right arm (I25Right), and decreased by 7% in the second length during the active phase of the left arm (II25Left) and 6% during the active phase of the right arm (II25Right). A decrease of this value indicates improved trunk stabilization. Athletes swam more economically, by lowering the force needed to overcome water resistance in lateral movements.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAt the same time, the study showed significant differences between the groups in the maximum angular velocity around the sagittal axis (ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY) during the active phase of the left arm. In the EG, a decrease of 5.7% was observed in I25Left and II25Left. In contrast, an increase of 7.8% in I25Left and 6.0% in II25Left was observed in the CG. These changes indicate that technical tethered swimming (TTS) may have helped participants to improve control of body rotation, but the lack of significant difference in the active phase of the right arm suggests that these changes are asymmetrical and mainly involve movements during the active phase of the left arm, which may be related to the respiratory phase. As we know from research, athletes prefer a unilateral breathing phase, especially during maximal efforts (87% of those surveyed were right-handed) (Barden \u0026amp; Barber, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Seifert et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e). A decrease in ab\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003e with a simultaneous decrease in ωmaxY may be indicative of a more stable body position in the water, which reduces energy loss due to excessive lateral movements, after application of TTS.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eBody roll\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eBased on the findings of a computer simulation study, the authors suggested that body rotation about the vertical axis can have a significant effect on hand trajectory, promote the development of propulsive forces and therefore improve swimming performance (Psycharakis \u0026amp; Sanders, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). In the literature, angular velocity and maximum pelvic angle around the vertical axis are used to describe body roll (He \u0026amp; Cheng, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Lee et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). The description was extended with variables describing the time required to reach the maximum angular velocity around the vertical axis. This variable enriches the analysis with the dynamics of the swimmer's movement.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study revealed a significant difference between groups in the maximum angle of pelvic roll relative to the vertical axis (A\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR). A\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR in the EG decreased by 5.9% in I25Left, 3.4% in I25Right, 3.7% in II25Left and 2.2% in II25Right, while increasing by 4.0% in I23Left, 5.9% in I25Right, 3.8% in II25Left and 4.8% in II25Right in CG. A reduction in this value may indicate better stabilization, reduced water resistance and increased efficiency. We know from research that hip rotation is inversely correlated with swimming speed (Andersen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), which has a positive effect on improving sports performance. There was a significant increase in the value of ω\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR in the CG of 4.29% in I25Left and 1.24% in II25Left, and a decrease in the value of this variable in the EG of 6.0% in I25Left and II25Left. The significant differences observed between the groups in movements during active left arm work suggest better trunk stabilization. The less effective stabilization is probably caused by the unilateral breathing phase in the athletes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eAs we know from research (Skorulski et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), during long maximal efforts, numerous adverse changes in swimming technique occur in adolescent athletes. Based on the literature (He \u0026amp; Cheng, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Lee et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Psycharakis \u0026amp; Sanders, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e), it can be concluded that the changes observed after the application of the training protocol with technical tethered swimming (TTS) are positive. Nevertheless, they did not significantly improve the sports result in relation to the group performing technical training in free swimming. However, this may be related to the training loads applied before the end of the experiment according to the training periodization (Table\u0026nbsp;1).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe changes observed during the active phase of the left arm are likely to be the result of a correction in the technical errors acquired during the earlier training process that occur under the influence of non-unilateral breathing in athletes. It is probable that after using technical tethered swimming (TTS), the athletes made better use of the arm pull during the breathing phase by making smaller yaw movements.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe changes observed during tethered technical training can improve swimming performance and reduce hydrodynamic drag (He \u0026amp; Cheng, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), even if they are not immediately apparent in improved athletic performance. This suggests that TTS can be a valuable part of a training programme. The method helps permanently correct technical errors and improves swimming mechanics. It bases exercises on a whole-movement teaching practice. Training based on whole movement teaching practice tends to promote greater improvements in executive functions. This may result from the need for integrated planning and precise temporal coordination required to perform entire motor sequences, which are less emphasized in part-based practice (Richter et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe performance of TTS exercises is characterized by low intensity, comparable to the intensity performed during technical exercises in free swimming. It is worth considering in the future whether extending the time of such training in the training microcycle can significantly improve athletic performance. It is also important to study how TTS affects swimming technique in the short term, for example when used as part of a swimming warm-up. In addition, the impact of this method on kinematics and athletic performance in other swimming styles would need to be assessed. Understanding these relationships can help to better match training methods to individual players' needs and maximize their potential.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003eFunding\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research was funded by the Polish Ministry of Education and Science in the years 2023\u0026ndash;2024 under the University Research Project no. 3 at J\u0026oacute;zef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw, Poland: \u0026ldquo;Postural assessment and accelerometric characterisation of movement technique in selected sports disciplines.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAmaro, N. M., Morou\u0026ccedil;o, P. G., Marques, M. C., Fernandes, R. J., \u0026amp; Marinho, D. A. (2017). \u003cem\u003eBiomechanical and bioenergetical evaluation of swimmers using fully-tethered swimming: A qualitative review\u003c/em\u003e. https://rua.ua.es/dspace/handle/10045/71966\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAndersen, J. T., Sinclair, P. J., McCabe, C. B., \u0026amp; Sanders, R. H. (2020). Kinematic Differences in Shoulder Roll and Hip Roll at Different Front Crawl Speeds in National Level Swimmers. \u003cem\u003eThe Journal of Strength \u0026amp; Conditioning Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000003281\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArellano, R., Dom\u0026iacute;nguez-Castells, R., Perez-Infantes, E., \u0026amp; S\u0026aacute;nchez, E. (2010). Effect of stroke drills on intra-cycle hip velocity in front crawl. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the Biomechanics and Medicine in Swimming XI\u003c/em\u003e, 45\u0026ndash;47.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eB\u0026auml;chlin, M., \u0026amp; Tr\u0026ouml;ster, G. (2012). Swimming performance and technique evaluation with wearable acceleration sensors. \u003cem\u003ePervasive and Mobile Computing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(1), 68\u0026ndash;81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmcj.2011.05.003\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBarden, J. M., \u0026amp; Barber, M. V. (2022). The Effect of Breathing Laterality on Hip Roll Kinematics in Submaximal Front Crawl Swimming. \u003cem\u003eSensors\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22062324\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBarris, S., Farrow, D., \u0026amp; Davids, K. (2013). Do the kinematics of a baulked take-off in springboard diving differ from those of a completed dive. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sports Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e31\u003c/em\u003e(3), 305\u0026ndash;313. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2012.733018\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBujak, P., Rogowska, P., \u0026amp; Zarzeczny, R. (2025). Correlations between peripubertal male swimmers\u0026rsquo; results of short-distance swimming tests and land-based sprint and endurance tests. \u003cem\u003eBiomedical Human Kinetics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e(1), 68\u0026ndash;77. https://doi.org/10.2478/bhk-2025-0007\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCortesi, M., Gatta, G., Carmigniani, R., \u0026amp; Zamparo, P. (2024). Estimating active drag based on full and semi-tethered swimming tests. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sports Science \u0026amp; Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e23\u003c/em\u003e(1), 17.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCrowley, E., Harrison, A. J., \u0026amp; Lyons, M. (2017). The Impact of Resistance Training on Swimming Performance: A Systematic Review. \u003cem\u003eSports Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e47\u003c/em\u003e(11), 2285\u0026ndash;2307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0730-2\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCuenca Fern\u0026aacute;ndez, F., Gay P\u0026aacute;rraga, A., Ruiz Navarro, J. J., \u0026amp; Arellano Colomina, R. (2020). \u003cem\u003eThe effect of different loads on semi-tethered swimming and its relationship with dry-land performance variables\u003c/em\u003e. https://digibug.ugr.es/handle/10481/62642\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDM Filho, P., \u0026amp; Denadai, B. S. (2008). \u003cem\u003eMathematical basis for modeling swimmer power output in the front crawl tethered swimming: An application to aerobic evaluation\u003c/em\u003e. https://benthamopen.com/ABSTRACT/TOSSJ-1-31\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFleck, S. J., \u0026amp; Kraemer, W. (2014). \u003cem\u003eDesigning resistance training programs, 4E\u003c/em\u003e. Human Kinetics. https://books.google.com/books?hl=pl\u0026amp;lr=\u0026amp;id=CczZAgAAQBA\nJ\u0026amp;oi=fnd\u0026amp;pg=PR1\u0026amp;dq=\nDesigning+Resistance+Training+Programs,+fleck+\n2016\u0026amp;ots=kA1yavecdV\u0026amp;sig=XZHxgEM1X_fRTs8aG1ZXc-D-cAE\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFontana, F. E., FurtadoJr., O., Mazzardo, O., \u0026amp; Gallagher, J. D. (2009). Whole and Part Practice: A Meta-Analysis. \u003cem\u003ePerceptual and Motor Skills\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e109\u003c/em\u003e(2), 517\u0026ndash;530. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.109.2.517-530\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFranken, M., De Jesus, K., De Jesus, K., \u0026amp; De Souza Castro, F. A. (2024). Variables and protocols of the tethered swimming method: A systematic review. \u003cem\u003eSport Sciences for Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(2), 535\u0026ndash;575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11332-023-01140-1\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGonjo, T., Narita, K., McCabe, C., Fernandes, R. J., Vilas-Boas, J. P., Takagi, H., \u0026amp; Sanders, R. (2020). Front Crawl Is More Efficient and Has Smaller Active Drag Than Backstroke Swimming: Kinematic and Kinetic Comparison Between the Two Techniques at the Same Swimming Speeds. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e, 570657. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.570657\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHe, Q., \u0026amp; Cheng, Y. (2022). Research Progress on the Characteristics of Body Roll in Swimming. \u003cem\u003eHBDSS 2022; 2nd International Conference on Health Big Data and Smart Sports\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;5. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/10104254\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKimura, T., Ohba, M., \u0026amp; Shionoya, A. (2013). Construction of a multiple-regression model for estimating the force in tethered swimming, and power in semi-tethered swimming for males. \u003cem\u003eProcedia Engineering\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e60\u003c/em\u003e, 275\u0026ndash;280.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee, J., Mellifont, R., Winstanley, J., \u0026amp; Burkett, B. (2008). Body Roll in Simulated Freestyle Swimming. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Sports Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e(7), 569\u0026ndash;573. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-989285\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLoturco, I., Barbosa, A., Nocentini, R., Pereira, L., Kobal, R., Kitamura, K., Abad, C., Figueiredo, P., \u0026amp; Nakamura, F. (2015). A Correlational Analysis of Tethered Swimming, Swim Sprint Performance and Dry-land Power Assessments. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Sports Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(03), 211\u0026ndash;218. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1559694\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLucero, B. (2015). \u003cem\u003eThe 100 Best Swimming Drills\u003c/em\u003e. Meyer \u0026amp; Meyer Verlag.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMagel, J. R. (1970). Propelling Force Measured during Tethered Swimming in the Four Competitive Swimming Styles. \u003cem\u003eResearch Quarterly. American Association for Health, Physical Education and Recreation\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e(1), 68\u0026ndash;74. https://doi.org/10.1080/10671188.1970.10614948\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMaglischo, C. W., \u0026amp; Maglischo, E. W. (1984). Tethered and nontethered crawl swimming. \u003cem\u003eISBS-Conference Proceedings Archive\u003c/em\u003e. https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/1416\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMuniz-Pardos, B., Gomez-Bruton, A., Matute-Llorente, A., Gonzalez-Aguero, A., Gomez-Cabello, A., Gonzalo-Skok, O., Casajus, J. A., \u0026amp; Vicente-Rodriguez, G. (2019). Swim-Specific Resistance Training: A Systematic Review. \u003cem\u003eThe Journal of Strength \u0026amp; Conditioning Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(10), 2875. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000003256\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOlbrecht, J. (2015). \u003cem\u003eThe science of winning: Planning, periodizing and optimizing swim training\u003c/em\u003e. F\u0026amp;G Partners.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePinder, R. A., Davids, K., Renshaw, I., \u0026amp; Ara\u0026uacute;jo, D. (2011). Representative learning design and functionality of research and practice in sport. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sport and Exercise Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(1), 146\u0026ndash;155.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePsycharakis, S. G., \u0026amp; Sanders, R. H. (2010). Body roll in swimming: A review. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sports Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e(3), 229\u0026ndash;236. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410903508847\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePsycharakis, S. G., Soultanakis, H., Gonz\u0026aacute;lez Rav\u0026eacute;, J. M., \u0026amp; Paradisis, G. P. (2024). Force production during maximal front crawl tethered swimming: Exploring bilateral asymmetries and differences between breathing and non-breathing conditions. \u003cem\u003eSports Biomechanics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e23\u003c/em\u003e(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2021.1891277\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRichter, M. J., Ali, H., \u0026amp; Immink, M. A. (2024). Enhancing Executive Function in Children and Adolescents Through Motor Learning: A Systematic Review. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Motor Learning and Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(1), 59\u0026ndash;108. https://doi.org/10.1123/jmld.2024-0038\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eROBERTSON, R. J., GOSS, F. L., BOER, N. F., PEOPLES, J. A., FOREMAN, A. J., DABAYEBEH, I. M., MILLICH, N. B., Balasekaran, G., RIECHMAN, S. E., \u0026amp; GALLAGHER, J. D. (2000). Children\u0026rsquo;s OMNI scale of perceived exertion: Mixed gender and race validation. \u003cem\u003eMedicine \u0026amp; Science in Sports \u0026amp; Exercise\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(2), 452.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSamson, M., Monnet, T., Bernard, A., Lacouture, P., \u0026amp; David, L. (2019). Comparative study between fully tethered and free swimming at different paces of swimming in front crawl. \u003cem\u003eSports Biomechanics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2018.1443492\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSeifert, L., Button, C., \u0026amp; Davids, K. (2013). Key Properties of Expert Movement Systems in Sport: An Ecological Dynamics Perspective. \u003cem\u003eSports Medicine\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e43\u003c/em\u003e(3), 167\u0026ndash;178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-012-0011-z\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSeifert, L., Chollet, D., \u0026amp; Allard, P. (2005). Arm coordination symmetry and breathing effect in front crawl. \u003cem\u003eHuman Movement Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(2), 234\u0026ndash;256.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSkorulski, M., Stachowicz, M., Kuliś, S., \u0026amp; Gajewski, J. (2025). Accelerometric assessment of fatigue-induced changes in swimming technique in high performance adolescent athletes. \u003cem\u003eScientific Reports\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(1), 2409.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSokołowski, K., Bartolomeu, R. F., Barbosa, T. M., \u0026amp; Strzała, M. (2022). V˙ O 2 kinetics and tethered strength influence the 200-m front crawl stroke kinematics and speed in young male swimmers. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Physiology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e, 1045178.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStachowicz, M., \u0026amp; Milde, K. (2023a). Changes in thrust force in swimmers in the annual training cycle. \u003cem\u003eBiomedical Human Kinetics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(1), 159\u0026ndash;171. https://doi.org/10.2478/bhk-2023-0019\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStachowicz, M., \u0026amp; Milde, K. (2023b). Changes in thrust force in swimmers in the annual training cycle. \u003cem\u003eBiomedical Human Kinetics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(1), 159\u0026ndash;171. https://doi.org/10.2478/bhk-2023-0019\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStaniak, Z., Buśko, K., G\u0026oacute;rski, M., \u0026amp; Pastuszak, A. (2018). Accelerometer profile of motion of the pelvic girdle in butterfly swimming. \u003cem\u003eActa of Bioengineering and Biomechanics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(1), 159\u0026ndash;167.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Tables","content":"\u003cp\u003eTable 1. Training volume completed by the control group, expressed as swimming distance (m), in the successive weeks of the experiment by designated training task\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"614\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWeek\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal[m]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eREC[m]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAEC1[m]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAEC2[m]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAEP[m]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eANP[m]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eANC[m]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSP[m]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22170\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6950\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13600\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e600\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1020\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33070\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19920\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12850\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e300\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29950\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17500\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11950\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e500\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27450\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11600\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e300\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e600\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e850\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22850\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13150\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6500\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2600\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e600\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32300\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12050\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17400\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e850\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21050\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18500\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e550\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 55px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29280\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13610\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11400\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e500\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e720\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 70px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1050\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 1. REC \u0026ndash; swim sets included warm up, cool down, kicking, pulling, and drill sets; AEC1 (aerobic capacity type 1) \u0026ndash; swim set included swimming up to 30 min in one style, high volume, low intensity, and short rest. AEC2 (aerobic capacity type 2) \u0026ndash; combination of short, intensive repetitions with AEC1; AEP (aerobic power) \u0026ndash; included swimming sets with high intensity work, short rest, competitions of 200\u0026nbsp;m and more; ANP (anaerobic power) \u0026ndash; swimming sets included extremely hard efforts with short rest, competitions up to 100\u0026nbsp;m. ANC (anaerobic capacity) \u0026ndash; included short interval (25-50\u0026nbsp;m), long rest, very high to maximal intensity; SP (sprint sets) \u0026ndash; very short sets ( \u0026lt;10\u0026nbsp;s) with maximal velocity, and very long rest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;Table 2. Mean \u0026plusmn; standard deviation (SD) of the analyzed acceleration components during the first and second lengths of the pool, measured before and after the 8-week training cycle in the experimental group (technical tethered swimming) and the control group.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" align=\"left\" width=\"958\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSide\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 429px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl group\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 373px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExperimental group\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 209px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 220px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eII25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 187px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 187px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eII25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreTest\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostTest\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreTest\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostTest\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreTest\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostTest\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreTest\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostTest\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026omega;\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLeft\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217.0 \u0026plusmn; 40.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e226.7 \u0026plusmn; 47.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e233.6 \u0026plusmn; 49.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e236.51 \u0026plusmn; 43.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e241.6 \u0026plusmn; 45.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e228.0 \u0026plusmn; 49.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e253.3 \u0026plusmn; 45.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e240.0 \u0026plusmn; 46.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRight\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e237.6 \u0026plusmn; 51.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e229.1 \u0026plusmn; 47.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e241.9 \u0026plusmn; 43.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e230.7 \u0026plusmn; 43.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e244.8 \u0026plusmn; 54.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e233.0 \u0026plusmn; 56.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e246.9 \u0026plusmn; 50.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e244.6 \u0026plusmn; 44.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTime_\u0026omega;\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLeft\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.27 \u0026plusmn; 0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.31 \u0026plusmn; 0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.29 \u0026plusmn; 0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.31 \u0026plusmn; 0.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.24 \u0026plusmn;0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.24 \u0026plusmn; 0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.27 \u0026plusmn; 0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.28 \u0026plusmn; 0.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRight\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.23 \u0026plusmn; 0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.25 \u0026plusmn; 0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.24 \u0026plusmn; 0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.27 \u0026plusmn; 0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.26 \u0026plusmn; 0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.23 \u0026plusmn; 0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.27 \u0026plusmn; 0.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.27 \u0026plusmn; 0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026omega;\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLeft\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e108.2 \u0026plusmn; 18.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e117.3 \u0026plusmn; 22.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e112.9 \u0026plusmn; 21.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e120.2 \u0026plusmn; 21.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e106.9 \u0026plusmn; 25.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e101.1 \u0026plusmn; 25.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e110.9 \u0026plusmn; 27.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e104.9 \u0026plusmn; 24.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRight\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e109.6 \u0026plusmn; 21.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e108.8 \u0026plusmn; 18.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e111.3 \u0026plusmn; 19.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e114.9 \u0026plusmn; 16.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e111.8 \u0026plusmn; 24.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e106.9 \u0026plusmn; 21.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e112.7 \u0026plusmn; 22.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e112.9 \u0026plusmn; 20.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTime_\u0026omega;\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLeft\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.28 \u0026plusmn; 0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.29 \u0026plusmn; 0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.33 \u0026plusmn; 0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.32 \u0026plusmn; 0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.30 \u0026plusmn; 0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.28 \u0026plusmn; 0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.32 \u0026plusmn; 0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.31 \u0026plusmn; 0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRight\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.27 \u0026plusmn; 0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.29 \u0026plusmn; 0.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.30 \u0026plusmn; 0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.31 \u0026plusmn; 0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.31 \u0026plusmn; 0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.29 \u0026plusmn; 0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.31 \u0026plusmn; 0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.32 \u0026plusmn; 0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eab\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLeft\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.14 \u0026plusmn; 3.44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.38 \u0026plusmn; 4.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.20 \u0026plusmn; 3.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.91 \u0026plusmn; 3.84\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.20 \u0026plusmn; 2.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.67 \u0026plusmn; 2.79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.87 \u0026plusmn; 3.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.03 \u0026plusmn; 2.93\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRight\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.01 \u0026plusmn; 1.63\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.67 \u0026plusmn; 1.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.43 \u0026plusmn; 2.00\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.51 \u0026plusmn; 2.02\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.23 \u0026plusmn; 2.66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.11 \u0026plusmn; 2.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.11 \u0026plusmn; 2.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.43 \u0026plusmn; 2.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eA\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLeft\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.62 \u0026plusmn; 4.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.81 \u0026plusmn; 4.77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33.10 \u0026plusmn; 4.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34.42 \u0026plusmn; 4.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.83 \u0026plusmn; 4.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.23 \u0026plusmn; 5.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32.91 \u0026plusmn; 5.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.84 \u0026plusmn; 4.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRight\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.61 \u0026plusmn; 4.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.34 \u0026plusmn; 4.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32.30 \u0026plusmn; 4.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33.92 3.81\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.94 \u0026plusmn; 4.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.02 \u0026plusmn; 5.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.94 \u0026plusmn; 5.40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.26 \u0026plusmn; 4.62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTime_A\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLeft\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.55 \u0026plusmn; 0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.55 \u0026plusmn; 0.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.61 \u0026plusmn; 0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.62 \u0026plusmn; 0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.53 \u0026plusmn; 0.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.53 \u0026plusmn; 0.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.60 \u0026plusmn; 0.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.59 \u0026plusmn; 0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 52px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRight\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.50 \u0026plusmn; 0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.53 \u0026plusmn; 0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.56 \u0026plusmn; 0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 115px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.59 \u0026plusmn; 0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.53 \u0026plusmn; 0.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.52 \u0026plusmn; 0.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.58 \u0026plusmn; 0.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.58 \u0026plusmn; 0.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;Left \u0026ndash; motion during active left upper limb, Right \u0026ndash; motion during active right upper limb, I25 \u0026ndash; the first part (25 m) of the analyzed effort, II25 \u0026ndash; the second part (25 m) of the analyzed effort, \u0026omega;\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR \u0026ndash; maximum angular velocity around the long axis in rotation movements, t_\u0026omega;\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR \u0026ndash; time needed to achieve maximum angular velocity around the long axis (roll),\u0026nbsp;\u0026omega;\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY \u0026ndash; maximum angular velocity around the sagittal axis of the athletes in yaw movements (yaw rotation), t_\u0026omega;\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eY \u0026ndash; time needed to achieve maximum angular velocity around the sagittal axis of the athletes in yaw movements (yaw rotation), ab\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003e \u0026ndash; acceleration along the transverse axis in yaw movments, A\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR \u0026ndash; maximum angle around the long axis in rotation movements, t_A\u003csub\u003emax\u003c/sub\u003eR \u0026ndash; time needed to achieve maximum angle around the long axis in rotation movements.\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Swimming, Humans, Biomechanical Phenomena, Physical Exertion","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7079764/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7079764/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe aim of this study was to assess the effect of long-term use of technical tethered swimming on kinematics of crawl swimming, and sport performance. The experiment was attended by 19 girls (age 13.18\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.66 years; body height 163.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.2 cm; body weight 50.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.42 kg; body fat 20.5% \u0026plusmn; 2.0%) and 20 boys (age 13.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.60 years; body height 167.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.76 cm; body weight 52.46\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.8 kg; body fat 14.1% \u0026plusmn; 2.3%). The participants were randomly assigned to two groups. The experimental group received additional technical tethered swimming protocol. At this time, the control group performed standard technical training in free swimming. The study included an 8-week training cycle. Changes in swimming technique were assessed using a device equipped with a triaxial gyroscope and a triaxial accelerometer, with a particular focus on body roll and yaw movements of the athletes. Significant changes were observed in the variables describing yaw, and body roll movements. The study showed that a training protocol involving technical tethered swimming can positively affect front crawl kinematics in adolescent athletes when applied over the long term.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Effect of an 8-week technical tethered swimming program on front crawl kinematics in adolescent swimmers","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-11 11:03:39","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7079764/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-09-18T06:52:19+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-09-17T16:48:54+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"172656848855766861799838511407787210289","date":"2025-09-09T07:12:19+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-09-06T20:22:12+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"222132529091317017503261553827024340052","date":"2025-09-06T20:12:03+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-09-04T06:43:22+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-09-04T06:41:39+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-09-03T19:12:21+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-09-02T11:17:17+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Scientific Reports","date":"2025-09-02T11:12:00+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"e83122dc-d4e8-4de7-b031-f20e71d8f606","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 11th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[{"id":54413833,"name":"Health sciences/Health care"},{"id":54413834,"name":"Biological sciences/Physiology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-11-10T16:00:13+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-7079764","link":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-24816-9","journal":{"identity":"scientific-reports","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Scientific Reports"},"publishedOn":"2025-11-07 15:56:58","publishedOnDateReadable":"November 7th, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-11 11:03:39","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1038/s41598-025-24816-9","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-24816-9","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7079764","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7079764","identity":"rs-7079764","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}