1

Topic: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those> PS points and  bonus, and  while are not present. The part of people trained on a long interval with such  in the middle. For shorts while especially do not abuse. To you here: twitter.com

2

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

2300 in  for 45 minutes - it is already similar to truth.

3

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Those> And 2500 without  for 45 minutes - not similar? For you - is not present, it is absolutely not similar Those> floated who more feasibly So much. Not simply is more feasible, and is much stronger and with on the order the best technics.

4

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

In  it generally about what. Specification  without  a crawl of seconds 50 in my opinion, and at you 35 quitted. So for muscles of a back it abruptly, and for to brag does not approach.

5

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those> I do not brag. It only the beginning. These normal swimmers 35 without  do. You now seriously wrote it or ? The World record of 100 meters freestyle 46,91...

6

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those> 50 for 35 in . 50 for 35 without  more than it is achievable for the normal swimmer. At what here 50 meters, at you hours on 100 meters give statistics, I from it and was repelled.

7

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those> PS points and  bonus, and  while are not present. The part of people trained on a long interval with such  in the middle. For shorts while especially do not abuse. It is necessary to attach a motor still

8

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

AM> It is necessary to attach a motor still Yes all right! Look, how the reactive stream helps it. And the red leather bonus sofa will be more whole!

9

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those> https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activ … nique_id=9 Those> the First interval 600 (2 x6 tracks) it is finite, hours again cut more tracks. A penultimate interval 50 (1 track) -  after rest. I.e. in the previous subject, people told that your results nonsense were right. But as you rested.

10

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

11

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those> https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activ … nique_id=9 Those> 3rd training in pool, after yesterday's evening  (, , ). A subject, you already Tong On will beat?

12

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

13

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Bigger, you wrote: B> the Subject, you already Tong On will beat? On points which hours count, it whom you want beats, and whom you want goes round.

14

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those> I recognized for a long time and enumerated. Then I even showed speed of a breast stroke on video. I made it, me not . And what you made? I play volleyball in the pleasure, I roll on Priore without pleasure, not  on a Lancer, I learn to roll on a snowboard. To float to me it is boring. To prove you to me something laziness. Those> 70x25 it 1500. To 1750 you did not reach - well here therefore and got to the bottom of hours that you realize that the weakling and on me absolutely in vain rolled butts. Mathematician from you as from shit a bullet, you forgive for frankness. I accurately wrote at once, 45 60 tracks - 1.5. Go to school.

15

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

We wait from Artema of results of competitions of heats in pool and in open water.

16

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those> Hello, wraithik, you wrote: Those>>> I recognized for a long time and enumerated. Then I even showed speed of a breast stroke on video. I made it, me not . And what you made? W>> I play volleyball in the pleasure, I roll on Priore without pleasure, not  on a Lancer, I learn to roll on a snowboard. W>> to float to me it is boring. To prove you to me something laziness. Those> you Play volleyball - what successes? Or it is games under beer? , I the fan. Relax. I never was the sportsman. But I try to do all correctly. Those> In  I and the passenger did not sit down, not that what to lead. On what I  I do not hide - on  . A snowboard, as well as with the fads, in Rostov it is a little strange to roll skis. To you can and it is strange, normal people go in mountains. Those>>> 70x25 it 1500. To 1750 you did not reach - well here therefore and got to the bottom of hours that you realize that the weakling and on me absolutely in vain rolled butts. W>> Mathematician from you as from shit a bullet, you forgive for frankness. W>> I accurately wrote at once, 45 60 tracks - 1.5. Go to school. Those> 1750 too about what You understand, what here I that  with , and normal who are engaged - they floated in the same training on the adjacent track 2500 without everyones  longer? And who with me on the track was - they floated 2300 without . I was engaged no more than 6 months only for myself since could not do anything else. I do not prove that I float much. What for you pass as  on "I  the father I will result, it shows to you", float itself. I with  never floated, but I think it much easier since feet pull in times more strongly.

17

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: , it you?

18

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those> You go in mountains 2-3 times a week on trainings with a snowboard? And differently what for to compose, what you on a snowboard study? And somewhere the mandatory number of occupations in a week that it was considered is regulated I "study"? W>> I was engaged no more than 6 months only for myself since could not do anything else. I do not prove that I float much. What for you pass as  on "I  the father I will result, it shows to you", float itself. Those> I floated 2300 with  on 3 occupation. Buy rubber spice-cake and rejoice. You can still here such device to yourself buy. Generally all you will tear. Those> You understand what to repeat 2300 without last - me half a year is not required? I do not understand. With  to float in times is easier, than without them. So, float at first, and then tell.

19

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those>>> In  I and the passenger did not sit down, not that what to lead. On what I  I do not hide - on  . A snowboard, as well as with the fads, in Rostov it is a little strange to roll skis. W>> to you can and it is strange, normal people go in mountains. Those> You go in mountains 2-3 times a week on trainings with a snowboard? And differently what for to compose, what you on a snowboard study? It is possible to study on a miscellaneous. It in a high and for itself. W>> I was engaged no more than 6 months only for myself since could not do anything else. I do not prove that I float much. What for you pass as  on "I  the father I will result, it shows to you", float itself. Those> I floated 2300 with  on 3 occupation. You understand what to repeat 2300 without last - me half a year is not required? Well and who you after that? To you at once some persons told that at you a problem with TECHNICS. You will deliver technics and you will float more. I know who you. W>> I with  never floated, but I think it much easier since feet pull in times more strongly. Those> I.e. except as a crawl in pool without , in any way in another way you did not try to float. A breast stroke, a dolphin - not, did not hear. You and on waves on a paunch to slide off probably did not try. Here you any . Explicitly wrote that floated for itself to receive aerobic loading since could not run. I did not have a purpose something to prove. At a forum asked pair of questions, in pool pair of councils of a distance,  on me from outside and I started to float easily. It is not necessary to me any more. It you here eternally are measured by a member, remaining .

20

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

21

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

22

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those> Hello, wraithik, you wrote: W>> this year 5 times will be. A hamster in pool we already saw Note, I do not speak that I am able to stand well on a board, in difference from some . About float, too the results as the great I do not consider. And bonus hours at me are not present. Those> Where you go? , Arhyz. W>> Float without  something longer. Those> Here you obstinate. I floated 2200 a breast stroke in a rock pool without . The good fellow. W>> the track it how many meters? To give time for 2 tracks, if on them not to heat (it anyway a maximum 100 if pool standard, but at you there all upwards-feet) - about what does not speak. Those> For example speaks that now I a crawl on the short float at level of Garri4, on 4 occupation. Only occupation in the total 2300, instead of 400 in an hour. And in pool of the Olympic size, instead of in a splash pool Well . Here 2200 to float it is already normal. And 2 tracks are . W>> I do not know as Alexey, I will not float, at me the best on a long distance 77/50, without the strong pushes from a wall, pool 25. For  is not result generally, it to a word. Those> So much I floated a breast stroke without  on long still before on trainings went. You 6  did not learn to float faster having a rest breast stroke "not on a science", but judgement about "the wrong technics" have. I generally from this  deduced the formula: the  the person floats, the more it does remarks apropos techniques of others. Give the time on 2200 .

23

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, wraithik, you W> Give the time on 2200 . In .

24

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those> Hello, wraithik, you wrote: W>> Azau, Arhyz. Those> On 2 times a week? Not far? I am glad to your anxiety, but all the same descend in school. And that 5 times are as that strongly less than 2 times a week. 70*25 it too 1750, instead of 1500. Still it is possible to use calc.exe. W>> Give the time on 2200 . Those> 58 Norms, if without . The technics means appears. Well or very strong.

25

Re: Re: 2300 for 1 occupation

W> Norms, if without . The technics means appears. Well or very strong. Not, there "And you tell other explanation" (