“Make the stroke longer” is one of the most common technical cues in swimming. Behind it lies the sensible idea of avoiding frantic, short movements through the water. But a biomechanical study published in 2026 shows how dangerous it can be to focus on a single metric.
Twelve licensed male freestyle swimmers were analysed over 25 metres. The variables recorded included stroke count, stroke length, stroke rate and glide time.
Length alone says little
[bild id="XX"]
In this sample, faster times were associated with higher stroke rate and effective use of the glide phase. Greater stroke length, by contrast, was not automatically a sign of better performance.
At first this sounds paradoxical. The explanation is simple: a swimmer can artificially increase stroke length by waiting too long between strokes or reducing stroke rate so much that speed falls.
Efficiency is a balance
What matters is therefore not the maximum possible distance per stroke, but the relationship between stroke length and stroke rate at a given speed.
A sprinter needs a different optimum from a distance swimmer. Body size, strength, body position and stroke also alter this relationship.
What coaches can do with this
Stroke count remains a useful metric – but only together with time and rate. For example, a set can be swum at the same target time while coaches observe how stroke count and stroke rate change.
A lower stroke count is not automatically technical progress if the swimmer is slower. If the same or higher speed is maintained with stable body position and a controlled stroke rate, however, the change becomes meaningful.
The study is small and involved only male freestyle swimmers. Its most important message is nevertheless powerful: an attractive metric is not automatically good technique.
One number always needs another
Anyone working with stroke count should at least record the time as well. Better still is the combination of time, stroke count and stroke rate. Only these three measures show whether a longer stroke is genuinely becoming more efficient or whether the swimmer is simply waiting longer between propulsive phases.
SCIENTIFIC SOURCE
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42298694/