Int J Sports Med
DOI: 10.1055/a-2657-9181
Physiology & Biochemistry

Does Breathing Every Two Cycles Reduce the Breaststroke Energy Cost?

1   CIFI2D, University of Porto, Faculty of Sport, Porto, Portugal (Ringgold ID: RIN224740)
,
Ana Sofia Monteiro
2   Centre of Research, Education, Innovation and Intervention in Sport, University of Porto, Faculty of Sport, Porto, Portugal
,
1   CIFI2D, University of Porto, Faculty of Sport, Porto, Portugal (Ringgold ID: RIN224740)
3   Porto Biomechanics Laboratory, University of Porto, Portugal
,
4   Physical Education & Sports Science Academic Group, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore
5   Polytechninc Institute of Braganca, Portugal
,
6   Department of Biomechanics, Faculty of Sport, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
› Author Affiliations

Supported by: Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa https://doi.org/10.54499/2021.08308.BD
Preview

World Aquatics rules require only part of the swimmer’s head to break the surface each breaststroke cycle. We aimed to assess the impact of breathing every one or two cycles in breaststroke on energy cost (C) and related bioenergetic variables. Fifteen swimmers completed a 6-week intervention to learn the new breathing pattern, followed by a 5-m×200-m step test (0.05-m∙s−1 increments, 30-s rest) in both patterns. Oxygen consumption (VO2) and blood lactate ([La]) were measured to calculate energy expenditure (E tot) and C. Linear and exponential regressions were computed between E tot and velocity. Paired t-tests and ANCOVA were applied, controlling for World Aquatics points and age. [La] peak, VO2 peak, E tot, and C were lower at some intensities when breathing every cycle. Adjusted analyses showed higher E tot with breathing every two cycles at steps 1, 2, and 5. Linear and exponential regressions showed strong associations for both breathing patterns (r 2=0.74 vs. 0.72, respectively). Individual regressions showed similar patterns in some swimmers, while others differed. Breathing every two cycles elicited higher bioenergetic responses at steps 1, 2, and 5 and did not prove effective during incremental 200-m efforts when compared to the traditional breathing pattern.



Publication History

Received: 18 February 2025

Accepted after revision: 14 July 2025

Article published online:
18 August 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany