Ranger - News To Shock

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 21st, 2005, 1:07 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Dec 21 2005, 06:40 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>you row 15k in 1 hour (2:00 Pace), but do it in varying "intervals", supposedly at a 1:52 pace, and coast for a rest every so often, based on something that you have not eluded to. This sounds a lot like a golfer that ignores his "duffs" while scoring. (Unfortunately the duffs, and even the wiffs count.)[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br /> <br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » December 21st, 2005, 1:10 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>How about you just do 5 x 3k x 1 min rest at 1:52 R17 </td></tr></table><br /><br />To do what you suggest for this kind of rowing is an entirely different philosophy of training, Paul. To each his own. I find no need to analyze or to submit the rowing to a rigid structure. I don't consider the workout a performance. The purpose of the workout is just to row a lot of meters at 15 SPI.<br /><br />Yes, of course. Rowing for an hour at 15 SPI taking no breaks finishes the hour faster than rowing 15 SPI taking some short breaks. No matter. The workout is not a race.<br /><br />The course of development of the training is that, over time, the rowing gets easier and easier, and more and more continuous. Technique improves markedly, too, as does relaxation, rhythmicity, endurance, durability, and a host of other things. Eventually, the hope is that the rowing becomes entirely continuous, with no breaks needed.<br /><br />As I phase out my cross-training, when I have the time and easy access to an erg, I might try to do this sort of rowing up to three times a day (e.g., 3 x 15K), or eventually, for a marathon-length session.<br /><br />The key to these sessions is not their continuity but their unusually high stroking power. Low rate/L4 sessions, even at WR levels, for someone my age and weight are normally set at about 11 SPI (e.g. 2:01 at 18 spm) rather than 15 SPI (1:50 @ 18 spm).<br /><br />I am building up power and technical efficiency in my stroke.<br /><br />ranger

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 21st, 2005, 1:13 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Dec 21 2005, 06:40 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>You do realize you're claiming that at an out-of-shape 220 lbs at the age of 59, you'd be faster than Andy Ripley was at an in shape 249 lbs at the age of 50?[right] </td></tr></table><br />Omg, 249 pounds...... <br /><br />Yes I would definitely be much more in shape at 220 than that! <br /><br />Let's take the open class World Records and compare them to the 50+ lwt WR.<br /><br />6:25.8 x 5:37.0 / 6:02.6 ................ = 5:58.6<br /><br />The 50+ hwt record is very slow and should be at least 9 seconds faster.<br /><br />I was generous developing PATT to give 100 points to the 2k records in each division.<br /><br />This encourages more participation and competitiveness, even though the hwt standards are not as high as the lightweights.<br />

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » December 21st, 2005, 1:14 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 21 2005, 08:49 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I am not talking about lifetime learning here. I am talking about learning the basics. I have just learned the basics.<br /><br />Isn't a rower considered a novice until they have raced one season on the water?<br /><br />If so, I am not anywhere near having lost my novice status.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />In Masters Rowing you claim novice status only through the end of your first calendar year after getting on the water, it has nothing to do with racing. I'm sure the specifics can be looked up at the USRA site, and I'm likely not 100% accurate due to the legalese involved, but would say I've caught the spirit of the rule.<br /><br />Otherwise, you could train for 5 years and then race in a "novice" class (which I think technically can be done, we call it "medal shopping", among other things).<br /><br />In the UK, they have some sort of point system which when "gamed" can have Olympic medalists racing against club rowers because the International Points don't count as domestic points, or something like that. It's somewhat controversial and generally self-monitoring by the rowers. i.e. What's the point in racing inferior competition, the "1st place" medal has little value in such a situation.<br /><br />Perhaps you would feel great to beat a person who has been in a boat for 3 months when you have been for a couple years, but that's not the norm in the rowing community. In fact, I see the top folks looking for more difficult challenges and not bothering with what is not really a challenge. My best performances have come when under the most challenge not the least, YMMV.<br />

[old] JimR · Post by **[old] JimR** » December 21st, 2005, 1:17 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Dec 16 2005, 06:46 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 16 2005, 02:36 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>No Force = No Drive, in fact the PM would consider that part of the recovery.[right] </td></tr></table><br />The pm makes no distinction nor definition of terms.<br /><br />If you look at a pitcher tossing a baseball, there is considerable movement before the baseball is released, which is in the direction of toss, and considerable movement after release in the follow through, also in the direction of toss and would not be called "recovery", as all are part of the movement of throwing the baseball. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />The PM updates the stats for the stroke after Drive completion, so though you can not see an explicit indicator of a drive being taken, it is happening. Have faith!<br /><br />You're straying again, get back on topic. Have you ever actually tossed a baseball? <br /><br />I bet John throws like a girl <br /><br />JimR<br /><br />It's a good thing we're not playing baseball. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » December 21st, 2005, 1:26 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 21 2005, 09:10 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Yes, of course. Rowing for an hour at 15 SPI taking no breaks finishes the hour faster than rowing 15 SPI taking some short breaks. <br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />So you don't like to quanitfy results? Definitely an interesting philosophy.<br /><br />You've got some strange hours in your world! <br /><br />Are you and John neighbors?<br /><br />I'd suggest that if you don't take the breaks and remain continuous, that at least your perception of the hour will be that it has become considerably longer. <br /><br />How many breaks are you going to take in your 2k, when the going gets tough, since that's apparently the nature of your training? Or are you going to break through the notion that "we race as we train"?

[old] NavigationHazard · Post by **[old] NavigationHazard** » December 21st, 2005, 2:11 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 21 2005, 12:13 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Dec 21 2005, 06:40 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>You do realize you're claiming that at an out-of-shape 220 lbs at the age of 59, you'd be faster than Andy Ripley was at an in shape 249 lbs at the age of 50?[right] </td></tr></table><br />Omg, 249 pounds...... <br /><br />Yes I would definitely be much more in shape at 220 than that! <br /><br />Let's take the open class World Records and compare them to the 50+ lwt WR.<br /><br />6:25.8 x 5:37.0 / 6:02.6 ................ = 5:58.6<br /><br />The 50+ hwt record is very slow and should be at least 9 seconds faster.<br /><br />I was generous developing PATT to give 100 points to the 2k records in each division.<br /><br />This encourages more participation and competitiveness, even though the hwt standards are not as high as the lightweights. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />The conceptual problems with PATT are well hashed on this Forum. Like leftover Thanksgiving turkey, at this point they don't need reheating. <br /><br />Still I can't help noting that the 50s HW 2k record is sufficently not "slow" that you apparently can't do even 500m at that pace.<br /><br />Anyway, since you're determined to construe "quality" on the basis of the spread between HW and LW times in each division, Graham Watt's time is closer to Ripley's than Luini's is to Siejkowski's (.95 as fast vs .93). In your interpretation this is because Ripley's time is "weak." One could just as easily argue that it's because Luini's performance is the one that is comparatively "weak." If he were as close to Siejkowski in percentage terms as Watt is to Ripley, the absolute LW record would be 5:54.7.<br /><br />

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 21st, 2005, 3:00 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Dec 21 2005, 10:11 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I can't help noting that the 50s HW 2k record is sufficently not "slow" that you apparently can't do even 500m at that pace.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Uh..... duh...... perhaps you have noticed my max drive is 1:24 pace, which is much FASTER than the 50's hwt record for a 2k.<br /><br />Were I 6'5 and 220 pounds, there is no doubt in my mind that I would be faster than it is at the moment.<br /><br />Both Eskild Ebbesen and Elia Luina are Olympic Champions, World Champions, and World Record holders. <br /><br />You don't get any better than that, except to do it again and again, which between them they have done.<br /><br />By the way, based on this criteria, the open hwt record is also somewhat weak, as MS has not been an Olympic nor World Champion.<br />

[old] NavigationHazard · Post by **[old] NavigationHazard** » December 21st, 2005, 3:20 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 21 2005, 02:00 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Dec 21 2005, 10:11 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I can't help noting that the 50s HW 2k record is sufficently not "slow" that you apparently can't do even 500m at that pace.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Uh..... duh...... perhaps you have noticed my max drive is 1:24 pace, which is much FASTER than the 50's hwt record for a 2k.<br /><br />Were I 6'5 and 220 pounds, there is no doubt in my mind that I would be faster than it is at the moment.<br /><br />Both Eskild Ebbesen and Elia Luina are Olympic Champions, World Champions, and World Record holders. <br /><br />You don't get any better than that, except to do it again and again, which between them they have done.<br /><br />By the way, based on this criteria, the open hwt record is also somewhat weak, as MS has not been an Olympic nor World Champion. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />I hadn't noticed the 1:24 maximum drive, since it's not in your signature.* I had noticed the 1:43 500m that's in the current on-line rankings for you. If you've actually rowed something this year that's better than 1:31.9 (Ripley's pace), by all means, please rank it and prove me in error.<br /><br />As for this: <br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Were I 6'5 and 220 pounds, there is no doubt in my mind that I would be faster than it is at the moment. </td></tr></table><br /><br />to comment further would be to detract from artistic brilliance.<br /><br /><br />* By the way, my max full-slide drive is at least 1:10, which is 1020w. Which is even faster than the 50s HW 2k record pace. And I did 3 or 4 of them in a row, so no PM tricks.

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » December 21st, 2005, 3:21 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 21 2005, 11:00 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Uh..... duh...... perhaps you have noticed my max drive is 1:24 pace, which is much FASTER than the 50's hwt record for a 2k.<br /><br />Were I 6'5 and 220 pounds, there is no doubt in my mind that I would be faster than it is at the moment.<br /><br />By the way, based on this criteria, the open hwt record is also somewhat weak, as MS has not been an Olympic nor World Champion. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Max Drive (for a single stroke) is meaningless, based on the way a PM works.<br /><br />If Pigs had wings. (That is the way you put it, wasn't it John?)<br /><br />The overall WR is "somewhat weak", in spite of there being about 5 people on the planet to have been anywhere close to it? <br />(I'm certain it can be beaten, but have a difficult time with imagining it will be "easy" to do so.)<br /><br />Priceless stuff John, absolutely priceless!

[old] onethirtyfive · Post by **[old] onethirtyfive** » December 21st, 2005, 4:00 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Dec 22 2005, 06:10 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>As I phase out my cross-training, when I have the time and easy access to an erg, I might try to do this sort of rowing up to three times a day (e.g., 3 x 15K), or eventually, for a marathon-length session.<br />ranger<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Hi Ranger,<br /><br />I am confused in that you have made the comment that you will be doing your first race on the 21st of Jan (as a Lwt since you will be at the weight by Xmas).<br /><br />You made the comment to George NZ that you were now finished with these long rows at low rates and high SPI and were moving onto AT work a higher rates and faster paces. You also said that you would be 'reporting' these sessions, but I cant see any?<br /><br />Given that you are only 4 weeks till your first race and not that long given that you have to get used to higher rates for your major goal at Boston. When will you be reporting the details of these sessions.<br /><br />I note in your comments to PaulS that you also dont quantify your training the way most people do, so I was wondering how you will assess your training progress as you close in on your goal.<br /><br />As to the novice question I am not sure why you keep talking about being a novice in regard to OTW as this is an Indoor rowing forum and that is all this is about. You are much more experinced than a lot here both in terms of Indoor Rowing (you have told us how many times you have raced), and you also have a lifelong history of endurance training ... so I think the term novice is somewhat incorrect.<br /><br />Look forward to hearing details of your new training and what you will be doing in the next weeks and months<br /><br />tks for taking the time<br /><br />cheers

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 21st, 2005, 4:38 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Dec 21 2005, 11:20 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I hadn't noticed the 1:24 maximum drive, since it's not in your signature.[right] </td></tr></table><br />It's not a ranking event, but I did this a number of times, invariably with at least 2, 3, or 4 strokes in a row.<br /><br />Just this morning I did a few strokes at 1:33 pace and I'm only 143 pounds.<br /><br />It's not much of a stretch to see that at 6'5 and 220 pounds that I could relatively easily row faster than a 6:07 for the 2k at age 50.

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 21st, 2005, 4:43 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Dec 21 2005, 11:20 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>my max full-slide drive is at least 1:10[right] </td></tr></table><br />Well mine is also at least 1:10.<br /><br />Actually it's 1:24, which is more than 1:10.<br /><br />Or did you mean faster than 1:10?<br /><br />If so, then your max drive is the same as Eskild Ebbesen's, lightweight, who has rowed 6:03.2 for the 2k.<br /><br />This is faster than the men's 50+ hwt record of 6:07 or whatever it is.<br /><br />Thus you should also be able to break the 50' hwt record, especially considering you are 6'6 and weigh 248 pounds. <br /><br />Are you sure you're not 250 pounds? <br /><br />At that point it doesn't make much difference does it?

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » December 21st, 2005, 4:47 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(onethirtyfive @ Dec 21 2005, 12:00 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>You also said that you would be 'reporting' these sessions, but I cant see any?<br /><br />Given that you are only 4 weeks till your first race and not that long given that you have to get used to higher rates for your major goal at Boston. When will you be reporting the details of these sessions.[right] </td></tr></table><br />Details will be forthcoming very soon! <br /><br />This has been posted before... so... stay tuned!<br /><br />It won't be long now... just a matter of a few weeks! ... or so.... <br />

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » December 21st, 2005, 5:02 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Dec 21 2005, 12:38 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>It's not a ranking event, but I did this a number of times, invariably with at least 2, 3, or 4 strokes in a row.<br /><br />Just this morning I did a few strokes at 1:33 pace and I'm only 143 pounds.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />So you can avg 1:24 for 4 whole strokes, how much distance was covered as you whipped up and down that slide, it must have been pretty impressive. But wait, being light helps with that doesn't it? And you seem to use that as an excuse, shame on you......<br /><br />Surely you should be able to make it through at least 100m or 200m at your Max pull of 1:24, why not give that a try? You could even set up 100m splits to see if you could maintain a 1:24 for any further than 30m.<br /><br />In fact, you may as well just stick with the minimum ranking distance of 500m, as you need a lot of work there anyhow.<br /><br />You mentioned "illusion" before, and your 1:24 Max pull is exactly that, otherwise your 500m PB wouldn't be so slow.

Concept2 Forum

Ranger - News To Shock

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions