What S10mps Offers Me As An Indoor Rower

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » March 12th, 2006, 5:30 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(TomR/the elder @ Mar 12 2006, 12:46 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>10 MPS seems too slow at lower rates and too fast as higher rates. I'm sure there is something I don't understand about it, but if I do a 60+ minute session at 21 SPM, 10 MPS isn't challenging. If I do AT workouts at 25-26 SPM, I can't quite hold 10 MPS, and w/ race-pace workouts at 30 SPM, 10 MPS is an idle dream. So I just don't know how to make the protocol work, except in a narrow band of rates.<br /><br />This thread did cause me to do a quick calculation of my MPS while racing at the CrashBs.<br /><br />In 2003, I rowed a 6.59.8, averaging approx 32 SPM, for approx 224 strokes, or 8.9 MPS.<br /><br />In 2006, I rowed a 7.28.9, averaging approx 30 SPM, for approx 224 strokes, or 8.9 MPS. <br /><br />To go sub-7 again, all I have to do is row 2 more strokes per minute for 7 minutes. Why is that so difficult?<br /><br />Tom<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />The question I would have is, why are you hung up on rating to determine the nature of your traning session (AT) when Pace is the ultimate goal?<br /><br />S10PS will have you working in very narrow rate ranges for the majority of your training. 24 to 26 will cover 2:07 - 1:54 as far as whe the PM is displaying. The true rate is of course fractional from 23.6 to 26.3.<br /><br />What can be shown quite easily, and this is what the unit of SPI can be used for reasonably, is that your SPI has decreased from 9.462 to 8.254 in the last 3 years.<br /><br />What makes id difficult is low rate training pieces where the body ha learned to drive very well, but recovery very poorly.<br />

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » March 12th, 2006, 7:00 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Mar 12 2006, 04:18 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>If I might interject on the argument about WR holders and their ratings and dps (maybe a discussion for another thread) , this thread is about TRAINING methodologies for the average erger who wants to get better. <br /><br />As PaulS has said time and time again and been ignored just as many times, the s10ps is about training, and when you race you strap in and do what is takes to go as fast as you can for 2000m, BUT it is hoped that the good habits ingrained in training will be carried thru and you willo perform much more efficiently with a smoother stoke.<br /><br /><br />George<br /> </td></tr></table><br />George:<br /><br />It also allows one to "nail down" (or at least "ratio-ize') a number variables and put together a training program that can be monitired, tested, and measured ... allowing for a more scientific approach to training. It's fine to say that "variety" is important, it's fine to say "intervals" must be done, it's fine to say one must "build aerobic base" ... but how to do it, and gauge progress as regularly as possible against some standard, is important. S10PS seems to do that. Yes?<br /><br />-- Mark

[old] NavigationHazard · Post by **[old] NavigationHazard** » March 12th, 2006, 7:27 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Mar 12 2006, 04:18 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>If I might interject on the argument about WR holders and their ratings and dps (maybe a discussion for another thread) , this thread is about TRAINING methodologies for the average erger who wants to get better. <br /><br />As PaulS has said time and time again and been ignored just as many times, the s10ps is about training, and when you race you strap in and do what is takes to go as fast as you can for 2000m, BUT it is hoped that the good habits ingrained in training will be carried thru and you willo perform much more efficiently with a smoother stoke.<br /><br />George<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Fair enough, and it was/is not my intention to get bogged down in a discussion of Luini with Mr. Rupp. However I would suggest that average ergers may gain from better understanding of what the fast men and women are actually doing, and why they're doing it. <br /><br />As I understand it, S10mps is a training tool aimed at helping rowers learn to carry over power -- without compromising their stroking -- as they up the rating. To this end, I think it's useful to know that 10mps r35 for 2k (with straps) would allow one to contend for the Open MLW title at the World Indoor Championships. Thus the training idea should not be dismissed out of hand via misrepresentation of its possibilities. <br />

[old] george nz · Post by **[old] george nz** » March 12th, 2006, 7:53 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Mar 13 2006, 12:27 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(george nz @ Mar 12 2006, 04:18 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>If I might interject on the argument about WR holders and their ratings and dps (maybe a discussion for another thread) , this thread is about TRAINING methodologies for the average erger who wants to get better. <br /><br />As PaulS has said time and time again and been ignored just as many times, the s10ps is about training, and when you race you strap in and do what is takes to go as fast as you can for 2000m, BUT it is hoped that the good habits ingrained in training will be carried thru and you willo perform much more efficiently with a smoother stoke.<br /><br />George<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Fair enough, and it was/is not my intention to get bogged down in a discussion of Luini with Mr. Rupp. <b>However I would suggest that average ergers may gain from better understanding of what the fast men and women are actually doing, and why they're doing it. </b><br /><br />As I understand it, S10mps is a training tool aimed at helping rowers learn to carry over power -- without compromising their stroking -- as they up the rating. To this end, I think it's useful to know that 10mps r35 for 2k (with straps) would allow one to contend for the Open MLW title at the World Indoor Championships. Thus the training idea should not be dismissed out of hand via misrepresentation of its possibilities.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Totally agree Nav and you make good points, however we both know your 'facts' were going to be disregarded and I am enjoying the discussion to date

<br /><br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(mpukita @ Mar 13 2006, 12:00 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(george nz @ Mar 12 2006, 04:18 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>If I might interject on the argument about WR holders and their ratings and dps (maybe a discussion for another thread) , this thread is about TRAINING methodologies for the average erger who wants to get better. <br /><br />As PaulS has said time and time again and been ignored just as many times, the s10ps is about training, and when you race you strap in and do what is takes to go as fast as you can for 2000m, BUT it is hoped that the good habits ingrained in training will be carried thru and you willo perform much more efficiently with a smoother stoke.<br /><br /><br />George<br /> </td></tr></table><br />George:<br /><br />It also allows one to "nail down" (or at least "ratio-ize') a number variables and <b>put together a training program that can be monitored, tested, and measured</b> ... allowing for a more scientific approach to training. It's fine to say that "variety" is important, it's fine to say "intervals" must be done, it's fine to say one must "build aerobic base" ... but how to do it, and gauge progress as regularly as possible against some standard, is important. S10PS seems to do that. Yes?<br /><br />-- Mark<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Mark the comments I have highlighted in bold I think are key for the 'thinking' rower who wants to improve and know why <br /><br />George<br />

[old] Sean Seamus · Post by **[old] Sean Seamus** » March 12th, 2006, 8:07 pm

this is a great thread, and I am enjoying it<br />but<br />is there somewhere a Basic Intro to this idea ?<br />or<br />is it really simple : strapless, pull 10 meters per stroke, all stroke rates (focussing twixt 20 - 26, and keeping 18 - 20 for cooldown)<br /><br />I am a beginner, have rowed almost 2 million meters.<br />53, 160 lbs, 5'7"<br />Following the UK site's "original 2,000 meter program"<br />1st year, 7 weeks training - 8:23<br />2nd year, 6 months " - 7:54<br /><br />reading this stuff I get really baffaloed, but it's getting easier

[old] TomR/the elder · Post by **[old] TomR/the elder** » March 12th, 2006, 8:17 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Mar 12 2006, 04:30 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>The question I would have is, why are you hung up on rating to determine the nature of your traning session (AT) when Pace is the ultimate goal?<br /><br />S10PS will have you working in very narrow rate ranges for the majority of your training. 24 to 26 will cover 2:07 - 1:54 . . . . <br /><br />What makes id difficult is low rate training pieces where the body ha learned to drive very well, but recovery very poorly.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Paul--<br /><br />I do use pace, not rate, to determine the nature of training, and only meant to suggest that I typically reach AT paces at 24-26 SPM (generally speaking).<br /><br />That said, I am inclined to agree that lots of low-rate training can make it difficult to adjust to the higher rates used in racing. Even though I am an old dog, I am trying to learn a few new tricks--or perhaps relearn some old tricks--to slow the decline.<br /><br />Tom

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » March 12th, 2006, 8:26 pm

OK ... here's something you experienced guys can help me with, which also might be beneficial to the rest of the forum.<br /><br />How does one best define UT2, UT1, AT, etc.? In the UK documentation, it's percentages of max heart rate. That's what I've used to set some training objectives for longer rows when wanting some variety from the WP. Slow days, when tired, UT2. Days with more energy, UT1 & up. All done by HR.<br /><br />However, I've seen others using pace, rate, etc.<br /><br />HELP!<br /><br />

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » March 12th, 2006, 8:43 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(NavigationHazard @ Mar 12 2006, 12:09 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>to obsess over average ratings and paces can be misleading over 2k-- in Luini's case they tend to obscure both a quick start and a no-holds-barred finish while ignoring his usual strategy of finding a 'cruising pace' in the middle </td></tr></table><br /><br />As long as Luini neither starts nor finishes a race, then he is doing it "right", at least your way, right?<br /><br />How profound.<br /><br />Of course no one can finish a race without starting it, and won't get a time with no finish.

<br /><br />So you got Luini doing a workout in what was a slow time for him.<br /><br />So? So what?<br /><br />That has zero relevance to what I have posted before, about him going 8 meters per stroke in his record.<br /><br />Also you have said before that both him and Eskild Ebbesen don't do this, but in addition to Luini's stroke rate information for his record, I have a videotape of Ebbesen going 8 meters per stroke all the way through a 6:06.4 for the 2k, and previous to that stroke information showing the same. You'll probably deny this too, and say that Ebbesen rigged up the tape just to make a fool out of you and Paul Smith, but in all likelihood he's never heard of either of you.<br /><br />Anyway if you want to keep being lazy and rowing along at low ratings, that is fine with me.

[old] george nz · Post by **[old] george nz** » March 12th, 2006, 9:13 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(mpukita @ Mar 13 2006, 01:26 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>OK ... here's something you experienced guys can help me with, which also might be beneficial to the rest of the forum.<br /><br />How does one best define UT2, UT1, AT, etc.? In the UK documentation, it's percentages of max heart rate. That's what I've used to set some training objectives for longer rows when wanting some variety from the WP. Slow days, when tired, UT2. Days with more energy, UT1 & up. All done by HR.<br /><br />However, I've seen others using pace, rate, etc.<br /><br />HELP!<br /><br />

<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Mark I am of the opinion that unless you are:<br /><br />1/ Having regular lactate tests (10 - 12 weeks)<br />2/ Or are doing monitored 'step tests' on a regular base<br />3/ Training 8+ times per week<br /><br />Then a lot of the talk about training bands is just that talk and most people would have no idea whether they are in the right band or not ..... <br /><br /> ..... case in point: people saying they did a UT2 workout 3 x 15 or 4 x 15 intervals - what they really mean is that they did a really easy session HR wise. To classify as UT2 it would need to be about 75 min continuous at least and more like 90 min ... a better argument could be made for classifying sessions of 'Rating Percieved Exertion' in conjunction with pace / rate data.<br /><br />I have come to the conclusion that for me anyway HR is nice to know and can be a guide to progress in steady state sessions where pace has increased without the HR changing. But I would want to be sure that I had a 'good' understanding of what the original pace/HR was (over a number of sessions) and what the new base was (over a number of sessions) before I drew a conclusion. One 10k 3 months ago and one 10k now is not enough info to make categorical statements on.<br /><br />IMHO

<br /><br />George

[old] michaelb · Post by **[old] michaelb** » March 12th, 2006, 9:18 pm

Please let's not get distracted by John Rupp and lose track of the point of this thread.<br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Sean Seamus @ Mar 12 2006, 07:07 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>this is a great thread, and I am enjoying it<br />but<br />is there somewhere a Basic Intro to this idea ?<br />or<br />is it really simple : strapless, pull 10 meters per stroke, all stroke rates (focussing twixt 20 - 26, and keeping 18 - 20 for cooldown)<br /><br />I am a beginner, have rowed almost 2 million meters.<br />53, 160 lbs, 5'7"<br />Following the UK site's "original 2,000 meter program"<br />1st year, 7 weeks training - 8:23<br />2nd year, 6 months " - 7:54<br /><br />reading this stuff I get really baffaloed, but it's getting easier<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes it really is that simple. That is part of the point. It may be coincidence or not, I can't tell, but for a broad range of paces, each increase of SR of one is about a 5 second increase in pace:<br /><br /><br />10 MPS=<br />Pace Rate<br />2:50 18<br />2:45 18<br />2:40 19<br />2:35 19<br />2:30 20<br />2:25 21<br />2:20 21<br />2:15 22<br />2:10 23<br />2:05 24<br />2:00 25<br />1:55 26<br />1:50 27<br />1:45 29<br />1:40 30<br />1:35 32<br /><br />Paul is correct to point out that this chart is too simplistic because of rounding in how the SR is displayed. So the much more precise and disciplined way to row 10mps is to catch on the zeros (or the 1s?) or on the rowpro buoys.<br /><br />In this thread on the UK forum, Marcus pieces together PaulS's so called "stop the madness" training plan. I had heard of this before, but hadn't been able to find it, and I wonder if it was lost with the old forum:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.concept2.co.uk/forum/viewtop ... ight=10mps" target="_blank">http://www.concept2.co.uk/forum/viewtop ... t=10mps</a>

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » March 12th, 2006, 9:22 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Mar 12 2006, 08:13 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I have come to the conclusion that for me anyway HR is nice to know and can be a guide to progress in steady state sessions where pace has increased without the HR changing. But I would want to be sure that I had a 'good' understanding of what the original pace/HR was (over a number of sessions) and what the new base was (over a number of sessions) before I drew a conclusion. One 10k 3 months ago and one 10k now is not enough info to make categorical statements on.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />So doing, let's say, 5K to 10K continuous pieces (pick a distance or distances) at a set pace, and rate ... let's just say S10PS ... and using the log card function to take readings every ... say 500M, 1K, or 2K ... and looking at average and/or peak HR along the way, across a number of these exactly same pieces, would give one some great test and measure information for progress assessment on aerobic fitness, yes?<br /><br />Gotta start wearing that blasted HRM again!

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » March 12th, 2006, 10:03 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Mar 12 2006, 04:43 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 @ Mar 12 2006, 12:09 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>to obsess over average ratings and paces can be misleading over 2k-- in Luini's case they tend to obscure both a quick start and a no-holds-barred finish while ignoring his usual strategy of finding a 'cruising pace' in the middle </td></tr></table><br /><br />I have a videotape of Ebbesen going 8 meters per stroke all the way through a 6:06.4 for the 2k, and previous to that stroke information showing the same. You'll probably deny this too, and say that Ebbesen rigged up the tape just to make a fool out of you and Paul Smith, but in all likelihood he's never heard of either of you.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />On a review of this exact video here is what it entails:<br /><br />2000m in 6:06.4, 247 strokes total.<br /><br />Start and first minute is quite high rate, but after 1 minute he has settled to a R37.5 and stays there until 5 minutes into the race, where he then begins a wind up to R42 (5:15), R45 (5:35), R51 (5:51 to the end).<br /><br />Now given an overall average pace of 1:31.6, it is impossible to claim 8 meters/stroke was done as any sort of normal stroke during this race. <br />R37.5 at 8m/stroke would be a 1:40 pace, did Eskild really row the middle 4 minutes of this race at 1:40? No. <br />Did he have an average SR of 40.5? Yes, 247 strokes/6:06 = R40.5.<br />Did he ever row at R40.5? While I took a Rate reading every two strokes I did not see a R40.5 for more than 2 or 3 readings, so perhaps for 6-8 strokes he was at that rate.<br /><br />Back to the middle 4 minutes at R37.5 and a likely pace of 1:32, that would be 8.7m/stroke for the bulk of the race.<br />In the first minute his rate was over 40 (7.8m/stroke), and in the final 350m his rate was 45-51, (7.5 to 6.5m/stroke).<br /><br />So as can be clearly seen, the "8m/stroke all the way through" that is being touted as fact, is anything but a fact. Now as to why I'm wasting my time to clarify something that should have absolutely no credibility in the first place? I have no idea, and likely very few care about the real facts or appreciate them being presented anyhow. Have a nice day.

<br /><br />Finally, what does this have to do with S10PS as a training principle? 8)

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » March 12th, 2006, 10:41 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Mar 12 2006, 06:03 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Finally, what does this have to do with S10PS as a training principle? 8)<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Nothing at all!

<br /><br />Eskild Ebbesen rows at 8 meters per stroke.

[old] george nz · Post by **[old] george nz** » March 13th, 2006, 1:12 am

As I understand it one of the reasons for extended duration pieces 60min plus at low rates 18 - 22 is to promote aerobic endurance while limiting lactate production (as this could / would impact on future training) ... and I cant think of a rebutment to that logic, however ...<br /><br />...for someone like myself who chooses to limit my time for training to 5 - 6 sessions a week for a max of about an hour on average I need to look at what I have, what I want, and how to utilise the time and motivation I am blessed with to the achieve the best possible outcome.<br /><br />What do I have, well I have height, size (usable), and a good degree of natural strength. What I lack is endurance, not the endurance to sit there at 20spm in the UT2 zone for long periods, but a lack of endurance as the rate picks up and technique becomes ragged. We know it costs energy to change direction in the stroke and as your rate goes up that cost goes up, and I am guessing the bigger you are the bigger the cost ???<br /><br />So one thing that s10ps does is that if forces me to stroke at a higher rate for paces between about 2:00 and 1:45 than I would prefer to - generally as I get tired within this range my rate drops and I muscle the stroke and rest on the extended recovery. An example of this would be that I would find it harder to do my 30 @ 20 pace at 10mps where the rate would be much higher, so ...<br /><br />.... by rowing that 30 min at s10ps I achieve a number of things, I develop a smoother stroke, I develop a ratio of drive/recovery that will carry thru to 2k rates and paces, I develop a flow in my stroke rather than a heave, I work hard aerobically without overloading the musculature (less risk of injury), I train the neuro system to fire in a pattern that is more consistent with my ultimate goal .....<br /><br />just some thoughts<br /><br />George

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » March 13th, 2006, 10:35 am

Excellent thoughts George, perhaps you would enjoy exploring why S10PS is equally applicable to the 170cm 60kg gal, the 172cm 72kg male, and the 2m 104kg monster such as yourself. Though, with all the excellent posts it has been nailed down very well.

<br /><br />TomR/the elder, <br />You are probably in a position where you will have to take a step back in pace targets, and then work your way forward again under the new format. Another thing to explore would be some technical feedback, it may be that you have nothing to improve there, but that would be unusual, and technique is the one thing that works in favor of the more seasoned athlete, when youth, strength, and enthusiam are just not enough anymore. 8)