What S10mps Offers Me As An Indoor Rower

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--quoteo(post=59173:date=Mar 12 2006, 06:41 PM:name=John Rupp)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Mar 12 2006, 06:41 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Eskild Ebbesen rows at 8 meters per stroke. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes, if you are fat, lazy, and out of shape, row at lower ratings and 10 meters per stroke.<br /><br />This way you won't get too "tired". <br />

[[old] FrancoisA]

I am sorry guys to disturb the touching harmony that has developed on this thread around this 10 mps, but I remain skeptical to this one size fits all approach (fixation ?!).<br /><br />Although I can see that an overemphasis on spi, à la Ranger, might not be optimal training, Ranger and Mike Caviston are or have been WR holders using training plans that completely disregard this 10 mps business and rely instead on a healthy dose of high dps. <br /><br />Also, I disagree with the opinion that it is harder to hold, say a pace of 1:50 @ 27 spm (10.1 mps) instead of 24 spm (11.36 mps); At least not for me, but then, I have good endurance and poor strength.<br /><br />When one realizes that 34 spm is pretty much the maximum stroke rate one can maintain for a 2K, the only way to go faster is to pull harder at each stroke. The L4 workouts of the Wolverine Plan have been very useful to me in that respect.<br /><br />Cheers!<br /><br />Francois

[[old] PaulS]

<!--quoteo(post=59203:date=Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM:name=FrancoisA)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I am sorry guys to disturb the touching harmony that has developed on this thread around this 10 mps, but I remain skeptical to this one size fits all approach (fixation ?!).<br /> </td></tr></table><br />This is what makes it fun, no need to be sorry, let's address your issues.<br /><!--quoteo(post=59203:date=Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM:name=FrancoisA)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Although I can see that an overemphasis on spi, à la Ranger, might not be optimal training, Ranger and Mike Caviston are or have been WR holders using training plans that completely disregard this 10 mps business and rely instead on a healthy dose of high dps. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Neither of their plans completely disregard 10MPS, perhaps you just missed the numerous mentions of it from the people in question.<br /><!--quoteo(post=59203:date=Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM:name=FrancoisA)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Also, I disagree with the opinion that it is harder to hold, say a pace of 1:50 @ 27 spm (10.1 mps) instead of 24 spm (11.36 mps); At least not for me, but then, I have good endurance and poor strength.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Okay, but then you contradict this a bit by putting a cap on what you think is the max SR attqainable for a 2k. You also specify your particular weakness. If it is too easy for you to hold a 1:50 @ SR27 then try a 1:49, or 1:48, whatever it takes to make it challenging for you. This will help you to learn how to row at the higher rates with good power. <br /><!--quoteo(post=59203:date=Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM:name=FrancoisA)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>When one realizes that 34 spm is pretty much the maximum stroke rate one can maintain for a 2K, the only way to go faster is to pull harder at each stroke. The L4 workouts of the Wolverine Plan have been very useful to me in that respect.<br /><br />Cheers!<br /><br />Francois<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I've not realized this R34 as "the maximum for 2k" yet, but perhaps in time I will. Many others seem to not realize it either. <br /><br />If your approach is so useful, why is your 500m sprint still showing an imbalance leaning your toward the endurance end of the scale? Do you snub your nose at Dennis' World Record? i.e. a 2k @ 1:44 should have a 500m of 1:34 if your strength were in balance with your endurance. (Paul's Law).<br /><br />Please feel free to poke holes in the line of thinking presented.<br />

[[old] John Rupp]

Eskild Ebbesen's long time world record was 6:03.2, done at 8 mps and 41.3 spm.<br /><br />Ebbesen's 30+ record of 6:06.4 was done at 8.1 mps and 40.5 spm.<br /><br />In this latter race, Ebbesen's cumulative stroke rating <b>never dipped below 39.3 spm</b>. Then it increased back up to the average of 40.5 spm.<br /><br /><!--quoteo(post=59171:date=Mar 12 2006, 06:03 PM:name=PaulS)--><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'>after 1 minute he has settled to a R37.5 and stays there until 5 minutes into the race </td></tr></table><br /><br />Ebbesen's cumulative stroke rating <b>never dipped below 39.3 spm</b>.<br /><br />Discounting 20 strokes at the start and the last 57 strokes where he was above 40 spm, <b>the other 170 strokes averaged 38.27 spm</b>. If he averaged 8.1 mps for the 77 strokes above 40 spm, where he was going at a sub 1:30 pace, then he averaged the same 8.1 mps for the 170 strokes where he was averaging 38.27 spm and slower than a 1:33 pace. <br /><br />In any case, if you ignore the 77 strokes above 40 spm, which was 31% of his race, he still averaged 38.27 spm for the rest of it where he was going the slowest.<br /><br />

[[old] hjs]

<a href="http://www.concept2.co.uk/wirc/race_ana ... ton&race=1" target="_blank">http://www.concept2.co.uk/wirc/race_ana ... e=1</a><br /><br />Benton this year in Boston. av rate 31 ish. That is 179 strokes. 11.1 meters. In training he also does 16 k at rate 18 in 1.43 ish. That's 16.2 meters per stroke. <br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.concept2.co.uk/wirc/race_ana ... ton&race=1" target="_blank">http://www.concept2.co.uk/wirc/race_ana ... e=1</a><br /><br />Benton this year in Boston. av rate 31 ish. That is 179 strokes. 11.1 meters. In training he also does 16 k at rate 18 in 1.43 ish. That's 16.2 meters per stroke. <br /><br />race :http://www.concept2.co.uk/wirc/replays/ ... 2F1/H35<br />

[[old] michaelb]

<!--quoteo(post=59218:date=Mar 13 2006, 01:18 PM:name=John Rupp)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Mar 13 2006, 01:18 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Quack!<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Please let's not get distracted by John Rupp in this otherwise interesting thread.<br /><br />Francois:<br /><br />What about the possibilty that training hard at higher SRs and middle distances, all at 10mps, would increase your endurance at rowing at higher SRs, so that a SR higher than 34 was possible for the 2k? I have rowed my 2ks at a much lower rate, 30-31 or so, but am open to the possibility that I could rate higher.<br /><br />I don't think there is a one size fits all plan, and I didn't see this thread as proposing that. Many of us use strapless 10mps. I couldn't do the wolverine plan because it is way to complicated for my tastes. But I have done low SR rowing in the past and see the value. My concern about low SR rowing, say 20mps and below, is that it seems to affect (mess up) the rhythm of my stroke, so that I have to pause to go that slow in rate, and if you do a lot of that, it may make it harder to rate higher for racing when needed.

[[old] FrancoisA]

<!--quoteo(post=59212:date=Mar 13 2006, 05:31 PM:name=PaulS)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Mar 13 2006, 05:31 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--quoteo(post=59203:date=Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM:name=FrancoisA)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Although I can see that an overemphasis on spi, à la Ranger, might not be optimal training, Ranger and Mike Caviston are or have been WR holders using training plans that completely disregard this 10 mps business and rely instead on a healthy dose of high dps. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Neither of their plans completely disregard 10MPS, perhaps you just missed the numerous mentions of it from the people in question.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Paul, I have pretty much read all of what Mike has written on the WP, and I don't remember that he mentioned this 10 mps as part of the training.<br /><br /><!--quoteo(post=59212:date=Mar 13 2006, 05:31 PM:name=PaulS)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Mar 13 2006, 05:31 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--quoteo(post=59203:date=Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM:name=FrancoisA)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Also, I disagree with the opinion that it is harder to hold, say a pace of 1:50 @ 27 spm (10.1 mps) instead of 24 spm (11.36 mps); At least not for me, but then, I have good endurance and poor strength.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Okay, but then you contradict this a bit by putting a cap on what you think is the max SR attqainable for a 2k. You also specify your particular weakness. If it is too easy for you to hold a 1:50 @ SR27 then try a 1:49, or 1:48, whatever it takes to make it challenging for you. This will help you to learn how to row at the higher rates with good power. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Yes, but then if I do 1:48 @ SR27, I will no longer be at 10 mps but at 10.3. So, who is contradicting himself? <br /><br /><!--quoteo(post=59212:date=Mar 13 2006, 05:31 PM:name=PaulS)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Mar 13 2006, 05:31 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--quoteo(post=59203:date=Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM:name=FrancoisA)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Mar 13 2006, 09:10 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>When one realizes that 34 spm is pretty much the maximum stroke rate one can maintain for a 2K, the only way to go faster is to pull harder at each stroke. The L4 workouts of the Wolverine Plan have been very useful to me in that respect.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I've not realized this R34 as "the maximum for 2k" yet, but perhaps in time I will. Many others seem to not realize it either. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Well, it is for me. I am not any faster at stroke rates above 34.<br /><br /><!--quoteo(post=59212:date=Mar 13 2006, 05:31 PM:name=PaulS)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Mar 13 2006, 05:31 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>If your approach is so useful, why is your 500m sprint still showing an imbalance leaning your toward the endurance end of the scale? Do you snub your nose at Dennis' World Record? i.e. a 2k @ 1:44 should have a 500m of 1:34 if your strength were in balance with your endurance. (Paul's Law).<br /> </td></tr></table><br />The 1:38 in my signature was the last 500m of an 8x500m L1 workout, so it is somewhat "soft". Nonetheless, you are quite right that I have an imbalance towards endurance. The truth is the imbalance was a lot worse before I started using the WP. In fact, before, I could only hold 1:38 for three consecutive strokes, now, I can hold 1:35! <br /><br />And no, I don't snub my nose to Dennis', or anyone else, accomplishments! Quite the opposite!<br /><br />I would love to do my 500m in 1:34, since my 2K would probably be 16 sec faster.<br /><br />Cheers!<br />

[[old] PaulS]

I thought a ducks quack didn't echo... (even the Mythbusters appeared to confirm that). 8)

[[old] michaelb]

<!--quoteo(post=59220:date=Mar 13 2006, 01:39 PM:name=hjs)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(hjs @ Mar 13 2006, 01:39 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />Benton this year in Boston. av rate 31 ish. That is 179 strokes. 11.1 meters. In training he also does 16 k at rate 18 in 1.43 ish. That's 16.2 meters per stroke. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I am also interested in what PaulS would say about how someone like Graham would train at 10mps, not that it is at all relevant to my actual training. Once, long ago, I believe Paul did say that 11mps would be better than 10, but it is just much harder to train that way. His 16k at 1:43 at 10mps would be around rate 30 or so, which would also be really hard and would be great training at building strength for his recovery and race pace.<br />

[[old] hjs]

<!--quoteo(post=59224:date=Mar 13 2006, 07:48 PM:name=michaelb)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(michaelb @ Mar 13 2006, 07:48 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--quoteo(post=59220:date=Mar 13 2006, 01:39 PM:name=hjs)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(hjs @ Mar 13 2006, 01:39 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />Benton this year in Boston. av rate 31 ish. That is 179 strokes. 11.1 meters. In training he also does 16 k at rate 18 in 1.43 ish. That's 16.2 meters per stroke. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I am also interested in what PaulS would say about how someone like Graham would train at 10mps, not that it is at all relevant to my actual training. Once, long ago, I believe Paul did say that 11mps would be better than 10, but it is just much harder to train that way. His 16k at 1:43 at 10mps would be around rate 30 or so, which would also be really hard and would be great training at building strength for his recovery and race pace.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I personaly think you should train both low rate stuff but also the higher (2k rate and a bit above) rates. The first for more power and the second for more efficiency. <br />

[[old] PaulS]

<!--quoteo(post=59222:date=Mar 13 2006, 10:44 AM:name=FrancoisA)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Mar 13 2006, 10:44 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Paul, I have pretty much read all of what Mike has written on the WP, and I don't remember that he mentioned this 10 mps as part of the training.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />You would have to read Mikes forum posts, it is clearly mentioned there. Not in relation to the low rate stuff, but to the other levels.<br /><!--quoteo(post=59222:date=Mar 13 2006, 10:44 AM:name=FrancoisA)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Mar 13 2006, 10:44 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Yes, but then if I do 1:48 @ SR27, I will no longer be at 10 mps but at 10.3. So, who is contradicting himself? <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Come on, you know I was just giving an example, I guess I should have said if S10PS is too easy at 1:50 for you, go to 1:49 (S10PS), or 1:48 (S10PS). But you knew that already, didn't you? <br /><!--quoteo(post=59222:date=Mar 13 2006, 10:44 AM:name=FrancoisA)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Mar 13 2006, 10:44 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Well, it is for me. I am not any faster at stroke rates above 34.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />That's fine, work on it. You think you will learn to get the rate up by training at low rates? Interesting.<br />Obvioulsy you can not maintain your drive power at rates above 34, it just depends on what you consider the source of this problem, the drive, the recovery, or both.<br /><!--quoteo(post=59222:date=Mar 13 2006, 10:44 AM:name=FrancoisA)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Mar 13 2006, 10:44 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>The 1:38 in my signature was the last 500m of an 8x500m L1 workout, so it is somewhat "soft". Nonetheless, you are quite right that I have an imbalance towards endurance. The truth is the imbalance was a lot worse before I started using the WP. In fact, before, I could only hold 1:38 for three consecutive strokes, now, I can hold 1:35! <br /><br />And no, I don't snub my nose to Dennis', or anyone else, accomplishments! Quite the opposite!<br /><br />I would love to do my 500m in 1:34, since my 2K would probably be 16 sec faster.<br /><br />Cheers!<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Well, firm it up. That's what signatures are for, aren't they? <br />Do you know how Dennis trained during the time leading up to his WR? I have a pretty good idea. 8)

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--quoteo(post=59221:date=Mar 13 2006, 10:41 AM:name=michaelb)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(michaelb @ Mar 13 2006, 10:41 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--quotec-->I'm an idiot and a quack!<br /><br />Please don't get distracted by me in this otherwise interesting thread. </td></tr></table><br /><br />No worries.<br /><br />We can all spot an idiot when we see one. <br />

[[old] george nz]

John I am asking a favour of you that this thread does not get side tracked into arguments on what the very top LW's race at. If you have information that can be linked to for how they carry out their training (not just a comment in an interview) then I would be grateful to have the chance to read it.<br /><br />I would be interested in your 'detailed' views on a training programme as every one has a right to air their thoughts on that here, that is what this is about, by all means share a structured 3 or 6 month programme.<br /><br />tks George<br /><br />ps I think that inserting comments into someone else's post in the form of an altered quote is pretty poor by anyone

[[old] John Rupp]

George,<br /><br />I agree, and am doing my best to keep the thread from getting sidetracked.<br /><br />Michaelb, let that be a lesson to you.<br /><br /><br /><!--quoteo(post=59220:date=Mar 13 2006, 10:39 AM:name=hjs)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(hjs @ Mar 13 2006, 10:39 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--quotec-->Benton this year in Boston. av rate 31 ish. That is 179 strokes. 11.1 meters. In training he also does 16 k at rate 18 in 1.43 ish. That's 16.2 meters per stroke. </td></tr></table><br /><br /><!--quoteo(post=59225:date=Mar 13 2006, 10:56 AM:name=hjs)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(hjs @ Mar 13 2006, 10:56 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--quotec-->I personaly think you should train both low rate stuff but also the higher (2k rate and a bit above) rates. The first for more power and the second for more efficiency. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Great points.<br /><br />Ebbesen and Luini at 8 meters per stroke, Benton at 11.1 and 16.2, quite a range.

[[old] PaulS]

<!--quoteo(post=59224:date=Mar 13 2006, 10:48 AM:name=michaelb)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(michaelb @ Mar 13 2006, 10:48 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--quoteo(post=59220:date=Mar 13 2006, 01:39 PM:name=hjs)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(hjs @ Mar 13 2006, 01:39 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />Benton this year in Boston. av rate 31 ish. That is 179 strokes. 11.1 meters. In training he also does 16 k at rate 18 in 1.43 ish. That's 16.2 meters per stroke. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I am also interested in what PaulS would say about how someone like Graham would train at 10mps, not that it is at all relevant to my actual training. Once, long ago, I believe Paul did say that 11mps would be better than 10, but it is just much harder to train that way. His 16k at 1:43 at 10mps would be around rate 30 or so, which would also be really hard and would be great training at building strength for his recovery and race pace.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />He would simply "Just Do it.", though it's very likely that his target paces would need some adjustment to keep the training effects in line. An experiment for him to do, would be to get his ratio inline for the 16k session at 1:43 pace (Presumably a UT1 or AT session), R26 would be 11.2m/stroke, and see if that feels the same, too easy, or too difficult. My guess would be that the first 30 minutes would feel rather easy, but then the final 25 minutes would expose the differences.<br /><br />Here is a graphic of what the different profiles for the pace/rate combinations mentioned would look like.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.ps-sport.net/pictures/Test01 ... _DF105.jpg" target="_blank">S10PS, Low Rate, and Race Pace Force Profiles.</a><br /><br />A critical thing to look at, is the ratios involved. While the Low Rate profile is much closer to the Race Pace Profile, it is going to be done for a much longer period of time (55 minutes if 'hjs' figures are right), about 10 times the duration of the Race pace Profile. One might wonder how that would be possible, but then take a look at the ratio, it increases by 59% for the low rate Drives.<br /><br />Now look at the similar pace for S10PS as compared to the Low Rate, there is a much lower force requirement, however the ratio is much closer.<br /><br />Apparently the athlete that trains at S10PS, can produce a longer ratio and higher force, but could the Athlete training at the Low Rate, reduce their ratio and maintain efficiency when in a racing situation?<br /><br />The final question is, Do we want to train a particular Drive Profile for all Rates and let Rate govern our program, or do we want to train a Ratio that can remain the same over a variety of Paces, and use Pace to regulate training effects?