First Impressions On The Slides

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » January 14th, 2006, 2:43 pm

Edited to improve the accuracy of Johns post.<br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Jan 14 2006, 09:09 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Those are excellent points Kappy.<br /><br />This makes perfect sense and I'm glad you have pointed this out.<br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />See John, once we go with just the facts, your post make perfect sense.<br /><br />Now please stop with the slander.<br /><br />All I do is ask you questions about things you have actually said, and you get increasingly angry because you can't justify your conclusions and they make no logical sense. Perhaps you should think through what you post before putting it in front of people who will only conclude you are either purposefully provocative, or simply a vindicitve idiot.

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » January 14th, 2006, 3:37 pm

Edited to say what Paul really meant.<br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Jan 14 2006, 10:43 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>See John, when I am honest, your posts make perfect sense.<br /><br />Please forgive me for slandering you.<br /><br />What I was trying to do was ask questions that twisted the things things you have actually said, and I apologize for getting increasingly angry and acting like I was slapping you around like I do with my little dog and my wife. My conclusions can't be justified and they make no logical sense. Perhaps I should think through what you post before putting trying to twist it around and being either purposefully provocative, or simply a vindictive idiot. Also I promise to work on my reading comprehension, and my spelling. I have a long ways to go because, old habits die hard, but hope you and the other people on the forum appreciate my efforts. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Thank you for being honest about this, Paul.

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » January 14th, 2006, 3:40 pm

Further editing to say what Paul really means.<br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Jan 14 2006, 10:43 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>John,<br /><br />I also want to apologize to you and the forum for my misleading messages and experiments.<br /><br />Of course my 8 strokes at 2k plus 12 pace didn't prove anything. My only purpose in doing that was to twist things around. You will note, however, that I did say it was not a valid experiment.<br /><br />Please forgive me.<br /><br />You are right. The slides are much faster than the erg. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Of course they are, Paul. <br />

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » January 14th, 2006, 7:44 pm

John,<br /><br />You are a sick little man. It's quite obvious that you are bastardizing the forum to serve your own selfish agenda. However you have destroyed yourself along the way.<br /><br />Too bad you can't simply be honest, it's the best policy you know.<br /><br />Seek help, perhaps a Life Coaching colleague, but find one that actually helps people improve their worth to society, instead of allowing you to continue on your self-destructive path.<br /><br />Ciao, rodentus illegitimus.<br /><br />FB2 out.

[old] Citroen · Post by **[old] Citroen** » January 15th, 2006, 4:41 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Jan 14 2006, 11:44 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>FB2 out. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Paul, since you couldn't make a New Year resolution to stop rising to JR bait. Make it a birthday resolution to do the same. Please stop replying to his posts (when they are just there to annoy you).<br /><br /><span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Many Happy Returns for today - <u>Old</u> FB2.</span>

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » January 15th, 2006, 5:33 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Citroen @ Jan 15 2006, 12:41 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(PaulS @ Jan 14 2006, 11:44 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>FB2 out. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Paul, since you couldn't make a New Year resolution to stop rising to JR bait. Make it a birthday resolution to do the same. Please stop replying to his posts (when they are just there to annoy you).<br /><br /><span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Many Happy Returns for today - <u>Old</u> FB2.</span> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Thanks Dougie! Perhaps the added maturity will be instrumental in empowering some restraint. <br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(But maybe not)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><span style='color:white'>Now if only John were not such a master baiter. </span> <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Cheers!

[old] gw1 · Post by **[old] gw1** » January 15th, 2006, 8:53 pm

Happy Birthday FB, good win yesterday by the Seahawks also!<br /><br />Cheers<br />Other FB

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » January 19th, 2006, 12:52 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Jan 13 2006, 09:20 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Lightweights are pushing much less weight with their legs, and driving less weight with their torso and your arms. </td></tr></table><br /><br />The erg is the same weight regardless of the weight of the rower.<br /><br />Thus the differential between heavyweight and lightweight and the erg is much greater.<br /><br />Lightweights are pushing a much greater percentage of their weight.

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » January 19th, 2006, 10:11 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Jan 18 2006, 08:52 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(PaulS @ Jan 13 2006, 09:20 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Lightweights are pushing much less weight with their legs, and driving less weight with their torso and arms. </td></tr></table><br /><br />The erg is the same weight regardless of the weight of the rower.<br /><br />Thus the differential between heavyweight and lightweight and the erg is much greater.<br /><br />Lightweights are pushing a much greater percentage of their weight. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />John,<br /><br />Why did you go back and edit virtually all of your previous posts yesterday (Jan 18, 2006)? I know they made no sense before, and that's what this discussion has been about, the attempt to rewrite history is pitiful.<br /><br />However, you are still putting yourself into a conundrum with this.<br /><br />Yes, the Erg (or Erg + Earth) is the same weight for a Hwt and a lwt.<br /><br />The Flywheel is the source of Work required on the Erg for everyone.<br /><br />Everyone moves their weight along the slide, whatever it is, and this makes no difference in the work required to move the flywheel.<br /><br />Unless you are going to claim that lwts have an advantage on the ground, you can not claim that hwts have a greater advantage on the Slides, or the other way around.<br /><br />So which one do you want to claim? "Trading weight for pace" (gives hwts an advantage on the Ground) or "Hwts get more of an advantage on Slides" (Both are wrong, but both can't exist in the real world either.)<br /><br />Here is what happens when the pace is held constant, but the rate is changed. <br /><br /><a href='http://www.ps-sport.net/pictures/Test01PaceRate.jpg' target='_blank'>Trading Rate for Pace.</a><br /><br />As the rate goes up, the Power required on the Drive goes down. It's easy to see why this is done when an athlete runs out of drive power, and it is directly indicated when that athletes SPI begins to drop to achieve a new PB. In fact, that is why the SPI unit was developed in the first place, to indicate when strength training would be a good addition to the overall training plan.

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » January 19th, 2006, 12:31 pm

Trading rate for pace means that, as the rower increases the rating, the pace gets slower.<br /><br />This is not an efficient way to row and shows that the technique is not good.<br /><br />The rower should find the rating that gives the fastest average pace for her or his efforts.<br /><br />This is what Rod Freed does, and is why he has all the 50+ lightweight records from 30 minutes through the half marathon.

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » January 19th, 2006, 12:37 pm

The rower's weight is an important means of thrusting weight against the flywheel. Heavier rowers have an easier time doing this, as they have more weight, and thus are able to trade weight for fitness. However, this is not the same as having a better technique to go faster.<br /><br />A test of one's technique is to try different ratings and see which rating yields the fastest pace over distance. This is the one that should be used for the race.<br /><br />As the rating goes up, the watts produced should also increase.<br /><br />If the watts go down when the rating is increased, i.e. trading rate for pace, then the rower should focus on being more efficient at the rating where the power and watts output are the highest. When technique improves then the rating can be tested again.

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » January 19th, 2006, 12:51 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Jan 19 2006, 08:31 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Trading rate for pace means that, as the rower increases the rating, the pace gets slower.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Not exactly. (In fact, <b>"exactly wrong"</b>) Since I came up with the phrase first, and have defined it, try to stay on the same page.<br />Trading rate for pace will hopefully result in a faster pace, otherwise there would be no reason to row at a higher rate in competition. When a higher rate is resulting in a slower pace, the athlete has literally run out of rate to trade, and must then proceed to train to increase the power that they can deliver on the drive (the only opportunity to input power to the flywheel), rather than trying to sustain a higher RPM on the flywheel by rushing the recovery..<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'>This is not an efficient way to row and shows that the technique is not good.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />You are correct here, but you have also promoted this high rate (trading rate for pace) training, another contradiction of your own view?<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'>The rower should find the rating that gives the fastest average pace for her or his efforts.<br /><br />This is what Rod Freed does, and is why he has all the 50+ lightweight records from 30 minutes through the half marathon. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />You seem to know a lot about Rod Freed, have you met or communicated directly with the man, or ever seen him on an Erg?

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » January 19th, 2006, 1:09 pm

When the rating goes higher, the pace should get faster, which means you are gaining pace with the rating.<br /><br />Conversely, trading rate for pace means you are losing pace when the rating goes higher.<br />

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » January 19th, 2006, 1:11 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Jan 19 2006, 08:37 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>The rower's weight is an important means of thrusting weight against the flywheel. Heavier rowers have an easier time doing this, as they have more weight, and thus are able to trade weight for fitness. However, this is not the same as having a better technique to go faster.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />It is impossible to trade weight for fitness, what are you talking about? Weight in and of itself is no particular advantage, as illustrated by Range having lost 30 lbs and remained virtually the same speed over 2k, in spite of getting older.<br /><br />Also, if you were correct here, then your conclusions about hwts having a greater advantage on Slides could not be correct. Another contradiction.<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'>A test of one's technique is to try different ratings and see which rating yields the fastest pace over distance. This is the one that should be used for the race.<br /><br />As the rating goes up, the watts produced should also increase.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />This is true, but directly contradicted by your earlier post.<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'>If the watts go down when the rating is increased, i.e. trading rate for pace, then the rower should focus on being more efficient at the rating where the power and watts output are the highest. When technique improves then the rating can be tested again. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />All except for your incorrect usage of "trading rate for pace", this is correct. I think where you would disagree is inthe area of training to achieve this end. You do your training rows at too high of a rate to allow for the additional strength adaptations that are required after having run out of rate to trade. I'd suggest moving to a higher distance/stroke (S10PS) for training so that there is a "control" on the power generated during the Drive. i.e. Using S10PS as a control the drive must become more powerful to produce a faster pace, there is no way out of it. This way, the displayed pace becomes a very useful measure of training stress.<br /><br />This exact relationship has been shown to exist in on water rowing as well, by the research of Valery Kleshnev in <a href='http://www.ps-sport.net/RowingBioMechan ... News10.pdf' target='_blank'>Rowing BioMechanics Newsletter No10 Vol5</a>

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » January 19th, 2006, 1:17 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Jan 19 2006, 09:09 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>When the rating goes higher, the pace should get faster, which means you are gaining pace with the rating.<br /><br />Conversely, trading rate for pace means you are losing pace when the rating goes higher. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />John,<br /><br />I know in your Bizzare way, you are trying to justify your views, but stick with the way the language is spoken and it will be easier for you.<br /><br />When we "trade" something (Rate increase), we generally expect to get value for it (faster pace). It makes sense to everyone in the real world, just join us, it's fine.<br /><br />Or you can continue being the "genius" that you claim to be, though that hasn't been very productive, has it.

Concept2 Forum

First Impressions On The Slides

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training